# (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)



## Moparman

Place holder Pics


----------



## Moparman

Ok the 2 files below are my F5 bios settings. I have found the F5 will not let me save bios to USB.

DISCLAIMER!!! These setting will not work for everyone and are only for your guidance on what worked for me.

My setup. 

Z390 AORUS Master F5 Bios 

CPU random retail 9600k

RAM Team Dark Pro 3200C14 Bdie

RD400 NVME 128Gb boot drive

GPU's 2x 780ti SLI with Aquacomputer full cover blocks.

PSU Firepower Firestorm 1050W gold PSU

Cooling. XSPC Raystorm Pro block using Tgrizz Kryo paste. 1x RS360 1x ex120 push pull on both. X20 420 bay res with D5 added for flow 3/8 and 1/2 XSPC soft tube.

CASE Rosewill RISE


----------



## Moparman

Place holder TBD


----------



## skummm

Hi 

I bought the AORUS MASTER Z390 which runs beautifully and cool with the F5 bios *but* I cannot yet get USB working with W7 (I would prefer to dual-boot as opposed to VM for running Pro-Tools).

Already started a seperate thread about it, but it is not the board's fault 

Apart from this issue I am very happy with my purchase.


----------



## Moparman

skummm said:


> Hi
> 
> I bought the AORUS MASTER Z390 which runs beautifully and cool with the F5 bios *but* I cannot yet get USB working with W7 (I would prefer to dual-boot as opposed to VM for running Pro-Tools).
> 
> Already started a seperate thread about it, but it is not the board's fault
> 
> Apart from this issue I am very happy with my purchase.


Glad you like the board. This thread is also going to be a place for everyone to post issues, Fixes, OC info and more.


----------



## Falkentyne

Ok guys please help.

Should I even consider this board?
You know, my last board (i still own it) was the Gigabyte P67 UD5 B3, and I am sure you remember the problems with the bios, boot loops and the problems with them making a UEFI which they abandoned, and no working ivy bridge multiplier support, and the overvolting /LLC issues on it. So why should I give Gigabyte another chance?
What reason do they deserve after all the crap and BS they pulled in the past with the P67 and Z68 boards?


----------



## skummm

Falkentyne said:


> Ok guys please help.
> 
> Should I even consider this board?
> You know, my last board (i still own it) was the Gigabyte P67 UD5 B3, and I am sure you remember the problems with the bios, boot loops and the problems with them making a UEFI which they abandoned, and no working ivy bridge multiplier support, and the overvolting /LLC issues on it. So why should I give Gigabyte another chance?
> What reason do they deserve after all the crap and BS they pulled in the past with the P67 and Z68 boards?


Hi. 

Had this board for a week now and had a reasonable play with it.

I have had zero P67/Z68 type issues with it, voltages seem very stable and accurate (tested with a DM), and the VRM cooling is excellent. The F4 bios was not brilliant and a little messy but the F5 bios is a definite improvement with more overclocking options.
I have had my 8700k up to 5.3Ghz with slightly less volts than my previous board, my only issue so far is no USB 3.1 drivers for Windows 7 (I want to dual boot for Pro-Tools support) which might also be an issue for other OS's too (Linux). Not really tested RAM overclocking much yet but the board was happy and stable with 5.3Ghz CPU on all cores and DDR4 3600 CL16. 

The USB issue means no USB ports at all on desktop at the moment but obviously if you are using W10 this is a non-issue for you  

I tested the USB 2.0 headers with the same result.


----------



## porksmuggler

Falkentyne said:


> Ok guys please help.
> 
> Should I even consider this board?
> You know, my last board (i still own it) was the Gigabyte P67 UD5 B3, and I am sure you remember the problems with the bios, boot loops and the problems with them making a UEFI which they abandoned, and no working ivy bridge multiplier support, and the overvolting /LLC issues on it. So why should I give Gigabyte another chance?
> What reason do they deserve after all the crap and BS they pulled in the past with the P67 and Z68 boards?


You're a trooper for staying on P67 instead of moving on to Z68, and one of the earliest P67 boards at that. UEFI was so fresh, and so many P67 boards had all those same issues, I mean I know because I probably had builds on all of the mid to high end P67 boards. Ivy bridge was iffy on plenty of Z68 boards, never mind P67, and overvolting from using excessive LLC is still a thing on many modern boards from all brands.

Maybe just saying it might not have been just an issue with that Gigabyte board from 8 years ago, and things have improved quite a bit in the years since, especially considering the glacier pace of Intel in that timeframe. All the board manufacturers have had a lot of practice getting it right, well the ones left that is.


----------



## Falkentyne

Guess I'll give it a shot, then.
Just need to find a decent deal on DDR4. I do like the bios options.


----------



## porksmuggler

Falkentyne said:


> Guess I'll give it a shot, then.
> Just need to find a decent deal on DDR4. I do like the bios options.


Prices will continue to drop through year end, maybe hold there through Q1, or drop further if not impacted by the tariff situation.

Best deals currently are $125 for 16GB DDR4-3200 CAS 16, or $250 for the same if you want to go overkill for 32GB.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

You are welcome to merge this into the top post(s) and I can delete this one...

PCIe diagram: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1iN8e03gnDNNhXByn4DQbnqQaDoJDmUme 
OC Guide: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dpIBIsQm466r5Mmz5ctc0FBlptcj8DAO/view?usp=sharing

Edit: Updated PCIe diagram link with more boards.


----------



## kabes

GBT-MatthewH said:


> You are welcome to merge this into the top post(s) and I can delete this one...
> 
> PCIe diagram: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L7YKBNnMJKg1GRj7xOibt7_WQa7Geibh/view?usp=sharing
> OC Guide: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dpIBIsQm466r5Mmz5ctc0FBlptcj8DAO/view?usp=sharing


Is the Ultra the same as the Master in regards to PCIe? It's not in that list.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

kabes said:


> Is the Ultra the same as the Master in regards to PCIe? It's not in that list.


Ah, let me update the file with all the boards.


----------



## Halk

How's the fan control software or BIOS for this? The master seems to have 8 fan channels and I'd love it if I could set fan curves, or even just some kind of basic duty cycles for them. I'd love it even more if I could use a temp probe in my res to give it a temperature to base the rad fans off of.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Halk said:


> How's the fan control software or BIOS for this? The master seems to have 8 fan channels and I'd love it if I could set fan curves, or even just some kind of basic duty cycles for them. I'd love it even more if I could use a temp probe in my res to give it a temperature to base the rad fans off of.


All of the above -

Fan Control in BIOS -> Yes
Fan Control in Software -> Yes
Base fan profiles off probe thermistor temp -> Yes (Software & BIOS)


----------



## Halk

Thanks Matthew. This'll be my first gigabyte board since opterons were all the rage.


----------



## Phantomas 007

I have preorder from amazon a Z390 AORUS ULTRA for a 8700k. It's the first time after many years that I wil not get a ASUS Hero. But I have only 1 question. The quality, VRMs etc it's the same in all AORUS series ? I'm thinking also the Z390 AORUS Pro wifi.


----------



## skummm

Phantomas 007 said:


> I have preorder from amazon a Z390 AORUS ULTRA for a 8700k. It's the first time after many years that I wil not get a ASUS Hero. But I have only 1 question. The quality, VRMs etc it's the same in all AORUS series ? I'm thinking also the Z390 AORUS Pro wifi.


No, the VRM quality is not the same for different boards in the series.

Here is a list of the different VRM configs for the Z390 series: >clicky<


----------



## sanae346

I just wonder whether gigabyte will provide us an “AORUS” brand M-ATX mobo since ALC 892 on Z390 M gaming is an entry-level one.


----------



## Halk

Matthew - when will the Xtreme be UK available? I can't find a price on it, but if it's around by the time I'm ready to buy the Master then it's worth me spending some time looking into it to see if I can justify spending more.


----------



## m9viper

There is a user reporting LLC issues (voltage fluctuating) https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-261.html#post27684172

Any users of Z390 Aorus Pro/Ultra can confirm these issues? 
Aorus Pro's hardware and value looks like killer choice, but these LLC reported issues are making me think twice.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

m9viper said:


> There is a user reporting LLC issues (voltage fluctuating) https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-261.html#post27684172
> 
> Any users of Z390 Aorus Pro/Ultra can confirm these issues?
> Aorus Pro's hardware and value looks like killer choice, but these LLC reported issues are making me think twice.


Probably on an old BIOS. I have a master, I set 1.35 and under load it runs 1.368


----------



## Cyph3r

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Probably on an old BIOS. I have a master, I set 1.35 and under load it runs 1.368


I read somewhere (I think on the Gigabyte site) that the Master can control the PWM fans based on GPU temps, not just CPU temps - is that true?


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Cyph3r said:


> I read somewhere (I think on the Gigabyte site) that the Master can control the PWM fans based on GPU temps, not just CPU temps - is that true?


Yup, you can control any fan based off: CPU Temp, MOS Temp, GPU Temp, PCIe Temp, System Temp, or Thermistor Temps. Attached is a diagram of the temp sensors and locations.


----------



## Cyph3r

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Yup, you can control any fan based off: CPU Temp, MOS Temp, GPU Temp, PCIe Temp, System Temp, or Thermistor Temps. Attached is a diagram of the temp sensors and locations.


That's awesome! I do not know why more motherboards do not implement this. I think Asus does - but you have to have an Asus Strix card. 

I returned my Maximus XI Hero, and instead jumped ship to the Aorus Master (your presence on these forums being a contributing factor). Super excited to try it out.


----------



## Halk

The fan control is a big deal for me. I have a Maximus Extreme IX at the moment and the fan control is ok, but not quite where I want it to be. Loading a profile doesn't actually work properly and I have a fan that spins up and down fast despite manually setting long times and a different profile. Sometimes the fans don't follow the curve, you can see the orange dot indicating temp/fan speed is sometimes nowhere near the fan curve. I've been on Asus for a long time now so I'm keen to try something else in the hope it works better for fans. However it's probably fair to say that if I spent more time on it, and did it in BIOS rather than AI Suite I might have got somewhere.

This new build I'm intending running my rad fans off the water temperature, so I'll fire a plug/probe into the res and as confirmed earlier in the thread the Master board will be able to control it based on that. I'll also be able to run my pump based on CPU temps (maybe GPU temps?) and a single case fan based on VRM or board temps.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Halk said:


> This new build I'm intending running my rad fans off the water temperature, so I'll fire a plug/probe into the res and as confirmed earlier in the thread the Master board will be able to control it based on that. I'll also be able to run my pump based on CPU temps (maybe GPU temps?) and a single case fan based on VRM or board temps.


Yup, so in BIOS or software (I prefer BIOS) you basically tell "Header X" to monitor "EC_TempX" then set the curve as you see fit.

Side note: For GPU based temp control you need to use the software because the BIOS can't "see" the GPU temp.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Cyph3r said:


> That's awesome! I do not know why more motherboards do not implement this. I think Asus does - but you have to have an Asus Strix card.


Our board shouldn't care what brand GPU you have... Here is a SS of how to set "System pump 5" (same as above) to go based off GPU temp.

Edit/Full disclosure when making a purchasing decision: Because we have 8 fan headers there are 2 super I/O's to control them. Only the 2nd controller can "see" the GPU. This means to control a fan based off GPU temps you need to use: System 4, System pump 6, or system pump 5 headers. See above for where those are located on the board (also labeled on the silk screen on the board)


----------



## Halk

Yeah, that was the final straw for me. It's almost certainly going to be this board. 

I see you're working with EKWB on Aorus 1080 full cover blocks, are you bringing out any full cover block support for your 2080 ti with EKWB? I'm in the market for a 2080 ti too.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Halk said:


> Yeah, that was the final straw for me. It's almost certainly going to be this board.
> 
> I see you're working with EKWB on Aorus 1080 full cover blocks, are you bringing out any full cover block support for your 2080 ti with EKWB? I'm in the market for a 2080 ti too.


Not sure if its EK, but I can check... Apologies for the horrible quality of the picture but you get the idea  Note this is a rendering and not the final product shot.


----------



## nhanphan1990

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Probably on an old BIOS. I have a master, I set 1.35 and under load it runs 1.368


I just got my z390 master yesterday, updated to bios F5 and did some overclocking.
With llc at Turbo and bios vcore 1.325, hwinfo showee vcore at 1.40, sometimes got up to 1.42  the strange thing was that changing vcore in bios to 1.35 or 1.3 doesn't affect vcore reading from hwinfo, it still shows 1.4 to 1.42.

Oh and I had to set vccsa at 1.3, any lower and I will get ram instability.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Halk

Ah that card is available to buy. but I prefer the look of the EK cards.

As for the Master Z390, the manual mentions flow rate but I don't know how it would know what the flow rate is. Is there some kind of header on the motherboard to support this?

Page 12 of the manual and page 56 mention it.


----------



## Falkentyne

@GBT-MatthewH
Why isn't this board available on Amazon? I wants it !


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Halk said:


> Ah that card is available to buy. but I prefer the look of the EK cards.
> 
> As for the Master Z390, the manual mentions flow rate but I don't know how it would know what the flow rate is. Is there some kind of header on the motherboard to support this?
> 
> Page 12 of the manual and page 56 mention it.


Some flow rate monitors (for monitoring the speed at which water is flowing through a water cooled system) have 3/4 pin connectors that you would plug into any fan header on the board.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

nhanphan1990 said:


> I just got my z390 master yesterday, updated to bios F5 and did some overclocking.
> With llc at Turbo and bios vcore 1.325, hwinfo showee vcore at 1.40, sometimes got up to 1.42  the strange thing was that changing vcore in bios to 1.35 or 1.3 doesn't affect vcore reading from hwinfo, it still shows 1.4 to 1.42.
> 
> Oh and I had to set vccsa at 1.3, any lower and I will get ram instability.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Im using HW Info 5.90 (latest non-beta). 50x multiplier, LLC Turbo, 1.35V, XMP on.

For the first sensor (IT8668E) I see 1.4 as the max but its stable at 1.368. 
For the second sensor (IT8692E) I see max 1.342 and stable at 1.342. 
Using a multimeter I get 1.348 rock solid.


----------



## nhanphan1990

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Im using HW Info 5.90 (latest non-beta). 50x multiplier, LLC Turbo, 1.35V, XMP on.
> 
> For the first sensor (IT8668E) I see 1.4 as the max but its stable at 1.368.
> For the second sensor (IT8692E) I see max 1.342 and stable at 1.342.
> Using a multimeter I get 1.348 rock solid.


Thanks for your reply.
I'm using hwinfo 5.9 as well, with the same settings as yours. The second sensor shows vcore at 1.32, as well as cpuz, but the first sensor has the vcore jumping around to 1.4
I will try resetting the bios to default, then start overclocking again to see if I can fix this.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Halk

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Some flow rate monitors (for monitoring the speed at which water is flowing through a water cooled system) have 3/4 pin connectors that you would plug into any fan header on the board.


Ah, I see. So it's just a way to designate the fan speed reading from the third pin on a fan header if for example the koolance flow rate meter was used.


----------



## Dymblos

Anyone can confirm if this:
https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2781-msi-m2-heat-shield-increases-temperatures

happend with the Aorus Shield?


----------



## porksmuggler

Dymblos said:


> Anyone can confirm if this:
> https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2781-msi-m2-heat-shield-increases-temperatures
> 
> happend with the Aorus Shield?


That is for Micro-Star International board, do you mean does this happen also for Gigabyte boards with M.2 heatsinks?


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Dymblos said:


> Anyone can confirm if this:
> https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2781-msi-m2-heat-shield-increases-temperatures
> 
> happend with the Aorus Shield?


I can confirm this doesn't happen with out shields. That was one of the first M.2 shields and didn't have an adequate thermal pad or any heat dissipation. Essentially it was a "cover" that trapped heat... Our M.2 thermal gaurds are actual heatsinks with thermal pads that will lower temps. We have had them for 2-3 generations now and no reports of any issues.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

kabes said:


> Is the Ultra the same as the Master in regards to PCIe? It's not in that list.


Yes, same layout. Updated in OP and here! https://drive.google.com/open?id=1iN8e03gnDNNhXByn4DQbnqQaDoJDmUme


----------



## Falkentyne

Why isn't this board (Aorus Master) on Amazon yet?
The other models are on Amazon (Not the Extreme, of course) but not the Master.
It's on newegg but I don't want to buy from them.

So what's the deal?
I know the 9900K isn't available (unless you were lucky enough to get one of the 67 preordered ones)...


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Falkentyne said:


> Why isn't this board (Aorus Master) on Amazon yet?
> The other models are on Amazon (Not the Extreme, of course) but not the Master.
> It's on newegg but I don't want to buy from them.
> 
> So what's the deal?
> I know the 9900K isn't available (unless you were lucky enough to get one of the 67 preordered ones)...


Gotta ask Amazon... We have the boards, up to them to stock it.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Gotta ask Amazon... We have the boards, up to them to stock it.


Does Gigabyte sell directly to the public?
Can I just go to their main offices in City of Industry and buy a board directly from you guys?
Like, show you the money and get a board  No middleman involved.

Would be faster than dealing with waiting.

The last time I was there (admittedly, this was back when the "ATI" X850XTX was out!), they had a really nice place with some skilled and friendly people.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Falkentyne said:


> Does Gigabyte sell directly to the public?
> Can I just go to their main offices in City of Industry and buy a board directly from you guys?
> Like, show you the money and get a board  No middleman involved.
> 
> Would be faster than dealing with waiting.
> 
> The last time I was there (admittedly, this was back when the "ATI" X850XTX was out!), they had a really nice place with some skilled and friendly people.


We really aren't setup for it - IE have a store front or anything


----------



## nhanphan1990

Hi Matthew,

Just a quick update  after resetting CMOS and updating (again) to bios f5, I was able to set the vcore and stabilize it (somewhat). Running 1.275 v @ 5.0 Ghz right now. Occasionally the vcore spikes to 1.288 under turbo LLC. Should it be something that I need to worry about? 

Other than that, the system has been rock stable. I love the design and build quality of this board, especially the VRM heatsink !


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

nhanphan1990 said:


> Hi Matthew,
> 
> Just a quick update  after resetting CMOS and updating (again) to bios f5, I was able to set the vcore and stabilize it (somewhat). Running 1.275 v @ 5.0 Ghz right now. Occasionally the vcore spikes to 1.288 under turbo LLC. Should it be something that I need to worry about?
> 
> Other than that, the system has been rock stable. I love the design and build quality of this board, especially the VRM heatsink !


Sounds about right. I run 1.35 and Hwinfo shows 1.368, but multimeter shows 1.348. Software is an approximation of the voltage, not an exact reading. Long story short your fine, under 1.3 is pretty good actually!


----------



## Moparman

Sorry for not having the OP fully done i have been very busy as of late. I got my board in from Gigabyte and it looks awesome. Lots of accessories in the box and the thermal probs are a nice add. I still have no CPU at this time and finding a 9900k at a good price is very hard. I might just go grab a 9600k or 8086k and give it a go. I will be working on the Thread more very soon. Sorry for the Delay.


----------



## Falkentyne

Moparman said:


> Sorry for not having the OP fully done i have been very busy as of late. I got my board in from Gigabyte and it looks awesome. Lots of accessories in the box and the thermal probs are a nice add. I still have no CPU at this time and finding a 9900k at a good price is very hard. I might just go grab a 9600k or 8086k and give it a go. I will be working on the Thread more very soon. Sorry for the Delay.


Are these boards even in stock anywhere besides Newegg?


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Falkentyne said:


> Are these boards even in stock anywhere besides Newegg?


Microcenter should have them as well.

For our friends north of the border Canada Computer and Memory Express should also have them.


----------



## Moparman

Right now it looks like Microcenter, Newegg, Frys, Amazon is what I have found so far.


----------



## Falkentyne

Moparman said:


> Right now it looks like Microcenter, Newegg, Frys, Amazon is what I have found so far.


https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-Z390-AORUS-LGA1151-Motherboard/dp/B07HS4PQWK/


Not there


----------



## Moparman

My bad man I must have missed it wasn't in stock. Can you not get one from Newegg?


----------



## Xanthux

I got an issue with Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master, it keeps resetting/clearing CMOS whenever I reboot/boot after shutdown when I overclocked CPU.

CPU: Intel i7-9700K
BIOS Version: F5
VCore: 1.30V
LLC: Turbo
Speedstep and C-States disabled

I can boot into Windows 10 (Version 1803, build 17134.376) immediately after overclocking,
I have ran Prime95 with AVX for 4 hours. Real Bench for 8 hours. No errors.

So the overclocking settings are stable.

However whenver I reboot it/boot after complete shutdown, the PC would reboot itself for a few times, resetting the CMOS settings entirely.

At first few times I thought my settings wasnt stable enough. But after a few long stress test I am sure my settings is stable.

Seems it somehow deem my overclocking settings were unstable, hence resetting my settings.

If there's any Gigabyte staff here, please help to test/replicate the scenario. Thank you in advance.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Xanthux said:


> I got an issue with Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master, it keeps resetting/clearing CMOS whenever I reboot/boot after shutdown when I overclocked CPU.
> 
> CPU: Intel i7-9700K
> BIOS Version: F5
> VCore: 1.30V
> LLC: Turbo
> Speedstep and C-States disabled
> 
> I can boot into Windows 10 (Version 1803, build 17134.376) immediately after overclocking,
> I have ran Prime95 with AVX for 4 hours. Real Bench for 8 hours. No errors.
> 
> So the overclocking settings are stable.
> 
> However whenver I reboot it/boot after complete shutdown, the PC would reboot itself for a few times, resetting the CMOS settings entirely.
> 
> At first few times I thought my settings wasnt stable enough. But after a few long stress test I am sure my settings is stable.
> 
> Seems it somehow deem my overclocking settings were unstable, hence resetting my settings.
> 
> If there's any Gigabyte staff here, please help to test/replicate the scenario. Thank you in advance.


My guess is memory timings/training. Can you enable XMP (or if enabled try setting manually) and/or switch to single BIOS mode.

To switch BIOS mode look to the bottom left of the board. There are 2 selector switches. Move the switch on the right to position "1" as seen here:


----------



## Xanthux

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Xanthux said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got an issue with Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master, it keeps resetting/clearing CMOS whenever I reboot/boot after shutdown when I overclocked CPU.
> 
> CPU: Intel i7-9700K
> BIOS Version: F5
> VCore: 1.30V
> LLC: Turbo
> Speedstep and C-States disabled
> 
> I can boot into Windows 10 (Version 1803, build 17134.376) immediately after overclocking,
> I have ran Prime95 with AVX for 4 hours. Real Bench for 8 hours. No errors.
> 
> So the overclocking settings are stable.
> 
> However whenver I reboot it/boot after complete shutdown, the PC would reboot itself for a few times, resetting the CMOS settings entirely.
> 
> At first few times I thought my settings wasnt stable enough. But after a few long stress test I am sure my settings is stable.
> 
> Seems it somehow deem my overclocking settings were unstable, hence resetting my settings.
> 
> If there's any Gigabyte staff here, please help to test/replicate the scenario. Thank you in advance.
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is memory timings/training. Can you enable XMP (or if enabled try setting manually) and/or switch to single BIOS mode.
> 
> To switch BIOS mode look to the bottom left of the board. There are 2 selector switches. Move the switch on the right to position "1" as seen here:
Click to expand...

Thank you very much Matthew. I will test that tomorrow.


----------



## serpentine

Picked up my Master from Newegg Canada, it’s $20 more expensive at Canada Computers for some reason and still in back order


----------



## Moparman

Ok so I like the look of the board out if the box. However I am the guy that likes less of the plastic covers and lights on things. I have removed the VRM and i/o cover and I really think they board looks good this way. The active cooling backplate is also a nice touch. One thing to note this is a very heavy motherboard.


----------



## Xanthux

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Xanthux said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got an issue with Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master, it keeps resetting/clearing CMOS whenever I reboot/boot after shutdown when I overclocked CPU.
> 
> CPU: Intel i7-9700K
> BIOS Version: F5
> VCore: 1.30V
> LLC: Turbo
> Speedstep and C-States disabled
> 
> I can boot into Windows 10 (Version 1803, build 17134.376) immediately after overclocking,
> I have ran Prime95 with AVX for 4 hours. Real Bench for 8 hours. No errors.
> 
> So the overclocking settings are stable.
> 
> However whenver I reboot it/boot after complete shutdown, the PC would reboot itself for a few times, resetting the CMOS settings entirely.
> 
> At first few times I thought my settings wasnt stable enough. But after a few long stress test I am sure my settings is stable.
> 
> Seems it somehow deem my overclocking settings were unstable, hence resetting my settings.
> 
> If there's any Gigabyte staff here, please help to test/replicate the scenario. Thank you in advance.
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is memory timings/training. Can you enable XMP (or if enabled try setting manually) and/or switch to single BIOS mode.
> 
> To switch BIOS mode look to the bottom left of the board. There are 2 selector switches. Move the switch on the right to position "1" as seen here:
Click to expand...

Hi Matthew, I tried to manaully set my memoery timing following the XMP profile.

For BIOS switch, out of the box it is both on position "1" (Right). And I have changed the SB to position "2" (Left side).

Issue persist. Whenever I reboot or cold boot, it will go into reboot loops and a reboot later My CMOS settings were cleared/reset to default.


----------



## porksmuggler

Xanthux said:


> Issue persist. Whenever I reboot or cold boot, it will go into reboot loops and a reboot later My CMOS settings were cleared/reset to default.


Given the benchmarks you've run, likely not the issue, but have you tried with just one stick of memory yet? One then the other if the first stick results in the same.


----------



## Xanthux

porksmuggler said:


> Xanthux said:
> 
> 
> 
> Issue persist. Whenever I reboot or cold boot, it will go into reboot loops and a reboot later My CMOS settings were cleared/reset to default.
> 
> 
> 
> Given the benchmarks you've run, likely not the issue, but have you tried with just one stick of memory yet? One then the other if the first stick results in the same.
Click to expand...

Sure, will try later today and report back.
Thanks for helping


----------



## nhanphan1990

Xanthux said:


> Sure, will try later today and report back.
> Thanks for helping


Try replacing the cmos battery? 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## PabloDiablo

Silly question as I know it should be obvious. But for the Z390 Aorus Pro WIFI which one is the more up to date BIOS the f6 or the f6b?

I know that seems silly but the f6b has a release date of Oct 12 and the f6 has a release date of Oct 22 (hence my confusion). Cheers


----------



## Xanthux

Thanks to all, issues resolved. I simply re-seat the RAM again.


----------



## Cyph3r

PabloDiablo said:


> Silly question as I know it should be obvious. But for the Z390 Aorus Pro WIFI which one is the more up to date BIOS the f6 or the f6b?
> 
> I know that seems silly but the f6b has a release date of Oct 12 and the f6 has a release date of Oct 22 (hence my confusion). Cheers


I assume F6b is the F6 Beta version which is why it came out sooner and F6 is the proper release. I'm just guessing though.


----------



## Fckbutton

Hello guys, while OC'ing my 9700K to 4,9 GHz on a Aorus Pro I ran into a issue...If I put AVX offset at 4 and leave all power saving features on auto, but I set high performance in windows, my core frequency jumps between 4,9 and 4,5 GHz on all cores all the time, whether it be just at idle with nothing running or in stress tests. If I leave AVX offset at 4, but disable the power saving settings, this doesn't happen, it will stay at 4,9 GHz at all times...
Anyone know which setting is causing this?


----------



## Telstar

subscribed.


----------



## Moparman

Fckbutton said:


> Hello guys, while OC'ing my 9700K to 4,9 GHz on a Aorus Pro I ran into a issue...If I put AVX offset at 4 and leave all power saving features on auto, but I set high performance in windows, my core frequency jumps between 4,9 and 4,5 GHz on all cores all the time, whether it be just at idle with nothing running or in stress tests. If I leave AVX offset at 4, but disable the power saving settings, this doesn't happen, it will stay at 4,9 GHz at all times...
> Anyone know which setting is causing this?


Sounds like it has to do with the power settings. I think if you leave it at auto it is going to hit a power limit like a gpu does and throttle. I would turn that stuff off when you're pushing an OC. I still haven't had chip come yet so I can't test yet to be more helpful.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Fckbutton said:


> Hello guys, while OC'ing my 9700K to 4,9 GHz on a Aorus Pro I ran into a issue...If I put AVX offset at 4 and leave all power saving features on auto, but I set high performance in windows, my core frequency jumps between 4,9 and 4,5 GHz on all cores all the time, whether it be just at idle with nothing running or in stress tests. If I leave AVX offset at 4, but disable the power saving settings, this doesn't happen, it will stay at 4,9 GHz at all times...
> Anyone know which setting is causing this?


Can you list the settings you changed in BIOS - MCE AUTO or Off? Any changes to C-states? 

My guess is something to do with C-states but I need to setup my board the same as yours to see what's going on.


----------



## Glerox

Aorus Master looks like one of the best choice for z390+9900K (so I ordered it). No major complaints apart an "audio shield" issue. Can somebody elaborate on that please? Thanks


----------



## Fckbutton

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Can you list the settings you changed in BIOS - MCE AUTO or Off? Any changes to C-states?
> 
> My guess is something to do with C-states but I need to setup my board the same as yours to see what's going on.


Things I changed from default (Gigabyte optimized) F6 bios:

MCE : OFF

CPU Clock Ratio : 49

AVX Offset : 4

XMP : Profile 1

Uncore Ratio : 43

VT-d : Disabled

LLC : Turbo

CPU Vcore : 1,25V 

Didn't touch C-states or any other power saving/power efficiency settings. High performace power setting in windows 10 1803.


----------



## Moparman

Glerox said:


> Aorus Master looks like one of the best choice for z390+9900K (so I ordered it). No major complaints apart an "audio shield" issue. Can somebody elaborate on that please? Thanks


Can you explain the Audio problem you're having please?


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Fckbutton said:


> Things I changed from default (Gigabyte optimized) F6 bios:
> 
> MCE : OFF
> 
> CPU Clock Ratio : 49
> 
> AVX Offset : 4
> 
> XMP : Profile 1
> 
> Uncore Ratio : 43
> 
> VT-d : Disabled
> 
> LLC : Turbo
> 
> CPU Vcore : 1,25V
> 
> Didn't touch C-states or any other power saving/power efficiency settings. High performace power setting in windows 10 1803.


I can reproduce this. Let me check and get back to you.

Edit: Setting C3 to disabled seems to fix this.


----------



## Fckbutton

GBT-MatthewH said:


> I can reproduce this. Let me check and get back to you.
> 
> Edit: Setting C3 to disabled seems to fix this.


This did not fix it for me unfortunately. I'm starting to think something is bugged with my AVX offset. If I turn AVX offset to auto or 0 I am stable (cinebench, prime) at 1,24vcore 4,9 GHz whether c-states etc. are enable or disabled, doesn't seem to matter. If I set AVX offset to 2 or 4 I instacrash in cinebench at the same vcore, both with c-states etc. enabled or disabled, again doesn't seem to matter. Just to pass cinebench I need 1,29v with avx offset...


----------



## Stockman

Moparman said:


> Can you explain the Audio problem you're having please?


When I hook up high quality headphones to the line-out jack on the I/O panel on my AORUS Master Z390 I hear a good deal of interference/static noise when the GPU is under load. So basically every gaming scenario is impacted. It doesn't overwhelm other sounds being played, but it's really noticeable during quieter sequences.

I've seen a few other cases of this reported so I'm guessing exchanging my board for a new one won't help.

Gigabyte - can you offer any suggestions on how to fix this?

I like everything else about the board (including the BIOS ), but at this price point poor audio shielding is really a bummer.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Fckbutton said:


> This did not fix it for me unfortunately. I'm starting to think something is bugged with my AVX offset. If I turn AVX offset to auto or 0 I am stable (cinebench, prime) at 1,24vcore 4,9 GHz whether c-states etc. are enable or disabled, doesn't seem to matter. If I set AVX offset to 2 or 4 I instacrash in cinebench at the same vcore, both with c-states etc. enabled or disabled, again doesn't seem to matter. Just to pass cinebench I need 1,29v with avx offset...


Try leaving MCE on AUTO and/or Uncore on AUTO.


----------



## Amanbra

Hey All, 



Anyone seeing some weird behaviour when dynamic overclocking? 



I have set AC / DC loadline to 1, Vcore to normal and when I start tweaking frequency to test for ability to OC the vcore keeps changing. 



Initially i start with just cinebench and monitor the vcore and a given frequency, what' I'm expecting to see the vcore to stay the same if I don't touch it but what my board is doing is changing the vcore based on frequency. ie: 4.7 normal no dvid offset 1.2v goes through. 4.8 vcore jumps to 1.22, 5g all of a sudden we're in 1.3 territory. 



Based on my experience with a gigabyte z270 board this shouldn't be happening. 



Anyone else see this?


----------



## Fckbutton

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Try leaving MCE on AUTO and/or Uncore on AUTO.


Turning on MCE fixed the jumping core frequency with avx offset on and cstates etc. enabled. It didn't fix the crashing though.

If I have two identical OC profiles, only difference being, one has avx offset 0/auto and one has avx offset 2, the profile with 0 will be stable at a much lower vcore than the one with 2.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Fckbutton said:


> Turning on MCE fixed the jumping core frequency with avx offset on and cstates etc. enabled. It didn't fix the crashing though.
> 
> If I have two identical OC profiles, only difference being, one has avx offset 0/auto and one has avx offset 2, the profile with 0 will be stable at a much lower vcore than the one with 2.


Got it, let me feedback to BIOS team and see what they say.


----------



## Moparman

Great to see this thread is already starting to help people. So has anyone used the Fan Commander on these boards? looking to see if it is something you all use?


----------



## Falkentyne

Amanbra said:


> Hey All,
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone seeing some weird behaviour when dynamic overclocking?
> 
> 
> 
> I have set AC / DC loadline to 1, Vcore to normal and when I start tweaking frequency to test for ability to OC the vcore keeps changing.
> 
> 
> 
> Initially i start with just cinebench and monitor the vcore and a given frequency, what' I'm expecting to see the vcore to stay the same if I don't touch it but what my board is doing is changing the vcore based on frequency. ie: 4.7 normal no dvid offset 1.2v goes through. 4.8 vcore jumps to 1.22, 5g all of a sudden we're in 1.3 territory.
> 
> 
> 
> Based on my experience with a gigabyte z270 board this shouldn't be happening.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else see this?


Perfectly normal.
Your CPU's default VID scales up to the highest official one core multiplier, which in this case is 5 ghz.
Your "adaptive" voltage is based on the CPU's default VID + offset.


----------



## shaolin95

Well after completely dismissing the Gigabyte Z390, it looks like I will end up with the Master as my 9900k mobo.
Just finally got a 9900k coming in two days so need a mobo now and the Asus Hero was kind of ruled out after the whole vrm fiasco. Then the MSI also because it cannot enable iGPU so that left me with the Asrock Taichi Ultimate and this Gigabyte Master. While I like the 8 Sata connectors of the Asrock, I kind of prefer what I have seen of the Gigabyte board.
How "bad" is the Bios as so many people claim vs Asus and others?
Do notice that I am coming from an ancient Asus Formula III board so is not like I am used to fancy Bios anyways. lol

Thanks


----------



## Amanbra

Falkentyne said:


> Perfectly normal.
> Your CPU's default VID scales up to the highest official one core multiplier, which in this case is 5 ghz.
> Your "adaptive" voltage is based on the CPU's default VID + offset.





really... i was expecting the vcore to stay the same =/ okay thanks


----------



## doom26464

My 9900k is sopuses to ship today so I think I will be going with the master after the asus debacle. 

Only worry is about the audio issolation issues people have been reporting. Anyone out there with the master who doesn't have audio issues????


----------



## Cyph3r

doom26464 said:


> My 9900k is sopuses to ship today so I think I will be going with the master after the asus debacle.
> 
> Only worry is about the audio issolation issues people have been reporting. Anyone out there with the master who doesn't have audio issues????


Audio isolation issues are common on motherboards. You can't single out the Master for it. 

If you're using speakers it's likely you wouldn't notice. If you're using high impedance headphones it's possible you wouldn't notice. If you have bad hearing, it's possible you won't notice.


----------



## PuD

Hi all, I take the message written in the other thread as requested by matthew:


...What I noticed, however, is that this behavior occurs only when in p95 a thread got in error (one core stop to work, overclocking not stable, voltage too low) and repeats itself every time a new thread fails...




GBT-MatthewH said:


> Can you elaborate? Maybe in the Master thread so we don't derail this thread into tech support: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...-thread-7.html



I try to explain myself better.
During the overclocking phase doing the tests with p95 + AVX I noticed that: if 1 core fails the fans/pump connected on sysfan_pump_5 and 6 (set with the cpu temp sensor as a reference) stop to functions (0 rpm) for a few seconds and then resume normally until another core fails. This never happens if overclocking is stable and there are no errors in the test. All monitored by hwmonitor64.


----------



## Cyph3r

PuD said:


> I try to explain myself better.
> During the overclocking phase doing the tests with p95 + AVX I noticed that: if 1 core fails the fans/pump connected on sysfan_pump_5 and 6 (set with the cpu temp sensor as a reference) stop to functions (0 rpm) for a few seconds and then resume normally until another core fails. This never happens if overclocking is stable and there are no errors in the test. All monitored by hwmonitor64.


My fans attached to Sysfan pump 5 and 6 will randomly stop and resume even though no threads/cores are failing.


----------



## shaolin95

doom26464 said:


> My 9900k is sopuses to ship today so I think I will be going with the master after the asus debacle.
> 
> Only worry is about the audio issolation issues people have been reporting. Anyone out there with the master who doesn't have audio issues????


Ha welcome to the club. That is the same reason I went with the Master after the whole asus vrm fiasco. Although MSI was my 2nd choice until the lack of iGPU issue showed up. 
So audio issues...maybe I should keep my Sound Blaster Z then.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

doom26464 said:


> Only worry is about the audio issolation issues people have been reporting. Anyone out there with the master who doesn't have audio issues????


I'm looking into this and trying to reproduce. If you have any isolation issues please PM me or list it out in this thread. Specifically what I am looking for is ways to re-create it. Pertinent information would be: Motherboard, stock or overclocked?, GPU, headset (plugged into the board or I/O?), is your system in a case or test bench?, steps to reproduce the issue.



PuD said:


> Hi all, I take the message written in the other thread as requested by matthew:
> 
> ...What I noticed, however, is that this behavior occurs only when in p95 a thread got in error (one core stop to work, overclocking not stable, voltage too low) and repeats itself every time a new thread fails...
> 
> I try to explain myself better.
> During the overclocking phase doing the tests with p95 + AVX I noticed that: if 1 core fails the fans/pump connected on sysfan_pump_5 and 6 (set with the cpu temp sensor as a reference) stop to functions (0 rpm) for a few seconds and then resume normally until another core fails. This never happens if overclocking is stable and there are no errors in the test. All monitored by hwmonitor64.


Thanks, going to try and reproduce this myself today.

Edit: So far I can't get the fans to stop. I even lowered Vcore to cause threads to fail (which 2 already have). I'll post a screen shot after lunch so it has more time to test, but thus far both fan5/6 are humming along.


----------



## Cyph3r

GBT-MatthewH said:


> I'm looking into this and trying to reproduce. If you have any isolation issues please PM me or list it out in this thread. Specifically what I am looking for is ways to re-create it. Pertinent information would be: Motherboard, stock or overclocked?, GPU, headset (plugged into the board or I/O?), is your system in a case or test bench?, steps to reproduce the issue.


Aorus Master
8700k 5GHz @ 1.344v
EVGA 1080Ti FTW3

Philips X2 and Sennheiser HD558

Plugged directly into the board (front I/O always results in worse shielding issues for me but that's dependant on the case)

Meshify C case.

Happens when the GPU is under load - the heavier the load the worse the interference. TimeSpy benchmark is particularly bad, most games results in a faint electrical hum that is easily drowned out by the game itself but is audible in silent sections. No issues when the GPU isn't under load.

Note that the Aorus Master has better audio isolation than the Z370 Taichi, but not as good as the Asus Max (though a fair trade off consider the rest of the board is so much better). I just wish these quirks with the fan headers, c-states and audio isolation weren't present because it'd be a 10/10 board otherwise which I've never been able to say before.


----------



## Moparman

Does anyone have Multi GPU's and NVME installed?


----------



## doom26464

Cyph3r said:


> doom26464 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My 9900k is sopuses to ship today so I think I will be going with the master after the asus debacle.
> 
> Only worry is about the audio issolation issues people have been reporting. Anyone out there with the master who doesn't have audio issues????
> 
> 
> 
> Audio isolation issues are common on motherboards. You can't single out the Master for it.
> 
> If you're using speakers it's likely you wouldn't notice. If you're using high impedance headphones it's possible you wouldn't notice. If you have bad hearing, it's possible you won't notice.
Click to expand...

Ok thank you for the input. If i have audio issues I will report back in this thread. 

Im just going to order the master off newegg after work today as im tired of reading through mobo info for the last 3 weeks. With the cpu on its way its go time.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Quick update so we're all on the same page:

AVX being applied at idle - Can reproduce, should have a BIOS fix soon.

Audio noise - Looking into it.

Fan's stopping on 5/6 - Can't reproduce (yet?). Going to keep trying.


----------



## PuD

Thanks MatthewH for your interest.
I try to give more info:
On header 5 I have a laing ddc pump
On header 6 there are 3 AP 181 Fans
Smart 5 app installed.
Maybe the problem occurs only when there is greater absorption?

My build:
9600K
16Gb corsair vengeance LPX 3000 Mhz
256Gb Nvme 970 Samsung
1Tb crucial mx500
Gtx1080 zotac mini

Let me know if you need more info.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Well I can kind of re-create it, but not consistently yet. I forwarded what I found to our HQ engineers, if they can recreate it they can fix it... If they can't re-create it I'll keep digging on my end.

FYI this is what fan testing looks like in my office


----------



## bastian

Matthew:

Master user here. Please have the BIOS people do something to improve making adjustments to fan curves.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

bastian said:


> Matthew:
> 
> Master user here. Please have the BIOS people do something to improve making adjustments to fan curves.


Can you be more specific?


----------



## Bronson

Is the Aorus extreme the only one that comes with thunderbolt? I've received an email advertizing it and aside the far from good design, it looks like it has all the rings and bells, I couldn't find it on Amazon though...thanxs in advance


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Leemarvin said:


> Is the Aorus extreme the only one that comes with thunderbolt? I've received an email advertizing it and aside the far from good design, it looks like it has all the rings and bells, I couldn't find it on Amazon though...thanxs in advance


Xtreme and Designare have TB3. Xtreme is only available on newegg right now, although it sold out :-( Should have more next week.


----------



## Fornowagain

Cyph3r said:


> My fans attached to Sysfan pump 5 and 6 will randomly stop and resume even though no threads/cores are failing.


Bought in a Master with a mind to replace an Asus Hero. Found the same problem with the pump stopping randomly with the cpu under load. Also noticed the noise you mentioned. Nice board, very well made. Seemed quite stable. Its gone back for now, not sure what to try next.


----------



## GTANY

Fornowagain said:


> Bought in a Master with a mind to replace an Asus Hero. Found the same problem with the pump stopping randomly with the cpu under load. Also noticed the noise you mentioned. Nice board, very well made. Seemed quite stable. Its gone back for now, not sure what to try next.


High-end pumps require much current, more than what motherboards can provide. I advise you to connect it to the power supply or a rheobus (Aquaero). It should solve your problem.


----------



## PuD

Hello everyone, I found another strange behavior. When I turn on my PC I see the code "*04*" on the debug display and if I have the vcore set manually (for example 1.30v) it seems not to be considered because its value is 1.21v (as if it were set to default / normal). But if I restart (without shutdown), the code becomes "*A0*" and the vcore is correct as I manually set it.
I tried to move the SB into single bios, but the problem was the same.
Any idea?


For the problem related to fan5 and 6 I saw that if I start a p95 + AVX stress test and after Intel XTU utility, sometimes (usually when overclock is not stable) the drop in rpm / stop occurs. It seems that the software interacts badly when the CPU is fully loaded.


----------



## PuD

GTANY said:


> High-end pumps require much current, more than what motherboards can provide. I advise you to connect it to the power supply or a rheobus (Aquaero). It should solve your problem.



The headers "SYS_FAN5/6_PUMP" are made to support larger loads, in fact from specifications should support 2A (24W) which in my case are more than enough to handle the connected load: 18W for the laing ddc pump and the 3xAP181 fans about 16.2W.


----------



## Fornowagain

GTANY said:


> High-end pumps require much current, more than what motherboards can provide. I advise you to connect it to the power supply or a rheobus (Aquaero). It should solve your problem.


It is a typical PWM D5. It takes it's current from a separate feed. All that connects to the board is the PWM and signal wires. Also the pump headers are designed for higher loads.


----------



## tek_01

Hey guys im running the master with an 9900k, have set xmp to profile 1 (3000mhz) and everything else is left stock. 
My cpu i have noticed runs at4.7-4.8ghz but hits 1.452v on cvore, to my understanding that is way too much for daily use (not to mention the temps get close to the 100 degree mark)
Is this normal? I tried running 1.35v max at 47 multi but it just crashed and corrupted the bios


----------



## PuD

Hi, try with the normal settings under vcore. The “auto” value which is the default give to much voltage when all cores goes up in frequency.
For the overclocking if you are on air cooler I suggest don’t push to much with the vcore. This 9k are very power angry


----------



## tek_01

I am using the Dark rock pro 4 cooler, so air cooler but a decent one


----------



## Stryfe2000Turbo

tek_01 said:


> I am using the Dark rock pro 4 cooler, so air cooler but a decent one


A high end air cooler is really just the bare minimum when it comes to 9900k


----------



## Hercules99

*Thanks!*

Fornowagain directed me to the thread and I was already set on buying the board because of hw unboxed vrm vid and I had an asus board and I sent it back because of the vrm bologna. I just want to say thanks everyone for your posts, and the fact that a company rep is in the thread only sloidified my decision to get the board.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

tek_01 said:


> Hey guys im running the master with an 9900k, have set xmp to profile 1 (3000mhz) and everything else is left stock.
> My cpu i have noticed runs at4.7-4.8ghz but hits 1.452v on cvore, to my understanding that is way too much for daily use (not to mention the temps get close to the 100 degree mark)
> Is this normal? I tried running 1.35v max at 47 multi but it just crashed and corrupted the bios


Are you on the latest BIOS? Where are you seeing 1.452? I think you are looking at VID not Vcore.


----------



## Moparman

tek_01 said:


> Hey guys im running the master with an 9900k, have set xmp to profile 1 (3000mhz) and everything else is left stock.
> My cpu i have noticed runs at4.7-4.8ghz but hits 1.452v on cvore, to my understanding that is way too much for daily use (not to mention the temps get close to the 100 degree mark)
> Is this normal? I tried running 1.35v max at 47 multi but it just crashed and corrupted the bios


Can you take pics and post them please?


----------



## tek_01

I Will take them when i get home after work. I am using HWMonitor so unless that gives false readings? I am looking at CPU CVore that is right up the top one of the first few readings.

I am using the f5 BIOS, which is what got corrupt after the failed attempt at 1.35v 47x multi causing a black screen and reverting to the f4 BIOS. Since then i have re-flashed back to f5


----------



## PuD

PuD said:


> Hello everyone, I found another strange behavior. When I turn on my PC I see the code "*04*" on the debug display and if I have the vcore set manually (for example 1.30v) it seems not to be considered because its value is 1.21v (as if it were set to default / normal). But if I restart (without shutdown), the code becomes "*A0*" and the vcore is correct as I manually set it.
> I tried to move the SB into single bios, but the problem was the same.
> Any idea?


Thanks to Matthew there is a simple fix: disable the "fast startup" on Windows 10


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Ya, thats VID which is normal. VID is the Voltage the CPU asks for and set by Intel - Vcore is the actual voltage delivered. 

This shows VID (1.4) @ 4.7










As compared to Vcore listed further below.


----------



## tek_01

Thanks for the reply mathew 

This is not my picture but exactly where im reasing the voltage, the line i am reading from is the very first one VCORE, i am using hwmonitor not hwinfo so i think they are 2 different programs










Is the true Vcore or VID? because there are VID listed further down for each core i think from memory


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Ah, I only ever use HWInfo. HWMonitor also shows VID and Vcore, but they are in different orders  I have both open right now and they both show similar Vcore values on my Z390 Master / 9900k


----------



## Fornowagain

tek_01 said:


> Is the true Vcore or VID? because there are VID listed further down for each core i think from memory


When in the bios, what does it report for CPU voltage in the EasyMode summary page or the ALT pop out.


----------



## Moparman

Great news my 9600k just shipped today so I will be able to start joining in on the fun really soon.


----------



## whymoo

Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask but does the mini/wifi version of this board have 2 or more usb 3.0 or higher controllers (you can check here https://www.oculus.com/blog/oculus-roomscale-identifying-host-controllers/) Also, are there other miniITX boards that will work with 9th gen intel and have 2 or more usb 3.0 or higher controllers?


----------



## porksmuggler

whymoo said:


> Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask but does the mini/wifi version of this board have 2 or more usb 3.0 or higher controllers (you can check here https://www.oculus.com/blog/oculus-roomscale-identifying-host-controllers/) Also, are there other miniITX boards that will work with 9th gen intel and have 2 or more usb 3.0 or higher controllers?


Here's the usb availability for the Z390 I Aorus Pro Wifi:

1 x USB Type-C™ port with USB 3.1 Gen 1 support, available through the internal USB header
1 x USB Type-C™ port on the back panel, with USB 3.1 Gen 2 support
1 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-A port (red) on the back panel
6 x USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports (4 ports on the back panel, 2 ports available through the internal USB header)
2 x USB 2.0/1.1 ports available through the internal USB header


----------



## Sajaa

Hello,

I have a weird behavior / bug with my Aorus Master :My Aorus MAster doesn't recognize my SSD 860Evo 500Gb.

I really need your help, this is Driving me nuts.

Here my config,

Aorus master z390 mother board and 8700k

1 GPU on port PCI express 16x (1st)

2 970 Pro 512 NVME :
1 Nvme on M2M (Sata 4&5 disabled) Win10
1 Nvme on M2A

3 SSD :
1 Crucial MX200 on port SATA 0
1 Samsung 850 Evo 256Go SATA 1
1 Samsung 860 Evo on SATA 3

All SSD are detected exept the 860Evo 500Go

I did some cross tests :

When I plugg the 860Evo to a Sata where the others SSD are detected : it's not detected
When I plugg the Crucial (or the other 256Go Samsung) to a Sata port where the 860Evo is not detected : it's detected…
I installed the 860Evo on another computer : it's detected….










When I do a hot plug I can see it (I can format write on it etc.), but as soon as I reboot my computer it disapear
Last time I enabled / disabled Erp in Bios / Power, it appears and disapear again after reboot.



Is there any bios options I forgot to activate ?

Why all the SSD are detected but not this one ?


I hope I won't have to RMA it...


Thanks for you help !


----------



## Timur Born

What's with all the USB hubs on even highly priced boards like the Master and Extreme?

On the Master and Extreme: how many internal/external USB 2 ports are directly connected to the PCH USB lanes instead of being degraded by hubs? 

On the Designare: how many internal/external USB 3 ports are directly connected to the PCH USB lanes instead of being degraded by hubs?


----------



## Stockman

Quote from Gigabyte : "I'm looking into this and trying to reproduce. If you have any isolation issues please PM me or list it out in this thread. Specifically what I am looking for is ways to re-create it. Pertinent information would be: Motherboard, stock or overclocked?, GPU, headset (plugged into the board or I/O?), is your system in a case or test bench?, steps to reproduce the issue."

Here is my setup:
Thermal take Core P3 case
Aorus Master Z390
BIOS all stock/auto except for XMP
2x 8 GB 3200
9700k no OC
1080 ti no OC
Sennheiser headphones

When plugged into rear I/O line out very noticeable interference through headphones when GPU is under load. No issues with speakers plugged into same jack. All drivers up-to-date (even though this has little to do with software)

Sorry if this post looks goofy, I'm on mobile.


----------



## Majek

Deleted


----------



## Majek

PuD said:


> Hello everyone, I found another strange behavior. When I turn on my PC I see the code "*04*" on the debug display and if I have the vcore set manually (for example 1.30v) it seems not to be considered because its value is 1.21v (as if it were set to default / normal). But if I restart (without shutdown), the code becomes "*A0*" and the vcore is correct as I manually set it.
> I tried to move the SB into single bios, but the problem was the same.
> Any idea?
> 
> 
> For the problem related to fan5 and 6 I saw that if I start a p95 + AVX stress test and after Intel XTU utility, sometimes (usually when overclock is not stable) the drop in rpm / stop occurs. It seems that the software interacts badly when the CPU is fully loaded.





Hercules99 said:


> Fornowagain directed me to the thread and I was already set on buying the board because of hw unboxed vrm vid and I had an asus board and I sent it back because of the vrm bologna. I just want to say thanks everyone for your posts, and the fact that a company rep is in the thread only sloidified my decision to get the board.





PuD said:


> Thanks to Matthew there is a simple fix: disable the "fast startup" on Windows 10


Hi,

I am wondering if I have the same issue? My Z390 Aours Master has its BIOS settings set to default (F5 version). The cpu core in UEFI is 1,248v. 

Upon cold boot, immediately after Windows starts, the vcore jumps up to 1,44v even though the VID on each core of i9 9900k is around 1,23v only. The reading comes from CPU-Z as well as HWInfo64. When applications are loading vcore fluctuates between 1,308 and 1,44v.

When I restart the PC (no changes to BIOS, Windows settings etc. whatsoever, just reboot), the vcore does not exceed 1,248 as expected under any circumstances. 

I have reproduced it several times - every cold boot, the vcore jumps wildly to over 1,4v until restart. First windows restart and it settles below 1,248 upon load.

Again, all the settings in BIOS are default/auto. I have tried to restore them (F7) but it does not help. There are no overclocking applications installed and no oc settings are applied anywhere (BIOS/windows).

Is this what you were seeing and what Matthew's solution applies to. Not at my PC at the moment, so can't check.

Thanks!


----------



## Timur Born

porksmuggler said:


> Here's the usb availability for the Z390 I Aorus Pro Wifi:
> 
> 1 x USB Type-C™ port with USB 3.1 Gen 1 support, available through the internal USB header
> 1 x USB Type-C™ port on the back panel, with USB 3.1 Gen 2 support
> 1 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-A port (red) on the back panel
> 6 x USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports (4 ports on the back panel, 2 ports available through the internal USB header)
> 2 x USB 2.0/1.1 ports available through the internal USB header


This is what the Gigabyte site lists for the Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi. It differs from your list?!

Chipset:

1 x USB Type-C™ port with USB 3.1 Gen 2 support on the back panel
1 x USB Type-C™ port with USB 3.1 Gen 1 support, available through the internal USB header
2 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-A ports (red) on the back panel
5 x USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports (3 ports on the back panel, 2 ports available through the internal USB header)

Chipset+USB 2.0 Hub:

8 x USB 2.0/1.1 ports (4 ports on the back panel, 4 ports available through the internal USB headers)


----------



## Falkentyne

Majek said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am wondering if I have the same issue? My Z390 Aours Master has its BIOS settings set to default (F5 version). The cpu core in UEFI is 1,248v.
> 
> Upon cold boot, immediately after Windows starts, the vcore jumps up to 1,44v even though the VID on each core of i9 9900k is around 1,23v only. The reading comes from CPU-Z as well as HWInfo64. When applications are loading vcore fluctuates between 1,308 and 1,44v.
> 
> When I restart the PC (no changes to BIOS, Windows settings etc. whatsoever, just reboot), the vcore does not exceed 1,248 as expected under any circumstances.
> 
> I have reproduced it several times - every cold boot, the vcore jumps wildly to over 1,4v until restart. First windows restart and it settles below 1,248 upon load.
> 
> Again, all the settings in BIOS are default/auto. I have tried to restore them (F7) but it does not help. There are no overclocking applications installed and no oc settings are applied anywhere (BIOS/windows).
> 
> Is this what you were seeing and what Matthew's solution applies to. Not at my PC at the moment, so can't check.
> 
> Thanks!


I don't have this motherboard yet but try the following.

Set voltage to override. 1.25v.
Set Core IA AC DC loadline to the LOWEST non zero value. On Asus boards this is 0.01. On some other boards, it is 1. 
This may be called internal AC DC loadline.

The reference value for 9900K is 1.60 mOhms This value causes the voltage to be boosted by a factor of 1.60 mOhms of resistance --the higher the current, the higher the load voltage. Basically it's Intel preprogrammed vdroop compensation, which is usually designed for ADAPTIVE VOLTAGES ONLY. This option is not designed to be used with "Loadline Calibration", but there have been buggy Bioses in the past where the IA AC DC setting gets applied on top of loadline calibration (note: IA AC DC is intel authorized design and Loadline calibration is third party motherboard design), causing immense voltage spikes.

IA AC loadline is the load voltage signal going to the CPU (based on resistance). IA DC loadline is the measured voltage that is reported to the system (not the real voltage).


14. Load Line (AC/DC) should be measured by the VRTT tool and programmed accordingly via the BIOS Load Line override setup
options. AC/DC Load Line BIOS programming directly affects operating voltages (AC) and power measurements (DC). A
superior board design with a shallower AC Load Line can improve on power, performance, and thermals compared to boards
designed for POR impedance.


----------



## PuD

Majek said:


> Hi, I am wondering if I have the same issue?....



What code do you see when you detect the high vcore? If it is 04 you have the same problem mine and can be solved easily, if the code is A0, there are other problems.


----------



## doom26464

my gigabyte master should be here this afternoon, hopefully this evening I can begin assembly. 

This will be my first gigabyte board since athlon days so hopefully all goes smooth with this board.


----------



## Teemu

I have a z390 aorus pro wifi. Should I update the bios from f5 to f6b? Isn't there always risk that the flashing goes wrong?


----------



## Stryfe2000Turbo

Teemu said:


> I have a z390 aorus pro wifi. Should I update the bios from f5 to f6b? Isn't there always risk that the flashing goes wrong?


You should update to F6. F6b was the beta version that came before F6

The board has a backup BIOS chip that will return the board to the BIOS it was shipped with, should something go wrong.


----------



## Majek

PuD said:


> What code do you see when you detect the high vcore? If it is 04 you have the same problem mine and can be solved easily, if the code is A0, there are other problems.


Hi,

Thanks for your reply. It looks like in my case enabling the fast boot fixed my issue - no more overvolting. Weird - in your case disabling it worked...


----------



## Majek

Falkentyne said:


> I don't have this motherboard yet but try the following.
> 
> Set voltage to override. 1.25v.
> Set Core IA AC DC loadline to the LOWEST non zero value. On Asus boards this is 0.01. On some other boards, it is 1.
> This may be called internal AC DC loadline.
> 
> The reference value for 9900K is 1.60 mOhms This value causes the voltage to be boosted by a factor of 1.60 mOhms of resistance --the higher the current, the higher the load voltage. Basically it's Intel preprogrammed vdroop compensation, which is usually designed for ADAPTIVE VOLTAGES ONLY. This option is not designed to be used with "Loadline Calibration", but there have been buggy Bioses in the past where the IA AC DC setting gets applied on top of loadline calibration (note: IA AC DC is intel authorized design and Loadline calibration is third party motherboard design), causing immense voltage spikes.
> 
> IA AC loadline is the load voltage signal going to the CPU (based on resistance). IA DC loadline is the measured voltage that is reported to the system (not the real voltage).
> 
> 
> 14. Load Line (AC/DC) should be measured by the VRTT tool and programmed accordingly via the BIOS Load Line override setup
> options. AC/DC Load Line BIOS programming directly affects operating voltages (AC) and power measurements (DC). A
> superior board design with a shallower AC Load Line can improve on power, performance, and thermals compared to boards
> designed for POR impedance.


Thanks a lot for this exhaustive answer. I appreciate it.

For now it seems simply enabling fast boot fixed the issue...


----------



## Shiftstealth

I cheaped out and bought the Aorus Ultra D:

Should still be good enough for the 9900k


----------



## porksmuggler

Timur Born said:


> This is what the Gigabyte site lists for the Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi. It differs from your list?!
> 
> Chipset:
> 
> 1 x USB Type-C™ port with USB 3.1 Gen 2 support on the back panel
> 1 x USB Type-C™ port with USB 3.1 Gen 1 support, available through the internal USB header
> 2 x USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-A ports (red) on the back panel
> 5 x USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports (3 ports on the back panel, 2 ports available through the internal USB header)
> 
> Chipset+USB 2.0 Hub:
> 
> 8 x USB 2.0/1.1 ports (4 ports on the back panel, 4 ports available through the internal USB headers)


That's not the board we're talking about, take a look, two different boards.

https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/Z390-I-AORUS-PRO-WIFI-rev-10#kf


----------



## Timur Born

Ah, I missed the "I" in the name. Thanks for pointing me to it and sorry for the confusion.


----------



## porksmuggler

Timur Born said:


> Ah, I missed the "I" in the name. Thanks for pointing me to it and sorry for the confusion.


No worries, and your other question regarding usb, I'd recommend starting here:

https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...s/300-series-chipset-pch-datasheet-vol-1.html

Particularly 3.2 Flexible I/O Implementation. There's only so much to go around, and depending on the number of each usb type, you get more or less overall usb ports.


----------



## pzaren

Could someone please comment on Z390 Aorus Pro (Wifi)? Is this board sufficient for decent 9900k overclocks?
Will VRM and VRM cooling be good enough for long and heavy 8 core loads?


----------



## Moparman

pzaren said:


> Could someone please comment on Z390 Aorus Pro (Wifi)? Is this board sufficient for decent 9900k overclocks?
> Will VRM and VRM cooling be good enough for long and heavy 8 core loads?


You should have no issue with the 8core and that board as it was designed for it. However if you're worried about it have a fan blow over the Vrm as you should have cooling anyway when you push a high OC.


----------



## Moparman

OK so I was getting my loop up and going. Everyone needs to check if they have a metal cooler backplate all of mine make contact with a capacitor pin on the back of the board. Had to bend the pin over.


----------



## tek_01

Ok for the non believers, here is a screenshot of my vcore going crazy. Thos was right after I woke the computer from sleep. I was doing nothing apart from browsing.
Yesterday i couldnt get it to go above 1.34v even with p95 or cinebench (hence the high temps in that screenshot) But now its like 1.4v+ doing nothing!? wth...

EDIT: The 2 snapshots were not taken at the exact same second thats why the current and the cpu z shot dont match.


----------



## Timur Born

porksmuggler said:


> No worries, and your other question regarding usb, I'd recommend starting here:
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...s/300-series-chipset-pch-datasheet-vol-1.html
> 
> Particularly 3.2 Flexible I/O Implementation. There's only so much to go around, and depending on the number of each usb type, you get more or less overall usb ports.


USB 2 ports seem to be on top of any flexible I/O implementation. Both the Extreme and Master use 2x USB 2 hubs, one for the backpanel and one for internal. This looks very much like wanting to save on copper lines and limits the usability of those ports. Fortunately you can still use the many hub-less USB 3 ports instead (11 on Extreme, 9 on Master).

The Designare only offers 7 hub-less USB 3 ports. One could assume that the rest was needed for Thunderbolt, but then the Extreme also offers TB (and more) on top of its 11 USB 3 ports. That looks like letdown. Does anyone know what kind USB 3.1 Gen 1 hub chipsets are used by Gigabyte (especially on the Designare)? Asrock and Asus keep using a faulty Asmedia 3.0 chipset. Gigabyte used Genesys Logic for their USB 2 hub, but hopefully they do not use GL for their USB 3 hub, because that one is faulty, too.


----------



## pzaren

Moparman said:


> You should have no issue with the 8core and that board as it was designed for it. However if you're worried about it have a fan blow over the Vrm as you should have cooling anyway when you push a high OC.


Do you mean a fan directly "pasted" on the VRM, or is it enough with front case fans directed towards the VRM part of the motherboard?


----------



## PuD

tek_01 said:


> Ok for the non believers, here is a screenshot of my vcore going crazy. Thos was right after I woke the computer from sleep. I was doing nothing apart from browsing.
> Yesterday i couldnt get it to go above 1.34v even with p95 or cinebench (hence the high temps in that screenshot) But now its like 1.4v+ doing nothing!? wth...
> 
> EDIT: The 2 snapshots were not taken at the exact same second thats why the current and the cpu z shot dont match.





Majek said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am wondering if I have the same issue? My Z390 Aours Master has its BIOS settings set to default (F5 version). The cpu core in UEFI is 1,248v.
> 
> Upon cold boot, immediately after Windows starts, the vcore jumps up to 1,44v even though the VID on each core of i9 9900k is around 1,23v only. The reading comes from CPU-Z as well as HWInfo64. When applications are loading vcore fluctuates between 1,308 and 1,44v.
> 
> When I restart the PC (no changes to BIOS, Windows settings etc. whatsoever, just reboot), the vcore does not exceed 1,248 as expected under any circumstances.
> 
> I have reproduced it several times - every cold boot, the vcore jumps wildly to over 1,4v until restart. First windows restart and it settles below 1,248 upon load.
> 
> Again, all the settings in BIOS are default/auto. I have tried to restore them (F7) but it does not help. There are no overclocking applications installed and no oc settings are applied anywhere (BIOS/windows).
> 
> Is this what you were seeing and what Matthew's solution applies to. Not at my PC at the moment, so can't check.
> 
> Thanks!





Majek said:


> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for your reply. It looks like in my case enabling the fast boot fixed my issue - no more overvolting. Weird - in your case disabling it worked...


 

You probably have the same problem that Majek had, try to enable or disable the fastboot.


----------



## JonathanNgo

I bought an AORUS Xtreme Z390 and I'm not a fan of that SOLID pin right angle. I have Phanteks Evolv X and it cramps the 24 pin connector to a super tight place.


----------



## Timur Born

Does anyone know what USB 3 hub chipset is used on the Designare? Having a hub in front of so called "DAC" ports is a rather bad idea.


----------



## Timur Born

Are the Thunderbolt ports on Designare and Extreme "Alpine Ridge" or "Titan Ridge" parts?


----------



## Majek

PuD said:


> You probably have the same problem that Majek had, try to enable or disable the fastboot.


Hi guys,

No, I thought this fixed the issue but it didn't. Today after cold boot on auto settings, the vcore (not VID) was jumping happily to 1.44v on the desktop. 
A Windows restart later and it is maxing out at around 1.2v.

@tek_01 - does restarting windows fix it for you?
@GBT-MatthewH

First of all, this is my first Gigabyte board since Core2Duo times, so haven't been looking at Gigabyte threads for a long time. It is great to see that you are actively participating in the discussions.

Would you be able to comment here with regard to Aorus Master overvolting i9 9900k at idle with stock settings upon cold boot (F5 BIOS)?
In my case, the voltage jumps anywhere from 1.308 to 1.44v just 'doing nothing'. Restart and the voltage sits around 1.2v (close to VID) until I power off the computer completely. 

Thank you in advance!


----------



## Stryfe2000Turbo

Majek said:


> Would you be able to comment here with regard to Aorus Master overvolting i9 9900k at idle with stock settings upon cold boot (F5 BIOS)?
> In my case, the voltage jumps anywhere from 1.308 to 1.44v just 'doing nothing'. Restart and the voltage sits around 1.2v (close to VID) until I power off the computer completely.


Have you tried the F6 BIOS? I found the vcore to be more reasonable once I updated


----------



## Moparman

pzaren said:


> Do you mean a fan directly "pasted" on the VRM, or is it enough with front case fans directed towards the VRM part of the motherboard?


 Just airflow in the case should do. In my case (Rosewill RISE) I have the 2 fans at the top blowing into the case and that goes across the VRM. But this is how I have setup all my rigs in the past where the vrm has airflow.


----------



## PuD

Majek said:


> Hi guys,
> No, I thought this fixed the issue but it didn't. Today after cold boot on auto settings, the vcore (not VID) was jumping happily to 1.44v on the desktop.
> A Windows restart later and it is maxing out at around 1.2v.



Instead of enabling or disabling the fast boot from the bios try to follow this procedure that disables it from Windows 10: https://www.windowscentral.com/how-disable-windows-10-fast-startup



Only in this way has stopped giving me problems and what I set as vcore was kept even after a shutdown.


There is no F6 bios for the aorus master that I know.


----------



## tek_01

@Majek 
Yes, restarting makes the voltages stable, inline with what I think they should be . never going above 1.3ish 
I have reproduced this 3 times, so solution for me now is to restart pc every time it goes to sleep


----------



## Falkentyne

tek_01 said:


> @Majek
> Yes, restarting makes the voltages stable, inline with what I think they should be . never going above 1.3ish
> I have reproduced this 3 times, so solution for me now is to restart pc every time it goes to sleep


Did you file a bug report?
@GBT-MatthewH
This seems to be a bug with sleep/resume and cpu vcore.
I've seen similar things on other systems, like spread spectrum being set to 0.50% (causing BCLK 99.750) after sleep, but then back to 0% (100.00 bclk) after power off and restart.


----------



## tek_01

Falkentyne said:


> Did you file a bug report?
> 
> @GBT-MatthewH
> This seems to be a bug with sleep/resume and cpu vcore.
> I've seen similar things on other systems, like spread spectrum being set to 0.50% (causing BCLK 99.750) after sleep, but then back to 0% (100.00 bclk) after power off and restart.


Where would I submit this bug report ?


----------



## porksmuggler

Moparman said:


> OK so I was getting my loop up and going. Everyone needs to check if they have a metal cooler backplate all of mine make contact with a capacitor pin on the back of the board. Had to bend the pin over.


Thanks, checked, and not an issue for SecuFirm 2 backplates, Noctua.


----------



## Moparman

Who has a 9600k? If you don't mind please save your bios and OC setting and post them. My cpu comes tomorrow and would like to have some idea what I should be shooting for.


----------



## serpentine

Moparman said:


> Who has a 9600k? If you don't mind please save your bios and OC setting and post them. My cpu comes tomorrow and would like to have some idea what I should be shooting for.


Or if anyone’s done this with a 9700K as well on a Master

Finished the build today from the ground up gonna play around with it tomorrow


----------



## serpentine

Also a single 8 pin power connector for the cpu should be fine no?

Especially while just running on air cooling

Opted to go with that instead of plugging in both


----------



## Robbært

serpentine said:


> Also a single 8 pin power connector for the cpu should be fine no?
> Especially while just running on air cooling


Single ATX power connector pin is 8.5A 12V, there 4, 34A*12 = 408W.
9900K OC 196A*1.4V = 274.4W
It should be safe to use single 8pin.


----------



## Moparman

Ok so I for sure need help. If I change the multi just one number I do nothing but bootloop. I'm running a 9600k, 2x8gb 3200Bdie and RD400 NVME.


----------



## Zyvv

Hi, I want to make sure the M2p slots can achive pcieX4 speed, little confusing reading the manual (this should be the same for most of high/mid level Aorus mbs)
"The PCIEX4 slot shares bandwidth with the M2P connector. The PCIEX4 slot operates at up to x2mode when a PCIe SSD is installed in the M2P connector."
Does this mean the M2P slot only operate at PCIeX2 speed even if I don't put anything in the PCIEX4 slot?

Also, speed wise which slot is better if I have two M.2 ssd that can fit in all of them, M2M, M2A or M2P

Thanks


----------



## Moparman

The M2P is X4 and what i'm currently using with SLI. Just did a speed test on my RD400 and it matches my X470 system I had it in.


----------



## Zyvv

Moparman said:


> The M2P is X4 and what i'm currently using with SLI. Just did a speed test on my RD400 and it matches my X470 system I had it in.


Thanks, So M2P should be way faster than M2M, since M2M only occupies 2 sata3 lanes, 2sata3 lanes should be about the same speed of one PCIe x1, am I correct?


----------



## Majek

PuD said:


> Instead of enabling or disabling the fast boot from the bios try to follow this procedure that disables it from Windows 10: https://www.windowscentral.com/how-disable-windows-10-fast-startup
> 
> 
> 
> Only in this way has stopped giving me problems and what I set as vcore was kept even after a shutdown.
> 
> 
> There is no F6 bios for the aorus master that I know.


Thank you, PuD!!!
This fixed the issue for me too.

Much appreciated!


----------



## porksmuggler

Zyvv said:


> Thanks, So M2P should be way faster than M2M, since M2M only occupies 2 sata3 lanes, 2sata3 lanes should be about the same speed of one PCIe x1, am I correct?


They're all PCIe x4. The only difference is what they share lanes with. If you populate M2M, its x4, but SATA3 #4 and #5 are impacted. If you populate M2A, its x4, only SATA3 #1 is impacted if its a M.2 SATA SSD. If you populate M2P, its x4, but the PCIEX4 slot drops to x2 mode.

Use M2A, if you are installing a M.2 NVMe, and don't want any lane sharing at all.


----------



## Moparman

CAn anyone save me a bios profile for say a 5.2ghz OC? I am having nothing but issues with my 9600k on the F5 bios on the master.


----------



## pm1109

About to install a 970 evo NVME drive on the z390 Master.Which is the best slot to use...Top,Middle or Bottom? I am only running one video card and will be using 2 other SATA SSD’s using the SATA 3 slots
Thanks in advance


----------



## TheMadMan697

I see many people having issues with isolation on the audio with these gigabyte boards. Does anyone know if this would also effect the optical output or would it only be analog audio outputs that are effected?


----------



## Robbært

TheMadMan697 said:


> I see many people having issues with isolation on the audio with these gigabyte boards. Does anyone know if this would also effect the optical output or would it only be analog audio outputs that are effected?


i think they hear it only with some headphones (low impedance ones)?


----------



## TheMadMan697

Robbært said:


> i think they hear it only with some headphones (low impedance ones)?


I do use headphones but through an external DAC/Amp which is hooked up by optical.


----------



## Shiftstealth

TheMadMan697 said:


> I see many people having issues with isolation on the audio with these gigabyte boards. Does anyone know if this would also effect the optical output or would it only be analog audio outputs that are effected?


I had some crackling on my USB headset when it was plugged into one of the USB ports. I had to change ports for my Arctis 5s to sound correct.

Aorus Z390 Ultra


----------



## PuD

pm1109 said:


> About to install a 970 evo NVME drive on the z390 Master.Which is the best slot to use...Top,Middle or Bottom? I am only running one video card and will be using 2 other SATA SSD’s using the SATA 3 slots
> Thanks in advance


Use the bottom, so you can use any sata ports :thumb:


----------



## pm1109

PuD said:


> Use the bottom, so you can use any sata ports :thumb:


Thanks mate....Will do


----------



## Moparman

Is anyone running a multi gpu setup and having issues?


----------



## VeritronX

Can someone test readings for voltage settings for me on the master and pro, does using offset voltage apply higher VID and voltage when avx is detected.. and how good does the llc work in offset mode? for example If I set power profile in windows to high performance and it holds high multiplier and VID, is there a setting where the voltage will go down when starting non-avx prime95 etc but not by much (hopefully less than 10mv)?


----------



## pm1109

Moparman said:


> OK so I was getting my loop up and going. Everyone needs to check if they have a metal cooler backplate all of mine make contact with a capacitor pin on the back of the board. Had to bend the pin over.


I notice the capacitor pins touching my metal backplate..What to do?
I really don’t want to bend the capacitors like you did


----------



## serpentine

hmm did a completely new build, everything looks to be in order

but my i cant format my 1tb hdd

won't show up in disk management, but it's recognized in BIOS and under disk drives in device manager

tried putting it in a different sata slot

anyone experience this yet with a Master?

maybe a driver or something, nothing looks to be of interest on the gigabyte page however


----------



## pm1109

Anyone here using water cooling on the z390 master and using a metal backplate? Are you having any issues? The motherboard pins seems to be almost touching the metal backplate


----------



## PuD

I’m using a water loop as you see in my signature. The back plate was isolated, watch this image: https://goo.gl/images/ChTN6e with the 2nd sheet.
If you have an isolation like this one, don’t worry. But if you have some pins touching the metal you need to isolate them with a piece of scotch or something.


----------



## pm1109

Moparman said:


> OK so I was getting my loop up and going. Everyone needs to check if they have a metal cooler backplate all of mine make contact with a capacitor pin on the back of the board. Had to bend the pin over.





PuD said:


> I’m using a water loop as you see in my signature. The back plate was isolated, watch this image: https://goo.gl/images/ChTN6e with the 2nd sheet.
> If you have an isolation like this one, don’t worry. But if you have some pins touching the metal you need to isolate them with a piece of scotch or something.


What’s the image?


----------



## pm1109

The last thing I want to do is short out the motherboard.No idea why Gigabyte put motherbiard pins where people most likely would be using backplates.
Btw I’m using a xspc raystorm pro cpu block..Here is a picture of the back
plate 
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...XFs37Gy0EEj3beFzgWaIKi3K49AsHjto3E3EykHu3Cp6k
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...sdXAjOMN-lMvHAViAj6feEftJSyvq_C1E4bF2gCdhEZxI


----------



## PuD

Is not a problem of the motherboard but how was made your backplate, if correctly isolated or not. Mine was perfect (Heat Killer III) and I don’t have had to do nothing.
As I previously said if you have some pins touching, try to manually isolate them.


----------



## robertr1

Is there a good explanation why GB boards have poor performance with high frequency ram and tighter timings? Is this is a BIOS issue or an architecture decision?


----------



## pm1109

PuD said:


> Is not a problem of the motherboard but how was made your backplate, if correctly isolated or not. Mine was perfect (Heat Killer III) and I don’t have had to do nothing.
> As I previously said if you have some pins touching, try to manually isolate them.


So you recommend using scotch tape on the backplate just to be safe?


----------



## PuD

Only if you see that there are some pins touching not isolated by you back plate.
To be sure you can use electrician tape, however it is on the back and nobody would see it


----------



## vvoid

robertr1 said:


> Is there a good explanation why GB boards have poor performance with high frequency ram and tighter timings? Is this is a BIOS issue or an architecture decision?


There is. It's about their decision to go with T-topology for the memory slots. Not so sure about the technical details, but in practice this means they favour all 4 slots being populated. Not that you can go super high-freq wise with 4 modules installed, but compared to other boards from e.g. Asus/Asrock, Gigabyte should have an advantage there. Conversely, using only 2 slots is going to be worse and this is where the other boards have their strength.
But how much the difference in reality is, who knows. Would be interesting to test, using exactly the same components, just switching between a few different boards and go for max memory freq / timings.


----------



## Robbært

robertr1 said:


> Is there a good explanation why GB boards have poor performance with high frequency ram and tighter timings? Is this is a BIOS issue or an architecture decision?


adding VCCSA voltage fixes it for some people.
not gigabyte related link

a bit outdated


> The 7700k overclocking guide at ASUS indicates that VCCIO/VSSA voltage requirements will probably differ from chip to chip, but on average will require 1.15-1.2v each for 3000Mhz (on the RAM itself) and above.


so there nothing special in gigabyte T-topology compared to Asus


----------



## The L33t

pm1109 said:


> PuD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is not a problem of the motherboard but how was made your backplate, if correctly isolated or not. Mine was perfect (Heat Killer III) and I don’t have had to do nothing.
> As I previously said if you have some pins touching, try to manually isolate them.
> 
> 
> 
> So you recommend using scotch tape on the backplate just to be safe?
Click to expand...

No insulation washers on your kit? For spacing?

If using tape, use electrical kind.

You could also use thermal pads.


----------



## PuD

Regarding the settings for overclocking a 9600K I tell you what I could get from my build. I'm not a professional overclocker so take everything with due consideration.
The highest frequency I could achieve with a decent voltage is 5.0Ghz stable and 5.1Ghz not very stable.
These are the tensions for each stable frequency reached:

4.7Ghz - CPU Vcore = 1.23v
4.8Ghz - 1.34v
4.9Ghz - 1.37v
5.0Ghz - 1.395v
5.1Ghz - 1.42v (Not completely stable)

XMP = Profile1
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Turbo
PWM Phase Control = exm Perf
VT-d = disable
Integrated card = disabled
All other settings have been left by default.

In daily use, however, I found the right compromise, leaving the CPU to 4.8Ghz with dynamic Vcore, so consumption and waste of electricity is reduced to the maximum with more than enough performance for me 

These are the settings I currently use:

CPU Vcore = normal
Dynamic Vcore (DVID) = normal
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = High

In this way the Vcore ranges from 0.7v to low load (800Mhz) up to peaks of 1.36v (4.8Ghz) but as average of 1.34v, exactly how much I have set myself with my manual Vcore testing.
I strongly advise against leaving the automatic settings for Vcore and Loadline Calibration (except if you do not overclock) because from what I have found we get too high Vcore voltage, I have also seen more than 1.48v as peaks in my various tests (bios F5).
So far I am very satisfied with this motherboard.


----------



## vvoid

Robbært said:


> so there nothing special in gigabyte T-topology compared to Asus


afaik Asus isn't using T-topology, so what do you mean with 'nothing special'?
Easily spotted in the mb manuals, where Asus/Asrock specify DIMM A2/B2 for 2-stick configurations, but in case of Gigabyte it doesn't matter if you use A1/B1 or A2/B2. All 4 slots are created equal there.
Or am I wrong?


----------



## PuD

The manual says this:


----------



## Falkentyne

PuD said:


> Regarding the settings for overclocking a 9600K I tell you what I could get from my build. I'm not a professional overclocker so take everything with due consideration.
> The highest frequency I could achieve with a decent voltage is 5.0Ghz stable and 5.1Ghz not very stable.
> These are the tensions for each stable frequency reached:
> 
> 4.7Ghz - CPU Vcore = 1.23v
> 4.8Ghz - 1.34v
> 4.9Ghz - 1.37v
> 5.0Ghz - 1.395v
> 5.1Ghz - 1.42v (Not completely stable)
> 
> XMP = Profile1
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Turbo
> PWM Phase Control = exm Perf
> VT-d = disable
> Integrated card = disabled
> All other settings have been left by default.
> 
> In daily use, however, I found the right compromise, leaving the CPU to 4.8Ghz with dynamic Vcore, so consumption and waste of electricity is reduced to the maximum with more than enough performance for me
> 
> These are the settings I currently use:
> 
> CPU Vcore = normal
> Dynamic Vcore (DVID) = normal
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = High
> 
> In this way the Vcore ranges from 0.7v to low load (800Mhz) up to peaks of 1.36v (4.8Ghz) but as average of 1.34v, exactly how much I have set myself with my manual Vcore testing.
> I strongly advise against leaving the automatic settings for Vcore and Loadline Calibration (except if you do not overclock) because from what I have found we get too high Vcore voltage, I have also seen more than 1.48v as peaks in my various tests (bios F5).
> So far I am very satisfied with this motherboard.


Your prime95 window is messy.
Organize it. Set it to Cascade, then set it back to tile.
If not using a large screen (like 1440p or 4k), if there are more than 8 threads, there may be another way to break up the windows so each thread still shows but I don't have my CPU yet so I can't mess with that.


----------



## PuD

Thanks, I did not really mind it, so it's much better


----------



## Robbært

vvoid said:


> afaik Asus isn't using T-topology, so what do you mean with 'nothing special'?
> Easily spotted in the mb manuals, where Asus/Asrock specify DIMM A2/B2 for 2-stick configurations, but in case of Gigabyte it doesn't matter if you use A1/B1 or A2/B2. All 4 slots are created equal there.
> Or am I wrong?


you can put memory in any slots
you have to put in pairs (same speed, etc) for Dual Channel memory mode
2-stick configurations is for Dual Channel
Z390 Aorus Pro English manual at page 11 and 12

Asus T-topology


----------



## Moparman

So I guess i'm not doing that bad then as my 9600k is at 5.1ghz 1.32V


----------



## Fckbutton

Moparman said:


> So I guess i'm not doing that bad then as my 9600k is at 5.1ghz 1.32V


Have not seen that many OC results for 9600K, but I believe you have a quite good chip


----------



## Robbært

it seems 9900/9700 has less memory oc capability link


> @M10H i3 8100 can [email protected],i9 9900K/i7 9700K only can [email protected]
> @M10H i3 8100 can [email protected],i9 9900K/i7 9700K only can [email protected]
> B-die CL18-20-20-44 1.35V


----------



## PuD

Moparman said:


> So I guess i'm not doing that bad then as my 9600k is at 5.1ghz 1.32V



Seems a very nice chip, what are your settings? Thx


----------



## Moparman

These are the current settings I'm using.


----------



## pm1109

Quote: Originally Posted by Moparman View Post
OK so I was getting my loop up and going. Everyone needs to check if they have a metal cooler backplate all of mine make contact with a capacitor pin on the back of the board. Had to bend the pin over.


I notice the capacitor pins touching my metal backplate..What to do?
I really don’t want to bend the capacitors like you did


----------



## Moparman

pm1109 said:


> Quote: Originally Posted by Moparman View Post
> OK so I was getting my loop up and going. Everyone needs to check if they have a metal cooler backplate all of mine make contact with a capacitor pin on the back of the board. Had to bend the pin over.
> 
> 
> I notice the capacitor pins touching my metal backplate..What to do?
> I really don’t want to bend the capacitors like you did


You're not bending the cap. You bend the pin over some or clip it a tad shorter with a pair of side cuts. Same thing we do when building amplifiers if pins are to long you bend them or cut them off.


----------



## pm1109

Moparman said:


> You're not bending the cap. You bend the pin over some or clip it a tad shorter with a pair of side cuts. Same thing we do when building amplifiers if pins are to long you bend them or cut them off.


I just spoke with XSPC and they advised that there is a plastic film on the back of the backplate so it’s not possible to short out the motherboard
Here is a picture of the backplate


----------



## porksmuggler

If you look under the thermal baseplate on the back, you're likely to already see pins that are bent from the factory to avoid any contact.

Again, this is an issue with the aftermarket backplate adapters design, not found in all, for example the secufirm2 used by Noctua. There are specification for component proximity to the socket that Gigabytes follows same as the other vendors.

If its too close for comfort, definitely go with electrical tape or apply plastidip, coating preferably to the spray, over the pin.


----------



## porksmuggler

pm1109 said:


> I just spoke with XSPC and they advised that there is a plastic film on the back of the backplate so it’s not possible to shirt out the motherboard
> Here is a picture of the backplate


Contact may still be made with the metal vertical edge of the backplate. Please check, as the film is likely laminated only to the horizontal surface touching the motherboard.


----------



## pm1109

porksmuggler said:


> Contact may still be made with the metal vertical edge of the backplate. Please check, as the film is likely laminated only to the horizontal surface touching the motherboard.


Thanks for the advice..Will check carefully


----------



## Moparman

that pin will work it's way through that film on the back same as my Xspc. I wouldn't risk it but it isn't my setup. I would be careful if you do leave it and don't lay the pin over some.


----------



## Stockman

Z390 Aorus Master BIOS F5 bug -

SpeedStep and C1E remain enabled on startup despite being disabled in BIOS. Gigabyte, please fix.

Confirmed with ThrottleStop.

9700k


----------



## pm1109

Just sent a support ticket to Gigabyte...I’m not taking any chance especially when this cost me $500...Will see what they say about bending or cutting off the top of the pins to avoid contact with the backplate.
Never had to do this before on my previous Gigabyte boards


----------



## Moparman

Your other option is to use a different backplate. This problem I have found over the years with a lot of different boards and cooler configs. When I still had my shop I would just collect backplates that I didn't use and was always able to find one that worked.


----------



## davids40




----------



## Timur Born

Just got my Aorus Master, that's a hunk of heavy metal. Don't plan to carry your desktop easier with this mainboard inside.

No issues with the "backplate" of the Arctic Liquid Freezer 240, because it's basically just a big X made out of plastic.

+1 on fixing any Speedstep and especially C-state related UEFI settings.


----------



## Stockman

tek_01 said:


> @Majek
> Yes, restarting makes the voltages stable, inline with what I think they should be . never going above 1.3ish
> I have reproduced this 3 times, so solution for me now is to restart pc every time it goes to sleep


Also confirmed on my Z390 Aorus Master w/9700k. Cold boots produce large over voltages. Restart fixes the issue. I am using manual voltage and LLC turbo. Fast boot on or off makes no difference.


----------



## Luck100

Do any of the fan headers do voltage control? Or are they all PWM control only like in the past?


----------



## davids40

hello

sometimes, my gigabyte Z390 Aorus master is "hard rebooting" by itself ... 3 times during internet research in 4 days...

my i7 9700K @ 5ghz 1.3v seems to be ok in games and prime95... 


is hard reboot caused by cpu backplate ? (waterblock koolance 380i) or bad overclocking ?

no bsod.... just hard reboot it's the first time , it's hapenned to me in 20 years of overclocking .

usually it's bsod, crash games ...any ideas ? 

thanks (excuse my bad english )


----------



## Mo2k

Does anybody know if AVX offset works on Aorus Pro Wifi?

Asrock Boards have some issues throtteling cpu core speed even when no avx is used by software.

Can somebody confirm that AVX offset works Fine? 🙂

Regards


----------



## bastian

Compared to my previous cheap MSI Z370 mobo, for whatever reason, the Aorus Z390 Master takes longer to boot. Rather annoying.


----------



## PuD

Stockman said:


> Also confirmed on my Z390 Aorus Master w/9700k. Cold boots produce large over voltages. Restart fixes the issue. I am using manual voltage and LLC turbo. Fast boot on or off makes no difference.



Instead of enabling or disabling the fast boot from the bios try to follow this procedure that disables it from Windows 10: https://www.windowscentral.com/how-disable-windows-10-fast-startup

For me and majek this solution fix the problem.


----------



## Falkentyne

Stockman said:


> Also confirmed on my Z390 Aorus Master w/9700k. Cold boots produce large over voltages. Restart fixes the issue. I am using manual voltage and LLC turbo. Fast boot on or off makes no difference.


 @GBT-MatthewH can you confirm this bug please?

OP: Do this favor for me.

Go into your Bios and set Internal IA AC DC Loadline to 1, 0.01, or the lowest value that is not zero.
If there is another setting for CPU IA AC DC Loadline as well, set that to 1 also. The value you want is 0.01 mOhms if possible. Just don't sets this to auto. 
Under NO circumstances ever do you set these to anywhere near the upper ranges, ever (62.49 mOhms will destroy the CPU instantly or destroy the motherboard).
The Intel reference value I believe is 1.60 mOhms (From my own tests, this will boost the CPU VID by about 120mv at full load, regardless of Loadline Calibration setting, which is NOT the same setting!).

Then see if cold booting fixes anything.


----------



## Falkentyne

Majek said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> No, I thought this fixed the issue but it didn't. Today after cold boot on auto settings, the vcore (not VID) was jumping happily to 1.44v on the desktop.
> A Windows restart later and it is maxing out at around 1.2v.
> 
> 
> @tek_01 - does restarting windows fix it for you?
> 
> @GBT-MatthewH
> 
> First of all, this is my first Gigabyte board since Core2Duo times, so haven't been looking at Gigabyte threads for a long time. It is great to see that you are actively participating in the discussions.
> 
> Would you be able to comment here with regard to Aorus Master overvolting i9 9900k at idle with stock settings upon cold boot (F5 BIOS)?
> In my case, the voltage jumps anywhere from 1.308 to 1.44v just 'doing nothing'. Restart and the voltage sits around 1.2v (close to VID) until I power off the computer completely.
> 
> Thank you in advance!


Go into your Bios and set "Internal IA AC DC loadline" to the lowest non-zero value, either 1 or 0.01.
Then set CPU IA AC DC Loadline to 1 or 0.01, whichever is closest to zero.

see if you still get the voltage problems after doing this.


----------



## Moparman

davids40 said:


> hello
> 
> sometimes, my gigabyte Z390 Aorus master is "hard rebooting" by itself ... 3 times during internet research in 4 days...
> 
> my i7 9700K @ 5ghz 1.3v seems to be ok in games and prime95...
> 
> 
> is hard reboot caused by cpu backplate ? (wat
> 
> no bsod.... just hard reboot it's the first time , it's hapenned to me in 20 years of overclocking .
> 
> usually it's bsod, crash games ...any ideas ?
> 
> thanks (excuse my bad english )


You will need to check to see if your backplate makes contact or not with the pins on the back of the board.


----------



## PuD

@*Falkentyne*: 

The problem of the high voltages on cold boot give also the error "04" visible on the debug display. After rebooting the code changes to "A0" (I was the first to report this problem).
For me, was a bug in the management of Windows fastboot.
I'm out for work and I can not take a test of what you've suggested, but I'll let you know if someone don't reply first.


----------



## davids40

maybe no


----------



## vvoid

davids40 said:


> hello
> sometimes my gigabyte Z390 Aorus master is "hard rebooting" by itself ... 3 times during internet research in 4 days...
> my i7 9700K @ 5ghz 1.3v seems to be ok in games and prime95...
> 
> is hard reboot caused by cpu backplate ? (waterblock koolance 380i) or bad overclocking ?
> no bsod.... just hard reboot it's the first time , it's hapenned to me in 20 years of overclocking .
> usually it's bsod, crash games ...any ideas ?
> thanks (excuse my bad english )


Not Gigabyte or Z390 related, but I've had these kinds of reboots in the past. Turned out to be a faulty PSU (which honestly was quite old) and after replacing with a new unit, problem gone.


----------



## Moparman

davids40 said:


> maybe no


That looks to be fine. Mine hits the caps on the other side of your circle.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

WannaBeOCer said:


> Maybe @GBT-MatthewH can answer if the 9900k warranty is still active if they run at the 4.7Ghz all core boost speeds.


4.7 all core is the Intel defined spec for all core turbo, so it shouldn't have any affect on the warranty.



Falkentyne said:


> Did you file a bug report?
> 
> @GBT-MatthewH
> This seems to be a bug with sleep/resume and cpu vcore.


Happens on my board as well. I'll have the BIOS team look into it. The work around for now seems to be turning on/off fast boot from windows.



Mo2k said:


> Does anybody know if AVX offset works on Aorus Pro Wifi?
> 
> Asrock Boards have some issues throtteling cpu core speed even when no avx is used by software.


We are looking into this. As it happens on other brands as well we are trying to determine if its an Intel or BIOS bug.


----------



## Mo2k

GBT-MatthewH said:


> We are looking into this. As it happens on other brands as well we are trying to determine if its an Intel or BIOS bug.



Thank you very much. I hope you will find a solution. 

and a question to this cold boot fast boot thing: Does it also affekt aorus pro wifi or only aorus master? 

Regards


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Mo2k said:


> Thank you very much. I hope you will find a solution. and a question to this cold boot fast boot thing: Does it also affekt aorus pro wifi or only aorus master?


AFAIK it affects both. I have also seen it on some other brands boards - hence we are trying to figure out where in the code (ours, Intel, AMI?) the problem is.

Just to be clear the issue is AVX offsets are being applied at idle. So if you set 47 mutliplier with 2 avx offset your CPU runs at 4.5 on your desktop... Interestingly if you run a game or benchmark without AVX the clock speed usually shoots up to 4.7, then back to 4.5 at idle.


----------



## Hercule Poirot

Afternoon Matthew. Couple questions, that you may or may not be able to answer. Do you believe there will be stock available of the Z390 Xtreme for/prior to Black Friday? Also, do you expect additional on-line vendors, other than Newegg (out of stock) or Amazon to begin to carry the board?


Thanks
Poirot


----------



## c0ld

Any guides for OC'ing on the Master? I am itching to OC my 9900k.


----------



## Moparman

c0ld said:


> Any guides for OC'ing on the Master? I am itching to OC my 9900k.


 I'm working on one but only have the 9600k. However i'm sure a lot of it will apply. YOu can see post 200 of mine and look at some of my settings in the Bios pics and try them.


----------



## Evostance

Have been told to post this here.

Just installed my 9700k into the Aorus Ultra, only thing I've changed is enabling XMP.

CPU is running at 4.6ghz and 0.86v at idle. When under load from say Prime, it's going to 1.2v but its hitting 95c in less than 3 minutes. Not really sure what's going on, nor why its sat at 4.6ghz when its only 3.6ghz stock.


----------



## Stockman

Evostance said:


> Have been told to post this here.
> 
> Just installed my 9700k into the Aorus Ultra, only thing I've changed is enabling XMP.
> 
> CPU is running at 4.6ghz and 0.86v at idle. When under load from say Prime, it's going to 1.2v but its hitting 95c in less than 3 minutes. Not really sure what's going on, nor why its sat at 4.6ghz when its only 3.6ghz stock.


The 9700k is designed by Intel to turbo boost to 4.6ghz. If you don't want that, you can disable turbo boost in BIOS.

I have the Master, not the Ultra but I'm guessing the below still applies:
If in the BIOS you have CPU core voltage set to auto it will over-volt. Either type in a manual voltage or change the setting to "Normal"


----------



## Stockman

@GBT-MatthewH

Can you please advise how to disable spread spectrum in Aorus Master F5 BIOS?


----------



## c0ld

Moparman said:


> I'm working on one but only have the 9600k. However i'm sure a lot of it will apply. YOu can see post 200 of mine and look at some of my settings in the Bios pics and try them.


Link for the OC guide posted isn't working either


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

c0ld said:


> Link for the OC guide posted isn't working either


https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf


----------



## Evostance

Stockman said:


> The 9700k is designed by Intel to turbo boost to 4.6ghz. If you don't want that, you can disable turbo boost in BIOS.
> 
> I have the Master, not the Ultra but I'm guessing the below still applies:
> If in the BIOS you have CPU core voltage set to auto it will over-volt. Either type in a manual voltage or change the setting to "Normal"


Ok that makes sense. What doesn't is the 90c temps. Will have to take another look at the cooler

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Evostance said:


> Have been told to post this here.
> 
> Just installed my 9700k into the Aorus Ultra, only thing I've changed is enabling XMP.
> 
> CPU is running at 4.6ghz and 0.86v at idle. When under load from say Prime, it's going to 1.2v but its hitting 95c in less than 3 minutes. Not really sure what's going on, nor why its sat at 4.6ghz when its only 3.6ghz stock.


Change your power plan to balanced and it should drop when idle.



Stockman said:


> @GBT-MatthewH
> 
> Can you please advise how to disable spread spectrum in Aorus Master F5 BIOS?


I don't believe you can.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> AFAIK it affects both. I have also seen it on some other brands boards - hence we are trying to figure out where in the code (ours, Intel, AMI?) the problem is.
> 
> Just to be clear the issue is AVX offsets are being applied at idle. So if you set 47 mutliplier with 2 avx offset your CPU runs at 4.5 on your desktop... Interestingly if you run a game or benchmark without AVX the clock speed usually shoots up to 4.7, then back to 4.5 at idle.


Yep. this is true.
This also happens on my **MSI** laptop.
If you set an AVX offset, it keeps dropping the multiplier by 2 on the desktop or when opening pages.
I'm almost certain this is due to Windows using AVX code somewhere. Hard to say. If windows is using AVX or AVX like code, then the problem is whoever is making windows 10.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Change your power plan to balanced and it should drop when idle.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe you can.


Pretty sure I saw this option in some video on the Aorus Master. Not sure if it was called PCIE spread spectrum or something else.
It was also mentioned that changing the language to Chinese makes "other" options appear.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Falkentyne said:


> Yep. this is true.
> This also happens on my **MSI** laptop.
> If you set an AVX offset, it keeps dropping the multiplier by 2 on the desktop or when opening pages.
> I'm almost certain this is due to Windows using AVX code somewhere. Hard to say. If windows is using AVX or AVX like code, then the problem is whoever is making windows 10.


This is our working theory right now as well. If you do a complete fresh install of windows the AVX offset wont be applied at idle. At some point during driver/software installs and reboots the avx starts getting applied even at "idle". Perhaps its a chipset driver since that would be common to all boards and platforms? Not sure yet, but our team is leaning away from a BIOS issue since it does not happen on a 100% clean install.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> This is our working theory right now as well. If you do a complete fresh install of windows the AVX offset wont be applied at idle. At some point during driver/software installs and reboots the avx starts getting applied even at "idle". Perhaps its a chipset driver since that would be common to all boards and platforms? Not sure yet, but our team is leaning away from a BIOS issue since it does not happen on a 100% clean install.


Well my 9900K arrrives tomorrow and I just ordered a Vega 64.
Still no motherboard, heatsink or DDR4 memory or SSD yet. Waiting for any sales but I may jump on the SSD's currently on sale on Amazon. Was holding off on the Master because there's apparently a black friday sale announced for it.


----------



## porksmuggler

The first tests I typically run are related to power states. I disable hibernation and sleep in Windows, then compare the Balanced power plan and High Performance. For High Performance or Balanced, you can easily determine Windows "contribution" to the clock speeds by adjusting the Processor Power Management > Minimum Processor State setting. In this way even the High Performance power plan can be used to avoid other issues, while still having the CPU drop to whatever clock speed is desired.

Input 0% for the Minimum Processor State to determine the hardware or bios' predetermination for minimum clock, and the impact of AVX.

Also, there's repeated mention of changing fast boot within Windows, this is not an issue or even available option in Windows 10 (Windows removes the selection entirely) if you have already disabled hibernation / sleep, which should be done for testing hardware / bios impacts within Windows.


----------



## Luckbad

@GBT-MatthewH Thanks for supporting us in this thread.

I picked up a 9700k and Aorus Z390 Master a few days ago. My only issue thus far is a minor but frustrating one:

Often when I boot the machine, my keyboard does not function until I go to the back of the PC and physically remove/insert the USB cable again.

I never experienced the issue with this same keyboard on a Gigabyte Z170X Designare w/ 6700k. It's not just in the BIOS, as I also can't enter my password to get into Windows. If I remove the USB connector at the keyboard's own connectorand reinsert, it still does not detect the keyboard. I actually have to unplug it from the motherboard backplate.

I've tried it in a couple of the different USB 2.0 spots back there and it happens in both.

My mouse seems fine each time even though it is also connected to a USB 2.0 port right next to the keyboard.


----------



## Evostance

Luckbad said:


> @GBT-MatthewH Thanks for supporting us in this thread.
> 
> I picked up a 9700k and Aorus Z390 Master a few days ago. My only issue thus far is a minor but frustrating one:
> 
> Often when I boot the machine, my keyboard does not function until I go to the back of the PC and physically remove/insert the USB cable again.
> 
> I never experienced the issue with this same keyboard on a Gigabyte Z170X Designare w/ 6700k. It's not just in the BIOS, as I also can't enter my password to get into Windows. If I remove the USB connector at the keyboard's own connectorand reinsert, it still does not detect the keyboard. I actually have to unplug it from the motherboard backplate.
> 
> I've tried it in a couple of the different USB 2.0 spots back there and it happens in both.
> 
> My mouse seems fine each time even though it is also connected to a USB 2.0 port right next to the keyboard.


Is it a Corsair keyboard? This happens all the time with my mouse. Happened on my old Asus Z170 board too

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Billingsc

*Vcore variance all over the place*

Hi all

So just wanted to run some results past you guys with same boards.

I’ve got a 9700k on the ultra z390 with a good quality brand new psu rm650x) but I’m having big problems getting the vcore to stabilise. The only setting I Can choose that doesn’t have serious vdroop is turbo llc which actually levels things out really well..... However regardless of when under load or idle I get sudden vcore dips going down to 1.272 and spikes up to 1.368v and then constantly moving around somewhere in between. No settings are left on auto and no cstates or power saving features are enabled. I was really expecting more based on the quality off the VRM’s on here. (On a positive not the vrm cooling is extremely good). Is this a potential Bios issue or does this sound like a faulty board perhaps? 
Cheers
C


----------



## Robbært

Billingsc said:


> Hi all
> 
> So just wanted to run some results past you guys with same boards.
> 
> I’ve got a 9700k on the ultra z390 with a good quality brand new psu rm650x) but I’m having big problems getting the vcore to stabilise. The only setting I Can choose that doesn’t have serious vdroop is turbo llc which actually levels things out really well..... However regardless of when under load or idle I get sudden vcore dips going down to 1.272 and spikes up to 1.368v and then constantly moving around somewhere in between. No settings are left on auto and no cstates or power saving features are enabled. I was really expecting more based on the quality off the VRM’s on here. (On a positive not the vrm cooling is extremely good). Is this a potential Bios issue or does this sound like a faulty board perhaps?
> Cheers


you need 100-MHz bandwidth oscilloscope with 1.5 pF probe, 1 Mohm input and ground to probe line under 5mm to measure cpu voltages.

try disable C-states
try disable win10 fast startup
try HWiNFO to monitor

MCE enabled? is it OC with all cores same speed?
since you edit all your bios settings - AVX offset?


----------



## Timur Born

Luckbad said:


> @GBT-MatthewH Thanks for supporting us in this thread.
> 
> I picked up a 9700k and Aorus Z390 Master a few days ago. My only issue thus far is a minor but frustrating one:
> 
> Often when I boot the machine, my keyboard does not function until I go to the back of the PC and physically remove/insert the USB cable again.
> 
> I never experienced the issue with this same keyboard on a Gigabyte Z170X Designare w/ 6700k. It's not just in the BIOS, as I also can't enter my password to get into Windows. If I remove the USB connector at the keyboard's own connectorand reinsert, it still does not detect the keyboard. I actually have to unplug it from the motherboard backplate.
> 
> I've tried it in a couple of the different USB 2.0 spots back there and it happens in both.
> 
> My mouse seems fine each time even though it is also connected to a USB 2.0 port right next to the keyboard.


All USB 2 ports on the Master are run via hubs, one hub for backpanel and one for internal. It's a shame that Gigabyte saved on copper lines. Better try one of the USB 3 ports that are directly connected to the chipset.


----------



## Billingsc

Robbært said:


> you need 100-MHz bandwidth oscilloscope with 1.5 pF probe, 1 Mohm input and ground to probe line under 5mm to measure cpu voltages.
> 
> try disable C-states
> try disable win10 fast startup
> try HWiNFO to monitor
> 
> MCE enabled? is it OC with all cores same speed?
> since you edit all your bios settings - AVX offset?


Thanks for the reply

Unfortunately i don’t have access to an oscilloscope to test precisely for ripple. Regarding hwinfo however this is the main software I use to monitor along with cpu z and in this circumstance gigabytes own software. All show the same results however the min/ max vcore readings are easier to view along with watching the realtime fluctuations inhwinfo. All Cstates are disabled/power saving features etc , MCE disabled, and fast startup disabled already. AVX offset is set to 1 however I have tested with it set to auto or 0 but this made no changes to the vcore variance/ fluctuations. 
Is anyone else having these same types of fluctuations when setting up manual overclock (not dynamic) at all? Debating whether to RMA for a replacement.... just cant see the point in that if its something being worked out in a bios update.


----------



## Robbært

Billingsc said:


> Debating whether to RMA for a replacement.... just cant see the point in that if its something being worked out in a bios update.


reset all bios settings, especially set avx=0/none
test with some consistent load, like prime95 fpu stress test (windows never really idle)
look for there no throttle, no speed shifts (CPU-Z can show current speed) affect cpu usage
you have to do it before ever consider rma
voltage numbers can differ to real values, but i think they should not go here and there


----------



## doom26464

My logitech c922 webcam seems to keep disconecting when rebooting and I have to unplug it and change usb ports numerous times to get it to register again. 

Also rgb fusion software seems to save my preset 80% of the time then oddly every once and awhile it changes to blue and I have to re open it and set everything to red again.

All on aurous master. Also audio on this board has been very good and clean to my ears so far even under gpu load.


----------



## c0ld

So F4 BIOS can hold my XMP profile for 4000MHz for my memory but can't get it to boot with the F5 BIOS. I have to manually set it to 3900MHz and timings with the F5 BIOS. Anyone have problems with XMP profiles?


----------



## Luckbad

doom26464 said:


> My logitech c922 webcam seems to keep disconecting when rebooting and I have to unplug it and change usb ports numerous times to get it to register again.
> 
> Also rgb fusion software seems to save my preset 80% of the time then oddly every once and awhile it changes to blue and I have to re open it and set everything to red again.
> 
> All on aurous master. Also audio on this board has been very good and clean to my ears so far even under gpu load.


Ah ha, a second person with USB issues! Is it plugged into one of the USB 2.0 outputs? I was trying to figure out if I should return the board for exchange but it might not be isolated.

My keyboard usually doesn't function if I shut down and then start the PC. I have to get up and go to the back of the computer to make it work every time. Also on the Aorus Master.


----------



## serpentine

PuD said:


> Instead of enabling or disabling the fast boot from the bios try to follow this procedure that disables it from Windows 10: https://www.windowscentral.com/how-disable-windows-10-fast-startup
> 
> 
> 
> Only in this way has stopped giving me problems and what I set as vcore was kept even after a shutdown.
> 
> 
> There is no F6 bios for the aorus master that I know.


thanks it was happening for me as well (on a Master) but disabling fast boot has fixed it for me


----------



## PuD

I'm glad to read that you have solved too.
I recommend to all those who have strange behavior with the F5 bios to try this procedure first, especially those who have problems after reboots.
And check the code that appears on the motherboard display, if you have "04" then the problem is related to the fast boot (disable it on Windows, not in the bios options).


----------



## Glerox

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Our board shouldn't care what brand GPU you have... Here is a SS of how to set "System pump 5" (same as above) to go based off GPU temp.
> 
> Edit/Full disclosure when making a purchasing decision: Because we have 8 fan headers there are 2 super I/O's to control them. Only the 2nd controller can "see" the GPU. This means to control a fan based off GPU temps you need to use: System 4, System pump 6, or system pump 5 headers. See above for where those are located on the board (also labeled on the silk screen on the board)


Hi, I have a PWM fan in the System 4 header on the Z390 Aorus Master but I don't see the option "VGA". I want to do a custom fan curve based on the GPU temp.
Maybe it's something I did wrong?

Thanks

Etienne


----------



## Billingsc

Robbært said:


> reset all bios settings, especially set avx=0/none
> test with some consistent load, like prime95 fpu stress test (windows never really idle)
> look for there no throttle, no speed shifts (CPU-Z can show current speed) affect cpu usage
> you have to do it before ever consider rma
> voltage numbers can differ to real values, but i think they should not go here and there


I’ve reset BIOS and setup only a set manual vcore and turned off all cstates and power saving settings, no llc or anything else touched. I’m still getting close to 100mv of variance between max and min this time coming in at 1.248 - 1.344v. These readings are under load with prime but ther same is true in idle as well. What sort of variance should I be expecting at both idle and load with these boards? 

Thanks


----------



## Timur Born

Installed the Aorus Master today (9900K). Using F4 BIOS I used the Easy Setup option to OC from "Normal" to "Performance" and activated XMP profile 1. Since I switched the system from an AMD 1800X I first had to wait for the already present Windows installation to install all drivers, but everything went smooth so far. Curiously the CPU would only clock to a maximum of 4.2 GHz.

Next I updated to BIOS F5. I had to manually download the file, because @BIOS claimed that no new version was available on the server. Last time I used a Gigabyte board was on Haswell and @BIOS behaved exactly the same. F5 disabled the easy OC option, so I enabled XMP, changed command rate to 1T (no idea why XMP uses 2T) and enabled the option to overclock all cores at once.

Now the CPU clock at 5 GHz on all cores, but does not lower the frequency when idle. But that's better than only getting 4.2 GHz before. Next I will check for VRM noise and then look through the various OC settings.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Billingsc said:


> I’ve reset BIOS and setup only a set manual vcore and turned off all cstates and power saving settings, no llc or anything else touched. I’m still getting close to 100mv of variance between max and min this time coming in at 1.248 - 1.344v. These readings are under load with prime but ther same is true in idle as well. What sort of variance should I be expecting at both idle and load with these boards?
> 
> Thanks


Have to keep in mind software is an approximation... 

My system (master/9900) during prime shows 1.368 in CPU-Z and HWinfo, but using a multi meter I am at 1.348V solid. Turbo should be +/- .03 of the Vcore you set in BIOS under load. 

Idle my system shows either 1.368 or 1.380 but again using a multimeter I am at 1.346 solid. 

This is with LLC Turbo, 1.35 Vcore, 50x multiplier, XMP (didnt touch anything else)


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Timur Born said:


> Now the CPU clock at 5 GHz on all cores, but does not lower the frequency when idle.


You need to set windows power mode to balanced for the CPU to downclock.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> You need to set windows power mode to balanced for the CPU to downclock.





Timur Born said:


> Installed the Aorus Master today (9900K). Using F4 BIOS I used the Easy Setup option to OC from "Normal" to "Performance" and activated XMP profile 1. Since I switched the system from an AMD 1800X I first had to wait for the already present Windows installation to install all drivers, but everything went smooth so far. Curiously the CPU would only clock to a maximum of 4.2 GHz.
> 
> Next I updated to BIOS F5. I had to manually download the file, because @BIOS claimed that no new version was available on the server. Last time I used a Gigabyte board was on Haswell and @BIOS behaved exactly the same. F5 disabled the easy OC option, so I enabled XMP, changed command rate to 1T (no idea why XMP uses 2T) and enabled the option to overclock all cores at once.
> 
> Now the CPU clock at 5 GHz on all cores, but does not lower the frequency when idle. But that's better than only getting 4.2 GHz before. Next I will check for VRM noise and then look through the various OC settings.


Also keep in mind that "Command rate 1T" is not a standard XMP setting from anywhere as far as I know. Some sticks will simply not be stable at 1T command rate. XMP profiles are not supposed to change the command rate (Nmode).


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> You need to set windows power mode to balanced for the CPU to downclock.


Already did. I suspect that "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" keeps the CPU from downclocking. Could also be that Windows did not like the change from 1800X to 9900K, although it did downclock with F4 (when it reached a max of only 4.2, though).

Will check once I find time, today was just a quick start to get the system going and test 5 Ghz performance in Total War Warhammer 2, which is a special case of single/multi-core behavior.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Also keep in mind that "Command rate 1T" is not a standard XMP setting from anywhere as far as I know. Some sticks will simply not be stable at 1T command rate. XMP profiles are not supposed to change the command rate (Nmode).


I wasn't sure if command rate is part of XMP. That means that the Aorus Master uses 2T as default then. Good to know and quick to change.


----------



## porksmuggler

Timur Born said:


> Already did. I suspect that "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" keeps the CPU from downclocking.


No issue here with that setting on Auto and "downclocking", suggest checking your Balanced power plan Minimum Processor State, etc. see my previous post. If not review to see if you have changed any power management settings in bios perhaps.

Most DDR4 kits are command rate 2T in XMP, not Gigabyte specific. If it runs 1T fine, but recommend extra memory testing at that setting to ensure stability.

Also, again regarding usb, Gigabyte is not saving copper with hub, there's limited bandwidth for usb. Better that usb 2 in on hub than the newer standards on hub. Did you review flex I/O?

Edit: Maybe Intel Spec for Z390 helps explain, 14 total if only 2.0, new standards use more "lanes"
# of USB Ports 14
USB Configuration 10 Total USB 3.1 Ports
- Up to 6 USB 3.1 Gen 2 Ports
- Up to 10 USB 3.1 Gen 1 Ports
14 USB 2.0 Ports


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

BETA BIOS for those with the sleep / higher Vcore issue on Z390 Master: F7A

**Please note this is a BETA BIOS, not an official BIOS. If you run into any issues let me know and revert back to the latest official BIOS.


----------



## Glerox

Sorry for asking again, but on the Aorus Master, I don't see the GPU temp sensor in SmartFan5 to do a custom fan curve. I use the Fan4 header. Anyone else found a way to do a custom fan curve with SmartFan5?

Thanks!


----------



## ThorsMalice

Wondering if anyone could give some advice on my z390 Master, I'm running an 8700k currently with everything at stock F4 bios and getting a loud whine from the vrm area around the cpu. This is a fresh watercooling build with plenty of air going across the vrm area.


----------



## Glerox

Glerox said:


> Sorry for asking again, but on the Aorus Master, I don't see the GPU temp sensor in SmartFan5 to do a custom fan curve. I use the Fan4 header. Anyone else found a way to do a custom fan curve with SmartFan5?
> 
> Thanks!


I answered myself. I found a newer version of SmartFan 5 and now it's working  Fan curves with GPU temps yeah


----------



## Luckbad

Inspired by the quality of the Aorus Master, I also grabbed the Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi. Lovely board.

My only issue I've seen so far is that when I boot, my subwoofer pops loud as hell twice.

EDIT: Seems to be a Realtek driver issue. Since the Gigabyte support site only has a partial driver with no Realtek Audio Manager included, I scoured the internet and found one that has it and doesn't make the thump on startup.


----------



## Billingsc

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Have to keep in mind software is an approximation...
> 
> My system (master/9900) during prime shows 1.368 in CPU-Z and HWinfo, but using a multi meter I am at 1.348V solid. Turbo should be +/- .03 of the Vcore you set in BIOS under load.
> 
> Idle my system shows either 1.368 or 1.380 but again using a multimeter I am at 1.346 solid.
> 
> This is with LLC Turbo, 1.35 Vcore, 50x multiplier, XMP (didnt touch anything else)


Agreed that i’d totally expect to have some variance in voltage for sure and the average level is above what is set in bios but this is of no real concern to me....... but where hwinfo is ranging 100mv min to max is a bit extreme and not something I’ve experienced on previous systems. It means 1. the vcore has to be set low to allow for sudden spikes unrelated to demand and 2. On the flip side vcore has to be set higher to allow for sudden random drops making stable overclock really awkward. 

The variances during idle i’m Seeing are regardless of what llc setting is chosen otherwise i would happily settle for a higher vcore without extreme spikes to allow for droop or a higher llc with a lower base vcore and do away with droop. I’m unable to actually achieve either though as it spikes and drops irrelevant of demand. So based on your board hwinfo results it seems like i’m getting a much a wider variance than your seeing on your board.... would this clarify theirs an issue on my specific board? Lastly the +/- .03 for turbo is this a static difference to bios your describing or is this a +/- .03v variance over time in use? 

Regarding the accuracy of software i also understand its not going to be exact but with the variances I am seeing i would not think the sensors to be that far out. 
Thanks for the help Matthew at this point i’m Ultimately now trying to work out if a new ultra z390 MOBO will behave the exact same because its bios related and a fix is on the way? Or if a new board should fix the issue. Or even if theirs a setting i cam adjust to start lowering these variances? So frustrating when the physical board design appears to be such a good design


----------



## Adamastor

Sorry for ignorance but how do you notice the high voltage issue from booting? You start the computer and already in Windows the high voltage appears in something like hwinfo?

Also how should i setup my Corsair H115i platinum in bios? The new ones use sata cable to give a stable current to pump but should i also set in bios cpu_fan cpu_fan speed to max speed and control to DC?

Also could you please confirm what's the exact name in BIOS to the MCE?

Thank you in advance


----------



## Timur Born

porksmuggler said:


> No issue here with that setting on Auto and "downclocking", suggest checking your Balanced power plan Minimum Processor State, etc. see my previous post. If not review to see if you have changed any power management settings in bios perhaps.


Minimum Processor State is set correctly and works properly. I specifically enabled "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" to quickly test 5 GHz and it turns out that this completely disables C-states higher than C1.



> Most DDR4 kits are command rate 2T in XMP, not Gigabyte specific. If it runs 1T fine, but recommend extra memory testing at that setting to ensure stability.


I checked the XMP data of my dimms via HWinfo and it says "Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns", which corresponds to 1T. I am not entirely sure if this is CR or a different timer. Anyway, the BIOS decides to use 2T on "Auto", which is a conservative setting for my dimms (2x 8 GB G.Skill TridentZ 3200-C14). Nothing wrong with that, just reporting my experience.



> Also, again regarding usb, Gigabyte is not saving copper with hub, there's limited bandwidth for usb. Better that usb 2 in on hub than the newer standards on hub. Did you review flex I/O?


Like I wrote before, USB 2 ports are *not* part of the whole flex I/O thing.

And even the USB 3 hub on the Designare is unnecessary, because the Extreme proves that enough flex I/O ports are available for USB 3 and many other devices (including TB3).



> Edit: Maybe Intel Spec for Z390 helps explain, 14 total if only 2.0, new standards use more "lanes"
> # of USB Ports 14
> USB Configuration 10 Total USB 3.1 Ports
> - Up to 6 USB 3.1 Gen 2 Ports
> - Up to 10 USB 3.1 Gen 1 Ports
> 14 USB 2.0 Ports


I interpret this very different: "Up to" is what depends on flex I/O ports, "14" means "14" and is completely independent of any flex I/O. The low bandwidth of all 14 USB 2.0 ports can be handled by a single (!) PCIe 3 lane.

So it still looks like "lazy" design to me to run all USB 2 ports via hubs, especially the internal ones which are situated so close to the PCH.


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Have to keep in mind software is an approximation...
> 
> My system (master/9900) during prime shows 1.368 in CPU-Z and HWinfo, but using a multi meter I am at 1.348V solid. Turbo should be +/- .03 of the Vcore you set in BIOS under load.
> 
> Idle my system shows either 1.368 or 1.380 but again using a multimeter I am at 1.346 solid.
> 
> This is with LLC Turbo, 1.35 Vcore, 50x multiplier, XMP (didnt touch anything else)


At what resistors on the backplate of the CPU socket do we measure Vcore and other voltages best? For Ryzen we had a handy image that showed which resistors are Vcore and which are Vsoc.


----------



## Stockman

Timur Born said:


> GBT-MatthewH said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have to keep in mind software is an approximation...
> 
> My system (master/9900) during prime shows 1.368 in CPU-Z and HWinfo, but using a multi meter I am at 1.348V solid. Turbo should be +/- .03 of the Vcore you set in BIOS under load.
> 
> Idle my system shows either 1.368 or 1.380 but again using a multimeter I am at 1.346 solid.
> 
> This is with LLC Turbo, 1.35 Vcore, 50x multiplier, XMP (didnt touch anything else)
> 
> 
> 
> At what resistors on the backplate of the CPU socket do we measure Vcore and other voltages best? For Ryzen we had a handy image that showed which resistors are Vcore and which are Vsoc.
Click to expand...

The Master has specific voltage readout points. (Not sure about other Aorus boards)

Can also confirm solid 1.344 voltage under load when using multimeter. 9700k @ 5.3GHz

In HWinfo I'm seeing two different Vcore values. Don't have screen in front of me now, but the lower of the two is much closer (but still slightly higher) than multimeter reading.


----------



## Stockman

ThorsMalice said:


> Wondering if anyone could give some advice on my z390 Master, I'm running an 8700k currently with everything at stock F4 bios and getting a loud whine from the vrm area around the cpu. This is a fresh watercooling build with plenty of air going across the vrm area.


I also have very annoying VRM whine on Aorus Master. It's the worst at idle. Just moving the mouse around can be painful to the ears.

I've tried everything and nothing helps except disabling CPU idle state in power settings after a registry edit. However, this should not be necessary to prevent VRM coil whine.

I've swapped PSUs, GPUs, used different mouse/USB ports and tried every BIOS setting I can think of. The whine endures.

I wanted to try disabling spread spectrum, but Mathew stated earlier this is not a setting in BIOS (I thought every board had this option?)

Should also note that I owned a Asus Maximus Hero XI previously that exibited the same VRM whine.

I'm ready to give up and wear earplugs.


----------



## Timur Born

I could not find the voltage read-out points in the manual yet and often these are hard to get by and measure voltages at a distance from the CPU. So measuring at the backpanel right behind the CPU can be easier and give better results (measure at the point where the voltage is used, not where it's created).


----------



## Timur Born

Stockman said:


> I also have very annoying VRM whine on Aorus Master. It's the worst at idle. Just moving the mouse around can be painful to the ears.


Try disabling C-states for testing. Start with disabling all and then enable one by one again.


----------



## Threx

Hi, I have a few questions. I'm using an Aorus Elite with the latest bios.

1. Is there any way to make the vcore downvolt while idle on the desktop apart from setting it to auto in the bios? My cpu won't completely downclock either (4.8 in bios). It will constantly bounce around between 800-4800mhz while the vcore never downvolts. I have c states on, enhanced multi core off, and power set to balanced in windows.

2. Is there a way to turn off the motherboard lights when I shut off my pc, while having it turn back on when I boot it up? I've turned both LED options (forgot the exact names) in the bios under peripherals to OFF. The lights refuse to turn off when I shut down my PC and I have to switch off the PSU.

Oh, and another thing. The cpu usage in task manager is significantly different than in hwinfo64. eg. It will show as 80% in TM but only about 60% in hwinfo64. Anyone know why?


----------



## ThorsMalice

ThorsMalice said:


> Wondering if anyone could give some advice on my z390 Master, I'm running an 8700k currently with everything at stock F4 bios and getting a loud whine from the vrm area around the cpu. This is a fresh watercooling build with plenty of air going across the vrm area.


Disregard my previous statement, apparently the board is working perfectly. Found out the whine was coming from my gpu after I put my ek waterblock on it, so I get to figure out that issue now.


----------



## Moparman

Timur Born said:


> At what resistors on the backplate of the CPU socket do we measure Vcore and other voltages best? For Ryzen we had a handy image that showed which resistors are Vcore and which are Vsoc.


Put your meter on resistance and hold the leads together and see how much resistance is in them as I will bet it isn't a perfect zero and that is why you're seeing a very slight difference on your meter.


----------



## Falkentyne

Threx said:


> Hi, I have a few questions. I'm using an Aorus Elite with the latest bios.
> 
> 1. Is there any way to make the vcore downvolt while idle on the desktop apart from setting it to auto in the bios? My cpu won't completely downclock either (4.8 in bios). It will constantly bounce around between 800-4800mhz while the vcore never downvolts. I have c states on, enhanced multi core off, and power set to balanced in windows.
> 
> 2. Is there a way to turn off the motherboard lights when I shut off my pc, while having it turn back on when I boot it up? I've turned both LED options (forgot the exact names) in the bios under peripherals to OFF. The lights refuse to turn off when I shut down my PC and I have to switch off the PSU.
> 
> Oh, and another thing. The cpu usage in task manager is significantly different than in hwinfo64. eg. It will show as 80% in TM but only about 60% in hwinfo64. Anyone know why?


In order for the vcore to downvolt (assuming you want something like 800 mhz / 0.625v or something here), you need to use adaptive voltage. You also need to have c-states enabled (disabling c-states will make the CPU downclock but the vcore won't). If your Bios has an option for "Speed Shift" with a range of 0-255, 0 means that you won't have any downclocking, and 255 means you will have heavy downclocking, and anything besides extremely high load (like small FFT Prime95) will cause downclocking even in benchmarks. I am not sure what will happen if speed shift is disabled.

I use Throttlestop 8.70+ on my MSI jokebook (throttlebook laptop) to control speed shift, rather than the Bios. If you're having problems with speedshift, try Throttlestop 8.70.


----------



## Threx

Falkentyne said:


> In order for the vcore to downvolt (assuming you want something like 800 mhz / 0.625v or something here), you need to use adaptive voltage. You also need to have c-states enabled (disabling c-states will make the CPU downclock but the vcore won't). If your Bios has an option for "Speed Shift" with a range of 0-255, 0 means that you won't have any downclocking, and 255 means you will have heavy downclocking, and anything besides extremely high load (like small FFT Prime95) will cause downclocking even in benchmarks. I am not sure what will happen if speed shift is disabled.
> 
> I use Throttlestop 8.70+ on my MSI jokebook (throttlebook laptop) to control speed shift, rather than the Bios. If you're having problems with speedshift, try Throttlestop 8.70.


Hi, thanks. I actually figured it out.

I previously used haswell which you could simply select adaptive voltage and frequency.

With this mobo I had to set my vcore to "normal" then select an offset to specify the actual voltage used... rather than inputting a specific voltage and selecting an adaptive option. Just seemed a little counter intuitive to me.

Still can't figure out how to turn off the mobo lights though when I shut down the pc.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Threx said:


> 2. Is there a way to turn off the motherboard lights when I shut off my pc, while having it turn back on when I boot it up? I've turned both LED options (forgot the exact names) in the bios under peripherals to OFF. The lights refuse to turn off when I shut down my PC and I have to switch off the PSU.


F7A fixes this... It may have been fixed on F5 as well, but I tested on F7A.


----------



## Timur Born

Moparman said:


> Put your meter on resistance and hold the leads together and see how much resistance is in them as I will bet it isn't a perfect zero and that is why you're seeing a very slight difference on your meter.


I can zero my meter and the difference between measuring points and CPU socket usually comes down to the components between them. Measuring Vcore at the VRM output is not the same as measuring at the CPU input.

And as I wrote, neither did I find the position of said measuring points in the manual (yet), nor is it convenient to reach them inside a case. Whereas the backpanel usually is easy to reach and you can be quite sure to get the best measuring point available.

Where are the measuring points on the Master then?


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Timur Born said:


> Where are the measuring points on the Master then?


Right above the DIMM slots.


----------



## pzaren

Got a 9900k to go with my Aorus Wifi Pro. 

Vcore sometimes goes above 1.3 - usually about 1.29 according to hwinfo and aorus system information viewer, but max at 1.385. XMP enabled (@3000 mhz) everything else is as the board shipped (default). Is this a normal voltage? Should I change anything? Bios is F5.


----------



## Timur Born

Thanks, Matthew. These don't seem to be mentioned in the manual other than being listed as feature. They are hard to reach within a case and I prefer measuring points that allow to plugin the probes. Apart from being more comfortable to handle they also provide more contact area to get proper readings.


----------



## Mo2k

Hey guys, 



I now own a Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi with a i5 9600K  



I'm overclocking right now, mainly doing this like in the PDF-File which I downloaded here. I just disabled TDP Control since with it I can't get a stable Prime Run even with 4,5Ghz. 



Now my system seems to be stable at 4,7Ghz with 1,23V Core Voltage. RAM is G. Skill Aegis 3000 at 3000 with CL16 (XMP). 



By adding just 100Mhz I can't get it stable. I raised Voltage even to 1,28V and it always stops workers on Prime95. Its the newest Prime Version. AVX offset is zero since I want a AVX stable system and AVX offset seems not to work properly right now with Z390. 



So guys, did I get a bad CPU or are there any other settings I could change to get it stable, maybe with 5Ghz? 




Temperatures are right now getting to 90°C, which is to much for air cooling. 



By the way: I use Small FFTs Test!



Regards


----------



## Moparman

Mo2k said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> 
> 
> I now own a Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi with a i5 9600K
> 
> 
> 
> I'm overclocking right now, mainly doing this like in the PDF-File which I downloaded here. I just disabled TDP Control since with it I can't get a stable Prime Run even with 4,5Ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> Now my system seems to be stable at 4,7Ghz with 1,23V Core Voltage. RAM is G. Skill Aegis 3000 at 3000 with CL16 (XMP).
> 
> 
> 
> By adding just 100Mhz I can't get it stable. I raised Voltage even to 1,28V and it always stops workers on Prime95. Its the newest Prime Version. AVX offset is zero since I want a AVX stable system and AVX offset seems not to work properly right now with Z390.
> 
> 
> 
> So guys, did I get a bad CPU or are there any other settings I could change to get it stable, maybe with 5Ghz?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temperatures are right now getting to 90°C, which is to much for air cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> By the way: I use Small FFTs Test!
> 
> 
> 
> Regards


Check post 200 as I have the same setup. Also try the cpu up 5ghz 8700k profile in the bios as it also worked very well for me.


----------



## Threx

GBT-MatthewH said:


> F7A fixes this... It may have been fixed on F5 as well, but I tested on F7A.


Those aren't available for the Elite though. The latest driver on the official page is F4c. Or can I flash it with the F7A bios from another motherboard?


----------



## Falkentyne

Threx said:


> Those aren't available for the Elite though. The latest driver on the official page is F4c. Or can I flash it with the F7A bios from another motherboard?


You absolutely can NOT do this. Instant brick if the software even allows the flash to go through.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Threx said:


> Those aren't available for the Elite though. The latest driver on the official page is F4c. Or can I flash it with the F7A bios from another motherboard?


Ah, let me check if we have a new BIOS for Elite I can post.


----------



## Mo2k

Moparman said:


> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> 
> 
> I now own a Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi with a i5 9600K /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> I'm overclocking right now, mainly doing this like in the PDF-File which I downloaded here. I just disabled TDP Control since with it I can't get a stable Prime Run even with 4,5Ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> Now my system seems to be stable at 4,7Ghz with 1,23V Core Voltage. RAM is G. Skill Aegis 3000 at 3000 with CL16 (XMP).
> 
> 
> 
> By adding just 100Mhz I can't get it stable. I raised Voltage even to 1,28V and it always stops workers on Prime95. Its the newest Prime Version. AVX offset is zero since I want a AVX stable system and AVX offset seems not to work properly right now with Z390.
> 
> 
> 
> So guys, did I get a bad CPU or are there any other settings I could change to get it stable, maybe with 5Ghz?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temperatures are right now getting to 90°C, which is to much for air cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> By the way: I use Small FFTs Test!
> 
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> Check post 200 as I have the same setup. Also try the cpu up 5ghz 8700k profile in the bios as it also worked very well for me.
Click to expand...


Microsoft does not boot with your Settings 😕

Dont know why 😞


----------



## Jonny321321

Having trouble stabilizing past 5Ghz, are there settings I should be fiddling with? Whenever AVX happens my PC crashes soon after, my Vcore also does not change when under AVX load, should it? I was always under the impression it applied extra voltage


Furthermore,
- IA and GT VR config stuff (whatever it is)? 
- Power limits? Wat do? Should I just max them all?
- According to Deb8auer's video on GB Z370 (different chipset tho) Intel Turbo Boost should be disabled
- Anything else that should be upped due to poor management by Auto would be good too (e.g. PCH core. VCC voltages?)
- Base clock OC worth it?


----------



## Moparman

Jonny321321 said:


> Having trouble stabilizing past 5Ghz, are there settings I should be fiddling with? Whenever AVX happens my PC crashes soon after, my Vcore also does not change when under AVX load, should it? I was always under the impression it applied extra voltage
> 
> 
> Furthermore,
> - IA and GT VR config stuff (whatever it is)?
> - Power limits? Wat do? Should I just max them all?
> - According to Deb8auer's video on GB Z370 (different chipset tho) Intel Turbo Boost should be disabled
> - Anything else that should be upped due to poor management by Auto would be good too (e.g. PCH core. VCC voltages?)
> - Base clock OC worth it?


You can try my setting in post 200 or use the gigabyte guide in the OP. Also you can try the 8700k 5ghz profile saved in the bios. Under CPU level Up I think it's called.


----------



## Jonny321321

Moparman said:


> You can try my setting in post 200 or use the gigabyte guide in the OP. Also you can try the 8700k 5ghz profile saved in the bios. Under CPU level Up I think it's called.


Thanks, I shall look. I'm on 5.2Ghz, trying to stabilise. I've already looked at the Gigabyte guide, and have altered VCCIO accordingly. I thought the gigabyte guide was quite basic.


As as side note: in HWINFO - IA: MAX TURBO LIMIT is set to Yes. Should I be worried? There's currently no load.


----------



## Timur Born

Two questions about the OC guide:

1:



> *Note: Alternatively, instead of disabling all these options you can simply just disable the “Enhanced Multi-Core Performance” under Advanced Frequency Settings.


"These options" means C-states. According to this note you should disable "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" in order to disable all C-state options (previous page in the guide). But according to my tests it seems to be the other way around, enabled "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" disables all C-states and activates a pre-configured OC profile.

2:

The guide specifically asks to use Prime95 "Version 27.9 Build 1", even though v28.10 is published for ages and the most current one is v29.1. Why does the guide ask to use this specific version? Anything special about it?


----------



## Jonny321321

Timur Born said:


> Two questions about the OC guide:
> 
> 1:
> 
> 
> 
> "These options" means C-states. According to this note you should disable "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" in order to disable all C-state options (previous page in the guide). But according to my tests it seems to be the other way around, enabled "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" disables all C-states and activates a pre-configured OC profile.
> 
> 2:
> 
> The guide specifically asks to use Prime95 "Version 27.9 Build 1", even though v28.10 is published for ages and the most current one is v29.1. Why does the guide ask to use this specific version? Anything special about it?


Oooh, me me! I can answer the 2nd question. Prime95 (and AIDA64) by default utilise the AVX instruction set, which places a heavier strain on the CPU and might not necessarily be representative of your workload (stability issues, higher temps, higher risk etc). Previous Prime95 versions weren't equipped with the AVX instruction set, since it hadn't been released yet and therefore Gigabyte are recommending one of these older Prime versions, since it doesn't use AVX. Either way, with new versions of Prime95, you can achieve the same non-AVX effect by creating a 'local.txt' in the Prime95 folder, and placing in it 'CpuSupportsAVX=0'.

Personally I prefer to not use AVX for initial testing since I don't use the instruction set in my day-to-day.


----------



## Timur Born

Jonny321321 said:


> Oooh, me me! I can answer the 2nd question. Prime95 (and AIDA64) by default utilise the AVX instruction set, ...
> therefore Gigabyte are recommending one of these older Prime versions, since it doesn't use AVX.


That would be v26.6 for non AVX workload then. The OC guide specifically mentions to use v27.1 in order to utilize AVX.

"This particular version of Prime95 uses AVX instructions which push our CPU to the absolute max. "

So I still wonder why the old version for AVX test cases instead of a more current one?


----------



## porksmuggler

ThorsMalice said:


> Wondering if anyone could give some advice on my z390 Master, I'm running an 8700k currently with everything at stock F4 bios and getting a loud whine from the vrm area around the cpu. This is a fresh watercooling build with plenty of air going across the vrm area.


Coil whine is usually indicated on some video cards, ensure its not from the GPU VRM instead of the board.



Timur Born said:


> I interpret this very different: "Up to" is what depends on flex I/O ports, "14" means "14" and is completely independent of any flex I/O. The low bandwidth of all 14 USB 2.0 ports can be handled by a single (!) PCIe 3 lane.
> 
> So it still looks like "lazy" design to me to run all USB 2 ports via hubs, especially the internal ones which are situated so close to the PCH.


Your interpretation of flex I/O is incorrect. I do not have time to find, but please review the HSIO specifications for Z390. There are 24 lanes, and the vendor determines how they are allotted and shared, in this case PCH inclusion preference is given to the usb 3.1 gen 1 / 2, which is logical.



Timur Born said:


> Try disabling C-states for testing. Start with disabling all and then enable one by one again.


VRM noise is not related to C-states.



Threx said:


> Hi, I have a few questions. I'm using an Aorus Elite with the latest bios.
> 
> 1. Is there any way to make the vcore downvolt while idle on the desktop apart from setting it to auto in the bios? My cpu won't completely downclock either (4.8 in bios). It will constantly bounce around between 800-4800mhz while the vcore never downvolts. I have c states on, enhanced multi core off, and power set to balanced in windows.


Set enhanced multi core to Auto.


----------



## Mo2k

Damn, I was using newest prime version the whole time and wondered, why even 4,8 Ghz didn't get stable. 



Guys, do you all use 26,6 (last one without AVX), 27,9 b1 oder the newest one? Just to know with whom I compare my CPU


----------



## porksmuggler

Mo2k said:


> Damn, I was using newest prime version the whole time and wondered, why even 4,8 Ghz didn't get stable.
> 
> 
> 
> Guys, do you all use 26,6 (last one without AVX), 27,9 b1 oder the newest one? Just to know with whom I compare my CPU


I per core overclock, so I use both. I use the latest to determine thermal threshold with AVX, then use that core clock as the AVX offset. Then I test with 26.6 to determine max thermal threshold, and then set turbo clocks accordingly. Usually a single or dual core above 5GHz, all core at 5GHz, AVX offset -3 / 4. For the Master that's easy, then fine tune voltage using Normal and Offset voltages.

*26.6 or the latest (294b8) with edited txt file for no AVX load, but easier to just have both versions.


----------



## Mo2k

porksmuggler said:


> I per core overclock, so I use both. I use the latest to determine thermal threshold with AVX, then use that core clock as the AVX offset. Then I test with 26.6 to determine max thermal threshold, and then set turbo clocks accordingly. Usually a single or dual core above 5GHz, all core at 5GHz, AVX offset -3 / 4. For the Master that's easy, then fine tune voltage using Normal and Offset.
> 
> *26.6 or the latest with edited txt file for no AVX load, but easier to just have both versions.





I thought to do so also. 4,7 is gonna be my AVX Offset, hopefully 5,0 my standard core speed. I turned turbo off. And maybe a new version of bios for aorus pro will bring some improvement with avx offset which is now not working well as I understood.


----------



## ThorsMalice

I went back over my build to continue looking for the source of the whining and it led me back to the vrms on the motherboard, at first i though it was my gpu. I have updated to F5 bios and disabled all c-states I could find including speedshift and vt-d and set my power settings to performance but the issue still persists. This is running stock 8700k on the Master with 16gb 3200mhz ram using xmp. I've included a short video of the noise (very high pitch), if anyone has any other ideas please let me know, thanks. https://streamable.com/roiqh


----------



## porksmuggler

Mo2k said:


> I thought to do so also. 4,7 is gonna be my AVX Offset, hopefully 5,0 my standard core speed. I turned turbo off. And maybe a new version of bios for aorus pro will bring some improvement with avx offset which is now not working well as I understood.


I think 4.7GHz on AVX load put me around 90 C with a single fan D15S, not sure, have to check again. So I think its 4.6GHz for me with AVX, but that's just personal preference, fan noise, etc.

I do not disable turbo. I per core overclock, because its more of a challenge to retain all S3 / speedstep / power management features, and still reach high clocks. Plus, while doing basic things like browsing the internet, why not have all low idle low power usage, and low fan speeds.


----------



## Jonny321321

Anyone tried messing with base clock? I swear Google is awful these days, can't find a thing I search for.

On my Haswell I achieved 150mhz more by using a 125mhz strap.


Are PLL overvoltage etc' values good to increase (of course would only do it if someone said so)?


----------



## Timur Born

porksmuggler said:


> Your interpretation of flex I/O is incorrect. I do not have time to find, but please review the HSIO specifications for Z390. There are 24 lanes, and the vendor determines how they are allotted and shared, in this case PCH inclusion preference is given to the usb 3.1 gen 1 / 2, which is logical.


I did read both the specifications and the Intel datasheet for Z370 (Z390 not available yet). Here is a quote:

"Flexible Input/Output (I/O) is a technology that allows some of the PCH High Speed I/O (HSIO) Ianes to be configured for connection to a Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) Controller, a PCIe* Controller, a Extensible Host Controller Interface (XHCI) *USB 3.0* Controller, or an Advanced Host Controller Interface (AHCI) SATA Controller."

USB 2.0 is not mentioned anywhere in the Flexible I/O chapter, instead it is listed as a fixed number of 14 ports.

Then I went further and checked the number of USB ports on the USB root hub of my Aorus Master. It is 10 USB 3 ports and 16 USB 2 ports. I do wonder why there are two extra USB 2 ports, but in any case there are plenty of ports available.

And even if not then I would have wished that Gigabyte did not use Genesys Logic to provide the hub chipsets. At least their USB 3 hubs are badly implemented, but hopefully their USB 2 hubs do better. I will test this once I find time.



> VRM noise is not related to C-states.


Yes it is, and the noise frequency and modulation likely correlates to C-state switching frequencies. This can be reproduced. The volume (loudness) of audible noise usually is related to CPU frequency/voltages (Power Saver power plan usually is quieter than Balanced and High Performance).

Not necessarily on the Aorus Master (need to test), but generally yes. On the other hand VRMs' own switching frequency likely isn't directly related to audible noise, 400 kHz is far off the audible frequency band of about 0.05 - 16 kHz.

Of course, C-state switching is not the only possible source of VRM noise. USB polling frequency is another source, even correlated in audible frequency (1000 Hz USB polling = 1 kHz root frequency). And all that being said, graphic-card VRMs often are even worse (with FPS correlating to root frequency of their noise).



> Set enhanced multi core to Auto.


Which corresponds to "Disable". But since I specifically wanted to enable it I reported my observation that this disables all P-states and C-states. This seems to be a deliberate choice (see overclocking guide) by Gigabyte, which I did not know about when I first reported about the lack of downclocking.


----------



## Moparman

ThorsMalice said:


> I went back over my build to continue looking for the source of the whining and it led me back to the vrms on the motherboard, at first i though it was my gpu. I have updated to F5 bios and disabled all c-states I could find including speedshift and vt-d and set my power settings to performance but the issue still persists. This is running stock 8700k on the Master with 16gb 3200mhz ram using xmp. I've included a short video of the noise (very high pitch), if anyone has any other ideas please let me know, thanks. https://streamable.com/roiqh


I'm going to check mine again as i also have the same noise. I thought it was from the gpu's also. My 980ti SLI and 780ti SLi setups have the noise in this board. I did test a 9500gt i have here and no noise so i will get back as i'm going to dig deeper.


----------



## ThorsMalice

Moparman said:


> I'm going to check mine again as i also have the same noise. I thought it was from the gpu's also. My 980ti SLI and 780ti SLi setups have the noise in this board. I did test a 9500gt i have here and no noise so i will get back as i'm going to dig deeper.


Yea, I was almost certain it had to be the gpu because of the ek block but I had never had that issue before. In the video the closer I get to those vrms on the side of the cpu it goes crazy loud. Even under load the noise doesn't change at all, I've run cinebench and unigine and can't discern any audible difference, it's just a constant uniform pitch coming straight from the side vrms.


----------



## porksmuggler

Timur Born said:


> I did read both the specifications and the Intel datasheet for Z370 (Z390 not available yet). Here is a quote:
> 
> "Flexible Input/Output (I/O) is a technology that allows some of the PCH High Speed I/O (HSIO) Ianes to be configured for connection to a Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) Controller, a PCIe* Controller, a Extensible Host Controller Interface (XHCI) *USB 3.0* Controller, or an Advanced Host Controller Interface (AHCI) SATA Controller."
> 
> USB 2.0 is not mentioned anywhere in the Flexible I/O chapter, instead it is listed as a fixed number of 14 ports.
> 
> Then I went further and checked the number of USB ports on the USB root hub of my Aorus Master. It is 10 USB 3 ports and 16 USB 2 ports. I do wonder why there are two extra USB 2 ports, but in any case there are plenty of ports available.
> 
> And even if not then I would have wished that Gigabyte did not use Genesys Logic to provide the hub chipsets. At least their USB 3 hubs are badly implemented, but hopefully their USB 2 hubs do better. I will test this once I find time.


Hopefully you'll figure it out, again I'll post HSIO specs when I find them.



Timur Born said:


> Yes it is, and the noise frequency and modulation likely is directly connected to C-state switching frequencies, this can be reproduced. The volume (loudness) of audible noise usually is related to CPU frequency/voltages (Power Saver power plan usually is quieter than Balanced and High Performance).
> 
> Not necessarily on the Aorus Master (need to test), but generally yes. On the other hand VRMs' own switching frequency likely isn't directly related to audible noise, 400 kHz is far off the audible frequency band of about 0.05 - 16 kHz.
> 
> Of course, C-state switching is not the only possible source of VRM noise. USB polling frequency is another source, even correlated in audible frequency (1000 Hz USB polling = 1 kHz root frequency). And all that being said, graphic-card VRMs often are even worse (with FPS correlating to root frequency of their noise).


Correlation is not causation. I've read all the post in this forum and others related to C-states and VRM noise. It's not a solution, like placing a band-aid on a chest wound. He need to try a different PSU. As the PSU vendors like to say, incorrectly, not all components are "compatible". In this case tolerance and noise/ripple issues between the selected PSU and mainboard.

I'm too old to hear the noise, either through speakers or headset in his recording, but I'm certain its there  



Timur Born said:


> Which corresponds to "Disable". But since I specifically wanted to enable it I reported my observation that this disables all P-states and C-states. This seems to be a deliberate choice (see overclocking guide) by Gigabyte, which I did not know about when I first reported about the lack of downclocking.


This reply wasn't to / for you (please see the quote), but you're correct as to the function of disabling enhanced multi core. I have not tested enabling, but I'm certain you're correct there as well.

He needs to set it to Auto, regardless.


----------



## Moparman

ThorsMalice said:


> Yea, I was almost certain it had to be the gpu because of the ek block but I had never had that issue before. In the video the closer I get to those vrms on the side of the cpu it goes crazy loud. Even under load the noise doesn't change at all, I've run cinebench and unigine and can't discern any audible difference, it's just a constant uniform pitch coming straight from the side vrms.


My cards for sure are making noise in this board. However they don't in my X99, X470 and even 790i Ultra for testing at same OC using any of the psu's I have here, PCP&C 1050w, OCZ1250w Gold, TT Tough Power 850w and a Prototype Enhance 1000w I got.
So I will test more.


----------



## porksmuggler

Moparman said:


> My cards for sure are making noise in this board. However they don't in my X99, X470 and even 790i Ultra for testing at same OC using any of the psu's I have here, PCP&C 1050w, OCZ1250w Gold, TT Tough Power 850w and a Prototype Enhance 1000w I got.
> So I will test more.


I used to have a decent article, from many years ago explaining why the cards are more susceptible, given a certain GPU VRM and mainboard VRM combination. Good to hear, or bad? that its not a result of the PSU in this mainboards case.

I'm testing with a Gigabyte G1 970, but can't offer evidence, since I can't hear the coil whine regardless.


----------



## Timur Born

porksmuggler said:


> Hopefully you'll figure it out, again I'll post HSIO specs when I find them.


All the HSIO diagrams show up to ten USB 3 ports. USB 2 is neither mentioned nor would it be possible to have more than 10 USB ports total according to those diagrams, while in reality it is possible. So I assume that these diagrams do not include USB 2.



> Correlation is not causation. I've read all the post in this forum and others related to C-states and VRM noise.


Depends on the mainboard, setup and usage. On my Asus Crosshair 6 Hero I can completely turn off the audible noise by turning off C-states. That does not necessarily clear up the electric noise on ground-lines, though.



> He need to try a different PSU. As the PSU vendors like to say, incorrectly, not all components are "compatible". In this case tolerance and noise/ripple issues between the selected PSU and mainboard.


That is another possible source for noise, yes. I once tested a PSU that emitted an audible and measurable (ground lines) frequency drop after turning it off, likely as its capacitors dropped their charge. Quite a strange wailing noise with a ground loop via (USB + XLR) cable shielding on my powered speakers.



> This reply wasn't to / for you (please see the quote), but you're correct as to the function of disabling enhanced multi core. I have not tested enabling, but I'm certain you're correct there as well.


All your quotes featured users starting with a "T", no wonder I got confused.


----------



## porksmuggler

Timur Born said:


> All your quotes featured users starting with a "T", no wonder I got confused.


Completely understandable now that I see that too, lol.

Edit: Also, google singing capacitors, fun stuff, since you mentioned that PSU example.


----------



## Timur Born

porksmuggler said:


> I used to have a decent article, from many years ago explaining why the cards are more susceptible, given a certain GPU VRM and mainboard VRM combination. Good to hear, or bad? that its not a result of the PSU in this mainboards case.
> 
> I'm testing with a Gigabyte G1 970, but can't offer evidence, since I can't hear the coil whine regardless.


If you got a GPU that emits noise then let some graphic output run at 500 - 5000 fps. You can literally play a tune then.


----------



## porksmuggler

Okay, I do have one comment about the LLC settings for this board, and maybe Gigabyte UEFI has been this way in the past and I just missed it, but what's up with the goofy options?

There's Auto, Normal, Standard, Low, Medium, High, Turbo, Extreme, and Ultra Extreme. Seriously, can we not just get a numeric scale? Especially the whole Normal, Standard, Low, Medium segment, those obviously are not in any coherent order by English name.


----------



## Sajaa

Hello,

Anyone booting only with Samsung 970 Pro ? My Aorus Master doesn't want to boot at all. 

If I add an SSD then it works. 

I did a clear cmos, but it doesn't change anything....


----------



## Timur Born

porksmuggler said:


> Edit: Also, google singing capacitors, fun stuff, since you mentioned that PSU example.


People keep only referring to coils when it comes to audible effects, but forget (don't know) about capacitors. I am quite happy that PWM brightness controls of modern computer displays do not exhibit all the noise anymore.

This Murata video is quite revealing:

https://www.murata.com/products/capacitor/mlcc/solution/naki


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> BETA BIOS for those with the sleep / higher Vcore issue on Z390 Master: F7A
> 
> **Please note this is a BETA BIOS, not an official BIOS. If you run into any issues let me know and revert back to the latest official BIOS.


Thanks for publishing betas here and for generally being around and responsive. This is one strong reason for me to get the Aorus Master instead of an Asus board, since regrettably Elmor is no longer working at Asus.


----------



## TheMadMan697

Can you guys tell me if your board came in a sealed anti static bag and if it had any protective plastic film over the IHS etc. I am wondering If I got a returned board from amazon as mine did not have either. Also the board seems to have come with the latest F5 BIOS. I did not have to update it. 

I cant seem to get a display output from my RTX2080ti on this board but I can from the on-board graphics. Need to do further testing later by switching the GPU to another system but it was working before.


----------



## Jonny321321

TheMadMan697 said:


> Can you guys tell me if your board came in a sealed anti static bag and if it had any protective plastic film over the IHS etc. I am wondering If I got a returned board from amazon as mine did not have either. Also the board seems to have come with the latest F5 BIOS. I did not have to update it.
> 
> I cant seem to get a display output from my RTX2080ti on this board but I can from the on-board graphics. Need to do further testing later by switching the GPU to another system but it was working before.


My Pro came in an anti static bag, and had a plastic film over the VRM heatsink.


----------



## Stockman

TheMadMan697 said:


> Can you guys tell me if your board came in a sealed anti static bag and if it had any protective plastic film over the IHS etc. I am wondering If I got a returned board from amazon as mine did not have either. Also the board seems to have come with the latest F5 BIOS. I did not have to update it.
> 
> I cant seem to get a display output from my RTX2080ti on this board but I can from the on-board graphics. Need to do further testing later by switching the GPU to another system but it was working before.


Sounds like they gave you a returned board, unfortunately. My Master came in a sealed anti-static bag. There was also "peel off" plastic on chipset HS, and I/O cover. Also, the already upgraded BIOS is suspicious. You should check if the protective platic on the underside of M.2 heat sinks is still there.


----------



## anthony81212

TheMadMan697 said:


> Can you guys tell me if your board came in a sealed anti static bag and if it had any protective plastic film over the IHS etc. I am wondering If I got a returned board from amazon as mine did not have either. Also the board seems to have come with the latest F5 BIOS. I did not have to update it.
> 
> I cant seem to get a display output from my RTX2080ti on this board but I can from the on-board graphics. Need to do further testing later by switching the GPU to another system but it was working before.


Yeah, my Z390 Aorus Master came in an anti-static bag (sealed with tape), and the PCH shield & VRM and IO shrouds all had plastic film over them.


----------



## Adamastor

Moparman said:


> These are the current settings I'm using.


Thanks for the input!

LLC "extreme" isn't too much? I thought that medium/high was the most we should set.


----------



## Threx

Mind had the peel-off film on the heatsink. Anti static bag was not sealed by that's normal over here where I live.


----------



## ThorsMalice

So went ahead and put in a RMA for my Aorus Master, the coil whine from the vrm is absolutely unbearable, it sounds like tinnitus. Hopefully newegg sends me a new one without the issue otherwise I guess it's the psu's turn for a rma.


----------



## Timur Born

Sometimes a single twist can be lose on a coil, which leads to increased vibration. I did not have time to check my Master for VRM noise yet. Will do once I lower the rpm of my system fans after initial OC testing.


----------



## Jonny321321

Is there a reason why I can't use a 130mhz or higher base clock even with RAM and cache full downclocked? Insufficient voltage somewhere? Faulty board (Z390 Pro)?


----------



## Moparman

Jonny321321 said:


> Is there a reason why I can't use a 130mhz or higher base clock even with RAM and cache full downclocked? Insufficient voltage somewhere? Faulty board (Z390 Pro)?


Why are you trying to run the BCLK so high?


----------



## Jonny321321

Moparman said:


> Why are you trying to run the BCLK so high?


To see if I can squeeze some more mhz out. If you look at the top Kaby Lake statistic here they have a BCLK of 200 https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1621347-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-statistics.html


But I'm having a hard time stabilising anything using the base clock (even with a BCLK of 108mhz)


----------



## doom26464

I tries screwing with baseclock but even a 100.25 base clock which put me at 5.125ghz on the cpu was not stable. 5.1ghz with LCC to turbo and voltage @1.325v in bios(cpu-z shows 1.344v under load) is pretty much as stable As I can get.


108 base clock is insane and no way it would even come close to stable.


----------



## Robbært

Moparman said:


> Why are you trying to run the BCLK so high?


people run BCLK 200 with 25(26) multiplier to get less heat (have to edit mem settings too)


----------



## shaolin95

Robbært said:


> people run BCLK 200 with 25(26) multiplier to get less heat (have to edit mem settings too)


mmm how is running a BLCK at higher speeds gonna get less heat? Unless things are different with these systems, it should be harder to run higher BLCK than going by the multiplier...imo.


----------



## Moparman

Robbært said:


> people run BCLK 200 with 25(26) multiplier to get less heat (have to edit mem settings too)


I don't think i understand this at all. 200x25=5ghz the same as 100x50=5ghz No matter how you cut it you will need the same amount of power for 5ghz and if I had to guess more power for the higher BCLK since you have to push voltages more to make a higher BCLK stable.


----------



## doom26464

I think all base clock is usefull for is fine tuning the last 25-50mhz out of your setup. Even still you need to adjust voltage to a point to deal with the minor mhz bump.


----------



## Keninishna

What temps are you guys getting on air coolers? I just put my build together with a le grand macho and only thing I changed in bios was XMP profile to 1 and prime95 is hitting 100c and throttling. I know p95 uses avx and all but 100c on stock settings? I will do some more tinkering, I'm thinking update to latest beta bios and disable multi core enhancement and trying it again.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Keninishna said:


> What temps are you guys getting on air coolers? I just put my build together with a le grand macho and only thing I changed in bios was XMP profile to 1 and prime95 is hitting 100c and throttling. I know p95 uses avx and all but 100c on stock settings? I will do some more tinkering, I'm thinking update to latest beta bios and disable multi core enhancement and trying it again.


FYI all AORUS/GIGABYTE boards come with MCE off by default. Technically its set to "AUTO" which acts the same as OFF, by default.


----------



## shaolin95

GBT-MatthewH said:


> FYI all AORUS/GIGABYTE boards come with MCE off by default. Technically its set to "AUTO" which acts the same as OFF, by default.


Good to see a Gigabyte rep here. I was a bit afraid of getting a Gigabyte based on the "horrible" bios comments even though I was coming from and old style bios on my Asus rampage III Formula (x58) so anything would look fancy for me lol
Anyways, so far I am at 1.30v @5GHZ and need to test how low I can keep dropping voltage and keep stable. 
Two questions..
1st, I have been using Real Bench but am I correct to say that it has some usage of AVX though it could create less stability than what I need for non AVX related workloads? I havent played with the offset so maybe I will try that next.
2nd, for per core overclock we use the "Intel turbo boost technology" option and set for example 1 core to 52, 2 to 51 and the rest to 50 etc?

Bonus question...is anyone able to get the android RGB app working? I can see my desktop but never connects. The ratings in google store are NOT very good lol


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> This is our working theory right now as well. If you do a complete fresh install of windows the AVX offset wont be applied at idle. At some point during driver/software installs and reboots the avx starts getting applied even at "idle". Perhaps its a chipset driver since that would be common to all boards and platforms? Not sure yet, but our team is leaning away from a BIOS issue since it does not happen on a 100% clean install.


From what I (quickly) analyzed the following Windows processes are among the worst to invoke the AVX offset:

- Windows Defender: This is what seems to activate the AVX offset most often during "idle". It's especially bad after a Windows start/login. I replaced it with Symantec Endpoint Protection Cloud and my "idle" dips to AVX offset seem to be better, although Symantec also seems to use AVX during active scans.

- Windows Explorer, or maybe the shell extensions installed on my setup: This can most easily be reproduced by restarting Explorer, because it causes a big burst of AVX offset dips.

Opening new windows (Explorer or any MMC console) will also cause a short burst of AVX dips.

Scrolling in the Windows 10 start menu also seems to invoke AVX.

At one time I could invoke the AVX offset by quickly moving the Explorer selection frame on the desktop, but only when the USB mouse polling rate was set to higher than the default 125 Hz (I switched back and forth between different polling rates). After a relogin I could not reproduce this anymore. 

- Audio Endpoint Builder: This is connected to audio drivers and can sometimes be active even when it should not be. Can be reproduced by deactivating/activating any audio driver (plug in USB audio device or simply use Device Manager).

- Windows indexing: Mostly when Searchindexer is invoked (or index is rebuild). Fortunately the Search Filter Host does not seem to use AVX (may depend on the file type being indexed, but at least PDF files do not invoke AVX).

On top of that there of course is various third party software invoking AVX that may not be so obvious, like web browsers (Firefox, Chrome, Edge).


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> FYI all AORUS/GIGABYTE boards come with MCE off by default. Technically its set to "AUTO" which acts the same as OFF, by default.


If "Auto" is statically set to match one of the options then there should be no "Auto" entry, especially when "Enable" and "Disable" are the only options anyway. Only use "Auto" when something "automatic" really happens under the hood.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Timur Born said:


> If "Auto" is statically set to match one of the options then there should be no "Auto" entry, especially when "Enable" and "Disable" are the only options anyway. Only use "Auto" when something "automatic" really happens under the hood.


Your welcome to put it to disabled, but AUTO means variable output. For instance at default AUTO is the same as OFF.... However if you set your multiplier manually 50X then "AUTO" become "Enabled". We assume if you set 50x as the mutliplier your intention is to set every core to 50x. There are other various IF-Then scenarios but that's just an example of the difference between explicit "OFF" and Default "AUTO" == off.


----------



## kixxo

Hi,

I’ve been following this thread for quite a while, but first post in here.

I’m looking to buy a motherboard, and I have a shortlist. I had a Maximus XI Hero that I returned for a number of reasons.

After following this and the "Z370 / Z390 VRM discussion" thread for weeks it seems that every board has some caveat or weakness. 

My shortlist is two Gigabyte boards: the Aorus Master or Ultra. 

In terms of features \ price point \ power phasing \ VRM \ build quality I like what the Ultra offers. I watched buildzoid’s overview of the Gigabyte Z390 line and he had high praise for both the Master and Ultra, and at one point even suggests that in some ways he prefers the VRM’s on the Ultra (over Master) with a caveat mentioned of ‘depending on the cooling situation’ Cued here:
https://youtu.be/aVUON93T2j4?t=1908

I know the Ultra doesn’t have the Master’s backplate, but I wonder how much of a difference that actually makes for cooling? (I see the point as a structural thing) For cooling It is aluminum, which is great, but with some type of carbon type coating. 

I’m not a fan of the rear IO panel Clear CMOS on the Master. Wish it were on the board itself. I worry about my clumsy big hands accidentally hitting that.

USB and Sata appear to be the same on the Ultra or Master. Features wise, very similar.
The Ultra maintains the debug readout, but doesn’t appear to have a pwr on, on mainboard (handy for breadboarding) 

I’m putting together mainly an editing rig on the Z390 platform. 

It’s
9900K (have)
Noctua NH D15 (have)
Z390 board (need)
64GB GSKill DDR4 3000 CL14 B-die (have) 
MSI GTX 1080 (have)
970 EVO NVMe (have)
5 x 7200 rpm HDD’s (have) 
EVGA 750 W Gold PSU (buying)
Case Fractal Design R6 (buying)
Half dozen 140 \ 120 mm Noctua case fans. (have)

This will be a closed case. RGB Lights? The easier to turn off the better. I’m not a fan of the RGB trend

For oc’ing on air with the D15, I’d be happy with full time 4.9 maybe 5.0 non AVX, so probably offset to 4.6 or 4.7 AVX. Yes, I'm erring towards conservative for sure, especially after testing my 9900K out on the XI Hero and seeing the crazy heat it generated. 

Price difference for the boards in Canada where I am
Master $399
Ultra $299

So I’m wondering if there are any real standout reasons that I should pay the extra $110 (after tax) for the Master as opposed to the Ultra? 

My questions distilled:

Does that backplate on the Master actually make much of a difference in terms of sinking \ cooling? 
Are the Master’s VRM heatsinks significantly better than the Ultra? (VRM differences themselves are detailed well by buildzoid and other reviews, and I see no concerns with the Ultra)
Does the Ultra have an onboard pwr on? 

Anything else that I’m missing or overlooking that would significantly favor the Master? Price-wise I can afford either, just not sure if I need the Master

Also, if GBT-MatthewH is still monitoring this thread, has the Ultra been getting the same BIOS updates as the Master to address various problems users have raised here in regards to the Master? 

TIA for input


----------



## Robbært

GBT-MatthewH said:


> We assume if you set 50x as the mutliplier your intention is to set every core to 50x. There are other various IF-Then scenarios


What a misleading option!
Then there should be no "AUTO" setting when no IF scenario.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Robbært said:


> What a misleading option!
> Then there should be no "AUTO" setting when no IF scenario.


Edit: this is how nearly all "auto" settings work. Think of vcore. Auto will adjust based on other variables. Or you can explicitly set it to a value.

Hiding "auto" and making it show "off" until a user intervenes then introducing an "auto" option that was previously hidden makes no sense on multiple levels. First a value you saw as off is now explicitly on until you save and exit then turn it off? The logic tree just doesn't work. Auto is a placeholder for let the board determine the best setting... Or explicitly tell it on or off. We have a very long explanation up since last year of exactly how we handle mce to make sure we are 100% transparent about this feature: http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/2303/intel-turbo-policy-faq


----------



## Robbært

GBT-MatthewH said:


> You cant hide an undefined variable in BIOS like that. Its not C++


why hide, show instead? show: disabled / enabled / multi-auto or something.
atm it show "auto" for 1-option (like voltage), 2-option (like enabled/disabled) and for 3-option settings (enabled/disabled/multi-if-setting)
it can hide as there some grey-out options.
my guess this bios is 3rd party program for you and you have no power to change it? (since intel IME security require to si)

edit: if i was to redesign it i would add one more input box value after 'auto' (so it extra column of options) and it always set to show current setting.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Robbært said:


> why hide, show instead? show: disabled / enabled / multi-auto or something.
> atm it show "auto" for 1-option (like voltage), 2-option (like enabled/disabled) and for 3-option settings (enabled/disabled/multi-if-setting)
> it can hide as there some grey-out options.
> my guess this bios is 3rd party program for you and you have no power to change it?


We program our own BIOS - with a few caveats. The microcode comes from Intel and the basecode comes from AMI... If you asking for it to display what its currently set to (IE the value returned) that's something I can look into, however it would at a minimum require a save/exit reboot to show the value after making a change.


----------



## Jonny321321

After some digging it appears BCLK overclocking also affects FCLK, thus when pushing higher base clock we need to decrease the FCLK value accordingly (e.g. 800mhz)

Quote from ASUS:

"FCLCK is your system agent clock multiplier.
The only time you need to jack with that is if you are moving the BCLCK up to like 125 then you want to move that down to keep the correct multiplier so you can keep the system agent clock at 1GHz."


I have yet to test it though. It's such a pain having to do a full battery out CMOS reset every single time I change a value it doesn't like. My old board used to be much more intelligent at detecting a failed overclock. Or if I'm lucky (sarcasm) then it will switch to the 2nd bios, for some unknown reason. I need a CMOS reset button strapped to my face. But seriously, any pointers?


----------



## Robbært

GBT-MatthewH said:


> If you asking for it to display what its currently set to (IE the value returned) that's something I can look into, however it would at a minimum require a save/exit reboot to show the value after making a change.


yes, please, it would be great to know which effective setting applied.
"auto" not informative at all.

edit: the bug when bios overvolt on auto can happen only when there not possible to know what is "auto". it same for every option bios have, many of them very difficult to test.


----------



## Robbært

Jonny321321 said:


> I have yet to test it though. It's such a pain having to do a full battery out CMOS reset every single time I change a value it doesn't like. My old board used to be much more intelligent at detecting a failed overclock. Or if I'm lucky (sarcasm) then it will switch to the 2nd bios, for some unknown reason. I need a CMOS reset button strapped to my face. But seriously, any pointers?


ASUS doing it right now
idk we call it "probing", bios can reset board several times till it think it started "stable"
it not good too - you change something and don't know if your settings applied since asus restarted it several times.

back when all motherboards had same AMI/AWARD BIOS it was possible to hold down big insert button during power-on to reset bios settings.


----------



## Jonny321321

Robbært said:


> ASUS doing it right now
> idk we call it "probing", bios can reset board several times till it think it started "stable"
> it not good too - you change something and don't know if your settings applied since asus restarted it several times.
> 
> back when all motherboards had same AMI/AWARD BIOS it was possible to hold down big insert button during power-on to reset bios settings.



My last board (Z87 ASUS) allowed me to do exactly that,, hold power button when boot looping and voilá, back to bios. So nifty when I actually want to be tweaking and going about my day. I don't permanenly want my PC's guts splayed on my table.


I expect it has been mentioned but there are BETA bioses and it's a whole number leap, so I'm hoping for good things. Searching for a changelog of sorts.


----------



## bastian

GBT-MatthewH said:


> F7A fixes this... It may have been fixed on F5 as well, but I tested on F7A.


Any idea when the official bios will be released?


----------



## bastian

Sajaa said:


> Hello,
> 
> Anyone booting only with Samsung 970 Pro ? My Aorus Master doesn't want to boot at all.
> 
> If I add an SSD then it works.
> 
> I did a clear cmos, but it doesn't change anything....


No issues here with a 970 Pro. Using the latest BIOS and last M.2.


----------



## shaolin95

bastian said:


> No issues here with a 970 Pro. Using the latest BIOS and last M.2.


I have the 970 in the bottom m.2 slot and not a single issue either except no post when I accidentally didn't install it fully seated the very first time I turned on this computer.


----------



## c0ld

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Edit: this is how nearly all "auto" settings work. Think of vcore. Auto will adjust based on other variables. Or you can explicitly set it to a value.
> 
> Hiding "auto" and making it show "off" until a user intervenes then introducing an "auto" option that was previously hidden makes no sense on multiple levels. First a value you saw as off is now explicitly on until you save and exit then turn it off? The logic tree just doesn't work. Auto is a placeholder for let the board determine the best setting... Or explicitly tell it on or off. We have a very long explanation up since last year of exactly how we handle mce to make sure we are 100% transparent about this feature: http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/2303/intel-turbo-policy-faq


So my CPU is not downclocking at idle because my lower power states are set on Auto? I am unable to make it downclock with my 5.0G OC.


----------



## Excession

I recently got a Z390 Aorus Ultra and there are a couple of things in the BIOS that have me scratching my head. There's no option to change the VRM switching frequency, which has helped me get a really borderline overclock stable in the past. Is there any chance that this could be added in a future BIOS update? The other thing is that you can't manually enter a voltage below 1.1 volts, even though the board is perfectly capable of doing so for the low power states. Is there any particular reason for that? It's not a big deal since I'll never be running it under that 24/7, but I do like to see just how low I can go and still get good performance.


----------



## Falkentyne

Excession said:


> I recently got a Z390 Aorus Ultra and there are a couple of things in the BIOS that have me scratching my head. There's no option to change the VRM switching frequency, which has helped me get a really borderline overclock stable in the past. Is there any chance that this could be added in a future BIOS update? The other thing is that you can't manually enter a voltage below 1.1 volts, even though the VRM is perfectly capable of doing so for the low power states. Is there any particular reason for that? It's not a big deal since I'll never be running it under that 24/7, but I do like to see just how low I can go and still get good performance.


Change the language to Chinese and then see if those options appear for the VRM.


----------



## osb40000

How is the Aorus Master doing with MCE on a 9700k? Reasonable voltage or something we need to tinker with to drop volts. If so are you "undervolting" via offset and does that produce a stable system when power savings features are left on? Thanks guys! I've ran Asus and ASRock mobos for the past 7 years but this release from Gigabyte may get me to come back even after the horrendous RMA/customer service experience I had with multiple Gigabyte GPUs.


----------



## porksmuggler

c0ld said:


> So my CPU is not downclocking at idle because my lower power states are set on Auto? I am unable to make it downclock with my 5.0G OC.


If you want to keep all the power management features functioning, just change all the per core turbo settings to 50 instead of the single multiplier, leave it Auto and EMC Auto.

It's just a different way to OC. Set the XMP, set the per core turbos to 50, and preferably set the vcore to normal, LLC to normal, and a negative offset. That's it, no wondering why voltages don't go down at idle, why cores don't downclock, why voltages overshoot from LLC, and why temps are higher than they need to be from idle to full load.


----------



## Excession

Falkentyne said:


> Change the language to Chinese and then see if those options appear for the VRM.


Didn't see any changes in the options for different languages.



c0ld said:


> So my CPU is not downclocking at idle because my lower power states are set on Auto? I am unable to make it downclock with my 5.0G OC.


What are your windows power plan settings? If the minimum processor state is set to 100%, then your processor won't downclock regardless of what you have set in the BIOS.


----------



## Sajaa

bastian said:


> No issues here with a 970 Pro. Using the latest BIOS and last M.2.


Ok thank you Bastian. Which slot are you using ? And what is your bios version ?

I tryed everything (clear Cmos, all kind of settings) and I'm unable to boot with 1 Nvme. If I add my SSD Crucial to a Sata port then it boots. ...
Last chance is to flash the bios, I'm in F4.


----------



## shaolin95

Sajaa said:


> Ok thank you Bastian. Which slot are you using ? And what is your bios version ?
> 
> I tryed everything (clear Cmos, all kind of settings) and I'm unable to boot with 1 Nvme. If I add my SSD Crucial to a Sata port then it boots. ...
> Last chance is to flash the bios, I'm in F4.


I have mine on the bottom slow and running F5. No issues at all.


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Your welcome to put it to disabled, but AUTO means variable output. For instance at default AUTO is the same as OFF.... However if you set your multiplier manually 50X then "AUTO" become "Enabled". We assume if you set 50x as the mutliplier your intention is to set every core to 50x. There are other various IF-Then scenarios but that's just an example of the difference between explicit "OFF" and Default "AUTO" == off.


Then I misunderstood your last post about this thinking that "Auto" would always be equivalent do "Disable". If "Auto" does indeed change depending on various conditions then it is justified to call it "Auto".

Does "Auto" on LLC options change dynamically based on other conditions or does it statically use "Standard" or "Normal" (are they the same?)?

And is it intentional that MCE disables all C-states when those are set to "Auto" with MCE enabled?


----------



## Mo2k

Sajaa said:


> bastian said:
> 
> 
> 
> No issues here with a 970 Pro. Using the latest BIOS and last M.2.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok thank you Bastian. Which slot are you using ? And what is your bios version ?
> 
> I tryed everything (clear Cmos, all kind of settings) and I'm unable to boot with 1 Nvme. If I add my SSD Crucial to a Sata port then it boots. ...
> Last chance is to flash the bios, I'm in F4.
Click to expand...

Don‘t know if it helps but have you enabled fast boot and then „Last known device“ or so? If yes, maybe UEFI thinks SSD is your last known device and therefore not booting the other devices like your nvme


----------



## Sajaa

Mo2k said:


> Don‘t know if it helps but have you enabled fast boot and then „Last known device“ or so? If yes, maybe UEFI thinks SSD is your last known device and therefore not booting the other devices like your nvme


I disabled fast boot, but I will give a try tonight.
Thank you, I will keep update.


----------



## Jonny321321

Also what's interesting is the ability to choose Intact or Fast when updating the BIOS. Fast appears to neuter Intel Management Engine.


----------



## Luck100

GBT-MatthewH said:


> If you asking for it to display what its currently set to (IE the value returned) that's something I can look into, however it would at a minimum require a save/exit reboot to show the value after making a change.


Seeing the explicit value that auto is generating would be VERY useful, even if it did require a reboot. There's too much room for guessing/confusion when trying to decide what auto is actually doing in response to other settings changing.


----------



## shaolin95

PROBLEM REPORT!

So just experienced my first annoying problem.
I enabled the GPU from bios cause I wanted to test Quicksync in Premiere. 
When I booted to windows noticed that the vcore was showing 1.38 instead of 1.30
Rebooted back to windows and it was showing 1.30 but this time it rebooted during Real Bench so I figured the iGPU was making it unstable (require more voltage?) as it was stable before so decided to go to bios and instead of AUTO I changed the gpu to disable. 
That is when everything went down hill...the computer wouldnt post. Had to remove the power cord a few times until I was finally able to go to Bios and change the GPU to auto and save.
I thought it was all good but booted to windows and it was showing lower CPU speeds. So rebooted again to BIOS and ALL my profiles are gone! What happened? Did it switch to the second bios chip automatically? If so, can I switch back from within the BIOS?
Thanks


----------



## Moparman

shaolin95 said:


> PROBLEM REPORT!
> 
> So just experienced my first annoying problem.
> I enabled the GPU from bios cause I wanted to test Quicksync in Premiere.
> When I booted to windows noticed that the vcore was showing 1.38 instead of 1.30
> Rebooted back to windows and it was showing 1.30 but this time it rebooted during Real Bench so I figured the iGPU was making it unstable (require more voltage?) as it was stable before so decided to go to bios and instead of AUTO I changed the gpu to disable.
> That is when everything went down hill...the computer wouldnt post. Had to remove the power cord a few times until I was finally able to go to Bios and change the GPU to auto and save.
> I thought it was all good but booted to windows and it was showing lower CPU speeds. So rebooted again to BIOS and ALL my profiles are gone! What happened? Did it switch to the second bios chip automatically? If so, can I switch back from within the BIOS?
> Thanks


Sounds like it corrupted the 1st bios and swapped to the 2nd I just had this the other night while I was pushing mem over 4133. Reflash the bioses and start over.


----------



## shaolin95

Moparman said:


> Sounds like it corrupted the 1st bios and swapped to the 2nd I just had this the other night while I was pushing mem over 4133. Reflash the bioses and start over.


wow so changing the igpu to disable somehow killed my bios? :/
Sorry ho do you mean reflash the bioses and start over? Do I have to manually switch to the previous bios chip with the mobo switch and reflash? Or just flashing on my current one will do both?
Just dont want to mess it up.
Thanks!


----------



## Moparman

That is a good question for GBT-Matthew. All I did is flash F5 on my master again and reset all my settings.


----------



## shaolin95

Moparman said:


> That is a good question for GBT-Matthew. All I did is flash F5 on my master again and reset all my settings.


Ok so I switched from the mobo to the previous Bios (F5) and loaded defaults and that got me in windows so I will just copy the settings and reflash F5 again. Maybe I will play with the iGPU before I do that in case I break it again but very odd that such a simple change in bios will create such issues.


----------



## Keninishna

I found out my CPU fan header does not work/detect the CPU fan, so I put it on SYSFAN 6 (PUMP) and it detects it and works so I guess I'll use that. Updated BIOS to F7A and set AVX offset to 3 now the system is stable p95 w/ AVX and the CPU temps running into the high 80s. Kind of ridiculous I need to underclock the CPU by 300mhz (4.4Ghz all core) to get it AVX stable. Is this normal for Air cooling? I have 9900k with a le grand macho rt using thermal grizzly kryonaught and aorus master.


----------



## Moparman

shaolin95 said:


> Ok so I switched from the mobo to the previous Bios (F5) and loaded defaults and that got me in windows so I will just copy the settings and reflash F5 again. Maybe I will play with the iGPU before I do that in case I break it again but very odd that such a simple change in bios will create such issues.


I will take having to reflash anyday over what we used to get from giga. You might remember that a few years back we had the Boot loop problem on giga boards and would have to RMA them a lot. That seems to have been fixed. So just a flash is something I can live with.


----------



## Hercules99

*question*

@Moparman I just wanted to ask is the gigabyte oc guide that you posted still good ?


----------



## Moparman

Hercules99 said:


> @Moparman I just wanted to ask is the gigabyte oc guide that you posted still good ?


That is the OC guide from Gigabyte. We will have to see if they update it. However if anyone wants to try my current settings on my 9600k and Aorus Master I can save and send you the file if you want. currently running 5.1. I also have a 5.2 profile. I have also been messing with mem settings between 3400 and 4133 that work well with me Team Dark Pro 3200c14 Bdie kit.


----------



## Timur Born

Timur Born said:


> From what I (quickly) analyzed the following Windows processes are among the worst to invoke the AVX offset:
> 
> - Windows Defender: This is what seems to activate the AVX offset most often during "idle". It's especially bad after a Windows start/login. I replaced it with Symantec Endpoint Protection Cloud and my "idle" dips to AVX offset seem to be better, although Symantec also seems to use AVX during active scans.
> 
> - Windows Explorer, or maybe the shell extensions installed on my setup: This can most easily be reproduced by restarting Explorer, because it causes a big burst of AVX offset dips.
> 
> Opening new windows (Explorer or any MMC console) will also cause a short burst of AVX dips.
> 
> Scrolling in the Windows 10 start menu also seems to invoke AVX.
> 
> At one time I could invoke the AVX offset by quickly moving the Explorer selection frame on the desktop, but only when the USB mouse polling rate was set to higher than the default 125 Hz (I switched back and forth between different polling rates). After a relogin I could not reproduce this anymore.
> 
> - Audio Endpoint Builder: This is connected to audio drivers and can sometimes be active even when it should not be. Can be reproduced by deactivating/activating any audio driver (plug in USB audio device or simply use Device Manager).
> 
> - Windows indexing: Mostly when Searchindexer is invoked (or index is rebuild). Fortunately the Search Filter Host does not seem to use AVX (may depend on the file type being indexed, but at least PDF files do not invoke AVX).
> 
> On top of that there of course is various third party software invoking AVX that may not be so obvious, like web browsers (Firefox, Chrome, Edge).


I switched the NVidia driver for the Microsoft Standard VGA driver, but that does not seem to make much of a discernible difference.

On the other hand I noticed that applying an AVX offset seems to make a difference between being able to boot into Windows or not, so even during Windows boot and startup phase there might be at least some AVX calls.


----------



## Hercules99

@Moparman man can you send me the 5.1 and 5.2 profiles , the only difference is I will be using a 9900k.


----------



## c0ld

porksmuggler said:


> If you want to keep all the power management features functioning, just change all the per core turbo settings to 50 instead of the single multiplier, leave it Auto and EMC Auto.
> 
> It's just a different way to OC. Set the XMP, set the per core turbos to 50, and preferably set the vcore to normal, LLC to normal, and a negative offset. That's it, no wondering why voltages don't go down at idle, why cores don't downclock, why voltages overshoot from LLC, and why temps are higher than they need to be from idle to full load.


I'll try that I really want it to downclock since the TDP is really high on the 9900k. By the negative offset you mean the Dynamic Vcore?



Excession said:


> What are your windows power plan settings? If the minimum processor state is set to 100%, then your processor won't downclock regardless of what you have set in the BIOS.


I have it on Balanced with minimum sate at 5%.


----------



## Timur Born

Make sure that C-states are enabled, at least C1E, preferably also C3.


----------



## Moparman

Hercules99 said:


> @Moparman man can you send me the 5.1 and 5.2 profiles , the only difference is I will be using a 9900k.


I will send you my settings tonight. However just keep in mind that I'm on a pretty good 9600k so results will vary. Shoot me a PM so i don't forget.


----------



## Fezlakk

Hi Matthew (and anyone with the Aorus Master and Samsung 860 Evo SSD/s)

I have a new build on order including an Aorus Master and 2x 1TB Samsung 860 Evo SSDs for storage.

This story on the Gigabyte US forum has me concerned; his Aorus Master does not detect his 860 Evo - but detects other SSDs. 

http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/5493/aorus-master-860-evo-detected?page=1

I want to make sure the 860 Evo is supported by the Aorus Master. If not, I will switch my Order to the MSI Meg ACE - I'd rather not due to the inferior VRM, looks imo.

If you can confirm compatibility, that would be fantastic.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Fezlakk said:


> Hi Matthew (and anyone with the Aorus Master and Samsung 860 Evo SSD/s)
> 
> I have a new build on order including an Aorus Master and 2x 1TB Samsung 860 Evo SSDs for storage.
> 
> This story on the Gigabyte US forum has me concerned; his Aorus Master does not detect his 860 Evo - but detects other SSDs.
> 
> http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/5493/aorus-master-860-evo-detected?page=1
> 
> I want to make sure the 860 Evo is supported by the Aorus Master. If not, I will switch my Order to the MSI Meg ACE - I'd rather not due to the inferior VRM, looks imo.
> 
> If you can confirm compatibility, that would be fantastic.


Think that an isolated incident (IE something else going on). We tested and it works fine (see below)


----------



## porksmuggler

c0ld said:


> I'll try that I really want it to downclock since the TDP is really high on the 9900k. By the negative offset you mean the Dynamic Vcore?


I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.

In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.

Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.

M.I.T. tab
1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.) 
3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
--Advanced Voltage Settings 
4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)

Chipset tab
7 VT-d - Set Disabled
8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled

That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


----------



## shaolin95

Moparman said:


> I will take having to reflash anyday over what we used to get from giga. You might remember that a few years back we had the Boot loop problem on giga boards and would have to RMA them a lot. That seems to have been fixed. So just a flash is something I can live with.


Oh no, being able to switch bios to a backup etc its awesome. What I meant is, kind of harsh that a simple disable gpu option can break the bios so bad. Lesson learned, leave as auto lol
Time to keep testing how low vcore I can get for 5Ghz then see what 5.1 requires


----------



## Threx

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Ah, let me check if we have a new BIOS for Elite I can post.


Any update on a new bios for the Elite? I still have to switch my PSU off every time I shut down my PC or the mobo lights won't turn off. =/


----------



## Timur Born

I am a bit confused about how dual BIOS works. It seems that my rig just decided to switch to the 2nd BIOS, which still is F4 (primary is F7 beta). Some things that make me scratch my head:

- Many of the settings cannot be changed. For example CPU LLC is stuck to AUTO and does not even react to me pressing Enter.

- When I booted into Windows I was offered to update the firmware by some Gigabyte application. I did that, but the BIOS still is listed as F4.

- How do I know which BIOS is active? Is this even a BIOS switch or is it some additional emergency fallback being active (keeping me from flashing and changing settings)?


----------



## c0ld

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


Awesome looks like it is downclocking now mainly down to 4.6 and few jumps to 800Mhz. Thank you for your input!

Quick follow ups 

2. AVX Offset -4 means it subtracts -400Mhz on an avx workload to your turbo clock right?
3. Started with -0.030V and booted just fine. What are you doing for stress test and how long. I am assuming if it fails the stress test set it to -0.060V and try again?


----------



## Timur Born

Timur Born said:


> Is this even a BIOS switch or is it some additional emergency fallback being active (keeping me from flashing and changing settings)?


Turns out that it was not a simple Dual Bios switch. I manually switched between them and they both showed up as F4 and did not allow me to change all settings. I now reflashed F7 to the second BIOS and can change settings again.

So what kind of mechanism is at work here?


----------



## Nephalem89

Hello good morning! One question this mother board gigabyte extrem or master is the best option for z390 or there are other best options? Is for my 9900k... My last mother board for 8700k is gaming 7 is a lot problems for stability vcore... Spike voltage in the computer loaded.. Set in bios 1,32 in work moment for llc turbo in occt 1,37..thanks a lot


----------



## porksmuggler

c0ld said:


> Awesome looks like it is downclocking now mainly down to 4.6 and few jumps to 800Mhz. Thank you for your input!
> 
> Quick follow ups
> 
> 2. AVX Offset -4 means it subtracts -400Mhz on an avx workload to your turbo clock right?
> 3. Started with -0.030V and booted just fine. What are you doing for stress test and how long. I am assuming if it fails the stress test set it to -0.060V and try again?


Yes -4 in the BIOS will reduce the turbo clock by 400 MHz, so 4.6 GHz when AVX loads are present. FYI, Windows 10 during desktop use will clock down to 4.6 GHz sporadically even when there's technically no AVX load.

Stress tests are your choice, but for me, where I don't have days for some client builds, I'll do prime95 version 26.6 Small FFT for 1/2 hour to stress the non-AVX 5.0 GHz setting. Then its prime95 newest version Small FFT for 1/2 hour to stress the AVX Offset setting. I like both temps to be under 80 C, but that's personal preference. Your temps will differ based on your cooling solution obviously. Maybe even clock higher for turbo and less AVX Offset if you're comfortable with higher temps and more fan noise. Once stable on those, I'll usually finish by running prime95 version 26.6 Blend for at least 12 hours, then a few other short benches like cinebench.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/stress-test-cpu-pc-guide,5461-2.html

If you pass stress tests, go further negative DVID, -0.030 V then -0.060 V, down to -0.110 V. Depending on your CPU, you may be able to go further negative to reduce load Vcore, but you'll likely hit an idle freeze before then. If you fail stress tests, move back up positive DVID to increase both idle and load voltage.

Monitor voltages with HWiNFO, scroll down in sensor status to the Gigabyte sensors, and watch the IT8792E sensor primarily. It reports Vcore more accurately than the IT8688E sensor. Monitor CPU-Z also for the load voltage.

Edit: For this test system with the settings mentioned, I idle at 800 MHz and 0.561 V, roughly 12 watts, and 6 C over ambient. Load non-AVX at 5.0 GHz is 1.248 V. Load AVX at 4.6 GHz is 1.14 V.


----------



## Robbært

@GBT-MatthewH when to expect new BIOSes for other Aorus?
Overvolt (win10 1st boot) bug affect even Z390-UD.


----------



## Fckbutton

Timur Born said:


> Turns out that it was not a simple Dual Bios switch. I manually switched between them and they both showed up as F4 and did not allow me to change all settings. I now reflashed F7 to the second BIOS and can change settings again.
> 
> So what kind of mechanism is at work here?


For me on Auros Pro what happens is sometimes if I crash in stress test, actually only when I crash when stressing memory, not CPU, is that I will end up on default bios with no profiles aswell. I guess this is the second bios activating, but I have no way of checking. Anyways, what I noticed was that after turning my PC off for the night and returning the next day, suddenly the old bios with all my profiles was back. Then the next time the same thing happened I shut off my PC and turned off the PSU and pressed the power button a few times. Then restarted and instantly my main bios with profiles was back, no need to reflash anything.


----------



## Robbært

Fckbutton said:


> For me on Auros Pro what happens is sometimes if I crash in stress test, actually only when I crash when stressing memory, not CPU, is that I will end up on default bios with no profiles aswell. I guess this is the second bios activating, but I have no way of checking. Anyways, what I noticed was that after turning my PC off for the night and returning the next day, suddenly the old bios with all my profiles was back. Then the next time the same thing happened I shut off my PC and turned off the PSU and pressed the power button a few times. Then restarted and instantly my main bios with profiles was back, no need to reflash anything.


from how it looks
Intel ME sees hardware error and throw some flag to use fail-safe option


----------



## serpentine

Moparman said:


> Hercules99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Moparman man can you send me the 5.1 and 5.2 profiles , the only difference is I will be using a 9900k.
> 
> 
> 
> I will send you my settings tonight. However just keep in mind that I'm on a pretty good 9600k so results will vary. Shoot me a PM so i don't forget.
Click to expand...

If i could get those settings as well please, ty!


----------



## shaolin95

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


Thanks for this! Testing now


----------



## GreedyMuffin

The loadline calibration does not work at al l. Tried Auto, performance, turbo and extreme.. No difference at all..

Currently testing 1.380V at 5 ghz (1.221V under load, yes, 160mv lower than what I type in the BIOS..).

I've got a little fan, 80mm.. Is there any point in adding that? Got it on a little bracket. Was thinking of having it in the corner. 

Temps are great on my sample. At 1.340V (auto OC before i tweaked it) I got to 67-73'C in CB R15 after several runs.

EDIT: The new F7A bios fixed the issue!!


----------



## c0ld

porksmuggler said:


> Yes -4 in the BIOS will reduce the turbo clock by 400 MHz, so 4.6 GHz when AVX loads are present. FYI, Windows 10 during desktop use will clock down to 4.6 GHz sporadically even when there's technically no AVX load.
> 
> Stress tests are your choice, but for me, where I don't have days for some client builds, I'll do prime95 version 26.6 Small FFT for 1/2 hour to stress the non-AVX 5.0 GHz setting. Then its prime95 newest version Small FFT for 1/2 hour to stress the AVX Offset setting. I like both temps to be under 80 C, but that's personal preference. Your temps will differ based on your cooling solution obviously. Maybe even clock higher for turbo and less AVX Offset if you're comfortable with higher temps and more fan noise. Once stable on those, I'll usually finish by running prime95 version 26.6 Blend for at least 12 hours, then a few other short benches like cinebench.
> 
> https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/stress-test-cpu-pc-guide,5461-2.html
> 
> If you pass stress tests, go further negative DVID, -0.030 V then -0.060 V, down to -0.110 V. Depending on your CPU, you may be able to go further negative to reduce load Vcore, but you'll likely hit an idle freeze before then. If you fail stress tests, move back up positive DVID to increase both idle and load voltage.
> 
> Monitor voltages with HWiNFO, scroll down in sensor status to the Gigabyte sensors, and watch the IT8792E sensor primarily. It reports Vcore more accurately than the IT8688E sensor. Monitor CPU-Z also for the load voltage.
> 
> Edit: For this test system with the settings mentioned, I idle at 800 MHz and 0.561 V, roughly 12 watts, and 6 C over ambient. Load non-AVX at 5.0 GHz is 1.248 V. Load AVX at 4.6 GHz is 1.14 V.



Awesome thank you so much for the input. OC settings are really different from my 4960X I upgraded from.

PM me that guide if you publish it


----------



## shaolin95

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


Seems to be working great for my 9900!
I did got greedy and tried 51 and it BSOD. What would you tweak if anything to try 5.1Ghz? It seems is not as easy to hit but just checking. Otherwise, I will just start playing with the RAM to max out my system at 5Ghz.


----------



## porksmuggler

c0ld said:


> Awesome thank you so much for the input. OC settings are really different from my 4960X I upgraded from.
> 
> PM me that guide if you publish it


Will do, might be a while. Maybe the OP can sticky / add to the first post or something. That way forum users can see that the Master can OC well and play nice with the CPU VID tables too. I've been overclocking this way since Sandy Bridge. I rarely bother with the manual Vcore / LLC dance, unless I'm going for numbers, instead of usability.



shaolin95 said:


> Seems to be working great for my 9900!
> I did got greedy and tried 51 and it BSOD. What would you tweak if anything to try 5.1Ghz? It seems is not as easy to hit but just checking. Otherwise, I will just start playing with the RAM to max out my system at 5Ghz.


It depends on your CPUs individual VID table, 5.1 GHz may require higher voltage than the CPU is requesting. If you're deep in the negative DVID, like -0.110 V, like I set, step up next to like -0.090V, and up the scale. This increases the load voltage a bit at a time. You might even end up with a positive DVID value at some point. That's fine too, just watch the load voltage and temps.

Stability will break down at some high overclock value of course where LLC is absolutely necessary. Its quite a bit more difficult though at that point to juggle variable voltages, heat, Vdroop, etc.

For more fun, OC'ing this way lets you set per core values also, since you're still using turbo. So, you could also have an all core 5.0 GHz, and maybe one or two cores up to 5.2 GHz, and / or four cores set to 5.1 GHz. The fun part being an ultimately more complicated OC setup, but min-maxing the OC, to still use power saving features, while reaching north of 5.0 GHz. Manual / LLC overclocking gets boring after a decade or so lol.


----------



## MegatronicRus

Hello. Have 9900 and aorus master, when i set LLC on ultra extreme, then i start linx and after 30 sec pc has turns off, when i set LLC on extreme, linx works fine. Another bug on this board? Have thermaltake toughpower dps g rgb 750w, connected 1 8 pin to board, this is not enough power for oc 9900? Same goes for other settings like cpu internal ac\dc load line, using last bios f5.


----------



## pm1109

Would a 850 watt Corsair PSU be enough for a 9900k and Gigabyte 1080 gtx ti extreme 
Plan to overclock the cpu to around 5 - 5.2 GHz


----------



## Falkentyne

MegatronicRus said:


> Hello. Have 9900 and aorus master, when i set LLC on ultra extreme, then i start linx and after 30 sec pc has turns off, when i set LLC on extreme, linx works fine. Another bug on this board? Have thermaltake toughpower dps g rgb 750w, connected 1 8 pin to board, this is not enough power for oc 9900? Same goes for other settings like cpu internal ac\dc load line, using last bios f5.


Ultra extreme causes extremely high voltage boost at load.
You are most likely overloading the VRM's or bypassing the cpu current limit.
Do you have the CPU Current limit set to 255?
Also make sure you have vcore protection or voltage protection turned off.

Even MORE important question:
Why the heck are you running LinX with such settings on your 9900K? What exactly are you trying to do? You can literally pull 300W with all of that load. 
Please don't use Ultra Extreme LLC with LinX. All you're going to do is burn out your CPU or VRM's. No need for something like that.

Just cinebench, realbench and prime95 1344K fixed FFT is good enough for stability.


----------



## The L33t

pm1109 said:


> Would a 850 watt Corsair PSU be enough for a 9900k and Gigabyte 1080 gtx ti extreme
> Plan to overclock the cpu to around 5 - 5.2 GHz


More than enough.


----------



## Ownedj00

hey i currently have a MSI Z370 Pro Carbon with a 8700k and am looking at upgrading my motherboard to a gigabyte Z390, i'm just unsure which one to get. I'm looking at the Ultra or Pro just unsure which to get, i'll be delidding my 8700k and upgrading my 6 year old 240 aio to a corsair H150i Pro 360 too. 

I'm looking to get 5+ gig on my 8700k and i also have 3600mhz ram which i'll be trying to get abit more out of.


----------



## Timur Born

Robbært said:


> from how it looks
> Intel ME sees hardware error and throw some flag to use fail-safe option


And how do we reset it other than flashing a new BIOS? Both my dual BIOS versions showed the same behavior, reset to version F4 (from F7) and locked options. Unfortunately I did not try to pull the plug (aka switch power on the PSU) before I flashed, but I did try to load optimal settings in UEFI and do several reboots.


----------



## Hawkeye360

Hopefully right place to ask.

How are the Thunderbolt 3 ports configured on the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme in terms of PCIe lanes? I assume they use chipset lanes?


----------



## MegatronicRus

Falkentyne said:


> Ultra extreme causes extremely high voltage boost at load.
> You are most likely overloading the VRM's or bypassing the cpu current limit.
> Do you have the CPU Current limit set to 255?
> Also make sure you have vcore protection or voltage protection turned off.
> 
> Even MORE important question:
> Why the heck are you running LinX with such settings on your 9900K? What exactly are you trying to do? You can literally pull 300W with all of that load.
> Please don't use Ultra Extreme LLC with LinX. All you're going to do is burn out your CPU or VRM's. No need for something like that.
> 
> Just cinebench, realbench and prime95 1344K fixed FFT is good enough for stability.


But i only want more stable vcore on load, on extreme its not stable, jumps from 1.32 to 1.38 on 4.8 ghz. Previously on asus z370 board with 8700k i have good stable vcore on high LLC settings. But on aorus master its just terrible voltage control. Or maybe this is a monitoring software problem? About linx, I'm just used to this program. I think it is well reveals the instability of the system. About prime, what are the best settings for stability testing? Need to use old prime without avx or new with avx?


----------



## EarlZ

I'm gettig the Z390 Master tomorrow and ill be pairing it with a 9700K, id like to run 5Ghz all turbo, is this something easy to acheive on this board? My rig is used for gaming 99% of the time. What is the suggested set and forget settings for me to smoothly get 5Ghz?


----------



## Falkentyne

MegatronicRus said:


> But i only want more stable vcore on load, on extreme its not stable, jumps from 1.32 to 1.38 on 4.8 ghz. Previously on asus z370 board with 8700k i have good stable vcore on high LLC settings. But on aorus master its just terrible voltage control. Or maybe this is a monitoring software problem? About linx, I'm just used to this program. I think it is well reveals the instability of the system. About prime, what are the best settings for stability testing? Need to use old prime without avx or new with avx?


Use the "second" sensor in the Aorus Extreme for reading vcore. It's more consistent and closest to a hardware reading with a multimeter than sensor #1 is.
And never use Ultra Extreme LLC. Use Turbo or Extreme. That's all you need. You don't want the vcore shooting up at full load. It's not healthy.

And LinX is horrible for testing chips. Power draw is through the roof and temps are unreasonable. Just as unreasonable as testing FMA3 prime95 small FFT's. That's a power virus.

Best for prime is custom fixed size FFT 1344K. Edit local.txt and add CPUSupportsFMA3=0
If you want pure stability testing without AVX, you can add CPUSupportsAVX=0
Just avoid the small FFT AVX testing. There's no need for that stuff.
Check HWinfo64 for WHEA correctable errors (an uncorrectable error is a BSOD)

Don't degrade your brand new chips.


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I'm gettig the Z390 Master tomorrow and ill be pairing it with a 9700K, id like to run 5Ghz all turbo, is this something easy to acheive on this board? My rig is used for gaming 99% of the time. What is the suggested set and forget settings for me to smoothly get 5Ghz?


Keep in mind that the 9700K is lower binned than the 9900K.
Intel had enough problems getting good 8700K's to run at 5 ghz. The ones that were guaranteed to run at 5 ghz on all cores were binned up to the "limited edition" 8086K's. There were no reports of any of those failing at 5 ghz. But after the 8086K came out, more and more people were getting poorly clocking 8700K's which required a lot of voltage for 5 ghz (like 1.35+).

The 9900K is a safer bet if you want 5 ghz, but it's more expensive. You can also disable hyperthreading on it and shave off a bunch of C as well.
Not enough people have 9700K's to tell you what settings to use.

But my recommendations are: start at these settings:

1.30v, 5.0 ghz, Loadline Calibration: Turbo

Then test from there and then if stable, start reducing the voltage by 10mv a step.
We're going to hope your 9700K will be stable at 1.3v. That's the starting target.

Don't bother with FMA3 testing. it's silly. Prime95 AVX (edit local.txt and add CPUSupportsFMA3=0) with fixed size 1344K (FFT's in place) is good enough. Or you can disable AVX with CPUSupportsAVX=0). Then make sure you can run realbench, cinebench, also a good test is Throttlestop 8.70+'s TSbench, which actually is a very good stress test now (very close to prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled).


----------



## TheMadMan697

On Z390 Aorus Master is there a way to switch between the 2 BIOS chips from within the BIOS itself? I have installed my board with a vertical mounted GPU in water loop so cant access the switches on the bottom on the board. Right now I am stuck in the second BIOS due to OC fail. Can I re-select the first one without accessing the switches. Tks.


----------



## wmblalock

Ownedj00 said:


> hey i currently have a MSI Z370 Pro Carbon with a 8700k and am looking at upgrading my motherboard to a gigabyte Z390, i'm just unsure which one to get. I'm looking at the Ultra or Pro just unsure which to get, i'll be delidding my 8700k and upgrading my 6 year old 240 aio to a corsair H150i Pro 360 too.
> 
> I'm looking to get 5+ gig on my 8700k and i also have 3600mhz ram which i'll be trying to get abit more out of.


I recommend the Z390 Aorus Pro. I easily get 5.1GHz+ with my i7-8700K and the motherboard doesn't even break a sweat. 
I previously bought the Asrock Z390 Extreme4 and couldn't get past 4.9GHz.

Right now Amazon has the Pro on sale for $180 with a $20 coupon making it $160, what a steal!


----------



## Robbært

TheMadMan697 said:


> On Z390 Aorus Master is there a way to switch between the 2 BIOS chips from within the BIOS itself? I have installed my board with a vertical mounted GPU in water loop so cant access the switches on the bottom on the board. Right now I am stuck in the second BIOS due to OC fail. Can I re-select the first one without accessing the switches. Tks.


try power off your pc (with power supply switch or take 220V/110 power cord off)


----------



## Luckbad

Falkentyne said:


> EarlZ said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm gettig the Z390 Master tomorrow and ill be pairing it with a 9700K, id like to run 5Ghz all turbo, is this something easy to acheive on this board? My rig is used for gaming 99% of the time. What is the suggested set and forget settings for me to smoothly get 5Ghz?
> 
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that the 9700K is lower binned than the 9900K.
> Intel had enough problems getting good 8700K's to run at 5 ghz. The ones that were guaranteed to run at 5 ghz on all cores were binned up to the "limited edition" 8086K's. There were no reports of any of those failing at 5 ghz. But after the 8086K came out, more and more people were getting poorly clocking 8700K's which required a lot of voltage for 5 ghz (like 1.35+).
> 
> The 9900K is a safer bet if you want 5 ghz, but it's more expensive. You can also disable hyperthreading on it and shave off a bunch of C as well.
> Not enough people have 9700K's to tell you what settings to use.
> 
> But my recommendations are: start at these settings:
> 
> 1.30v, 5.0 ghz, Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> 
> Then test from there and then if stable, start reducing the voltage by 10mv a step.
> We're going to hope your 9700K will be stable at 1.3v. That's the starting target.
> 
> Don't bother with FMA3 testing. it's silly. Prime95 AVX (edit local.txt and add CPUSupportsFMA3=0) with fixed size 1344K (FFT's in place) is good enough. Or you can disable AVX with CPUSupportsAVX=0). Then make sure you can run realbench, cinebench, also a good test is Throttlestop 8.70+'s TSbench, which actually is a very good stress test now (very close to prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled).
Click to expand...

Is anyone getting 5GHz stable in a 9700k at 1.3v? That seems super low on the voltage. Even Silicon Lottery has the 5GHz chips at 1.35v.

I can get 5GHz at 1.356v under load (Prime95 small fft, Cinebench, Battlefield 5). I think that is 1.32v + Turbo LLC, C-States disabled, etc. Maybe my chip is trash? I considered grabbing one from Silicon Lottery but they're not advertising better numbers than I get.


----------



## Falkentyne

Luckbad said:


> Is anyone getting 5GHz stable in a 9700k at 1.3v? That seems super low on the voltage. Even Silicon Lottery has the 5GHz chips at 1.35v.
> 
> I can get 5GHz at 1.356v under load (Prime95 small fft, Cinebench, Battlefield 5). I think that is 1.32v + Turbo LLC, C-States disabled, etc. Maybe my chip is trash? I considered grabbing one from Silicon Lottery but they're not advertising better numbers than I get.



Luckbad aren't you on my steam list still?
I don't know about the 9700K. Probably should be similar as to getting the 8600K running at 5 ghz, if not a little better.

I only set 1.3v as a baseline. You don't want to destroy your chips with too much voltage.


----------



## Ownedj00

wmblalock said:


> I recommend the Z390 Aorus Pro. I easily get 5.1GHz+ with my i7-8700K and the motherboard doesn't even break a sweat.
> I previously bought the Asrock Z390 Extreme4 and couldn't get past 4.9GHz.
> 
> Right now Amazon has the Pro on sale for $180 with a $20 coupon making it $160, what a steal!


it looks like a nice board too. i'm in australia so its still $360 but thats not a bad price at all.


----------



## tek_01

TheMadMan697 said:


> On Z390 Aorus Master is there a way to switch between the 2 BIOS chips from within the BIOS itself? I have installed my board with a vertical mounted GPU in water loop so cant access the switches on the bottom on the board. Right now I am stuck in the second BIOS due to OC fail. Can I re-select the first one without accessing the switches. Tks.


From what i understand, when the BIOS fails it actually gets overwritten by the second bios. It never actually "switches" more so just copies from the backuop bios.

Happened to me, i just reflashed the BIOS to the latest one again


----------



## porksmuggler

tek_01 said:


> From what i understand, when the BIOS fails it actually gets overwritten by the second bios. It never actually "switches" more so just copies from the backuop bios.
> 
> Happened to me, i just reflashed the BIOS to the latest one again


I can't confirm that doesn't happen, but on this system, that's not how it functions. This one switched to the second bios chip, default version, no saved profiles, etc. Then once I went to G3 (PSU switched off) and back to the updated main bios it went.


----------



## kixxo

Hi,

I have an Aorus Master on the way. It’s replacing an XI Hero I had problems with. So I’ve already had my 9900K for about a month.

I’ll be running Win 10 Pro on the setup. 

While I’m waiting for the board to arrive I have a couple questions.

Does Gigabyte have something like the equivalent of Asus’s Armory crate that attempts driver installs? I don’t know what Gigabyte tries to install for bloatware, but I’d like to avoid as much as possible. So for drivers are most people just installing any drivers manually from Gigabyte’s site here:
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-driver
(beyond what Win 10 will install)

Or are people just letting Win 10 and Gigabyte software take care of it? Yah, not a huge fan of bloated software installs that some boards go for, so the leaner the better. 

Also, I see the latest BIOS on Gigabyte’s site is F5, yet scrolling through the thread here Matt from GB linked previous to a Beta (I believe it’s F7A). Not sure what my board will ship with of course, but updating BIOS is usually the first thing I like to do. So any recommendations? F5? F7A? Start with F5 and only go to F7A if there’s a problem?

Thanks

EDITED: for context


----------



## Robbært

kixxo said:


> Also, I see the latest BIOS on Gigabyte’s site is F5, yet scrolling through the thread here Matt from GB linked previous to a Beta (I believe it’s F7A). Not sure what my board will ship with of course, but updating BIOS is usually the first thing I like to do. So any recommendations? F5? F7A? Start with F5 and only go to F7A if there’s a problem?


F7a and probably asus audio driver (one of their boards have same audio).
I not install anything from supplied cd unless there no internet


----------



## Luckbad

@kixxo No bloatware to speak of but you pretty much have to download from the website. The installation disc will be out of date.

I'm also an Asus convert. The Gigabyte BIOS is worse but most everything is better, particularly hardware.


----------



## Falkentyne

kixxo said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have an Aorus Master on the way. It’s replacing an XI Hero I had problems with. So I’ve already had my 9900K for about a month.
> 
> I’ll be running Win 10 Pro on the setup.
> 
> While I’m waiting for the board to arrive I have a couple questions.
> 
> Does Gigabyte have something like the equivalent of Asus’s Armory crate that attempts driver installs? I don’t know what Gigabyte tries to install for bloatware, but I’d like to avoid as much as possible. So for drivers are most people just installing any drivers manually from Gigabyte’s site here:
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-driver
> (beyond what Win 10 will install)
> 
> Or are people just letting Win 10 and Gigabyte software take care of it? Yah, not a huge fan of bloated software installs that some boards go for, so the leaner the better.
> 
> Also, I see the latest BIOS on Gigabyte’s site is F5, yet scrolling through the thread here Matt from GB linked previous to a Beta (I believe it’s F7A). Not sure what my board will ship with of course, but updating BIOS is usually the first thing I like to do. So any recommendations? F5? F7A? Start with F5 and only go to F7A if there’s a problem?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> EDITED: for context


Gigabyte is old school. No hidden installs, just install what's on the DVD. It works and is reasonably current, and no bloatwares unless you choose to install it (don't press xpress install).
Chipset drivers and LAN/Wifi are essential. If you don't install the chipset drivers for Intel 300 series, you'll get CPU downclocking whenever you click the mouse button !

That being said, the internet port won't work on an unformatted previously, fresh installation of windows unless its the most current build. So if you don't have a DVD drive or USB DVD drive available, you should go to GB's website and download the drivers on a USB thumb drive. But it's nothing creepy like Asus. Just old school.


----------



## kixxo

Luckbad said:


> @kixxo No bloatware to speak of but you pretty much have to download from the website. The installation disc will be out of date.
> 
> I'm also an Asus convert. The Gigabyte BIOS is worse but most everything is better, particularly hardware.


Thanks Luckbad ... the install cd is a coaster as far as I'm concerned. Don't even have an optical reader anymore & haven't used an install cd since .... the 90's? maybe. I was referring to drivers from the site. And good to hear from another Asus convert! Hardware \ power phasing \ VRM's \ overall hardware build quality were the influencing factor in me deciding on the Master 



Robbært said:


> F7a and probably asus audio driver (one of their boards have same audio).
> I not install anything from supplied cd unless there no internet


Thanks Robbært .... F7a it is .... but I'm not sure what you mean "probably asus audio driver (one of their boards have same audio)"? 
Are you saying I should get my audio driver for the Master board from Asus? 
From the Master's driver dl's Gigabyte offers Realtek Audio Driver [8475]. Just to be clear, you're saying don't use that?
thx


----------



## Moparman

serpentine said:


> If i could get those settings as well please, ty!


 Ok I just posted the bios pics for everyone that wanted to try what I am using. CHECK POST #3 DISCLAIMER.... My settings might not work for you. I'm just showing what works for me.


----------



## kixxo

Falkentyne said:


> Gigabyte is old school. No hidden installs, just install what's on the DVD. It works and is reasonably current, and no bloatwares unless you choose to install it (don't press xpress install).
> Chipset drivers and LAN/Wifi are essential. If you don't install the chipset drivers for Intel 300 series, you'll get CPU downclocking whenever you click the mouse button !
> 
> That being said, the internet port won't work on an unformatted previously, fresh installation of windows unless its the most current build. So if you don't have a DVD drive or USB DVD drive available, you should go to GB's website and download the drivers on a USB thumb drive. But it's nothing creepy like Asus. Just old school.


Thanks Falkentyne, I don't have an optical drive. I'll dl from the site onto a thumb drive and install that way. And thanks for the heads up with the chipset driver, good to know. Here's what's currently available from Gigabyte for Chipset drivers (Nov 18)

https://i.imgur.com/nf7bOj5.jpg

(Sorry can't see how to do image posts directly to the thread)

So of those ... all three are necessary? 

Also all those drivers say Win 10 1803, I gotta assume they'll work on Win 10 v 1809, cause there's nothing newer; 1809 is where I am and what I'll be installing

Thx


----------



## kixxo

Moparman said:


> Ok the 2 files below are my F5 bios settings. I have found the F5 will not let me save bios to USB.
> 
> DISCLAIMER!!! These setting will not work for everyone and are only for your guidance on what worked for me.
> 
> My setup.
> 
> Z390 AORUS Master F5 Bios


Thanks for that Moparman, 

Is there a reason why you're staying with F5 BIOS and not going to F7A?


----------



## ttbq1981

Hi, I would like to know if the following GSkill memory will work with my new Gigabyte Aorus Z390 PRO wifi:

F4-3600C16D-16GTZR


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Keep in mind that the 9700K is lower binned than the 9900K.
> Intel had enough problems getting good 8700K's to run at 5 ghz. The ones that were guaranteed to run at 5 ghz on all cores were binned up to the "limited edition" 8086K's. There were no reports of any of those failing at 5 ghz. But after the 8086K came out, more and more people were getting poorly clocking 8700K's which required a lot of voltage for 5 ghz (like 1.35+).
> 
> The 9900K is a safer bet if you want 5 ghz, but it's more expensive. You can also disable hyperthreading on it and shave off a bunch of C as well.
> Not enough people have 9700K's to tell you what settings to use.
> 
> But my recommendations are: start at these settings:
> 
> 1.30v, 5.0 ghz, Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> 
> Then test from there and then if stable, start reducing the voltage by 10mv a step.
> We're going to hope your 9700K will be stable at 1.3v. That's the starting target.
> 
> Don't bother with FMA3 testing. it's silly. Prime95 AVX (edit local.txt and add CPUSupportsFMA3=0) with fixed size 1344K (FFT's in place) is good enough. Or you can disable AVX with CPUSupportsAVX=0). Then make sure you can run realbench, cinebench, also a good test is Throttlestop 8.70+'s TSbench, which actually is a very good stress test now (very close to prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled).


I appreciate the info, I do have my expectations set that I may not get 5Ghz at all. I've seem some videos on youtube to change the power limits of 95watts that something that I should also look into?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I appreciate the info, I do have my expectations set that I may not get 5Ghz at all. I've seem some videos on youtube to change the power limits of 95watts that something that I should also look into?


Yes its an unlocked chip.
The base power limit is designed for thermal dissipation with the "Intel stock cooler"(or whatever they want) at base clocks e.g. 3.6 ghz. Not turbo boost clocks, but base clocks.


----------



## Moparman

kixxo said:


> Thanks for that Moparman,
> 
> Is there a reason why you're staying with F5 BIOS and not going to F7A?


To be honest I didn't know a newer one was out lol. I have been crazy busy. I'll test it soon.


----------



## shaolin95

Just curious..anyone knows in HWMonitor, which temp listed is for the VRM? 
I see TMPIN0 to 4 there...

Thanks


----------



## Sajaa

Threx said:


> Any update on a new bios for the Elite? I still have to switch my PSU off every time I shut down my PC or the mobo lights won't turn off. =/


Try to enable Erp in Power section in the Bios.


----------



## porksmuggler

shaolin95 said:


> Just curious..anyone knows in HWMonitor, which temp listed is for the VRM?
> I see TMPIN0 to 4 there...
> 
> Thanks


The VRM PWM controller, IR35201 has sensors. Honestly though, they're going to show lower than the mainboard IT8688E VRM MOS, which should be a lot closer to the FETs. So, I'd say monitor that one.

They're all going to read low, but the FETs can take a lot more thermal load than you're likely to ever push.

Edit: Sorry, you said HWMonitor, I'm talking HWiNFO, which yeah, use that instead anyway.


----------



## Vrool

Hi

I've just upgraded from a 3570k / Z77 and I'm wondering which overclocking guide is recommended for a 8700k in the Z390 Aorus Pro?
Thanks.


----------



## Sneakyshadow

Hey I am in the process of building a computer using the Gigabyte Z390 Master which uses T-Topology. 

I know T Topology is designed for optimal speed with 4 sticks, but is 2 sticks still better even with T-topology? I am mainly looking for a slight RAM OC from 3200 to around 3600~ and wondering if it would be best to go with 4 or 2 sticks (both have the same timings).


----------



## TheMadMan697

ttbq1981 said:


> Hi, I would like to know if the following GSkill memory will work with my new Gigabyte Aorus Z390 PRO wifi:
> 
> F4-3600C16D-16GTZR


Yes, I have this exact kit and it works fine on my Aorus Master.


----------



## TheMadMan697

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


Thank you, This was very useful post. Been trying out these settings on my 9900k but voltage set to -0.020 V (I believe its around 1.33 volts on full load) and it still not 100% stable on prime95 v2.6.6 Small FFT. I am also seeing WHEA errors in event log. I can try a little more voltage but I'm going to have issues cooling it. Currently 95c on hottest core on prime. Is there any other tweaks I can try to help stabilise, for example disabling any of the C states?

MB is The Z390 Aorus Master and F5 BIOS.


----------



## Threx

Sajaa said:


> Try to enable Erp in Power section in the Bios.


Hey, that worked! Thank you!

Didn't know what Erp was until I looked it up.


----------



## Threx

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.



This is brilliant. I went from needing 1.368v to pass 5Ghz cinebench to 1.295v. Doing god's work there.

*smashes imaginary rep button*

I also have the same issue with idle freezes. I passed 10 Cinebench runs with -0.100v and Prime95 26.6 for an hour with -0.095v, but I crash after idling for a few minutes. Right now I have it set to -0.085v and hopefully it won't crash anymore.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

shaolin95 said:


> Just curious..anyone knows in HWMonitor, which temp listed is for the VRM?
> I see TMPIN0 to 4 there...
> 
> Thanks


Here's the sensor list/location. @Moparman wanna add this to the OP?


----------



## Stockman

Luckbad said:


> Is anyone getting 5GHz stable in a 9700k at 1.3v? That seems super low on the voltage. Even Silicon Lottery has the 5GHz chips at 1.35v.
> 
> I can get 5GHz at 1.356v under load (Prime95 small fft, Cinebench, Battlefield 5). I think that is 1.32v + Turbo LLC, C-States disabled, etc. Maybe my chip is trash? I considered grabbing one from Silicon Lottery but they're not advertising better numbers than I get.


Aorus Master with 9700k @ 5.3Ghz here. Manual voltage entered is 1.345 using Turbo LLC. Voltage under load using multi meter is 1.33.

I use AIDA64 and Intel Extreme Tuner for stress testing. Also okay in Cinebench render benchmark. I don't use Prime.

5.3GHz is solid for gaming, which is the most cpu intensive thing I do.

I owned the Hero XI before exchanging it for the Aorus Master. Was able to get the same CPU to clock at 5.4GHz on the Hero using all the same hardware and stressing conditions. I know it makes no difference performance-wise, but it really bugs me that I can't get that frequency on the Master. I'm hoping that once the Master has undergone more field testing an expert might be able to point out whatever setting made 5.4Ghz work on the Hero XI.


----------



## Hercules99

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


 @porksmuggler lol nice name , is this all you have done? I am using this and testing with various DVID seems to work good. do you have your cpu running at 5,0 all the time or only when workloads are present ??


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Stockman said:


> Aorus Master with 9700k @ 5.3Ghz here. Manual voltage entered is 1.345 using Turbo LLC. Voltage under load using multi meter is 1.33.
> 
> I use AIDA64 and Intel Extreme Tuner for stress testing. Also okay in Cinebench render benchmark. I don't use Prime.
> 
> 5.3GHz is solid for gaming, which is the most cpu intensive thing I do.
> 
> I owned the Hero XI before exchanging it for the Aorus Master. Was able to get the same CPU to clock at 5.4GHz on the Hero using all the same hardware and stressing conditions. I know it makes no difference performance-wise, but it really bugs me that I can't get that frequency on the Master. I'm hoping that once the Master has undergone more field testing an expert might be able to point out whatever setting made 5.4Ghz work on the Hero XI.


Did you try lowering uncore? I believe (not 100% sure as I don't have a ASUS board) they run 1-2x lower than us on "AUTO". I usually set 47, but you could also try 46.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Where should I attach ground when measuring Vcore w/ multimeter? To the case itself? 

If you look apart that 4000 mhz is difficult on this board (although I can easily boot and bench 4000 cl17-17-17). I'm really happy with it. I didn't need to bend anything on the backside. Although I didn't check. Perhaps I was lucky. 

Board is heavy, VRMs without a fan is cool, and ice-cool with a 120 mm blowing directly at them running 500-600 RPM. 

Matched really nicely with my Heatkiller IV Pro block. Beautiful board!


----------



## Luckbad

Stockman said:


> Aorus Master with 9700k @ 5.3Ghz here. Manual voltage entered is 1.345 using Turbo LLC. Voltage under load using multi meter is 1.33.
> 
> I use AIDA64 and Intel Extreme Tuner for stress testing. Also okay in Cinebench render benchmark. I don't use Prime.
> 
> 5.3GHz is solid for gaming, which is the most cpu intensive thing I do.
> 
> I owned the Hero XI before exchanging it for the Aorus Master. Was able to get the same CPU to clock at 5.4GHz on the Hero using all the same hardware and stressing conditions. I know it makes no difference performance-wise, but it really bugs me that I can't get that frequency on the Master. I'm hoping that once the Master has undergone more field testing an expert might be able to point out whatever setting made 5.4Ghz work on the Hero XI.


5.3 GHz? Frick man. I've never been 100% stable at 5.1 with two different CPUs (one in an Aorus Master and the other in an Aorus Pro WiFi)! Golden chip right there.

What's your HWInfo reading for vcore at 1.345 and Turbo LLC? I'd probably get spikes above 1.4v at that setting and my temps would be horrible under significant load despite having a full loop.


----------



## Stockman

Some additional thoughts/observations on the Aorus Master after a couple weeks testing with 9700k...

Still getting the VRM coil whine / chirping at idle. Silent under any kind of load. I've tried out literally every combination of power management options available in the BIOS (C-states, EIST, etc) and Windows. The only configuration that has no noise is when Intel Turbo Boost is disabled. This means limiting myself to 3.6GHz. The other option that works is disabling cpu idle state, but this seems like overkill. My Logitech G900 mouse makes it scream when dragging windows or even just moving the cursor. Lower the polling rate helps a lot, but I'm still stumped as to why the mouse creates whine with the Master (and the Hero XI I had before) but is completely silent on my old ASRock Z77 Extreme 4. I was running my delidded 3770k @ 4.8Ghz on that thing, so we're not talking a huge jump in frequency even though I realize that board is 6 years old. As mentioned, I heard the exact same noise from the VRM on the Asus Hero XI so given two different boards from two manufactures I've concluded it's likely not a defect in my Aorus Master. If anyone has any ideas or suggestions on this I welcome them with open arms. I really don't want to get rid of my G900.

Speaking of Intel Turbo Boost...just to save others research time, it is not possible to OC on the Master with this disabled. (Some generic Intel OC guides on the net will tell you to disable Turbo Boost in addition to C-states, etc when overclocking). If you disable Turbo Boost in Master BIOS and leave multiplier to AUTO, Turbo will remain disabled. If you disable Turbo Boost and enter a manual multiplier (say 48 or 50) in BIOS to overclock, Turbo Boost will re-enable in the background. Confirmed these findings using Intel Extreme Tuner which displays Turbo Boost status.

I wish I understood what is supposed to happen when you enable/disable "CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E)" in BIOS. My cpu still enters C1 when idling with this option (and all other C-states) disabled. I'm probably just missing something here.
@GBT-MatthewH - any update on the audio isolation issues from rear I/O previously reported?


----------



## ThorsMalice

Stockman said:


> Some additional thoughts/observations on the Aorus Master after a couple weeks testing with 9700k...
> 
> Still getting the VRM coil whine / chirping at idle. Silent under any kind of load. I've tried out literally every combination of power management options available in the BIOS (C-states, EIST, etc) and Windows.


I'm currently still waiting on my RMA for my Master because of the exact same issues. One thing that was pointed out that you might try is another Power Supply as some people said that could be whats causing it. I'm using a Evga G2 850w and the vrm noise from the motherboard was unbearable, once I get my new one back i'll try again and if it still persists I'll rip out my corsair 850w from my other computer to test.


----------



## Luckbad

RE: Coil Whine - I get it from the Master as well. The Pro WiFi does not exhibit this behavior. Might be the "fancy" VRM on the Master at fault.


----------



## kixxo

Stockman said:


> Some additional thoughts/observations on the Aorus Master after a couple weeks testing with 9700k...
> 
> Still getting the VRM coil whine / chirping at idle. Silent under any kind of load.





ThorsMalice said:


> I'm currently still waiting on my RMA for my Master because of the exact same issues .... I'm using a Evga G2 850w and the vrm noise from the motherboard was unbearable





Luckbad said:


> RE: Coil Whine - I get it from the Master as well. The Pro WiFi does not exhibit this behavior. Might be the "fancy" VRM on the Master at fault.


That's three reporting it. I'm waiting on shipment of my Master, now wondering if this was a good choice ... How many others are getting this? 

ThorsMalice, you mention you're using an EVGA 850W G2. I was just about to order an EVGA 750W G2 
Luckbad and Stockman what PSU's are you using? 

Thx


----------



## shaolin95

kixxo said:


> That's three reporting it. I'm waiting on shipment of my Master, now wondering if this was a good choice ... How many others are getting this?
> 
> ThorsMalice, you mention you're using an EVGA 850W G2. I was just about to order an EVGA 750W G2
> Luckbad and Stockman what PSU's are you using?
> 
> Thx


Any way to test this specifically so I can report about mine with the EVGA 1000 G3?
Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

TheMadMan697 said:


> Thank you, This was very useful post. Been trying out these settings on my 9900k but voltage set to -0.020 V (I believe its around 1.33 volts on full load) and it still not 100% stable on prime95 v2.6.6 Small FFT. I am also seeing WHEA errors in event log. I can try a little more voltage but I'm going to have issues cooling it. Currently 95c on hottest core on prime. Is there any other tweaks I can try to help stabilise, for example disabling any of the C states?
> 
> MB is The Z390 Aorus Master and F5 BIOS.


Use static (manual) voltage of 1.33v. Don't use offset or DVID or anything.
Download Throttlestop 8.70.
Run TSBench and check for the CPU VID shown at full load (not idle).
Report back your CPU VID shown at full load during TSBench at 5 ghz (the VID should be slightly higher at idle than at load).
You can always sets your old settings back I believe you can save your current settings to a profile and then just reload it after.

I need to see your CPU's default VID when using pure static voltage (no offsets and no DVID) at heavy load.


----------



## ThorsMalice

shaolin95 said:


> Any way to test this specifically so I can report about mine with the EVGA 1000 G3?
> Thanks


Didn't really do much testing on my end, I just happened to buy a new evga g2 for my build and had the issue both sets of cords (have cable mod cables for it). If you have a spare psu your best bet is to try it and maybe even test both with and without a gpu installed to vary the load on the system.


----------



## Hercules99

@Stockman what are your settings?


----------



## Vrool

kixxo said:


> That's three reporting it. I'm waiting on shipment of my Master, now wondering if this was a good choice ... How many others are getting this?
> 
> ThorsMalice, you mention you're using an EVGA 850W G2. I was just about to order an EVGA 750W G2
> Luckbad and Stockman what PSU's are you using?
> 
> Thx



I've just got a Z390 Aorus Pro and also have a 'chirping' noise at idle. I can eliminate the noise by disabling the C-states.
PSU is a BeQuiet Dark Power Pro 11.


----------



## OutlawII

Falkentyne said:


> Use static (manual) voltage of 1.33v. Don't use offset or DVID or anything.
> Download Throttlestop 8.70.
> Run TSBench and check for the CPU VID shown at full load (not idle).
> Report back your CPU VID shown at full load during TSBench at 5 ghz (the VID should be slightly higher at idle than at load).
> You can always sets your old settings back I believe you can save your current settings to a profile and then just reload it after.
> 
> I need to see your CPU's default VID when using pure static voltage (no offsets and no DVID) at heavy load.


Why use throttlestop? Cant you just change your power limit threshhold?


----------



## OutlawII

Stockman said:


> Some additional thoughts/observations on the Aorus Master after a couple weeks testing with 9700k...
> 
> Still getting the VRM coil whine / chirping at idle. Silent under any kind of load. I've tried out literally every combination of power management options available in the BIOS (C-states, EIST, etc) and Windows. The only configuration that has no noise is when Intel Turbo Boost is disabled. This means limiting myself to 3.6GHz. The other option that works is disabling cpu idle state, but this seems like overkill. My Logitech G900 mouse makes it scream when dragging windows or even just moving the cursor. Lower the polling rate helps a lot, but I'm still stumped as to why the mouse creates whine with the Master (and the Hero XI I had before) but is completely silent on my old ASRock Z77 Extreme 4. I was running my delidded 3770k @ 4.8Ghz on that thing, so we're not talking a huge jump in frequency even though I realize that board is 6 years old. As mentioned, I heard the exact same noise from the VRM on the Asus Hero XI so given two different boards from two manufactures I've concluded it's likely not a defect in my Aorus Master. If anyone has any ideas or suggestions on this I welcome them with open arms. I really don't want to get rid of my G900.
> 
> Speaking of Intel Turbo Boost...just to save others research time, it is not possible to OC on the Master with this disabled. (Some generic Intel OC guides on the net will tell you to disable Turbo Boost in addition to C-states, etc when overclocking). If you disable Turbo Boost in Master BIOS and leave multiplier to AUTO, Turbo will remain disabled. If you disable Turbo Boost and enter a manual multiplier (say 48 or 50) in BIOS to overclock, Turbo Boost will re-enable in the background. Confirmed these findings using Intel Extreme Tuner which displays Turbo Boost status.
> 
> I wish I understood what is supposed to happen when you enable/disable "CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E)" in BIOS. My cpu still enters C1 when idling with this option (and all other C-states) disabled. I'm probably just missing something here.
> 
> @GBT-MatthewH - any update on the audio isolation issues from rear I/O previously reported?


I have never OC on a Gig board but on Asus boards always disable turbo when manually overclocking. And as far as the chirping and mouse dragging ive had that before on Asus boards and its always the MEI driver. Not sure if thats just a ASUS thing or not.


----------



## doom26464

I noticed on a few occasion that my voltage randomly goes to 1.400v on a fresh boot up. 

Sometimes its ok and boots at my normal setting of 1.250 in bios(cpu-z shows 1.260 under load) this is with LCC to turbo. All is good at this setting.

Every once and awhile it will go to 1.400v and only way to fix it is re boot the system. Though if I do any type of load it instantly causes the cpu to go really hot since its running at such high voltage. No idea why it has a mind of its own. This is on a AUROUS master BTW


----------



## OutlawII

doom26464 said:


> I noticed on a few occasion that my voltage randomly goes to 1.400v on a fresh boot up.
> 
> Sometimes its ok and boots at my normal setting of 1.250 in bios(cpu-z shows 1.260 under load) this is with LCC to turbo. All is good at this setting.
> 
> Every once and awhile it will go to 1.400v and only way to fix it is re boot the system. Though if I do any type of load it instantly causes the cpu to go really hot since its running at such high voltage. No idea why it has a mind of its own. This is on a AUROUS master BTW


Sounds like a Bios issue to me. Have you tried a different Bios?


----------



## doom26464

OutlawII said:


> Sounds like a Bios issue to me. Have you tried a different Bios?


no I have not im on the current F5 bios.


After some more testing it does it every time from a flat out cold boot. I have to turn pc power button on, then once in windows restart and then everything is working. 

Really annoying though having to boot into windows twice to get my settings to work.


----------



## Falkentyne

OutlawII said:


> Why use throttlestop? Cant you just change your power limit threshhold?


Just trust me o.o
Throttlestop is a very useful program.
Easy to see the CPU VID, you can change CPU multipliers, voltages, newest version lets you change VR Current Limit (ICCMAX) like Intel XTU does, and you can enable and use Speed Shift.
I'm just trying to see your CPU default vid

btw you need to do 1 more thing
Go into your Bios and in CPU VR settings (or VR control), set IA AC DC Loadline to '1' for both values. For Asus boards, set it to 0.01. For most others set it to 1 (whatever the lowest non zero value is).

This a clever trick that lets you see your cpu's pre-programmed default Vid at its turbo boost multipliers (and all the way down to 800 mhz).
Then set a static voltage that you know is stable, at 5 ghz, then run TSBench (in Throttlestop) and report the CPU VID shown at full load to me please.

The VID will be grossly over-reported if you don't set IA AC DC Loadline to 1.


----------



## OutlawII

Im looking forward to joining this group sometime after the Holidays.Just not sure which board yet either the pro or master.


----------



## kixxo

...

Re: the Aorus Master F7A BIOS



Moparman said:


> To be honest I didn't know a newer one was out lol. I have been crazy busy. I'll test it soon.


fyi Moparman: in case you're looking for it, F7A BIOS is beta so it isn't listed on Gigabyte's site for the Master - F5 is still the official current Master BIOS release (as of today Nov 19)

The F7A was offered by Matt from GB to mitigate "sleep / higher Vcore issue on Z390 Master", back in post 265 linked here:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...z390-aorus-owners-thread-27.html#post27714278

Or his direct link to F7A
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SBE2EYV-KYLlLyUi_q-a4DFwzA8VoqMk/view

Matt from Gigabyte's further caveat:

**Please note this is a BETA BIOS, not an official BIOS. If you run into any issues let me [GBT-MatthewH] know and revert back to the latest official BIOS.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

I just add the beta bios thing because it hasn't passed all the internal checks. It's safe, just might have some weird bugs. In general its usually pretty stable. We have various levels of non-official BIOS, F#'t' are test BIOS that can be unstable. F#'x' are usually fine. The one large downside is I usually don't get change logs for these. They generally have bug fixes for issues I have reported (thanks to you guys!) along with any from tech support from around the globe.

For those interested there is also F7A for PRO Wifi, and F5B for Elite. So as not to derail this thread if you are looking for BETA BIOS for any board except master I suggest checking our BETA BIOS thread here - http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/5363/z390-beta-bios-thread?page=1&scrollTo=24425

P.S. If anyone wants to create a similar BETA BIOS thread here on OCN you are more than welcome to use any info/links I post.


----------



## doom26464

updated to beta bios fixed my voltage issue. All is good so far after multiple reboot and cold start test.


----------



## OutlawII

doom26464 said:


> updated to beta bios fixed my voltage issue. All is good so far after multiple reboot and cold start test.


Great to hear!!


----------



## shaolin95

GBT-MatthewH said:


> I just add the beta bios thing because it hasn't passed all the internal checks. It's safe, just might have some weird bugs. In general its usually pretty stable. We have various levels of non-official BIOS, F#'t' are test BIOS that can be unstable. F#'x' are usually fine. The one large downside is I usually don't get change logs for these. They generally have bug fixes for issues I have reported (thanks to you guys!) along with any from tech support from around the globe.
> 
> For those interested there is also F7A for PRO Wifi, and F5B for Elite. So as not to derail this thread if you are looking for BETA BIOS for any board except master I suggest checking our BETA BIOS thread here - http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/5363/z390-beta-bios-thread?page=1&scrollTo=24425
> 
> P.S. If anyone wants to create a similar BETA BIOS thread here on OCN you are more than welcome to use any info/links I post.


I noticed there is an F6G for Master on that link. Are whatever fixes from F6G included in the F7a beta you linked here?


----------



## Stockman

ThorsMalice said:


> I'm currently still waiting on my RMA for my Master because of the exact same issues. One thing that was pointed out that you might try is another Power Supply as some people said that could be whats causing it. I'm using a Evga G2 850w and the vrm noise from the motherboard was unbearable, once I get my new one back i'll try again and if it still persists I'll rip out my corsair 850w from my other computer to test.


Wasn't your board whining under load too? Mine only makes the chirping/screeching at idle. I wish it was the opposite - quiet when idle with some whine under load. You know, like a GPU? Sometimes it will just let out a continuous whine depending on what I have displayed on the screen. (BTW I realize this sounds GPU related, but when I put my ear up next to the board it's clearly coming from the VRM. Also used the cardboard-tube-from-paper-towel-roll method to confirm. I swapped to a different GPU anyway, with no improvement. Also tried internal graphics - same issue).

I also am using the EVGA G2 850W. I swapped this out the other day for my old Corsair GS800 and the whine is exactly the same. Tried a different surge protector and tried plugging directly into wall - she still sings.


----------



## Stockman

Luckbad said:


> 5.3 GHz? Frick man. I've never been 100% stable at 5.1 with two different CPUs (one in an Aorus Master and the other in an Aorus Pro WiFi)! Golden chip right there.
> 
> What's your HWInfo reading for vcore at 1.345 and Turbo LLC? I'd probably get spikes above 1.4v at that setting and my temps would be horrible under significant load despite having a full loop.


1.342v as reported by HWInfo IT8792E (the more accurate of the two)


----------



## Stockman

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Did you try lowering uncore? I believe (not 100% sure as I don't have a ASUS board) they run 1-2x lower than us on "AUTO". I usually set 47, but you could also try 46.


I had it set to AUTO and it was bringing in a Ring clock of 43. I tried manually setting it to 40, 42 and 46 but 5.4Ghz still isn't stable. I switched uncore back to AUTO and now Ring clock comes in at 46, all else equal. Weird.

Edit: After a cold boot this morning it's back to 43 when set to AUTO.


----------



## Stockman

Vrool said:


> I've just got a Z390 Aorus Pro and also have a 'chirping' noise at idle. I can eliminate the noise by disabling the C-states.
> PSU is a BeQuiet Dark Power Pro 11.


Did you also disable CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E)? Can you perform the below steps to see what state your CPU is in at idle, after you fixed the whine?

Win+R
Type perfmon, click OK
Click Performance Monitor
Click Green Plus
Under Processor Information add % C1 Time, % C2 Time, and %C3 Time

Let us know what state it idles in.

Thanks


----------



## Stockman

OutlawII said:


> I have never OC on a Gig board but on Asus boards always disable turbo when manually overclocking. And as far as the chirping and mouse dragging ive had that before on Asus boards and its always the MEI driver. Not sure if thats just a ASUS thing or not.


My Aorus Master won't let me overclock without turbo on. If I disable turbo, but set all-core multiplier to an obviously OC (like 50) turbo is re-enabled when I load windows, per Intel Extreme Tuning. Also confirmed with Throttlestop. If I click the checkbox "disable turbo" the multiplier instantly changes from whatever I had it set in the BIOS back to 36.

Can you please elaborate on what you mean by MEI driver? Are you suggesting to uninstall or alter it somehow? Maybe there's a solution there for us to rid of this whine.

Edit: cleaned up grammar


----------



## Moparman

Stockman said:


> My Aorus Master won't let me overclock without turbo on. If I disable turbo, but set all core multiplier to an obviously OC (like 50) turbo is re-enabled when I load windows, per Intel Extreme Tuning. Also confirmed with Throttlestop. If I click the checkbox "disable turbo" it my multiplier instantly changes from whatever I had it set in the BIOS to 36.
> 
> Can you please elaborate on what you mean by MEI driver? Are you suggesting to uninstall or alter it somehow? Maybe there's a solution there for us to rid of this whine.



What Bios? I posted settings in post #3 of this thread.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

shaolin95 said:


> I noticed there is an F6G for Master on that link. Are whatever fixes from F6G included in the F7a beta you linked here?


Yes, f7 is newer than f6  your welcome to test both. If you find anything that works on f6 but doesn't on f7 let me know, but theoretically f7 should be better than f6.


----------



## kixxo

ThorsMalice said:


> Didn't really do much testing on my end, I just happened to buy a new evga g2 for my build and had the issue both sets of cords (have cable mod cables for it). If you have a spare psu your best bet is to try it and maybe even test both with and without a gpu installed to vary the load on the system.


ThorsMalice, when you had your Master, what BIOS were you using?


----------



## Threx

Is there a way to set a limit so that vcore doesn't undervolt too low? eg. mine undervolts to 0.552v, is there a way to set it so it doesn't go below, say, 0.8v?

The issue is that I'm stable on P95 26.6 and Cinebench, but I get crashes while just idling on the desktop. Could it be because the vcore drops too low while idling?


----------



## Threx

GBT-MatthewH said:


> For those interested there is also F5B for Elite.


Is the F5b you posted newer than the official F5 that's posted on 11/12 on the official page?


----------



## anthony81212

GreedyMuffin said:


> Where should I attach ground when measuring Vcore w/ multimeter? To the case itself?


I would like to know this as well. @GBT-MatthewH could you please give us a hint?


----------



## ThorsMalice

kixxo said:


> ThorsMalice, when you had your Master, what BIOS were you using?


Tried F4 and F5 while I still had it, the beta bios hadn't been posted yet before I sent it in for rma.


----------



## Stockman

Moparman said:


> What Bios? I posted settings in post #3 of this thread.


F7A. Are you hearing any whine with your 9600k?

Per your settings you have Turbo disabled. With your OC applied, try opening up Intel Extreme Tuning and look for Turbo Boost status in upper right.


----------



## Timur Born

Found some time for tinkering, so here we go for the first bug reports of my GB Aorus Master:

Vcore LLC settings are broken! This was tested with F7 beta, but I am quite sure that I first noticed the oddities using F5. F4 does not even allow to manually set Vcore or Vcore LLC, but for comparison I list its base values.

- LLC cannot be disabled via UEFI, Auto, Normal and Standard all set a LLC equivalent to Low.

- Low, Medium and High all set a LLC that is one step higher than what they suggest. Furthermore they disallow EasyTune from changing LLC setting from within Windows.

- Turbo, Extreme and Ultra set LLC correctly.

All tests were done using Prime v26.6 1344K (in-place FFT), Vcore was set to fixed 1.4 V, Multi-core Enhancement enabled, CPU multiplier set to 48x (no AVX offset). F7 sets Uncore to x43 on Auto (F4 sets to x47).

Vcore according to 2nd (ITE 8792E) sensor, measured via Hwinfo.

F4:

1.342 - 1.353, drops down to 1.265 at start of P95 load.

F7 beta, comparison of UEFI settings vs. EasyTune display vs. measured Vcore:



Code:


BIOS	EasyTune	HWinfo

Auto	Low		1.254 - 1.265
Normal	Low		1.254 - 1.265
Stand.	Low		1.254 - 1.265
Low	Standard*	1.287 - 1.298
Medium	Standard*	1.320 - 1.331
High	Standard*	1.353
Turbo	Turbo		1.397
Extreme	Extreme		1.419
Ultra	Ultra		1.441 - 1.452

*LLC settings in EasyTune display Standard, but are greyed out and locked.

Vcore measurements of EasyTune settings:



Code:


Stand.	1.221
Low	1.254 - 1.265
Medium	1.287 - 1.298
High	1.320
Turbo	1.386 - 1.397
Extreme	1.408 - 1.419
Ultra	1.452

Settings LLC to "Standard" via EasyTune software seems to be the only way to disable LLC. Setting "High" via UEFI results in a setting that cannot be achieved via EasyTune at all.


----------



## Moparman

Stockman said:


> F7A. Are you hearing any whine with your 9600k?
> 
> Per your settings you have Turbo disabled. With your OC applied, try opening up Intel Extreme Tuning and look for Turbo Boost status in upper right.



What am i looking for? I don't want my chip to turbo since i wanted it to be 5.11ghz all the time.


----------



## Timur Born

Next bug:

I observed that the four fans of my radiator sometimes slow down to their lowest possible PWM setting (around 500 rpm). They are all connected to the HPWR pump header. Usually it only seems to happen once, but at one point I noticed it happening several times in a row within just a few seconds.

Even worse, the AIO DC pump connect to the CPU fan header seems to stop completely (off) sometimes, albeit only for a very short time as it seems.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Found some time for tinkering, so here we go for the first bug reports of my GB Aorus Master:
> 
> Vcore LLC settings are broken! This was tested with F7 beta, but I am quite sure that I first noticed the oddities using F5. F4 does not even allow to manually set Vcore or Vcore LLC, but for comparison I list its base values.
> 
> - LLC cannot be disabled via UEFI, Auto, Normal and Standard all set a LLC equivalent to Low.
> 
> - Low, Medium and High all set a LLC that is one step higher than what they suggest. Furthermore they disallow EasyTune from changing LLC setting from within Windows.
> 
> - Turbo, Extreme and Ultra set LLC correctly.
> 
> All tests were done using Prime v26.6 1344K (in-place FFT), Vcore was set to fixed 1.4 V, Multi-core Enhancement enabled, CPU multiplier set to 48x (no AVX offset). F7 sets Uncore to x43 on Auto (F4 sets to x47).
> 
> Vcore according to 2nd (ITE 8792E) sensor, measured via Hwinfo.
> 
> F4:
> 
> 1.342 - 1.353, drops down to 1.265 at start of P95 load.
> 
> F7 beta, comparison of UEFI settings vs. EasyTune display vs. measured Vcore:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> BIOS	EasyTune	HWinfo
> 
> Auto	Low		1.254 - 1.265
> Normal	Low		1.254 - 1.265
> Stand.	Low		1.254 - 1.265
> Low	Standard*	1.287 - 1.298
> Medium	Standard*	1.320 - 1.331
> High	Standard*	1.353
> Turbo	Turbo		1.397
> Extreme	Extreme		1.419
> Ultra	Ultra		1.441 - 1.452
> 
> *LLC settings in EasyTune display Standard, but are greyed out and locked.
> 
> Vcore measurements of EasyTune settings:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Stand.	1.221
> Low	1.254 - 1.265
> Medium	1.287 - 1.298
> High	1.320
> Turbo	1.386 - 1.397
> Extreme	1.408 - 1.419
> Ultra	1.452
> 
> Settings LLC to "Standard" via EasyTune software seems to be the only way to disable LLC. Setting "High" via UEFI results in a setting that cannot be achieved via EasyTune at all.


Please use SENSOR #2 to check your vcore, not sensor #1. MatthewH Said sensor#2 is very accurate. The Bios and HWmonitor report from sensor 1 (the inaccurate sensor).
Does Easytune use the 2nd sensor? It looks like easytune is reading from the first sensor, the same one that Bios reads from.
sorry if I'm wrong about that.

Otherwise, good points about Eztune.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Please use SENSOR #2 to check your vcore, not sensor #1. MatthewH Said sensor#2 is very accurate. The Bios and HWmonitor report from sensor 1 (the inaccurate sensor).


Erm, Hwinfo reports both sensors and I specifically mentioned that I am using sensor #2 (ITE 8792E). And the sole fact that EasyTune reports a greyed out/locked "Standard" LLC for Low, Medium and High makes clear that something is wrong with those settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Erm, Hwinfo reports both sensors and I specifically mentioned that I am using sensor #2 (ITE 8792E). And the sole fact that EasyTune reports a greyed out/locked "Standard" LLC for Low, Medium and High makes clear that something is wrong with those settings.


Fair enough. I just woke up anyway.


----------



## Timur Born

No harm done. The behavior can be measured on both sensors anyway, just with different values.


----------



## PuD

Timur Born said:


> Next bug:
> 
> I observed that the four fans of my radiator sometimes slow down to their lowest possible PWM setting (around 500 rpm). They are all connected to the HPWR pump header. Usually it only seems to happen once, but at one point I noticed it happening several times in a row within just a few seconds.
> 
> Even worse, the AIO DC pump connect to the CPU fan header seems to stop completely (off) sometimes, albeit only for a very short time as it seems.



Do you have your CPU overclocked? I saw the same behaviour with my testing phase when the CPU wasn't really stable. Try to raise up a bit your vcore and retry.


----------



## Vrool

Stockman said:


> Did you also disable CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E)? Can you perform the below steps to see what state your CPU is in at idle, after you fixed the whine?
> 
> Win+R
> Type perfmon, click OK
> Click Performance Monitor
> Click Green Plus
> Under Processor Information add % C1 Time, % C2 Time, and %C3 Time
> 
> Let us know what state it idles in.
> 
> Thanks


Hi

Yes I also disabled Enhanced Halt (C1E).

At idle -
% C1 Time = 98
% C2 Time = 0.0
% C3 Time = 0.0


I need to clarify that I'm in a quiet room, PC is a couple of feet away from me and is in an open case. I describe the vrm chirping noise as quiet but audible. My previous MB was totally silent.


----------



## Peteypabs72

I have a couple questions while I wait for my Aorus Master Z390 to arrive:

Is dual channel ram fine or should I buy 4 sticks for optimal performance?

I have a 1tb nvme and a 1tb ssd. Which m.2 slot is the optimal slot?

Finally, I have 3 silent wing 3 high speed case fans. Is one fan header able to power all three fans on a splitter? 

Thanks guys, I know they are basic questions


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Timur Born said:


> Next bug:
> 
> I observed that the four fans of my radiator sometimes slow down to their lowest possible PWM setting (around 500 rpm). They are all connected to the HPWR pump header. Usually it only seems to happen once, but at one point I noticed it happening several times in a row within just a few seconds.
> 
> Even worse, the AIO DC pump connect to the CPU fan header seems to stop completely (off) sometimes, albeit only for a very short time as it seems.


Can you try this? It will flash the firmware on the fan IC. Let me know if it fixes the issue (I can't reproduce it so I can't test it personally).

Download
Unzip to bootable flash drive
Boot from drive
Run W.Bat
Reboot to windows.


----------



## PuD

Peteypabs72 said:


> I have a couple questions while I wait for my Aorus Master Z390 to arrive:
> 
> Is dual channel ram fine or should I buy 4 sticks for optimal performance?



I'm using a dual channel configuration and working fine, but never tried with four.




Peteypabs72 said:


> I have a 1tb nvme and a 1tb ssd. Which m.2 slot is the optimal slot?



Use the bottom slot so you have all the sata ports free to use.




Peteypabs72 said:


> Finally, I have 3 silent wing 3 high speed case fans. Is one fan header able to power all three fans on a splitter?


The two pump/fan headers (SYS_FAN5_PUMP and SYS_FAN6_PUMP) support 2A (24W) which are more then enough


----------



## Falkentyne

PuD said:


> I'm using a dual channel configuration and working fine, but never tried with four.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Use the bottom slot so you have all the sata ports free to use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The two pump/fan headers (SYS_FAN5_PUMP and SYS_FAN6_PUMP) support 2A (24W) which are more then enough


How many SATA ports are free if you use the first two M.2 slots?


----------



## PuD

A picture is worth than a thousand words


----------



## shaolin95

Timur Born said:


> Next bug:
> 
> I observed that the four fans of my radiator sometimes slow down to their lowest possible PWM setting (around 500 rpm). They are all connected to the HPWR pump header. Usually it only seems to happen once, but at one point I noticed it happening several times in a row within just a few seconds.
> 
> Even worse, the AIO DC pump connect to the CPU fan header seems to stop completely (off) sometimes, albeit only for a very short time as it seems.


So are those set to FULL or so in the BIOS and controlled by your AIO software? I have the Thermaltake Floe Riing 360 and havent noticed that but want to investigate just in case.


----------



## shaolin95

PuD said:


> A picture is worth than a thousand words


Good thing this was brought up again because I am using the bottom slot for my Evo 970 and didnt lose any Sata ports as expected. Now it looks like if I were to get the same kind of M.2 drive and use in the middle slot, I wouldnt lose any sata ports either, correct? I just dont get how some show losing ports based on the "type?" of drive used.

Thanks!


----------



## Majek

doom26464 said:


> I noticed on a few occasion that my voltage randomly goes to 1.400v on a fresh boot up.
> 
> Sometimes its ok and boots at my normal setting of 1.250 in bios(cpu-z shows 1.260 under load) this is with LCC to turbo. All is good at this setting.
> 
> Every once and awhile it will go to 1.400v and only way to fix it is re boot the system. Though if I do any type of load it instantly causes the cpu to go really hot since its running at such high voltage. No idea why it has a mind of its own. This is on a AUROUS master BTW


Hi,

I had exactly the same issue. Disable fast boot setting in Windows (not BIOS). Worked for me and other users.


----------



## Stockman

Moparman said:


> What am i looking for? I don't want my chip to turbo since i wanted it to be 5.11ghz all the time.


It will say Intel Turbo Boost Technology Enable or Disable in the upper right.

The only point I'm trying to make is that (I believe) Turbo Boost is enabled whether you want it to or not on the Master if you OC the cpu.

Pretty sure ASUS boards do the same.


----------



## Majek

Threx said:


> This is brilliant. I went from needing 1.368v to pass 5Ghz cinebench to 1.295v. Doing god's work there.
> 
> *smashes imaginary rep button*
> 
> I also have the same issue with idle freezes. I passed 10 Cinebench runs with -0.100v and Prime95 26.6 for an hour with -0.095v, but I crash after idling for a few minutes. Right now I have it set to -0.085v and hopefully it won't crash anymore.


Hi,

Wow. This is quite a drop in voltage!
Is this on I9 9900k?


----------



## Moparman

It more than likely is since you're forcing a clock over the default and XTU thinks of it as Turbo.


----------



## PuD

shaolin95 said:


> Now it looks like if I were to get the same kind of M.2 drive and use in the middle slot, I wouldnt lose any sata ports either, correct?


Yes, but I prefer and recommend the bottom slot also for a question of size, which supports the most used format (2280) and the heatsink have the correct size.


----------



## Timur Born

shaolin95 said:


> So are those set to FULL or so in the BIOS and controlled by your AIO software? I have the Thermaltake Floe Riing 360 and havent noticed that but want to investigate just in case.


They are set to Normal/Standard (default) in BIOS. I did not rerun SIV since I last flashed the BIOS, which I am doing now to allow for recalibration and then for SIV to take over (same Standard setting). Let's see if this makes a difference.

Next I will try the firmware flash GBT-MatthewH provided.


----------



## shaolin95

Timur Born said:


> They are set to Normal/Standard (default) in BIOS. I did not rerun SIV since I last flashed the BIOS, which I am doing now to allow for recalibration and then for SIV to take over (same Standard setting). Let's see if this makes a difference.
> 
> Next I will try the firmware flash GBT-MatthewH provided.


oh ok. I have mine set to Full and then let my AIO handle it or manually set the profile I want based on my activities. Did that for my rear exhaust fan as well because leaving as Normal was making the LEDs go off. Then I just control the fan with its own software.
Hope the firmware helps you out.


----------



## Timur Born

Using SIV makes the fan-curve spinning up and down even worse unless the "Full" profile is chosen.

But also gives us a clue about a possible cause. At least with SIV the fan-header seems to switch constantly between reading the CPU temperature and reading the "System 1" temperature sensor as its input for fan-curves. Unsurprisingly fans spin down considerably when temps are read as 35°C instead of 60°C and then spin back up.

Next I uninstall SIV from the system to see if it makes a difference.


----------



## Falkentyne

shaolin95 said:


> Good thing this was brought up again because I am using the bottom slot for my Evo 970 and didnt lose any Sata ports as expected. Now it looks like if I were to get the same kind of M.2 drive and use in the middle slot, I wouldnt lose any sata ports either, correct? I just dont get how some show losing ports based on the "type?" of drive used.
> 
> Thanks!


Looks like with a m2 NVME drive, you lose no sata ports in the bottom slot and 1 SATA port in the middle slot.
With a m.2 SATA drive, you will lose 1 port in the middle slot.


----------



## shaolin95

Falkentyne said:


> Looks like with a m2 NVME drive, you lose no sata ports in the bottom slot and 1 SATA port in the middle slot.
> With a m.2 SATA drive, you will lose 1 port in the middle slot.


I thought the table is showing NO loss in either middle or bottom with NVME.


----------



## Hercules99

@gbt-Matthew does the oc button on the master light up when pressed?? I pressed it when I first installed the mobo and I think it's limiting my oc's. what are your settings matthew?


----------



## Jrw8FJBbLPkkJpB

The price of the Pro worth it over the Elite for a 8086K? All you get is a heat pipe and better capacitors, correct? The elite should be able to handle a 8086K @ 5ghz all cores, correct? I can afford to buy the pro, but the Elite would give me $10 extra dollars to go towards the CPU cooler.


----------



## Falkentyne

Hercules99 said:


> @gbt-Matthew does the oc button on the master light up when pressed?? I pressed it when I first installed the mobo and I think it's limiting my oc's. what are your settings matthew?


Never ever ever press that button !
try clearing CMOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

shaolin95 said:


> I thought the table is showing NO loss in either middle or bottom with NVME.


M.2 isn't the same as NVME.
You can have a M2 SSD that's SATA
Here's a M.2 drive that's SATA III

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1382504-REG/samsung_mz_n6e1t0bw_860_evo_1tb_internal.html


----------



## shaolin95

Falkentyne said:


> M.2 isn't the same as NVME.
> You can have a M2 SSD that's SATA
> Here's a M.2 drive that's SATA III
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1382504-REG/samsung_mz_n6e1t0bw_860_evo_1tb_internal.html


Ok but that is what I am saying. When I look at the table it shows the middle M.2 slot losing 1 Sata port when using M.2 SSD not when using NVME.


----------



## kixxo

shaolin95 said:


> I thought the table is showing NO loss in either middle or bottom with NVME.


M2A is the middle slot. M2A shares with SATA3_1 only if you are using a sata based M.2. If you are installing a PCIe based NVMe M.2 (not sata) then that middle M2A slot shares with nothing at ll. It's only when using a SATA based M.2 that middle M2A shares with SATA3_1

M2P is the bottom. It shares with PCIx4 but only if you populate the PCIx4 slot. So, if you are installing a PCIe based NVMe M.2 in M2P (bottom) there is only lane sharing when the PCI slot is used. 

For 1 PCIe based M.2, the bottom M2P slot is the logical choice cooling wise, as long as you are not populating any PCIx4 slots. 

For 2 PCIe based M.2, using the bottom M2P and the middle M2A still incur no lane sharing as long as you aren't populating the PCIx4 slot 

You can cross reference that with the chart and Porksmuggler's comments back in post 166
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...z390-aorus-owners-thread-17.html#post27710022


----------



## shaolin95

kixxo said:


> M2A is the middle slot. M2A shares with SATA3_1 only if you are using a sata based M.2. If you are installing a PCIe based NVMe M.2 (not sata) then that middle M2A slot shares with nothing at ll. It's only when using a SATA based M.2 that middle M2A shares with SATA3_1
> 
> M2P is the bottom. It shares with PCIx4 but only if you populate the PCIx4 slot. So, if you are installing a PCIe based NVMe M.2 in M2P (bottom) there is only lane sharing when the PCI slot is used.
> 
> For 1 PCIe based M.2, the bottom M2P slot is the logical choice cooling wise, as long as you are not populating any PCIx4 slots.
> 
> For 2 PCIe based M.2, using the bottom M2P and the middle M2A still incur no lane sharing as long as you aren't populating the PCIx4 slot
> 
> You can cross reference that with the chart and Porksmuggler's comments back in post 166
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...z390-aorus-owners-thread-17.html#post27710022


Guess populating that PCIx4 slot with a Sound Card wouldnt be too much of a problem, right?


----------



## Falkentyne

shaolin95 said:


> Ok but that is what I am saying. When I look at the table it shows the middle M.2 slot losing 1 Sata port when using M.2 SSD not when using NVME.


Right that's exactly what I said. (aka SATA III M.2 drive).

If you put a NVME drive in that slot, you shouldn't use a SATA port.

I don't know what happens if you have two NVME drives installed, however.


----------



## kixxo

shaolin95 said:


> Guess populating that PCIx4 slot with a Sound Card wouldnt be too much of a problem, right?


If you're doing that and using 1 PCIe base M.2, then I'd put it in the middle M2A as there would still be zero lane sharing. 

If you use a sound card in PCIx4 and still populated the bottom M2P, then both would still work but probably only at x2 each. 

EDIT: confirmed from the hmanual pg 34
"The PCIEX4 slot shares bandwidth with the M2P connector. The PCIEX4 slot operates at up to x2 mode when a PCIe SSD is installed in the M2P connector."

If you're planning on using the PCIx4 for anything, then the middle M2A M.2 becomes the better choice for a PCIe based M.2 

M.2 lane sharing is in the Masters' manual pg 34


----------



## Peteypabs72

Just got my MB and my Rog Strix 2080 ti today. Very excited! Almost done my build. Quick question though, would you guys recommend using the Beta Bios 7a or the Regular F6?


----------



## porksmuggler

Peteypabs72 said:


> Just got my MB and my Rog Strix 2080 ti today. Very excited! Almost done my build. Quick question though, would you guys recommend using the Beta Bios 7a or the Regular F6?


Recommend sticking with the official F6, unless you then determine you have a specific issue related to / solved by the beta release (I'm even still on F5).

There are a few open issues, none of which I'm experiencing on my test setup. Most are related to manual fixed Vcore overclocking, LLC, and those with Gigabyte's software installed, or possibly the Intel drivers most of us know not to install, like Intel MEI, Serial I/O, RST, unless there's a specific use case.

If you start from the beginning of the thread, you can pick up where most of the issues are coming from / related to. They're not listed though, as the OP may be too busy to capture all the daily round and round. There's quite a bit of repeat as other forum users acquire the mainboards, and aren't aware the issues are already known. So hopefully at some point they'll find their way into one of the OP's reserved posts at the start of the thread.

You made the right choice regardless, solid boards for sure, despite the usual tweaks needed / wanted.


----------



## Peteypabs72

porksmuggler said:


> Recommend sticking with the official F6, unless you then determine you have a specific issue related to / solved by the beta release (I'm even still on F5).
> 
> There are a few open issues, none of which I'm experiencing on my test setup. Most are related to manual fixed Vcore overclocking, LLC, and those with Gigabyte's software installed, or possibly the Intel drivers most of us know not to install, like Intel MEI, Serial I/O, RST, unless there's a specific use case.
> 
> If you start from the beginning of the thread, you can pick up where most of the issues are coming from / related to. They're not listed though, as the OP may be too busy to capture all the daily round and round. There's quite a bit of repeat as other forum users acquire the mainboards, and aren't aware the issues are already known. So hopefully at some point they'll find their way into one of the OP's reserved posts at the start of the thread.
> 
> You made the right choice regardless, solid boards for sure, despite the usual tweaks needed / wanted.


Yeah I’m not familiar with Gigabyte software or the UEFI at all. I’ve been trying to research the software most just so I can control fans (out of convenience) but it sounds like App Center really isn’t very good and filled with bloatware


----------



## Hercule Poirot

@*GBT-MatthewH*
Do you happen to have a time-frame on when the Xtreme may be available? Checked with the local MicroCenter and they are not going to carry it.


----------



## porksmuggler

Peteypabs72 said:


> Yeah I’m not familiar with Gigabyte software or the UEFI at all. I’ve been trying to research the software most just so I can control fans (out of convenience) but it sounds like App Center really isn’t very good and filled with bloatware


I can't comment on it, as I haven't used it. Standard process of eliminating variables when testing mainboards. Start with just a PSU, CPU, 1 stick of memory, memtest, and work your way up to a Windows install. Then its just the bare essential drivers from Gigabyte's site: Their Realtek, just the driver as it is, Intel INF, LAN, BT and WLAN. Then testing like I mentioned in post 390 at defaults, then post 383 for the daily OC. 

Once the bios revisions have slowed down, cleared up any issues, then I'll run a manual fixed Vcore / LLC OC to establish the max for a given CPU. This is in case I want to try that CPU on a different board for comparison only though. I don't run fixed Vcore due to all the inherent reasons I'm not bothering listing.

Speedfan 5 works fine in the bios, with a few caveats, but they're old issues, not specific to these Z390 boards.


----------



## Falkentyne

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


There is still a form of LLC but it's designed by Intel.
This is controlled by the "IA AC DC Loadline" setting which has a reference value of 1.60 mOhms on Z390. The higher the current, the more the VID is boosted, which will raise the voltage. There will still be vdroop since "LLC" is set to normal, but this vdroop will be countered by the 1.60 mOhms of resistance (sort of in a reverse way).

The negative offset you set will counteract this somewhat at full load. But since the exact offset is set at idle (and not scaled at all), thus you risk idle BSOD's.

This is why the default IA AC DC loadline is never set to 1. Setting it to 1 and using pure adaptive voltage can sometimes cause too low voltage and instability.

The only problem with the default IA AC DC setting is you can never see the CPU's original "default" VID at each speed mutliplier. it has to be set to 1 and 1 to see it (up to the highest turbo multiplier).


----------



## porksmuggler

Falkentyne said:


> There is still a form of LLC but it's designed by Intel.
> This is controlled by the "IA AC DC Loadline" setting which has a reference value of 1.60 mOhms on Z390. The higher the current, the more the VID is boosted, which will raise the voltage. There will still be vdroop since "LLC" is set to normal, but this vdroop will be countered by the 1.60 mOhms of resistance (sort of in a reverse way).
> 
> The negative offset you set will counteract this somewhat at full load. But since the exact offset is set at idle (and not scaled at all), thus you risk idle BSOD's.
> 
> This is why the default IA AC DC loadline is never set to 1. Setting it to 1 and using pure adaptive voltage can sometimes cause too low voltage and instability.
> 
> The only problem with the default IA AC DC setting is you can never see the CPU's original "default" VID at each speed mutliplier. it has to be set to 1 and 1 to see it (up to the highest turbo multiplier).


I'm well aware of that loadline setting, and your dozen of so posts about it in as many threads lately. I didn't indicate any question of the idle freeze.

I haven't kept up with your status otherwise though. Do you have an Aorus board yet? You're doing a lot of posting otherwise for a board you've yet tested for specific response to your suggestions.

Edit: If you have an Aorus board, please test your suggestion, and report back as to whether you find adjusting it has a positive impact on the offset OC


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Just an FYI I will be out of the office for thanksgiving until Monday. Have a safe happy holiday everyone!


----------



## porksmuggler

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Just an FYI I will be out of the office for thanksgiving until Monday. Have a safe happy holiday everyone!


You too, thanks for the support here on OCN!


----------



## Falkentyne

porksmuggler said:


> I'm well aware of that loadline setting, and your dozen of so posts about it in as many threads lately. I didn't indicate any question of the idle freeze.
> 
> I haven't kept up with your status otherwise though. Do you have an Aorus board yet? You're doing a lot of posting otherwise for a board you've yet tested for specific response to your suggestions.
> 
> Edit: If you have an Aorus board, please test your suggestion, and report back as to whether you find adjusting it has a positive impact on the offset OC


Didn't I make it clear I have an Aorus Master and my CPU is stable at 5 ghz @ 1.270v at LLC turbo?
Or are you trying to intentionally troll me?

I also don't use offset or adaptive voltages and I never will.

This is with IA AC DC loadline set to 1, at idle and full load.


----------



## Peteypabs72

Here is a stupid question. I can’t tell if there is a piece of plastic over the Sabre part on the Aorus Master Z390. It feels like there is plastic (a second piece after removing the large first piece). Can someone let me know, I don’t want to try peel it and scratch it


----------



## Falkentyne

Peteypabs72 said:


> Here is a stupid question. I can’t tell if there is a piece of plastic over the Sabre part on the Aorus Master Z390. It feels like there is plastic (a second piece after removing the large first piece). Can someone let me know, I don’t want to try peel it and scratch it


All there is is a piece of film. If you already removed that then there's nothing else to remove.
There should be two pieces of film, one over the big saber part, another over a smaller part.


----------



## EarlZ

Would anyone know if the onboard audio is better than the sound blaster z? I am using a Logitech Z5500 and a Sony MDR1000X


----------



## shaolin95

EarlZ said:


> Would anyone know if the onboard audio is better than the sound blaster z? I am using a Logitech Z5500 and a Sony MDR1000X


The Sound Blaster Z is better but are you going to be able to tell the difference? I doubt it with the Z5500. Not sure with the MDR1000X though. Too many variables come into play. I sold my Sound Blaster Z but I am not using my computer for high end audio work or music listening just VR gaming. I am keeping an eye on any BF deals for the AE-5 though cause its hard for me to NOT have a sound card even when I dont notice the difference...old school. lol


----------



## renji1337

Might have gotten a dud 9700k. I'm using a Z390 Aorus Pro with a 9700k and I can't get 4800mhz stable even at 1.315v. With TURBO LLC it seems like my voltage jumps around from 1.308v up to 1.356v when my voltage is set to 1.315.

Testing with newest version of P95


----------



## Fckbutton

porksmuggler said:


> I'm well aware of that loadline setting, and your dozen of so posts about it in as many threads lately. I didn't indicate any question of the idle freeze.
> 
> I haven't kept up with your status otherwise though. Do you have an Aorus board yet? You're doing a lot of posting otherwise for a board you've yet tested for specific response to your suggestions.
> 
> Edit: If you have an Aorus board, please test your suggestion, and report back as to whether you find adjusting it has a positive impact on the offset OC


I messed around abit with IA AC and IA DC loadline at 1 and using positive DVID, but I haven't had time to try it properly. What I did see atleast was that the idle voltage was at 0,7xx instead of 0,5xx so it doesn't freeze at idle. Btw if you go to this thread: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...rus-gaming-7-8700k-overclocking-settings.html there are many people there running IA AC 1 IA DC 1 and positive DVID with good results, but as I said I haven't had time to fully test it myself.


----------



## porksmuggler

Falkentyne said:


> Didn't I make it clear I have an Aorus Master and my CPU is stable at 5 ghz @ 1.270v at LLC turbo?
> Or are you trying to intentionally troll me?
> 
> I also don't use offset or adaptive voltages and I never will.
> 
> This is with IA AC DC loadline set to 1, at idle and full load.


No, I'm pointing out that I'm not seeking your possibly newfound understanding of IA AC DC Loadline, and that your suggestion does not positively impact the negative offset overclock. You responded to my offset overclock post, so clearly you felt the need to at least comment on "offset or adaptive voltages", even though you're never going to use them. I'm equally not interested in your results for non-offset / fixed voltage overclocking.

You seem to be obsessed as of late with others identifying their VID tables for their CPUs, which isn't nearly as useful as you think it is.


----------



## porksmuggler

Fckbutton said:


> I messed around abit with IA AC and IA DC loadline at 1 and using positive DVID, but I haven't had time to try it properly. What I did see atleast was that the idle voltage was at 0,7xx instead of 0,5xx so it doesn't freeze at idle. Btw if you go to this thread: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...rus-gaming-7-8700k-overclocking-settings.html there are many people there running IA AC 1 IA DC 1 and positive DVID with good results, but as I said I haven't had time to fully test it myself.


Again, well aware of the setting and it's function, nothing new, not nearly as new as the discussion in that thread. The mini OC guide I posted is specifically for obtaining a decent overclock without using fixed Vcore / LLC adjustments, while maintain c-states with the fewest number of meaningful changes in the bios. If you're interested, please try both. My simpler method should result in the lower idle and load voltage, without adjusting any of the loadline settings beyond normal as indicated.


----------



## Threx

Majek said:


> Hi,
> 
> Wow. This is quite a drop in voltage!
> Is this on I9 9900k?


Nah, I'm merely a 9700k peasant.


----------



## PuD

F6 bios: Improve system compatibility. Which are the fixes introduced?
Someone who has already installed the bios noticed improvements? Thanks


----------



## pm1109

New Bios out F6.....Any improvements from F5?


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Can you try this? It will flash the firmware on the fan IC. Let me know if it fixes the issue (I can't reproduce it so I can't test it personally).


This might have fixed it. At least I could not reproduce considerable rpm drops anymore.

Before I tried several other things that all did not fully fix the issue. One possible workaround that seemed to work was to use manual curves instead of the preinstalled ones.



Timur Born said:


> Even worse, the AIO DC pump connect to the CPU fan header seems to stop completely (off) sometimes, albeit only for a very short time as it seems.


This looks more like a read-out error, possibly by HWinfo. In one test run I noticed lots of drops to zero on my PWM System 1 fan reported by HWinfo, but not so by GB apps and the fan kept spinning. So I suspect that the drop to zero on the DC AIO pump also did not happen in reality, albeit one cannot be entirely sure. I did enable fan alarms in UEFI now, they did not trigger yet.



Timur Born said:


> But also gives us a clue about a possible cause. At least with SIV the fan-header seems to switch constantly between reading the CPU temperature and reading the "System 1" temperature sensor as its input for fan-curves. Unsurprisingly fans spin down considerably when temps are read as 35°C instead of 60°C and then spin back up.


This might have been my own mistake, switching around fan readings in SIV too often.

Anyway, if the firmware update fixes the fans then let us concentrate on fixing the LLC settings next. I would like to be able to disable LLC via UEFI, which at this point does not seem to be possible.


----------



## Jonny321321

What is IA VR and GT VR config? How should we configure it for maximum performance? Disable it or is it of some benefit?

https://imgur.com/KiDtAT1

https://imgur.com/amsaFUc


----------



## Knjaz136

Found this specific thread a bit too late but will still ask, how's Z390 Aorus Ultra compares to Master and to other brands of similar pricing in terms of it's VRM quality and it's ability to overclock 9900k to 4.9-5ghz? (aka, voltage levels, temps, ram overclockability, etc.).

Very little amount of reviews on Aorus Ultra out there, due to some reason.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jonny321321 said:


> What is IA VR and GT VR config? How should we configure it for maximum performance? Disable it or is it of some benefit?
> 
> https://imgur.com/KiDtAT1
> 
> https://imgur.com/amsaFUc


Don't mess with those. VR Current Limit is basically the same thing as "CPU Current Limit (Amps), which is set in the other menu directly as amps. 255 amps there would correspond to a value of 1023 here.
You can change it to 1023 safely but I dont know which value the mainboard will use. One of them will have priority over the other.

The IA AC DC setting influences the CPU VID reporting.
only change those if you want the CPU VID to not boost by 100-130mv at full load. This is useful for finding your CPU's original default VID, but not really for anything else.

IMON SLOPE and IMON OFFSET change how much wattage is reported. Only useful for boards without power limit overrides. Setting IMON SLOPE to something like 10 and IMON OFFSET to negative - 31999 can make a 200W CPU report its using 30 watts. (this is a guess. I only tested this and have feedback from others on laptops with hard TDP limits). These settings are only useful if you have a fully locked down CPU with no power limit overrides allowed, e.g. a non K processor.

Back to IA AC DC:
If you are using adaptive voltages with loadline calibration set to disabled or normal, and you set IA AC DC Loadline to "1", then you may possibly have instability if you use adaptive voltages without using a positive offset, because you will be removing the "vdroop compensation" from the 1.60 mOhms of VID boost from the IA AC loadline value. The IA DC value is the power consumption reporting. The IA AC loadline setting is the operating voltage, which is boosted by 1.60 mOhms and then reported under DC loadline as the CPU VID.

The reason this is set to 1.60 mOhms of resistance is, Loadline Calibration isn't designed to be used with adaptive voltages. That's where the VID boost of 1.60 mOhms is for.
The only reason to change IA AC loadline to 1 and IA DC loadline to 1 is to check the CPU's original default VID. Asus recommends this be set to 1, or 0.01 on their UEFI overclocking guide, but they also recommend using static voltages and "LLC" (Loadline Calibration).

Just leave it at auto unless you want to see the original 1 core CPU VID default for 5 ghz on your processor(test it at full load only), without it being boosted up. I only change mine to "1" because I don't like my VID reading 1.38v when I have the cpu vcore set to 1.28v at full load.

Going anywhere near the upper limits can destroy the mainboard or the processor, by the way.


----------



## msawwan2

porksmuggler said:


> I'm equally not interested in your results for non-offset / fixed voltage overclocking.
> .


hey, sorry for jumping in the middle of this. but i like what you are doing cause i hate the regular overclocking method of stable voltage.
your settings appeal to me very much. but i am having stability issues on bios f4.

did you update your bios?
should i update to f5 or wait for official f7? i am in no hurry to overclock.


----------



## OutlawII

porksmuggler said:


> No, I'm pointing out that I'm not seeking your possibly newfound understanding of IA AC DC Loadline, and that your suggestion does not positively impact the negative offset overclock. You responded to my offset overclock post, so clearly you felt the need to at least comment on "offset or adaptive voltages", even though you're never going to use them. I'm equally not interested in your results for non-offset / fixed voltage overclocking.
> 
> You seem to be obsessed as of late with others identifying their VID tables for their CPUs, which isn't nearly as useful as you think it is.


Wow dude if you dont like his posts dont read them. I think hes doing a great job helping people out


----------



## porksmuggler

msawwan2 said:


> hey, sorry for jumping in the middle of this. but i like what you are doing cause i hate the regular overclocking method of stable voltage.
> your settings appeal to me very much. but i am having stability issues on bios f4.
> 
> did you update your bios?
> should i update to f5 or wait for official f7? i am in no hurry to overclock.


Depending on the cause of your stability issues, might be best to trace that down first. Once you're stable though, again nothing new, but the process it outlined in posts 383, 390, 519 for the most part.




OutlawII said:


> Wow dude if you dont like his posts dont read them. I think hes doing a great job helping people out







Feel free to read whatever posts you like, "dude"


----------



## Moparman

Come on everyone lets keep it friendly please. This is supposed to be a Help/Info thread not a Octagon.


----------



## Falkentyne

porksmuggler said:


> Depending on the cause of your stability issues, might be best to trace that down first. Once you're stable though, again nothing new, but the process it outlined in posts 383, 390, 519 for the most part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c
> 
> Feel free to read whatever posts you like, "dude"


I'm not trying to act arrogant or preach or be a jerk, but I'm the guy who was able to power hack the MSI gaming laptops, both the Embedded Controller cancer (battery boost, hard AC power limit restrictions based on the type of MXM video card inserted) as well as the badly designed "Overvolting", caused by the static voltages being 'boosted' by the default IA AC DC loadline setting (making static voltages unusable on MSIbooks without unlocking your Bios). Including hacking the embedded controller's EC RAM to allow MSI laptops to draw full, unthrottled power when the battery is removed (it's supposed to limit the maximum AC power draw to 60% if the battery is removed). This is where i learned about the IA AC DC setting originally.

Desktops aren't designed with such cancer restrictions. The IA AC DC settings are done by AMI, and based on Intel VRM specifications.
No user has any business to change these except for informational purposes. If using ADAPTIVE VOLTAGES, the IA AC DC settings MUST be left at default. In this case, if a user wants to find the 'original' default VID for their CPU, he will have to change the loadlines to 1. However it's working different on the desktop mainboards than on cancer locked down firmware laptops. On MSIbooks, setting a static voltage (e.g. 1.275v), and setting IA AC DC loadline to 1, keeps the non AVX idle and load VID within 6mv variance, although the VID will only appear in 16mv ranges or something. e.g. idle 1.2798v, load=1.293v, which will apply if the manual voltage is set between 1.272v to 1.277v. At 1.271v, the VID drops to 1.2764 to 1.2769.
But you guys get the point

I'm a geek and a nerd and a chess master. Expect weird things from chess players.


----------



## Thunder-74

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


HI, i have Aorus Master and 9900k. I tried your method and i close Cinebench 15 with 1,272v ( -0.030 V on VID). I have not tried to increase the offset yet.
but I noticed that on cinebench I'm fixed at 5ghz, but with other bench (heaven, Aida 64 for example), the freq. drops to 4,7ghz . 
Can it be the fault of the offset AVX -3 set, which also acts when it does not have to?
I have F6 bios
Thanks

PS. Sorry for my english....


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> HI, i have Aorus Master and 9900k. I tried your method and i close Cinebench 15 with 1,272v ( -0.030 V on VID). I have not tried to increase the offset yet.
> but I noticed that on cinebench I'm fixed at 5ghz, but with other bench (heaven, Aida 64 for example), the freq. drops to 4,7ghz .
> Can it be the fault of the offset AVX -3 set, which also acts when it does not have to?
> I have F6 bios
> Thanks
> 
> PS. Sorry for my english....


Easiest way to test that is to set the AVX offset to 0 and re-test


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> Easiest way to test that is to set the AVX offset to 0 and re-test


of course  more than anything else I wanted to understand if it was known and could be a bug in the bios

how can i try


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> of course  more than anything else I wanted to understand if it was known and could be a bug in the bios
> 
> how can i try


It's not a bios bug.
My MSI laptop does the same thing. It's so annoying that I don't even use an offset anymore.
It seems to be caused by some windows update.
A 'clean' install of windows does not do this. Gigabyte tested this. It seems to be some installed update that makes windows use AVX instructions somewhere, for something.
Windows makes things. Windows can break things.


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> It's not a bios bug.
> My MSI laptop does the same thing. It's so annoying that I don't even use an offset anymore.
> It seems to be caused by some windows update.
> A 'clean' install of windows does not do this. Gigabyte tested this. It seems to be some installed update that makes windows use AVX instructions somewhere, for something.
> Windows makes things. Windows can break things.



I understood. surely my windows is not clean: I changed motherboard and processor, installing only the drivers

but I do not explain why with cinebench all cores remain at 5ghz ..


----------



## porksmuggler

Falkentyne said:


> I'm a geek and a nerd and a chess master. Expect weird things from chess players.


Good to know, since we're sharing now, here's my background.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686998-post2681.html

You're understanding of IA AC/DC loadline is mostly incomplete, but full agreement though on not changing it for normal use or overclocking.



Thunder-74 said:


> HI, i have Aorus Master and 9900k. I tried your method and i close Cinebench 15 with 1,272v ( -0.030 V on VID). I have not tried to increase the offset yet.
> but I noticed that on cinebench I'm fixed at 5ghz, but with other bench (heaven, Aida 64 for example), the freq. drops to 4,7ghz .
> Can it be the fault of the offset AVX -3 set, which also acts when it does not have to?
> I have F6 bios
> Thanks
> 
> PS. Sorry for my english....


Your english is fine. I'm not familiar with all benchmarks, but I believe those mentioned include AVX. Change your AVX offset if you wish to confirm without researching the benchmarks.


----------



## Falkentyne

porksmuggler said:


> Good to know, since we're sharing now, here's my background.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686998-post2681.html
> 
> You're understanding of IA AC/DC loadline is mostly incomplete, but full agreement though on not changing it for normal use or overclocking.
> 
> 
> 
> Your english is fine. I'm not familiar with all benchmarks, but I believe those mentioned include AVX. Change your AVX offset if you wish to confirm without researching the benchmarks.


Fair enough.


----------



## Thunder-74

ok, 
I set it to auto offset AVX. now it is always on i 5ghz.
But the voltage is not fixed in full. On some low-weight benchmarks (50W) the voltage fluctuates around 1.20v. With Aida64 more heavy, it also rises up to 1,36v
I thought that with the voltage offset I had the VID-offset = fixed voltage


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> ok,
> I set it to auto offset AVX. now it is always on i 5ghz.
> But the voltage is not fixed in full. On some low-weight benchmarks (50W) the voltage fluctuates around 1.20v. With Aida64 more heavy, it also rises up to 1,36v
> I thought that with the voltage offset I had the VID-offset = fixed voltage


This is normal.
Are you using adaptive voltage/offset, with bios "Loadline calibration" set to normal?
If so, that's why. the IA AC DC 1.60 mOhms setting is handling the "loadline calibration" for you by raising your VID up to ensure stability. Again my explanation is not electrically accurate but its enough to get an idea of what is going on.

The IA AC DC loadlines influence the VID like this.
At 5 ghz, with 1.27v (manual voltage) and default IA AC DC loadline, the VID will read 1.36v at full load, and with heavy AVX instructions, 1.39-1.40v. But the CPU vcore will be fixed at 1.265v (2nd sensor) since I am using static voltage..


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> This is normal.
> Are you using adaptive voltage/offset, with bios "Loadline calibration" set to normal?
> If so, that's why. the IA AC DC 1.60 mOhms setting is handling the "loadline calibration" for you by raising your VID up to ensure stability. Again my explanation is not electrically accurate but its enough to get an idea of what is going on.
> 
> The IA AC DC loadlines influence the VID like this.
> At 5 ghz, with 1.27v (manual voltage) and default IA AC DC loadline, the VID will read 1.36v at full load, and with heavy AVX instructions, 1.39-1.40v. But the CPU vcore will be fixed at 1.265v (2nd sensor) since I am using static voltage..


Yes, LLC set on normal. 

I want to keep an adaptive voltage, do you say it would be better to set up a more aggressive LLC?


----------



## Timur Born

I would like to add to this discussion that using BIOS loadline calication settings of Auto/Normal/Standard does not seem to disable LLC, but put it at Low. Currently the proper way to disable LLC seems to be via EasyTune.


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> Yes, LLC set on normal.
> 
> I want to keep an adaptive voltage, do you say it would be better to set up a more aggressive LLC?


No!! Use a higher offset voltage instead!

You can't change LLC (Loadline Calibration) when using adaptive voltage (or at least you're not SUPPOSED to be able to change it).
The IA AC DC Loadline setting is what does this for you (THIS is NOT the same thing as LLC!!!). You need to use OFFSET voltage instead.

Please don't mess with that setting.

If you are really that stubborn and want to actually see what happens, set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 210 (the Z370 reference value) and watch what happens to your CPU VID and vcore.
I do not recommend anyone mess with this setting. Setting it to "1" is safe when using MANUAL VOLTAGES for informational purposes only (finding the CPU's default VID its using at full load) but this is a dangerous setting to mess with, as it can bypass vcore protection if you go too high. 

I tried this on a MSI laptop.
Used 2.9 ghz at 1.0v static voltage and I set IA AC DC Loadline to 640.

Put a prime95 load on the CPU and the vcore shot up to 1.41v and the laptop simply shut off and on again from OCP.


----------



## Thunder-74

thank you so much. For now I leave the settings proposed by porksmuggler keeping everything under control.


----------



## porksmuggler

Timur Born said:


> Currently the proper way to disable LLC seems to be via EasyTune.


Proper as in only way 

Your Smartfan 5 testing, an observation. I haven't tested fully, but given the PWM calibration is likely off the mark...you might benefit from testing a PWM fan with voltage instead of Auto or PWM mode. The rpm response seems lower for voltage than PWM, and may not trigger the shutoff a full. Early on I hooked up a Arctic F12 PWM PST, and noticed an rpm variance of 100-200 rpm between the two modes, with the same fan curves. I'm used to seeing fans cut off below a certain PWM duty, but might also explain the at full cut-off. I haven't observed it myself though yet, with multiple fans tested.

Edit: All observations in bios Smartfan, not used SIV or whatever its called yet.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I would like to add to this discussion that using BIOS loadline calication settings of Auto/Normal/Standard does not seem to disable LLC, but put it at Low. Currently the proper way to disable LLC seems to be via EasyTune.


There is another setting called "CPU Internal AC DC Loadline". (Not the same as IA AC DC loadline but you never know...there's no documentation for that). Anyone try it?


----------



## Luckbad

Knjaz136 said:


> Found this specific thread a bit too late but will still ask, how's Z390 Aorus Ultra compares to Master and to other brands of similar pricing in terms of it's VRM quality and it's ability to overclock 9900k to 4.9-5ghz? (aka, voltage levels, temps, ram overclockability, etc.).
> 
> Very little amount of reviews on Aorus Ultra out there, due to some reason.


I've used the Aorus Z390 Master, Pro WiFi, and Ultra.

Today, I actually went into Micro Center to exchange my Master for an Ultra because it dropped to $219 and I was tired of the coil whine from the Master's VRM when moving browser windows around (before people ask again, I have an EVGA 850 T2 PSU).

The Pro WiFi did not have the same coil whine issues with the exact same system.

I opted for the Ultra because it is currently only $30 more than the Pro WiFi (bang for the buck king if you need the wireless) and I like having the LED readouts. The direct touch heatpipe is a bonus, but honestly the VRM temperatures on the Pro WiFi are incredible already. I'll also make use of the DAC-UP port for my Focusrite audio interface since it's there.

While I was at Micro Center, I noticed that they had stock of 9900k processors... I happened to bring my 9700k with me in case they did even though the website said they didn't, and I pulled the trigger on the 9900k with the Aorus Z390 Ultra.

Outstanding combination. I actually slightly prefer the Ultra to the Master thus far. If they can get rid of the coil whine on the Master it might be better (though the VRM could actually be superior on the Ultra).


----------



## supertreky

So I've been able to get a very stable 5ghz on all cores on my 9900k - but I was wondering if you set the turbo multiplier in the bios to 1 core 53, 2 cores 52 and 3 cores to 51 then set the rest to 50 - would you get one core turbo aat 5.3ghz in a single threaded game? how could you track if you were getting that 5.3 on that one core?


----------



## porksmuggler

supertreky said:


> So I've been able to get a very stable 5ghz on all cores on my 9900k - but I was wondering if you set the turbo multiplier in the bios to 1 core 53, 2 cores 52 and 3 cores to 51 then set the rest to 50 - would you get one core turbo aat 5.3ghz in a single threaded game? how could you track if you were getting that 5.3 on that one core?


Yes, and that's per core overclocking. Monitoring software like HWiNFO has logging functionality. So for example you could log each core during whatever activity, and even afterwards review each clock throughout the session.


----------



## supertreky

porksmuggler said:


> Yes, and that's per core overclocking. Monitoring software like HWiNFO has logging functionality. So for example you could log each core during whatever activity, and even afterwards review each clock throughout the session.


Ok thank you! 

Would this be an effective way eking out extra performance while gaming, while maintaining stability with large loads like transcoding? Also do those values (51/52/53/50 etc.) correspond to a specific core or is it literally looking at "whatever core is being used a lot"


----------



## porksmuggler

supertreky said:


> Ok thank you!
> 
> Would this be an effective way eking out extra performance while gaming, while maintaining stability with large loads like transcoding? Also do those values (51/52/53/50 etc.) correspond to a specific core or is it literally looking at "whatever core is being used a lot"


It is effective, dependent upon the application obviously. Meaning, there's plenty of multi-threaded games out there now, so I'm assuming you have specific ones in mind already that are single or low thread. The clock walks, the CPU / application / OS work together to determines which core is best suited at any given moment. This is why per core logging is useful, because you can review the clocks across all cores at any specific time.

If thermal or voltage thresholds are reached, its even effective to reduce the all core clocks while increasing say the 4, 2, or 1 core clocks to maintain your current noise / thermal / power limits.


----------



## Falkentyne

supertreky said:


> Ok thank you!
> 
> Would this be an effective way eking out extra performance while gaming, while maintaining stability with large loads like transcoding? Also do those values (51/52/53/50 etc.) correspond to a specific core or is it literally looking at "whatever core is being used a lot"


You can't put a particular core to a particular multiplier. Windows will use whatever core or thread it wants to use.
Notice that if you have a 8 core 8 thread processor and you try to run something with 4 threads at heavy load (like prime95 small FFT), with the number of threads set to 4, the cores that get the load will keep alternating between all 8, repeatedly.

You also will never be able to realistically use the 1 core turbo limit in any program, because windows by itself will use a thread all the time, so you will at best be bouncing around 2 core usage instead of just 1.

You also have another problem, in that you need to make sure you use enough voltage for the highest multiplier that you have set. Because if one core goes to 5400 mhz and your vcore isn't high enough, that core can crash.


----------



## Moparman

So I have been playing around tonight with mem/uncore settings. I can now run [email protected] with ram @ 3610 scoring 1306 in R15 with this 9600. on the Master. Updated


http://hwbot.org/submission/3989219_


----------



## porksmuggler

Moparman said:


> So I have been playing around tonight with mem/uncore settings. I can now run [email protected] with ram @ 3610 scoring 1306 in R15 with this 9600. on the Master. Updated


I think that's about what I got for R15 on a stock Ryzen 1700 build a while back, and has to be at least close to a stock 8700k, nice.


----------



## Moparman

It still isn't close to my [email protected] or [email protected] but it's an interesting overpriced cpu.


----------



## shaolin95

Falkentyne said:


> You can't put a particular core to a particular multiplier. Windows will use whatever core or thread it wants to use.
> Notice that if you have a 8 core 8 thread processor and you try to run something with 4 threads at heavy load (like prime95 small FFT), with the number of threads set to 4, the cores that get the load will keep alternating between all 8, repeatedly.
> 
> You also will never be able to realistically use the 1 core turbo limit in any program, because windows by itself will use a thread all the time, so you will at best be bouncing around 2 core usage instead of just 1.
> 
> You also have another problem, in that you need to make sure you use enough voltage for the highest multiplier that you have set. Because if one core goes to 5400 mhz and your vcore isn't high enough, that core can crash.


That is what I have noticed playing with this when trying to use Cinebench. Even when using the single core option, I dont see it going to 51 which was the highest select for one core OC.


----------



## supertreky

Testing putting only one core at 5.3ghz has resulted in it never reaching 5.3 max I've seen is 5.1 doing a bunch of different games/loads on the cpu. I had that set for 3 cores. I may try and bump 3 cores to 5.3 and see how that works. Thanks porksmuggler and Falkentyne for your information and insight I appreciate it.


----------



## renji1337

Is there an issue with aorus pro's at all and there LLC? I have the Z390 Pro and I can't keep my 9700k stable even at 4.8ghz. My voltage has swung from 1.248v to 1.368v with turbo LLC


----------



## Falkentyne

renji1337 said:


> Is there an issue with aorus pro's at all and there LLC? I have the Z390 Pro and I can't keep my 9700k stable even at 4.8ghz. My voltage has swung from 1.248v to 1.368v with turbo LLC


Are you looking at core voltage or CPU VID? This should not be happening.


----------



## renji1337

Falkentyne said:


> Are you looking at core voltage or CPU VID? This should not be happening.


Core voltage in CPU-Z, and HWMonitor, and HWInfo.

Looks like I have a C State on still. Turned it off

Now my voltage is only going from 1.308v up to 1.360v but that still seems high with turbo LLC


----------



## Nephalem89

A question the z390 Aorus Master is a good choice? Have the same problems with the hwinfo as with the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7 and have the problem of the LLC and the VCore that fluctuates a lot and has high voltage spikes? Thank you


----------



## Timur Born

Setting Vcore to "Normal" in BIOS does not change the issue that LLC cannot be disabled via BIOS. A LLC setting of "Normal" still results in LLC "Low" being used.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Setting Vcore to "Normal" in BIOS does not change the issue that LLC cannot be disabled via BIOS. A LLC setting of "Normal" still results in LLC "Low" being used.


Please set VR IA AC DC Loadline to "1" and then test again. I think this is not a bug at all but a feature and you guys are not realizing that vcore=normal uses intel's own built in loadline calibration, which is called IA AC DC Loadline (in mOhms).

Also keep in mind there is another setting "CPU Internal IA DC Loadline", but I do not know if those two values are related to each other or not.


----------



## Timur Born

It's exactly one LLC bin higher than what "Normal" sets via Easytune, it even is called "Low" in EasyTune and all other LLC settings below Turbo are exactly one bin higher, too. So to me it very much looks like BIOS settings Normal to High are just plain broken (off by a single bin).

The moment I press Enter on the "VR IA AC DC Loadine" setting in F7 BIOS the PC freezes.


----------



## Ownedj00

Luckbad said:


> I've used the Aorus Z390 Master, Pro WiFi, and Ultra.
> 
> Today, I actually went into Micro Center to exchange my Master for an Ultra because it dropped to $219 and I was tired of the coil whine from the Master's VRM when moving browser windows around (before people ask again, I have an EVGA 850 T2 PSU).
> 
> The Pro WiFi did not have the same coil whine issues with the exact same system.
> 
> I opted for the Ultra because it is currently only $30 more than the Pro WiFi (bang for the buck king if you need the wireless) and I like having the LED readouts. The direct touch heatpipe is a bonus, but honestly the VRM temperatures on the Pro WiFi are incredible already. I'll also make use of the DAC-UP port for my Focusrite audio interface since it's there.
> 
> While I was at Micro Center, I noticed that they had stock of 9900k processors... I happened to bring my 9700k with me in case they did even though the website said they didn't, and I pulled the trigger on the 9900k with the Aorus Z390 Ultra.
> 
> Outstanding combination. I actually slightly prefer the Ultra to the Master thus far. If they can get rid of the coil whine on the Master it might be better (though the VRM could actually be superior on the Ultra).


do you think its worth pairing the Ultra with a 8700k? i'm looking at upgrade from my MSI Z370 mobo. i'll be delidding my 8700k and changeing my AIO too.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> It's exactly one LLC bin higher than what "Normal" sets via Easytune, it even is called "Low" in EasyTune and all other LLC settings below Turbo are exactly one bin higher, too. So to me it very much looks like BIOS settings Normal to High are just plain broken (off by a single bin).
> 
> The moment I press Enter on the "VR IA AC DC Loadine" setting in F7 BIOS the PC freezes.


There is advanced voltage control, then internal VR settings.
Then there are two options separately: IA AC loadline and IA DC loadline

you just use up or down arrow then enter a 1.
Are you saying it freezes after you enter a 1?

That doesn't happen to me at all. I'm using F7a.
Setting vcore to "normal" is adaptive voltage which uses the CPU VID for its base voltage. The CPU VID is 'boosted' by the amount of current via mOhms of resistance, which is what the "Reference" value of 160 (1.6 mOhms) is for the IA AC and IA DC loadline setting

I have not tested what "CPU Internal IA AC DC Loadline is.
I have a guess its the same thing just gigabytefied. Having options like low, auto, high extreme, etc.
Someone needs to test that.

Because there is another option called "CPU Current Limit (Amps)"
But this is the same thing which is usually controlled by "VR Current Limit" in the Core I/A VR settings, which goes up to a value of 1023 (1023 divided by 8 is 255 for 255 amps).
However changing one of the two does not affect the other one, so I do not know which one is being used or given priority.


----------



## Excession

So, I ran into a rather bizarre problem. My Ultra refuses to boot if I have a thumb drive in the front-panel USB3 port. This happens on both the F4 and F5 BIOS (untested on F3). No other USB ports seem to have this problem.


----------



## PuD

Timur Born said:


> *The moment I press Enter on the "VR IA AC DC Loadine" setting in F7 BIOS the PC freezes*



The same happened to me on *F6 bios*, tested yesterday night. @GBT-MatthewH could you please pay attention on this.

I don't have tried with F5 bios, someone can check it? Thx.


----------



## Vrool

I'm using an Aorus Pro, F5 BIOS.

In HWiNFO the Z390 CPU temperature sensor (ITE IT8688E) shows 10°C less than the CPU Package sensor.
Smart Fan 5 uses the lower temperature so I've based my fan curve on that.
Is this normal?

Thanks.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Are you saying it freezes after you enter a 1?


It freezes when I press Enter before entering a value (default is 0). I press Enter in order to be able to enter a value.



> Setting vcore to "normal" is adaptive voltage which uses the CPU VID for its base voltage. The CPU VID is 'boosted' by the amount of current via mOhms of resistance, which is what the "Reference" value of 160 (1.6 mOhms) is for the IA AC and IA DC loadline setting


Start EasyTune after you set LLC to "Normal" in BIOS. EasyTune will show "Low". Then change LLC to "Normal" in EasyTune, you will see that load voltages drop by another bin. Furthermore, if you compare any of the other settings between BIOS and EasyTune (or look at my corresponding post) you will see that they are off by exactly one bin for anything below Turbo.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> It freezes when I press Enter before entering a value (default is 0). I press Enter in order to be able to enter a value.
> 
> 
> Start EasyTune after you set LLC to "Normal" in BIOS. EasyTune will show "Low". Then change LLC to "Normal" in EasyTune, you will see that load voltages drop by another bin. Furthermore, if you compare any of the other settings between BIOS and EasyTune (or look at my corresponding post) you will see that they are off by exactly one bin for anything below Turbo.


Ok I can confirm the bug.
@GBT-MatthewH the bios crashes if you press "Enter" on the CPU VR Settings options (I dont know if all of the options crash it, but IA AC/IA DC Loadline does).
Please pass that to the team to fix.
Probably crashes because there are 6250 different values for IA AC and IA DC loadline. (0 - 6249).

Anyway to avoid the crash don't press enter. Just enter a value and then left or right arrow away.

Also CPU internal IA AC DC loadline seems to be presets for IA AC DC Loadline. I don't know which one takes priority if both are set to custom values though. I also don't know if AC or DC have different presets but I think it does, because I tried "Power saving" (with IA AC DC loadline set to 0), and the CPU VID shown was 1.19v at load and 1.25v at idle, whereas at auto its 1.36 load and 1.31 idle, and at turbo its very close to auto.

With it at auto and IA AC DC loadline set to 1 manually, it's 1.21v idle and 1.25 VID load.

The only way to get the idle vid lower than 1.21v is to raise IA DC loadline slightly and keep IA AC Loadline at 1.

Those values are useless unless you are using adaptive voltages (static voltages are not affected. It will affect the power draw readings though).


----------



## Thunder-74

currently, what's the best bios to use on Master model?


----------



## shalafi

Paired the Aorus Pro with a 9700k yesterday in place of my 2700x build (because gaming) and did a quick OC to 5.1GHz according to post #383 (but 0 AVX offset, as everything seems to have AVX these days .. or it's a Win10 thing). I didn't have more than 30-40 minutes to test, fired up some games to compare (which worked great), a few passes of Cinebench R15 single/multi, then 3d Mark Firestrike (bluescreened), then did some browsing and afterwards had another bluescreen while idle. I think both bluesceens mentioned a WHEA error.
I'll play with it a lot more today when I get home from work, need to get it stable  

First impressions great, apart from the horrid RBG Fusion crap. Set all my lights to red (board + 2x2 Phanteks strips), but the thing insists on controlling my CM Masterkeys Pro L keyboard lighting! I bought it specifically for the ability to set and store profiles without a need for any software, and now RGB Fusion renders the profile keys unusable, while offering exactly 2 lighting modes (the keyboard has a LOT more). Also, the brightness slider does absolutely nothing for the keyboard, always full brightness (ouch). When i unplug/replug, the keyboard works again, but obviously I don't want to do that on every logon. EDIT: also the board boots with the default orange colour scheme, switches to red on windows logon. After one of the bluescreens, it didn't even do that until I ran RGB Fusion manually and re-set it to red. Does the board really fall back to default while a program is not actively controlling the lights?


----------



## Robbært

shalafi said:


> Paired the Aorus Pro with a 9700k yesterday


disable win10 fast startup since there still no aorus pro bios with overvoltage fix
it also only 28% of 9700k capable of 5.1GHz stable (siliconlottery stats)


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Also CPU internal IA AC DC loadline seems to be presets for IA AC DC Loadline. I don't know which one takes priority if both are set to custom values though. I also don't know if AC or DC have different presets but I think it does, because I tried "Power saving" (with IA AC DC loadline set to 0), and the CPU VID shown was 1.19v at load and 1.25v at idle, whereas at auto its 1.36 load and 1.31 idle, and at turbo its very close to auto.
> 
> With it at auto and IA AC DC loadline set to 1 manually, it's 1.21v idle and 1.25 VID load.
> 
> The only way to get the idle vid lower than 1.21v is to raise IA DC loadline slightly and keep IA AC Loadline at 1.
> 
> Those values are useless unless you are using adaptive voltages (static voltages are not affected. It will affect the power draw readings though).


I wonder if you mean other settings than I do. There are two rows of IA loadline settings, AC and DC. Both are at 0 (zero) by default, not Auto. When I set both to 1 I got a black screen when trying to boot Windows. When I then set AC to 1 and DC to 0 I got a BSOD. Next I set AC to 0 and DC to 1, which allowed booting, but first I had to use a restore point in order to repair the damage that was done by using AC 1 before.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I wonder if you mean other settings than I do. There are two rows of IA loadline settings, AC and DC. Both are at 0 (zero) by default, not Auto. When I set both to 1 I got a black screen when trying to boot Windows. When I then set AC to 1 and DC to 0 I got a BSOD. Next I set AC to 0 and DC to 1, which allowed booting, but first I had to use a restore point in order to repair the damage that was done by using AC 1 before.


Are you using adaptive voltage?
if so that's why.
IA AC DC Loadline affects adaptive voltages. It's basically intel's pre-programmed loadline calibration.
the reference value is 1.60 mOhms. mOhms is a measure of resistance. What that means is, the more current going into the chip, the more resistance there is. This resistance will raise the CPU VID at heavy load, raising it higher than idle. 

"CPU internal Load Line" is basically a 'Gigabyte' way to access this setting and set values automatically. Again only useful for normal/auto voltages, not for static voltages (IA AC DC must be set to 0 to use CPU Internal Load Line).

The IA AC setting is the operating voltage. The IA DC setting is the power consumption measurement.

When using manual (override) voltages, the static voltage will ignore any changes to IA AC DC loadline, although the reported power draw may be different.
Setting IA AC DC loadline to 1 removes all Intel built in loadline calibration. So if you are using adaptive voltage, you are most likely going to BSOD unless you use a positive offset.

sorry about the BSOD and the waste of time from reinstalling.


----------



## Timur Born

I set everything to optimal default and then only changed those two values to see their effect. How much of a positive VCore offset would be needed for a stock clock to begin with?


----------



## MegatronicRus

Hello. If i use manual (override) voltage vcore, then IA AC DC must be 0 or 1? And cpu internal load line will be set on auto or other setting?


----------



## Falkentyne

PuD said:


> The same happened to me on *F6 bios*, tested yesterday night. @GBT-MatthewH could you please pay attention on this.
> 
> I don't have tried with F5 bios, someone can check it? Thx.


Most likely, the freeze happens because the IA AC DC loadline setting has 6280 possible values (0 to 6279, 0=auto, and 1= 0.01 mOhms (removes CPU VID from boosting past the intel pre-programmed VID at full load).
And looks like the Bios is unable to bring up a selection of 6280 possible values.
(DO NOT EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER ENTER A HIGH VALUE HERE. 1 is fine for removing "VID BOOST at load" when using static voltages. reference value for Z390 is 160 (1.6 mOhms). Z370 is 210 (2.1 mOhms). Kaby Lake is 180 (1.8 mOhms).


----------



## Stockman

Luckbad said:


> Knjaz136 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Found this specific thread a bit too late but will still ask, how's Z390 Aorus Ultra compares to Master and to other brands of similar pricing in terms of it's VRM quality and it's ability to overclock 9900k to 4.9-5ghz? (aka, voltage levels, temps, ram overclockability, etc.).
> 
> Very little amount of reviews on Aorus Ultra out there, due to some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> I've used the Aorus Z390 Master, Pro WiFi, and Ultra.
> 
> Today, I actually went into Micro Center to exchange my Master for an Ultra because it dropped to $219 and I was tired of the coil whine from the Master's VRM when moving browser windows around (before people ask again, I have an EVGA 850 T2 PSU).
> 
> The Pro WiFi did not have the same coil whine issues with the exact same system.
> 
> I opted for the Ultra because it is currently only $30 more than the Pro WiFi (bang for the buck king if you need the wireless) and I like having the LED readouts. The direct touch heatpipe is a bonus, but honestly the VRM temperatures on the Pro WiFi are incredible already. I'll also make use of the DAC-UP port for my Focusrite audio interface since it's there.
> 
> While I was at Micro Center, I noticed that they had stock of 9900k processors... I happened to bring my 9700k with me in case they did even though the website said they didn't, and I pulled the trigger on the 9900k with the Aorus Z390 Ultra.
> 
> Outstanding combination. I actually slightly prefer the Ultra to the Master thus far. If they can get rid of the coil whine on the Master it might be better (though the VRM could actually be superior on the Ultra).
Click to expand...

So to be clear, the Ultra has NO whine for you? Great news, if so!

I also had to return my Master. I worked at home for 10 hours on Tuesday and my head was about to explode after listening to the high pitched whine all day. (My job does not need computational power so CPU was at idle all day - when the VRM whine is loudest)

I didn't exchange it for a new Master because I'm starting to suspect it might not be an isolated issue. Maybe the Ultra is also an option for me. The VRM uses different components.


----------



## Timur Born

So I set both IA AC and DC LLC to 1, set a Vcore offset of +0.100 with everything else at default/optimized settings. Runnung Prime95 26.6 at 1344K (in-place FFT) resulted in 1.144 V.

Next I used EasyTune to check the Vcore LLC setting and again it reports "Low" instead of "Standard". Changing said LLC setting to "Standard" via EasyTune resulted in Vcore dropping to 1.100 V.

So again there are strong indications that Vcore LLC remains active at "Low" level when you set Auto/Normal/Standard in BIOS, even when IA DC/AC Loadline is used with adaptive voltages.

Based on your statement that IA DC/AC Loadline settings should not be combined with VCore LLC settings this either seems to be a problem for your setup or it is not, the latter of which would mean that LLC can be mixed with IA LL (because currently it already *is*).


----------



## Timur Born

Curious observation:

Using EasyTune LLC "Standard" (no corresponding setting in BIOS available) uses less power compared to what TomsHardware measured and it is *not* P95 29.4B8 Small FFTs stable.

Using EasyTune LLC "Low" (corresponds to BIOS "Standard") uses more power compared to what TomsHardware measured and it is P95 29.4B8 Small FFTs stable.


----------



## shaolin95

Thunder-74 said:


> currently, what's the best bios to use on Master model?


For me, F6 seems to be more stable than F7a and F5 so far.


----------



## Thunder-74

shaolin95 said:


> For me, F6 seems to be more stable than F7a and F5 so far.



Ok, the last official ... thank you 


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## shaolin95

Thunder-74 said:


> Ok, the last official ... thank you
> 
> 
> Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


You are very welcome.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> So I set both IA AC and DC LLC to 1, set a Vcore offset of +0.100 with everything else at default/optimized settings. Runnung Prime95 26.6 at 1344K (in-place FFT) resulted in 1.144 V.
> 
> Next I used EasyTune to check the Vcore LLC setting and again it reports "Low" instead of "Standard". Changing said LLC setting to "Standard" via EasyTune resulted in Vcore dropping to 1.100 V.
> 
> So again there are strong indications that Vcore LLC remains active at "Low" level when you set Auto/Normal/Standard in BIOS, even when IA DC/AC Loadline is used with adaptive voltages.
> 
> Based on your statement that IA DC/AC Loadline settings should not be combined with VCore LLC settings this either seems to be a problem for your setup or it is not, the latter of which would mean that LLC can be mixed with IA LL (because currently it already *is*).


Thanks for testing.
Anyway maybe I need to explain a bit more in depth.
The IA AC DC settings are intel's own LLC.
You have to look in the design documents. One of them has the default loadline slopes for these processors. It may be in the PDF I posted. If it isn't, you need to find the intel VRM specifications for 8th generation and it should be there.

As you know, each chip is pre-programmed with a default VID for each multiplier, this starts at 800 mhz and goes up to the highest turbo multiplier. So the chip will usually stop scaling there.
If you disable C-states and speedshift and use Throttlestop 8.70, with static voltage and turbo Loadline Calibration, then go from X50 down 1 multplier at a time in the FIVR window, you will see the VID decrease at each multiplier step. However the VID will most likely be much higher than your stable vcore setting at full/maximum load. That's because of the IA AC DC loadline setting.

To see the default VID without it being boosted by IA AC DC, you need to set IA AC DC loadline to 1.

Basically, this setting is designed for adaptive voltages and stock/default settings without manual overclocking. The VID will be boosted up with the default IA AC DC setting based on resistance (1.60 mOhms). this will insure CPU stability at full load, because there is still vdroop coming from the motherboard by design (Intel specifications).

Motherboard based Loadline Calibration is designed for static voltages. That's why on the Asus UEFI Guide, they say to put IA AC DC Loadline to "1", so the default VID is reported accurately instead of something like 150mv over what your static voltage is.

When motherboard based Loadline Calibration is used in combination with Adaptive voltages and IA AC DC Loadline=auto, this can cause unpredictable behavior and excessive voltage overshoot. That's why its not usually recommended to use mainboard based Loadline Calibration with adaptive voltages. Better to just use offsets instead.

The IA AC loadline setting is the actual CPU supply voltage "boost" amount above the default VID. The IA DC loadline setting is what is reported by the CPU as power consumption and VID (vdroop and wattage). If you change IA AC loadline to a high value, let's say, 600, and DC loadline to 1, the cpu supply voltage (with auto/normal voltages) will be boosted by about 300mv at full load, above the default VID setting.

if you set IA AC loadline to 1 and DC loadline to 600, the reported CPU VID will be LOWERED by at least 200mv *BELOW* the actual voltage going into the CPU. So remember that. IA AC loadline is the actual voltage supply. IA DC Loadline is the reported power consumption and VID affected by vdroop reporting).


----------



## Falkentyne

MegatronicRus said:


> Hello. If i use manual (override) voltage vcore, then IA AC DC must be 0 or 1? And cpu internal load line will be set on auto or other setting?


For manual (override) voltage, the IA AC DC loadline setting is not important.
But if you want to see what the CPU's default VID is at each multiplier step (From 800 mhz to highest official 1 core turbo multplier/turbo boost), set it to "1".

I like setting it to 1, so my VID doesn't show up as 1.38v when I'm putting 1.270v into the CPU.


----------



## Luckbad

Stockman said:


> So to be clear, the Ultra has NO whine for you? Great news, if so!
> 
> I also had to return my Master. I worked at home for 10 hours on Tuesday and my head was about to explode after listening to the high pitched whine all day. (My job does not need computational power so CPU was at idle all day - when the VRM whine is loudest)
> 
> I didn't exchange it for a new Master because I'm starting to suspect it might not be an isolated issue. Maybe the Ultra is also an option for me. The VRM uses different components.


I'm loving the Aorus Z390 Ultra after a couple of days. The temperatures are virtually identical to the Master. Stability is outstanding. VRM MOSFETs are staying in the low 40s under full load.

Love the Ultra. The Pro WiFi is also amazing and is slightly better bang for the buck unless you need any of the additional Ultra features.

All that said, I like the Ultra better than the Master because it does all the same things I could want it to and has no coil whine.

Also, to all of us here, let's be patient and assume @GBT-MatthewH will not be able to respond to us until Monday. It's Thanksgiving in the USA and hopefully he has the rest of the week off as well.


----------



## shaolin95

Hello guys, 
I am trying to push for 3500 C15 right now but I seem to be missing which option to change the ratio as currently it is changing the DRAM ratio in a way that I end up with 3200 at boot again.
Any tips of what I need to change?


----------



## Thunder-74

at the end I chose to perform a manual oc with fixed voltage: 5ghz - 1,315v - llc on TURBO and deactivated the energy savings. I have good temperature on all cores. 
crossing my fingers for stability


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Thanks for testing.


Thanks for the explanations.



> Basically, this setting is designed for adaptive voltages and stock/default settings without manual overclocking. The VID will be boosted up with the default IA AC DC setting based on resistance (1.60 mOhms). this will insure CPU stability at full load, because there is still vdroop coming from the motherboard by design (Intel specifications).


When motherboard LLC is set to "Standard" via EasyTune (aka lower than Standard via BIOS) then CPU stability is not insured after vdroop. So something is not working as expected.



> Motherboard based Loadline Calibration is designed for static voltages. That's why on the Asus UEFI Guide, they say to put IA AC DC Loadline to "1", so the default VID is reported accurately instead of something like 150mv over what your static voltage is.


Nevertheless the Aorus Master seems to apply "Low" LLC when Auto/Normal/Standard is set via BIOS. Even more important, this level of LLC is mandatory to keep my CPU stable at stock settings.



> When motherboard based Loadline Calibration is used in combination with Adaptive voltages and IA AC DC Loadline=auto, this can cause unpredictable behavior and excessive voltage overshoot. That's why its not usually recommended to use mainboard based Loadline Calibration with adaptive voltages. Better to just use offsets instead.


Not to mention undershoots and ringing. Nevertheless my CPU is unstable at the lowest possible LLC setting available on the Master (aka "Standard" via EasyTune).


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Thanks for the explanations.
> 
> 
> When motherboard LLC is set to "Standard" via EasyTune (aka lower than Standard via BIOS) then CPU stability is not insured after vdroop. So something is not working as expected.
> 
> 
> Nevertheless the Aorus Master seems to apply "Low" LLC when Auto/Normal/Standard is set via BIOS. Even more important, this level of LLC is mandatory to keep my CPU stable at stock settings.
> 
> 
> Not to mention undershoots and ringing. Nevertheless my CPU is unstable at the lowest possible LLC setting available on the Master (aka "Standard" via EasyTune).


What CPU speed are you testing? What is the CPU VID reported as? What offset are you using?


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> What CPU speed are you testing? What is the CPU VID reported as? What offset are you using?


Like I wrote: Stock settings, aka Optimized defaults with no overclock at all, aka x47 on all cores while P95 is running.

I usually hide VID in HWinfo, but did a quick test. VID is between 1.205 and 1.215 during the first minute of a P95 29.4 Small FFTs run.

Using EasyTune LLC "Low" (aka Standard in BIOS) measures Vcore at sensor #2 at quite steady 1.210 (low 1.199, high 1.232).

Using EasyTune LLC "Standard" (aka no BIOS equivalent available) measure Vcore at sensor #2 at 1.144/1.155. VID hit up to 1.235, but mostly stayed below 1.230. There were some short VID spikes closer to 1.3 when one of P95's threads stopped working due to a calculation error, but not every time.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Like I wrote: Stock settings, aka Optimized defaults with no overclock at all, aka x47 on all cores while P95 is running.
> 
> I usually hide VID in HWinfo, but did a quick test. VID is between 1.205 and 1.215 during the first minute of a P95 29.4 Small FFTs run.
> 
> Using EasyTune LLC "Low" (aka Standard in BIOS) measures Vcore at sensor #2 at quite steady 1.210 (low 1.199, high 1.232).
> 
> Using EasyTune LLC "Standard" (aka no BIOS equivalent available) measure Vcore at sensor #2 at 1.144/1.155. VID hit up to 1.235, but mostly stayed below 1.230. There were some short VID spikes closer to 1.3 when one of P95's threads stopped working due to a calculation error, but not every time.


Do me a favor.

Go into your Bios and set "CPU Internal Loadline Calibration" to Power saving.
Then Set Easytune LLC to low, please.

Then tell me if the vcore/vid is the same as Easytune Standard.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Do me a favor.
> 
> Go into your Bios and set "CPU Internal Loadline Calibration" to Power saving.
> Then Set Easytune LLC to low, please.
> 
> Then tell me if the vcore/vid is the same as Easytune Standard.


Nope, not the same. Running P95 26.6 (non AVX) at 1344K freezes or BSOD within 1 second once I switch from ET Low to ET Standard.

This seems like an expected result. Remember that I already reproduced the difference between Low and Standard after manually setting IR AC/DC LL to 1. So "Power Saving" should behave the same regardless of what value it corresponds to, should it not!?


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Nope, not the same. Running P95 26.6 (non AVX) at 1344K freezes or BSOD within 1 second once I switch from ET Low to ET Standard.
> 
> This seems like an expected result. Remember that I already reproduced the difference between Low and Standard after manually setting IR AC/DC LL to 1. So "Power Saving" should behave the same regardless of what value it corresponds to, should it not!?


No, Power Saving changes the AC DC loadlines to a strange value. It seems like it raises the DC loadline to some value (below default of 160, but above 1), while keeping AC loadline at either 1 or a very low value.
The VID is lower with "Power saving" than even with manual AC=1, DC=1.

I was able to get an even lower VID when I set AC to 1 and DC to 160. But since this "CPU Internal Loadline" setting doesn't show the values its using in IA AC DC loadline, it would take ages to find out what its trying to use.

It's a similar thing with "CPU Current Limit" and "VR Current Limit". They change the exact same thing, but CPU Current Limit is in amps directly, while VR Current Limit is in a divider by 4, in amps, in Core I/A VR settings.


----------



## Timur Born

I meant "behave the same" in regard to how ET LLC Standard still lowers the voltage compared to ET Low/BIOS Standard. It does not seem to matter whether IA AC DC is set to Auto or other values, ET LLC Standard remains lower than BIOS LLC settings and less stable for a stock CPU clock (x47).


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I meant "behave the same" in regard to how ET LLC Standard still lowers the voltage compared to ET Low/BIOS Standard. It does not seem to matter whether IA AC DC is set to Auto or other values, ET LLC Standard remains lower than BIOS LLC settings and less stable for a stock CPU clock (x47).


Well I hope they fix that.
I refuse to use adaptive voltage, as a matter of principle (i'll only use it on a laptop on battery power), but it would have been nice for Gigabyte to explain that "CPU Internal Load Line" is only meant for adaptive (normal) voltages also. At least you can't destroy the processor or mainboard with that setting (unlike the manual IA AC DC loadline), although I'm afraid what the "extreme (was there an Ultra Extreme too?)" setting might set. Turbo seems to be very close to the reference value of 1.60 mOhms, although not exactly the same, but close (Auto for IA AC DC). The auto value for CPU internal Load Line uses the manual IA AC DC loadline numbers instead.

It would have been nice for a little documentation. This setting does not affect manual vcore settings, even though the VID will change drastically.

I got bored once and on my laptop, I set IA AC DC loadline to 640 (6.4 mOhms) and put 1.0v @ 2900 mhz into my 7820HK.
ran prime95.

At full load, the VID was reading 1.41v for a few seconds with the temps very high, then the laptop power tripped from overcurrent protection.
You can imagine what would happen if someone tried using values much higher than that.

Happy thanksgiving, by the way.


----------



## EarlZ

Is it safe/recommended to use a PWM fan splitter on the pump headers on this board. I will be using 2x 140mm highspeed silent wings 3 + 120mm high speed silent wings 3 on the bottom pump header and 2x noctua chromax fans on the other pump header.


----------



## renji1337

Has anyone identified if the Z390 Pro has a LLC problem?

4.8ghz and 1.3v set in bios. monitoring throughout the day i've gone from 1.272v to 1.344v while 1.296v and 1.308v being the most common

I thought it was a c-states problem but I have MCE and all c-states off and it's still happening.


----------



## Falkentyne

renji1337 said:


> Has anyone identified if the Z390 Pro has a LLC problem?
> 
> 4.8ghz and 1.3v set in bios. monitoring throughout the day i've gone from 1.272v to 1.344v while 1.296v and 1.308v being the most common
> 
> I thought it was a c-states problem but I have MCE and all c-states off and it's still happening.


Did you measure the vcore with a multimeter to make sure it was actually spiking?


----------



## magnite

I picked up a 8700k during yesterdays ebay promo and are now looking for a motherboard, I was originally looking at the Asus Z370 Prime-A but noticed that the GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS Elite was only $20 more. How is the elite overall? Skimming through this thread looks like most went with the Master or Pro. Right now I can get the Elite for $200ish while the Pro is going for $260. I am not going to be pushing it too crazy, just a moderate oc for every day use.


----------



## renji1337

Falkentyne said:


> Did you measure the vcore with a multimeter to make sure it was actually spiking?


Don't have a multi-meter unfortunately, just going off what the software is reporting to me.


----------



## Nephalem89

Falkentyne said:


> renji1337 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone identified if the Z390 Pro has a LLC problem?
> 
> 4.8ghz and 1.3v set in bios. monitoring throughout the day i've gone from 1.272v to 1.344v while 1.296v and 1.308v being the most common
> 
> I thought it was a c-states problem but I have MCE and all c-states off and it's still happening.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you measure the vcore with a multimeter to make sure it was actually spiking?
Click to expand...

Where the measuring points are in the z390 aorus master thanks


----------



## Luckbad

Does anyone know where to measure Vcore on the Aorus Z390 non-Master boards (e.g. Ultra, Pro)?

After replacing my Master with an Ultra (Master had coil whine) and my 9700k with a 9900k (Micro Center happened to have a couple in stock so I caved), I'm getting very good temps and Vcore readings in HWiNFO64.

I haven't actually fully pushed my OC or optimized what I've achieved with it thus far, but I'm 100% stable (standard battery of tests and hours of Small FFTs in Prime95) using some pretty conservative offsets at 5GHz.

These settings aren't likely to work for anyone else since every CPU is different, but I'll throw them here in any case.

Quick Specs:
- Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra, F5 BIOS
- CPU: Intel i9-9900k
- RAM: G.SKILL TridentZ 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) | F4-3600C15D-16GTZ

My BIOS settings:
- CPU Frequency: 50x
- Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.): XMP Profile1 | CAS Latency 15 | Timing 15-15-15-35 | Voltage 1.35V
- CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Normal
- CPU Vcore: Normal
- Dynamic Vcore (DVID): -0.040 V
- AVX Offset: Auto
- Uncore Ratio: Auto
- VT-d: Disabled
- Smart Fan 5: My D5 pump is the only thing controlled here. 58% speed until I hit 70 °C, then I push it up to 100%
- Full Screen Logo Show: Disabled, mostly so I can see if the BIOS gets changed to the backup because I'll get the Aorus splash screen

You can see that I've only tried somewhat pedestrian offset-based overclocking settings thus far, as I've only had the chip for a couple of days. That said, I've been really impressed with the performance of the motherboard and processor. I'll work on pushing its limits later on in the week most likely.

My highest readings when torture testing (including AVX-enabled IntelBurnTest and AVX-disabled Prime95):
- CPU cores spike at most to 85 °C for a few moments, but stay 10+ °C lower than that sustained
- VRM Mosfets at 52 °C after hours of Prime95
- Vcore on IT8792E maxes at 1.276 V, but since I'm using dynamic offset voltage and not really using LLC, my Vdroop puts me below 1.2 V almost all the time

Curiously, I've actually found Battlefield 5 between rounds to be the best measure of stability. With my previous 9700k, things would look very stable in synthetic stress tests then I could blue screen or freeze between rounds in BF5 (for some reason, it's way harder on the CPU between rounds than it is during the round, possibly because it's loading the next map).

Anyway, I'm just rambling at this point.

Here, have a couple of beauty shots:


----------



## porksmuggler

Luckbad said:


> Does anyone know where to measure Vcore on the Aorus Z390 non-Master boards (e.g. Ultra, Pro)?


I can't find any decent close-ups, but looks like there might be points above the two memory slots closest to the CPU.

So, what case is that? Looks like a horizontal layout maybe right? I keep all my towers laying down so that all fans are vertical, no vid card sag, better heatpipe function, etc. Though an ATX designed that way would be worth looking at, if that's the case for that case.


----------



## Sajaa

Hello,
Since I upgraded my Bios from F4 to F6, the "EZ Oc" in the easy mode in the bios is not available anymore. I can't change anything, it's write : "Ez Oc not supported here"


Is it normal ?


Thanks a lot !


----------



## porksmuggler

Sajaa said:


> Hello,
> Since I upgraded my Bios from F4 to F6, the "EZ Oc" in the easy mode in the bios is not available anymore. I can't change anything, it's write : "Ez Oc not supported here"
> 
> 
> Is it normal ?
> 
> 
> Thanks a lot !


I haven't tested it, since I'm still on F5, but others have reported the same. So yes, its normal in that regard.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Well I hope they fix that.
> I refuse to use adaptive voltage, as a matter of principle (i'll only use it on a laptop on battery power), but it would have been nice for Gigabyte to explain that "CPU Internal Load Line" is only meant for adaptive (normal) voltages also.


Well, this doesn't seem like an easy "fix".

- Internal LLC Auto + ET Low (BIOS Auto/Standard/Normal) is stable. This is the current default behavior.

- Internal LLC Auto + ET Standard is at least P95 Small FFTs unstable. This should be the "fixed" behavior, but causes stability issues.

- Internal LLC Power-Saving + ET Low is unstable even for normal desktop operation.

- Internal LLC Performance + ET Standard is stable, but Performance not only is more aggressive than Auto, but even the combination with ET Standard is still more aggressive than Auto + ET Low.



> Happy thanksgiving, by the way.


Same to you, but we don't have that here.  The closest things that we got is more of a "harvest day" thanksgiving, which is on a Sunday in October.


----------



## Sajaa

porksmuggler said:


> I haven't tested it, since I'm still on F5, but others have reported the same. So yes, its normal in that regard.


 

Ok thank you !
What setting can I do to have a good steady power with my CPU (8700k) ?
Everything is set to auto, and I don't want to OC, but how can I optimized power setting, like CPU loadline etc. ?
Thank you !


----------



## GTANY

Luckbad said:


> I'm loving the Aorus Z390 Ultra after a couple of days. The temperatures are virtually identical to the Master. Stability is outstanding. VRM MOSFETs are staying in the low 40s under full load.
> 
> Love the Ultra. The Pro WiFi is also amazing and is slightly better bang for the buck unless you need any of the additional Ultra features.
> 
> All that said, I like the Ultra better than the Master because it does all the same things I could want it to and has no coil whine.
> 
> Also, to all of us here, let's be patient and assume @GBT-MatthewH will not be able to respond to us until Monday. It's Thanksgiving in the USA and hopefully he has the rest of the week off as well.


I own the Pro model and I agree with you : 2 80mm fans on VRM heatsinks and the VRM temperature is about 45°C on Real Bench (9900K @ 5000 Mhz, 1.29 V). The bios is easy to use, I was able to obtain a 5 Ghz stable overclock after a 2 hours session. 

Really satisfied with my purchase : I always owned ASUS boards but this Gigabyte changed my mind in relation to this brand.


----------



## Luckbad

porksmuggler said:


> Luckbad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone know where to measure Vcore on the Aorus Z390 non-Master boards (e.g. Ultra, Pro)?
> 
> 
> 
> I can't find any decent close-ups, but looks like there might be points above the two memory slots closest to the CPU.
> 
> So, what case is that? Looks like a horizontal layout maybe right? I keep all my towers laying down so that all fans are vertical, no vid card sag, better heatpipe function, etc. Though an ATX designed that way would be worth looking at, if that's the case for that case.
Click to expand...

Good eye! I might try to measure at those points when I overclock harder.

My case is a Thermaltake Core X9. It is huge but very nice to work with. Coupled with a bunch of Cougar fans, it's both silent and amazing for cooling.

I used big cases back in the 90s and early 2000s but switched to mid towers for about 10 years.

After a year or two with this case, I don't ever want to go back to something small again. It's so much easier to work in this big case.


----------



## Falkentyne

Luckbad said:


> Good eye! I might try to measure at those points when I overclock harder.
> 
> My case is a Thermaltake Core X9. It is huge but very nice to work with. Coupled with a bunch of Cougar fans, it's both silent and amazing for cooling.
> 
> I used big case back in the 90s and early 2000s but Switched to mid towers for about 10 years.
> 
> After a year or two with this case, I don't ever want to go back to something small again. It's so much easier to work in this big case.


I'm with you on big cases.
I have a Corsair 760T and even though the HDD LED/reset button light is no longer working (worst part of the case), ever since Corsair fixed the transparent door glue issue (by adding screws), it's been an awesome case to work with. Very easy to assemble a motherboard and components because there's so much room. And especially with severe back problems and a metal bar in my spine, it gets MUCH much easier to work on a nice roomy case instead of some midtower.

I had the Lian-Li PC-777b case and while I loved how it looked, it was basically a midtower and there was simply not enough room to work with.


----------



## Sajaa

I have an Samsung 860Evo 500Go (last firmware upgraded with magician) that appears / disapears randomly after boot or reboot.

I thought I had a faulty SSD because all others SSD works on the same port : crucial MX200 256Go, Sandisk Ultra Plus 256Go, Samsung (unknown model) 256Go and Crucial MX500 500Go.

I bought a 2nd 860 Evo500 and it exactly behave the same !
@*GBT-MatthewH* did a test but he tryed with 256Go Samsung :
https://i.imgur.com/UMGP1eQ.png


It looks like a power problem : if I swich off my computer (with the PSU button) then it disappears : after 3 - 4 reboot it comes back and disapear the next boot : after a few hours.


Is there a compatibility issue with Samsung *860Evo 500Gb* ??
Does anyone have a 860Evo 500go to test with a Aorus master ?

Thank you.


----------



## Nephalem89

Gigabyte will solve the problem of voltage spikes to CPU... And with that program you can see the most accurate value another question on the board where you look with a tester... My model is the master z390


----------



## Moparman

Nephalem89 said:


> Gigabyte will solve the problem of voltage spikes to CPU... And with that program you can see the most accurate value another question on the board where you look with a tester... My model is the master z390



The Master has voltage read points right above the Ram Slots.


----------



## Nephalem89

Moparman said:


> Nephalem89 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gigabyte will solve the problem of voltage spikes to CPU... And with that program you can see the most accurate value another question on the board where you look with a tester... My model is the master z390
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Master has voltage read points right above the Ram Slots.
Click to expand...

What I don't understand is how gigabyte drags the problems with the VCore from the z370 series


----------



## Moparman

I don't understand the issues or see them that you all are talking about. With my setup using the Master I have 1.370v set in bios and i'm getting 1.38v under load.


----------



## Thunder-74

Moparman said:


> I don't understand the issues or see them that you all are talking about. With my setup using the Master I have 1.370v set in bios and i'm getting 1.38v under load.



I agree, I have 1.30v on bios and I'm getting 1.298v with LLC on "turbo"


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## davidm71

Hi Guys,

On my Aorus Master I keep on getting an unknown usb device port reset error. This motherboard is right out of the barn so not sure whats going on? I think its related to the usb 3.1 port.

Thanks


----------



## renji1337

Thunder-74 said:


> I agree, I have 1.30v on bios and I'm getting 1.298v with LLC on "turbo"
> 
> 
> Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


I have 1.30v on bios and i'm normally 1.296v or 1.308v, sometimes 1.320v but I go down to 1.248v and....1.368v when idle.. 

I attached a photo of HW monitor down below but pretty much HWInfo and CPU-z reports the same stuff.

Maybe my board is faulty?


----------



## Falkentyne

renji1337 said:


> I have 1.30v on bios and i'm normally 1.296v or 1.308v, sometimes 1.320v but I go down to 1.248v and....1.368v when idle..
> 
> I attached a photo of HW monitor down below but pretty much HWInfo and CPU-z reports the same stuff.
> 
> Maybe my board is faulty?


Use HWinfo64.
HWmonitor is garbage.
The sensor HWMonitor detects is sensor #1 in HWinfo64. That sensor tends to be inaccurate and have a lot of fluctuations. If your mainboard has a second sensor, that one is usually much more accurate and very close to multimeter readings.

Software readings of sensors can be very iffy. I think everyone forgot the "stuck" temperature sensors of the Core 2 Quad days...


----------



## renji1337

Falkentyne said:


> Use HWinfo64.
> HWmonitor is garbage.
> The sensor HWMonitor detects is sensor #1 in HWinfo64. That sensor tends to be inaccurate and have a lot of fluctuations. If your mainboard has a second sensor, that one is usually much more accurate and very close to multimeter readings.
> 
> Software readings of sensors can be very iffy. I think everyone forgot the "stuck" temperature sensors of the Core 2 Quad days...



I noticed there is 2 sensors in HWINfo. Which sensor is the one I should look at. Sensor #2 seems way more accurate and I know on the gaming 7 series the IT892E sensor was the one people used for VCORE


----------



## Falkentyne

renji1337 said:


> I noticed there is 2 sensors in HWINfo. Which sensor is the one I should look at. Sensor #2 seems way more accurate and I know on the gaming 7 series the IT892E sensor was the one people used for VCORE


Yes #2


----------



## Nephalem89

Moparman said:


> I don't understand the issues or see them that you all are talking about. With my setup using the Master I have 1.370v set in bios and i'm getting 1.38v under load.


If in my case I mean the vcore in charge with the 8700k with a asrock z370 extrem 4 pony in BIOS 1.345 and load was 1.345 with LLC extrem... With the same gaming 7 processor pony 1.325 and load is 1,36.... with LLC in Turbo... Could it be because I did not look at the correct sensor in HWInfo? The second sensor of the HWInfo is indicated for the CPU? That's what I meant if gigabyte had fixed that problem... Of those fluctuations of vcore thanks to all


----------



## MegatronicRus

Is it possible to lower vcc pll oc to 1.150? If the temperature drops, will there be any problems with the system? And will the temperatures be displayed correctly in the monitoring?


----------



## Falkentyne

MegatronicRus said:


> Is it possible to lower vcc pll oc to 1.150? If the temperature drops, will there be any problems with the system? And will the temperatures be displayed correctly in the monitoring?


Try it and find out. It's your system. No one here knows the answer to that. So try it and report your results.
I posted the 8th gen PDF several times already if you want the defaults.


----------



## davidm71

Anyone have a clue why in device manager one would get 'unknown usb device (port reset failed)'?


----------



## Robbært

davidm71 said:


> Anyone have a clue why in device manager one would get 'unknown usb device (port reset failed)'?


looking at solutions for your error
link, ignore their "method 4"
it can be you still have enabled win10 fast startup, disable it.


----------



## davidm71

*Gigabyte Auros Master Z390 - USB DEVICE NOT RECOGNIZED??!!!*



Robbært said:


> looking at solutions for your error
> link, ignore their "method 4"
> it can be you still have enabled win10 fast startup, disable it.


Hi,

Thanks but I tried all that and it didn't work. Here is a visual off the error and if anyone can go into hardware info and see what that port looks like on their Auros Mater Z390 I would appreciate it.

Thank you.


----------



## Sajaa

Did anyone already connect a Samsung 860Evo 500go on Aorus Master ?
Did it work ?


----------



## Cueballz

Sajaa said:


> Did anyone already connect a Samsung 860Evo 500go on Aorus Master ?
> Did it work ?



Yes, i have a 860 EVO 500GB as my boot drive, no problems at all.
(Bios F6)


----------



## Luckbad

Does anyone know how to make it so my CPU actually throttles down to below the 5GHz set point? Aorus Z390 Ultra w/ i9-9900k.

In both my Offset and Manual Voltage profiles, my clock never goes down below the 5GHz setting. I've tried disabling Multi-Core Enhancement and that doesn't seem to do the trick. I left all of the C-States and such enabled as well.

I'm trying to get cooler idle/low use temps just to satisfy my desire for lower temps really. Idle temps seem to hover in the mid 30s °C or so most of the time for all cores (with one usually popping up over 40). 

My cooling solution is adequate for lower temps, I believe. It's a full loop with a Hardware Labs Black Ice SR2 420 MP Radiator. My GPU (1080 Ti) sits at ~27 °C at idle.

My CPU block is an Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos NEXT with VISION. The liquid temp during low use (web browsing) is 29-30 °C and I use Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut.

Full load temps are actually not bad at all. 60s when playing Battlefield 5 for long periods.

Anyway, I'm assuming that if I can get the speed to throttle when I'm not taxing the system, I can get temperatures down when not gaming or doing something intensive.


----------



## Sajaa

Cueballz said:


> Yes, i have a 860 EVO 500GB as my boot drive, no problems at all.
> (Bios F6)


Ok thank you ! My 860 is not a boot drive, it's just for "storage" but it keeps disappearing all the time. And 2 different 860 Evo 500Go...
No problem with another ssd like my crucial mx500 500go.
Very strange.


----------



## b4db0y

Hey guys, I have a weird issue with my Aorus Pro Wifi motherboard. So whenever I restart or turn the computer on, some of my fans just stop spinning. For example, as I turn on the PC, all fans spin up but once the motherboard lights turn on some of my fans stop spinning. The weird thing is it happens with different fans on different fan headers so it's not really something I can pin point and the fact that all fans spin up on boot tells me that this probably a software issue. Occasionally, all the fans spin and it functions like normal but I would say 75% of the time some fans are not spinning at all. Anyone else have this problem? 

Specs:

Aorus Pro Wifi
9900k
G.Skill TridentZ RGB 32 GB RAM
2080 Ti
NZXT Hale90 750 W power supply
6x noctua NF A12x25 fans
Custom loop


----------



## Falkentyne

Luckbad said:


> Does anyone know how to make it so my CPU actually throttles down to below the 5GHz set point? Aorus Z390 Ultra w/ i9-9900k.
> 
> In both my Offset and Manual Voltage profiles, my clock never goes down below the 5GHz setting. I've tried disabling Multi-Core Enhancement and that doesn't seem to do the trick. I left all of the C-States and such enabled as well.
> 
> I'm trying to get cooler idle/low use temps just to satisfy my desire for lower temps really. Idle temps seem to hover in the mid 30s °C or so most of the time for all cores (with one usually popping up over 40).
> 
> My cooling solution is adequate for lower temps, I believe. It's a full loop with a Hardware Labs Black Ice SR2 420 MP Radiator. My GPU (1080 Ti) sits at ~27 °C at idle.
> 
> My CPU block is an Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos NEXT with VISION. The liquid temp during low use (web browsing) is 29-30 °C and I use Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut.
> 
> Full load temps are actually not bad at all. 60s when playing Battlefield 5 for long periods.
> 
> Anyway, I'm assuming that if I can get the speed to throttle when I'm not taxing the system, I can get temperatures down when not gaming or doing something intensive.


Enable all c-states.
then download Throttlestop 8.70 and enable speed shift in TS, in the TPL window, range from 8 to your maximum overclock. and click "enable speedshift when TS starts."
Then your CPU will downclock fine. 

VID will drop but real vcore (check sensor#2) will not drop if c-states are disabled.

In the main Throttlestop window it should now say SST in green. A value will be next to it you can change.
A value of 0 means no downclocking. 128 means medium downclocking (it will go to full speed on medium and heavy loads) and 255 means maximum downclocking (will only go to full speed in something like prime95).

Profit.


----------



## Timur Born

C3 often is sufficient for downclocking during idle, it's also necessary if you do not want to (over)clock all cores to the same frequency. Anything more than that decreases power-consumption just slightly and increases latency until a core wakes up again.

The High Performance profile does not downclock, but it does not make much of a difference, because C-states save more power than P-states.


----------



## pm1109

Can I plug 3 pin fans into z390 master motherboard and control the fan speed?
Either through the BIOS or through Windows?


----------



## GTANY

On the Z390 Aorus Pro model bios F6, when I enter 1.21 V for VCC PLL OC, I see 1.25 V : it seems a bug.


----------



## Falkentyne

GTANY said:


> On the Z390 Aorus Pro model bios F6, when I enter 1.21 V for VCC PLL OC, I see 1.25 V : it seems a bug.


I don't think it's a bug. Press enter and check the values. They may be in 5mv steps.
Vcore is in 5mv steps. For example you can enter 1.270v or 1.275v but not 1.272v.

Pretty logical since if you're trying to find stability, you don't want to be testing 1mv steps anyway.


----------



## msawwan2

Smart fan 5 on aorus master z390

I read somewhere that it is impossible to setup the program using temp from graphic card

somehow on one of my fans i noticed it give me the option to select VGA which is my rtx 2080 temperature. 
ok thats great. (fan on sys 4)

the other 4 fans, does not even show that the sensor is there. (cpu opt, sys 1, sys 2, sys 3) it only let me chose my sensor to be what ever is on the motherboard.

apparently in the program settings ID 2 is cpu temp, ID 1 is pch temp etc. ID 32 is VGA temp
i tried to manually edit the profile and made ID32 responsible for sys1 fan but no luck.

would upgrading my bios fix this issue?

currently on f4. i hate to upgrade if its not broken


Edit:

















Edit 2:








this image shows sys fan 4 in a seperate tab. is that related to sys 4 detecting VGA temp while the others not detecting it?
how can i fix this?


----------



## EarlZ

Hi,

I cant seem to find this information on the manual but what is the max fan Amperage that the standard fan headers support, I am guessing its 1A? How about for the CPU/PUMP fan headers?


----------



## Jonny321321

Mmm, suffering from frame time spiking in Black Ops 4 (and pretty sure other games too but to a lesser extent) - Z390 AORUS PRO. Every 30/40 seconds getting a 50-60 ms frame time spike (according to afterburner). Reverted GPU bios back to stock, tried different drivers, tried different Windows 10 versions, tried the backup BIOS's F5 bios (as opposed to F7a), everything has been reverted to optimized defaults. Tried RAM in different DIMM slots. One possibility is if it's the mere presence of my SAMSUNG SM951 NVMe drive (even if it's not the boot drive or drive where game is located). Tried different AHCI & NVME drivers. Flush buffer off. All Intel LAN driver options off. All drivers installed, different audio drivers tried. I suppose can try different USB ports + different header. Will try using Intel RST and maybe reflashing BIOS choosing the 'Intact' (non-Intel-ME-neutered option) though I would have thought F5 comes with Intel ME intact.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jonny321321 said:


> Mmm, suffering from frame time spiking in Black Ops 4 (and pretty sure other games too but to a lesser extent) - Z390 AORUS PRO. Every 30/40 seconds getting a 50-60 ms frame time spike (according to afterburner). Reverted GPU bios back to stock, tried different drivers, tried different Windows 10 versions, tried the backup BIOS's F5 bios (as opposed to F7a), everything has been reverted to optimized defaults. Tried RAM in different DIMM slots. One possibility is if it's the mere presence of my SAMSUNG SM951 NVMe drive (even if it's not the boot drive or drive where game is located). Tried different AHCI & NVME drivers. Flush buffer off. All Intel LAN driver options off. All drivers installed, different audio drivers tried. I suppose can try different USB ports + different header. Will try using Intel RST and maybe reflashing BIOS choosing the 'Intact' (non-Intel-ME-neutered option) though I would have thought F5 comes with Intel ME intact.


Disable all C-states and try it again to see if it's fixed.


----------



## Jonny321321

Falkentyne said:


> Disable all C-states and try it again to see if it's fixed.


I have done unfortunately. Before I reverted to optimized defaults everything was disabled in BIOS (all C-states, C1E, speed shift & all power saving options disabled), high performance power plan in Windows. I do expect it to be the M.2 drive causing the issues. However, as a last resort I'll try updating to 1803 (I've currently tried 1511, 1607 & 1703) to see if it's an issue of compatibility between older Windows and newer Z390 chipset).


----------



## Falkentyne

Jonny321321 said:


> I have done unfortunately. Before I reverted to optimized defaults everything was disabled in BIOS (all C-states, C1E, speed shift & all power saving options disabled), high performance power plan in Windows. I do expect it to be the M.2 drive causing the issues. However, as a last resort I'll try updating to 1803 (I've currently tried 1511, 1607 & 1703) to see if it's an issue of compatibility between older Windows and newer Z390 chipset).


I see.
I haven't had any stuttering with my Aorus Master, but I had to set FlipQueueSize to 3 (the original old defaults) in the registry in the UMD field section for the AMD drivers section for my Vega 64


----------



## Moparman

pm1109 said:


> Can I plug 3 pin fans into z390 master motherboard and control the fan speed?
> Either through the BIOS or through Windows?



Yes you should have no issues.


----------



## Robbært

EarlZ said:


> I cant seem to find this information on the manual but what is the max fan Amperage that the standard fan headers support, I am guessing its 1A? How about for the CPU/PUMP fan headers?


It's on WEB product page 


> Supports High Current Fans up to 24W(2Ax12V) with Over-Current Protection


all "z390 aorus *" fan connectors is like that.
not all fans can be controlled with GPU temperature tho.


----------



## desastrux

Hey everyone, I will be getting the AORUS PRO WIFI board for Christmas and am just trying to have everything in place to be able to set it up smoothly with my current case. I have the Cooler Master HAF X, which has a USB 3.0 front header connection, but this board has a USB C front header connection. I found this cable on Amazon https://www.amazon.com/Goliton-Front-Header-Extension-Motherboard/dp/B078Y2JNXN, which would allow me to connect my USB ports to it. Obviously I would lose the USB C port capability, but I can use the one in the rear panel for that. My question is has anyone used a cable like this, or have any recommendations of ones that have been used and work? Thanks in advance!

Edit: Disregard all of that, as clearly I am blind and completely missed the USB 3.0 header that is on the board.


----------



## EarlZ

Robbært said:


> It's on WEB product page
> 
> all "z390 aorus *" fan connectors is like that.
> not all fans can be controlled with GPU temperature tho.


Thanks for that information, so theres really nothing special aside from marketing a PUMP header on the board?


----------



## DirtyScrubz

I just grabbed the Master off NewEgg because they had a pretty nice rebate on it plus $20 MIR. Ended up returning my ASUS Z390-E because the VRMs were getting toasty at 5 GHz so I figured I'd give Gigabyte a shot despite the horrendous bios. This is my first Gigabyte board ever, are there any good guides out there for overclocking this with a 9900K? Also, is anyone using an EK Velocity CPU block with this and are you hitting anything on the back like the XSPC backplate? Oh yeah, one last question, is anyone using this thing with a Thermaltake P3? I'm building a WC setup around that case + this board so I'm hoping it all comes together well.


----------



## DirtyScrubz

Jonny321321 said:


> Mmm, suffering from frame time spiking in Black Ops 4 (and pretty sure other games too but to a lesser extent) - Z390 AORUS PRO. Every 30/40 seconds getting a 50-60 ms frame time spike (according to afterburner). Reverted GPU bios back to stock, tried different drivers, tried different Windows 10 versions, tried the backup BIOS's F5 bios (as opposed to F7a), everything has been reverted to optimized defaults. Tried RAM in different DIMM slots. One possibility is if it's the mere presence of my SAMSUNG SM951 NVMe drive (even if it's not the boot drive or drive where game is located). Tried different AHCI & NVME drivers. Flush buffer off. All Intel LAN driver options off. All drivers installed, different audio drivers tried. I suppose can try different USB ports + different header. Will try using Intel RST and maybe reflashing BIOS choosing the 'Intact' (non-Intel-ME-neutered option) though I would have thought F5 comes with Intel ME intact.


Turn off any Corsair iCUE software if you have it installed and power monitoring in programs like Afterburner (this was a known problem that NVIDIA acknowledged but I'm not sure if they ever fixed it).


----------



## Stockman

Picked up the Aorus Ultra yesterday after returning the Master last week.

I noticed the Ultra is missing quite a few settings under Power Settings in BIOS F5. How important are the missing settings?

There's only two options in Ultra:
CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration

Master options:
CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration
VAXG Loadline Calibration (MISSING FROM ULTRA)
CPU Vcore/VAXG Protection (MISSING FROM ULTRA)
CPU Vcore Current Protection (MISSING FROM ULTRA)
VAXG Current Protection (MISSING FROM ULTRA)
CPU Vcore PWM Switch Rate (MISSING FROM ULTRA)
VAXG PWN Switch Rate (MISSING FROM ULTRA)
PWM Phase Control (MISSING FROM ULTRA)
VAXG Phase Control (MISSING FROM ULTRA)

Can someone please offer an opinion on how important the missing settings are? The one that comes to my mind is PWM Switch Rate...the others I can promise you I'm less familiar with.
It doesn't make sense why Gigabyte would leave these out on the Ultra, given the VRM quality on that board.

Thanks!


----------



## Jonny321321

DirtyScrubz said:


> Turn off any Corsair iCUE software if you have it installed and power monitoring in programs like Afterburner (this was a known problem that NVIDIA acknowledged but I'm not sure if they ever fixed it).


I don't use anything but MSI AB. Voltage monitoring disabled but equally I had to specifically enable frame time monitoring. It's not my NVMe drive causing the issue, so perhaps it's my other SSD (840 evo). Or can try a different PCIE slot or different GPU (currently using a GTX 970). After that, latest version of windows or PC goes out window.


----------



## Vesimas

Hello everyone, subbing and joining the club since i'm waiting for my shipment  I had only Asus board till now, this is the first time i buy a Gigabyte and i have a couple of question 

Arous Master + 9900K
4x8GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3000 CL15
970 EVO 250GB O.S.
970 EVO 500GB Games
EVGA GTX 1070 FTW (Waiting to see what AMD will launch)
EVGA G3 1000

I read in which slot is better put the M.2 NVMe drive but they will both run at x4 speed?
Not planning any OC at the moment so first time in bios is good enough to just set the XMP profile?
Since at the start i was opting for a 2600X i bought a Cryorig R1 Universal waiting to do a custom loop. Would be enough to cooling a stock 9900K or better return it and buy an AIO waiting for the custom loop or just downclock the cpu?

Thank You


----------



## Stockman

Jonny321321 said:


> I don't use anything but MSI AB. Voltage monitoring disabled but equally I had to specifically enable frame time monitoring. It's not my NVMe drive causing the issue, so perhaps it's my other SSD (840 evo). Or can try a different PCIE slot or different GPU (currently using a GTX 970). After that, latest version of windows or PC goes out window.


Sorry to hear about this. I hate hearing reports of "hitching", "microstutter", etc. because they often are difficult to diagnose past the standard advice that you've already tried: disable c-states, EIST, speedshift, enable High Performance mode in windows, etc

The other frustrating thing is a lot depends on the specific game engine (and other things that I can't explain). For example, I've spend tens of hours trying to get rid of microstutter in Far Cry 5 and AC: Origins to no avail. They are both CPU intensive games, so upgrading from a 3770k to 9700k has helped with FPS immensely, but the occasional microstutter remains. But then there's times where both games run butter smooth and I can't figure out what's changed.

Have you tried running a synthetic benchmark like Timespy that is well optimized? If you're seeing frametime issues in Timespy then you know you have a real problem, versus something that could be more engine-specific.

Sorry I don't have any real solutions for you.


----------



## Jidonsu

What's the current consensus on overclocking via this method here? https://www.overclock.net/forum/27719124-post383.html 

I'm used to manual overclocking, so this is new to me. 

I did it exactly as posted with DVID at -.110V with a 9700K and Aorus Master. I'm running at 5ghz at 1.188V on vcore according to IT8792E through HWINFO. That voltage seems low, no? It seems stable so far in gaming, Cinebench, and Prime95 with AVX turned off. I need to run Prime or AIDA for longer, of course.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jonny321321 said:


> I don't use anything but MSI AB. Voltage monitoring disabled but equally I had to specifically enable frame time monitoring. It's not my NVMe drive causing the issue, so perhaps it's my other SSD (840 evo). Or can try a different PCIE slot or different GPU (currently using a GTX 970). After that, latest version of windows or PC goes out window.


Jonny,
please disable (don't run it) MSI Afterburner, use no monitoring tools (no HWinfo64, nothing) and then report back to me and tell me if the hitching is gone, please.


----------



## Jonny321321

Hmm, I'm actually wondering if my board's faulty. VGA_LED is on/red until after POST, and it doesn't appear to work over HDMI/DVI-D, only DisplayPort, tried 3 different GPUs. Seems irrespective of PCIE lane though so I dunno.

EDIT: Okay, I shan't run afterburner. Though I was rather hoping to place my faith in the tool, since frametime appears to be quite an important statistic and potentially is useful beyond what one can discern (without another machine to A/B test).


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

msawwan2 said:


> Smart fan 5 on aorus master z390
> 
> I read somewhere that it is impossible to setup the program using temp from graphic card
> 
> somehow on one of my fans i noticed it give me the option to select VGA which is my rtx 2080 temperature.
> ok thats great. (fan on sys 4)
> 
> the other 4 fans, does not even show that the sensor is there. (cpu opt, sys 1, sys 2, sys 3) it only let me chose my sensor to be what ever is on the motherboard.


There are 2 Super IO chips on the board to control fans. The second (8792) is linked to the GPU temp. So you have to also use fans connected to that chip to monitor the GPU temp.



EarlZ said:


> Hi,
> 
> I cant seem to find this information on the manual but what is the max fan Amperage that the standard fan headers support, I am guessing its 1A? How about for the CPU/PUMP fan headers?


Normal headers are 1A, Fan/pump headers are 2A.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jonny321321 said:


> Hmm, I'm actually wondering if my board's faulty. VGA_LED is on/red until after POST, and it doesn't appear to work over HDMI/DVI-D, only DisplayPort, tried 3 different GPUs. Seems irrespective of PCIE lane though so I dunno.
> 
> EDIT: Okay, I shan't run afterburner. Though I was rather hoping to place my faith in the tool, since frametime appears to be quite an important statistic and potentially is useful beyond what one can discern (without another machine to A/B test).


Jonny, relax. There was a bug with Nvidia drivers causing stuttering on many systems when any GPU monitoring tool was installed, whenever the board hit its power limit and downclocked. This was discussed massively and raged about on Nvidia forums for ages earlier this year. I encountered this on my MSI laptop. I was able to bypass it by enabling full performance mode in the NVCP instead of adaptive power, which kept the card at full clocks all the time, then when it downclocked from power limit, it didn't stutter. i haven't seen this bug happen recently so I went back to adaptive.

I'm just trying to see if you're encountering an Ngreedia problem with their Firestarter Space Invaders cards (grin) or an actual Bios bug.

I'm using an AMD Vega on my Aorus Master so I can't test for something like this now.


----------



## Phantomas 007

Just bought a Z390 Ultra. Where I can find the latest drivers ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Phantomas 007 said:


> Just bought a Z390 Ultra. Where I can find the latest drivers ?


Gigabyte's page.
The drivers on the CD are current enough. If it's an Intel 9560/Intel bluetooth, there are more current drivers here:

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/28275?v=t
not sure where the bluetooth ones are.

All that is essential are the Intel ME drivers and the chipset drivers and realtek.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Timur Born said:


> The moment I press Enter on the "VR IA AC DC Loadine" setting in F7 BIOS the PC freezes.


Same here, I'll report it and let you know when we have a fix.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Same here, I'll report it and let you know when we have a fix.


Matthew,
This happens because there are 6249 different values. 6250 if you count "zero" for Auto.
The only bios option that has more possible values is "IMON OFFSET", which can range from 0 to 63999, and POSSIBLY a RAM timing called tREFI, which ranges from 0 to 65535.

Can you check those settings and see if it also freezes ?

A simple fix would be to 'disable" the pull down menu on any bios option that has more than 1024 possible options. Example: VR Current Limit in Core I/A settings goes from 0 to 1023 (which is the same thing as "CPU Current LimiT" that Gigabyte allows you to put directly in Amps, except this is divided by 4).

BTW people: heads up:

"CPU Internal AC DC Load Line" is a "preset" option for IA AC DC Loadline, using some sort of fixed values. I do NOT know what values it uses, but both settings should NOT be active at once!! I *CAN* tell you that the power saving option sets AC Loadline to 1 or close to 1 while keeping DC loadline at a higher value. (DC loadline is how much "Vdroop" is on the CPU VID, and AC loadline is how much vid "BOOST" there is).


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Gigabyte's page.
> The drivers on the CD are current enough. If it's an Intel 9560/Intel bluetooth, there are more current drivers here:
> 
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/28275?v=t
> not sure where the bluetooth ones are.
> 
> All that is essential are the Intel ME drivers and the chipset drivers and realtek.


Is there a negative impact if I dont install the ME drivers?


----------



## Peteypabs72

I’m using F6 Bios. I was told that you could access rgb Fusion from the bios under peripherals. I have the option to turn rgb off, any way I can change colour? 

Rgb Fusion and siv software kept causing issues so I uninstalled them


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Is there a negative impact if I dont install the ME drivers?


The Gigabyte CD said those drivers are mandatory.

Without the chipset AND without the ME drivers installed, the CPU will downclock to 800 mhz when idle, whenever you click a mouse button. I am not kidding.
I don't know which one fixed that but I installed them both....


----------



## shaolin95

Vesimas said:


> Hello everyone, subbing and joining the club since i'm waiting for my shipment  I had only Asus board till now, this is the first time i buy a Gigabyte and i have a couple of question
> 
> Arous Master + 9900K
> 4x8GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3000 CL15
> 970 EVO 250GB O.S.
> 970 EVO 500GB Games
> EVGA GTX 1070 FTW (Waiting to see what AMD will launch)
> EVGA G3 1000
> 
> I read in which slot is better put the M.2 NVMe drive but they will both run at x4 speed?
> Not planning any OC at the moment so first time in bios is good enough to just set the XMP profile?
> Since at the start i was opting for a 2600X i bought a Cryorig R1 Universal waiting to do a custom loop. Would be enough to cooling a stock 9900K or better return it and buy an AIO waiting for the custom loop or just downclock the cpu?
> 
> Thank You


I use the bottom M.2 port as to not lose any of the Sata Ports. I think on the bottom one you will only share lines if you use the 4x pcie slot, otherwise, no sharing.


----------



## Timur Born

davidm71 said:


> Anyone have a clue why in device manager one would get 'unknown usb device (port reset failed)'?


What did you connect to that port? Mine if free.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> The Gigabyte CD said those drivers are mandatory.
> 
> Without the chipset AND without the ME drivers installed, the CPU will downclock to 800 mhz when idle, whenever you click a mouse button. I am not kidding.
> I don't know which one fixed that but I installed them both....


Thanks, It always been a challenge for me in navigating intels website to grab the latest chipset drivers and I tried again today along with looking for the management engine and I end up with a 2017 driver version. Is there another site that also hosts or points to the latest download with ease of navigation ? I am bout to build my system this weekend once the processor arrives.


----------



## OutlawII

Why would you go to the Intel site? Get your driver's from gigabytes site they should be on there


----------



## EarlZ

OutlawII said:


> Why would you go to the Intel site? Get your driver's from gigabytes site they should be on there


Because in the past Gigabyte has stopped updating their chipset driver links and intel had a more recent version.


----------



## Jonny321321

Falkentyne said:


> Jonny, relax. There was a bug with Nvidia drivers causing stuttering on many systems when any GPU monitoring tool was installed, whenever the board hit its power limit and downclocked. This was discussed massively and raged about on Nvidia forums for ages earlier this year. I encountered this on my MSI laptop. I was able to bypass it by enabling full performance mode in the NVCP instead of adaptive power, which kept the card at full clocks all the time, then when it downclocked from power limit, it didn't stutter. i haven't seen this bug happen recently so I went back to adaptive.
> 
> I'm just trying to see if you're encountering an Ngreedia problem with their Firestarter Space Invaders cards (grin) or an actual Bios bug.
> 
> I'm using an AMD Vega on my Aorus Master so I can't test for something like this now.


*deep breath in, deep breath out*

Indeedy but alas I don't think that's the issue. Previously before reverting to stock I was using a modified BIOS with the power limits increased as much as possible. Also I am/was using 'Prefer maximum performance' in the NVIDIA settings. Currently installing W10 1803 to see if it's some sort of incompatibility issue.

Some time later...

Welp, no joy with 1803 or with reflashing BIOS as 'Intact' (retaining Intel ME components) or using Intel RST. Next and last challenge would be to pop my 770 in to see if that solves it. And true I do need to ensure that the issue occurs when AB is disabled, but 


Some more time later...
No, experiencing same issue with GTX 770 as well, though HDMI and DVI-D is working correctly. 
I've tried a different PSU, I've tried using 1 RAM stick in different slots. Unplugged all fans. Is there some hidden reason why I should be getting a 60-70ms frame time spike in BO4 every 30 seconds? I appear to be experiencing similar frame time issues in other games too (though to a lesser degree). Anyone else experiencing same or is an RMA in order?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jonny321321 said:


> *deep breath in, deep breath out*
> 
> Indeedy but alas I don't think that's the issue. Previously before reverting to stock I was using a modified BIOS with the power limits increased as much as possible. Also I am/was using 'Prefer maximum performance' in the NVIDIA settings. Currently installing W10 1803 to see if it's some sort of incompatibility issue.
> 
> Some time later...
> 
> Welp, no joy with 1803 or with reflashing BIOS as 'Intact' (retaining Intel ME components) or using Intel RST. Next and last challenge would be to pop my 770 in to see if that solves it. And true I do need to ensure that the issue occurs when AB is disabled, but
> 
> 
> Some more time later...
> No, experiencing same issue with GTX 770 as well, though HDMI and DVI-D is working correctly.
> I've tried a different PSU, I've tried using 1 RAM stick in different slots. Unplugged all fans. Is there some hidden reason why I should be getting a 60-70ms frame time spike in BO4 every 30 seconds? I appear to be experiencing similar frame time issues in other games too (though to a lesser degree). Anyone else experiencing same or is an RMA in order?


What CPU?


----------



## Jonny321321

Falkentyne said:


> What CPU?


i5 9600k (@ 5.1, though reverting to stock didn't solve the frame time issues), no HT (it doesn't have it)

Also tried the last PCIE slot, disabled the audio controller, tried removing mouse and keyboard.


Only constant other than mobo and CPU is the high quality powerline adapter I'm using. I could try mobile internet.


----------



## Falkentyne

@GBT-MatthewH
Can you ask your engineers if they can add "CPU SVID SUPPORT" enabled/disabled option to the Bios?

Asus boards have this option. CPU SVID support allows the CPU to communicate with the voltage regulator.
Enabling this option allows Throttlestop to see the voltages on Asus boards.

This is required for Throttlestop 8.70 to see the FIVR and allow voltage control in windows (CPU core, static/adaptive/offsets), GT cores, System Agent, etc.

This option seems to not be enabled at all on GB boards, preventing any voltage control being used in Throttlestop (it says everything is set to Adaptive, regardless of what you're using).

If CPU SVID support is actually enabled by default, why can't Throttlestop see the voltages?

@unclewebb ?

My PM from unclewebb:


> Some desktop motherboards ignore the FIVR voltage stuff that ThrottleStop and Intel XTU lets you adjust. My Asus Z170 desktop motherboard has an option in the bios to control this feature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Gigabyte motherboard might not have an option to enable SVID support. That means ThrottleStop or Intel XTU FIVR adjustments will not do anything. FIVR set to Adaptive or Static voltage does not matter because the CPU is ignoring that setting.
> 
> I have no idea if SVID Support can be unlocked with a modified bios. Maybe.



Here is what Throttlestop sees in my MSI Throttlebook. (first attachment)

Here is what Throttlestop sees in BGA Killer 9900K.


----------



## Phantomas 007

It's possible a SSD with windows 10 installation from a Z170 system (ASUS Hero) if connect to the Z390 Ultra to boot or I will have a blue screen ?


----------



## Jidonsu

Phantomas 007 said:


> It's possible a SSD with windows 10 installation from a Z170 system (ASUS Hero) if connect to the Z390 Ultra to boot or I will have a blue screen ?


I did the same thing from a Z97 board. It'll boot and windows 10 will usually sort it out. Mine did. I did have to retype in my old Windows 7 key for it to reactivate though since my Windows 10 was upgraded from 7.


----------



## SaLaDiN666

Can anyone help me, I bought the master version with 9900k and honestly, I do not know what to think about this mobo. Either it is a buggy piece of something or I am an idiot.


I own x299 Taichi XE and overclocking there is pretty easy, you set the multiplier, the load line calibration to 1 or 2, input voltage, vcore voltage and ez, you are done, voltage entering into the cpu is pretty stable, you get what you did submit.


But here?


There is something like CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line, I do not know what that does, google gives conflicting reports. Then CPU Vcore Load Line calibration, that is straightforward. Been playing with the Vcore LLC and it just makes my pc unstable, it just restarts withing a few minutes when set to turbo or extreme.


Also, there are 3 different sensors in HWINFO64 showing 3 different values of Vcore, for example I set my vcore to 1.35, one sensor is showing over 1.42, the second 1.32 and the last one 1.25 during the load. What am I supposed to choose from. It is absolutely pointless to stress test anything now and if it overshoots so much it could even damage my cpu. Thanks for any help.


----------



## Hercules99

@falkentyne or anyone who sees this I used this vid of tweak town and it worked but I keep getting different bsod's all related to windows dirvers such as IRQL_NOT_OR_Less_EQUAL or System_service_exception but all my driver's are up to date. I did import my old hdd to my new build.


----------



## Phantomas 007

Jidonsu said:


> I did the same thing from a Z97 board. It'll boot and windows 10 will usually sort it out. Mine did. I did have to retype in my old Windows 7 key for it to reactivate though since my Windows 10 was upgraded from 7.


ok. Thanks you.


----------



## Falkentyne

SaLaDiN666 said:


> Can anyone help me, I bought the master version with 9900k and honestly, I do not know what to think about this mobo. Either it is a buggy piece of something or I am an idiot.
> 
> 
> I own x299 Taichi XE and overclocking there is pretty easy, you set the multiplier, the load line calibration to 1 or 2, input voltage, vcore voltage and ez, you are done, voltage entering into the cpu is pretty stable, you get what you did submit.
> 
> 
> But here?
> 
> 
> There is something like CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line, I do not know what that does, google gives conflicting reports. Then CPU Vcore Load Line calibration, that is straightforward. Been playing with the Vcore LLC and it just makes my pc unstable, it just restarts withing a few minutes when set to turbo or extreme.
> 
> 
> Also, there are 3 different sensors in HWINFO64 showing 3 different values of Vcore, for example I set my vcore to 1.35, one sensor is showing over 1.42, the second 1.32 and the last one 1.25 during the load. What am I supposed to choose from. It is absolutely pointless to stress test anything now and if it overshoots so much it could even damage my cpu. Thanks for any help.


Hi,
The Aorus Master does *NOT* have three vcore sensors. It only has two. The ITE IT8688E is the more 'traditional' sensor and tends to be quite inaccurate for vcore.
The ITE IT8792E is far more accurate and extremely close to a digital multimeter reading. The "1.25" is probably something you are misreading, like VCCSA or VCCIO.

Do not touch CPU Internal Load Line.
I explained in a previous post what it does.

It's a gigabyte "preset" profile for the VR Core I/A AC DC Loadline settings with several presets, with absolutely no documentation. It affects the CPU VID, by controlling how much "Intel designed loadline calibration boost" gets applied to the CPU VID, which the vcore gets set by, when using "Normal" (adaptive) voltages. Override (manual) voltages will ignore the CPU VID.

Do not confuse this with Loadline Calibration (LLC). LLC affects the cpu vcore directly. The "Internal CPU loadlines, aka IA AC DC loadlines, affect the CPU VID).
What's the difference? 

The CPU VID is used by adaptive voltages, aka auto voltages, so Intel designed voltage boost will be done for you based on load/current, to help automatically mitigate vdroop, and the vcore is then set by the CPU VID value.
The onboard (LLC) Loadline calibration setting affects the CPU Vcore afterwards. Therefore it tends to be good practice NOT to use LLC when using adaptive voltages (use DVID offsets instead if you need more voltage).

The default values (1.60 mOhms) For IA AC DC Loadline are designed to be used with Intel Turbo boost, up to 4.7 ghz, where the VID will scale at each CPU multiplier step upwards (each chip has a different VID table; usually the lower the default VID, the higher the CPU will overclock), and the reference IA AC DC setting is designed to keep the CPU stable at automatic voltages without the user having to change anything, from 800 mhz to 4.7 ghz (9900k) on all 8 cores, and 4600 mhz on all 8 cores (9700K), with adaptive voltages.

(@GBT-MatthewH its probably best to ask the engineers to explain this setting, or at least mention in the help that affects CPU VID directly. I'm basically the only person here who even knows how IA AC DC Loadline even works, and that's only from my "ahem" hacking MSI laptop bioses).

Consider it a "front end" for IA AC DC Loadline, the same way the option "CPU Current Limit (Amps)" is front end for the IA VR setting "VR Current Limit", which has a /4 divider (example: a value of 1023 equals 255 amps).

If you wanted to use VR Current Limit instead of CPU Current Limit, then CPU Current Limit must be set to auto, then VR current Limit will be used instead. I do NOT know which value takes priority if both are activated.

As far as the Internal CPU Load Line setting, I did only one quick test with it.

It "seems" like the "Turbo" setting is VERY close (not identical, but close) to the intel reference value of 1.60 mOhms, but it's not exactly the same. The reference value for IA AC loadline and IA DC loadline is 160, if the lowest value is 1 for 0.01 mOhms (in Asus bioses where it ranges from an entered value of 0.01 to 62.49, that's a value of 16).

The "Power saving" setting "seems" to put IA AC loadline at or close to 1, while keeping DC loadline at a higher value (not sure if reference value or not). It's really hard to test since the IA AC DC settings aren't automatically changed for you when you change the "CPU Internal" setting. It would be much more helpful if it did change them for you so you could see what it's doing.

The "Auto" value doesn't set a preset and just uses the IA AC DC manually entered value in internal VR control. A value of 0 (Auto) is the same as 160 if using 8 cores (1.60 mOhms). Reference value for 4 and 6 cores is 2.10 mOhms, or a bios value of 210.

Pressing "Enter" on the bios raw number values crashes the Bios. You have to just arrow over and enter the value then move to the next field.

*I DO NOT KNOW* what will happen if both IA AC DC loadline and CPU internal loadline are both changed to custom values, I do not know which one will take priority. Best not to change both.
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES DO YOU EVER, EVER GO ANYWHERE NEAR THE HIGHER VALUES FOR (INTERNAL VR CONTROL) IA AC DC LOADLINE. An AC value of 680, for example, can boost the CPU VID by as much as 400mv.


----------



## Falkentyne

Hercules99 said:


> @falkentyne or anyone who sees this I used this vid of tweak town and it worked but I keep getting different bsod's all related to windows dirvers such as IRQL_NOT_OR_Less_EQUAL or System_service_exception but all my driver's are up to date. I did import my old hdd to my new build.
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/d8rY4TrcDXg



Those two Blue screens of death are usually related to RAM. Make sure your RAM timings and DDR voltage are correct. High speed memory may not work at the default System Agent voltage (aka uncore voltage) of 1.050v. while Intel 8th generation specsheet says VCCSA (system agent) defaults to 1.050v, high speed memory puts a big strain on the IMC, so you may need 1.2v, 1.25v or 1.3v for stability. I think Gigabyte puts this at 1.3v for you.

You can also get those BSOD's if your CPU is VERY unstable. Usually minor instability on the CPU, will only happen at heavy load, giving you watchdog clock timeout (the old "stop 0x101 error) or WHEA_Uncorrectable_error (the old stop 0x124). 

VCCIO defaults to 0.950v but Gigabyte puts this higher. I don't know what VCCIO does, but I think it affects the PCIE lanes somehow.

How did you set up your bios? If you set adaptive voltage, you didn't do what he said and then enable DVID with a negative offset, did you?
Adaptive voltages are only guaranteed to work up to 4.7 ghz. Because the VID stops scaling at 4.7 ghz. You need to find what voltage your CPU needs to be stable at at 5 ghz. His may need 1.275v. Yours may need 1.325v. So you can't take his advice and just set a negative offset randomly.

Are you using static voltage?

I would personally start at 1.325v with LLC Turbo, test, and then work your way down from there.
Also update at least to Bios F6, if not F7A.


----------



## Moparman

SaLaDiN666 said:


> Can anyone help me, I bought the master version with 9900k and honestly, I do not know what to think about this mobo. Either it is a buggy piece of something or I am an idiot.
> 
> 
> I own x299 Taichi XE and overclocking there is pretty easy, you set the multiplier, the load line calibration to 1 or 2, input voltage, vcore voltage and ez, you are done, voltage entering into the cpu is pretty stable, you get what you did submit.
> 
> 
> But here?
> 
> 
> There is something like CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line, I do not know what that does, google gives conflicting reports. Then CPU Vcore Load Line calibration, that is straightforward. Been playing with the Vcore LLC and it just makes my pc unstable, it just restarts withing a few minutes when set to turbo or extreme.
> 
> 
> Also, there are 3 different sensors in HWINFO64 showing 3 different values of Vcore, for example I set my vcore to 1.35, one sensor is showing over 1.42, the second 1.32 and the last one 1.25 during the load. What am I supposed to choose from. It is absolutely pointless to stress test anything now and if it overshoots so much it could even damage my cpu. Thanks for any help.



What Bios are you on?


----------



## Timur Born

Observation: Setting VCore LLC to "Auto" does not always equal "Standard", I just saw it use a higher value than that, but lower than "Turbo".


----------



## OutlawII

Its a new board it should be the latest chip set


----------



## ThorsMalice

Just an update regarding the coil whine issue I brought up a few pages back. I received my new Master from RMA and updated bios to F6 and have had no issue with any noise on the new board, I have not put anything under water yet as I just wanted to test the board before anything else but it is looking good so far. From the other posts in this thread and a few other sites this coil whine does seem to be an issue effecting the Master version of the board but like all things seems to be luck of the draw.


----------



## OutlawII

ThorsMalice said:


> Just an update regarding the coil whine issue I brought up a few pages back. I received my new Master from RMA and updated bios to F6 and have had no issue with any noise on the new board, I have not put anything under water yet as I just wanted to test the board before anything else but it is looking good so far. From the other posts in this thread and a few other sites this coil whine does seem to be an issue effecting the Master version of the board but like all things seems to be luck of the draw.


Thanks for the update! Any idea what was causing it or didnt they say?


----------



## ThorsMalice

OutlawII said:


> Thanks for the update! Any idea what was causing it or didnt they say?


Wasn't told anything when I RMA'd to newegg, they just shipped me a new one no questions asked. Not sure what caused the vrm on that particular board to make the noise but it definitely wasn't any other components as they're all playing nice with the new board so far.


----------



## Falkentyne

ThorsMalice said:


> Wasn't told anything when I RMA'd to newegg, they just shipped me a new one no questions asked. Not sure what caused the vrm on that particular board to make the noise but it definitely wasn't any other components as they're all playing nice with the new board so far.


Excellent, good job.

Do you know what is different about bios F6 vs F7a? Does F6 have the vcore high on fastboot issue fixed that f7a was supposed to address?


----------



## Stockman

ThorsMalice said:


> Just an update regarding the coil whine issue I brought up a few pages back. I received my new Master from RMA and updated bios to F6 and have had no issue with any noise on the new board, I have not put anything under water yet as I just wanted to test the board before anything else but it is looking good so far. From the other posts in this thread and a few other sites this coil whine does seem to be an issue effecting the Master version of the board but like all things seems to be luck of the draw.


Glad to hear! Can you please remind us...on your original Master, did you hear the whine at idle, load, or both?


----------



## ThorsMalice

Stockman said:


> Glad to hear! Can you please remind us...on your original Master, did you hear the whine at idle, load, or both?


Whine was constant at idle and load, regardless of what settings I changed (all power saving settings off, sitting in bios, 100% cpu load in windows) nothing helped. It was loud enough that I could hear it 10 ft away and was very apparent that it was coming from the vrm on the left side of the cpu.


----------



## EarlZ

ThorsMalice said:


> Whine was constant at idle and load, regardless of what settings I changed (all power saving settings off, sitting in bios, 100% cpu load in windows) nothing helped. It was loud enough that I could hear it 10 ft away and was very apparent that it was coming from the vrm on the left side of the cpu.


That is very alarming, I already have my mobo but still waiting for arrival of my CPU. Will surely look out for that.


----------



## shalafi

Well, this is surprising. Finished 2 hours of Realbench and 2 hours of non-avx Prime95 (solely a gaming rig). Around 20 hours of Fallout76. Isn't the load Vcore somewhat low for 5.1GHz to be this stable?


----------



## Falkentyne

shalafi said:


> Well, this is surprising. Finished 2 hours of Realbench and 2 hours of non-avx Prime95 (solely a gaming rig). Around 20 hours of Fallout76. Isn't the load Vcore somewhat low for 5.1GHz to be this stable?


5.1 ghz at 1.276v is very awesome top tier cpu.
I needed 1.335v to do a 30 minute realbench test at 5.1 ghz.
But your prime test is barely stressing the computer also with those large FFT sizes. Blend doesn't do a lot. try small FFT.


----------



## Reefersmurf

ThorsMalice said:


> Just an update regarding the coil whine issue I brought up a few pages back. I received my new Master from RMA and updated bios to F6 and have had no issue with any noise on the new board, I have not put anything under water yet as I just wanted to test the board before anything else but it is looking good so far. From the other posts in this thread and a few other sites this coil whine does seem to be an issue effecting the Master version of the board but like all things seems to be luck of the draw.


i have had the same problem with two motherboards now :/ First Asus hero maximus xi and now the gigabyte master. Guess i have to RMA once again..


----------



## Adamastor

shalafi said:


> Well, this is surprising. Finished 2 hours of Realbench and 2 hours of non-avx Prime95 (solely a gaming rig). Around 20 hours of Fallout76. Isn't the load Vcore somewhat low for 5.1GHz to be this stable?


I have the same experience from other user here and many other who play BF games. Just play BF 1 or V if you have it. I had a "stable" oc in a 9700k at 5ghz after 4 hours of prime 95 with avx and 2 hours realbench. Crashed within 1 hour in BF V. The same happened in past with 7700k and BF1.

I think i'm finally stable at 1.285v - LLC High with no AVX offset (i read that BF uses some avx instructions and triggering constantly the offset may be the cause for stuttering)


----------



## Stockman

Reefersmurf said:


> ThorsMalice said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just an update regarding the coil whine issue I brought up a few pages back. I received my new Master from RMA and updated bios to F6 and have had no issue with any noise on the new board, I have not put anything under water yet as I just wanted to test the board before anything else but it is looking good so far. From the other posts in this thread and a few other sites this coil whine does seem to be an issue effecting the Master version of the board but like all things seems to be luck of the draw.
> 
> 
> 
> i have had the same problem with two motherboards now 😕 First Asus hero maximus xi and now the gigabyte master. Guess i have to RMA once again..
Click to expand...

Literally went through the same thing. I wish I could find some explanation for why this is happening on the higher-end Z390 boards. My first guess was higher power requirements with 8 core chips, but I'm ONLY hearing whine at idle. Disabling c-states helps, but doesn't eliminate. Gaming is fine, but when web browsing or just sending email the coil whine is unbearable.

1st board: Maximus Hero XI - returned
2nd board: Aorus Master - returned
3rd board: Aorus Ultra - still own - VRM whine is still present, but less so than previous Master

I have another Master board on the way. Will report back after testing.


----------



## shalafi

Adamastor said:


> I have the same experience from other user here and many other who play BF games. Just play BF 1 or V if you have it. I had a "stable" oc in a 9700k at 5ghz after 4 hours of prime 95 with avx and 2 hours realbench. Crashed within 1 hour in BF V. The same happened in past with 7700k and BF1.
> 
> I think i'm finally stable at 1.285v - LLC High with no AVX offset (i read that BF uses some avx instructions and triggering constantly the offset may be the cause for stuttering)


not a BF player  
yeah, avx instructions everywhere .. it was downclocking in benchmarks, fallout76, american truck simulator, no mans sky, you name it. 
4 hours of avx prime95 - small / large / blend? what's your cooling?


----------



## Reefersmurf

Stockman said:


> Literally went through the same thing. I wish I could find some explanation for why this is happening on the higher-end Z390 boards. My first guess was higher power requirements with 8 core chips, but I'm ONLY hearing whine at idle. Disabling c-states helps, but doesn't eliminate. Gaming is fine, but when web browsing or just sending email the coil whine is unbearable.
> 
> 1st board: Maximus Hero XI - returned
> 2nd board: Aorus Master - returned
> 3rd board: Aorus Ultra - still own - VRM whine is still present, but less so than previous Master
> 
> I have another Master board on the way. Will report back after testing.


i hear it in idle and load but when i turn off c-states it dissappears. Another thing that helps is lowering hz on the mouse from 1000hz to 125hz but it still there.


----------



## shalafi

Falkentyne said:


> 5.1 ghz at 1.276v is very awesome top tier cpu.
> I needed 1.335v to do a 30 minute realbench test at 5.1 ghz.
> But your prime test is barely stressing the computer also with those large FFT sizes. Blend doesn't do a lot. try small FFT.


small fft - i'll leave it running for another hour or so, but so far no errors, whether prime95 or whea, although it gets reeeeally toasty (Kraken X62).
i've reset hwinfo after starting prime95, average voltage 1.267, most of the run it's sitting on 1.265:


----------



## Moparman

Adamastor said:


> I have the same experience from other user here and many other who play BF games. Just play BF 1 or V if you have it. I had a "stable" oc in a 9700k at 5ghz after 4 hours of prime 95 with avx and 2 hours realbench. Crashed within 1 hour in BF V. The same happened in past with 7700k and BF1.
> 
> I think i'm finally stable at 1.285v - LLC High with no AVX offset (i read that BF uses some avx instructions and triggering constantly the offset may be the cause for stuttering)



Stop using P95 for testing. Use real world testing like gaming and Benching the benchmarks from Hwbot. I stopped using P95 years ago as i had the same issues that P95 past but other programs failed.


----------



## davidm71

I must have a sucky 9900K. I only could get it stable at 5.0ghz with all the C States, Speedstep, and EIST + VT disabled at 1.325V and having the Voltage compensation set to 'Turbo' mode and XMP turned on at 3200mhz ram speed. This is only like an hour of stability testing. Ran out of time to test further. I basically followed the Gigabyte Z390 overclock PDF guide. My temps max out on the hottest core at about 94 degrees with Prime95-AVX. Otherwise at 80 degrees with AVX off. Swear the voltage regulation Turbo setting increases the temps, and not sure about VT affecting stability. Would prefer VT be always on and think it would take another 0.05 cpu volts for it to be stable with it on. Wonder what other tweaks would reduce temps? Also wonder whats the max safe temp for the 9900K?

Thanks

Also for 24/7 maybe the stock 4.7 ghz setting that the motherboard is setting is way to go?


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> I must have a sucky 9900K. I only could get it stable at 5.0ghz with all the C States, Speedstep, and EIST + VT disabled at 1.325V and having the Voltage compensation set to 'Turbo' mode and XMP turned on at 3200mhz ram speed. This is only like an hour of stability testing. Ran out of time to test further. I basically followed the Gigabyte Z390 overclock PDF guide. My temps max out on the hottest core at about 94 degrees with Prime95-AVX. Otherwise at 80 degrees with AVX off. Swear the voltage regulation Turbo setting increases the temps, and not sure about VT affecting stability. Would prefer VT be always on and think it would take another 0.05 cpu volts for it to be stable with it on. Wonder what other tweaks would reduce temps? Also wonder whats the max safe temp for the 9900K?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Also for 24/7 maybe the stock 4.7 ghz setting that the motherboard is setting is way to go?


AVX Small FFT? Or 1344K in place fixed size? And what cooling do you have?
your chip might seem like it sucks but it runs a lot cooler than those who need less voltage...


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> davidm71 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I must have a sucky 9900K. I only could get it stable at 5.0ghz with all the C States, Speedstep, and EIST + VT disabled at 1.325V and having the Voltage compensation set to 'Turbo' mode and XMP turned on at 3200mhz ram speed. This is only like an hour of stability testing. Ran out of time to test further. I basically followed the Gigabyte Z390 overclock PDF guide. My temps max out on the hottest core at about 94 degrees with Prime95-AVX. Otherwise at 80 degrees with AVX off. Swear the voltage regulation Turbo setting increases the temps, and not sure about VT affecting stability. Would prefer VT be always on and think it would take another 0.05 cpu volts for it to be stable with it on. Wonder what other tweaks would reduce temps? Also wonder whats the max safe temp for the 9900K?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Also for 24/7 maybe the stock 4.7 ghz setting that the motherboard is setting is way to go?
> 
> 
> 
> AVX Small FFT? Or 1344K in place fixed size? And what cooling do you have?
> your chip might seem like it sucks but it runs a lot cooler than those who need less voltage...
Click to expand...


Yes Prime95 Small FFT max heat bench. I have it under a Heatkiller IV waterblock.

Thanks


----------



## davidm71

Also what RGB led lighting kits you guys recommend for this motherboard? I found one from Corsair but those seem short in the images. Also need a front panel usb 3.1 gen 2 C bay drive..

Thanks


----------



## Stockman

Moparman said:


> Stop using P95 for testing. Use real world testing like gaming and Benching the benchmarks from Hwbot. I stopped using P95 years ago as i had the same issues that P95 past but other programs failed.


Could not agree more.


----------



## Adamastor

shalafi said:


> not a BF player
> yeah, avx instructions everywhere .. it was downclocking in benchmarks, fallout76, american truck simulator, no mans sky, you name it.
> 4 hours of avx prime95 - small / large / blend? what's your cooling?


Small! The cooler is H115i Platinum



Moparman said:


> Stop using P95 for testing. Use real world testing like gaming and Benching the benchmarks from Hwbot. I stopped using P95 years ago as i had the same issues that P95 past but other programs failed.


Yes i agree with this! I'll stop using it simply because in the end it's just downright absurd to leave the CPU burning for hours and in 20/30 minutes a game just shows the real results.


----------



## shalafi

davidm71 said:


> Also what RGB led lighting kits you guys recommend for this motherboard? I found one from Corsair but those seem short in the images. Also need a front panel usb 3.1 gen 2 C bay drive..
> 
> Thanks


i have two phanteks rgb led combo kits, works seamlessly on the Aorus Pro, as it did on my previous Asus Crosshair VI Hero (Ryzen build)


----------



## davidm71

*Got to get the combo kit?*



shalafi said:


> i have two phanteks rgb led combo kits, works seamlessly on the Aorus Pro, as it did on my previous Asus Crosshair VI Hero (Ryzen build)


So you have to get the combo kit or would just the strips by themselves work?

Thanks for writing back..


----------



## shalafi

davidm71 said:


> So you have to get the combo kit or would just the strips by themselves work?
> 
> Thanks for writing back..


no, the strips have these connectors:
http://www.phanteks.com/images/product/accessories/LED strips/PH-LEDKT_CMBO/PH-LEDKT-2.jpg

while the kit has the splitter and adapters for the board's standard led connector:
http://www.phanteks.com/images/product/accessories/LED strips/PH-LEDKT_CMBO/PH-LEDKT-4.jpg


----------



## davidm71

shalafi said:


> davidm71 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you have to get the combo kit or would just the strips by themselves work?
> 
> Thanks for writing back..
> 
> 
> 
> no, the strips have these connectors:
> http://www.phanteks.com/images/product/accessories/LED strips/PH-LEDKT_CMBO/PH-LEDKT-2.jpg
> 
> while the kit has the splitter and adapters for the board's standard led connector:
> http://www.phanteks.com/images/product/accessories/LED strips/PH-LEDKT_CMBO/PH-LEDKT-4.jpg
Click to expand...


Ok Thanks


----------



## porksmuggler

davidm71 said:


> Also what RGB led lighting kits you guys recommend for this motherboard? I found one from Corsair but those seem short in the images. Also need a front panel usb 3.1 gen 2 C bay drive..
> 
> Thanks


I have the below arriving for testing soon, as lower cost alternatives to the vendor branded kits. The Master comes with 2 of the 3 pin JST-SM adapters for the digital LED strip headers, and the jumpers are 5V default. Both types are less than the 5A limit, but I'm unsure as to the RGB fusion applications ability to use RGBW type LEDs used in the second link.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MQ08JH...olid=2NOPRUL9NLDWX&psc=0&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07F9QFM3...olid=2NOPRUL9NLDWX&psc=0&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it


----------



## EarlZ

I currently have 4 sata drives (2SSD & 2HDD) I might be adding 1 more SSD and 1 M.2 drive and I also have a dedicated sound card, I've read before that the M.2 should be connected at the bottom slot to avoid some SATA ports being turned off, in terms of PCIE lane distribution I believe that my GPU will only get PCIE 3.0 8X since I have a sound card installed and id assume 2-4 lanes will be allocated for the sound card, what happens to the 4-6 lanes, does the board not allocate them to the top 2 M.2 slots?


----------



## anticommon

So can someone help me understand if there are any practical benefits of going from my aurus gaming 7 to one of these boards with a 9900k? My gaming 7 looks beautiful with all the lighting and I don't particularly care for the rgb on any of these boards when compared to it. The vrm on the gaming 7 is supposed to be really beefy and I can imagine I should be able to comfortably sit at 5.0ghz on the 9900k considering I have a dual 360mm loop (with a blocked 2080ti) I just don't know that it would be worth it to spend the extra $50-100 selling the z370 for a z390 unless there is something I am missing.


----------



## OutlawII

You pretty much answered your own question. Here is the differences
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Intel-Z370-vs-Z390-Chipset-Comparison-1231/


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I currently have 4 sata drives (2SSD & 2HDD) I might be adding 1 more SSD and 1 M.2 drive and I also have a dedicated sound card, I've read before that the M.2 should be connected at the bottom slot to avoid some SATA ports being turned off, in terms of PCIE lane distribution I believe that my GPU will only get PCIE 3.0 8X since I have a sound card installed and id assume 2-4 lanes will be allocated for the sound card, what happens to the 4-6 lanes, does the board not allocate them to the top 2 M.2 slots?


What sound card do you have? What sort of PCIE soundcard would need 4 lanes?

Some sound cards run at 1x, so that would steal no bandwidth at all from the video card.
I have an old PCIE Fatal1ty X-fi with the drive bay console, and it runs at 1x (It's listed as a PCIE 2.0 x1 card). It's installed in the farthest PCIE slot (I think that's x4) above the NVME drive and the NVME drive is running at x4 with no drawbacks.
Also, the primary video card X16 is controlled by the CPU, not the chipset anyway.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> What sound card do you have? What sort of PCIE soundcard would need 4 lanes?
> 
> Some sound cards run at 1x, so that would steal no bandwidth at all from the video card.
> I have an old PCIE Fatal1ty X-fi with the drive bay console, and it runs at 1x (It's listed as a PCIE 2.0 x1 card). It's installed in the farthest PCIE slot (I think that's x4) above the NVME drive and the NVME drive is running at x4 with no drawbacks.
> Also, the primary video card X16 is controlled by the CPU, not the chipset anyway.


I dont exactly know the lanes required for a sound blaster Z, I also assumed they go in lanes of 2's. If I have my sound card at the bottom slot that does not take any lanes from the CPU? I didnt know the chipset also had its own dedicated lanes that is different from the CPU.

EDIT: I just realized that the PCH has 24 lanes via the block diagram from intel. Is there a diagram specific for this board?


----------



## Madness11

Hey guys, please help me OC my RAM  (G skill trident Z RGB 3200C16 ) i dont know how oc , on this mboard


----------



## pm1109

Guys, what programs do you recommend to test the stability of my 9900k...Not sure whether using Prime 95 is the safest option to go because of the high temps


----------



## Timur Born

EarlZ said:


> I dont exactly know the lanes required for a sound blaster Z, I also assumed they go in lanes of 2's.


Not even half a lane.

PCI was enough, PCIe v1.1 was enough, PCIe 3 is overkill aka enough.


----------



## Timur Born

pm1109 said:


> Guys, what programs do you recommend to test the stability of my 9900k...Not sure whether using Prime 95 is the safest option to go because of the high temps


There is little benefit of running P95 for hours, but there is benefit in running it for seconds to minutes. If an OC doesn't survive that short a time then you at least know that it isn't stable at these specific loads. 1344K is a lot easier on the CPU than Small FFTs, the latter of which can result in a crash or thermal throttling within seconds.

Once you pass that you can switch to more realistic loads. Personally I like to switch to the Balanced power profile (50% Core Parking enabled) in order to allow the CPU to go up and down in voltages during normal daily tasks, this often reveals crashes that would not happen at constant high load. I also liked Intel Burn Test for its tendency to switch between high load and low load (in between loops), but the AVX version does not work on my 9900K (did on the Ryzen).


----------



## Acen1

Hi,
I'm new to oc and just got my 9700k, I'm running 5GHZ 1.330V(still doing stress tests) with avx offset 2, I'm disabling c states to run the cpu at full speed at all time but it still drops to 800mhz.
any tips?
I'm using aorus master


----------



## PuD

Do you have the "High Performance" profile under power options on Windows?


----------



## davidm71

pm1109 said:


> Guys, what programs do you recommend to test the stability of my 9900k...Not sure whether using Prime 95 is the safest option to go because of the high temps


It was just stated few posts earlier that Prime95 not the best stress tester for every day real world.


----------



## PuD

This tool from intel: https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/19792/Intel-Processor-Diagnostic-Tool seams to be a good starting point.
I'm using it after a few test with p95 with AVX and no crash.


----------



## ITAngel

Question how come a system can auto clock to 5.0Ghz with only 1.27v on its on but I can't get it to run at 5.0Ghz with 1.30v ? So I set the system to run at 1.35Ghz which ran cinebench just fine and during the test the CPU seems to only be using 1.27v but is unstable with Intel benchmark tool on the Gigabyte side of programs. Let alone on Prime95. I used the Gigabyte guide for Overclocking. Did my test on F4 bios, F5 bios, and F6 bios but only found F5 to be more stable. Anyone with similar setup that has been very successful?

Mobo: Gigabyte AORUS MASTER Z390
CPU: Intel i9-9900K
Cooler: bequiet! DARK PRO 4


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> Question how come a system can auto clock to 5.0Ghz with only 1.27v on its on but I can't get it to run at 5.0Ghz with 1.30v ? So I set the system to run at 1.35Ghz which ran cinebench just fine and during the test the CPU seems to only be using 1.27v but is unstable with Intel benchmark tool on the Gigabyte side of programs. Let alone on Prime95. I used the Gigabyte guide for Overclocking. Did my test on F4 bios, F5 bios, and F6 bios but only found F5 to be more stable. Anyone with similar setup that has been very successful?
> 
> Mobo: Gigabyte AORUS MASTER Z390
> CPU: Intel i9-9900K
> Cooler: bequiet! DARK PRO 4


Try beta bios f7a to fix a bug with cpu overvoltage and windows fast boot, if you haven't already.
If you're talking about 'auto clocking' (voltage set to "Normal"), then the CPU is using the VID to set the vcore, and the default Core IA AC DC loadlines will handle the vdroop in that case
If you use manual voltages, the cpu vcore will override the CPU VID and you have to use the bios LLC levels for that.

Did you set Loadline calibration to turbo?
Try the f7a beta bios (google "Gigabyte latest beta bios" for it).

Also install HWinfo64 and look for the IR 35201 sensor.
Can you tell me what your "VR VOUT" reports under your 5 ghz "auto" setting you said was tested stable, and your 5 ghz 1.30v manual setting you said was unstable?
The value in VR VOUT is important.


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> Try beta bios f7a to fix a bug with cpu overvoltage and windows fast boot, if you haven't already.
> If you're talking about 'auto clocking' (voltage set to "Normal"), then the CPU is using the VID to set the vcore, and the default Core IA AC DC loadlines will handle the vdroop in that case
> If you use manual voltages, the cpu vcore will override the CPU VID and you have to use the bios LLC levels for that.
> 
> Did you set Loadline calibration to turbo?
> Try the f7a beta bios (google "Gigabyte latest beta bios" for it).
> 
> Also install HWinfo64 and look for the IR 35201 sensor.
> Can you tell me what your "VR VOUT" reports under your 5 ghz "auto" setting you said was tested stable, and your 5 ghz 1.30v manual setting you said was unstable?
> The value in VR VOUT is important.


Awesome! Let me check on that here in an hour or so I am at work but yes I just had issues trying to overclock it only to 5.0Ghz on all cores and seems all the settings didn't work. Until today at lunch when I found F5 working a bit better @ 1.35v but still was not stable enough even though it pass Cinebench. The temps on the processor were low 29C to 60ish on benching. I did notice on CoreTemp VID: was showing around 1.4XX Volt which I was not family what was that but it kept changing around even though the bios volt were at 1.35. I will get back to you shortly in a little while.


----------



## ITAngel

Bios = (f7a beta bios)
CPU: i9-9900K 
COOLER: bequiet! DARK PRO 4
MOBO = GIGABYTE AORUS MASTER Z390

1. XMP = Profile 1 (3000Mhz)(32GB 4x8)
2. CPU Clock Ratio = 50

3. I Disabled The Following;
A. Intel Speed Shift Technology
B. CPU Enchanced Halt (C1E)
C. C3 State Support
D. C6/C7 State Support
E. C8 State Support
F: C10 State Support
G: Ring to Core offset (DownBin)
H: Voltage Optimization

4. Enchanced Multi-Core Performance
5. Uncore Ratio = 47
6. TjMAX Temperature = 110C
7. AVX Offfset = 0
8. CPU Vcore = 1.350V
9. VT-d = Disabled
10. Internal Graphics = Disabled
11. CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Turbo

OTHER
HWiNFO64: VR-VOUT = 1.230 (Min), 1.326V (Max), 1.311V (Avg)
Cinebench R15 = Benchmark = Pass
Gigabyte Intel Extreme Tunning Utility = Basic Tuning Step 1 Benchmark Score = (Crashed)


----------



## LegitMaan

On an Aorus Master, enabling XMP with 3200MHz memory automatically increased the VCCSA voltage to 1.3V (from 1.05V) and VCCIO voltage to 1.2V (from 0.95V). Should I be concerned about this or are these safe voltages for everyday use?


----------



## Falkentyne

LegitMaan said:


> On an Aorus Master, enabling XMP with 3200MHz memory automatically increased the VCCSA voltage to 1.3V (from 1.05V) and VCCIO voltage to 1.2V (from 0.95V). Should I be concerned about this or are these safe voltages for everyday use?


This is done deliberately to insure compatibility with faster, tighter timing sticks. 1.05 VCCSA is based on 2400 mhz memory. Most memory especially at 4000+ require a higher VCCSA.
If you are stable, you can try reducing this to 1.20v and 1.15v and reduce VCCIO to 1.05v.
I was fine with 1.15v VCCSA and 1.05v VCCIO with 3200 mhz cas 14 memory (16 GB * 2).

I don't know of long term problems with running VCCSA at 1.3v. Check the DDR4 memory overclocking or stability thread over here (Forgot if it's in the Intel or the RAM section). Lots of people pushing RAM so there should be much more info about VCCSA.


----------



## ITAngel

@Falkentyne; Any changes I should do on the setup to OC this chip or should I do a different oc method? It seems EasyTune (AutoTune) feature don't like the setup or anything. Why have a software that doesn't work all it does jump you to 5.2Ghz when these chips you are lucky to hit 5.1 or 5.2 etc...


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> @Falkentyne; Any changes I should do on the setup to OC this chip or should I do a different oc method? It seems EasyTune (AutoTune) feature don't like the setup or anything. Why have a software that doesn't work all it does jump you to 5.2Ghz when these chips you are lucky to hit 5.1 or 5.2 etc...


Sorry I don't know. I do everything by hand.


----------



## danzerman

Hi i was wandering does anyone have z390 aorus, elite/ ultra or pro & have any noticed any coil whine from the VRM's.
thought it might be a whole lineup issue as i saw the Z390 aorus Master has consistent coil whine with a number of users


----------



## EarlZ

danzerman said:


> Hi i was wandering does anyone have z390 aorus, elite/ ultra or pro & have any noticed any coil whine from the VRM's.
> thought it might be a whole lineup issue as i saw the Z390 aorus Master has consistent coil whine with a number of users


I've only noticed a single post on this thread about that but it really is alarming


----------



## Moparman

ITAngel said:


> Bios = (f7a beta bios)
> CPU: i9-9900K
> COOLER: bequiet! DARK PRO 4
> MOBO = GIGABYTE AORUS MASTER Z390
> 
> 1. XMP = Profile 1 (3000Mhz)(32GB 4x8)
> 2. CPU Clock Ratio = 50
> 
> 3. I Disabled The Following;
> A. Intel Speed Shift Technology
> B. CPU Enchanced Halt (C1E)
> C. C3 State Support
> D. C6/C7 State Support
> E. C8 State Support
> F: C10 State Support
> G: Ring to Core offset (DownBin)
> H: Voltage Optimization
> 
> 4. Enchanced Multi-Core Performance
> 5. Uncore Ratio = 47
> 6. TjMAX Temperature = 110C
> 7. AVX Offfset = 0
> 8. CPU Vcore = 1.350V
> 9. VT-d = Disabled
> 10. Internal Graphics = Disabled
> 11. CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Turbo
> 
> OTHER
> HWiNFO64: VR-VOUT = 1.230 (Min), 1.326V (Max), 1.311V (Avg)
> Cinebench R15 = Benchmark = Pass
> Gigabyte Intel Extreme Tunning Utility = Basic Tuning Step 1 Benchmark Score = (Crashed)



If you look at post 3 I have saved settings you might look at trying. Also why not try the 5ghz Preset under the CPU up in the bios?


----------



## danzerman

do you think it is a good idea to return the board & if so, is there any z390 you recommend that as no coil whine


----------



## danzerman

EarlZ said:


> I've only noticed a single post on this thread about that but it really is alarming


do you think it is a good idea to return the board & if so, is there any z390 you recommend that as no coil whine


----------



## Stockman

danzerman said:


> do you think it is a good idea to return the board & if so, is there any z390 you recommend that as no coil whine


https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...sion-thread-254.html#/topics/1638955?page=339

Post# 3389


----------



## ITAngel

Moparman said:


> If you look at post 3 I have saved settings you might look at trying. Also why not try the 5ghz Preset under the CPU up in the bios?


There is a preset in the bios? I didn't know that if so were? lol


----------



## danzerman

Stockman said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...sion-thread-254.html#/topics/1638955?page=339
> 
> Post# 3389


Mate appreciate that, do you think aorus elite will be safe? ( a bit worried because it has the same vrms as aorus Ultra) 
also whats your situation regarding the coil whine now, have you bought another board, or are you considering going to z370 + bios flash


----------



## Robbært

danzerman said:


> Hi i was wandering does anyone have z390 aorus, elite/ ultra or pro & have any noticed any coil whine from the VRM's.
> thought it might be a whole lineup issue as i saw the Z390 aorus Master has consistent coil whine with a number of users


Aorus Master, Aorus Xtreme, I-Aorus and rest Aorus (elite-pro-ultra) is 4 different VRMs.
It could be very unlikely they all whine in same configuration.

Seasonic PSU known for whine (and people still buying for overall quality I guess).


----------



## Vrool

Is there any disadvantage in running a DVID offset OC as per Porksmuggler's post #383?

I'm running a 8700K (non-delid on air) - Z390 Aorus Pro.
4.9GHz
DVID -0.060V
No AVX Offset 
C-States disabled
Stable with good temps.


----------



## derx

I have a Seasonic Prime Platinum 750 with a Z390 Aorus Pro. 9700k at 5.1 (still in testing fase  ) and I hear no coil whine. The mobo is still laying on the mobo box, as I want to fully OC/test it first before I'm going to replace my current system, and redo the whole watercooling setup. So no, no issues here so far.


----------



## EarlZ

Timur Born said:


> Not even half a lane.
> 
> PCI was enough, PCIe v1.1 was enough, PCIe 3 is overkill aka enough.


Thanks for confirming, though I wonder why with my current rig that I only get PCIE 8X on my GPU if I have my sound card installed.


----------



## davidm71

Hi guys,

Wanted to share a tip about lowering your peak load cpu temps on your 9900K or any cpu you might be overclocking. I found that by placing a fan on the backside of my motherboard facing the socket area and blowing air onto that area on its underside lowered my peak temps by a few degrees. Thing is my computer case has a backside fan mount and I placed a small Thermalright low profile cooler fan there on the back of the motherboard area and I think it has lowered temps. As the 9900K is one hot cpu this little trick has some benefits you should try..


----------



## Timur Born

EarlZ said:


> Thanks for confirming, though I wonder why with my current rig that I only get PCIE 8X on my GPU if I have my sound card installed.


On your old rig the three x16 PCIe slots may be divided among the CPU lanes.

16x/0x/0x
8x/8x/0x
8x/4x/4x

So if you put anything into the lower slot then the upper GPU slot goes down to 8x. On the Aorus Master the lower slot is connected to the chipset instead of the CPU.


----------



## comset

Hello.
I have a question.
When setting the CPU voltage manually, does I not care about the VID value displayed by HWiNFO64?
In the case of manual voltage, it was written that VID is overwritten with manual voltage.
When Vcore is manually set to 1.30 v and tested with Prime 95,
I was worried that the VID value of HWiNFO64 became 1.4 v.


----------



## Jidonsu

I think I'm happy with what I got so far with manual OC.

5.2Ghz
AVX Offset 2
Core Voltage 1.35V
MEC Off

Was able to get through 6 hours of Prime95 Small FFTs with AVX Off and just under a hour with AVX On. I cut latter one due to temps as you can see in the screen. One core hit 102. I'm on a custom water loop. I might try realbench next, but I think I'm just gonna game on it and see what happens and maybe dial down the voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

comset said:


> Hello.
> I have a question.
> When setting the CPU voltage manually, does I not care about the VID value displayed by HWiNFO64?
> In the case of manual voltage, it was written that VID is overwritten with manual voltage.
> When Vcore is manually set to 1.30 v and tested with Prime 95,
> I was worried that the VID value of HWiNFO64 became 1.4 v.


Yes. Ignore the VID when setting voltage manually.


----------



## ITAngel

I am debating if I should request from newegg replacements to test in case my chip is bad running at 1.35 since it seems the CPU want to run mainly between 1.35v-to1.40v (vcore). Unless that is the typical range on a 9900K chipset then is okay I guess.


----------



## ITAngel

Jidonsu said:


> I think I'm happy with what I got so far with manual OC.
> 
> 5.2Ghz
> AVX Offset 2
> Core Voltage 1.35V
> MEC Off
> 
> Was able to get through 6 hours of Prime95 Small FFTs with AVX Off and just under a hour with AVX On. I cut latter one due to temps as you can see in the screen. One core hit 102. I'm on a custom water loop. I might try realbench next, but I think I'm just gonna game on it and see what happens and maybe dial down the voltage.


Damn nice! Great Job! Makes me want to keep my water cooling hardware that I am trying to sell to see if I can push the CPU higher. I am just worried I will miss my replacement / refund window policy from newegg. I still need a block for the 1151 socket to put it on my water cooling setup and fluid.


----------



## comset

Falkentyne said:


> Yes. Ignore the VID when setting voltage manually.



Thank you.
I have read all this thread. I learned very well.
I set IA AC DC to 1.


----------



## Jidonsu

ITAngel said:


> Damn nice! Great Job! Makes me want to keep my water cooling hardware that I am trying to sell to see if I can push the CPU higher. I am just worried I will miss my replacement / refund window policy from newegg. I still need a block for the 1151 socket to put it on my water cooling setup and fluid.


What’s wrong with it?

Watercooling is a pain in the ass, but it’s so nice once it’s done being setup.


----------



## ITAngel

Jidonsu said:


> What’s wrong with it?
> 
> Watercooling is a pain in the ass, but it’s so nice once it’s done being setup.


Yea it is nice once is done and takes so much work to do. I been doing it for a while with soft tubing and still have an EK 360mm Rad, 240mm Rad PE model plus my D5 pump. All I need is the block 1151 that I can slap in there but I was trying to go all out on air. Well I cannot seems to get a good OC on this processor at 5.0Ghz on all cores. Not sure if is the bios on the mobo or cpu or what but I am lucky if I can run Prime95 on it. The only time it ran it took temps to 109C. That was using the Easy Tuner profile 5.2Ghz and then I changed the core ratio to 5.0Ghz instead. Another time It ran on auto voltage seems that it likes anything over 1.35V to 1.40V which I am not sure what is the average range for a i9-9900K voltage wise. Maybe I am over thinking this but on auto the chip runs great and fast. If I crank up the core it still runs solid 5.0Ghz on all cores as long as I let it choose its own voltage. But Once I start to control every single aspec of it start to hate me. It will pass any Cinebench test but fail on Prime95.


----------



## Jidonsu

ITAngel said:


> Yea it is nice once is done and takes so much work to do. I been doing it for a while with soft tubing and still have an EK 360mm Rad, 240mm Rad PE model plus my D5 pump. All I need is the block 1151 that I can slap in there but I was trying to go all out on air. Well I cannot seems to get a good OC on this processor at 5.0Ghz on all cores. Not sure if is the bios on the mobo or cpu or what but I am lucky if I can run Prime95 on it. The only time it ran it took temps to 109C. That was using the Easy Tuner profile 5.2Ghz and then I changed the core ratio to 5.0Ghz instead. Another time It ran on auto voltage seems that it likes anything over 1.35V to 1.40V which I am not sure what is the average range for a i9-9900K voltage wise. Maybe I am over thinking this but on auto the chip runs great and fast. If I crank up the core it still runs solid 5.0Ghz on all cores as long as I let it choose its own voltage. But Once I start to control every single aspec of it start to hate me. It will pass any Cinebench test but fail on Prime95.


It doesn't sound usual to need over 1.35V for 5.0. It sucks for sure, but you're not alone. 

Speaking of water cooling, my acrylic EK pump top cracked and leaked today. I had to rig this up for the time being.


----------



## porksmuggler

davidm71 said:


> Also what RGB led lighting kits you guys recommend for this motherboard? I found one from Corsair but those seem short in the images. Also need a front panel usb 3.1 gen 2 C bay drive..
> 
> Thanks


Follow-up, since I mentioned these earlier in the thread. These did not function on the Z390 Master.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01MQ08JH6/ref=ask_ql_qh_dp_hza

@GBT-MatthewH Wondering if you had any idea as to why? The manual (page 31), indicates max power rating at 5A (12V or 5V). I verified the switches were set at 5V (default), and tested both headers.

The strip is standard WS2812B, 5V, 18W/M, 3.6A at max brightness. I tried both the 3pin JST-SM adapters that come with the mainboard, and verified the correct orientation.

Edit: Side note, the motherboard LEDs, Trident Z, and standard 12V C1/C2 headers are all functioning as expected.


----------



## Reefersmurf

EarlZ said:


> I've only noticed a single post on this thread about that but it really is alarming



its not just gigabytes boards i had it with hero maximus xi also ,and my new board now.. aorus master.


----------



## eliau81

*IGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER help with OC*

HI bros...

just finished my new build ,and im struggling hard to get 5.2~3 out of new cpu but still no success 
i even can't get 5.1 blue screen all over my face 
i took some shouts 
https://imgur.com/a/vIQV67r

my temp prrety good in idel 25c at load 65c no OC

GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER Z390 BIOS V6
Intel Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz (4.9 GHz Turbo) 
CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 2 x 8GB DDR4 3000
TITAN X PASCAL
EVGA SuperNOVA 850 G2 80+ GOLD
950 PRO M.2 500GB
AIR COOLING NOCTUA NH-D15


----------



## Falkentyne

eliau81 said:


> HI bros...
> 
> just finished my new build ,and im struggling hard to get 5.2~3 out of new cpu but still no success
> i even can't get 5.1 blue screen all over my face
> i took some shouts
> https://imgur.com/a/vIQV67r
> 
> my temp prrety good in idel 25c at load 65c no OC
> 
> GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER Z390 BIOS V6
> Intel Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz (4.9 GHz Turbo)
> CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 2 x 8GB DDR4 3000
> TITAN X PASCAL
> EVGA SuperNOVA 850 G2 80+ GOLD
> 950 PRO M.2 500GB
> AIR COOLING NOCTUA NH-D15


A 9700K isn't guaranteed to reach 5.1 ghz.
What voltage is it stable with at 5 ghz ? Very few can reach 5.1 ghz. Only 28% of the tested 9700K's can reach 5.1 ghz or higher.
What do you need for 5 ghz and what voltage is stable?


----------



## davidm71

The Phantek LED combo kit worked out with my Auros Master but the magnets don't hold it well in place but other wise no issues.


----------



## eliau81

Falkentyne said:


> A 9700K isn't guaranteed to reach 5.1 ghz.
> What voltage is it stable with at 5 ghz ? Very few can reach 5.1 ghz. Only 28% of the tested 9700K's can reach 5.1 ghz or higher.
> What do you need for 5 ghz and what voltage is stable?


It seems that i cant get 5 with 1.4v 
same settings as the shouts shows


----------



## Falkentyne

eliau81 said:


> It seems that i cant get 5 with 1.4v
> same settings as the shouts shows


Try 4.9 ghz. Report back.


----------



## porksmuggler

davidm71 said:


> The Phantek LED combo kit worked out with my Auros Master but the magnets don't hold it well in place but other wise no issues.


Yeah, that's why I'm surprised by the DLED headers, the board has been otherwise flawless. I saved the RGB implementation last for testing, because its a minor concern. The standard 12 V C1/C2 headers were fine, which the Phantek kit uses. I have probably 300 LEDs for 12 V, but I wanted to test an addressable strip using the newer headers, especially since they indicated 5A for those on this board.


----------



## ITAngel

eliau81 said:


> HI bros...
> 
> just finished my new build ,and im struggling hard to get 5.2~3 out of new cpu but still no success
> i even can't get 5.1 blue screen all over my face
> i took some shouts
> https://imgur.com/a/vIQV67r
> 
> my temp prrety good in idel 25c at load 65c no OC
> 
> GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER Z390 BIOS V6
> Intel Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz (4.9 GHz Turbo)
> CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 2 x 8GB DDR4 3000
> TITAN X PASCAL
> EVGA SuperNOVA 850 G2 80+ GOLD
> 950 PRO M.2 500GB
> AIR COOLING NOCTUA NH-D15


Nice I am getting the same thing as you and my temps are 25C to 68C Max on air on stock settings though.


----------



## ITAngel

I think this chip don't like this motherboard or maybe the motherboard don't like the chip unless is set as default. I ran a 50x on default setup and XMP and notice that during cinebench volt reached upto 1.49V which is stupid high. I tried doing a test at 1.4V and didn't like it. Maybe I am doing something wrong or maybe both hardware don't get along. I almost tempted to get an ASUS Hero lol


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> I think this chip don't like this motherboard or maybe the motherboard don't like the chip unless is set as default. I ran a 50x on default setup and XMP and notice that during cinebench volt reached upto 1.49V which is stupid high. I tried doing a test at 1.4V and didn't like it. Maybe I am doing something wrong or maybe both hardware don't get along. I almost tempted to get an ASUS Hero lol


Use sensor #2 (ITE 8792E) to monitor voltage, or even better, use VR VOUT. VR VOUT is most accurate. What loadline calibration setting are you using?
What does VR VOUT say?

Not every 9900K or 9700K can reach 5 ghz.


----------



## Robbært

ITAngel said:


> I think this chip don't like this motherboard or maybe the motherboard don't like the chip unless is set as default. I ran a 50x on default setup and XMP and notice that during cinebench volt reached upto 1.49V which is stupid high. I tried doing a test at 1.4V and didn't like it. Maybe I am doing something wrong or maybe both hardware don't get along. I almost tempted to get an ASUS Hero lol


disable fast startup windows 10
or/and switch to F7A BIOS if you on master


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> Use sensor #2 (ITE 8792E) to monitor voltage, or even better, use VR VOUT. VR VOUT is most accurate. What loadline calibration setting are you using?
> What does VR VOUT say?
> 
> Not every 9900K or 9700K can reach 5 ghz.


I know but the darn thing does it on its own with 1.27V lol I mean default of course so I figure maybe it will be somewhere in the middle. It is Turbo that is set for loadline calibration settings. It should not be the temps right? I mean I feel I have a decent air cooler and setup on this Thermaltake Core X71


----------



## ITAngel

Robbært said:


> disable fast startup windows 10
> or/and switch to F7A BIOS if you on master


I am using F7A BIOS do I still need to disable fast startup on Win10?


----------



## Robbært

ITAngel said:


> I am using F7A BIOS do I still need to disable fast startup on Win10?


i don't see at your screenshots 1.49v you had reported before


----------



## ITAngel

Robbært said:


> i don't see at your screenshots 1.49v you had reported before


Ohh this is a modified OC that I saved, the one I reported before was on Default settings with only XMP and Clock Ratio set to 50 but voltage set to auto. I can retake that test and snap shot. Also This setup I have right now can play games, do my audio production with huge tracks with no issues and only using 1.338V base on VR VOUT.


***UPDATE***
Here is the shot taking it with the setup I just mention before. I did notice that voltage there is lower than what I saw before. Hmmm.... That is interesting and the temps were a bit higher but the room is a bit warmer by 2 degrees more plus system has done many test since that one test I mention before.

What is the safe range for voltage on this CPU that I should stay within?


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> I know but the darn thing does it on its own with 1.27V lol I mean default of course so I figure maybe it will be somewhere in the middle. It is Turbo that is set for loadline calibration settings. It should not be the temps right? I mean I feel I have a decent air cooler and setup on this Thermaltake Core X71


What are you talking about? I see your voltage 1.28-1.342. Sorry I don't understand, man.
oh you mean the other screenshot??
Are you sure you're using the right voltages? That looks like you're using adaptive voltages + Loadline calibration at the same time....sorry I don't know what's going on. Did you update your bios to f7a? Do you have windows fast boot enabled? There was a bug with overvoltage and fast boot, that was fixed by f7a (or you can disable windows fast boot in power options).


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> What are you talking about? I see your voltage 1.28-1.342. Sorry I don't understand, man.


Are you seen that on my last picture?


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> Are you seen that on my last picture?


Bios version? Update your bios.


----------



## EarlZ

Timur Born said:


> On your old rig the three x16 PCIe slots may be divided among the CPU lanes.
> 
> 16x/0x/0x
> 8x/8x/0x
> 8x/4x/4x
> 
> So if you put anything into the lower slot then the upper GPU slot goes down to 8x. On the Aorus Master the lower slot is connected to the chipset instead of the CPU.


Do you have like a block diagram for this on the master?


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> Bios version? Update your bios.


Bios is F7A 

That last screenshoot is just a optimized default setup and just put clock ratio on 50 and XMP that is about it. That is were I was talking someone that I saw voltages to to 1.49V but it didn't do it this time around. I have another profile that is set like this;

Bios = (f7a beta bios)
CPU: i9-9900K 
COOLER: bequiet! DARK PRO 4
MOBO = GIGABYTE AORUS MASTER Z390

1. XMP = Profile 1 (3000Mhz)(32GB 4x8)
2. CPU Clock Ratio = 50
3. I Disabled The Following
A. Intel Speed Shift Technology
B. CPU Enchanced Halt (C1E)
C. C3 State Support
D. C6/C7 State Support
E. C8 State Support
F: C10 State Support
G: Ring to Core offset (DownBin)
H: Voltage Optimization
4. Enchanced Multi-Core Performance
5. Uncore Ratio = 47
6. TjMAX Temperature = 110C
7. AVX Offfset = 0
8. CPU Vcore = 1.350V
9. VT-d = Disabled
10. Internal Graphics = Disabled
11. CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Turbo


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> Bios is F7A
> 
> That last screenshoot is just a optimized default setup and just put clock ratio on 50 and XMP that is about it. That is were I was talking someone that I saw voltages to to 1.49V but it didn't do it this time around. I have another profile that is set like this;
> 
> Bios = (f7a beta bios)
> CPU: i9-9900K
> COOLER: bequiet! DARK PRO 4
> MOBO = GIGABYTE AORUS MASTER Z390
> 
> 1. XMP = Profile 1 (3000Mhz)(32GB 4x8)
> 2. CPU Clock Ratio = 50
> 3. I Disabled The Following
> A. Intel Speed Shift Technology
> B. CPU Enchanced Halt (C1E)
> C. C3 State Support
> D. C6/C7 State Support
> E. C8 State Support
> F: C10 State Support
> G: Ring to Core offset (DownBin)
> H: Voltage Optimization
> 4. Enchanced Multi-Core Performance
> 5. Uncore Ratio = 47
> 6. TjMAX Temperature = 110C
> 7. AVX Offfset = 0
> 8. CPU Vcore = 1.350V
> 9. VT-d = Disabled
> 10. Internal Graphics = Disabled
> 11. CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Turbo


Disable windows fast boot in power options and see if it happens again. I can't really help with this. Sorry. But you shouldn't be having this problem.
The people who were having this problem before were on older bioses and had windows fast boot enabled (it apparently ONLY happened after AC power off/on then fixed itself on warm windows restarts).

good luck.


----------



## joeh4384

Does anyone here know of any bugs with the Aorus Ultra where the top PCIeX16 slot runs at X4. Mine is running at 4x and I can't figure out why. I currently do have NVME drives in M2M and M2A. I am on bios F5.


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> Disable windows fast boot in power options and see if it happens again. I can't really help with this. Sorry. But you shouldn't be having this problem.
> The people who were having this problem before were on older bioses and had windows fast boot enabled (it apparently ONLY happened after AC power off/on then fixed itself on warm windows restarts).
> 
> good luck.


Yea it could pretty well be something I am doing wrong. Main crashes only happen with Prime95 lol as long as I don't use that I can play and use most application but also that Gigabyte Intel Benchmark can crash it but something it passes just fine the test. I am not a big fan of Prime95 to be honest.

To be honest something even more amazing happen. I got my Hackintosh done and is working perfect. Perfect temps for the performance and such so is exactly what I wanted to do in the first place. The board and chip is working perfectly fine and in Windows I will continue to tweak it a bit better to get more out of it for games and other projects. For now I think I am very happy with my setup and I can now go to sleep.  Thanks for your help. I will continue to look into what is going on and I bet is something I am doing completely wrong.


----------



## porksmuggler

EarlZ said:


> Do you have like a block diagram for this on the master?


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L7YKBNnMJKg1GRj7xOibt7_WQa7Geibh/view


----------



## Timur Born

EarlZ said:


> Do you have like a block diagram for this on the master?


The Master does not divide all three x16 slots among CPU lanes, the lower slot is connected to the chipset lanes. So you can put anything into the lower slot and still keep x16 speed on the upper GPU slot as long as the middle slot remains empty (x16/x0/x4). As far as I understood this doesn't matter much anyway, because PCIe 3 x8 seems to be enough to not bottleneck even the 2080 TI.

In the past Gigabyte used to put connection diagrams in their manuals, which I always thought to be a special "feature" of their manuals. Too bad that they stopped doing so (wink Matthew).


----------



## Robbært

joeh4384 said:


> Does anyone here know of any bugs with the Aorus Ultra where the top PCIeX16 slot runs at X4. Mine is running at 4x and I can't figure out why. I currently do have NVME drives in M2M and M2A. I am on bios F5.


remove what you put in upper slot and look inside, if there some pin bend
it also can be cpu socket pin



ITAngel said:


> What is the safe range for voltage on this CPU that I should stay within?


it common not to try over 1.42v unless you pushing some high overclock for a temporary benchmark, etc.

voltage examples from siliconlottery (9900k)
4.8GHz 1.275v 100%
4.9GHz 1.287v 82%
5.0 1.300v 46%
5.1 1.312v 14%


----------



## eliau81

Where can i find bios f7a ?
Is it official gigabyte?
Cant find it on the site


----------



## joeh4384

Robbært said:


> remove what you put in upper slot and look inside, if there some pin bend
> it also can be cpu socket pin
> 
> 
> 
> it common not to try over 1.42v unless you pushing some high overclock for a temporary benchmark, etc.
> 
> voltage examples from siliconlottery (9900k)
> 4.8GHz 1.275v 100%
> 4.9GHz 1.287v 82%
> 5.0 1.300v 46%
> 5.1 1.312v 14%


Bummer, its my 1080ti. Tried my card from my other rig and it went to 16x fine.


----------



## Stockman

Reefersmurf said:


> its not just gigabytes boards i had it with hero maximus xi also ,and my new board now.. aorus master.


Did/do you hear it under load or at idle....or both?


----------



## Stockman

When you guys are updating the BIOS on these boards are you selecting Fast or Intact? What is the difference? Which is the better choice?


----------



## eliau81

Cant set 5ghz with 1.4v


----------



## Timur Born

I would like to point out that the LLC setting bug - described earlier by myself - results in quite considerable Vcore/droop differences. Settings VCore to Normal with 0 offset I get the following VCore and VID numbers while running non AVX P95 Small FFTs:

BIOS Vcore LLC set to "Standard" = EasyTune "Low": Vcore 1.320, ave. VID 1.326
EasyTune "Standard": Vcore 1.254 - 1.265, ave. VID 1.339

So considerable more droop and higher VID when Vcore LLC is set to "Standard" via EasyTune. It is not possible to get the same setting via BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I would like to point out that the LLC setting bug - described earlier by myself - results in quite considerable Vcore/droop differences. Settings VCore to Normal with 0 offset I get the following VCore and VID numbers while running non AVX P95 Small FFTs:
> 
> BIOS Vcore LLC set to "Standard" = EasyTune "Low": Vcore 1.320, ave. VID 1.326
> EasyTune "Standard": Vcore 1.254 - 1.265, ave. VID 1.339
> 
> So considerable more droop and higher VID when Vcore LLC is set to "Standard" via EasyTune. It is not possible to get the same setting via BIOS.


The problem is, the VID and vcore are supposed to closely match each other and droop with each other.
VID and vcore are not supposed to be separated by 80mv like in the easytune standard test. So #1 is the correct result. #2 isn't.

sorry for continuing to bug you about this, but did you check VR VOUT?
VR VOUT is the exact voltage going into the CPU.

If Elmor is correct, VR VOut should exactly match the Vcore at idle, and be significantly lower than the vcore at load (with loadline calibration set to ultra extreme, VR Vout will have a 0 mOhm loadline, idle and load will be identical)---this is based on manual voltages (not adaptive). Adaptive will be..interesting, because the internal IA AC DC Loadlines themselves get involved, and Loadline Calibration (LLC) affects the vcore (also affects VR VOUT), but not VID.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> The problem is, the VID and vcore are supposed to closely match each other and droop with each other.
> VID and vcore are not supposed to be separated by 80mv like in the easytune standard test. So #1 is the correct result. #2 isn't.


Like I wrote before, personally I don't care much about VID, but only about voltages. I listed it for comparability of what happens.



> sorry for continuing to bug you about this, but did you check VR VOUT?


P95 26.6 Small FFTs:

BIOS "Standard" = EasyTune "Low": 1.271
EasyTune "Standard": 1.221


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Like I wrote before, personally I don't care much about VID, but only about voltages. I listed it for comparability of what happens.
> 
> 
> 
> P95 26.6 Small FFTs:
> 
> BIOS "Standard" = EasyTune "Low": 1.271
> EasyTune "Standard": 1.221


Ok that's what i expected.
All your tests are being done with adaptive voltages (not manual overrides), is that correct?

What's alerting me to an issue is that the "CPU VID" changed in your test.
the CPU VID is completely unlinked to the bios "Loadline calibration" setting. LLC only affects vcore.
If the CPU VID changed, then that means the "internal CPU AC DC loadlines" are not using the default values.

Just to make sure I'm not wrong here, if you set Bios (NOT easytune) LLC to high or tubo, does the VID change at all? (Not the vcore or VR VOUT).


----------



## Timur Born

LLC Turbo cannot be measured in combination with adaptive voltage, because it leads to instant cold-resets once you apply too much load. I don't even want to know how much voltage that applies, but I can tell you that trying 1344K with an offset of -0.05V still results in 1.475V Vcore (sensor 2), so you can imagine why the system just shuts down immediately with Small FFTs.

Other than that my tests with manual Vcore showed that EasyTune "Turbo" and "Extreme" equal the corresponding BIOS settings. Only the lower settings are affected by the discrepancy.

Another oddity worth noting: Using "Normal" (adaptive) Vcore in combination with 0 (zero) offset in BIOS leads to Vcore being (re)set to "Auto" within EasyTune. The voltages seem to be the same as a true 0 (zero) offset, though, so no harm done.

The LLC bug happens with both adaptive and manual Vcore settings. So currently it still looks to me like LLC "Low" is applied when "Standard" is chosen in BIOS, which would be contrary in result to what you try to achieve (adaptive + no external LLC).


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> LLC Turbo cannot be measured in combination with adaptive voltage, because it leads to instant cold-resets once you apply too much load. I don't even want to know how much voltage that applies, but I can tell you that trying 1344K with an offset of -0.05V still results in 1.475V Vcore (sensor 2), so you can imagine why the system just shuts down immediately with Small FFTs.
> 
> Other than that my tests with manual Vcore showed that EasyTune "Turbo" and "Extreme" equal the corresponding BIOS settings. Only the lower settings are affected by the discrepancy.
> 
> Another oddity worth noting: Using "Normal" (adaptive) Vcore in combination with 0 (zero) offset in BIOS leads to Vcore being (re)set to "Auto" within EasyTune. The voltages seem to be the same as a true 0 (zero) offset, though, so no harm done.
> 
> The LLC bug happens with both adaptive and manual Vcore settings. So currently it still looks to me like LLC "Low" is applied when "Standard" is chosen in BIOS, which would be contrary in result to what you try to achieve (adaptive + no external LLC).


This cold reset issue can be addressed by increasing CPU Vcore protection.
But when you are doing these tests, what I recommend is using a MUCH lower CPU speed, like 4 ghz, because then the vcore will be somewhere between 1.0-1.1v nice and low. That makes testing much safer and less scary to do.  I wouldn't do those tests at 4.7 ghz or higher since the default VID is going to be much higher.

Did you check the CPU VID to see if it changed when using Easytune's LLC?
If you're going to check that, try doing it at 4 ghz so you don't have to worry about high voltages.

If it changes then that means Easytune is changing more than just LLC. 
I personally refuse to use software to change settings (if Throttlestop doesn't do it, I don't use it). Unfortunately, Throttlestop has no access to the FIVR on a gigabyte board, so all you can change are CPU multipliers and speedshift.


----------



## Pragzor

Guys any idea what is this VIN3? I wonder if the voltage in the safe zone. Z390 Master
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4807/45410396974_5ef60a25c9_o.jpg


----------



## Reefersmurf

Stockman said:


> Did/do you hear it under load or at idle....or both?



On idle its constant and more when moving the mouse and under load its like waves. But the asus board had much worse on both.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> This cold reset issue can be addressed by increasing CPU Vcore protection.


More likely I would just burn my CPU to death. 



> But when you are doing these tests, what I recommend is using a MUCH lower CPU speed, like 4 ghz, because then the vcore will be somewhere between 1.0-1.1v nice and low.


I went even further. I set 4 Ghz and disabled all idle functions via Windows power profile. That way the non-load VID and VCore valus are very close to the Small FFTs load values.



> Did you check the CPU VID to see if it changed when using Easytune's LLC?


The results are the same for both BIOS and EasyTune:

Higher LLC settings decrease VID in the 0.00x range for non-load situations and in the 0.0xy range for load situations. This corresponds to what I reported earlier for 5 Ghz, but with smaller relative values (somewhat expected).


----------



## Timur Born

Reefersmurf said:


> On idle its constant and more when moving the mouse and under load its like waves. But the asus board had much worse on both.


The Asus Crosshair 6 Hero was very audible, too. Most of the noise on both the Aorus Master and the C6H seem to be based on C-state switching. In my experience the noise frequency is based on C-state switching and USB polling frequencies (among others) and the loudness of the noise is based on CPU frequency or maybe voltage (I should check that).

Try the "Power Saver" Windows profile to see if it gets quieter. Try disabling *all* idle features via Windows power profile (via hidden options) to see if it completely vanishes. I hear zero noise from my Aorus Master after doing the latter, of course this comes at the price of higher idle power-draw and accompanying fan-noise.

Also keep in mind that graphic-cards' (NVidia and AMD) VRM section often is an even worse offender and quite closely located to the CPU, which makes localization of the noise source harder to achieve.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> More likely I would just burn my CPU to death.
> 
> 
> I went even further. I set 4 Ghz and disabled all idle functions via Windows power profile. That way the non-load VID and VCore valus are very close to the Small FFTs load values.
> 
> 
> The results are the same for both BIOS and EasyTune:
> 
> Higher LLC settings decrease VID in the 0.00x range for non-load situations and in the 0.0xy range for load situations. This corresponds to what I reported earlier for 5 Ghz, but with smaller relative values (somewhat expected).


I just looked in the Bios and saw there was a "Normal" and "Standard' setting for Loadline Calibration. I have absolutely no idea what the difference between them are. Did you say Easytune had a "normal" setting and a "low" setting, but not a "standard" setting?

I got bored and did some tests at 4 ghz so I wouldn't blow up my CPU.
Bios vcore was 1.150v, static. IA AC DC Loadline was 1, except in the last 4 pictures, I set it back to default.

really not much important about these pictures, except at each LLC setting, the VID was the same at idle and load relative to each picture, as I had IA AC DC loadline set to 1.

Picture order is (IDLE, LOAD)-> Normal, Standard, Low, Medium, High, Turbo, Extreme, Ultra Extreme.

the last 4 pictures are Normal and Ultra Extreme (Load, load, then idle, idle) with IA AC DC loadline set back to the auto (reference) value of 1.60 mOhms (=160 raw value).


----------



## Jonny321321

Follow up to my previous frame time problem on Z390 AORUS PRO, after trying literally everything (yes, everything) I've submitted a RMA request for the mobo to my retailer. Getting frame time spikes like this: https://imgur.com/g0mfEGT (beginning spikes is just the game loading, it's the middle 27ms spikes I get consistently) in whatever game I play. VGA_LED turns on (no matter PCIE slot/integrated) in BIOS/before posting. Also get "WARN: Unable to process RAM module 0h" warning in userbenchmark + Rammon crashes irrespective of RAM brand installed (might not be an issue). One thing I wouldn't mind some reassurance regarding is whether or not this an implementation fail (I have tried all BIOSes + beta) or rather a faulty board (so that I don't mistakenly purchase the same board if I'm going to experience the same problem).


----------



## Robbært

Jonny321321 said:


> Follow up to my previous frame time problem on Z390 AORUS PRO, after trying literally everything (yes, everything) I've submitted a RMA request for the mobo to my retailer. Getting frame time spikes like this: https://imgur.com/g0mfEGT (beginning spikes is just the game loading, it's the middle 27ms spikes I get consistently) in whatever game I play. VGA_LED turns on (no matter PCIE slot/integrated) in BIOS/before posting. Also get "WARN: Unable to process RAM module 0h" warning in userbenchmark + Rammon crashes irrespective of RAM brand installed (might not be an issue). One thing I wouldn't mind some reassurance regarding is whether or not this an implementation fail (I have tried all BIOSes + beta) or rather a faulty board (so that I don't mistakenly purchase the same board if I'm going to experience the same problem).


You can try to cut IntelME firmware by modding BIOS as last test.
And there whole reason to suspect IME on this behavior since it only thing running in background (prior to OS).


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> I just looked in the Bios and saw there was a "Normal" and "Standard' setting for Loadline Calibration. I have absolutely no idea what the difference between them are. Did you say Easytune had a "normal" setting and a "low" setting, but not a "standard" setting?


Normal and Standard seem to do the very same thing. EasyTune only offers "Standard" (plus all others), but not "Normal". This makes more sense than offering two entries for the same setting as is done in UEFI.

When you set UEFI to Normal/Standard then EasyTune will display "Low" instead. When you use anything above Standard but below Turbo then EasyTune will display a grayed out "Standard". "Grayed out" is the important part, because that means that you cannot change the setting in EasyTune.

Any UEFI setting lower than Turbo results in LLC being one step higher than the corresponding setting in EasyTune. So Low in UEFI applies the same LLC as Medium in EasyTune, Medium in UEFI applies LLC corresponding to High in EasyTune.

High in UEFI is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via EasyTune (higher than ET High, but lower than Turbo). 

Standard in EasyTune is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via UEFI (lower than UEFI Standard/Normal).

This all points to the UEFI applying wrong LLC values and EasyTune applying correct values.


----------



## BurritoJustice

Does anyone know if there is a rumoured release date for the Z390 Aorus Xtreme Waterforce? Additionally, will it be upgraded in other areas or will it just be a built in VRM waterblock? The VRM temps on the Xtreme are already so incredible I don't think it's worth waiting for that alone.


----------



## GTANY

Is this kit compatible with the Z390 Aorus Pro : TXBD432G4000HC18FQC01, TeamGroup Xtreem 8Pack Edition DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-4000, CL18-18-18-38 : https://geizhals.eu/teamgroup-xtree....html?hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=eu&hloc=pl&hloc=uk ?

On the Z390 Pro qualified vendors list, it is not included but on the Z390 Master supported memory, it is included.

And if it is compatible, am I sure that the RAM wil be able to be overclocked to 4000 Mhz with such tight timings ?


----------



## Mo2k

Hey guys, 

AVX Offset seems to work fine with my Aorus Pro Wifi (F6) but the vCore stays the same when AVX offset starts (e.g. With newest prime) 

I know that is expectable since i have set manual vcore to 1,335 (i5 9600k at 4,9 and -0,2 offset). LLC is Turbo! 

The avx offset helps with stability, yeah, but does not help with Temperature since vCore stays at 1,335! 

Is there a possibility to let vcore also be decreased when avx offset Starts? 

And After finding my stable settings I would like to enable power saving modes like EIST and so on ... but with vcore set manually does it save power when throtteling, since vcore stays?

Regards

Sorry for my english i am from Germany 🙂


----------



## Jonny321321

Robbært said:


> You can try to cut IntelME firmware by modding BIOS as last test.
> And there whole reason to suspect IME on this behavior since it only thing running in background (prior to OS).


I have tried the 'Fast' BIOS update option (as opposed to 'Intact), which implies that it neuters Intel Management Engine. I've tried with the ME drivers uninstalled, or installed. So all out of options. I've tried LTSC 2019 Windows 10, 1607, 1511, 1803, 1809 (non-LTSC). I would try Windows 7 but there's no support for the USB drivers.


----------



## wmblalock

Jonny321321 said:


> Follow up to my previous frame time problem on Z390 AORUS PRO, after trying literally everything (yes, everything) I've submitted a RMA request for the mobo to my retailer. Getting frame time spikes like this: https://imgur.com/g0mfEGT (beginning spikes is just the game loading, it's the middle 27ms spikes I get consistently) in whatever game I play. VGA_LED turns on (no matter PCIE slot/integrated) in BIOS/before posting. Also get "WARN: Unable to process RAM module 0h" warning in userbenchmark + Rammon crashes irrespective of RAM brand installed (might not be an issue). One thing I wouldn't mind some reassurance regarding is whether or not this an implementation fail (I have tried all BIOSes + beta) or rather a faulty board (so that I don't mistakenly purchase the same board if I'm going to experience the same problem).


Just for reference, here is what my frametime graph looks like while playing BFV at Ultra on the Z390 Pro with a 980TI and 8700K @ 5.1GHz.
I really don't know much about frametimes and what is good or bad, but my FPS stays basically locked at 75FPS (monitor refresh rate), and runs buttery smooth in my eyes.
Looks like I have the same spikes, or worse, than you, but I don't notice any problems or stuttering in games.


----------



## ITAngel

So I did the following seems to be pushing now 5.0GHz much easier. I ran 5.2GHz but was not very stable. Crashed doing halfway of the Cinebench Test. Second Test @ 5.1Ghz pass Cinebench.


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> So I did the following seems to be pushing now 5.0GHz much easier. I ran 5.2GHz but was not very stable. Crashed doing halfway of the Cinebench Test. Second Test @ 5.1Ghz pass Cinebench.


Why is your voltage so high? Does your CPU actually need 1.42v *load* vcore (1.365 VR VOUT) to be stable at 5.1 ghz?

1.42v (Even though the raw voltage reading, 1.365v on VR VOUT) is lower is not guaranteed safe for thees processors to avoid degradation. Maximum recommended voltage on the previous generation for long term use was 1.35v. And I don't think that's changed on this platform as the 9900K is simply an 8086K with 2 more cores.

Are you using Normal (Adaptive) voltages, + Loadline Calibration ? Or are you using "Auto" voltage?

I don't know what the difference is between Auto and Normal, but I can tell you right now that "Auto" should never be used as a general rule, and if there is an option to use auto or normal, you should use normal.
Normal voltage (set in the Bios) unlocks "DVID" (aka offset voltage) and uses the CPU VID as a voltage target, with the CPU VID responding to boosting / drooping, based on the internal IA AC DC Loadlines (this gets complicated). The CPU VID for all cores scales starting at 800 mhz and stops scaling up at 4.7 ghz. 800mhz-4.7 ghz is guaranteed stable with normal voltage, without loadline calibration (LLC set to normal) or a DVID offset set.

At speeds higher than 4.7 ghz, if this setting gives you instability at load, you usually compensate by increasing the DVID (offset), usually like 20mv at a time, until you're stable.
Another method is to increase Loadline Calibration slowly (LLC), but LLC is completely different from the internal IA AC DC Loadlines. LLC functions directly on the CPU Vcore voltage (or VR VOUT, which is the extremely accurate reading), while the internal IA AC DC loadlines functions on the CPU VID instead. It's usually recommended that people use DVID offsets first to find the voltage they need to be stable, and only then fine tune it with loadine calibration (LLC) later. I don't use offsets or adaptive voltage at all however, so you're on your own if you use adaptive.

But having the vcore reading at 1.42v isn't something you should be comfortable with.

But are you using "Normal" or "Auto"?

What happens if you switch it to "Normal"?(again i do not know the difference).


----------



## davidm71

Timur Born said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just looked in the Bios and saw there was a "Normal" and "Standard' setting for Loadline Calibration. I have absolutely no idea what the difference between them are. Did you say Easytune had a "normal" setting and a "low" setting, but not a "standard" setting?
> 
> 
> 
> Normal and Standard seem to do the very same thing. EasyTune only offers "Standard" (plus all others), but not "Normal". This makes more sense than offering two entries for the same setting as is done in UEFI.
> 
> When you set UEFI to Normal/Standard then EasyTune will display "Low" instead. When you use anything above Standard but below Turbo then EasyTune will display a grayed out "Standard". "Grayed out" is the important part, because that means that you cannot change the setting in EasyTune.
> 
> Any UEFI setting lower than Turbo results in LLC being one step higher than the corresponding setting in EasyTune. So Low in UEFI applies the same LLC as Medium in EasyTune, Medium in UEFI applies LLC corresponding to High in EasyTune.
> 
> High in UEFI is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via EasyTune (higher than ET High, but lower than Turbo).
> 
> Standard in EasyTune is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via UEFI (lower than UEFI Standard/Normal).
> 
> This all points to the UEFI applying wrong LLC values and EasyTune applying correct values.
Click to expand...


Was using 'Turbo' setting for LLC but getting high cpu temps which dropped like 8 degrees just going one step down to High. The temperature drop was the same with either using Easytune or from Uefi bios. Still feels stable so I gladly accept the lower temps. Had no idea that Easytune vs Bios settings are different?

Thanks.


----------



## Jonny321321

wmblalock said:


> Just for reference, here is what my frametime graph looks like while playing BFV at Ultra on the Z390 Pro with a 980TI and 8700K @ 5.1GHz.
> I really don't know much about frametimes and what is good or bad, but my FPS stays basically locked at 75FPS (monitor refresh rate), and runs buttery smooth in my eyes.
> Looks like I have the same spikes, or worse, than you, but I don't notice any problems or stuttering in games.


Thanks for this. It would be interesting to get other people's opinions on this as to whether or not this is an issue exclusive to the Z390 Pro (or are other AORUS boards affected?). Could anyone else run Afterburner and check whether or not they have the same issue? I'm running at 240hz and can tell, perhaps when capped at 75hz it's not so noticeable but I did just buy a new rig, I would like it to work properly. In Black Ops 4 the spikes are 50-60ms which is a big deal to me. I am using 2 sticks of RAM, not 4, I recall reading something about the Gigabyte mobos being designed optimally for 4 sticks though, perhaps relevant?


----------



## titanoc

Aorus Pro Wifi and 9900k here.



I lowered my *VCCPLL OC* to 1.110V, and temperatures decreased hugely....


Machine is stable after some strees tests, and I wonder if there is any issue in lowering it...


Can any expert in this thread explain what *VCCPLL OC *does?


----------



## Falkentyne

titanoc said:


> Aorus Pro Wifi and 9900k here.
> 
> 
> 
> I lowered my *VCCPLL OC* to 1.110V, and temperatures decreased hugely....
> 
> 
> Machine is stable after some strees tests, and I wonder if there is any issue in lowering it...
> 
> 
> Can any expert in this thread explain what *VCCPLL OC *does?


Don't lower that.
The temp decrease is fake.

VCCPLL OC is linked to vDDQ somehow and affects the DTS temp sensors in some bizarre way. The temps aren't really lowered, they just appear lower.
VCCPLL OC is usually used at higher values to deal with cold boot bugs when the CPU temp is sub-zero.

I don't know what VCCPLL (the other setting) does but I highly doubt it's going to make a borderline unstable CPU stable. 

Leave them at the default values.
Intel 8th gen datasheet attached for your pleasure (8th and 9th gen will have the same settings).


----------



## derx

I seem to have gotten a bit of a dud 9700k. Only getting 5.1 stable at 1.39v with llc on extreme on my z390 aorus pro. Anything less that that gives me bluescreens on 3dmark timespy cpu and crashes in geekbench. Been playing with it for 2 days now, but can't seem to get it stable at lower volts. Maybe it's the cooler that's killing it, as I have it (for now) on an open testbed with a Scyte Mugen 2b. When I finally decide I've tested enough, I'll have a custom watercooling setup with a XSPC RX360 and a 30mm thick 280mm (can't remember the make at the moment) radiator. Waterblock is an EK Supremacy Evo and driving it all with an EK D5 pump. So cooling should be enough. Just hope that the awful overclocking is due to the cooling, although I don't go above 85C during any of the tests (bar OCCT or prime 95 small fft).


----------



## Falkentyne

derx said:


> I seem to have gotten a bit of a dud 9700k. Only getting 5.1 stable at 1.39v with llc on extreme on my z390 aorus pro. Anything less that that gives me bluescreens on 3dmark timespy cpu and crashes in geekbench. Been playing with it for 2 days now, but can't seem to get it stable at lower volts. Maybe it's the cooler that's killing it, as I have it (for now) on an open testbed with a Scyte Mugen 2b. When I finally decide I've tested enough, I'll have a custom watercooling setup with a XSPC RX360 and a 30mm thick 280mm (can't remember the make at the moment) radiator. Waterblock is an EK Supremacy Evo and driving it all with an EK D5 pump. So cooling should be enough. Just hope that the awful overclocking is due to the cooling, although I don't go above 85C during any of the tests (bar OCCT or prime 95 small fft).


doesn't sound like a dud.
What does it do at 5 ghz with LLC on turbo (not extreme), for stable volts?


----------



## OutlawII

derx said:


> I seem to have gotten a bit of a dud 9700k. Only getting 5.1 stable at 1.39v with llc on extreme on my z390 aorus pro. Anything less that that gives me bluescreens on 3dmark timespy cpu and crashes in geekbench. Been playing with it for 2 days now, but can't seem to get it stable at lower volts. Maybe it's the cooler that's killing it, as I have it (for now) on an open testbed with a Scyte Mugen 2b. When I finally decide I've tested enough, I'll have a custom watercooling setup with a XSPC RX360 and a 30mm thick 280mm (can't remember the make at the moment) radiator. Waterblock is an EK Supremacy Evo and driving it all with an EK D5 pump. So cooling should be enough. Just hope that the awful overclocking is due to the cooling, although I don't go above 85C during any of the tests (bar OCCT or prime 95 small fft).


How is this a dud? Think about this the compettion is lucky to get 4.5ghz. You got a good chip dude be happy


----------



## Padinn

Could I received some latest guidance on overclocking the 9900k with the z390 Aorous Master? My specs are: 9900k z390 Aorous Master Corsair h150i pro using Thermal Grizzly Kyronaut G.Skill DDR4 3200 I am When I set most things to auto, turn on XMP, and set VCC IO and VCC SA to 1.10 volts (LLC set to Standard) Core voltage set to auto. My ambient temperature is around 26c. VR VOut reads average of 1.25v (peak of 1.31). I am stable with 4.7Ghz all core, around 80c during x264 blend test from the Kaby Lake OC thread. Does my temp seem about right for this level or am I running hot?

I am on the F6 bios.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Could I received some latest guidance on overclocking the 9900k with the z390 Aorous Master? My specs are: 9900k z390 Aorous Master Corsair h150i pro using Thermal Grizzly Kyronaut G.Skill DDR4 3200 I am When I set most things to auto, turn on XMP, and set VCC IO and VCC SA to 1.10 volts (LLC set to Standard) Core voltage set to auto. My ambient temperature is around 26c. VR VOut reads average of 1.25v (peak of 1.31). I am stable with 4.7Ghz all core, around 80c during x264 blend test from the Kaby Lake OC thread. Does my temp seem about right for this level or am I running hot?
> 
> I am on the F6 bios.


Seems about right to me although I never ran x264 whatever that is. Why do you have your core voltage set to Auto? Set it to "Normal" and tell me if your VR Vout is any lower.
If VR Vout (true voltage) is reading 1.25v at full load, then I'm guessing the Vcore sensor (the second one) is reading about 1.3v-1.31v. That's a bit high.

Set your vcore to "Normal" and tell me if the readings change any.


----------



## Beggisch

Is XMP not working correctly with the Aorus Master or is it only me?

I bought GSkill F4-3600C17-16GTZR, 2x 16 GB kit

The only thing in Bios I changes is the Case Fan Curves and I load the XMP Profiles.
In Bios it shows me 3600mhz.

When I'm in Windows I only had 3200Mhz (timings 17-19-19-39)with F6 Bios and switching to F7a I get 3466 Mhz with same timings.

anyone else with the same issue? Or do I have to change any other Setting?


----------



## Robbært

Beggisch said:


> Is XMP not working correctly with the Aorus Master or is it only me?


try manual instead of xmp


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> Why is your voltage so high? Does your CPU actually need 1.42v *load* vcore (1.365 VR VOUT) to be stable at 5.1 ghz?
> 
> 1.42v (Even though the raw voltage reading, 1.365v on VR VOUT) is lower is not guaranteed safe for thees processors to avoid degradation. Maximum recommended voltage on the previous generation for long term use was 1.35v. And I don't think that's changed on this platform as the 9900K is simply an 8086K with 2 more cores.
> 
> Are you using Normal (Adaptive) voltages, + Loadline Calibration ? Or are you using "Auto" voltage?
> 
> I don't know what the difference is between Auto and Normal, but I can tell you right now that "Auto" should never be used as a general rule, and if there is an option to use auto or normal, you should use normal.
> Normal voltage (set in the Bios) unlocks "DVID" (aka offset voltage) and uses the CPU VID as a voltage target, with the CPU VID responding to boosting / drooping, based on the internal IA AC DC Loadlines (this gets complicated). The CPU VID for all cores scales starting at 800 mhz and stops scaling up at 4.7 ghz. 800mhz-4.7 ghz is guaranteed stable with normal voltage, without loadline calibration (LLC set to normal) or a DVID offset set.
> 
> At speeds higher than 4.7 ghz, if this setting gives you instability at load, you usually compensate by increasing the DVID (offset), usually like 20mv at a time, until you're stable.
> Another method is to increase Loadline Calibration slowly (LLC), but LLC is completely different from the internal IA AC DC Loadlines. LLC functions directly on the CPU Vcore voltage (or VR VOUT, which is the extremely accurate reading), while the internal IA AC DC loadlines functions on the CPU VID instead. It's usually recommended that people use DVID offsets first to find the voltage they need to be stable, and only then fine tune it with loadine calibration (LLC) later. I don't use offsets or adaptive voltage at all however, so you're on your own if you use adaptive.
> 
> But having the vcore reading at 1.42v isn't something you should be comfortable with.
> 
> But are you using "Normal" or "Auto"?
> 
> What happens if you switch it to "Normal"?(again i do not know the difference).


Well So far just been changing the voltage and been focusing on 4.8Ghz. I have so far hit 4.8Ghz on all 8 cores with 1.250V and CPU Max Temp of 76C using ASUS RealBench tool. I can't go so far below 1.230V. Crashed the test. I am thinking 1.250V is best I can pull on this chip with current air cooling. I plan to pick up a block and get the system maybe water cooled again soon. Is that a bad OC or okay?


----------



## robertr1

PSA: Don't ever set vcore on GB Z390 on Auto. Swapped out my 8086k for a 9900k and tried it for fun. 1.45v Manual is 1.27 for the same frequency 4.9ghz incase anyone wants a comparison. 

Also, if you want stability testing, BF 5 multiplayer is really good for teasing out issue. It'll push the CPU heavily along with the rest of the system. 

I could pass Prime95, realbench, timespy, cinebench, ibt at 1.26v with LLC Turbo running 4.9ghz but system locks in BF 5. Bumping to 1.27v is now stable running a 2.5hr session and ofcourse all the benchmarks pass. 

I can do 5ghz with 1.3v but the temps are too high on air with a dark 4 cooler. There's no reasonable workload where the 100mhz performance gain is worth the 12-14c temp jump.


----------



## OhForPetesSake

So, I just built a new machine (will include pcpartpicker at the bottom for reference) using the z390 aorus master. So far, everything is excellent. I haven't gotten into testing overclocking yet, but I plan to soon. 

I've now noticed a quirk x2 though, which makes me think it might not go away, so I wanted to check in with you all who know more than me. Twice now, when booting from cold, I get a post code of C4 (which doesn't actually have anything associated with it) and the machine won't boot. I cleared CMOS and no help. The first time this happened, it was shortly after enabling XMP, so I removed one stick of ram, and the machine booted. Put the stick back in, and the machine booted. Enabled XMP, and the machine booted. Ran Prime95 blender for 1-2 hours, no issues. Gamed for a few hours, no issues. Turned my computer off, went to bed, this morning, same thing, with the same solution.

The fact that once I boot, everything goes well, including with XMP, it makes me think this is related to the board moreso than the RAM. The only additional observation I have, and I apologize if this shows ignorance, is that the ram I have is listed at:
DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600)
Timing 16-18-18-38
CAS Latency 16
Voltage 1.35V

Currently, it's running those timings, but it looks like the voltage is 1.2V. Could this be the problem?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

*CPU:* Intel - Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor (Purchased For $399.99) 
*CPU Cooler:* NZXT - Kraken X62 Rev 2 98.17 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler (Purchased For $124.99) 
*Motherboard:* Gigabyte - Z390 AORUS MASTER ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (Purchased For $229.00) 
*Memory:* G.Skill - Trident Z 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory (Purchased For $134.99) 
*Storage:* Western Digital - Black NVMe 500 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive (Purchased For $89.99) 
*Storage:* Samsung - 860 Evo 1 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive (Purchased For $129.00) 
*Storage:* Seagate - Barracuda 3 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (Purchased For $59.99) 
*Video Card:* Gigabyte - GeForce RTX 2080 8 GB GAMING OC Video Card (Purchased For $749.99) 
*Case:* Lian-Li - PC-O11DW ATX Full Tower Case (Purchased For $115.20) 
*Power Supply:* EVGA - SuperNOVA P2 850 W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (Purchased For $79.99) 
*Monitor:* Asus - PG279Q ROG Swift 27.0" 2560x1440 165 Hz Monitor (Purchased For $549.00) 
*Other:* NZXT Aer RGB 2 120mm RGB LED Fan, Hue 2 Compatible (HF-28120-B1) (Purchased For $26.99) 
*Other:* NZXT Aer RGB 2 120mm RGB LED Fan, Hue 2 Compatible (HF-28120-B1) (Purchased For $26.99) 
*Other:* NZXT Aer RGB 2 120mm RGB LED Fan, Hue 2 Compatible (HF-28120-B1) (Purchased For $26.99) 
*Other:* Nzxt AER RGB 2 120mm Case Fans Triple Starter Pack with Hue 2 Black (HF-2812C-TI) (Purchased For $117.00) 
*Total:* $2860.10
_Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available_
_Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-12-03 06:29 EST-0500_


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Could I received some latest guidance on overclocking the 9900k with the z390 Aorous Master? My specs are: 9900k z390 Aorous Master Corsair h150i pro using Thermal Grizzly Kyronaut G.Skill DDR4 3200 I am When I set most things to auto, turn on XMP, and set VCC IO and VCC SA to 1.10 volts (LLC set to Standard) Core voltage set to auto. My ambient temperature is around 26c. VR VOut reads average of 1.25v (peak of 1.31). I am stable with 4.7Ghz all core, around 80c during x264 blend test from the Kaby Lake OC thread. Does my temp seem about right for this level or am I running hot?
> 
> I am on the F6 bios.
> 
> 
> 
> Seems about right to me although I never ran x264 whatever that is. Why do you have your core voltage set to Auto? Set it to "Normal" and tell me if your VR Vout is any lower.
> If VR Vout (true voltage) is reading 1.25v at full load, then I'm guessing the Vcore sensor (the second one) is reading about 1.3v-1.31v. That's a bit high.
> 
> Set your vcore to "Normal" and tell me if the readings change any.
Click to expand...

I set to normal and left it at 1.2. Running the x264 16 thread test references here https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-guide-statistics.html#/topics/1621347?page=1

I will double check tonight but from what I recall voltages were about the same on VROut. What did you mean by second voltage reading?


----------



## Stockman

Jonny321321 said:


> wmblalock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just for reference, here is what my frametime graph looks like while playing BFV at Ultra on the Z390 Pro with a 980TI and 8700K @ 5.1GHz.
> I really don't know much about frametimes and what is good or bad, but my FPS stays basically locked at 75FPS (monitor refresh rate), and runs buttery smooth in my eyes.
> Looks like I have the same spikes, or worse, than you, but I don't notice any problems or stuttering in games.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for this. It would be interesting to get other people's opinions on this as to whether or not this is an issue exclusive to the Z390 Pro (or are other AORUS boards affected?). Could anyone else run Afterburner and check whether or not they have the same issue? I'm running at 240hz and can tell, perhaps when capped at 75hz it's not so noticeable but I did just buy a new rig, I would like it to work properly. In Black Ops 4 the spikes are 50-60ms which is a big deal to me. I am using 2 sticks of RAM, not 4, I recall reading something about the Gigabyte mobos being designed optimally for 4 sticks though, perhaps relevant?
Click to expand...

Jonny - have you tried the "clear standby memory" fix? See below.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/...by_memory_issue_causing_stutters_on_creators/

I have bad stuttering (high frame times) in Far Cry 5 and found this video below where the guy is clearing standby memory to fix. Unfortunately , it didn't make a difference for me.

https://youtu.be/V7iX8F_5PfA


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> I set to normal and left it at 1.2. Running the x264 16 thread test references here https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-guide-statistics.html#/topics/1621347?page=1
> 
> I will double check tonight but from what I recall voltages were about the same on VROut. What did you mean by second voltage reading?


There are two vcore sensors. The first one is extremely inaccurate and spikes all over. The second reads the MLCC caps behind the socket and keeps idle and load vcore the same with LLC Turbo, but is still too high (look in the bios, notice that turbo still shows a loadline drop graphically in the bios itself?)
VR VOUT matches the bios "graph" 100%, and shows voltage the same with Ultra Extreme (0 mOhm loadline) at idle and load. VR VOUT matches the CPU on-die sense voltage reading.


----------



## ITAngel

Hey @Falkentyne; What is the safe temp range and safe voltage range for the 9900K? I was told I needed to keep temps below 60C and voltages below 1.35V.


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> Hey @Falkentyne; What is the safe temp range and safe voltage range for the 9900K? I was told I needed to keep temps below 60C and voltages below 1.35V.


Under 100C is fine. The chips are rated for 100C anyway but lower the better obviously. No one likes 100C. I heard that ideally, under 80C is safest. No idea who told you 60C unless they live in an Igloo.

1.35v or lower is a good safety barrier to follow but no one really knows for sure. 8th gen hasn't really been out long enough (9th gen is just 8th gen with 2 more cores anyway).

Has anyone seen degradation on a 8700K from using more than 1.35v long term?


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> There are two vcore sensors. The first one is extremely inaccurate and spikes all over. The second reads the MLCC caps behind the socket and keeps idle and load vcore the same with LLC Turbo, but is still too high (look in the bios, notice that turbo still shows a loadline drop graphically in the bios itself?)
> VR VOUT matches the bios "graph" 100%, and shows voltage the same with Ultra Extreme (0 mOhm loadline) at idle and load. VR VOUT matches the CPU on-die sense voltage reading.


Maybe he means the two VR VOUT I believe there is two that show up on HWiNFO64.




Falkentyne said:


> Under 100C is fine. The chips are rated for 100C anyway but lower the better obviously. No one likes 100C.
> 1.35v or lower is a good safety barrier to follow but no one really knows for sure. 8th gen hasn't really been out long enough (9th gen is just 8th gen with 2 more cores anyway).
> 
> Has anyone seen degradation on a 8700K from using more than 1.35v long term?


Oh okay that is good then, I did put extended warranty on the chip and mobo for 3 years just in case something happen it is cover some how. =)


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> Maybe he means the two VR VOUT I believe there is two that show up on HWiNFO64.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh okay that is good then, I did put extended warranty on the chip and mobo for 3 years just in case something happen it is cover some how. =)


No, there are two vcore sensors. I'm talking about vcore, not on-die sense.
the first vcore sensor is the old traditional sensor we've seen for years. Spikes all over the place.
the second vcore sensor is alot more tight and seems to match the CPU socket MLCC caps reading, according to this chart.
Elmor thinks this is what sensor #2 is reading, since at Extreme and Ultra Extreme, load vcore will be higher than idle vcore.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

VR VOUT is very close to the CPU On-die sense, and should be a dead on accurate representation of true CPU voltage (with Ultra Extreme Loadline, Idle and load will be exactly the same).
(but using UE is not wise because transient voltage spikes will be much higher and worse, as there is no vdroop to buffer them).


----------



## Jonny321321

Stockman said:


> Jonny - have you tried the "clear standby memory" fix? See below.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/...by_memory_issue_causing_stutters_on_creators/
> 
> I have bad stuttering (high frame times) in Far Cry 5 and found this video below where the guy is clearing standby memory to fix. Unfortunately , it didn't make a difference for me.
> 
> https://youtu.be/V7iX8F_5PfA


I have indeed tried that fix Stockman. No joy. The problem occurs on an OS before that fix is relevant (e.g. 1511). Thanks for the suggestion though.


----------



## Adamastor

Jonny321321 said:


> Thanks for this. It would be interesting to get other people's opinions on this as to whether or not this is an issue exclusive to the Z390 Pro (or are other AORUS boards affected?). Could anyone else run Afterburner and check whether or not they have the same issue? I'm running at 240hz and can tell, perhaps when capped at 75hz it's not so noticeable but I did just buy a new rig, I would like it to work properly. In Black Ops 4 the spikes are 50-60ms which is a big deal to me. I am using 2 sticks of RAM, not 4, I recall reading something about the Gigabyte mobos being designed optimally for 4 sticks though, perhaps relevant?


I one frametime spike here and there in BF V. Maybe each 3/4 minutes but i would consider it a normal thing. If you're having those spikes in BO4 could it be game-engine related? What does that spikes translates in game playing? Are you feeling some bad stuttering? Could it be related to your monitor and type of sync used (https://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/gsync101-input-lag-tests-and-settings/2/)?

You could also try the new software from the DDU creator: https://www.wagnardsoft.com/content/intelligent-standby-list-cleaner-v1000-released
Didn't tried it but some people say that it helped alot with frametimes issues


----------



## Stockman

Jonny321321 said:


> I have indeed tried that fix Stockman. No joy. The problem occurs on an OS before that fix is relevant (e.g. 1511). Thanks for the suggestion though.


I'm pretty sure HPET is disabled by default now, but it might be worth checking:

https://www.overclockers.at/articles/the-hpet-bug-what-it-is-and-what-it-isnt


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I set to normal and left it at 1.2. Running the x264 16 thread test references here https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-guide-statistics.html#/topics/1621347?page=1
> 
> I will double check tonight but from what I recall voltages were about the same on VROut. What did you mean by second voltage reading?
> 
> 
> 
> There are two vcore sensors. The first one is extremely inaccurate and spikes all over. The second reads the MLCC caps behind the socket and keeps idle and load vcore the same with LLC Turbo, but is still too high (look in the bios, notice that turbo still shows a loadline drop graphically in the bios itself?)
> VR VOUT matches the bios "graph" 100%, and shows voltage the same with Ultra Extreme (0 mOhm loadline) at idle and load. VR VOUT matches the CPU on-die sense voltage reading.
Click to expand...

At work so I can't remember well, I will pay a screenshot tonight. The one I am describing is the one that I believe is supposed to be accurate. Sensor part number starts with a 3 if I recall correctly.


----------



## Jonny321321

Adamastor said:


> I one frametime spike here and there in BF V. Maybe each 3/4 minutes but i would consider it a normal thing. If you're having those spikes in BO4 could it be game-engine related? What does that spikes translates in game playing? Are you feeling some bad stuttering? Could it be related to your monitor and type of sync used (https://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/gsync101-input-lag-tests-and-settings/2/)?
> 
> You could also try the new software from the DDU creator: https://www.wagnardsoft.com/content/intelligent-standby-list-cleaner-v1000-released
> Didn't tried it but some people say that it helped alot with frametimes issues


My 240hz is Freesync and have a NVIDIA GPU atm so not utilising it. Furthermore, I tried with my ASUS VG248QE and same issue. I've tried on Integrated Graphics and same issue. I've tried with HDMI & DVI-D as well as the main displayport. Initially I thought it was related to the engine but I get the same issue with Fortnite and CS GO, Black Ops 4 is the worst but equally it stresses the CPU/RAM the most out of those 3 games. I also tried changing the Black Ops render threads from 4, to 5/6 (tried both).

I've tried with HPET forced off, disabled in Windows, no difference. I have tried DDU, but given that I was installing these drivers from a fresh install often, I didn't expect it to make a difference and it didn't. Also, I've tried the EmptyStandbyList.exe thing, no change. Interestingly, when I tried with HPET forced on, the timer Mhz went to 24mhz (or was it 28mhz) as opposed to 14.3 or something like that, it really made everything quite unstable (even on desktop). Probably not related though.


----------



## ITAngel

What is the best water block for an i9-9900K?


----------



## Peteypabs72

Hey guys, question about Overclocking my 9700k

Right now I’ve got it at 5.2 with an avx offset of 2. I really only use my pc for gaming, web browsing, word docs etc, no video editing or anything. 

I have F6 BIOS. I set my Vcore to 1.365 
Cpu-z is showing my Vcore as 1.380
hWInfo64 is showing 2 Vcore, 1 at 1.380 and the secondary at 1.364 

Right now I’m just running Blender and will do Prime95 27.9 next. 

Is that Vcore okay? How high is safe?
So far the highest temp I’ve got on blender is 84 degrees


----------



## Falkentyne

Peteypabs72 said:


> Hey guys, question about Overclocking my 9700k
> 
> Right now I’ve got it at 5.2 with an avx offset of 2. I really only use my pc for gaming, web browsing, word docs etc, no video editing or anything.
> 
> I have F6 BIOS. I set my Vcore to 1.365
> Cpu-z is showing my Vcore as 1.380
> hWInfo64 is showing 2 Vcore, 1 at 1.380 and the secondary at 1.364
> 
> Right now I’m just running Blender and will do Prime95 27.9 next.
> 
> Is that Vcore okay? How high is safe?
> So far the highest temp I’ve got on blender is 84 degrees


Standard for most people since Kaby Lake (Coffee Lake is just kaby lake with 2 moar corez, and 9th gen is just a 8086K/8700K with 2 more also) was to stay at or below 1.35v for 24/7.

I don't know if this means bios (idle) voltage or or true load voltage or even "on-die sense" (raw) CPU voltage, because a bios voltage of 1.35v could droop a lot depending on loadline calibration.
And the "on die sense" voltage will read significantly lower than the CPU Vcore sensor. (Only on Asus Maximus XI is the cpu voltage calibrated to match the on-die sense, that's why people are reporting a lot more vdroop on them).


----------



## Robbært

Jonny321321 said:


> My 240hz is Freesync and have a NVIDIA GPU atm so not utilising it. Furthermore, I tried with my ASUS VG248QE and same issue. I've tried on Integrated Graphics and same issue. I've tried with HDMI & DVI-D as well as the main displayport. Initially I thought it was related to the engine but I get the same issue with Fortnite and CS GO, Black Ops 4 is the worst but equally it stresses the CPU/RAM the most out of those 3 games. I also tried changing the Black Ops render threads from 4, to 5/6 (tried both).
> 
> I've tried with HPET forced off, disabled in Windows, no difference. I have tried DDU, but given that I was installing these drivers from a fresh install often, I didn't expect it to make a difference and it didn't. Also, I've tried the EmptyStandbyList.exe thing, no change. Interestingly, when I tried with HPET forced on, the timer Mhz went to 24mhz (or was it 28mhz) as opposed to 14.3 or something like that, it really made everything quite unstable (even on desktop). Probably not related though.


ParkControl?
as CPUs getting better games load it less and less so windows power system park cores
there really only this and IME can cause these huge 30ms delays since any other system task is very effectively cached


----------



## Falkentyne

Jonny321321 said:


> Follow up to my previous frame time problem on Z390 AORUS PRO, after trying literally everything (yes, everything) I've submitted a RMA request for the mobo to my retailer. Getting frame time spikes like this: https://imgur.com/g0mfEGT (beginning spikes is just the game loading, it's the middle 27ms spikes I get consistently) in whatever game I play. VGA_LED turns on (no matter PCIE slot/integrated) in BIOS/before posting. Also get "WARN: Unable to process RAM module 0h" warning in userbenchmark + Rammon crashes irrespective of RAM brand installed (might not be an issue). One thing I wouldn't mind some reassurance regarding is whether or not this an implementation fail (I have tried all BIOSes + beta) or rather a faulty board (so that I don't mistakenly purchase the same board if I'm going to experience the same problem).


No idea about frametime issues.

disabled vsync and enabled frametime monitoring in Overwatch this morning, no spikes at all, literally a smooth graph (unless I alt tabbbed).
Aorus Master and RX Vega 64. All details set to maximum except render scale 100%.


----------



## ITAngel

I am looking at Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos NEXT with VISION 1151 with or without VISION that block looks sick. 

https://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?language=en&products_id=3561


----------



## titanoc

Falkentyne said:


> Don't lower that.
> The temp decrease is fake.
> 
> VCCPLL OC is linked to vDDQ somehow and affects the DTS temp sensors in some bizarre way. The temps aren't really lowered, they just appear lower.




Thanks!


I've set it back to auto.


I'm trying to undervolt the 9900k (I'm all stock, no overclock at all) in order to reduce my temps.


I've set *CPU Vcore* to *Normal*, and *Dynamic Vcore(DVID)* to *-0.090* (those were the only voltage/frequency settings I've changed at all)

I'm stable in Prime (SmallFFT), but in idle, the machine restarts after some time.


I'm a newbie in such voltage settings, but what I think is happening is voltage is getting very low when CPU is running at low clocks (balanced power plan, as I want CPU to lower clocks).


How can I overcome this?


----------



## Stockman

Robbært said:


> ParkControl?
> as CPUs getting better games load it less and less so windows power system park cores
> there really only this and IME can cause these huge 30ms delays since any other system task is very effectively cached


I assume that IME = Intel Management Engine. What can be done to IME to help with frame times? My understanding is you can't really "disable" it. Not installing the IME driver doesn't seem to make any difference.


----------



## Falkentyne

titanoc said:


> Thanks!
> 
> 
> I've set it back to auto.
> 
> 
> I'm trying to undervolt the 9900k (I'm all stock, no overclock at all) in order to reduce my temps.
> 
> 
> I've set *CPU Vcore* to *Normal*, and *Dynamic Vcore(DVID)* to *-0.090* (those were the only voltage/frequency settings I've changed at all)
> 
> I'm stable in Prime (SmallFFT), but in idle, the machine restarts after some time.
> 
> 
> I'm a newbie in such voltage settings, but what I think is happening is voltage is getting very low when CPU is running at low clocks (balanced power plan, as I want CPU to lower clocks).
> 
> 
> How can I overcome this?


Is -0.09mv 90mv or 9mv?

Hi.
When using vcore=Normal, don't undervolt.
Undervolting like that is really only for laptops (long story), which come often extremely overvolted.

Just keep it like it is without a negative offset.

When vcore is set to normal, the CPU will use the default VID that is programmed at each mhz step. This vid may start from 0.620v at 800 mhz and go all the way up to 1.25v at 4.7 ghz. (This is just a random example. EVERY cpu will have a different default VID table at each +100mhz speed up to the point where the VID stops scaling (4600 mhz on 9700K, 4700 mhz on 9900K).

This is then relegated and picked up as vcore, after the internal IA AC DC Loadlines (NOT LOADLINE CALIBRATION) deal with the loadline and droop slopes with setting the VID, and the loadline slopes should match the motherboard's onboard VRM's own default loadline (which should be set to 1.60 mOhms loadline slope), so the VID and vcore should both register similar values

When you set a negative offset, your load voltage may drop by 9mv, and the chip will still easily be stable at full load (as there is a cushion there, the VID has to be stable at that preset voltage up to 100C). But when you downclock to idle, going down at 0.650v and dropping 9mv is a MUCH larger percentage difference, enough to crash the CPU. 650mv is a very low voltage. There isn't a lot of wiggle room here.

There's really no need to use a negative offset with using all normal voltages.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> There are two vcore sensors. The first one is extremely inaccurate and spikes all over. The second reads the MLCC caps behind the socket and keeps idle and load vcore the same with LLC Turbo, but is still too high (look in the bios, notice that turbo still shows a loadline drop graphically in the bios itself?)
> VR VOUT matches the bios "graph" 100%, and shows voltage the same with Ultra Extreme (0 mOhm loadline) at idle and load. VR VOUT matches the CPU on-die sense voltage reading.


Here are the pics as promised. This is with Voltage and Offset set to Normal, LLC Auto, all CStates Enabled, 1.1 on VCC IO and VCC SA. Temps are around 80c stable doing the stress test I mentioned. I think main thing that I find odd is that the VIDs hover around 1.29v and I'm not really overclocking (though I see my max cores went to 4.8Ghz, not sure why that happened as they stabilize at 4.7). I'm trying to get a sense on if these temps are normal. From what I can tell, I am in right range (I see similar coolers at 77C, but my ambient of 26c is a little higher)


----------



## Falkentyne

This is normal and expected.
The VID's have a loadline slope just like "Loadline Calibration"'s vdroop.
Perhaps @elmor can explain it better than me because I'm awkward.
But the VIDs have a 1.6 mOhm loadline slope, and they are put into IA AC loadline (cpu voltage power supply) and IA DC Loadline (Power measurement). I'm pretty sure that this is done so that the VID will be higher at idle (just like when you use manual voltage control, your CPU Bios voltage is your idle voltage, right?), and then at full load, the VID will drop down based on load and current (slight boost in VID for AVX loads), just like how your CPU Vcore will drop down when using default Loadline Calibration.

I'm taking a random guess here, and @elmor can correct me if he wishes, but I think the 'default' motherboard Loadline caibration setting is supposed to match the Internal CPU IA AC DC loadlines, so the vcore droop at load matches the VID.

The Intel 8th gen documentation sheet only says this "useful" gem of information on what these two values even mean:

8. Load Line (AC/DC) should be measured by the VRTT tool and programmed accordingly via the BIOS Load Line override
setup options. AC/DC Load Line BIOS programming directly affects operating voltages (AC) and power measurements
(DC). A superior board design with a shallower AC Load Line can improve on power, performance, and thermals compared
to boards designed for POR impedance

Ok anyway:
Example, at 4.7 ghz, at idle, you may have a VID of 1.36v, and then at full 8 core load, the VID will drop to 1.25v, and the CPU Vcore should match this.

All cores should be binned the same, so the VID on all cores should not vary more than 10mv per core. And all CPU's will have different VID defaults at a given mhz (Up to the highest 8 core turbo multiplier).
In general, the lower the default VID is (at full load), the better the chip tends to overclock.

It's important NOT to mess with the internal IA AC DC loadlines too much. Setting it to "1" (0.01 on Asus bioses) is best done ONLY if you are using manual voltage control, as this might give you an unstable system if using adaptive (normal) voltages.

setting it higher than 210 (21 on Asus bioses)--reference value 2.10 mOhms (2.10 mOhms reference is for 4 and 6 cores, 1.60 mOhms is for 8 cores) is NOT recommended and can be DANGEROUS if you go anywhere near the higher ranges.

Gigabyte has a 'preset' for this when IA AC DC loadline is set to its auto value of 0....called "CPU Internal Load Line" with obscure stuff like "power saving", "performance", " turbo", and stuff, with absolutely NO documentation on it. Turbo seems to be "close" to the default values. "Power saving"..uh......seems...to use a value for AC loadline close to 1, and a much higher value for DC loadline. How high I don't know. And i can't be bothered testing (has to be lower than 2.10 mOhms though).


----------



## Padinn

Thanks for the reply. So based on what you know, my temps seem fine for those voltages? I wanted to make sure I had a good starting place before trying to overclock.


----------



## Falkentyne

I don't have your heatsink so I have no idea. But they seem standard fare to me.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> I don't have your heatsink so I have no idea. But they seem standard fare to me.


Thanks the h150i is basically a 360mm version of the h100i, with slower can speeds so it performsa bout the same


----------



## Robbært

Stockman said:


> I assume that IME = Intel Management Engine. What can be done to IME to help with frame times? My understanding is you can't really "disable" it. Not installing the IME driver doesn't seem to make any difference.


It possible to disable all not related to motherboard start features of IME v11 and prior link.

z390 comes with IME v12. There is still no fix for it.


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> ...according to this chart...


Sorry, what chart are you referring to? Also, the link you posted is probably not the link you intended to post


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Sorry, what chart are you referring to? Also, the link you posted is probably not the link you intended to post


Oops.
I have no idea what happened there.
I fixed it.
I meant this.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


----------



## Hercules99

real bench or aida 64


----------



## Mencius

Hi everyone, I am about 2 weeks in to trying to stabilise my 9700k overclock on an aorus master and would really welcome some help at this point!

I am stable at 4.9ghz all cores, 4.6ghz cache, 1.3v manual vcore, turbo LLC and a -1 avx offset WITHOUT XMP. I have tested with both F6 and F7a bios.

Those settings passed 1-2 hours of: 
p95 non-avx 1344k ffts and 12k ffts (in-place, 15min per test)
Intel burn test (shorter test), 
occt large, 
occt non avx linpack (shorter test), and 
realbench. 

They also passed an overnight p95 non-avx 512k-4096k ffts (in-place 15min per). 

When I enable XMP it passes all of the tests listed above but it fails the overnight p95 non avx 512k-4096k ffts. It fails anytime between 2-5 hours in. Interestingly, it doesn't blue screen or error but hard locks (cursor freezes, fans spin down to low rpms, nothing recorded in event viewer or minidumps) when I was dialling in my core overclock I would typically see blue screens, resets or worker errors. 

My RAM is 2x8GB of Corsair vengeance lpx 3000mhz, Samsung double sided dies. This RAM was rock solid stable with xmp and tightened timings on my previous CPU and motherboard, a 4.4ghz overclocked 6600k and Asus Maximus viii gene.

I have tried:
Raising vcore to 1.31v (same result, hard lock several hours in)

Bumping DRAM voltage to 1.36v (same result)

Adjusting VCCIO and VCCSA:
The BIOS sets both these to 1.2 (I think, gigabyte doesn't tell you what auto does, but hwinfo reads 1.2 for VCCSA and 1.188 for VCCIO at auto and I have noticed VCCIO reads a little lower than the bios setting)

VCCIO and VCCSA voltages I have tried:
Stock: 0.95v and 1.05v (hard lock a couple hours in)
1.05v and 1.15v (same result) 
1.15v and 1.15v (same result)
1.17v and 1.17v (longest run so far 7+ hours till hard lock, better than auto xmp)
1.17v and 1.22v (currently testing)

To check the RAM on this platform I ran the CPU at stock with xmp enabled and tightened timings, 90% of capacity and 1500% coverage in HCI, no errors. 

Things I could still try:
Run the p95 512-4096 test for the full 21 hours with cpu overclocked and RAM at stock to see if xmp is just causing a marginal core instability to appear earlier,
Raise vcore more (prefer not to unless the above suggests I need to), 
Continue adjusting VCCIO and VCCSA (this is very slow to test), or
Run p95 512-4096 test at stock CPU with auto xmp enabled to test if xmp is the issue.

I'm pretty fed up at this point! Wondering if anyone has any suggestions? Any advice on settings or tests to try? Is there a test I could use to get this instability to show (or not) earlier than 2-7 hours in to p95 512k-4096k?

My current testing is really time inefficient but it seems stable in the 1-2 hour tests. I need a non avx test because temperatures are too high at avx 4.9ghz but I think I'm pretty stable all round at my avx offset of 4.8ghz (have not exhasuively tested).

Grateful for any help!


----------



## Falkentyne

Mencius said:


> Hi everyone, I am about 2 weeks in to trying to stabilise my 9700k overclock on an aorus master and would really welcome some help at this point!
> 
> I am stable at 4.9ghz all cores, 4.6ghz cache, 1.3v manual vcore, turbo LLC and a -1 avx offset WITHOUT XMP. I have tested with both F6 and F7a bios.
> 
> Those settings passed 1-2 hours of:
> p95 non-avx 1344k ffts and 12k ffts (in-place, 15min per test)
> Intel burn test (shorter test),
> occt large,
> occt non avx linpack (shorter test), and
> realbench.
> 
> They also passed an overnight p95 non-avx 512k-4096k ffts (in-place 15min per).
> 
> When I enable XMP it passes all of the tests listed above but it fails the overnight p95 non avx 512k-4096k ffts. It fails anytime between 2-5 hours in. Interestingly, it doesn't blue screen or error but hard locks (cursor freezes, fans spin down to low rpms, nothing recorded in event viewer or minidumps) when I was dialling in my core overclock I would typically see blue screens, resets or worker errors.
> 
> My RAM is 2x8GB of Corsair vengeance lpx 3000mhz, Samsung double sided dies. This RAM was rock solid stable with xmp and tightened timings on my previous CPU and motherboard, a 4.4ghz overclocked 6600k and Asus Maximus viii gene.
> 
> I have tried:
> Raising vcore to 1.31v (same result, hard lock several hours in)
> 
> Bumping DRAM voltage to 1.36v (same result)
> 
> Adjusting VCCIO and VCCSA:
> The BIOS sets both these to 1.2 (I think, gigabyte doesn't tell you what auto does, but hwinfo reads 1.2 for VCCSA and 1.188 for VCCIO at auto and I have noticed VCCIO reads a little lower than the bios setting)
> 
> VCCIO and VCCSA voltages I have tried:
> Stock: 0.95v and 1.05v (hard lock a couple hours in)
> 1.05v and 1.15v (same result)
> 1.15v and 1.15v (same result)
> 1.17v and 1.17v (longest run so far 7+ hours till hard lock, better than auto xmp)
> 1.17v and 1.22v (currently testing)
> 
> To check the RAM on this platform I ran the CPU at stock with xmp enabled and tightened timings, 90% of capacity and 1500% coverage in HCI, no errors.
> 
> Things I could still try:
> Run the p95 512-4096 test for the full 21 hours with cpu overclocked and RAM at stock to see if xmp is just causing a marginal core instability to appear earlier,
> Raise vcore more (prefer not to unless the above suggests I need to),
> Continue adjusting VCCIO and VCCSA (this is very slow to test), or
> Run p95 512-4096 test at stock CPU with auto xmp enabled to test if xmp is the issue.
> 
> I'm pretty fed up at this point! Wondering if anyone has any suggestions? Any advice on settings or tests to try? Is there a test I could use to get this instability to show (or not) earlier than 2-7 hours in to p95 512k-4096k?
> 
> My current testing is really time inefficient but it seems stable in the 1-2 hour tests. I need a non avx test because temperatures are too high at avx 4.9ghz but I think I'm pretty stable all round at my avx offset of 4.8ghz (have not exhasuively tested).
> 
> Grateful for any help!


Set VCCIO to 1.20v and VCCSA to 1.25v.
This should solve your problems.

VCCSA defaulted to 1.3v and VCCIO to 1.2v on my configuration (3200 mhz CAS 14 2x16 GB dimms). I had lowered it to 1.15v VCCSA and 1.05v VCCIO and everything was stable until I decided to set Command rate 1T and tRFC=270 and tREFI=32767 and later I had some random BSOD right when windows loaded (System service exception) once. Setting 1.20v VCCSA seems to have stopped that. I guess auto values just set whatever they please?

The 512K-4096K is a good test. It tests memory and IMC.
seems to be the IMC failing somehow, however I would not expect problems on just 3000 mhz RAM.
Did you get that range from this guide?

https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1630388-comprehensive-memory-overclocking-guide.html


----------



## Timur Born

I only just noticed that VCCSA is set to 1.3V by default (XMP 3200-C14 active). Isn't that a bit high?


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I only just noticed that VCCSA is set to 1.3V by default (XMP 3200-C14 active). Isn't that a bit high?


Done to ensure compatibility with RAM. Default is 1.05v, but this is based on 2400 mhz memory. Lower it if you can remain stable, but don't expect to reach 1.05v without problems. VCCIO is 0.95v default. That may be easier to stabilize if you go lower but all depends on your system. 

I was fine at 1.15 VCCSA until I started messing with RAM timings and then saw I needed 1.20v.


----------



## Mencius

Falkentyne said:


> Set VCCIO to 1.20v and VCCSA to 1.25v.
> This should solve your problems.
> 
> VCCSA defaulted to 1.3v and VCCIO to 1.2v on my configuration (3200 mhz CAS 14 2x16 GB dimms). I had lowered it to 1.15v VCCSA and 1.05v VCCIO and everything was stable until I decided to set Command rate 1T and tRFC=270 and tREFI=32767 and later I had some random BSOD right when windows loaded (System service exception) once. Setting 1.20v VCCSA seems to have stopped that. I guess auto values just set whatever they please?
> 
> The 512K-4096K is a good test. It tests memory and IMC.
> seems to be the IMC failing somehow, however I would not expect problems on just 3000 mhz RAM.
> Did you get that range from this guide?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1630388-comprehensive-memory-overclocking-guide.html


Thanks for your suggestion, that sounds promising. I'll try it out when I get home and see if the 1.17v & 1.22v has failed. 

It does seem that it could be the IMC as I'm running the p95 tests in place which would minimise RAM exposure. It is also odd to see IMC issues at just 3000mhz but maybe I drew a weak IMC. It could also be because I'm pretty close to the edge at 4.9ghz 1.3v, the chip hits a voltage wall at 5.0ghz, it might be stable somewhere above 1.34v at 5.0ghz but I haven't really wanted to try as the temperatures get a little silly at that vcore range on my D15s. My great fear is that it's not IMC and instead a really tiny core instability as that will be hard to isolate.

I did get the 512k-4096k range from that thread, I also looked at an LTT forum thread, something by der8auer, and a few Reddit threads too. It seems a good range because I'm pretty confident this setup can pass the smaller ffts all day long, they just unecessarily turn it into a space heater. 512-4096 seems great at teasing out these latent instabilities even if it does take frustratingly long to run. 

I suppose I could try the IMC range listed in that thread for a shorter test, 512-1024, but I think it has often passed those ranges in the 512-4096. Maybe worth a try though.

On another thought is there any wisdom about trying asynchronous overclocks with core boosts? For example, I know I can't reach 5ghz all cores at comfortable voltages on this CPU but if I can stabilise 4.9ghz I thought about trying a 2-6 core 5ghz turbo with all core at 4.9ghz. In theory this seems promising but I guess it could be really hard to stability test as it would be difficult to isolate the 5ghz boost range?


----------



## NoName45

*Old SSD with Win 10 on New Z390 Elite = No Boot?*

Hey guys. Wanted to see if anyone has any experience with something like this. Warning, fairly new to pc building. 
Aorus z390 elite - New
i59600k - new
Corsair H100i v2 - used
RM 750x - new
GSkill Ripjaw 8x2 (3200) - used
Samsung EVO 1tb SSD - used but very new, has win10 install from old computer on it. I've read trying to install drive with windows from another computer can cause a no boot situation but this is extremely fast. Turn on psu, lights click on then immediately off. Hit power button, same result. Same as a mobo short situation i'll describe below
Nothing else is attached to the computer yet. 

Quick question, when you power on psu, is it normal for all the lights to turn on white then immediately back off for this mobo?

First, I installed the water pump bracket incorrectly onto the mobo and caused a short, i guess (crap i read on the internet). Hit the power button and all lights turn on, then immediately off. Cannot power on again until on\off psu. Fixed bracket issue and now have bios. 
Now when I install the SSD power and SATA, when I hit the power button lights come on then immediately back off. Nothing else until I on\off the psu.

I'm guessing I can try to install an HDD that I have, secondary drive from the same old computer but doesn't have the windows files. Clean install from boot media onto HDD. Plug in SSD as secondary, format. Boot media again to installed back onto SSD. I'm going to try now to see if it will at least POST with the HDD in. 

Any thoughts?
Thanks everyone


Edit: I don't know what the issue was. Installed the HDD, hit power, all lights and computer shut immediately off. Hit the power again everything came on. Works with the SSD now too.


----------



## stl_wrx

Wanted to chime in on my luck overclocking my 9700k on a Z390 Aorus Master Board. I am currently running a stable, 5.1 Ghz, on all cores. Temps at idle ar 28-30C...temps during Prime95 custom 1344x1344 in place FFTs hover around 65C. SmallFFT temps reach about 74-77C. I followed the guide on page 43 to a T.

X.M.P.enabled
AVX Offset - Set -3 
Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 51
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Normal
CPU Vcore - Normal
Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.070 V 
VT-d - Set Disabled
8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled

Vcore during heavy loads hit 1.298-1.307. I wanted to try to touch 5.2Ghz...what do you think I would need to adjust to hitting that target? Is it worth it?


----------



## Falkentyne

stl_wrx said:


> Wanted to chime in on my luck overclocking my 9700k on a Z390 Aorus Master Board. I am currently running a stable, 5.1 Ghz, on all cores. Temps at idle ar 28-30C...temps during Prime95 custom 1344x1344 in place FFTs hover around 65C. SmallFFT temps reach about 74-77C. I followed the guide on page 43 to a T.
> 
> X.M.P.enabled
> AVX Offset - Set -3
> Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 51
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Normal
> CPU Vcore - Normal
> Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.070 V
> VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> Vcore during heavy loads hit 1.298-1.307. I wanted to try to touch 5.2Ghz...what do you think I would need to adjust to hitting that target? Is it worth it?


Going to be tricky at 5.2 ghz and you definitely may not be able to use a negative offset unless you have a very good chip.
Pay attention to the idle vcore when you're doing this. You don't want it above 1.4v even at idle.

*edit*
found an old test that I got flamed in the past for mentioning (typical rhetoric from "if it doesn't happen to me, its fake" and stuff).
I thought it was a haswell test or DC from old memory but it's Kaby Lake.
So keep this in mind.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html


----------



## stl_wrx

Yea you are probably right. I am content and happy with a stable 5.1 OC. The small gain in performance compared to a higher Vcore and heat is not worth it in my eyes.


----------



## Falkentyne

stl_wrx said:


> Yea you are probably right. I am content and happy with a stable 5.1 OC. The small gain in performance compared to a higher Vcore and heat is not worth it in my eyes.


Yep you need a balance.
You also need to decide if you want to be on the "keep it at 1.35v or under at idle" or "keep it under 1.35v at full load" camp side.
Mine is stable at 5.1 ghz with HT on at 1.335v, with 2 mv of room to adjust it to 1.35v if things go south, and 5.2 ghz with HT off also at 1.335v (might be able to go lower, did not test this yet).
So I want to be safe and smart with such an expensive upgrade. I degraded two 2600K's (one starting at just 1.38v, which all the know it all back in the day said was 100% completely safe, running Prime95 to get into the "5 ghz sandy stable club", and massively degraded a Pentium 4 EE chips and a 3.4C, and I do not know how much money I wasted on chips (Why did I buy EE chips for unlocked multipliers....why...i don't even think the P4 had an unlocked multi....just more cache or something....(emotionally scarred for life). But yeah. Just play it smart.

One reason I'm not a fan of adaptive voltages when *overclocking* is because of the possibly high idle voltages plus lots of vdroop.
The one good thing about adaptive voltage is having the CPU downclock and downvolt when idle, which just prolongs the life of your chip. But it gets VERY tricky to fine tune it to the same stable limits that you knew was stable with manual voltages and more fine tuned loadline calibration.

If you do decide to test 5.2 ghz, you may have more success testing with manual voltages. You may even need to use manual loadline calibration (Actual Loadline calibration, not "CPU Internal Load Line") to reduce some of the vdroop (you do NEED some vdroop). 

I know you can also tune with the IA AC DC loadines (only on adaptive voltage), but this is VERY tricky and difficult. And the Bios "shortcuts" for IA AC DC loadline, which are called "CPU Internal Load Line" with obscure values like "power saving, Turbo, Performance, Extreme Performance" or something have absolutely no documentation on how it affects the "VR settings" IA AC DC Loadline values.
I only tested "Power Saving" which seems to set the IA AC Loadline to a low value (like 1 or something, but I have NOT done a side by side comparison with this and manually adjusting the IA AC DC values by hand, and checking the VID in both tests!) and the DC loadline to a much higher value (probably close to the default of 160 = 1.6 mOhms).

Bah I'm rambling again.

Just make sure you keep the load voltage under 1.35v for sure.


----------



## stl_wrx

lots of information there - thank you! I just going to sit pretty at 5.qGhz. I'll see what my vcore in HWInfo is when I get home but I'm pretty sure it's 1.202 - 1.206. Speaking of HWInfo - which VCore counter do I want to pay attention to? One is lower than the other.


----------



## Falkentyne

stl_wrx said:


> lots of information there - thank you! I just going to sit pretty at 5.qGhz. I'll see what my vcore in HWInfo is when I get home but I'm pretty sure it's 1.202 - 1.206. Speaking of HWInfo - which VCore counter do I want to pay attention to? One is lower than the other.


Believe it or not, VR VOUT (CPU on-die sense) is the one you should be paying attention to !
Gigabyte Vcore sensor #2 (ITE 8792E) seems to be following the MLCC socket measurement, which is also where the digital multimeter read points are linked to.
Sensor #1 is the old traditional sensor with the wild swings people are used to seeing.

All Asus Maximus XI boards have been recalibrated to follow VR VOUT (which is why so many people are reporting CPU's being stable at lower load voltages and having higher vdroop than competitors).


https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


----------



## OhForPetesSake

stl_wrx said:


> Wanted to chime in on my luck overclocking my 9700k on a Z390 Aorus Master Board. I am currently running a stable, 5.1 Ghz, on all cores. Temps at idle ar 28-30C...temps during Prime95 custom 1344x1344 in place FFTs hover around 65C. SmallFFT temps reach about 74-77C. I followed the guide on page 43 to a T.
> 
> X.M.P.enabled
> AVX Offset - Set -3
> Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 51
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Normal
> CPU Vcore - Normal
> Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.070 V
> VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> Vcore during heavy loads hit 1.298-1.307. I wanted to try to touch 5.2Ghz...what do you think I would need to adjust to hitting that target? Is it worth it?


What kind of cooling are you using for this? At stock, my 9700k gets up into the mid 70s on prime95.


----------



## stl_wrx

I'm using a Corsair H110i 280MM AIO water cooler for my CPU, front intake, in a push/pull configuration. I replaced all the Corsair fans with Noctua NF-A14 iPPC-2000 PWM fans. Not related, but I also water cooled my 1080ti with a Kraken X52 via an exhaust at the top of the case. GPU temps are around 20c at idle and 38C under heavy load such as playing BF5.


----------



## OhForPetesSake

stl_wrx said:


> I'm using a Corsair H110i 280MM AIO water cooler for my CPU, front intake, in a push/pull configuration. I replaced all the Corsair fans with Noctua NF-A14 iPPC-2000 PWM fans. Not related, but I also water cooled my 1080ti with a Kraken X52 via an exhaust at the top of the case. GPU temps are around 20c at idle and 38C under heavy load such as playing BF5.


That's impressive. I'm running a Kraken x62 exhaust at the top of my case with intakes on the side and bottom (lian li pc-o11 dynamic).

I wonder if I just got a chip that runs hot and/or you got one that runs cool.


----------



## stl_wrx

For what its worth, I saw a 10c drop when I moved the rad for the cpu from the top exhaust to front intake. It will be an even higher amount if your GPU has an open back plate and the heat sinks are air exposed. Attached is an image of my setup before I went to the new master mobo a couple days ago.


----------



## Robbært

Mencius said:


> My RAM is 2x8GB of Corsair vengeance lpx 3000mhz, Samsung double sided dies. This RAM was rock solid stable with xmp and tightened timings on my previous CPU and motherboard, a 4.4ghz overclocked 6600k and Asus Maximus viii gene.
> 
> I have tried:
> Raising vcore to 1.31v (same result, hard lock several hours in)
> 
> Bumping DRAM voltage to 1.36v (same result)
> 
> Adjusting VCCIO and VCCSA:
> The BIOS sets both these to 1.2 (I think, gigabyte doesn't tell you what auto does, but hwinfo reads 1.2 for VCCSA and 1.188 for VCCIO at auto and I have noticed VCCIO reads a little lower than the bios setting)
> 
> VCCIO and VCCSA voltages I have tried:
> Stock: 0.95v and 1.05v (hard lock a couple hours in)
> 1.05v and 1.15v (same result)
> 1.15v and 1.15v (same result)
> 1.17v and 1.17v (longest run so far 7+ hours till hard lock, better than auto xmp)
> 1.17v and 1.22v (currently testing)


You have to increase VCCSA/VCCIO to make ram stable on Intel -9x00, not decrease.
Put 8700k in your z390 it should work.
VCCIO should be a bit less than VCCSA and both should be under Vcore.

And you want to increase VCCSA, VCCIO and Dram voltage a bit over lowest "stable" number.
There reports BattleField 5 can still crash after passing all tests.


----------



## stl_wrx

Falkentyne said:


> Believe it or not, VR VOUT (CPU on-die sense) is the one you should be paying attention to !
> Gigabyte Vcore sensor #2 (ITE 8792E) seems to be following the MLCC socket measurement, which is also where the digital multimeter read points are linked to.
> Sensor #1 is the old traditional sensor with the wild swings people are used to seeing.
> 
> All Asus Maximus XI boards have been recalibrated to follow VR VOUT (which is why so many people are reporting CPU's being stable at lower load voltages and having higher vdroop than competitors).
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


So as you suggested I checked my VR VOUT counter in HWInfo and it's 1.301 at the moment downloading some Steam games. Max so far has been 1.340v and min as been 1.225v. I'm current temps around 32c at the moment during this DL on a quiet fan profile. Does this all check out for a 5.1 GHz OC? BTW, this is not a turbo OC, this is an overclock.


----------



## stl_wrx

stl_wrx said:


> So as you suggested I checked my VR VOUT counter in HWInfo and it's 1.301 at the moment downloading some Steam games. Max so far has been 1.340v and min as been 1.225v. I'm current temps around 32c at the moment during this DL on a quiet fan profile. Does this all check out for a 5.1 GHz OC? BTW, this is not a turbo OC, this is an overclock.


Actually which VR VOUT do I pay attention to? They are drastically different.


----------



## Falkentyne

stl_wrx said:


> So as you suggested I checked my VR VOUT counter in HWInfo and it's 1.301 at the moment downloading some Steam games. Max so far has been 1.340v and min as been 1.225v. I'm current temps around 32c at the moment during this DL on a quiet fan profile. Does this all check out for a 5.1 GHz OC? BTW, this is not a turbo OC, this is an overclock.


Every CPU is different so no one can say what checks out or not for you will match others. Your cooling seems to be on point, though.
VR VOUT is very accurate, so looks like your voltage drooped to 1.225v at maximum load and 1.340v at idle.

I'm going to assume that your "Vcore sensor" on the ITE 8792E most likely read 1.340 at idle and 1.260v at load.


----------



## Vesimas

Here we go  For the moment i'll use the EVGA 1070 + 27" 2K 144Hz GSync that i already own, i'll try to wait for 7nm gpu and then choose a 34" with free/gsync


----------



## stl_wrx

Vesimas said:


> Here we go  For the moment i'll use the EVGA 1070 + 27" 2K 144Hz GSync that i already own, i'll try to wait for 7nm gpu and then choose a 34" with free/gsync


Killer man..looks like you'll be having a fun day of building. We have very similar set-ups - the master board and 9700 and 9900 are a beast combo. I game on a 3440*1440 34 inch wide screen right now and love it. It's the strix one from Asus..100 Mhz..I usually run around 130 FPS on my setup.


----------



## Poser

Cheers All:

Running a z390 ultra with a i9900 and gtx1070, 64gb of slower gskill 3000 trident sticks {cas 15} (unRAID, dockers and win10 gaming VM).

Doing routine checks, I see that the BIOS F5 was released recently. I am currently on F3 (release) BIOS... and since it is a server, have not pushed the board or silicon. Yet. Thinking about getting an E5 for the server and having a fun bench platform with the z390 and i9900...

Has anyone flashed/found issue with the latest release 9(F5). Coming from ASUS, the gigabyte BIOS tree is definitely a little different.

Thanks!


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Believe it or not, VR VOUT (CPU on-die sense) is the one you should be paying attention to !
> Gigabyte Vcore sensor #2 (ITE 8792E) seems to be following the MLCC socket measurement, which is also where the digital multimeter read points are linked to.
> Sensor #1 is the old traditional sensor with the wild swings people are used to seeing.
> 
> All Asus Maximus XI boards have been recalibrated to follow VR VOUT (which is why so many people are reporting CPU's being stable at lower load voltages and having higher vdroop than competitors).
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


Interesting. In my bios I'm using "normal" Vcore with +.010 offset. LLC set to "normal" and IA AC/DC set to 0. CPU 49x for 4.9 ghz. I have been tinkering with LLC and found that "normal" seemed to work. Wanted to play with as few settings as possible and see where it got me. My Vcore per CPU-Z and HWInfo (1st sensor) are the same at about 1.26v under heaviest load which is what I was using on my Z370 Hero for the same OC. The VR VOUT reading, however, is 1.208v. I see a spike of 1.232 or 1.283 at idle but maybe a millisecond and goes right back down. 

Everything seems to be working fine with my OC but this has me scratching my head. 



stl_wrx said:


> For what its worth, I saw a 10c drop when I moved the rad for the cpu from the top exhaust to front intake. It will be an even higher amount if your GPU has an open back plate and the heat sinks are air exposed. Attached is an image of my setup before I went to the new master mobo a couple days ago.


I'm also running a 280 radiator in front as intake and have been impressed with temps. I used to build big with several case fans for max airflow. Today I am focused on the smallest form factor I can build while still being able to use a regular ATX board. I'm not running a single case fan for the 1st time ever. Just the 280 cpu radiator in front and 120 gpu radiator in back as exhaust. Temps are great and everything is very quiet.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Interesting. In my bios I'm using "normal" Vcore with +.010 offset. LLC set to "normal" and IA AC/DC set to 0. CPU 49x for 4.9 ghz. I have been tinkering with LLC and found that "normal" seemed to work. Wanted to play with as few settings as possible and see where it got me. My Vcore per CPU-Z and HWInfo (1st sensor) are the same at about 1.26v under heaviest load which is what I was using on my Z370 Hero for the same OC. The VR VOUT reading, however, is 1.208v. I see a spike of 1.232 or 1.283 at idle but maybe a millisecond and goes right back down.
> 
> Everything seems to be working fine with my OC but this has me scratching my head.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also running a 280 radiator in front as intake and have been impressed with temps. I used to build big with several case fans for max airflow. Today I am focused on the smallest form factor I can build while still being able to use a regular ATX board. I'm not running a single case fan for the 1st time ever. Just the 280 cpu radiator in front and 120 gpu radiator in back as exhaust. Temps are great and everything is very quiet.


The link I posted explains why VR VOUT is lower than the first and second sensors.
VR VOUT isn't affected by power plane impedance. The two sensors are.


----------



## osb40000

My brother wanted an upgrade so I'm building him a box with my 8700k/Z360 setup. I picked up a 9900k, D15, and Aorus Master. 

As has been said many times, Gigabyte has an ass backwards UEFI/BIOS, but with the help of everyone on here I was able to find everything I needed to do a mild OC to 5ghz. 

I turned on XMP (3600mhz 16,16,16, 36) kept vcore and LLC on normal, turned multiplier to 50, turned VCCSA 1.25 and VCCIO 1.2. I haven't played with it enough to see if I can get vcore, VCCSA and VCCIO down but at least VCCSA isn't 1.3 like the mobo wanted to set it. Right now I'm prime stable for hours, realbench stable, and Battlefield 5 stable. So far so good. Outside of Prime95 temps are reasonable with gaming temps down in the 50s and 60s on most cores. 

Using a Define S with five Venturi HF-14 fans (three intake, two exhaust) set to spin up based off of CPU temp. I don't advise this if you care about having a silent case because it can be loud at load, but it seems to keep everything cool.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> The link I posted explains why VR VOUT is lower than the first and second sensors.
> VR VOUT isn't affected by power plane impedance. The two sensors are.


I understand and appreciate what Asus is doing here. Just uncomfortable / paranoid seeing VR VOUT fluctuate like it does.

*Edit*

Tried setting a 5.0 OC, "normal" Vcore and LLC settings, 0 AC/DC LLC, adjusted CPU thermal limit to 110C. Set offset to +.010. Here is a screen shot of Prime95 29.4 small ffp avx after 30 mins. The VR VOUT reading of 1.27v is the "accurate" reading rather than 1.320-1.392 Vcore? 

Tried RealBench and the Vcore jumps up to 1.368 and VR VOUT up to 1.307v after 5 mins. CPU max got up to 89C. 

I will play around with LLC settings and see if I can get this voltage + temps down more. 89C on RealBench seems very high to me.


----------



## Mo2k

Hey guys, 



I asked some pages ago, whether it's possible to adjust vcore to be lower when AVX Offset decreases core clock. 



Now I have learned, that I can use the voltage offset for that. 



I set Vcore to normal and DVID to around +0.030 or something, which is stable with Prime 26 SmallFFTs and good temperatures. Vout and both VCores show about 1,34 at maximum which is fine, because my system was prime stable at 4,9Ghz with 1,335v (i5 9600K). 



When I start Prime 29 SmallFFTs with AVX, the Offset lowers core speed to 4,7Ghz, which works fine ... but vCore and vOut explode and temperatures reach near 99°C so I shut down prime. 



CPU AC/DC Loadline ist set to Auto, Loadline Calibration is set to Normal/Standrd/Low and Mid and it's happening in all cases. Reducing DVID leads to instability of non avx core speed, increasing DVID makes the problem of exploding vcore even worse. 



What can I do? I want temperatures with AVX Offset to be lower otherweise AVX Offset doesn't bring any benefit with same vCore as without offset core speed. 



Sorry for my englisch, I'm from Germany. 



Regards


----------



## Falkentyne

Mo2k said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> 
> 
> I asked some pages ago, whether it's possible to adjust vcore to be lower when AVX Offset decreases core clock.
> 
> 
> 
> Now I have learned, that I can use the voltage offset for that.
> 
> 
> 
> I set Vcore to normal and DVID to around +0.030 or something, which is stable with Prime 26 SmallFFTs and good temperatures. Vout and both VCores show about 1,34 at maximum which is fine, because my system was prime stable at 4,9Ghz with 1,335v (i5 9600K).
> 
> 
> 
> When I start Prime 29 SmallFFTs with AVX, the Offset lowers core speed to 4,7Ghz, which works fine ... but vCore and vOut explode and temperatures reach near 99°C so I shut down prime.
> 
> 
> 
> CPU AC/DC Loadline ist set to Auto, Loadline Calibration is set to Normal/Standrd/Low and Mid and it's happening in all cases. Reducing DVID leads to instability of non avx core speed, increasing DVID makes the problem of exploding vcore even worse.
> 
> 
> 
> What can I do? I want temperatures with AVX Offset to be lower otherweise AVX Offset doesn't bring any benefit with same vCore as without offset core speed.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for my englisch, I'm from Germany.
> 
> 
> 
> Regards


Simple.
Don't run AVX small FFT prime95.
What's the point of running a power virus if you are using a negative offset anyway?
And why are you running AVX small FFT prime95 to begin with?
If you want to test AVX stability with prime95, use "in place fixed FFT's" and 1344K size only (Custom). 

Also there is NO manual way to reduce voltage when an AVX load happens. You are at the mercy of the pre-programmed default CPU VID and only when using adaptive ("Normal") voltages. The VID will decrease at 4.6 ghz and lower, each 100 mhz. 4.7 ghz and higher will stop scaling and VID will not change anymore.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> I understand and appreciate what Asus is doing here. Just uncomfortable / paranoid seeing VR VOUT fluctuate like it does.
> 
> *Edit*
> 
> Tried setting a 5.0 OC, "normal" Vcore and LLC settings, 0 AC/DC LLC, adjusted CPU thermal limit to 110C. Set offset to +.010. Here is a screen shot of Prime95 29.4 small ffp avx after 30 mins. The VR VOUT reading of 1.27v is the "accurate" reading rather than 1.320-1.392 Vcore?
> 
> Tried RealBench and the Vcore jumps up to 1.368 and VR VOUT up to 1.307v after 5 mins. CPU max got up to 89C.
> 
> I will play around with LLC settings and see if I can get this voltage + temps down more. 89C on RealBench seems very high to me.


You've got courage to be running small FFT AVX. I now only use AVX at in place fixed FFT of 1344k-1344K size only, as it's realistic, real world and still tests for stability in a good way.
And yes, you're correct. The VR Vout reading of 1.27v is the accurate voltage.

The 1.320v-1.392v....that can't be from IT8792E...that's gotta be from sensor #1 (8688E).
Completely inaccurate and all over the place.

Sensor #2 should read the maximum vcore shown almost the same as the maximum VID, as it gets its base voltage from the VID.
You're using adaptive voltage so I don't know how VR VOUT functions with adaptive. With manual voltage, usually VR VOUT will match vcore sensor #2 at full idle, then will drop way below sensor #2 at full load.
VF VOUT will drop even more below sensor #2 with small FFT AVX prime95, than with small FFT Non-AVX prime95 (this is one of the reasons why you may be unstable with AVX small FFT and fully stable without --the vcore may drop 20mv lower. (and higher temps too).

*edit*.
VR VOUT of 1.307v is pretty high. When I run 5.1 ghz @ 1.335v (manual) voltage and LLC=turbo, my VR VOUT is 1.287v with temps toasty. You're 20mv higher with better cooling. That would equal me trying to do 1.35v instead of 1.335v with LLC=turbo. Checks out.


----------



## Mencius

Falkentyne said:


> Set VCCIO to 1.20v and VCCSA to 1.25v.
> This should solve your problems.
> 
> VCCSA defaulted to 1.3v and VCCIO to 1.2v on my configuration (3200 mhz CAS 14 2x16 GB dimms). I had lowered it to 1.15v VCCSA and 1.05v VCCIO and everything was stable until I decided to set Command rate 1T and tRFC=270 and tREFI=32767 and later I had some random BSOD right when windows loaded (System service exception) once. Setting 1.20v VCCSA seems to have stopped that. I guess auto values just set whatever they please?
> 
> The 512K-4096K is a good test. It tests memory and IMC.
> seems to be the IMC failing somehow, however I would not expect problems on just 3000 mhz RAM.
> Did you get that range from this guide?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1630388-comprehensive-memory-overclocking-guide.html


Just an update on this, still not stable on my 9700k in non-avx p95 512k-4096k ffts (in-place, 15min per) at 4.9ghz, 1.3vcore, turbo LLC with XMP:

Latest VCCIO/VCCSA tests (1.2v/1.2v is auto XMP):

1.17v/1.22v (hard lock after 2-3 hours)
1.2/1.25 (hard lock after about 2-3 hours)

I read here (https://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/) that 'there may be a trade-off for the Uncore versus memory frequency on some CPU samples' (though I doubt they mean at just 3000mhz ). So, I tried reducing the cache to its stock 4.3ghz and testing 4.9ghz cores with XMP:

Result: blue screen after about 7 hours.

Interestingly, the test with the reduced cache blue screened whereas every other test with 4.9ghz core, 4.6ghz cache, XMP and various VCCIO/VCCSA settings results in a hard lock/freeze.

Still pretty baffled at this point, anyone have any further advice?

I still fear a minor core instability so I have turned off XMP and set core/cache to 4.9ghz/4.6ghz. I will run the full 512k-4096k with those settings rather than the 10-12 hours I ran previously to test core stability. 

I did observe with interest that under p95 load the VRVOUT reads 1.254v with XMP but without XMP it reads 1.260-1.262. I don't understand why this would happen as I did not think any of the XMP settings would cause vcore contention. Do they? Anyway, I previously tested 1.31vcore which ought to have addressed that but it failed.

This is pretty punishing stability testing but I'm of the "it's not stable unless it's as stable as stock" mindset so I guess I'll keep at it.


----------



## Falkentyne

Mencius said:


> Just an update on this, still not stable on my 9700k in non-avx p95 512k-4096k ffts (in-place, 15min per) at 4.9ghz, 1.3vcore, turbo LLC with XMP:
> 
> Latest VCCIO/VCCSA tests (1.2v/1.2v is auto XMP):
> 
> 1.17v/1.22v (hard lock after 2-3 hours)
> 1.2/1.25 (hard lock after about 2-3 hours)
> 
> I read here (https://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/) that 'there may be a trade-off for the Uncore versus memory frequency on some CPU samples' (though I doubt they mean at just 3000mhz ). So, I tried reducing the cache to its stock 4.3ghz and testing 4.9ghz cores with XMP:
> 
> Result: blue screen after about 7 hours.
> 
> Interestingly, the test with the reduced cache blue screened whereas every other test with 4.9ghz core, 4.6ghz cache, XMP and various VCCIO/VCCSA settings results in a hard lock/freeze.
> 
> Still pretty baffled at this point, anyone have any further advice?
> 
> I still fear a minor core instability so I have turned off XMP and set core/cache to 4.9ghz/4.6ghz. I will run the full 512k-4096k with those settings rather than the 10-12 hours I ran previously to test core stability.
> 
> I did observe with interest that under p95 load the VRVOUT reads 1.254v with XMP but without XMP it reads 1.260-1.262. I don't understand why this would happen as I did not think any of the XMP settings would cause vcore contention. Do they? Anyway, I previously tested 1.31vcore which ought to have addressed that but it failed.
> 
> This is pretty punishing stability testing but I'm of the "it's not stable unless it's as stable as stock" mindset so I guess I'll keep at it.


VR VOUT is based on CPU Current.
Most likely the XMP settings tweak some tertiary settings that affect AVX. I know there are two which can drastically increase AVX temps but I have NO experience with memory timings besides some basic things, and tRFC / tREFI and Command Rate (1T), so anything else is out of my league.

My suggestion to you is to RMA the chip. (OR possibly the RAM but I've never seen anyone get two defective RAM sticks in the same kit, but it CAN happen). 

This is the best advice I can give you
you may have a busted IMC. Before you do this though, just for kicks, set vcore to 1.35v.
If this doesn't work, try setting your RAM at 2400 mhz and test that.

I know how you feel. No one wants to waste time troubleshooting stuff like this. I've done it in the past (especially with CPU degradation) trying to find out if old stuff like "Sandy Bridge PLL Voltage" ever affected anything. I've been there.

There are only 2 possibilities I can think of.
Your RAM is defective (both sticks)
Or your CPU is defective.

I would RMA one or the other right away. Once you do this, you will know EXACTLY what is causing the problem.

Are you able to do a RMA? Which would be most convenient for you? The RAM or the CPU? This is a nasty situation because the IMC affects memory, so it's hard to divide and conquer. Literally a worst case scenario 

If I were you, I would do a RMA today. And not wait around anymore. If I were you....but I've been impulsive before. But you've done your homework and been very thorough. I say its time to just replace the hardware. Chip, RAM or both. I wish it were just the RAM....but this is getting far beyond my experience here.


----------



## Mo2k

Falkentyne said:


> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple.
> Don't run AVX small FFT prime95.
> What's the point of running a power virus if you are using a negative offset anyway?
> And why are you running AVX small FFT prime95 to begin with?
> If you want to test AVX stability with prime95, use "in place fixed FFT's" and 1344K size only (Custom).
> 
> Also there is NO manual way to reduce voltage when an AVX load happens. You are at the mercy of the pre-programmed default CPU VID and only when using adaptive ("Normal") voltages. The VID will decrease at 4.6 ghz and lower, each 100 mhz. 4.7 ghz and higher will stop scaling and VID will not change anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> So if I Unterstand correctly: Unless I don’t go lower than 4.7Ghz there is no way to reduce voltage even with AVX Offset? So what is the purpose of DVID? Just to decrease vdrop and vdroop? I thought LLC helps with hat?
> 
> So why shall I use DVID if it does not Reduce vCore when its possible to reduce it (E.g. When AVX offset Starts With 200mhz less and it Could run with less vcore)?
> 
> So AVX Offset is just there to increase stability, no possible way to lower vcore and temperatures? That would be a nice function for new UEFI versions 😄
> 
> And to the prime thing: I use AVXprime to Test whether the System is stable and works with acceptable tempratures when AVX is used! And to Test whether AVX Offset is enough! Of Course I Test with small FFTs only for 15 Minutes, for long term stability i use in Blend or 1344 in Place! 🙂
Click to expand...


----------



## Falkentyne

Mo2k said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> So if I Unterstand correctly: Unless I don’t go lower than 4.7Ghz there is no way to reduce voltage even with AVX Offset? So what is the purpose of DVID? Just to decrease vdrop and vdroop? I thought LLC helps with hat?
> 
> So why shall I use DVID if it does not Reduce vCore when its possible to reduce it (E.g. When AVX offset Starts With 200mhz less and it Could run with less vcore)?
> 
> So AVX Offset is just there to increase stability, no possible way to lower vcore and temperatures? That would be a nice function for new UEFI versions 😄
> 
> And to the prime thing: I use AVXprime to Test whether the System is stable and works with acceptable tempratures when AVX is used! And to Test whether AVX Offset is enough! Of Course I Test with small FFTs only for 15 Minutes, for long term stability i use in Blend or 1344 in Place! 🙂
> 
> 
> 
> DVID is to decrease or increase the maximum voltage that is "automatically" set by the CPU's default VID.
> The default VID (on new processors) is set by Intel and guaranteed to be stable from 800 mhz up to the highest intel turbo boost multiplier on all cores (4.7 ghz on 9900K, 4.6 ghz on 9700K), without changing any other settings, DVID, Loadline calibration or anything. For older processors, this cutoff may change, e.g. for 7820HK (BGA kaby lake), the cutoff is 3.9 ghz, even though that is the "1 core turbo multiplier".
> 
> DVID is used when you start actually overclocking past the Intel guaranteed 8 core turbo multiplier, because the default VID will stop scaling upwards. So you need offsets (Gigabyte calls it DVID, other companies call it offset or adaptive offset) to compensate.
> 
> Example: if you tried 5.5 ghz right now with DVID at +0.00, you would crash almost instantly. Because the default VID for 5.5 ghz would be the one for 4.7 ghz, etc etc etc. You might need as much as +0.150mv offset to be stable.
> 
> AVX offset is used to decrease CPU frequency when the base frequency is stable without AVX instructions, but unstable with AVX load. Not designed to 'decrease' temperatures. Just CPU multiplier. If the AVX offset when using adaptive voltage drops below the maximum CPU multiplier, then yes, the voltage will decrease (based on the "new" multiplier's default VID) but you have NO control over this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And to the prime thing: I use AVXprime to Test whether the System is stable and works with acceptable tempratures when AVX is used! And to Test whether AVX Offset is enough! Of Course I Test with small FFTs only for 15 Minutes, for long term stability i use in Blend or 1344 in Place! 🙂
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't use SMALL FFT avx for this.
> NOTHING besides professional number crunching programs (like if you did work requiring you to run prime95) uses this type of current!
> To test AVX stability, use IN PLACE FIXED FFT, size, 1344K-1344K.
> Then use Realbench for good measure.
> 
> if you can pass both of these, you're stable. Ignore small FFT AVX, please, unless your job or business requires it.
Click to expand...


----------



## Beggisch

I am also on the brink on RMA'ing something but I am not sure If I should RMA the RAM or the Board.

The Ram I bought is F4-3600C17D-32GTZR, so 2x16GB Sticks. 
They aren't listed on the the Aorus Master QVL List but G.Skill also has a QVL List for Memory/Mainboard combinations and there the Memory was listed.

Sometimes when I load XMP and change nothing else in the Bios the PC either won't boot, boot with lower than 3600MHz or it won't boot at all and I have to reset CMOS.
Sometimes it loads into Windows and everything is fine, but also sometimes I have games Crash or Windows Bluescreen with some Memory Management Error.

Most of the issues I had were with F7a Bios so I went back to F6.
I have a 5Ghz Overclock running right now and so far it looks fine with Prime SmallFFTS, I still want to make sure this board can Run my RAM so whats the best Stress test to make sure 100%?

Does this look fine for now? I haven't done any fine tuning with vcore yet. These numbers are with Intel XTU Memory Stress Test but I guess there is something better to use?


----------



## Beggisch

Well shortly after I posted this my System freezed again, I tried to power off/on but the System didn't want to boot with my XMP/OC settings.
Then I hit Reset CMOS and I was back in F7a even though the last time I flashed was F6?

I then set my XMP Profile with 3600Mhz and I don't get the PC to boot at all, I think it gets stuck in training, it doesnt do anything for minutes.

Then I reset CMOS again and load XMP but change the 3600Mhz to 3200Mhz and my System immediatly boots.

So what issue could this be?
Do you think this could be fixed by newer Bios versions? 

I have seen a lot of people complain about XMP on this board, so not sure if it is a Board issue or the Ram really isn't supported.

I did a lot of CPU overclocking in the past but with Ram I have zero knowledge, thats why I buy XMP ram, set it and forget about it...


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> You've got courage to be running small FFT AVX. I now only use AVX at in place fixed FFT of 1344k-1344K size only, as it's realistic, real world and still tests for stability in a good way.
> And yes, you're correct. The VR Vout reading of 1.27v is the accurate voltage.
> 
> The 1.320v-1.392v....that can't be from IT8792E...that's gotta be from sensor #1 (8688E).
> Completely inaccurate and all over the place.
> 
> Sensor #2 should read the maximum vcore shown almost the same as the maximum VID, as it gets its base voltage from the VID.
> You're using adaptive voltage so I don't know how VR VOUT functions with adaptive. With manual voltage, usually VR VOUT will match vcore sensor #2 at full idle, then will drop way below sensor #2 at full load.
> VF VOUT will drop even more below sensor #2 with small FFT AVX prime95, than with small FFT Non-AVX prime95 (this is one of the reasons why you may be unstable with AVX small FFT and fully stable without --the vcore may drop 20mv lower. (and higher temps too).
> 
> *edit*.
> VR VOUT of 1.307v is pretty high. When I run 5.1 ghz @ 1.335v (manual) voltage and LLC=turbo, my VR VOUT is 1.287v with temps toasty. You're 20mv higher with better cooling. That would equal me trying to do 1.35v instead of 1.335v with LLC=turbo. Checks out.


Finally settled in on a solid 5.0 ghz OC that survived 1 hour Prime95 29.4 small ffp avx testing. I tested again for 30 more mins to incorporate both Vcore sensor readouts this time in HWinfo. I've found that setting LLC to "standard" works best for my CPU. Lowered my offset voltage as well which helped temps, set to -.030 offset. Both Vcore sensor readings top out at 1.298v - 1.308v. VR VOUT max is 1.254v. I'm happy with this result.


----------



## Padinn

Where are you guys seeing a VR VOUT reading on the 8792E sensor? I only see VCore and VCCIO.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Where are you guys seeing a VR VOUT reading on the 8792E sensor? I only see VCore and VCCIO.


Below that (at least on Master and Ultra. Not sure about Pro. Elite reads a dummy value)


----------



## Mo2k

Falkentyne said:


> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And to the prime thing: I use AVXprime to Test whether the System is stable and works with acceptable tempratures when AVX is used! And to Test whether AVX Offset is enough! Of Course I Test with small FFTs only for 15 Minutes, for long term stability i use in Blend or 1344 in Place! 🙂
> 
> 
> 
> Don't use SMALL FFT avx for this.
> NOTHING besides professional number crunching programs (like if you did work requiring you to run prime95) uses this type of current!
> To test AVX stability, use IN PLACE FIXED FFT, size, 1344K-1344K.
> Then use Realbench for good measure.
> 
> if you can pass both of these, you're stable. Ignore small FFT AVX, please, unless your job or business requires it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> 
> For how Long do you run prime 95 with 1344 and in place? 12 Hours or 24? Don’t you use blend test at all?
> 
> And how do you Test RAM? Memtest?
> 
> And do you use Small FFTs with Prime 26 or even not with that version? Not even for 15 Minutes?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Falkentyne

Mo2k said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> 
> For how Long do you run prime 95 with 1344 and in place? 12 Hours or 24? Don’t you use blend test at all?
> 
> And how do you Test RAM? Memtest?
> 
> And do you use Small FFTs with Prime 26 or even not with that version? Not even for 15 Minutes?
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a gamer. I no longer stress test except for very short periods.
> I used to run prime95 with AVX (Blend? I forgot...) for 12 hours due to all the "experts" on this forum acting like it was some sort of Rite of Passage and required to be in a 'stable' club.
> I degraded TWO 2600K's doing that. One at just 1.38v @ 5 ghz originally, now (before I upgraded it to 9900K) it barely does 4.8 ghz @ 1.476v.
> I'm done with that now. I want to use my computer.
> 
> Now I'll run small FFT prime95 with AVX Disabled for no longer than 30 minutes as long as temps are lower than 90C,
> AVX (1344K in place fixed FFT's only) for no longer than 30 minutes,
> Realbench for no longer than 30 minutes to 1 hour.
> Blender and Cinebench tests, and I check for WHEA / CPU L0 errors in HWinfo64.
> I'll do RAM/IMC tests with prime95 AVX disabled (Custom 512K->4096K, in place unchecked, RAM size-75% of total RAM) for 1 to 2 hours to check RAM or IMC stability.
> I've found these 'short' tests combined with HWinfo64's WHEA reporting is enough to find stability for my system.
> 
> I know I won't make many friends here with those "tests" but I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to use my computer and have fun.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## OutlawII

Falkentyne said:


> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a gamer. I no longer stress test except for very short periods.
> I used to run prime95 with AVX (Blend? I forgot...) for 12 hours due to all the "experts" on this forum acting like it was some sort of Rite of Passage and required to be in a 'stable' club.
> I degraded TWO 2600K's doing that. One at just 1.38v @ 5 ghz originally, now (before I upgraded it to 9900K) it barely does 4.8 ghz @ 1.476v.
> I'm done with that now. I want to use my computer.
> 
> Now I'll run small FFT prime95 with AVX Disabled for no longer than 30 minutes as long as temps are lower than 90C,
> AVX (1344K in place fixed FFT's only) for no longer than 30 minutes,
> Realbench for no longer than 30 minutes to 1 hour.
> Blender and Cinebench tests, and I check for WHEA / CPU L0 errors in HWinfo64.
> I'll do RAM/IMC tests with prime95 AVX disabled (Custom 512K->4096K, in place unchecked, RAM size-75% of total RAM) for 1 to 2 hours to check RAM or IMC stability.
> I've found these 'short' tests combined with HWinfo64's WHEA reporting is enough to find stability for my system.
> 
> I know I won't make many friends here with those "tests" but I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to use my computer and have fun.
> 
> 
> 
> Well said ive been saying this for a few years now.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Moparman

Mo2k said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> 
> For how Long do you run prime 95 with 1344 and in place? 12 Hours or 24? Don’t you use blend test at all?
> 
> And how do you Test RAM? Memtest?
> 
> And do you use Small FFTs with Prime 26 or even not with that version? Not even for 15 Minutes?
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Running P95 in this day and age really has not point. You can be P95 stable and still crash in work loads and we see people talk about it all the time. Get your OC stable with the things you do and call it a day.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Padinn

Under the advanced voltage settings what are IR Voltage Enable and GA Voltage enable? It seems like once turned out it comes with a ton of additional options for voltage regulation that I don't really understand. Should I leave these two settings just disabled?


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Below that (at least on Master and Ultra. Not sure about Pro. Elite reads a dummy value)


I have a master, this is what I see for the 8792E. Should I be looking at this Vcore? It seems weird to me that with no overclock (only XMP 3200) that Vcore occassionally pulls up to 1.31v (max here shown is 1.298). That seems kind of nutty!


----------



## Mencius

Falkentyne said:


> VR VOUT is based on CPU Current.
> Most likely the XMP settings tweak some tertiary settings that affect AVX. I know there are two which can drastically increase AVX temps but I have NO experience with memory timings besides some basic things, and tRFC / tREFI and Command Rate (1T), so anything else is out of my league.
> 
> My suggestion to you is to RMA the chip. (OR possibly the RAM but I've never seen anyone get two defective RAM sticks in the same kit, but it CAN happen).
> 
> This is the best advice I can give you
> you may have a busted IMC. Before you do this though, just for kicks, set vcore to 1.35v.
> If this doesn't work, try setting your RAM at 2400 mhz and test that.
> 
> I know how you feel. No one wants to waste time troubleshooting stuff like this. I've done it in the past (especially with CPU degradation) trying to find out if old stuff like "Sandy Bridge PLL Voltage" ever affected anything. I've been there.
> 
> There are only 2 possibilities I can think of.
> Your RAM is defective (both sticks)
> Or your CPU is defective.
> 
> I would RMA one or the other right away. Once you do this, you will know EXACTLY what is causing the problem.
> 
> Are you able to do a RMA? Which would be most convenient for you? The RAM or the CPU? This is a nasty situation because the IMC affects memory, so it's hard to divide and conquer. Literally a worst case scenario /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
> 
> If I were you, I would do a RMA today. And not wait around anymore. If I were you....but I've been impulsive before. But you've done your homework and been very thorough. I say its time to just replace the hardware. Chip, RAM or both. I wish it were just the RAM....but this is getting far beyond my experience here.


Yeah it's tricky, I still have my maximus viii gene and 6600k so the other thing I could do is rebuild and test the RAM with those components. That could narrow it down to IMC on the 9700k.

I would like to RMA but not sure about the possibility. With my retailer in Australia I'd say it depends on whether the CPU is defective, if it runs everything ok at stock then it probably isn't, strictly speaking. I should perhaps test the CPU at stock with the RAM at 3000mhz to see if that passes because that would more clearly indicate a defect.

I'm not too fussed at the end of the day because I do enjoy the testing (although less so when I get stuck) and if I ultimately have to run the CPU at stock or a 4.8ghz OC I can deal with that, I just need the RAM to be able to hit its rated speed. 

Thanks again for your advice though, very helpful tips.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> I have a master, this is what I see for the 8792E. Should I be looking at this Vcore?


No.
IR 35201 voltage regulator.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> No.
> IR 35201 voltage regulator.


Gotcha, this is what I see here. Everything in bios is set to 1.2v and all other settings normal, only increases are to SA and VCCIO. Seem right for default settings?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Gotcha, this is what I see here. Everything in bios is set to 1.2v and all other settings normal, only increases are to SA and VCCIO. Seem right for default settings?


I don't know. What loadline calibration setting are you using?
Your bios voltage can NOT be 1.2v because all of the vcore readings are 1.2-1.3v.
Compared to the other two vcore sensors, VR VOUT seems to be accurate.
Your bios voltage has to be 1.3v.


----------



## GaryLiao

Anyone else getting a ~10c discrepancy between the measurement of package temperature and the temperature reading on the motherboard sensor? It happens both at load and idle, but the strange thing is that the idle temps appear to be correct when I'm in the UEFI but reports incorrectly once in windows. Unfortunately this has an effect on fan curves set in the uefi.


----------



## Timur Born

Yep, CPU sensor is 10°C lower than package sensor.


----------



## jlp0209

I'm continuing to have adaptive voltage issues, still get too much vdroop when comparing avx load with lighter load. When I manage to control Vdroop I overshoot. No matter what I do it is just wonky. Throwing in the towel for now on adaptive voltage. 

Reverted back to old faithful manual voltage and will stick with 4.9 ghz using 1.250v in bios and "turbo" LLC. Gives me Vcore sensor readings of 1.260 (IT8688E) and 1.254 (IT8792E), and VR VOUT of 1.248. I don't have to worry about random spikes and droop. I hope my CPU will be fine in the long run given that the voltage will always stay at 1.248 - 1.260.

Hopefully Gigabyte works on the bios some more. Or maybe I'm just dumb. Either way I'm done and will just enjoy.


----------



## Timur Born

One thing I am missing from my previous Asus board is the ability to use multiple temperature sensors as source for fan settings. Did I miss it somewhere or does Gigabyte not offer such a feature.


----------



## Mo2k

Moparman said:


> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> 
> For how Long do you run prime 95 with 1344 and in place? 12 Hours or 24? Don’t you use blend test at all?
> 
> And how do you Test RAM? Memtest?
> 
> And do you use Small FFTs with Prime 26 or even not with that version? Not even for 15 Minutes?
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Running P95 in this day and age really has not point. You can be P95 stable and still crash in work loads and we see people talk about it all the time. Get your OC stable with the things you do and call it a day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ok Thank you! 🙂
> 
> Another Question: I dismissed the idea to use adaptive voltage since it doesnt work with my Aorus Pro, I even get these spikes of vcore with allday software.
> 
> Is it in Order to use manual voltage and let it on 1,335 24/7?
> 
> Does ist degrade my cpu or does it lead to that higher power consumption and electricity bills? 😄
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Timur Born

Let's talk about VR VOUT during CPU idle times with adaptive voltages. C3 residency of all cores being between >90% to >94%, CPU frequency minimum set to 50% and CPU autonomous mode active at 50%.

CPU internal LLC set to "Performance", external LLC set to "Normal" (="Low" in EasyTune).

C0 VID: ave. 0.87 V
VCore S2: ave. 0.73 V
VR VOUT: ave. 1.185 V

So what's up with VR VOUT staying over 1 V during C3? Even more so, it often reads nearly constant 1.25 V while VCore S2 reads prolonged phases of around 0.7 V (and lower). Unfortunately the backplate of my cooler keeps me from reaching the CPU socket with a VRM and the VRM measuring points on the Aorus Master are only labeled but not documented (where do I best get ground from?).


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gotcha, this is what I see here. Everything in bios is set to 1.2v and all other settings normal, only increases are to SA and VCCIO. Seem right for default settings?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know. What loadline calibration setting are you using?
> Your bios voltage can NOT be 1.2v because all of the vcore readings are 1.2-1.3v.
> Compared to the other two vcore sensors, VR VOUT seems to be accurate.
> Your bios voltage has to be 1.3v.
Click to expand...

I am using the offset mode and it's set to normal. This is what I find perplexing. Llc is on standard


----------



## Stockman

Timur Born said:


> VRM measuring points on the Aorus Master are only labeled but not documented (where do I best get ground from?).


I've successfully confirmed voltages at all these points using multi meter. What do you mean by ground?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> I am using the offset mode and it's set to normal. This is what I find perplexing. Llc is on standard


Use manual mode.
Offset relies on the CPU VID, plus offset value and I don't use offset so I can't help you if you do.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Let's talk about VR VOUT during CPU idle times with adaptive voltages. C3 residency of all cores being between >90% to >94%, CPU frequency minimum set to 50% and CPU autonomous mode active at 50%.
> 
> CPU internal LLC set to "Performance", external LLC set to "Normal" (="Low" in EasyTune).
> 
> C0 VID: ave. 0.87 V
> VCore S2: ave. 0.73 V
> VR VOUT: ave. 1.185 V
> 
> So what's up with VR VOUT staying over 1 V during C3? Even more so, it often reads nearly constant 1.25 V while VCore S2 reads prolonged phases of around 0.7 V (and lower). Unfortunately the backplate of my cooler keeps me from reaching the CPU socket with a VRM and the VRM measuring points on the Aorus Master are only labeled but not documented (where do I best get ground from?).


I don't use offset mode or easytune nor do I use c-states, and I don't know what the presets do for CPU Internal LLC (they set IA AC and IA DC loadline to some weird pre-programmed numbers with no documentation, between 1 and 210, which we don't know because they remain on auto if 0). I'll try it later when I'm not in bed, but no problems with VR VOUT with 1.180v at 4.5 ghz (4 cores disabled).
I did notice in the bios that the lowest manual voltage you can set is 1.10v while the VID goes much lower at slower speeds.

I'll do a quick check later for you with c-states and adaptive when I get some time, but you're on your own otherwise. I only use manual voltages.


----------



## Stockman

Does anyone know exactly what the OC button does on the Aorus Master? Is it possible to assign a custom profile to it because that would be really cool


----------



## Falkentyne

Stockman said:


> Does anyone know exactly what the OC button does on the Aorus Master? Is it possible to assign a custom profile to it because that would be really cool


You mean the button that shalt never be pressed button?
Just don't use it.
Even buildzoid says don't press it.


----------



## Anzial

Got a question about the Z390 Pro model, specifically about the last (3rd) PCIEx16 slot. The manual says nothing about it, only the top 2 x16 slots, and one review mentions that if all 3 x16 slots are occupied, the 2&3 fall to x4 as if they are ALL connected to the CPU directly even though the same review says that the 3rd x16 slot is fed by PCH which means that it's not supposed to affect number of lanes available to the top 2 x16 slots. So which is it? Is the 3rd x16 connected to CPU or PCH? Does it force 2nd x16 slot to x4 when in use or not? I may want to occupy all 3 x16 slots and I don't want to drop 2nd x16 slot to 4x speed. Oh, does the use of the 3rd x16 slot disable a SATA port like using M2?


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Let's talk about VR VOUT during CPU idle times with adaptive voltages. C3 residency of all cores being between >90% to >94%, CPU frequency minimum set to 50% and CPU autonomous mode active at 50%.
> 
> CPU internal LLC set to "Performance", external LLC set to "Normal" (="Low" in EasyTune).
> 
> C0 VID: ave. 0.87 V
> VCore S2: ave. 0.73 V
> VR VOUT: ave. 1.185 V
> 
> So what's up with VR VOUT staying over 1 V during C3? Even more so, it often reads nearly constant 1.25 V while VCore S2 reads prolonged phases of around 0.7 V (and lower). Unfortunately the backplate of my cooler keeps me from reaching the CPU socket with a VRM and the VRM measuring points on the Aorus Master are only labeled but not documented (where do I best get ground from?).


And this is why I don't use adaptive voltage. and to hell with c-states.
See?

Decided to set adaptive voltage+cstates on for you and 3.7 ghz

My CPU didn't even downclock to 800 mhz. (probably something in the bios i didn't set, I don't know...maybe i should have enabled Speed Shift in Throttlestop or in the Bios and EIST....had them disabled...had everything else enabled including C1E and all c-states....)

and look.

vcore 0.63v at 3.7 ghz at idle? I think not......unless it was 3.7 ghz with all clock cycles cut...I don't know how c-states work..would've used Throttlestop 8.70 but I had a profile preset for 4.7 ghz so I didn't bother...

VR VOUT makes much more sense in the first picture than a 0.637vcore at 3.7 ghz (even if c-states is what made the vcore go that low). Notice VR VOUT matches the CPU VID while vcore is much lower?

For proof look at the load.

I blame c-states. 

And I thought I destroyed my CPU too.
Tried to test manual voltage at 3.6 ghz @ 1.1v (the lowest the bios would go).
Machine check exception while loading windows. 
Then frozen POST at code A9.
Was about to clear CMOS until I managed ONE TIME to get into the Bios and saw the CPU was at 4.7 ghz @ 1.1v....

Somehow I managed to load a profile without the bios crashing and got stable again.

Then I found out that setting a 36x cpu multiplier (which is supposed to be base?) forces the CPU to 4.7 ghz (maximum 8 core multiplier) even though I have all turbo boost multis set to auto and MCE disabled.
But setting a x37 multi forces the CPU to 3.7 ghz.
I guess turbo boost has to be disabled completely to set a manual x36 or lower.

Only safe way to go below a x36 multiplier is to use Throttlestop, enable speed shift, then set speedshift range manually to the same min and max multiplier then SST=0 for full speed, e.g. 16, 16)

I'm done testing this stuff.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Use manual mode.
> Offset relies on the CPU VID, plus offset value and I don't use offset so I can't help you if you do.


Okay I went back to manual mode and these are the first settings I can use and run the stress test for more then a minute without instantly crashing. CPU set to 5GHz, Uncore 4.7. Manual Voltage Mode, 1.34v. VCCSA 1.25. VCCIO 1.15 Turbo LLC. I have the VRMs set to extreme performance (to transition between voltages quicker) - this seems to help. 

All C-States Off and Speedshift Off. 
The attached picture shows my temperatures at load in the stress test I referenced before. I think my temps are "okay." The graph with VCore is from the 8792 sensor and its showing a nearly rock solid 1.34v. The VROut Graph is the IR35201 sensor. CPU Package Temperature is obvious, and liquid temperature is for my Corsair H150i Pro (just making sure it stays stable under 40c, seems good so far).

My questions:

1.) The VID numbers terrify me (maximum 1.45v, nearly 1.46v) , but based on what I understand from reading this thread I can safely ignore them as that is what the CPU is requesting, but not being given based on the info above. Is this correct?

2.) Based on the info here, do you think this is a good starting point? My goal is only 5GhZ Stable - ideally I would like to turn on the power saving features but I can live to fight another day. 
So far its been running for about 30 minutes stable.

3.) I'd like to get my cores under 90s all the time, they occasionally spike to mid 90s. I think I can get there with a slight decrease in voltage. It doesn't appear I am in too much danger of thermal throttling but I prefer under 90c. When I ran my stock 4.7GHz all core I was able to set VCC IO and VCC SA both at 1.10v and had no issues with my ram at 3200. Would I need more voltage there now at the higher core frequency? I'm thinking I might be able to decrease these again (and maybe .05v off the core) and test again.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Okay I went back to manual mode and these are the first settings I can use and run the stress test for more then a minute without instantly crashing. CPU set to 5GHz, Uncore 4.7. Manual Voltage Mode, 1.34v. VCCSA 1.25. VCCIO 1.15 (may be 1.20, need to double check). Turbo LLC.
> All C-States Off and Speedshift Off. I have the VRMs set to extreme performance (to transition between voltages quicker) - this seems to help.
> 
> The attached picture shows my temperatures at load in the stress test I referenced before. I think my temps are "okay." The graph with VCore is from the 8792 sensor and its showing a nearly rock solid 1.34v. The VROut Graph is the IR35201 sensor. CPU Package Temperature is obvious, and liquid temperature is for my Corsair H150i Pro (just making sure it stays stable under 40c, seems good so far).
> 
> My questions:
> 
> 1.) The VID numbers terrify me (maximum 1.45v, nearly 1.46v) , but based on what I understand from reading this thread I can safely ignore them as that is what the CPU is requesting, but not being given based on the info above. Is this correct?
> 
> 2.) Based on the info here, do you think this is a good starting point? My goal is only 5GhZ Stable - ideally I would like to turn on the power saving features but I can live to fight another day.
> So far its been running for about 30 minutes stable.
> 
> 3.) I'd like to get my cores under 90s all the time, they occasionally spike to mid 90s. I think I can get there with a slight decrease in voltage. It doesn't appear I am in too much danger of thermal throttling but I prefer under 90c. When I ran my stock 4.7GHz all core I was able to set VCC IO and VCC SA both at 1.10v and had no issues with my ram at 3200. Would I need more voltage there now at the higher core frequency? I'm thinking I might be able to decrease these again (and maybe .05v off the core) and test again.


Yes, VID is ONLY used when using 'adaptive' (Gigabyte calls that "Normal") voltages (I DO NOT know if VID is used for "Auto" voltages. No man worth their salt uses auto voltages unless they know for a FACT it won't overvolt you).

Now you see how the IA AC DC loadlines work? 
IA AC DC Loadlines= affect VID. Does NOT affect vcore when using override voltages (DC loadline may still affect power draw or have some effect i will *NOT* test).
Loadline Calibration = affects VCORE (but not VID).
Vcore is linked to VID when using adaptive voltages and *THEN* (Vcore is) influenced by loadline calibration.
Only on laptops (Throttlebooks) is VID linked to vcore when using override voltages.

Um.......question please?

How did you actually test that PWM Phase control / PWM switch rate actually helps you?
What did you to prove that 'extreme' helps?


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Yes, VID is ONLY used when using 'adaptive' (Gigabyte calls that "Normal") voltages (I DO NOT know if VID is used for "Auto" voltages. No man worth their salt uses auto voltages unless they know for a FACT it won't overvolt you).
> 
> Only on laptops (Throttlebooks) is VID linked to vcore when using override voltages.
> 
> How did you actually test that PWM Phase control / PWM switch rate actually helps you?
> What did you to prove that 'extreme' helps?


Gotcha, thanks.

I suppose I don't have any proof, I will set that back to auto and see what happens. 

See pic below for all voltage settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Gotcha, thanks.
> 
> I suppose I don't have any proof, I will set that back to auto and see what happens.
> 
> See pic below for all voltage settings.


I sort of edited my post 3 times while you were replying.
I have no idea if PWM phase control (or switch rate) actually affects stability (because you would have to already be borderline stable to test that, and that's VERY messy).
I tried doing some searching last night, and all I could find was the IR 35201 datasheet someone linked yesterday, and it seems this VR has some sort of "Transient voltage spike" protection, which can be enabled or disabled by "setting a bit", but I do NOT know if PWM phase control or switch rate has anything to do with this. I know absolutely nothing.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Gotcha, thanks.
> 
> I suppose I don't have any proof, I will set that back to auto and see what happens.
> 
> See pic below for all voltage settings.


Unless you get a random "System service exception", "IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL" , or bizarre random crashes, try setting system agent to 1.20v. Should only need to go higher when using RAM > 3866 mhz or really pushing timings somehow.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Unless you get a random "System service exception", "IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL" , or bizarre random crashes, try setting system agent to 1.20v. Should only need to go higher when using RAM > 3866 mhz or really pushing timings somehow.


Gotcha, thanks. I was able to complete 10 loops of the x264 custom benchmark with the settings above without issue. I am now testing VCCSA at 1.20v and setting phase control back to auto.

*EDIT*
Interestingly enough, EZtune is showing both phase control settings set to extreme performance even though they now are set to auto in the BIOS. This may be the boards default behavior when overclocking.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> My CPU didn't even downclock to 800 mhz. (probably something in the bios i didn't set, I don't know...maybe i should have enabled Speed Shift in Throttlestop or in the Bios and EIST....had them disabled...had everything else enabled including C1E and all c-states....)


You likely use the "High Performance" Windows power profile, which is set to a minimum of 100% CPU clock (= non Turbo frequency).



> vcore 0.63v at 3.7 ghz at idle? I think not......unless it was 3.7 ghz with all clock cycles cut...I don't know how c-states work..


C3 and deeper completely disable the core clock and PLL and flush the L1/L2 cache. The 3.7 Ghz reported is just the last state the core was in before entering deep sleep (C3 or deeper). So effectively the core is not clocked at all but shut down, which is why 0.637 V makes sense.

In reality the core is switched on and off repeatedly, unless you are using Windows' core parking that keeps cores unoccupied on purpose.



> For proof look at the load.


There is no load on cores that are in C3, or rather the "Core # C3 Residency" measurement of HWinfo tells you how much time (in percent) the core is shut down, the rest of the time it's busy doing stuff.

My CPU package power drops below 5 W when I leave the computer completely idle. I am using the very "Ultimate Performance" power profile in combination with Speedshift (50%), so my cores increase frequency and voltage rather aggressively (aka quick).


----------



## Timur Born

Stockman said:


> I've successfully confirmed voltages at all these points using multi meter. What do you mean by ground?


Against what ground did you measure them? The measuring pins are not documented other than their labels, so I don't know which pin is supposed to be ground.

What are the smaller pins below the bigger ones for? Two of the big pins are quite close together, not easy to navigate with a probe without bridging them.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> You likely use the "High Performance" Windows power profile, which is set to a minimum of 100% CPU clock (= non Turbo frequency).
> 
> 
> C3 and deeper completely disable the core clock and PLL and flush the L1/L2 cache. The 3.7 Ghz reported is just the last state the core was in before entering deep sleep (C3 or deeper). So effectively the core is not clocked at all but shut down, which is why 0.637 V makes sense.
> 
> In reality the core is switched on and off repeatedly, unless you are using Windows' core parking that keeps cores unoccupied on purpose.
> 
> 
> There is no load on cores that are in C3, or rather the "Core # C3 Residency" measurement of HWinfo tells you how much time (in percent) the core is shut down, the rest of the time it's busy doing stuff.
> 
> My CPU package power drops below 5 W when I leave the computer completely idle. I am using the very "Ultimate Performance" power profile in combination with Speedshift (50%), so my cores increase frequency and voltage rather aggressively (aka quick).


*runs and pats my unpatched windows 10 1703 build with high performance power profile*
But yes, VR VOUT is working as intended.
Not getting into C-states


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Against what ground did you measure them? The measuring pins are not documented other than their labels, so I don't know which pin is supposed to be ground.
> 
> What are the smaller pins below the bigger ones for? Two of the big pins are quite close together, not easy to navigate with a probe without bridging them.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

Maybe send Elmor a PM asking for help on read points? Not a lot of people are engineers here (and you can bet your buns the few who are will just explain things like you're trying to learn ancient Chinese from 50,000 years ago 

Starting to regret not taking a class in EE and becoming a techhead. Maybe I could find out the secret of Space Invaders on the RTX cards too if I had


----------



## Stockman

Timur Born said:


> Against what ground did you measure them? The measuring pins are not documented other than their labels, so I don't know which pin is supposed to be ground.
> 
> What are the smaller pins below the bigger ones for? Two of the big pins are quite close together, not easy to navigate with a probe without bridging them.


The smaller pins are the measuring points. I'm not sure what the bigger pins are. I can take a picture when I get home and post with a circle around what I'm talking about.

When I touch positive/negative leads of multi meter to each set of small pins I get expected voltages when compared to HWinfo (they are labeled on the board itself).


----------



## Timur Born

I do know how to use those read points, but I do not know which pin is the electrical ground that the CPU is connected to. I could use just any ground, but that is not the same. Overall I wonder why the manual does not mention this at all?! And I really wish manufacturers would use sockets that allow to put the probes inside instead of me having to juggle the probes around small solder points.


----------



## Timur Born

Stockman said:


> The smaller pins are the measuring points. I'm not sure what the bigger pins are. I can take a picture when I get home and post with a circle around what I'm talking about.
> 
> When I touch positive/negative leads of multi meter to each set of small pins I get expected voltages when compared to HWinfo (they are labeled on the board itself).


Thank you. So the each pair of small pins includes its own ground pin?! Well, the smaller size doesn't make it easier and Gigabyte should document this stuff.

Maybe I should just get another cooler backplate instead and use the resistors at the back of the CPU for measurement instead.


----------



## Robbært

Anzial said:


> Got a question about the Z390 Pro model, specifically about the last (3rd) PCIEx16 slot. The manual says nothing about it, only the top 2 x16 slots, and one review mentions that if all 3 x16 slots are occupied, the 2&3 fall to x4 as if they are ALL connected to the CPU directly even though the same review says that the 3rd x16 slot is fed by PCH which means that it's not supposed to affect number of lanes available to the top 2 x16 slots. So which is it? Is the 3rd x16 connected to CPU or PCH? Does it force 2nd x16 slot to x4 when in use or not? I may want to occupy all 3 x16 slots and I don't want to drop 2nd x16 slot to 4x speed. Oh, does the use of the 3rd x16 slot disable a SATA port like using M2?


aorus pro? page 6
3rd slot is x4 chipset connected
1 and 2 is x16 + empty or x8 + x8
asus boards are same link

use one of M.2 slots disable some SATA (it in manual)


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I do know how to use those read points, but I do not know which pin is the electrical ground that the CPU is connected to. I could use just any ground, but that is not the same. Overall I wonder why the manual does not mention this at all?! And I really wish manufacturers would use sockets that allow to put the probes inside instead of me having to juggle the probes around small solder points.


Are you trying to read the "on-die sense" that the CPU is directly connected to (Aka the VR VOUT reading?)
you're going to have to PM Elmor about that. He's the only person here who knows enough about that.

The resistors at the back of the CPU is the MLCC socket reading (The 2nd "Vcore" sensor seems to read those as MatthewH said they match the multimeter read points almost exactly)
See the link I posted.


----------



## Padinn

So my overclock seems pretty stable now, looks like 1.335v or 1.34v will be my final setting (1.3v crashed after around 30 minutes). Anything to watch out for if I want to enable Cstates and power saving stuff now? (i.e., will it cause voltage spiking?)


----------



## Padinn

Interestingly enough I can't even get my CPU to post with the default voltage manually set (1.20v) and LLC set to Standard. If I set LCC to turbo it posts, but crashes loading windows. I wonder if my 9900k is just terrible, or working right? What settings would I use if I just wanted to all core 4.7Ghz at?

I can run it stable at 1.34v at 5.0Ghz, with LLC Turbo and the stuff I posted earlier today.


----------



## Stockman

Falkentyne said:


> Stockman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone know exactly what the OC button does on the Aorus Master? Is it possible to assign a custom profile to it because that would be really cool
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the button that shalt never be pressed button?
> Just don't use it.
> Even buildzoid says don't press it.
Click to expand...

Yes, that one. Everyone says don't touch it, but no one can explain what it does.


----------



## EarlZ

I am thinking of adding another pair of Trident Z 16Gb (8*2) 3200Mhz C16 on my system, will this have any impact on my cpu overclock ?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I am thinking of adding another pair of Trident Z 16Gb (8*2) 3200Mhz C16 on my system, will this have any impact on my cpu overclock ?


No. Board uses T-topology (whatever that is) so its optimized for 4 dimms already.


----------



## Anzial

Robbært said:


> aorus pro? page 6
> 3rd slot is x4 chipset connected
> 1 and 2 is x16 + empty or x8 + x8
> asus boards are same link
> 
> use one of M.2 slots disable some SATA (it in manual)


Yes, I understand all that, and I did read the manual lol. What the manual does not say, and neither does the diagram (very helpful otherwise, thank you) is whether the 2nd PCIe x16 will drop to 4x when all three are occupied? Because I think it shouldn't, since it does not share PCIe lanes from the CPU with the 3rd slot. But the review on Guru3d did say that it would, so I don't know who's wrong here -me or the Guru3d reviewer, as Gygabyte manual is silent on the matter. 

I'm also wondering if the 3rd x16 slot shares bandwidth with one of the M2/Sata ports, meaning that using the 3rd x16 slot will shut down one of the SATA ports. Ideally, I would like to use all 6 satas AND all 3 pcie x16 slots and retain x8+x8 config on the first 2 x16 slots



I'd appreciate if @GBT-MatthewH could comment.


----------



## ITAngel

My System is stock on a reboot and the post LED light stops at the VGA and then restarts. Is so annoying. Even If I reboot the system without the VGA it will still do the same. Any advice you guys can give me?


----------



## Falkentyne

ITAngel said:


> My System is stock on a reboot and the post LED light stops at the VGA and then restarts. Is so annoying. Even If I reboot the system without the VGA it will still do the same. Any advice you guys can give me?


Well what did you do before it started doing this?
You must have done or changed something to make that happen.
Did you try unplugging all USB devices?
Did you try switching to the backup bios with the jumper switch to switch to secondary bios?


----------



## ITAngel

Falkentyne said:


> Well what did you do before it started doing this?
> You must have done or changed something to make that happen.
> Did you try unplugging all USB devices?
> Did you try switching to the backup bios with the jumper switch to switch to secondary bios?



It was working last night just fine and today I just replace the cooler with a water block, and that is about it. Ran it and just got stuck on a reboot. It did this before and it fixed itself. I did put the switch to bios 2 on both of them but nothing. Is running but stuck with the 4F code and LED on VGA LED on bios is on Master the bottom bios LED light. MB. I take that back I never ran it yesterday only the day before.

Is there a way to do a bios update using USB?

damn i think I am going to have to break the loop all up and rest my GPU on another system and test the mobo and cpu alone on this system. This is annoying.


----------



## ITAngel

I even rested and re-pasted the CPU. I don't have anything connected but power and one monitor and that is about it.

the motherboard should be able to boot into bios without the cpu right?

Base on the book it said 3F~4F is reserved. What does that mean?


----------



## ITAngel

I have it on air and still doing the same thing, I am done with this board. It has been only problems after problems so returning it back to newegg.


----------



## Robbært

ITAngel said:


> I have it on air and still doing the same thing, I am done with this board. It has been only problems after problems so returning it back to newegg.


Looking at next AMD CPU lineup it very good time to wait for AMD instead.
And there so much less problems with CPU having pins.
AMD have so much profit from fast RAM.
People buying these 3600-4200 RAM modules that give only 1 to 3% (game) performance on Intels.
Lamborghini and Ferrari not gonna sell at all if they only 3% faster than family Volkswagen.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

I've had my 9900k and aorus master mobo system up and running for about a day now and i had some questions about this.

My preliminary OC results right are:
5.2ghz non avx @ 1.35v load(passes p95 1344k in place non avx for 1 hour)
5.1ghz avx @ 1.35v load(passes p95 1344k in place avx for 1 hour, real bench crashes at the 45 minute mark)
I have not touched uncore or brought my memory past xmp settings yet, will do it once i'm convinced these settings are fully stable
Bios settings are a bump in frequency to 52, XMP enabled, uncore set to 44, avx offset 1, c states disabled, LLC set to turbo, vcore 1.365, sa 1.25, vccio 1.2

When OC'ing on this board which voltage reading in hwinfo is most relevant? 
The ITE IT8688E vcore reading is all over the place, at load its dropping as low as 1.296 and tops out at 1.392, average reading is 1.368
ITE IT8792E reads 1.353 average and sits there most of the time with a small variation up and down(guessing this is the most relevant sensor)
IRF IR35201 VR OUT reads ~1.351 average with little variation at low loads(gaming) but with stress testing drops down to 1.312

Just trying to get a feel for the way voltages work on this board. I'm skirting the edge of stability right now with my avx and non avx loads, i may need to bring the voltage up another 10mv to get it 100% stable. I know the acceptable upper limit on these chips right now is 1.35v which is why i targeted that voltage right off. I have a custom water loop, temps are fine across the board. I just want to make sure i'm not going past the acceptable upper limits with some of the voltage fluctuations.

Second issue i'm running into is the dual bios function. I dislike this feature and want it disabled. Every time i have any instability while stress testing, it dumps me into the backup bios upon reboot. To get back to the primary bios i have to kill the power on the psu. I have the dip switch on the board set to 1 for the primary bios, and 2 to disable dual bios. It still dumps me into the secondary bios every time i have instability from OCing. Anyone else having this issue? Is there a fix for it? I'm on the latest bios from the support section on gigabyte's website.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> The resistors at the back of the CPU is the MLCC socket reading (The 2nd "Vcore" sensor seems to read those as MatthewH said they match the multimeter read points almost exactly)
> See the link I posted.


The voltage at the socket is supposed to be the voltage that goes into the CPU. The read points can match those, but not necessarily, because obviously the read points are not situated at the socket. And the read points on the Aorus Master are hard to reach and small, the back of the CPU often can be reached easier when the board is inside a case. Unfortunately my AIO backplate blocks the area.


----------



## OutlawII

Robbært said:


> Looking at next AMD CPU lineup it very good time to wait for AMD instead.
> And there so much less problems with CPU having pins.
> AMD have so much profit from fast RAM.
> People buying these 3600-4200 RAM modules that give only 1 to 3% (game) performance on Intels.
> Lamborghini and Ferrari not gonna sell at all if they only 3% faster than family Volkswagen.


Go troll elsewhere


----------



## Robbært

OutlawII said:


> Go troll elsewhere


he changed cooler.
system not boot.
what else should it be?
cpu socket.


----------



## OutlawII

ITAngel said:


> I even rested and re-pasted the CPU. I don't have anything connected but power and one monitor and that is about it.
> 
> the motherboard should be able to boot into bios without the cpu right?
> 
> Base on the book it said 3F~4F is reserved. What does that mean?


Did you check to see if you got your cooler tightened down to much? Overtightening can cause some strange issues


----------



## ITAngel

Issue is nothing happen like I done multiple AMD 2700X and Threadripper installs of water cooling systems and no issues what so ever. After owning a 3930K back in the days felt it would be good to do 9900K system and now I am having more problems. Nothing change except a cooler and yes the system didn't run the day before was fully disconnected to get it ready for the install yesterday. Now is just not booting just keep repeating 4F Reserved error code on the motherboard and rebooting. Primary or Secondary bios. 

Is there a way to do a bios flash directly from USB when the system is like this? I know some motherboard you can hold the bottom and flash a bios without a cpu on the socket.


----------



## OutlawII

ITAngel said:


> Issue is nothing happen like I done multiple AMD 2700X and Threadripper installs of water cooling systems and no issues what so ever. After owning a 3930K back in the days felt it would be good to do 9900K system and now I am having more problems. Nothing change except a cooler and yes the system didn't run the day before was fully disconnected to get it ready for the install yesterday. Now is just not booting just keep repeating 4F Reserved error code on the motherboard and rebooting. Primary or Secondary bios.
> 
> Is there a way to do a bios flash directly from USB when the system is like this? I know some motherboard you can hold the bottom and flash a bios without a cpu on the socket.


You said it ran fine before you installed a new cooler?


----------



## ITAngel

OutlawII said:


> You said it ran fine before you installed a new cooler?


Yes but I seen this happen before once were it got crazy rebooting and such but eventually it fixed itself. Except this time is not even doing that but to answer your question Yes. I removed the hardware before yesterday and left it unplugged until yesterday when I put the new cooler in. Any thoughts?

I left the cooler sitting on top of the cpu no pressure added and still it will do the same. I really thing is a motherboard bios issue than anything else.


----------



## Moparman

Robbært said:


> he changed cooler.
> system not boot.
> what else should it be?
> cpu socket.



Very good chance of shorting some backplates to capacitor pins on the back of the board. Need to check this.


----------



## PuD

Moparman said:


> Very good chance of shorting some backplates to capacitor pins on the back of the board. Need to check this.


 @ITAngel Or if you don't tried yet, reseat your memory modules.


----------



## osb40000

Robbært said:


> Looking at next AMD CPU lineup it very good time to wait for AMD instead.
> And there so much less problems with CPU having pins.
> AMD have so much profit from fast RAM.
> People buying these 3600-4200 RAM modules that give only 1 to 3% (game) performance on Intels.
> Lamborghini and Ferrari not gonna sell at all if they only 3% faster than family Volkswagen.


AMD has poor latency and always has, that's why they perform worse in games. Faster memory does help to mitigate this to some degree but you can crank the most expensive, fastest memory possible on the 2700X and it still has way more latency than an Intel chip with slow RAM. Maybe this will change with the 3000 series, maybe it won't. Regarding CPU pins, absolutely not. I've seen plenty of problems over the years with AMD CPUs and bent/broken pins. Take your AMD fanbio comments and take a hike. AMD at this point is a great budget proposition, but anyone gaming above 60hz should still be looking at Intel.


----------



## osb40000

Moparman said:


> Very good chance of shorting some backplates to capacitor pins on the back of the board. Need to check this.


This. I had a backplate shorting out years ago. Chances are this is the problem.


----------



## ITAngel

I shipped it out back getting full refund the system had stability issues from the start even on air. Which is why I was planning to put it on water but oh well I will grab a different board and cpu to get this build finished again. 

Thanks for all the advice and tips on troubleshooting the board but I am done with it. Be safe all!


----------



## Padinn

So, if I wanted to just run everything at stock to make sure its working right, what would I do. Reset CMOS and Load Optimized Defaults?


----------



## pm1109

Load Optimized Defaults to run at full stock settings


----------



## Padinn

Beta Bios 7b came out today, I'm trying it out (for the Aorous Master)


----------



## Moparman

Padinn said:


> Beta Bios 7b came out today, I'm trying it out (for the Aorous Master)



For sure lets us know how it is. I'm still on F5 as i have had zero issues.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Beta Bios 7b came out today, I'm trying it out (for the Aorous Master)


No changelogs?

........And they were never heard from again.


----------



## pm1109

Padinn said:


> Beta Bios 7b came out today, I'm trying it out (for the Aorous Master)


Let us know how you find it 

Thanks


----------



## Padinn

Seems fine so far, but I'm not overclocking at the moment. Still trying to figure out what my chips voltage is. 80c with 4.7GHz all core sound right to you guys? Seems hot to me, but from what I can see in reviews I'm in the right range.


----------



## davids40

Padinn said:


> Beta Bios 7b came out today, I'm trying it out (for the Aorous Master)


where ? 

thanks

edit : here -> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## Falkentyne

davids40 said:


> where ?
> 
> thanks


https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## davids40

Falkentyne said:


> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html



merci, thanks, danke


----------



## Timur Born

osb40000 said:


> AMD has poor latency and always has, that's why they perform worse in games. Faster memory does help to mitigate this to some degree but you can crank the most expensive, fastest memory possible on the 2700X and it still has way more latency than an Intel chip with slow RAM.


The difference is about 45 ns on Intel 9900K vs. 70 ns on AMD 1800X for 3200-C14 memory. The 1800X can be pushed towards 65 ns, the 2700X is supposed to improve on latency slightly.


----------



## jlp0209

Who gives a damn about AMD, wrong thread, get out of here. 

I think I killed my Z390 Master. I was tinkering with OC settings some more and did 3 simple things: set multiplier to 50, adaptive DVID -.050, LLC to extreme, AC/DC LLC to 1 per recommendation of various forums for adaptive voltage. 

Well, my main bios crapped out and it has been impossible to restore it. I'm in the backup bios and followed instructions to boot to the backup bios, flip the switch to main bios, and flash. Did nothing. If anything now my backup bios are updated to F6. The mBIOS LED will not turn on, flipping SB bios switch to revert to single bios does nothing and still boots from the backup bios. Removed battery, cleared CMOS. No matter what I do, I am limited just to the backup bios. 

I will call Gigabyte support and try to get a case number and hope to return the board to Microcenter and exchange for a different brand. So infuriating.


----------



## anthony81212

Does anyone know how to re-flash the main BIOS, if I cannot boot into it anymore? I am on Z390 Aorus Master with 9700K and BIOS version F6. I had a stable OC at 5GHz and XMP profile for 3600 MHz (all components on QVL).

I have no idea what happened to it, the PC was working fine, and then I booted the machine, and all of a sudden it won't boot into that main BIOS anymore. I had single BIOS switch on.

Clearing CMOS didn't help. After turning the PC on again, it turns on/off many times, flashing different post codes (including 31, 34, 3A, 35, 38, 39, and getting stuck at 40 for a while), and then it reboots, all fans on high and no post code (and no debug LED on (CPU,DRAM,VGA,Boot)), and just seems to hang there... I've left it for ~10 min while writing this post with no change. 

Now I enabled dual BIOS (by toggling the SB switch to "1"--dual BIOS mode), and the motherboard detects that the main BIOS is kaputt, and switches to the backup BIOS (which luckily is still working lol).
The BIOS LED indicator shows me that I'm on the backup BIOS.

I re-flashed the BIOS F6 file while I am in backup BIOS, and reboot, but it seems that this only reflashed the secondary BIOS ROM, and didn't touch the primary BIOS ROM (since I am booted into secondary BIOS).
So I still don't have a working primary BIOS. :doh:

TLDR: Does anyone have an idea how I can re-flash the *primary BIOS*, while I am booted into the *secondary BIOS*? Is there a way to do this?

@GBT-MatthewH I saw your post on the official Gigabyte forums talking about a way to do this, but that was for a AM4 motherboard and it was over 1+ years ago. Are there similar steps for Z390 Aorus Master + 9700K?

Thanks!


----------



## anthony81212

jlp0209 said:


> ...
> Well, my main bios crapped out and it has been impossible to restore it. I'm in the backup bios and followed instructions to boot to the backup bios, flip the switch to main bios, and flash. Did nothing. If anything now my backup bios are updated to F6. The mBIOS LED will not turn on, flipping SB bios switch to revert to single bios does nothing and still boots from the backup bios. Removed battery, cleared CMOS. No matter what I do, I am limited just to the backup bios.


Wow this is *exactly* the same thing that just happened to me!!! I actually just wrote a post about it, below your post haha. Let's see if anyone has solved this issue, or if Matt can help us out 

edit: but seriously though, I am super paranoid now about even changing ANY setting. I don't even think I'll enable XMP now since I am worried that the secondary BIOS will also get messed up, and then it's game over!


----------



## ScomComputers

Hi all! 
Please help me,what this the "VR Loop" ?
Is't very hot in idle, 51C, load 62C.....
Thanks!


----------



## jlp0209

anthony81212 said:


> Wow this is *exactly* the same thing that just happened to me!!! I actually just wrote a post about it, below your post haha. Let's see if anyone has solved this issue, or if Matt can help us out
> 
> edit: but seriously though, I am super paranoid now about even changing ANY setting. I don't even think I'll enable XMP now since I am worried that the secondary BIOS will also get messed up, and then it's game over!


Lol. Good timing haha. Somehow I got both bios to work by flipping the bios switch and flashing two more times from within the backup bios. I have absolutely no idea why flashing 3 times did the trick. I have an odd problem now though. My bios switch is on "2" which should be backup bios, but the mBIOS LED is now lit. If I switch the bios switch to "1" it will boot and the b (backup) BIOS LED is lit. Shouldn't it be the other way around??


----------



## anthony81212

jlp0209 said:


> Lol. Good timing haha. Somehow I got both bios to work by flipping the bios switch and flashing two more times from within the backup bios. I have absolutely no idea why flashing 3 times did the trick.


Oh, congrats! Could you please write down the steps of exactly what you did? I'd like to try them out as well, I really want to fix this botched BIOS. Thanks.



jlp0209 said:


> I have an odd problem now though. My bios switch is on "2" which should be backup bios, but the mBIOS LED is now lit. If I switch the bios switch to "1" it will boot and the b (backup) BIOS LED is lit. Shouldn't it be the other way around??


Yeah, it should be haha. Weird how that turns out like that. Did you turn off PC and unplug it (or switch the PSU switch off) and then do a clear CMOS? Also when you are doing this, I think you have to be in single BIOS mode (using the SB switch).


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Who gives a damn about AMD, wrong thread, get out of here.
> 
> I think I killed my Z390 Master. I was tinkering with OC settings some more and did 3 simple things: set multiplier to 50, adaptive DVID -.050, LLC to extreme, AC/DC LLC to 1 per recommendation of various forums for adaptive voltage.
> 
> Well, my main bios crapped out and it has been impossible to restore it. I'm in the backup bios and followed instructions to boot to the backup bios, flip the switch to main bios, and flash. Did nothing. If anything now my backup bios are updated to F6. The mBIOS LED will not turn on, flipping SB bios switch to revert to single bios does nothing and still boots from the backup bios. Removed battery, cleared CMOS. No matter what I do, I am limited just to the backup bios.
> 
> I will call Gigabyte support and try to get a case number and hope to return the board to Microcenter and exchange for a different brand. So infuriating.


you corrupted the Bios by booting at unstable settings and the recovery may have failed because the CPU was unstable.

IA AC DC loadline=1 is for MANUAL voltage only (mainly to stop the VID from being 100mv higher than your manual voltage). On some other platforms due to bugs, the default IA AC loadline value was actually affecting the CPU Vcore on manual voltages. This happened on some early Z370 Bioses, I think by Asrock. That issue was addressed later but at the time, the CPU VID was boosting the cpu vcore on manual voltages improperly. Basically people were setting vcore to 1.30v manual, and getting 1.40v directly on vcore (AND VID). That was a bios bug (prevented by setting IA AC DC loadline to 1). This was later addressed.

I confirmed that this doesn't happen on Z390.

Setting the iA AC DC loadline to "1" at 4.7 ghz (without offsets) may allow your system to be stable enough to boot into bios although windows would not pass stress tests.
But default VID stops scaling at 4.7 ghz, so 5 ghz would 100% not be stable just with this.

You also used -50mv on DVID in -addition- to using adaptive voltage without the VID being adjusted by default. I'm guessing you tried booting up at 1.15v CPU voltage at 5 ghz (assuming IA AC DC loadline=1 set your idle VID at 1.20v). Bios tried to restore itself and crashed because the CPU was too unstable to even boot.

yesterday I 'almost' corrupted my bios by trying to boot at x36 multiplier and 1.10v 3600 mhz (base clocks for 9900k) is perfectly stable at 1.1v, but setting a x36 multiplier will boot at x47 (default 8 core turbo boost setting), not sure why. x37 however will boot at 3.7 ghz. I think to use x36, turbo boost has to be disabled. Anyway on the first boot, before i realized i was trying to run 4700 mhz @ 1.1v, windows took forever to load then froze with MACHINE CHECK EXCEPTION. Then the bios kept freezing on post code A9, and I was about to clear cmos but hesitated. Eventually I got into the bios and to my horror I saw the CPU at 4.7 ghz @ 1.1v. 

I don't believe i've ever so quickly reached for a "load saved profile" button before.
Managed to load a 5 ghz profile without corrupting anything, then I tried setting x36 with 1.27v and sure enough I saw it booted at x47 at 1.27v so I found out what happened.

I'm confused why you can't boot from the backup bios however. The backup bios is supposed to load pure default settings.
I had some RAM timing epic fails when trying to push 4000 mhz DDR4 and the system booted at 2133 mhz RAM, 4.7 ghz CPU and default voltage after a failed timing.


Try removing EVERYTHING from your motherboard except the video card, CPU and fans. Remove all disk drives.
then set it to the backup bios in single bios mode and see if you can boot into it.

If you can, set the switch to primary bios mode while in the bios (this is the key) and run Qflash.
This is the same trick used to reflash a video card bios that has a dual bios switch. I dont believe the backup bios can be manually flashed by Qflash.
ALT+F10 - UEFI BIOS is supposed to flash the backup bios if the primary is stable.


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Does anyone know how to re-flash the main BIOS, if I cannot boot into it anymore? I am on Z390 Aorus Master with 9700K and BIOS version F6. I had a stable OC at 5GHz and XMP profile for 3600 MHz (all components on QVL).
> 
> I have no idea what happened to it, the PC was working fine, and then I booted the machine, and all of a sudden it won't boot into that main BIOS anymore. I had single BIOS switch on.
> 
> Clearing CMOS didn't help. After turning the PC on again, it turns on/off many times, flashing different post codes (including 31, 34, 3A, 35, 38, 39, and getting stuck at 40 for a while), and then it reboots, all fans on high and no post code (and no debug LED on (CPU,DRAM,VGA,Boot)), and just seems to hang there... I've left it for ~10 min while writing this post with no change.
> 
> Now I enabled dual BIOS (by toggling the SB switch to "1"--dual BIOS mode), and the motherboard detects that the main BIOS is kaputt, and switches to the backup BIOS (which luckily is still working lol).
> The BIOS LED indicator shows me that I'm on the backup BIOS.
> 
> I re-flashed the BIOS F6 file while I am in backup BIOS, and reboot, but it seems that this only reflashed the secondary BIOS ROM, and didn't touch the primary BIOS ROM (since I am booted into secondary BIOS).
> So I still don't have a working primary BIOS. :doh:
> 
> TLDR: Does anyone have an idea how I can re-flash the *primary BIOS*, while I am booted into the *secondary BIOS*? Is there a way to do this?
> 
> @GBT-MatthewH I saw your post on the official Gigabyte forums talking about a way to do this, but that was for a AM4 motherboard and it was over 1+ years ago. Are there similar steps for Z390 Aorus Master + 9700K?
> 
> Thanks!


Remove all drives and cards except VGA.
Boot to backup bios in single bios mode.
Switch primary switch to main bios while in the bios,
Run Qflash.
This is supposed to be how you do it.
I wasn't aware the backup bios was directly flashable by booting into it as it was supposed to be an emergency bios.
ALT+F10 is supposed to flash the backup when booting to the main but I don't know if that applies to z390 or only to "dual bios" mode being enabled.


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> Remove all drives and cards except VGA.
> Boot to backup bios in single bios mode.
> Switch primary switch to main bios while in the bios,
> Run Qflash.
> This is supposed to be how you do it.
> I wasn't aware the backup bios was directly flashable by booting into it as it was supposed to be an emergency bios.
> ALT+F10 is supposed to flash the backup when booting to the main but I don't know if that applies to z390 or only to "dual bios" mode being enabled.


Thanks for your response. I've got some questions tho:

Why is it necessary to remove all drives and cards? (I've got a bunch of HDD and SSD connected, these are not a huge problem but the 2 NVMe's are really buried and hard to get to).

"Switch primary switch to main bios while in the bios" -> @GBT-MatthewH said in this post post (for AM4 tho) to have the switch on dual-BIOS mode? Although I'd actually tend to agree with you. With the switch in dual-BIOS mode and the selector on main BIOS, it never boots to the main BIOS because it detects there's an error with it. So it boots into the secondary BIOS, and thus I can't toggle my selector switch to the main BIOS, because it is already there!  Unless I have it in dual-BIOS mode and put the selector switch on secondary BIOS? :thinking:

"I wasn't aware the backup bios was directly flashable by booting into it" -> yeah, me neither! TBH I thought the secondary BIOS is read-only.


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Thanks for your response. I've got some questions tho:
> 
> Why is it necessary to remove all drives and cards? (I've got a bunch of HDD and SSD connected, these are not a huge problem but the 2 NVMe's are really buried and hard to get to).
> 
> "Switch primary switch to main bios while in the bios" -> @GBT-MatthewH said in this post post (for AM4 tho) to have the switch on dual-BIOS mode? Although I'd actually tend to agree with you. With the switch in dual-BIOS mode and the selector on main BIOS, it never boots to the main BIOS because it detects there's an error with it. So it boots into the secondary BIOS, and thus I can't toggle my selector switch to the main BIOS, because it is already there!  Unless I have it in dual-BIOS mode and put the selector switch on secondary BIOS? :thinking:
> 
> "I wasn't aware the backup bios was directly flashable by booting into it" -> yeah, me neither! TBH I thought the secondary BIOS is read-only.


Back in the old days, you always removed everything except video and CPU when you had a partially bricked bios and needed to try to do a 'blind boot block bios recovery'.
By removing absolutely all initializations. But we had PS/2 ports for keyboard and mouse back then too...

I don't know about the 'switch' instructions as I never used it on this system. I'm only guessing here, based on this being the way to reflash a video card main bios when you have a dual bios switch and needed to boot to backup because mistakes were made (like on AMD video card, this is still what you do on Vega 64, etc).


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> anthony81212 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for your response. I've got some questions tho:
> 
> Why is it necessary to remove all drives and cards? (I've got a bunch of HDD and SSD connected, these are not a huge problem but the 2 NVMe's are really buried and hard to get to).
> 
> "Switch primary switch to main bios while in the bios" -> @GBT-MatthewH said in this post post (for AM4 tho) to have the switch on dual-BIOS mode? Although I'd actually tend to agree with you. With the switch in dual-BIOS mode and the selector on main BIOS, it never boots to the main BIOS because it detects there's an error with it. So it boots into the secondary BIOS, and thus I can't toggle my selector switch to the main BIOS, because it is already there! /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif Unless I have it in dual-BIOS mode and put the selector switch on secondary BIOS? /forum/images/smilies/thinking.gif
> 
> "I wasn't aware the backup bios was directly flashable by booting into it" -> yeah, me neither! TBH I thought the secondary BIOS is read-only.
> 
> 
> 
> Back in the old days, you always removed everything except video and CPU when you had a partially bricked bios and needed to try to do a 'blind boot block bios recovery'.
> By removing absolutely all initializations. But we had PS/2 ports for keyboard and mouse back then too...
> 
> I don't know about the 'switch' instructions as I never used it on this system. I'm only guessing here, based on this being the way to reflash a video card main bios when you have a dual bios switch and needed to boot to backup because mistakes were made (like on AMD video card, this is still what you do on Vega 64, etc).
Click to expand...

I didn’t need to remove anything from my system. Somehow flashing a couple times did the trick and I can’t explain how or why. But now the bios switch on “1” loads the back up bios and “2” loads main bios. No idea why this happens, it could have been like this out of the box and I just didn’t notice.

Re: AC/DC LLC, I read that setting it to “1” for adaptive voltage was the trick, I also recall you saying don’t do that. I tried for kicks and this is where it got me haha.

Once I got back up I tried setting a core multiplier to 49 and enabled XMP profile. I left every single other setting at auto. It gives me pretty good results surprisingly, Vcore a little higher than I want (away from PC now but but sensor max was 1.320, can’t recall what VOUT was) but temps were good. Vcore also behaved just like adaptive and went way down at idle. 

I’m meeting a buddy and will be by Microcenter on way home, I may just pick up an Asus board and sell this one locally and take the loss. This whole experience has soured my mood toward GB. I am probably very much at fault, but these bios are just not good.


----------



## shaolin95

Padinn said:


> Beta Bios 7b came out today, I'm trying it out (for the Aorous Master)


Any feedback? I hate when there are now changelogs :/


----------



## Falkentyne

shaolin95 said:


> Any feedback? I hate when there are now changelogs :/


Working for me. same as F7A but I don't know what's different.
I'm guessing it's the usual "Improve system compatibility" or something.
Maybe some RAM high speed issues are fixed? I don't know.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> I didn’t need to remove anything from my system. Somehow flashing a couple times did the trick and I can’t explain how or why. But now the bios switch on “1” loads the back up bios and “2” loads main bios. No idea why this happens, it could have been like this out of the box and I just didn’t notice.
> 
> Re: AC/DC LLC, I read that setting it to “1” for adaptive voltage was the trick, I also recall you saying don’t do that. I tried for kicks and this is where it got me haha.
> 
> Once I got back up I tried setting a core multiplier to 49 and enabled XMP profile. I left every single other setting at auto. It gives me pretty good results surprisingly, Vcore a little higher than I want (away from PC now but but sensor max was 1.320, can’t recall what VOUT was) but temps were good. Vcore also behaved just like adaptive and went way down at idle.
> 
> I’m meeting a buddy and will be by Microcenter on way home, I may just pick up an Asus board and sell this one locally and take the loss. This whole experience has soured my mood toward GB. I am probably very much at fault, but these bios are just not good.


Well considering the bios saved your motherboard when you had the CPU completely unstable and its working again, I say it did its job.
I don't know why the switch says it's backwards. Important thing is that it's working.

It's also very possible that the backup became the main bios and the main became the backup bios. When you set the board back to "Dual bios" mode, does it use bios #2 as default? Could possibly be a "feature".

I would have have hated you to have done this with an Asus board and got permanently corrupted, but Bios seems to be the best part of Asus boards for awhile now.


----------



## Moparman

Who has the bios on the Master and how do you like it? Any improvements in overclocking?


----------



## pm1109

Moparman said:


> Who has the bios on the Master and how do you like it? Any improvements in overclocking?


Hoping we get that magic bios that suddenly improves overcloking,

Wouldn’t that be a nice Christmas present


----------



## Moparman

lol would be nice.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Well considering the bios saved your motherboard when you had the CPU completely unstable and its working again, I say it did its job.
> I don't know why the switch says it's backwards. Important thing is that it's working.
> 
> It's also very possible that the backup became the main bios and the main became the backup bios. When you set the board back to "Dual bios" mode, does it use bios #2 as default? Could possibly be a "feature".
> 
> I would have have hated you to have done this with an Asus board and got permanently corrupted, but Bios seems to be the best part of Asus boards for awhile now.


Agree, everything is up and running and I've booted into both bios separately and there are indeed two separate and intact bios. All is well on that front it seems. Strange that the switch has it backwards, probably not an issue at all in the grand scheme.

Yes I have set the board back to dual bios mode. I think it uses bios 2 as default, because with the switch on "1" the backup bios LED is lit. I have no other way of determining which bios is being used as default. 

I didn't buy Asus just yet. I have reset everything and am starting over re: overclocking. I just finished 1 hour in Prime95 small ffp avx at 4.9 ghz using a manual OC. Set Vcore to 1.195v in bios with LLC "extreme." This solves my vdroop problem. Vcore sensors 1 and 2 show average 1.236 and 1.230, and VR VOUT is 1.158 average. Temps are staying under 90 degrees. This result is much more in line with what I expected.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Agree, everything is up and running and I've booted into both bios separately and there are indeed two separate and intact bios. All is well on that front it seems. Strange that the switch has it backwards, probably not an issue at all in the grand scheme.
> 
> Yes I have set the board back to dual bios mode. I think it uses bios 2 as default, because with the switch on "1" the backup bios LED is lit. I have no other way of determining which bios is being used as default.
> 
> I didn't buy Asus just yet. I have reset everything and am starting over re: overclocking. I just finished 1 hour in Prime95 small ffp avx at 4.9 ghz using a manual OC. Set Vcore to 1.195v in bios with LLC "extreme." This solves my vdroop problem. Vcore sensors 1 and 2 show average 1.236 and 1.230, and VR VOUT is 1.158 average. Temps are staying under 90 degrees. This result is much more in line with what I expected.


How do your LED's light up? Both of my lights are off.

Both my switches are set to the "Right", which apparently is "1" and "Dual bios" but no lights are turned on.
So I never had it in single bios mode.

*Edit* didn't pay attention to the 'confusing' manual closely enough. Found them. That strange weird amber color.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> How do your LED's light up? Both of my lights are off.
> 
> Both my switches are set to the "Right", which apparently is "1" and "Dual bios" but no lights are turned on.
> So I never had it in single bios mode.
> 
> *Edit* didn't pay attention to the 'confusing' manual closely enough. Found them. That strange weird amber color.


Yes, the two amber color LEDs by the SATA ports. Switch is on "2" and mBIOS is lit. When I put the switch on "1" bBIOS is lit.


----------



## jlp0209

anthony81212 said:


> Wow this is *exactly* the same thing that just happened to me!!! I actually just wrote a post about it, below your post haha. Let's see if anyone has solved this issue, or if Matt can help us out
> 
> edit: but seriously though, I am super paranoid now about even changing ANY setting. I don't even think I'll enable XMP now since I am worried that the secondary BIOS will also get messed up, and then it's game over!


I fixed it!! I found some random post from 2017 and tried it and it actually worked. Assuming you are able to now boot into both main and backup bios, give this a shot. I'll describe what I did, sorry for slight repeat. I ended up flashing the backup bios (booted into bios with switch on "2") in the hope that it would also flash the main bios, similar to the instructions I think we both saw. Rebooted again back into the bios. While in the bios I flicked the bios switch back onto "1" and flashed the bios again. I was able to boot into both bios and confirmed they were both functional.

However, the problem is that bios switch on "1" booted into the backup bios / bBIOS LED was lit. Bios switch on "2" booted into main bios / mBIOS LED was lit.

Here is exactly what I did. Power down the PC. ***Make sure both the bios switch and SB switch are both set to "1." Unplug the power supply and turn of the PSU power switch. Remove the CMOS battery for 10-15 seconds. Leave the battery out and press / hold the clear CMOS button on the I/O shield for at least 10 seconds. Press the board's power button (right next to clear CMOS button) 10 times. Then put back in the CMOS battery. Plug it back in and power on. That did the trick for me. Now both of my bios switches are on "1" and the main bios LED is lit. 

No idea why this worked but it did. Try it out and see.


----------



## Moparman

pm1109 said:


> Hoping we get that magic bios that suddenly improves overcloking,
> 
> Wouldn’t that be a nice Christmas present


 What do you feel is the issue with the current Bioses? I can run 5.2ghz on my 9600k on the F5 bios 50 cache and mem at 4000C18 no issues.


----------



## pm1109

Moparman said:


> What do you feel is the issue with the current Bioses? I can run 5.2ghz on my 9600k on the F5 bios 50 cache and mem at 4000C18 no issues.


Well the 9900k runs a lot hotter than the 9600k for starters...Good luck trying to get the the 9900k to 5.2ghz under reasonable temps...I suppose most 9900k would not be able to get to 5.2 ghz (stable anyways)
I have never overclocked the board under F5 Bios only F6...So for all I would know maybe F5 is better for overcloking...Not sure ????


----------



## ElectroManiac

Any Aorus Ultra owner here?

Which Bios version I should use?


----------



## pm1109

Quick question....If I’m not overcloking my memory (using XMP) is there any reason to increase the CPU VCCIO and the CPU System Agent Voltage? Or should I just leave them at Auto Voltages?


----------



## Moparman

pm1109 said:


> Quick question....If I’m not overcloking my memory (using XMP) is there any reason to increase the CPU VCCIO and the CPU System Agent Voltage? Or should I just leave them at Auto Voltages?



I would just leave it at auto. As for the 9900k temps it's just crap 14nm nothing can be done. This 9600k is a hot chip as well.


----------



## Falkentyne

ElectroManiac said:


> Any Aorus Ultra owner here?
> 
> Which Bios version I should use?


Latest betas are always here

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Latest betas are always here
> 
> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


Is the F7b good enough for daily use compared to the F6 official ?


----------



## Moparman

jlp0209 said:


> Agree, everything is up and running and I've booted into both bios separately and there are indeed two separate and intact bios. All is well on that front it seems. Strange that the switch has it backwards, probably not an issue at all in the grand scheme.
> 
> Yes I have set the board back to dual bios mode. I think it uses bios 2 as default, because with the switch on "1" the backup bios LED is lit. I have no other way of determining which bios is being used as default.
> 
> I didn't buy Asus just yet. I have reset everything and am starting over re: overclocking. I just finished 1 hour in Prime95 small ffp avx at 4.9 ghz using a manual OC. Set Vcore to 1.195v in bios with LLC "extreme." This solves my vdroop problem. Vcore sensors 1 and 2 show average 1.236 and 1.230, and VR VOUT is 1.158 average. Temps are staying under 90 degrees. This result is much more in line with what I expected.



Why do you use p95 when it is known to not be reliable for stability these days?


----------



## pm1109

You have to be brave to be running prime 95 small fttp with AVX on the latest core i9 cpus that’s for sure


----------



## Robbært

pm1109 said:


> Quick question....If I’m not overcloking my memory (using XMP) is there any reason to increase the CPU VCCIO and the CPU System Agent Voltage? Or should I just leave them at Auto Voltages?


they can be near 1.3v on auto for high RAM OC compatibility so it reasonable to set em lower.
setting them low help with CPU temp.
vccio have to be lower than vccsa.
vccsa def 1.05v, vccio def 0.95v


----------



## Kamil1983

Hello. I have aorus z390 master and I have such a problem
[I am writing with the help of a google translator]


----------



## anthony81212

jlp0209 said:


> I fixed it!! I found some random post from 2017...


Do you mean this thread? Or this one? How did you actually verify that both your BIOS's work now?

I just tried those steps. I had dual-BIOS switch on (SB = 1), and BIOS selector on 2 (BIOS_SW = 2). Booted into secondary BIOS fine. And then I toggle BIOS_SW to 1, and proceeded to flash the update.


Actually here I noticed something weird, when I selected the F6 BIOS file, it showed some info about the file, like Checksum is A82B, and the BIOS date (11/08/2018), and the mobo model. AFTER the flash, the checksum is still the same, but the BIOS date becomes "00/48/20992"??. Can you see if this happens for you too? (I've SHA-256 checksummed my BIOS file and made sure it is identical with a freshly-downloaded BIOS file).​
The PC then reboots itself after a 5-second timeout. And it reboots into secondary BIOS, not primary BIOS, even though the SW is now on 1. I think the mobo "remembers" which BIOS it's been using.

So I power off & unplug PC, clear CMOS and leave SW on 1 and SB on 1. The PC tries with main BIOS, reboots a few times and showing various POST codes, and then finally decides to boot into secondary BIOS again :doh: 

So I power off & unplug again, clear CMOS, this time with SW on 1 and SB on 2 (so I am forcing it to ONLY boot into main BIOS). No luck. The PC does the same steps like I described in my previous post 

I've tried this a few times, and I am not sure what's up with my main BIOS. Can it really be *that* corrupted that it can't be re-flashed again?

All my components are on the QVL, and when I am doing all of these changes, the BIOS is on "optimized defaults" (so no XMP, OC, or whatever). My RAM is also working fine, tested with memtest86 for 20 hours when I first built my PC.


----------



## SaLaDiN666

Anyone using Windows audio at 100? I got another Z390 Master, returned previous one because of coil whine and audio issues and there is still audio crackling, popping on youtube, twitch which seems to happen randomly.


On the other hand, I can replicate audio crackling, popping regulary in CoD Bo4 and Arma 2 OA, it happens always when certain soundtracks, sounds are being played.


It is less noticeable when the audio is set to 50, 60 but sorry Gigabyte not gonna do that when the mobo cost me 300e.


I am not unlucky, it is definitely issue with the hw or drivers because z370 series were plagued by the same issue which has not been fixed yet. 



If I do not fix this within a few days, I am gonna exchange it for Taichi ultimate. Second z390 master, the same issue.


----------



## Robbært

SaLaDiN666 said:


> Anyone using Windows audio at 100? I got another Z390 Master, returned previous one because of coil whine and audio issues and there is still audio crackling, popping on youtube, twitch which seems to happen randomly.
> 
> On the other hand, I can replicate audio crackling, popping regulary in CoD Bo4 and Arma 2 OA, it happens always when certain soundtracks, sounds are being played.
> 
> It is less noticeable when the audio is set to 50, 60 but sorry Gigabyte not gonna do that when the mobo cost me 300e.
> 
> I am not unlucky, it is definitely issue with the hw or drivers because z370 series were plagued by the same issue which has not been fixed yet.


I've read somewhere, it better to use Asus audio driver with Gigabyte.
You will have Asus audio panel/software functionality too.
Have to somehow remove old drivers tho.


----------



## davidm71

Hi,

I also am having audio issues with my Auros Master Z390 in playing games like Hitman 2 the audio just cuts out for a second on and off. Kind of annoying. I have tried using DDU to uninstall all audio and gpu drivers and reinstall them fresh so not sure where this is coming from. It doesn't matter if the sound is coming from the Nvidia gpu sound connection via displayport or using the Realtek audio port on headphones.

Kind of disturbing..

Thanks


----------



## jlp0209

Moparman said:


> Why do you use p95 when it is known to not be reliable for stability these days?





pm1109 said:


> You have to be brave to be running prime 95 small fttp with AVX on the latest core i9 cpus that’s for sure


I only use it for 1 hour at a time to check absolute worst load stability. I like to test for vdroop and overshoot and go back and forth between AVX and non AVX loads to do it. My experience has been if the CPU passes Prime95 small ffp avx, it is stable in everything. I don't kill CPUs with high voltage, if I see that it needs too much I don't bother going forward. 



Kamil1983 said:


> Hello. I have aorus z390 master and I have such a problem
> [I am writing with the help of a google translator]


You should try re-installing all chipset and serial IO drivers from the Gigabyte website. 



anthony81212 said:


> Do you mean this thread? Or this one? How did you actually verify that both your BIOS's work now?
> 
> I just tried those steps. I had dual-BIOS switch on (SB = 1), and BIOS selector on 2 (BIOS_SW = 2). Booted into secondary BIOS fine. And then I toggle BIOS_SW to 1, and proceeded to flash the update.
> 
> 
> Actually here I noticed something weird, when I selected the F6 BIOS file, it showed some info about the file, like Checksum is A82B, and the BIOS date (11/08/2018), and the mobo model. AFTER the flash, the checksum is still the same, but the BIOS date becomes "00/48/20992"??. Can you see if this happens for you too? (I've SHA-256 checksummed my BIOS file and made sure it is identical with a freshly-downloaded BIOS file).​
> The PC then reboots itself after a 5-second timeout. And it reboots into secondary BIOS, not primary BIOS, even though the SW is now on 1. I think the mobo "remembers" which BIOS it's been using.
> 
> So I power off & unplug PC, clear CMOS and leave SW on 1 and SB on 1. The PC tries with main BIOS, reboots a few times and showing various POST codes, and then finally decides to boot into secondary BIOS again :doh:
> 
> So I power off & unplug again, clear CMOS, this time with SW on 1 and SB on 2 (so I am forcing it to ONLY boot into main BIOS). No luck. The PC does the same steps like I described in my previous post
> 
> I've tried this a few times, and I am not sure what's up with my main BIOS. Can it really be *that* corrupted that it can't be re-flashed again?
> 
> All my components are on the QVL, and when I am doing all of these changes, the BIOS is on "optimized defaults" (so no XMP, OC, or whatever). My RAM is also working fine, tested with memtest86 for 20 hours when I first built my PC.


Yes I tried those steps shown at that link. I verified that both bios work because I booted into the main bios which is my overclocked bios, mBIOS LED is lit. Flipping the switch to "2" now correctly lights up the backup bios LED and booting into it, everything is 100% stock setting like I want.

I went into Q-flash as if I were to flash the bios again to check what mine says. On both bioses, I see current bios version F6, date is 11/8/2018. On the update bios file it shows version F6, date 11/8/2018, and checksum is A82B. I don't know why yours is showing up like that and mine works properly. So frustrating. I can't think of a reason why your bios can't be re-flashed properly. Maybe try flashing again with a freshly downloaded bios from Gigabyte's site?


----------



## anthony81212

jlp0209 said:


> Flipping the switch to "2" now correctly lights up the backup bios LED and booting into it, everything is 100% stock setting like I want.


Could you please check something else for me? Could you boot into your BIOS (either main or backup), in dual-BIOS mode, and toggle BIOS_SW to the other one--does your BIOS LED change? (i.e. if main LED was originally on, does it turn off and the backup BIOS LED turns on? And vice versa?)
Could you also do this in single-BIOS mode?

For me, when I toggle BIOS_SW from 1->2 or 2->1, in either dual / single BIOS mode, the BIOS LED does not change at all. Although in the other threads I have read, it seems like the LED should switch?



jlp0209 said:


> I went into Q-flash as if I were to flash the bios again to check what mine says. On both bioses, I see current bios version F6, date is 11/8/2018. On the update bios file it shows version F6, date 11/8/2018, and checksum is A82B.


For me it shows F6, 11/8/2018 and A82B when I select the file in Q-flash (and it also shows that my current BIOS has those properties too). Only *AFTER* I flash the selected F6 BIOS file does it show a different BIOS date (but checksum *still is the same*!). In fact, after *every* time I flash, the BIOS date is different :applaud:! Here's a list of the dates I've gotten:

00/68/8192
00/72/19712
00/48/20992


----------



## jlp0209

anthony81212 said:


> Could you please check something else for me? Could you boot into your BIOS (either main or backup), in dual-BIOS mode, and toggle BIOS_SW to the other one--does your BIOS LED change? (i.e. if main LED was originally on, does it turn off and the backup BIOS LED turns on? And vice versa?)
> Could you also do this in single-BIOS mode?
> 
> For me, when I toggle BIOS_SW from 1->2 or 2->1, in either dual / single BIOS mode, the BIOS LED does not change at all. Although in the other threads I have read, it seems like the LED should switch?
> 
> 
> 
> For me it shows F6, 11/8/2018 and A82B when I select the file in Q-flash (and it also shows that my current BIOS has those properties too). Only *AFTER* I flash the selected F6 BIOS file does it show a different BIOS date (but checksum *still is the same*!). In fact, after *every* time I flash, the BIOS date is different :applaud:! Here's a list of the dates I've gotten:
> 
> 00/68/8192
> 00/72/19712
> 00/48/20992


Just tried, the bios LED does not change when I flip the switch from 1 to 2 or vice versa, while still in the bios. The LED changes when I power the PC off and then back on. That's so weird re: those bios dates, I've never seen that before.


----------



## Jonny321321

SaLaDiN666 said:


> Anyone using Windows audio at 100? I got another Z390 Master, returned previous one because of coil whine and audio issues and there is still audio crackling, popping on youtube, twitch which seems to happen randomly.
> 
> 
> On the other hand, I can replicate audio crackling, popping regulary in CoD Bo4 and Arma 2 OA, it happens always when certain soundtracks, sounds are being played.
> 
> 
> It is less noticeable when the audio is set to 50, 60 but sorry Gigabyte not gonna do that when the mobo cost me 300e.
> 
> 
> I am not unlucky, it is definitely issue with the hw or drivers because z370 series were plagued by the same issue which has not been fixed yet.
> 
> 
> 
> If I do not fix this within a few days, I am gonna exchange it for Taichi ultimate. Second z390 master, the same issue.



I had/have this crackling in Blacks Ops 4 at the beginning drop on both Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Pro, & Asrock Z390 Phantom Gaming ITX.


----------



## jchon930

*adaptive*

Can someone point me to where the "adaptive voltage" setting is in the motherboard so it drops voltage when just browsing web/movies? I'm coming from an Asus bios and it doesn't show the option of AUTO/MANUAL/OFFSET/ADAPTIVE". i checked several pages and i don't see anyone asking


----------



## anthony81212

jlp0209 said:


> Just tried, the bios LED does not change when I flip the switch from 1 to 2 or vice versa, while still in the bios. The LED changes when I power the PC off and then back on. That's so weird re: those bios dates, I've never seen that before.


Yea, I dunno what the dates are saying. Please keep an eye out for it the next time you're flashing your BIOS and let me know 

Well I am really stumped, I tried all combinations of things I could think of, using single/dual BIOS mode, having the system try to boot main BIOS and finally switch to backup BIOS automatically/forcing it to use backup BIOS using the switch, flashing the BIOS in Q-flash or even under Windows using the @BIOS application (normally I wouldn't do this, but I was out of options ). Nothing seems to have worked.

And then I tried the new F7b BIOS--because maybe it has fixed some bugs and people have been reporting F7a/F7b are working. So I tried to flash F7b to the main BIOS, and I ended up with F7b on the backup BIOS lol... I thought the backup BIOS was supposed to be read-only! xD

And the other confusing thing is what the single BIOS mode switch should be on on, which one did you have when you flashed, *single or dual mode*?

GBT-MatthewH says to use Dual mode: http://forum.gigabyte.us/post/3320
But Gigabyte officially says to use Single mode: https://www.gigabyte.com/Support/FAQ/3876

In any case, I tried both and none of it worked :cryingsmi Primary BIOS is still botched. I'm actually wondering if I even touched it at all through all of this flashing around, or if I've just been changing the backup BIOS all the time. I've no way to tell!

@GBT-MatthewH if you are around, I would really appreciate some pointers  

Thanks to you both!


----------



## Falkentyne

jchon930 said:


> Can someone point me to where the "adaptive voltage" setting is in the motherboard so it drops voltage when just browsing web/movies? I'm coming from an Asus bios and it doesn't show the option of AUTO/MANUAL/OFFSET/ADAPTIVE". i checked several pages and i don't see anyone asking


Adaptive= "Normal".
then you can change DVID (Offset in other manufacturers bioses). Gigabyte calls adaptive 'normal' and offset 'dvid'.


----------



## ElectroManiac

Falkentyne said:


> Latest betas are always here
> 
> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


Thanks for that.

It seems the Ultra as is not a popular board as the Pro/Master is not getting that much attention in term of Bios release.

Hopefully that doesn't mean it will get less support down the road.

Will flash to the latest when I get a chance to assemble it. Still waiting for the ram to arrive.


----------



## Falkentyne

ElectroManiac said:


> Thanks for that.
> 
> It seems the Ultra as is not a popular board as the Pro/Master is not getting that much attention in term of Bios release.
> 
> Hopefully that doesn't mean it will get less support down the road.
> 
> Will flash to the latest when I get a chance to assemble it. Still waiting for the ram to arrive.


No need to fix what isn't broken.
if you found a verified, repeatable bug, contact them with a bug report or post on that thread and on their official forums or PM MatthewH but he's busy.


----------



## SaLaDiN666

So I have found 2 people so far, I really do not believe the audio issues aren't that common. Once you notice it and you know what to look for it is unbearable.


----------



## jlp0209

anthony81212 said:


> And the other confusing thing is what the single BIOS mode switch should be on on, which one did you have when you flashed, *single or dual mode*?
> 
> GBT-MatthewH says to use Dual mode: http://forum.gigabyte.us/post/3320
> But Gigabyte officially says to use Single mode: https://www.gigabyte.com/Support/FAQ/3876


I had the switch set to dual mode.


----------



## SaLaDiN666

davidm71 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I also am having audio issues with my Auros Master Z390 in playing games like Hitman 2 the audio just cuts out for a second on and off. Kind of annoying. I have tried using DDU to uninstall all audio and gpu drivers and reinstall them fresh so not sure where this is coming from. It doesn't matter if the sound is coming from the Nvidia gpu sound connection via displayport or using the Realtek audio port on headphones.
> 
> Kind of disturbing..
> 
> Thanks





Jonny321321 said:


> I had/have this crackling in Blacks Ops 4 at the beginning drop on both Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Pro, & Asrock Z390 Phantom Gaming ITX.







Has anyone of you ever noticed audio crackling, popping during the User Account Control /UAC/ pop out window asking for the permision to install/launch something? It either happens straight at the beginning of the UAC sound being played /sporadically - higher pitched crackling/ or at the end of it /I would describe it like a muffled fart lol/?


----------



## EarlZ

Regarding the coil whine,I also have it but I need my ears to be resting at the top of my case (Meshify C) in order to hear them at idle.


----------



## VeritronX

I have a different gigabyte board with the same bios switches, think of the dual bios mode as "auto" and single bios mode as "manual". On normal gigabyte boards without the switches it's stuck on auto mode, while we can set it to manual and disable the automatic bios switching and cross flashing functions. For tweaking I like the single bios / manual setting because you know it won't interfere on it's own.

When in single bios mode if you've managed to mess up a bios you just boot from the other one, load into the qflash menu, then flick the switch to the corrupted bios and it will flash that one instead.


----------



## DirtyScrubz

Im trying to mount my ek velocity block but these solder pins get in the way of the gasket. Anyone run into this and what did you do? I could take a plier and bend them but I don't want to void my warranty.

Edit: this is the aorus master


----------



## Falkentyne

DirtyScrubz said:


> Im trying to mount my ek velocity block but these solder pins get in the way of the gasket. Anyone run into this and what did you do? I could take a plier and bend them but I don't want to void my warranty.
> 
> Edit: this is the aorus master


I remember this being discussed in the past.
that's the part of the vendor supplying incompatible mounting sizes (like there's no proper standard for this stuff, unlike LGA 1151/1150/2011 etc mounting brackets, which is a standard).
People need to develop a standard to make compatible mounts rather than just designing it for a few motherboards they tested.


----------



## rv8000

So whats the deal with the Audio driver for the gigabyte z390 boards. I just bought a master and noticed that theres no realtek control panel, so virtually no means of EQ/adjustments. I'm using the latest driver from Gigabyte (install size seems minimal to past realtek drivers 30mb vs like 400mb).

What gives?


----------



## Mencius

rv8000 said:


> So whats the deal with the Audio driver for the gigabyte z390 boards. I just bought a master and noticed that theres no realtek control panel, so virtually no means of EQ/adjustments. I'm using the latest driver from Gigabyte (install size seems minimal to past realtek drivers 30mb vs like 400mb).
> 
> What gives?


That happened to me as well but I think it's because the Realtek control panel is a download through the windows app store now (which is perhaps a good thing.

After the audio driver install I initially had no control panel but then after a little while it auto-downloaded from the store, give it a half hour or so and maybe a reboot, see if it turns up.


----------



## DirtyScrubz

Falkentyne said:


> DirtyScrubz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Im trying to mount my ek velocity block but these solder pins get in the way of the gasket. Anyone run into this and what did you do? I could take a plier and bend them but I don't want to void my warranty.
> 
> Edit: this is the aorus master
> 
> 
> 
> I remember this being discussed in the past.
> that's the part of the vendor supplying incompatible mounting sizes (like there's no proper standard for this stuff, unlike LGA 1151/1150/2011 etc mounting brackets, which is a standard).
> People need to develop a standard to make compatible mounts rather than just designing it for a few motherboards they tested.
Click to expand...

Dunno who's at fault here but I took care of the problem with a little snipping.


----------



## Falkentyne

rv8000 said:


> So whats the deal with the Audio driver for the gigabyte z390 boards. I just bought a master and noticed that theres no realtek control panel, so virtually no means of EQ/adjustments. I'm using the latest driver from Gigabyte (install size seems minimal to past realtek drivers 30mb vs like 400mb).
> 
> What gives?


The answer to this goes back years and is just more corporate BS and complicated.
The realtek CP doesn't appear if you install MSI realtek drivers on a msi laptop either (without Nahimic). 
To get the realtek panel, you have to uninstall the MSI drivers, install the official "realtek" drivers from the realtek website, then install the MSI drivers on top of them, then the realtek control panel appears.
Who to blame? Realtek? MSI? Gigabyte? Asus? who knows.


----------



## nyk20z3

I am considering picking up a Aorus Master because i just bought a 2080 Aorus Extreme WaterForce and i like to match components in my builds. I am coming from a Z270,Z370 Asus Apex board and running a 8700K now so do you guys think i would lose much as far as quality in components and performance ?


----------



## rv8000

Falkentyne said:


> The answer to this goes back years and is just more corporate BS and complicated.
> The realtek CP doesn't appear if you install MSI realtek drivers on a msi laptop either (without Nahimic).
> To get the realtek panel, you have to uninstall the MSI drivers, install the official "realtek" drivers from the realtek website, then install the MSI drivers on top of them, then the realtek control panel appears.
> Who to blame? Realtek? MSI? Gigabyte? Asus? who knows.


That wouldn't such a problem except it's apparently impossible to navigate/locate drivers for products on the realtek website... love how the ALC1220 isn't listed at all.

And here I thought this would be a casual install and reformat for swapping out parts. What a nightmare, I/O plate made it nearly impossible to line up the mobo screw threads, things not labeled properly in manual, grrrr....

*Now theres randomly an application installed when I use the search bar...... okay windows. -_-


----------



## Mencius

The Realtek audio console app just turned up for me a few minutes after installing the driver. It's not as full featured as the control panel was on my maximus viii Asus board (particularly on the Asus board there was a workaround to get the headphone amp working on the rear output by switching the front panel to ac97 which I can't the app) but it feels a bit lighter too so it's a wash to me. 

Gigabyte's alc1220 implementation sounds way better to me than my old maximus viii one too, though I was able to route the psu cables further away from the audio section of the motherboard in my new case so maybe I reduced interference too.


----------



## rv8000

Mencius said:


> The Realtek audio console app just turned up for me a few minutes after installing the driver. It's not as full featured as the control panel was on my maximus viii Asus board (particularly on the Asus board there was a workaround to get the headphone amp working on the rear output by switching the front panel to ac97 which I can't the app) but it feels a bit lighter too so it's a wash to me.
> 
> Gigabyte's alc1220 implementation sounds way better to me than my old maximus viii one too, though I was able to route the psu cables further away from the audio section of the motherboard in my new case so maybe I reduced interference too.


It's odd that it doesn't show in the notifications area (or at least for me right now). I have to manually search for it.

Anyways coming from an ASUS CH6 without any EQ and set to 24/192, the sound is definitely cleaner. I had to up my windows volume and also increase the level on my amp though. I also noticed that the low level snow sound I was getting through my speakers is now gone (always thought it was just some poor contact with the 3.5mm connection on the amp or soldering inside of it), looks like it may have been something with the CH6.


----------



## Falkentyne

Mencius said:


> The Realtek audio console app just turned up for me a few minutes after installing the driver. It's not as full featured as the control panel was on my maximus viii Asus board (particularly on the Asus board there was a workaround to get the headphone amp working on the rear output by switching the front panel to ac97 which I can't the app) but it feels a bit lighter too so it's a wash to me.
> 
> Gigabyte's alc1220 implementation sounds way better to me than my old maximus viii one too, though I was able to route the psu cables further away from the audio section of the motherboard in my new case so maybe I reduced interference too.


Do you have a link to the driver that has the audio console app?
The one on the gigabyte CD doesn't seem to have it.


----------



## Santhapiya

Hello friends, 

Z390 Auros Master 
Stuck at Error Code 78 ACPI Core Initialization
Haven't reached BIOS yet. 

I have tried everything short of testing the build with a different CPU or motherboard and flashing updated BIOS. Any advice is appreciated. This is my first build. 

Here is the build: https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Santhapiya/saved/sHkZ8d

Corsair Vengeance LPX 2X8GB 3000MHz CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 ver.5.32 RAM bought for testing.

Motherboard manual: 
http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/Manual/mb_manual_z390-aorus-master_1001_e.pdf

pg129-134
Code 78 - ACPI Core Initialization

May you be well, happy, and peaceful.


----------



## Falkentyne

Santhapiya said:


> Hello friends,
> 
> Z390 Auros Master
> Stuck at Error Code 78 ACPI Core Initialization
> Haven't reached BIOS yet.
> 
> I have tried everything short of testing the build with a different CPU or motherboard and flashing updated BIOS. Any advice is appreciated. This is my first build.
> 
> Here is the build: https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Santhapiya/saved/sHkZ8d
> 
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 2X8GB 3000MHz CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 ver.5.32 RAM bought for testing.
> 
> Motherboard manual:
> http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/Manual/mb_manual_z390-aorus-master_1001_e.pdf
> 
> pg129-134
> Code 78 - ACPI Core Initialization
> 
> May you be well, happy, and peaceful.


Hardware error.
*HOWEVER* before doing the bottom : this could potentially be a corrupt bios also.
Switch bios switch to 'bios 2' (backup bios), unplug power supply, remove RAM and GPU, press clear cmos button several times, reset bios, reinstall RAM and GPU, replug in all connections and try to boot to bios.
If ok, post back here with results.

If not:

Take 1 stick of RAM out. Move remaining stick to another slot. Unplug and remove all SSD's and HDD's and power cables except video card, CPU 8 pin and ATX, then try to boot
If failed, remove CPU and check for bent pins, then remove motherboard and check for proper standoffs and mounting and shorts, then remount bare essentials and try again.
If failed again, RMA the motherboard first.


----------



## rv8000

Falkentyne said:


> Do you have a link to the driver that has the audio console app?
> The one on the gigabyte CD doesn't seem to have it.


Type "Realtek Audio Console" in the windows search bar, the result it pulls up shows its from the app store but if you click it it opens the app on your pc and apparently says it's installed. Only way I've been able to access it, I can't seem to search for it on the windows store, and can't find any settings to enable it in the notifications area on the task bar.


----------



## Mencius

Falkentyne said:


> Do you have a link to the driver that has the audio console app?
> The one on the gigabyte CD doesn't seem to have it.


Yeah, just the one from Gigabyte's downloads page for the master - I didn't use the CD so just downloaded all my drivers ahead of install. 

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-driver

Though note that I am not sure if it actually HAS the realtek audio console in the download - it seems to tell Win10 to download the audio console (I think from the app store, it shows up in my installed apps in the app store but it's not available as a general app from a search in the store) after install which for me took a few minutes.


----------



## Falkentyne

Thank you.


----------



## EarlZ

Whats the serial I/O driver for on the Z390 master ?


----------



## Phantomas 007

It's possible someone to add here the link drivers for the important things for Aorus Ultra (Sata, Intel Chipset, LAN, USB 3,Audio etc) ?

F.e Gigabytre website has the Realtek Audio Driver 24,59 MB. On Realtek webpage I had fund driver with size 400MB.So what it's the correct ?


----------



## anthony81212

VeritronX said:


> I have a different gigabyte board with the same bios switches, think of the dual bios mode as "auto" and single bios mode as "manual". On normal gigabyte boards without the switches it's stuck on auto mode, while we can set it to manual and disable the automatic bios switching and cross flashing functions. For tweaking I like the single bios / manual setting because you know it won't interfere on it's own.
> 
> When in single bios mode if you've managed to mess up a bios you just boot from the other one, load into the qflash menu, then flick the switch to the corrupted bios and it will flash that one instead.


Yeah, that's what I tried as well, but no luck. My main BIOS just refuses to boot! I've cleared CMOS, unplugged PC, tried everything even flashing with @BIOS under Windows (gasp! haha), but it seems the primary BIOS is beyond rescue... Booting into secondary works.


----------



## Vesimas

Let's say i would like to plug two pumps to the Master what connectors i should use?


----------



## comset

Hi,
I have a question.
The second VR VOUT is 0.004 V. What voltage is it?
During the stress test of Prime 95 (AVX - 1344 K), it is almost 0.004 V, but the maximum value is shown as 1.102 v.
I am happy if there is no problem.


----------



## Robbært

Vesimas said:


> Let's say i would like to plug two pumps to the Master what connectors i should use?


any, they all 2A (24W).



nyk20z3 said:


> I am considering picking up a Aorus Master because i just bought a 2080 Aorus Extreme WaterForce and i like to match components in my builds. I am coming from a Z270,Z370 Asus Apex board and running a 8700K now so do you guys think i would lose much as far as quality in components and performance ?


8700k and Master board you can get coil whine when CPU Idle (if C-States enabled, default)


----------



## Falkentyne

comset said:


> Hi,
> I have a question.
> The second VR VOUT is 0.004 V. What voltage is it?
> During the stress test of Prime 95 (AVX - 1344 K), it is almost 0.004 V, but the maximum value is shown as 1.102 v.
> I am happy if there is no problem.


0.004v is a dummy value. notice that both IR VRM readouts have the exact same temp values as the first? Just hide that entire 2nd IR field in HWinfo64. Probably some bug.


----------



## PuD

Robbært said:


> any, they all 2A (24W)



For what I know it's not true. Only SYS_Fan5 and 6 are 2A, the others are 1A.


----------



## anthony81212

Vesimas said:


> Let's say i would like to plug two pumps to the Master what connectors i should use?





PuD said:


> For what I know it's not true. Only SYS_Fan5 and 6 are 2A, the others are 1A.


See this post from GBT-MatthewH:



GBT-MatthewH said:


> (2) 2 Amp headers seen in teal....
> 
> Blue = normal fan header
> Red Thermostat = Internal temperature readings
> Green Thermostat = External temperature readings (2 pin thermistor header, included in the box)


----------



## comset

Falkentyne said:


> 0.004v is a dummy value. notice that both IR VRM readouts have the exact same temp values as the first? Just hide that entire 2nd IR field in HWinfo64. Probably some bug.


Thank you.
It really becomes a study.


----------



## Vesimas

For the moment i'll plug an Alphacool Eisbaer 360 that use an Alphacool DC-LT 2600 Ultra low noise Ceramic. In the future i'm thinking to add an Eiswolf for a 2080Ti but i don't know what type of pump it use


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Anzial said:


> Yes, I understand all that, and I did read the manual lol. What the manual does not say, and neither does the diagram (very helpful otherwise, thank you) is whether the 2nd PCIe x16 will drop to 4x when all three are occupied? Because I think it shouldn't, since it does not share PCIe lanes from the CPU with the 3rd slot. But the review on Guru3d did say that it would, so I don't know who's wrong here -me or the Guru3d reviewer, as Gygabyte manual is silent on the matter.
> 
> I'm also wondering if the 3rd x16 slot shares bandwidth with one of the M2/Sata ports, meaning that using the 3rd x16 slot will shut down one of the SATA ports. Ideally, I would like to use all 6 satas AND all 3 pcie x16 slots and retain x8+x8 config on the first 2 x16 slots


Top top slot and 2nd slot share bandwidth. So either 16x/0x or 8x/8x. The 3rd slot comes from the chipset and switches with the M.2... Thus if all 3 are populated you get 8x/8x/4x and lose an M.2, the 2nd slot can never run at 4x.

If you want to run (6) sata, (3) pcie slots, you will be left with (1) M.2 x4 and (1) M.2 x2.



anthony81212 said:


> Primary BIOS is still botched. I'm actually wondering if I even touched it at all through all of this flashing around, or if I've just been changing the backup BIOS all the time. I've no way to tell!


Select single BIOS (so you know the BIOS you select is the one trying to boot). 
Boot off BIOS A.
If it fails shut down and switch to BIOS B.
Now that you have booted go into BIOS.
Load Defaults.
Save and Exit and go right back into BIOS.
Now that you are in BIOS flip the switch to the non-working BIOS (Do this while in the BIOS, its like a hot swap. The system is now pointing to the non-working BIOS even though it booted off the working BIOS)
Flash.
Both BIOS should now be working.



anthony81212 said:


> "Switch primary switch to main bios while in the bios" -> @GBT-MatthewH said in this post post (for AM4 tho) to have the switch on dual-BIOS mode? Although I'd actually tend to agree with you. With the switch in dual-BIOS mode and the selector on main BIOS, it never boots to the main BIOS because it detects there's an error with it. So it boots into the secondary BIOS, and thus I can't toggle my selector switch to the main BIOS, because it is already there!  Unless I have it in dual-BIOS mode and put the selector switch on secondary BIOS? :thinking:
> 
> "I wasn't aware the backup bios was directly flashable by booting into it" -> yeah, me neither! TBH I thought the secondary BIOS is read-only.


Its really 6 of one half dozen of another. Single Mode requires flipping the switch to find out the good BIOS. Dual BIOS mode boots off the working BIOS while the selector is on the backup. The best (safest) method is probably single BIOS mode.

Any board with a BIOS switch means either/both BIOS can be flashed. Its only on boards without a switch where the "backup" cannot be touched.



anthony81212 said:


> Does anyone know how to re-flash the main BIOS, if I cannot boot into it anymore? I am on Z390 Aorus Master with 9700K and BIOS version F6. I had a stable OC at 5GHz and XMP profile for 3600 MHz (all components on QVL).
> 
> @GBT-MatthewH I saw your post on the official Gigabyte forums talking about a way to do this, but that was for a AM4 motherboard and it was over 1+ years ago. Are there similar steps for Z390 Aorus Master + 9700K?


Exact same method for any platform. I edited it to say single BIOS mode based on feedback


----------



## Falkentyne

Random LLC tests to confirm VR VOUT is reading voltages accurately.

4.7 ghz HT Off, llc high: bios 1.200v
vrvout 1.193v, vcore 1.188v idle
vrvout 1.174v, vcore 1.188v load (No AVX), watts 77.500, amps 67.250A, CPU Pakcage 87.6W
vrvout 1.168v, vcore 1.188v (FMA3) watts 100.5W, amps 87.650, CPU Package 115.0

4.7 ghz HT Off llc extreme bios: 1.200v
vrvout 1.197v, vcore 1.199v idle
vrvout 1.186v, vcore 1.199v-1.210v load (No AVX), Watts:80.000, amps 68.250A, CPU Pakcage 89.4W
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.199v-1.210v load (FMA3), watts 102.500, amps 87.250A , CPU Package 115W

4.7ghz HT Off llc ultraextreme bios 1.180v
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.188v idle
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.199v (No AVX), watts 79.500, amps 67.750A, CPU Package 88.6W
vrvout 1.180v, vcore 1.210v load (FMA3), watts 102.500, amps 87.250A, CPU Package 115.5W

5.1 ghz 1.335v bios, LLC Turbo
vrvout 1.326v, vcore 1.331v idle
vrvout 1.273v, vcore 1.331v (no avx), watts 200.5W, amps 159.250v CPU Package 209W
1344K AVX: VRvout 1.287v, watts 158W, amps 123.5A

5.1 ghz HT On, 1.315 bios, LLC Extreme
vrvout 1.311v, vcore 1.309v idle
vrvout 1.277v, vcore 1.342v (no avx), watts 208, amps 163.250A, CPU Package 216W

5.1 ghz, HT On 1.310v bios, LLC Extreme
vrvout 1.305v, vcore 1.309v idle
vrvout 1.273v, vcore 1.331v (no avx), watts 202W, amps 159.250A, CPU Package 210W
vrvout 1.281v, vcore 1.331v (1344K avx), watts 158W, amps 124A


----------



## risteon

Anyone else seeing this issue with the Aorus Master (F6 bios version)? I searched around but may have missed this if mentioned already.

For reason unknown at this time, all my PWM fans and EK D5 PWM pump will get stuck at a static speed, no matter the load. In BIOS smartfan5, I use the normal fan curve profile for now, monitoring CPU temp for all, and PWM type manually set. I use HWinfo on a separate monitor at all times, since this is a new build which is mainly how I noticed it. I also didn't hear the fans spinning up.

Regular reboot didn't work. Current workaround for me was to reboot into BIOS, go to Smartfan5 and pick the system6-pump (connected to my D5 PWM wire), set mode to full speed, hear it spin up, then set it right back to Normal. Save/exit, boot back into Windows, and PWM behavior working normally again, fluctuating under varying loads/temps as expected.

I have SIV installed via the Gigabyte app center, but I don't really use it now and make adjustments in BIOS. Maybe this is crapping out and causing this condition? I haven't tried uninstalling it yet, but wanted to see if anyone else experiencing this too.


----------



## Falkentyne

risteon said:


> Anyone else seeing this issue with the Aorus Master (F6 bios version)? I searched around but may have missed this if mentioned already.
> 
> For reason unknown at this time, all my PWM fans and EK D5 PWM pump will get stuck at a static speed, no matter the load. In BIOS smartfan5, I use the normal fan curve profile for now, monitoring CPU temp for all, and PWM type manually set. I use HWinfo on a separate monitor at all times, since this is a new build which is mainly how I noticed it. I also didn't hear the fans spinning up.
> 
> Regular reboot didn't work. Current workaround for me was to reboot into BIOS, go to Smartfan5 and pick the system6-pump (connected to my D5 PWM wire), set mode to full speed, hear it spin up, then set it right back to Normal. Save/exit, boot back into Windows, and PWM behavior working normally again, fluctuating under varying loads/temps as expected.
> 
> I have SIV installed via the Gigabyte app center, but I don't really use it now and make adjustments in BIOS. Maybe this is crapping out and causing this condition? I haven't tried uninstalling it yet, but wanted to see if anyone else experiencing this too.


Update to bios version f7b and try it.

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## anthony81212

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Select single BIOS (so you know the BIOS you select is the one trying to boot).
> Boot off BIOS A.
> If it fails shut down and switch to BIOS B.
> Now that you have booted go into BIOS.
> Load Defaults.
> Save and Exit and go right back into BIOS.
> Now that you are in BIOS flip the switch to the non-working BIOS (Do this while in the BIOS, its like a hot swap. The system is now pointing to the non-working BIOS even though it booted off the working BIOS)
> Flash.
> Both BIOS should now be working.


Thank you for these steps! I will try it and report back (although I feel like I've tried these exact steps before 🙂 ) 

Could you also confirm something for me please? When I am in Qflash and I select a BIOS file for flashing (F6 for example), under the file details it shows version F6, date 11/8/2018 and checksum A82B (and it also shows that my current BIOS has those properties too). But AFTER I flash the selected F6 BIOS file, it show a different BIOS date (but checksum still is the same!). In fact, after every time I flash the same file, the BIOS date is different (but checksum is same! Here's a list of the dates I've gotten:
00/68/8192
00/72/19712
00/48/20992

*Edit: *nope, no luck with those steps that you sent me (thank you for continued help tho!).
BIOS 1 is the one that doesn't boot, so I set the switch to single BIOS mode and booted into BIOS 2, Loaded Defaults, save & exit and upon reboot went in straight to the BIOS again. Flipped the switch to #1 and flashed it using Q-flash (I used "Intact mode" instead of "Fast mode" for flashing--does this make a difference?).

Then I kept the BIOS switch on #1 (since the PC automatically reboots 5 seconds after BIOS flash, and I want it to boot into BIOS 1), and when the PC reboots it shows a post code 7F. I've looked this up and it seems that it is using for user input, but I do not see any screen and pressing any key on my keyboard does not do anything (I can see also my keyboard also isn't powered on). I also read it can be a graphics card problem--but it can't be, because this rig has been running stable for >1 month with gaming and thorough benchmarking/testing (plus it displayed the BIOS UI just fine less than 5 seconds before this!)

Rebooting the computer at this stage doesn't help--the screen always gets stuck at 7F within half a second of booting. Even after removing power (PSU switch off) and draining caps by pressing power button. If I do a CMOS reset (while all power is off), then we are back to the same problem I described again (after multiple restarts, the main BIOS just won't boot and gets stuck at a blank POST code screen and all fans on high). 

Do you have another suggestion? :/


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

anthony81212 said:


> Thank you for these steps! I will try it and report back (although I feel like I've tried these exact steps before 🙂 )
> 
> Could you also confirm something for me please? When I am in Qflash and I select a BIOS file for flashing (F6 for example), under the file details it shows version F6, date 11/8/2018 and checksum A82B (and it also shows that my current BIOS has those properties too). But AFTER I flash the selected F6 BIOS file, it show a different BIOS date (but checksum still is the same!). In fact, after every time I flash the same file, the BIOS date is different (but checksum is same! Here's a list of the dates I've gotten:
> 00/68/8192
> 00/72/19712
> 00/48/20992
> 
> *Edit: *nope, no luck with those steps that you sent me (thank you for continued help tho!).
> BIOS 1 is the one that doesn't boot, so I set the switch to single BIOS mode and booted into BIOS 2, Loaded Defaults, save & exit and upon reboot went in straight to the BIOS again. Flipped the switch to #1 and flashed it using Q-flash (I used "Intact mode" instead of "Fast mode" for flashing--does this make a difference?).
> 
> Then I kept the BIOS switch on #1 (since the PC automatically reboots 5 seconds after BIOS flash, and I want it to boot into BIOS 1), and when the PC reboots it shows a post code 7F. I've looked this up and it seems that it is using for user input, but I do not see any screen and pressing any key on my keyboard does not do anything (I can see also my keyboard also isn't powered on). I also read it can be a graphics card problem--but it can't be, because this rig has been running stable for >1 month with gaming and thorough benchmarking/testing (plus it displayed the BIOS UI just fine less than 5 seconds before this!)
> 
> Rebooting the computer at this stage doesn't help--the screen always gets stuck at 7F within half a second of booting. Even after removing power (PSU switch off) and draining caps by pressing power button. If I do a CMOS reset (while all power is off), then we are back to the same problem I described again (after multiple restarts, the main BIOS just won't boot and gets stuck at a blank POST code screen and all fans on high).
> 
> Do you have another suggestion? :/


Intact flashes the Intel ME, Fast is just the BIOS.

Makes no sense. 7F is waiting for user input, but you get no video? Maybe its stuck at the did not detect keyboard prompt? Haven't seen that one in years.... Just for fun try the same flash in dual bios mode.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

I'm having an odd issue that started last night and i spent most of the day troubleshooting it. I'm at the point where i believe its a faulty mobo and needs to be replaced. Otherwise its a bad cpu, i can't think of any other reason for the issues i'm having. I have an aorus z390 master with a 9900k and have had both for less than a week.

The issue i'm running into is memory related. I'm using 8gbx4 TZ 3200mhz CL 14 ram. I have had this memory for several years and have never had a problem with it. Based on my previous build these memory sticks will do 15-15-15-35 3600mhz @ 1.41v. My issues started when i went to apply those settings last night.

I started getting a lot of freezing issues and bsods related to memory. Once this started i dropped my ram back to XMP settings but the issues continued. The bsods were odd ones not related to overclocking such as memory management errors and pfn list corrupt errors. These issues ended up corrupting my windows install and i had to reinstall it. Issues continued after reinstall.

I discovered today that the memory is not the culprit, instead the issue crops up when 2 variables are met. First, XMP has to be enabled and second all four dimm slots must be populated. If XMP is disabled and the memory runs at 2133 then everything is stable. If i populated 3 or less dimm slots with XMP enabled the issue goes away and my pc is perfectly stable. If i populate 4 slots and enabled XMP the bsods immediately come back.

When getting the issue to go away it does not matter which dimm slots are populated nor does it matter which sticks of ram i use. All sticks of ram were individually tested and work perfectly with no errors in memtest.

The question now is what is the cause? Bad mobo? Bad cpu? Bad bios?


----------



## Falkentyne

Edge0fsanity said:


> I'm having an odd issue that started last night and i spent most of the day troubleshooting it. I'm at the point where i believe its a faulty mobo and needs to be replaced. Otherwise its a bad cpu, i can't think of any other reason for the issues i'm having. I have an aorus z390 master with a 9900k and have had both for less than a week.
> 
> The issue i'm running into is memory related. I'm using 8gbx4 TZ 3200mhz CL 14 ram. I have had this memory for several years and have never had a problem with it. Based on my previous build these memory sticks will do 15-15-15-35 3600mhz @ 1.41v. My issues started when i went to apply those settings last night.
> 
> I started getting a lot of freezing issues and bsods related to memory. Once this started i dropped my ram back to XMP settings but the issues continued. The bsods were odd ones not related to overclocking such as memory management errors and pfn list corrupt errors. These issues ended up corrupting my windows install and i had to reinstall it. Issues continued after reinstall.
> 
> I discovered today that the memory is not the culprit, instead the issue crops up when 2 variables are met. First, XMP has to be enabled and second all four dimm slots must be populated. If XMP is disabled and the memory runs at 2133 then everything is stable. If i populated 3 or less dimm slots with XMP enabled the issue goes away and my pc is perfectly stable. If i populate 4 slots and enabled XMP the bsods immediately come back.
> 
> When getting the issue to go away it does not matter which dimm slots are populated nor does it matter which sticks of ram i use. All sticks of ram were individually tested and work perfectly with no errors in memtest.
> 
> The question now is what is the cause? Bad mobo? Bad cpu? Bad bios?


What happens if you disable XMP and manually set timings to 3200 cas 14, by hand (primary and secondary, but I know nothing about RAM tweaking)?

What's your VCCIO and VCCSA voltages set at?

Have you tried changing VCCIO to 1.15v and VCCSA to 1.20v or 1.25v ?

Not sure if Mainboard is at fault here. I'm looking towards something about the IMC. 

Did you update to f7b beta bios?


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Falkentyne said:


> What happens if you disable XMP and manually set timings to 3200 cas 14, by hand (primary and secondary, but I know nothing about RAM tweaking)?
> 
> What's your VCCIO and VCCSA voltages set at?
> 
> Have you tried changing VCCIO to 1.15v and VCCSA to 1.20v or 1.25v ?
> 
> Not sure if Mainboard is at fault here. I'm looking towards something about the IMC.
> 
> Did you update to f7b beta bios?


I haven't tried manually setting them, i'll have write down the xmp secondaries and manually set it shortly.

I've tried IO/SA @ 1.2 and 1.25 manually and the default auto values which are 1.2 and 1.3. Doesn't make a difference

I'm on the f6 release bios

One other thing i noticed from day 1 with this. I could never take the cache clock above 4.4 with XMP enabled. It would instantly crash with a memory related error code if i threw a stress test at it. Leaving at 4.4 seemed to make things fine.

I really hope this isn't a bad cpu because the one i've got is a really good chip. I'm hitting 5.2ghz @ 1.36v p95 in place small fft non avx stable and 5.1ghz p95 1344k avx stable.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

One other thing i've noticed in hwinfo. No matter what slots are populated, whether its 1,2,3 or all 4, i always get a blank reading for the timings in the far column.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=237538&stc=1&d=1544494514


----------



## Falkentyne

Edge0fsanity said:


> One other thing i've noticed in hwinfo. No matter what slots are populated, whether its 1,2,3 or all 4, i always get a blank reading for the timings in the far column.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=237538&stc=1&d=1544494514


https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html

And that looks like that is a problem. @GBT-MatthewH can you help him ?


----------



## Anzial

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Top top slot and 2nd slot share bandwidth. So either 16x/0x or 8x/8x. The 3rd slot comes from the chipset and switches with the M.2... Thus if all 3 are populated you get 8x/8x/4x and lose an M.2, the 2nd slot can never run at 4x.
> 
> If you want to run (6) sata, (3) pcie slots, you will be left with (1) M.2 x4 and (1) M.2 x2.


thanks for the response but I'm a bit confused - you say if I use all 3 pcie x16s, I lose m2? but then you say I still have both M2s even if I use all x16s and 6 satas? manual does say that I can't use 2nd m2 if I use all satas, too... sorry for so many questions, just trying to wrap my head around the capabilities of the Pro board.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Falkentyne said:


> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
> 
> And that looks like that is a problem.
> @GBT-MatthewH can you help him ?


Thanks for posting that, i was getting ready to ask for a link to the f7b bios.

I think i may have found the issue. I put all 4 sticks of ram in again and decided to make use of the secondary bios which still has f4 on it. I put in my OC settings from the F6 bios and it booted right up. Ran p95 for about 10 minutes with no issues. Normally p95 would instacrash on the f6 bios if i was lucky enough not to bsod on windows startup. I'll have to do further testing to be sure that the problem is fixed.

One thing i am still having a problem with is the missing timings in hwinfo with f4 bios.

I'll flash the f7b bios tomorrow over f6 and see how that goes. I think i'm done for the night with this. I spent all afternoon and evening trouble shooting this.


----------



## anthony81212

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Intact flashes the Intel ME, Fast is just the BIOS.
> 
> Makes no sense. 7F is waiting for user input, but you get no video? Maybe its stuck at the did not detect keyboard prompt? Haven't seen that one in years.... Just for fun try the same flash in dual bios mode.


Yeah, I get no video and my keyboard doesn't turn on (backlit keys are off), re-plugging the keyboard in didn't work. 

Tried the same flashing steps in Dual BIOS mode, but same symptoms, and I also tried to flash both with Fast and Intact mode, same result.

Looking at the main BIOS chip, it looks like it is socketed and can be replaceable? (It has this plastic retainer around it and it looks like it can be opened). Is it actually possible to just get a working replacement BIOS chip? Or is replacing the whole board necessary? 

Could you also take a look at the anomaly with the BIOS date that I observed above? 🙂 (note you might have to try it a few times to get it to show up.. Sometimes the BIOS date after flashing shows the proper date. But no matter what date it shows, the checksum is always the same and the primary BIOS still never boots...)

Thanks!


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Yeah, I get no video and my keyboard doesn't turn on (backlit keys are off), re-plugging the keyboard in didn't work.
> 
> Tried the same flashing steps in Dual BIOS mode, but same symptoms, and I also tried to flash both with Fast and Intact mode, same result.
> 
> Looking at the main BIOS chip, it looks like it is socketed and can be replaceable? (It has this plastic retainer around it and it looks like it can be opened). Is it actually possible to just get a working replacement BIOS chip? Or is replacing the whole board necessary?
> 
> Could you also take a look at the anomaly with the BIOS date that I observed above? 🙂 (note you might have to try it a few times to get it to show up.. Sometimes the BIOS date after flashing shows the proper date. But no matter what date it shows, the checksum is always the same and the primary BIOS still never boots...)
> 
> Thanks!


Is your bios chip shaped like this? (SOIC8 chip)?
http://www.bios-chip24.com/Bios-Chip-Information/Bios-chip-package-types

If it is you can probably just force flash it with a hardware programmer, using a Skypro and a Pomona 5250 clip and some jumper cables to connect it, assuming it's a 3.3v chip.
If it's DIP-8, you could just use an IC puller and just put it inside the skypro directly. No idea if the Pomona clip will fit dip-8 but it will SOIC8.
Hardware flashes always work unless the chip itself is physically damaged.

https://www.amazon.com/WINGONEER®-high-Speed-Programmer-EZP2010-Supports/dp/B01DZC36GY/
https://www.amazon.com/CPT-063-Test-Clip-SOIC8-Pomona/dp/B00HHH65T4/
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_10?smid=A2WWHQ25ENKVJ1&psc=1

wiring is easy as long as you make sure pin 1 on the skypro (rectangular direction) matches how you line it up on the Pomona clip. Hardest part is making sure you find the indented circle on the bios chip which is pin 1 there (has to align up). Board must be powered off and unplugged from AC before doing that.

I used one with the out of date pascal bios editor to TDP mod my GTX 1070 laptop card from 115W to 230W TDP (with a 1.8v adapter also, not needed for 3.3v mainboard bioses).

I don't know what the drawbacks are of a hardware force flash. You may lose DMI information (usually you should have a hardware backup of the bios already dumped) but then you can just boot to bios 2 and then Qflash bios 1 that way (I don't know if that restores DMI information as this is beyond me).

Unfortunately buying flashing tools is probably more expensive than just getting a RMA. But it's always good to have a hardware programmer sitting around.
You can grab a 1.8v adapter for flashing, backing up and modding video card bioses too (Nvidia cards use a 1.8v bios, so a 1.8v adapter is REQUIRED).


----------



## VeritronX

anthony81212 said:


> Yeah, that's what I tried as well, but no luck. My main BIOS just refuses to boot! I've cleared CMOS, unplugged PC, tried everything even flashing with @BIOS under Windows (gasp! haha), but it seems the primary BIOS is beyond rescue... Booting into secondary works.


If booting secondary one works then you can fix the main one using the manual switches.. put a fresh bios on a USB and set the switches to single bios mode and secondary bios, boot into the bios and go into qflash, then while in qflash flick the switch on the board to main bios and then flash it from the file on the usb.


----------



## Falkentyne

VeritronX said:


> If booting secondary one works then you can fix the main one using the manual switches.. put a fresh bios on a USB and set the switches to single bios mode and secondary bios, boot into the bios and go into qflash, then while in qflash flick the switch on the board to main bios and then flash it from the file on the usb.


It won't work. He needs a hardware programmer. He tried everything you said.


----------



## Robbært

Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme WaterForce
16 phase VRM, 14x TDA21462 +2 iGPU look like 4C10/-06


----------



## Timur Born

I use F7a in combination manual BIOS switching, but with some failed OC attempts it still switches to F4 until I disconnect the power for some time. How is that possible?


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> Is your bios chip shaped like this? (SOIC8 chip)?
> http://www.bios-chip24.com/Bios-Chip-Information/Bios-chip-package-types


Hey, thanks for the answer, no my BIOS chip doesn't look like that. I've attached a picture of what they look like (the main BIOS is under the plastic cover (which looks socketed, like you can open and remove the BIOS chip and replace it?))

It says "Board uses two SPI chip labeled MXIC MX 2SL12873F a capacity of 128 Mb for storing UEFI BIOS."
From the review website: https://www.pctekreviews.com/Reviews/Z390MASTER.aspx

To flash it manually myself using a hardware flasher would be cool, but as of now I'd like to go through the official channels (RMA, or other fixes) especially since I am under warranty still


----------



## Moparman

Robbært said:


> Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme WaterForce



Now that is an interesting board.


----------



## Moparman

anthony81212 said:


> Hey, thanks for the answer, no my BIOS chip doesn't look like that. I've attached a picture of what they look like (the main BIOS is under the plastic cover (which looks socketed, like you can open and remove the BIOS chip and replace it?))
> 
> It says "Board uses two SPI chip labeled MXIC MX 2SL12873F a capacity of 128 Mb for storing UEFI BIOS."
> From the review website: https://www.pctekreviews.com/Reviews/Z390MASTER.aspx
> 
> To flash it manually myself using a hardware flasher would be cool, but as of now I'd like to go through the official channels (RMA, or other fixes) especially since I am under warranty still



Talk to GBT-Matthew and see if he can help.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Falkentyne said:


> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
> 
> And that looks like that is a problem.
> @GBT-MatthewH can you help him ?


Does "Average" usually show in HWinfo for memory? I don't use the program much so I don't know if this is a bug (even if it is, shouldn't it just be a copy/paste of the first 3 columns? Not like it fluctuates...) or just the same the software works.



anthony81212 said:


> Hey, thanks for the answer, no my BIOS chip doesn't look like that. I've attached a picture of what they look like (the main BIOS is under the plastic cover (which looks socketed, like you can open and remove the BIOS chip and replace it?))
> 
> It says "Board uses two SPI chip labeled MXIC MX 2SL12873F a capacity of 128 Mb for storing UEFI BIOS."
> From the review website: https://www.pctekreviews.com/Reviews/Z390MASTER.aspx
> 
> To flash it manually myself using a hardware flasher would be cool, but as of now I'd like to go through the official channels (RMA, or other fixes) especially since I am under warranty still


If the main BIOS is bricked and cannot be flashed we can send a replacement chip. Customer service should have them available if you are in the us/can. If the backup BIOS is bricked and cannot be flashed you would have to RMA since its soldered to the board.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Does "Average" usually show in HWinfo for memory? I don't use the program much so I don't know if this is a bug (even if it is, shouldn't it just be a copy/paste of the first 3 columns? Not like it fluctuates...) or just the same the software works.
> 
> 
> 
> If the main BIOS is bricked and cannot be flashed we can send a replacement chip. Customer service should have them available if you are in the us/can. If the backup BIOS is bricked and cannot be flashed you would have to RMA since its soldered to the board.


Can't the backup chip be force flashed with a Skypro programmer and Pomona 5250 clip?
I have one of those (from TDP modding a GTX 1070) just for incidents like this 

Is DMI system information lost if you hardware flash the bios directly from Gigabyte, without backing up the chip contents with the HW programmer first? (I know on laptops, if you do this (e.g. MSI laptop), the system works, but the "Model name" which is stored in DMI is lost (e.g. it will say "PLEASE_CHANGE_PRODUCT_NAME" instead of "GT73VR 7RF", as "product name" oddly enough, is the original label in the bios itself, the model name is stored in DMI). Windows embedded product keys (e.g. Windows 10 home) are also lost by force flashing).


----------



## Edge0fsanity

I spent some more time troubleshooting my mobo issues. I believe i'm going to have to send it back for a replacement. 

I've narrowed it down to a bios issue with the primary bios on the board. Early on, the first day i had it, i noticed that the dual bios feature would never disable itself even when the dip switches were set to only load the primary or only the secondary. Any instability with that feature disabled would still kick it to the secondary bios and require a power cycle to get back to the primary.

The secondary bios which is still on the F4 it originally shipped with is perfectly stable. No crashes, no issues, overclocks perfectly, stresses stable, games stable. The primary bios will crash with memory errors no matter what bios i use. I have tried F4, F6, and F7b.

Changing the dual bios shutoff back to enabled made no difference.

I also noticed inside the faulty bios that it won't recognize one of my m.2 ssds while the working bios does recognize all 3 of them.

Pretty frustrating problem and this mobo being in a custom waterloop makes replacement even more of a pain.


----------



## Falkentyne

Edge0fsanity said:


> I spent some more time troubleshooting my mobo issues. I believe i'm going to have to send it back for a replacement.
> 
> I've narrowed it down to a bios issue with the primary bios on the board. Early on, the first day i had it, i noticed that the dual bios feature would never disable itself even when the dip switches were set to only load the primary or only the secondary. Any instability with that feature disabled would still kick it to the secondary bios and require a power cycle to get back to the primary.
> 
> The secondary bios which is still on the F4 it originally shipped with is perfectly stable. No crashes, no issues, overclocks perfectly, stresses stable, games stable. The primary bios will crash with memory errors no matter what bios i use. I have tried F4, F6, and F7b.
> 
> Changing the dual bios shutoff back to enabled made no difference.
> 
> I also noticed inside the faulty bios that it won't recognize one of my m.2 ssds while the working bios does recognize all 3 of them.
> 
> Pretty frustrating problem and this mobo being in a custom waterloop makes replacement even more of a pain.


Do you have a SPI programmer?
If you have a Skypro, (and a Pomona 5250 IC clip and some male to female jumper cables, like these (for hooking up the Pomona clip to the Skypro):
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_10?smid=A2WWHQ25ENKVJ1&psc=1
https://www.amazon.com/WINGONEER®-high-Speed-Programmer-EZP2010-Supports/dp/B01DZC36GY/
https://www.amazon.com/CPT-063-Test...F8&qid=1544554596&sr=8-2&keywords=Pomona+5250


You could make a hard backup of the secondary bios with the Skypro,
then force flash the backup into the primary bios (I think you can just pull the primary chip and put it directly into the skypro, I don't know if the Pomona clip will fit DIP-8 biose chips; the secondary is SOIC8); I don't know if there is a socket adapter for the DIP 8 primary bios or not, then both bioses should be stable, unless there is an actual fault on the board itself or the bios chip is physically bad.

A hardware programmer is a complete lifesaver for situations like these. Makes bad flashes a memory.


----------



## Jidonsu

I'm definitely really happy with the Aorus Master and my 9700K. I'm definitely stable at 1.35V 5.2ghz with AVX offset of 2. I just took it up to 5.4ghz at 1.4V with no offset for a run. It passed Cinebench at 1824. I also ran Userbenchmark (https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/12842412) and got 100 percentile on the chip. I don't plan to run this at all as a regular use overclock, but I am tempted to see if it's Prime95 1344K and Realbench stable. I highly doubt it though...


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> I'm definitely really happy with the Aorus Master and my 9700K. I'm definitely stable at 1.35V 5.2ghz with AVX offset of 2. I just took it up to 5.4ghz at 1.4V with no offset for a run. It passed Cinebench at 1824. I also ran Userbenchmark (https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/12842412) and got 100 percentile on the chip. I don't plan to run this at all as a regular use overclock, but I am tempted to see if it's Prime95 1344K and Realbench stable. I highly doubt it though...


What happens if you remove the AVX offset at 5.2 ghz ?
Can you then lower the voltage?
there has been discussion that using an AVX offset causes instability for some strange reason, because the voltage winds up dropping due to some bizarre recalibration thing (explained on Asus ROG forums), requiring an increase in voltage, but i don't know if this applies to Gigabyte boards as well.

Also, as a rule, I do not recommend stress testing any chips that are above 1.35v, as this can increase risk of degradation due to high volts/high current.
Best to just game and run quick benchmarks like cinebench (and have HWinfo64 open; there is a section for WHEA /CPU L0 errors at the very bottom of HWinfo64 sensors).
It's already been proven that these chips can show degradation in just 36 hours at 1.55v vcore with absolutely *no* load at all. (all these chips are still 14nm), so I would hate to think how load at 1.4v would accelerate things (even if this is a logarithmic function of degradation rate).

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html

So be careful and overclock responsibly.


----------



## anthony81212

GBT-MatthewH said:


> If the main BIOS is bricked and cannot be flashed we can send a replacement chip. Customer service should have them available if you are in the us/can. If the backup BIOS is bricked and cannot be flashed you would have to RMA since its soldered to the board.


Thank you, Matthew.

The main BIOS is bricked, backup BIOS is working fine (so far).
I'm located in Germany, is the US/Can customer service able to send a replacement BIOS chip to Germany?
(I have contacted Gigabyte eSupport in Germany on Monday morning, but they haven't responded yet).


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> What happens if you remove the AVX offset at 5.2 ghz ?
> Can you then lower the voltage?
> there has been discussion that using an AVX offset causes instability for some strange reason, because the voltage winds up dropping due to some bizarre recalibration thing (explained on Asus ROG forums), requiring an increase in voltage, but i don't know if this applies to Gigabyte boards as well.
> 
> Also, as a rule, I do not recommend stress testing any chips that are above 1.35v, as this can increase risk of degradation due to high volts/high current.
> Best to just game and run quick benchmarks like cinebench (and have HWinfo64 open; there is a section for WHEA /CPU L0 errors at the very bottom of HWinfo64 sensors).
> It's already been proven that these chips can show degradation in just 36 hours at 1.55v vcore with absolutely *no* load at all. (all these chips are still 14nm), so I would hate to think how load at 1.4v would accelerate things (even if this is a logarithmic function of degradation rate).
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html
> 
> So be careful and overclock responsibly.


Good points. That's probably why I hesitate to stress it at 1.4V, especially considering how I'll never use it. 

Regarding the 2 offset at 5.2, if I reduce the offset to 0, it fails Prime95 with avx enabled.

I'm thinking there's no point in even running Prime95 with avx enabled due to the heat I saw in my custom loop. Maybe go back to offset 0 and see what happens in Realbench and just game on it and see what happens? I'm currently stable for hours in Prime95 without AVX and gaming.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

anthony81212 said:


> Thank you, Matthew.
> 
> The main BIOS is bricked, backup BIOS is working fine (so far).
> I'm located in Germany, is the US/Can customer service able to send a replacement BIOS chip to Germany?
> (I have contacted Gigabyte eSupport in Germany on Monday morning, but they haven't responded yet).


US cant/wont ship to EU. Have to get it locally. That being said in my history of working with PC's I have never seen a bricked BIOS chip... I have seen a bricked BIOS, but never a bricked chip that could not be re-flashed and fixed (short of physical damage). You should be able to flash the non-working BIOS pretty easily - Boot into BIOS, Once in BIOS flip the switch to the non-working BIOS, flash the BIOS.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Falkentyne said:


> Do you have a SPI programmer?
> If you have a Skypro, (and a Pomona 5250 IC clip and some male to female jumper cables, like these (for hooking up the Pomona clip to the Skypro):
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_10?smid=A2WWHQ25ENKVJ1&psc=1
> https://www.amazon.com/WINGONEER®-high-Speed-Programmer-EZP2010-Supports/dp/B01DZC36GY/
> https://www.amazon.com/CPT-063-Test...F8&qid=1544554596&sr=8-2&keywords=Pomona+5250
> 
> 
> You could make a hard backup of the secondary bios with the Skypro,
> then force flash the backup into the primary bios (I think you can just pull the primary chip and put it directly into the skypro, I don't know if the Pomona clip will fit DIP-8 biose chips; the secondary is SOIC8); I don't know if there is a socket adapter for the DIP 8 primary bios or not, then both bioses should be stable, unless there is an actual fault on the board itself or the bios chip is physically bad.
> 
> A hardware programmer is a complete lifesaver for situations like these. Makes bad flashes a memory.


I don't have one of those but i may grab one.

You also bring up a good point about pulling the backup bios to put onto the primary. One thing i haven't tried is backing up the f4 secondary bios in qflash then flashing that onto the primary.


----------



## Vesimas

Holy... I want one


----------



## Moparman

Ok i am having an interesting issue that I haven't seen talked about yet. my current config.


9600k, Aorus Z390 Master, Gigabyte G1 980ti SLI, RD400 NVME, 1TB WD blue, PCP&C Firestorm 1050W gold, current cooling is Mugen 4 with push pull. 



Current issue. if I run stock or Overclocked and leave the pc off overnight it wont post the next day and i have to hold in power button and then turn it back on. Now when it does this the screen comes on to a black screen but nothing else and just stares at me. Any ideas? I forgot to say but no post codes when this happens and doesn't mater what bios i have selected. This is day 3 of this.


----------



## anthony81212

GBT-MatthewH said:


> US cant/wont ship to EU. Have to get it locally. That being said in my history of working with PC's I have never seen a bricked BIOS chip... I have seen a bricked BIOS, but never a bricked chip that could not be re-flashed and fixed (short of physical damage). You should be able to flash the non-working BIOS pretty easily - Boot into BIOS, Once in BIOS flip the switch to the non-working BIOS, flash the BIOS.


Yeah, I thought that too, it must be super unlikely that this happens. But as of now I have spent cumulatively almost 2 days now tinkering with this (see my previous posts I detailed it all), I must have tried to flash it upwards of 30-50 times by now...
I tried all permutations of steps I could find / research / think of, but no matter what I do the main BIOS just doesn't want to cooperate


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

anthony81212 said:


> Yeah, I thought that too, it must be super unlikely that this happens. But as of now I have spent cumulatively almost 2 days now tinkering with this (see my previous posts I detailed it all), I must have tried to flash it upwards of 30-50 times by now...
> I tried all permutations of steps I could find / research / think of, but no matter what I do the main BIOS just doesn't want to cooperate


Actually because you and the other guy were having similar issues I just tried on my board. Flipping the switch doesn't seem to flash the second BIOS. Not sure what's going on but I sent it to our team to see if we can fix it.


----------



## Falkentyne

Edge0fsanity said:


> I don't have one of those but i may grab one.
> 
> You also bring up a good point about pulling the backup bios to put onto the primary. One thing i haven't tried is backing up the f4 secondary bios in qflash then flashing that onto the primary.


I wasn't aware you could backup the existing bios. Try that for sure first.

Sometimes, if the bios chip is corrupted, software flashing won't work.
A full erase and reprogram (via a hardware programmer) is sometimes the only way to fix things.
basically you disconnect all AC power, hook up the Skypro programmer to the Pomona 5250 clip via the jumper cables---make sure pin 1 lines up perfectly (very important), then the corner that has the circle indent is pin 1 on the bios chip's pins. Then you just do a read on the backup bios and save it, then if the pomona clip fits over that plastic cover on the main (if it can be removed), you just do a full erase and reprogram of the first chip. If the chip has to be removed, you just put it into the skypro (there may be adapters for the size included with it--not sure on that!). Then you load the bios file and just press "Auto" on the Skypro software, which will do an erase, program and verify.

However if the bios chip is electrically damaged somehow, then Gigabyte has to mail you a replacement (it is socketed). In VERY very rare circumstances, the traces on the mainboard relating to the 1st bios chip could be damaged but that's getting into tinfoil hat territory.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Actually because you and the other guy were having similar issues I just tried on my board. Flipping the switch doesn't seem to flash the second BIOS. Not sure what's going on but I sent it to our team to see if we can fix it.





anthony81212 said:


> Yeah, I thought that too, it must be super unlikely that this happens. But as of now I have spent cumulatively almost 2 days now tinkering with this (see my previous posts I detailed it all), I must have tried to flash it upwards of 30-50 times by now...
> I tried all permutations of steps I could find / research / think of, but no matter what I do the main BIOS just doesn't want to cooperate





Edge0fsanity said:


> I don't have one of those but i may grab one.
> 
> You also bring up a good point about pulling the backup bios to put onto the primary. One thing i haven't tried is backing up the f4 secondary bios in qflash then flashing that onto the primary.


Doesn't holding (or spamming) ALT+F10 cause the "backup" bios to get flashed when turning on the computer?


----------



## Mr-Dark

Moparman said:


> Ok i am having an interesting issue that I haven't seen talked about yet. my current config.
> 
> 
> 9600k, Aorus Z390 Master, Gigabyte G1 980ti SLI, RD400 NVME, 1TB WD blue, PCP&C Firestorm 1050W gold, current cooling is Mugen 4 with push pull.
> 
> 
> 
> Current issue. if I run stock or Overclocked and leave the pc off overnight it wont post the next day and i have to hold in power button and then turn it back on. Now when it does this the screen comes on to a black screen but nothing else and just stares at me. Any ideas? I forgot to say but no post codes when this happens and doesn't mater what bios i have selected. This is day 3 of this.



Hello

If i understand you correctly your monitor loss the signal after the bios logo on cold boot ? if yes then just disable the Win10 fast boot..


----------



## Moparman

Mr-Dark said:


> Hello
> 
> If i understand you correctly your monitor loss the signal after the bios logo on cold boot ? if yes then just disable the Win10 fast boot..



No logo no anything Just backlight comes on that is it. No post codes nothing


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> What happens if you remove the AVX offset at 5.2 ghz ?
> Can you then lower the voltage?
> there has been discussion that using an AVX offset causes instability for some strange reason, because the voltage winds up dropping due to some bizarre recalibration thing (explained on Asus ROG forums), requiring an increase in voltage, but i don't know if this applies to Gigabyte boards as well.
> 
> Also, as a rule, I do not recommend stress testing any chips that are above 1.35v, as this can increase risk of degradation due to high volts/high current.
> Best to just game and run quick benchmarks like cinebench (and have HWinfo64 open; there is a section for WHEA /CPU L0 errors at the very bottom of HWinfo64 sensors).
> It's already been proven that these chips can show degradation in just 36 hours at 1.55v vcore with absolutely *no* load at all. (all these chips are still 14nm), so I would hate to think how load at 1.4v would accelerate things (even if this is a logarithmic function of degradation rate).
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html
> 
> So be careful and overclock responsibly.


Just as a follow up, I'm now at 1.35V 5.2 without any AVX offset. I ran Realbench with half ram (16 out of 32) for an hour, and it was fine with no errors. I will run it for longer at some other time, but I'm just gonna see if it's stable in my normal activities for now. Thank you for the encouragement!


----------



## Santhapiya

Falkentyne said:


> Santhapiya said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello friends,
> 
> Z390 Auros Master
> Stuck at Error Code 78 ACPI Core Initialization
> Haven't reached BIOS yet.
> 
> I have tried everything short of testing the build with a different CPU or motherboard and flashing updated BIOS. Any advice is appreciated. This is my first build.
> 
> Here is the build: https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Santhapiya/saved/sHkZ8d
> 
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 2X8GB 3000MHz CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 ver.5.32 RAM bought for testing.
> 
> Motherboard manual:
> http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/Manual/mb_manual_z390-aorus-master_1001_e.pdf
> 
> pg129-134
> Code 78 - ACPI Core Initialization
> 
> May you be well, happy, and peaceful.
> 
> 
> 
> Hardware error.
> *HOWEVER* before doing the bottom : this could potentially be a corrupt bios also.
> Switch bios switch to 'bios 2' (backup bios), unplug power supply, remove RAM and GPU, press clear cmos button several times, reset bios, reinstall RAM and GPU, replug in all connections and try to boot to bios.
> If ok, post back here with results.
> 
> If not:
> 
> Take 1 stick of RAM out. Move remaining stick to another slot. Unplug and remove all SSD's and HDD's and power cables except video card, CPU 8 pin and ATX, then try to boot
> If failed, remove CPU and check for bent pins, then remove motherboard and check for proper standoffs and mounting and shorts, then remount bare essentials and try again.
> If failed again, RMA the motherboard first.
Click to expand...

UPDATE: I was attempting to boot the computer with a VGA monitor connected to the HDMI port with a HDMI to VGA adapter. When I spoke with GIGABYTE Tech Support they explained Q-code 78 means it is not detecting a monitor. Needs to be connected to native HDMI or Display Port monitor.

New monitor arrived and PC is operating as expected.


----------



## anthony81212

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Actually because you and the other guy were having similar issues I just tried on my board. Flipping the switch doesn't seem to flash the second BIOS. Not sure what's going on but I sent it to our team to see if we can fix it.


Thank you!! I'm glad you were able to reproduce, did it also show a gibberish "BIOS date" on the information screen after the flashing and right before you reboot? 

Please let us know if you hear of any news from the team 🙂. I like this motherboards a lot otherwise, and I'd love to enjoy this system to its fullest! 



Falkentyne said:


> Doesn't holding (or spamming) ALT+F10 cause the "backup" bios to get flashed when turning on the computer?


I've read that too, however in my case, it's the main BIOS that's corrupt and not the backup BIOS. Unless booting into secondary BIOS and spamming Alt-F10 let's us flash the "alternate" BIOS of the backup BIOS which is the main BIOS? 😛


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Thank you!! I'm glad you were able to reproduce, did it also show a gibberish "BIOS date" on the information screen after the flashing and right before you reboot?
> 
> Please let us know if you hear of any news from the team 🙂. I like this motherboards a lot otherwise, and I'd love to enjoy this system to its fullest!
> 
> 
> 
> I've read that too, however in my case, it's the main BIOS that's corrupt and not the backup BIOS. Unless booting into secondary BIOS and spamming Alt-F10 let's us flash the "alternate" BIOS of the backup BIOS which is the main BIOS? 😛


Well have you tried it ?


----------



## derx

Has anyone already tried the new F7 BIOS ? I saw it was released 2 days ago. Release notes very limited as usual, with updates to CPU microcode and iRST updates.


----------



## Robbært

Santhapiya said:


> UPDATE: I was attempting to boot the computer with a VGA monitor connected to the HDMI port with a HDMI to VGA adapter. When I spoke with GIGABYTE Tech Support they explained Q-code 78 means it is not detecting a monitor. Needs to be connected to native HDMI or Display Port monitor.
> 
> New monitor arrived and PC is operating as expected.


HDMI-VGA adapters not start if connected monitor is in power save mode.
you have to turn monitor(projector) on 2s before you do it with PC.


----------



## Billingsc

Does anyone else have any luck getting responses from gigabyte tech support that actually spend any time reading what has been asked?? Got to be some of the worst tech support I’ve ever had to deal with. Thing is now they’ve taken so long with their replies that i’vegone Over the 30 day return window and Ccl computers now say it can take over a month for me then to get a new board out after it has been sent back for testing.

I have a few issues that hopefully you guys can help with 
My z390 ultra switches bios and clears cmos everytime I cold boot and can’t find anyway of stopping this, has anyone else had this as well? 
With a static fixed vcore at 1.295v under normal use for an hour i’l get a range of about 100mv from minimum to maximum on the sensor and about 50-70mv variance under stress testing, gigabyte have just said this is normal in their response? 

I’m getting loads of electrical noise through music equipment when connected but using my old motherboard everything is quiet with no ground loops or anything present. Bit annoying as this was one of my reasons to get the board with its supposedly ultra clean DAC ports.

Lastly my system would pass stress tests at 5ghz using 1.30v yet all of a sudden I can only get 4.8ghz at the same voltages and also my ram Xmp profile worked fine but all of a sudden I have to bump bothe vccio and vccsa up by 20mv above Xmp or the mouse pointer and screen freeze constantly. This screen/ mouse freezing also happens when using factory default settings and only goes away once I up the vccio vccsa, but it’s weird it’s just suddenly started happening. 

Any help and advise would be well appreciated as i’m Not keen to send the mobo off to gigabyte to just have them say it’s fine and send it back after being without it for over a month.


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> Well have you tried it ?


No, not yet, because I don't know how this "Alt+F10" mode flashes the BIOS. I read somewhere that normally it copies the Main BIOS -> Backup BIOS and that's how it updates the Backup BIOS. And so far we have no confirmation that it is able to copy Backup BIOS -> Main BIOS.

So what happens if it does that for me? I would hate to botch up the second BIOS too and *completely *brick my board.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Falkentyne said:


> I wasn't aware you could backup the existing bios. Try that for sure first.
> 
> Sometimes, if the bios chip is corrupted, software flashing won't work.
> A full erase and reprogram (via a hardware programmer) is sometimes the only way to fix things.
> basically you disconnect all AC power, hook up the Skypro programmer to the Pomona 5250 clip via the jumper cables---make sure pin 1 lines up perfectly (very important), then the corner that has the circle indent is pin 1 on the bios chip's pins. Then you just do a read on the backup bios and save it, then if the pomona clip fits over that plastic cover on the main (if it can be removed), you just do a full erase and reprogram of the first chip. If the chip has to be removed, you just put it into the skypro (there may be adapters for the size included with it--not sure on that!). Then you load the bios file and just press "Auto" on the Skypro software, which will do an erase, program and verify.
> 
> However if the bios chip is electrically damaged somehow, then Gigabyte has to mail you a replacement (it is socketed). In VERY very rare circumstances, the traces on the mainboard relating to the 1st bios chip could be damaged but that's getting into tinfoil hat territory.


Backing up the working bios and flashing over the corrupted primary didn't do anything. Still having the same issue. I'm going to try contacting gigabyte support about this and see if they'll mail me a replacement for the damaged primary. If not i'm going to buy the hardware reprogrammer and try to fix it that way. For now i'm just running backup bios as it works fine.


----------



## anthony81212

Edge0fsanity said:


> Backing up the working bios and flashing over the corrupted primary didn't do anything. Still having the same issue. I'm going to try contacting gigabyte support about this and see if they'll mail me a replacement for the damaged primary. If not i'm going to buy the hardware reprogrammer and try to fix it that way. For now i'm just running backup bios as it works fine.


Take a look at what @GBT-MatthewH said:



GBT-MatthewH said:


> Actually because you and the other guy were having similar issues I just tried on my board. Flipping the switch doesn't seem to flash the second BIOS. Not sure what's going on but I sent it to our team to see if we can fix it.


It seems that at the moment, if you have a corrupt primary BIOS and a working secondary BIOS -> when you boot into the secondary BIOS, there is no way to flash the primary BIOS. Like it just keeps on flashing over the backup BIOS chip, no matter what you select with the BIOS_SW switch.

This is what I observed + another user here on the forum as well (in the last few pages--I can't find his post right now). And GBT-MatthewH was also able to reproduce it. 
This is on Z390 Aorus Master btw (I think that's the same board you have).


----------



## Stockman

Billingsc said:


> I’m getting loads of electrical noise through music equipment when connected but using my old motherboard everything is quiet with no ground loops or anything present. Bit annoying as this was one of my reasons to get the board with its supposedly ultra clean DAC ports.


I've had two different Master boards and an Ultra board with the same issue when plugging headphones into rear I/O audio jack, so don't expect this to go away with an exchange. I haven't experienced your other issues, however, which to me are even more troublesome than the audio interference. Sorry this post isn't more helpful.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

anthony81212 said:


> Take a look at what @GBT-MatthewH said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems that at the moment, if you have a corrupt primary BIOS and a working secondary BIOS -> when you boot into the secondary BIOS, there is no way to flash the primary BIOS. Like it just keeps on flashing over the backup BIOS chip, no matter what you select with the BIOS_SW switch.
> 
> This is what I observed + another user here on the forum as well (in the last few pages--I can't find his post right now). And GBT-MatthewH was also able to reproduce it.
> This is on Z390 Aorus Master btw (I think that's the same board you have).


Yeah its the same board but not quite same problem. I can boot into my primary bios which is the bad one and flash any bios i want onto it. Haven't tried the dip switch flashing method from the working secondary bios.


----------



## jlp0209

Stockman said:


> I've had two different Master boards and an Ultra board with the same issue when plugging headphones into rear I/O audio jack, so don't expect this to go away with an exchange. I haven't experienced your other issues, however, which to me are even more troublesome than the audio interference. Sorry this post isn't more helpful.


Also using a Master board and have had no audio issues. I installed the audio drivers from the CD and shortly after that the Realtek control panel also installed. I regularly use just 2 speakers and a subwoofer, plugged into the bottom-center audio port on the back of the board. Also have used 2 different headphones plugged into that same port in addition to the headphone port on the front of my case. I've played a few games, listened to iTunes music and YouTube, no issues at all.


----------



## Billingsc

On top of all the issues below I’ve just updated to the latest bios since it says stability improvements and now getting bsods at boot saying inaccessible boot device and then takes me straight back to the bios again. AHCI is still selected and now just going round in circles trying to fix this issue. Starting to wish I had stuck with ASUS pretty badly!




Billingsc said:


> Does anyone else have any luck getting responses from gigabyte tech support that actually spend any time reading what has been asked?? Got to be some of the worst tech support I’ve ever had to deal with. Thing is now they’ve taken so long with their replies that i’vegone Over the 30 day return window and Ccl computers now say it can take over a month for me then to get a new board out after it has been sent back for testing.
> 
> I have a few issues that hopefully you guys can help with
> My z390 ultra switches bios and clears cmos everytime I cold boot and can’t find anyway of stopping this, has anyone else had this as well?
> With a static fixed vcore at 1.295v under normal use for an hour i’l get a range of about 100mv from minimum to maximum on the sensor and about 50-70mv variance under stress testing, gigabyte have just said this is normal in their response?
> 
> I’m getting loads of electrical noise through music equipment when connected but using my old motherboard everything is quiet with no ground loops or anything present. Bit annoying as this was one of my reasons to get the board with its supposedly ultra clean DAC ports.
> 
> Lastly my system would pass stress tests at 5ghz using 1.30v yet all of a sudden I can only get 4.8ghz at the same voltages and also my ram Xmp profile worked fine but all of a sudden I have to bump bothe vccio and vccsa up by 20mv above Xmp or the mouse pointer and screen freeze constantly. This screen/ mouse freezing also happens when using factory default settings and only goes away once I up the vccio vccsa, but it’s weird it’s just suddenly started happening.
> 
> Any help and advise would be well appreciated as i’m Not keen to send the mobo off to gigabyte to just have them say it’s fine and send it back after being without it for over a month.


----------



## Falkentyne

Billingsc said:


> On top of all the issues below I’ve just updated to the latest bios since it says stability improvements and now getting bsods at boot saying inaccessible boot device and then takes me straight back to the bios again. AHCI is still selected and now just going round in circles trying to fix this issue. Starting to wish I had stuck with ASUS pretty badly!


Inaccessible boot device means you need to change the boot drive to the one that has windows on it.


----------



## PuD

@*GBT-MatthewH*: with the ultimate bios "F7" we can re-enable the fast boot option on windows?


----------



## pm1109

Anyone who updated their bios to F7....Did you see any improvements in overcloking?


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

PuD said:


> @*GBT-MatthewH*: with the ultimate bios "F7" we can re-enable the fast boot option on windows?


Looks like its working - Put the system to sleep with fast boot and voltage stayed the same.


----------



## Mdtape

Hi, i was looking to buy 3600mhz cl15 Ram for my z390 aorus pro, but i heard that gigabyte bords are below average concerning Ram OC. The kit isnt listed on the official Support list on the gigabyte website. What is your expercience with Ram Oc?


----------



## davidm71

Hey do you guys drop down your overclock when flashing a new bios?


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Hey do you guys drop down your overclock when flashing a new bios?


You -always- remove an overclock when flashing a bios.


----------



## davidm71

*No more overclock*



Falkentyne said:


> You -always- remove an overclock when flashing a bios.



Thats what I thought but there have been times I have gotten away with it. Can't be lazy I guess.

Will drop Bclk to 36 and set ram speed low I guess.

Thanks.

Edit: Better set to default settings? Though this particular board auto-overclocks to 4.7 ghz.


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Thats what I thought but there have been times I have gotten away with it. Can't be lazy I guess.
> 
> Will drop Bclk to 36 and set ram speed low I guess.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Edit: Better set to default settings? Though this particular board auto-overclocks to 4.7 ghz.


Multiplier at 36 sets it to 4700 mhz for some reason.
Try 37.
Also this won't work if intel turbo boost multipliers are not set to auto.


----------



## Jidonsu

Has anyone tried overclocking past XMP speeds? I have a Gskill 4 x 8GB Kit (C16 3200), but increasing voltage and trying to increase the clock speed to anything higher than 3466 defaults to 3466 in Windows 10. I'm on the Aorus Master.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> Has anyone tried overclocking past XMP speeds? I have a Gskill 4 x 8GB Kit (C16 3200), but increasing voltage and trying to increase the clock speed to anything higher than 3466 defaults to 3466 in Windows 10. I'm on the Aorus Master.


What happens if you set VCCIO to 1.30, VCCSA to 1.35, DDRV to 1.45, then try?


----------



## Moparman

Jidonsu said:


> Has anyone tried overclocking past XMP speeds? I have a Gskill 4 x 8GB Kit (C16 3200), but increasing voltage and trying to increase the clock speed to anything higher than 3466 defaults to 3466 in Windows 10. I'm on the Aorus Master.



Sounds like your mem just can't go that far. I would test with 2 sticks and remember you will have to change your timings around to keep going up. Example My Team Dark pro 3200C14 i'm currently running at [email protected]@ 1.45V no problem. Also my Cache multi at 48x


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> Doesn't holding (or spamming) ALT+F10 cause the "backup" bios to get flashed when turning on the computer?


So I just tried this out earlier. I used a wired USB keyboard.
Spamming Alt+F10 (Copy Main BIOS -> backup BIOS) or Ctrl+F10 (swap Main & Backup BIOS) didn't do anything. I spammed these key combinations everywhere I can think of: right after pressing power button to boot up, in the BIOS system info screen (press F9 when aorus logo appears), and in the BIOS itself. No acknowledgement of any sort, and no change.

Doing Alt+F12 / Ctrl+F12 also had no effect. So I guess no dice there.


----------



## Billingsc

Falkentyne said:


> Inaccessible boot device means you need to change the boot drive to the one that has windows on it.


Yeah The first thing I made sure was that it was the correct drive selected but still the f5 bios bsods with the same error every time. The only way around it was to cold boot which on my mobo always switches to the other bios and clears cmos anyway. Probably the only time this issue has actually been useful strangely. Have you got any ideas with the other issues i’m Encountering such as cold boot switching bios every time? 
Thanks
C


----------



## FailHaze

My Z390 Aorus Master automatically switches BIOS sometimes, even when the switch is set to single bios mode. I am not sure if I should get it replaced. Anyone else got this issue?


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> So I just tried this out earlier. I used a wired USB keyboard.
> Spamming Alt+F10 (Copy Main BIOS -> backup BIOS) or Ctrl+F10 (swap Main & Backup BIOS) didn't do anything. I spammed these key combinations everywhere I can think of: right after pressing power button to boot up, in the BIOS system info screen (press F9 when aorus logo appears), and in the BIOS itself. No acknowledgement of any sort, and no change.
> 
> Doing Alt+F12 / Ctrl+F12 also had no effect. So I guess no dice there.


Let's just wait for @GBT-MatthewH to get back to us on how to manually flash the backup (or "Secondary") Bios, for those that managed to make the backup bios the main bios somehow (I'm guessing by setting the switch to boot on backup bios, then clearing CMOS with either "Single" or "Dual" bios selected (idk which).

Not about to try that though. Losing profiles is annoying (even if you save them on USB you still have to reload and resave them one by one).


----------



## Jidonsu

anthony81212 said:


> So I just tried this out earlier. I used a wired USB keyboard.
> Spamming Alt+F10 (Copy Main BIOS -> backup BIOS) or Ctrl+F10 (swap Main & Backup BIOS) didn't do anything. I spammed these key combinations everywhere I can think of: right after pressing power button to boot up, in the BIOS system info screen (press F9 when aorus logo appears), and in the BIOS itself. No acknowledgement of any sort, and no change.
> 
> Doing Alt+F12 / Ctrl+F12 also had no effect. So I guess no dice there.


It says on page 91 that users can't update the BIOS manually. I'm assuming it's there as a safely net just to use in case the main one is corrupted and needs to be reflashed. Really curious if there's a way to update it though. I assume my backup is running F4 or F5.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> It says on page 91 that users can't update the BIOS manually. I'm assuming it's there as a safely net just to use in case the main one is corrupted and needs to be reflashed. Really curious if there's a way to update it though. I assume my backup is running F4 or F5.


Someone said they were able to switch what the "main" bios actually was, by making the backup bios the loading bios, then clearing CMOS fully (no idea if the bios switch was set to single or dual). YMMV.


----------



## shaolin95

Mdtape said:


> Hi, i was looking to buy 3600mhz cl15 Ram for my z390 aorus pro, but i heard that gigabyte bords are below average concerning Ram OC. The kit isnt listed on the official Support list on the gigabyte website. What is your expercience with Ram Oc?


Buildzoid said it was fine for RAM ocing so I wouldnt be concerned.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> What happens if you set VCCIO to 1.30, VCCSA to 1.35, DDRV to 1.45, then try?


I'm gonna give that a try, but maybe after I update to F7 just in case.


----------



## rv8000

shaolin95 said:


> Buildzoid said it was fine for RAM ocing so I wouldnt be concerned.


My DDR4 3600 kit boots without any issue set to XMP, also boots @ 4000 1.47vdimm c17 on F6 bios(will go for stability soon). My personal experience with higher end gigabyte boards and memory overclocking have always been great.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Let's just wait for @GBT-MatthewH to get back to us on how to manually flash the backup (or "Secondary") Bios, for those that managed to make the backup bios the main bios somehow (I'm guessing by setting the switch to boot on backup bios, then clearing CMOS with either "Single" or "Dual" bios selected (idk which).
> 
> Not about to try that though. Losing profiles is annoying (even if you save them on USB you still have to reload and resave them one by one).


I was able to manually (and probably inadvertently) flash the backup bios from F4 to F6 when I was having those issues with my main bios last week. The switch was set to "dual bios" and I was in the backup bios, moved the switch to main bios, and flashed it. I had hoped that it would fix the main bios, but it flashed the backup bios instead to F6. Main bios would not boot. Flashed within the backup bios w/ switch set to backup bios this time, rebooted into backup bios, flicked switch to main bios again and flashed again. And that's when the main bios started working, but the backup LED was lit. And vice versa if I booted into the backup bios. In my case powering down the PC, physically removing the power cord, removing battery, clearing CMOS, and repeatedly pressing the power button on the board mysteriously fixed things and all has been fine since. Main bios just flashed to F7 without issue. Backup is still intact on F6. This whole thing is so odd that anthony81212 is still experiencing. I'm confused just typing the process I went through, sorry if it makes no sense.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> I was able to manually (and probably inadvertently) flash the backup bios from F4 to F6 when I was having those issues with my main bios last week. The switch was set to "dual bios" and I was in the backup bios, moved the switch to main bios, and flashed it. I had hoped that it would fix the main bios, but it flashed the backup bios instead to F6. Main bios would not boot. Flashed within the backup bios w/ switch set to backup bios this time, rebooted into backup bios, flicked switch to main bios again and flashed again. And that's when the main bios started working, but the backup LED was lit. And vice versa if I booted into the backup bios. In my case powering down the PC, physically removing the power cord, removing battery, clearing CMOS, and repeatedly pressing the power button on the board mysteriously fixed things and all has been fine since. Main bios just flashed to F7 without issue. Backup is still intact on F6. This whole thing is so odd that anthony81212 is still experiencing. I'm confused just typing the process I went through, sorry if it makes no sense.


I'll keep this in mind for the future.
I do have a SPI programmer, so I can always force flash the backup bios if something ever happened. I have no idea if the main bios would fit the Pomona 5250 clip though. The backup is SOIC8, but the main has some plastaic cover on it, seems to be socketed and looks like it's DIP 8.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

FailHaze said:


> My Z390 Aorus Master automatically switches BIOS sometimes, even when the switch is set to single bios mode. I am not sure if I should get it replaced. Anyone else got this issue?


i have that issue. Happens anytime i have instability it'll boot me into the other bios with the switch set to single bios.


----------



## bastian

Z390 Master F7 appears official?

http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-master_f7.zip


----------



## davidm71

*Was wondering about ME*

Hi,

Was wondering if I upgraded my ME firmware to the latest version out there and the new F7 bios that just came out for the Auros Master has an older ME will flashing F7 revert me back to an earlier ME?

Thanks


----------



## Jidonsu

No go on the ram overclock. I might just grab this set because I'm an idiot.

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4133c17q-32gtzr


----------



## ShaddMP

Just when i thought F4 bios was ideal for my 8700K On My Master it flip flops back to F6 where i tried 5.2 and was actually semi stable this time with voltage bump but ended up throttling due to voltage. I ended up flashing F4 and im stable at the 4.8 cpu upgrade setting.

I guess what im trying to say is im throttling on every bios except F4 

Im considering trying F7 since its official now.. anyone notice any difference? Im so annoyed im considering a 9700K


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> Let's just wait for @GBT-MatthewH to get back to us on how to manually flash the backup (or "Secondary") Bios, for those that managed to make the backup bios the main bios somehow (I'm guessing by setting the switch to boot on backup bios, then clearing CMOS with either "Single" or "Dual" bios selected (idk which).
> 
> Not about to try that though. Losing profiles is annoying (even if you save them on USB you still have to reload and resave them one by one).


Actually, through my >2 days of debugging and trying to rescue the main BIOS, I discovered probably how @jlp0209 managed to swap the main / backup BIOS switch positions (and like always, it's probably a bug  !):

It seems that whatever position *BIOS_SW* is on when you try to *cold boot* the PC (complete power removed, WITH CMOS cleared) will be assigned to the "main BIOS" (if & after it successfully POSTs). So *either switch position 1 OR 2* could correspond to "main BIOS"!! And the other switch position is then set as the "backup BIOS". This persists through poweroff, and is only reset when you clear the CMOS. 

This is because whenever you cold boot, the motherboard ALWAYS tries main BIOS first, regardless of what your BIOS_SW specifies.
This is NOT what the manual says --> the manual says BIOS_SW 1 is always MAIN and BIOS_SW 2 is BACKUP BIOS.


----------



## FailHaze

Edge0fsanity said:


> i have that issue. Happens anytime i have instability it'll boot me into the other bios with the switch set to single bios.


Well it actually happens even when I hold the power button to force a shutdown. Very annoying.


----------



## davidm71

Digging in the latest F7 bios release for the Master and I see its not the latest microcode for the 9900K. All others are latest. Going to have to mod unless Gigabyte releases an updated bios file.

Thanks


----------



## jlp0209

anthony81212 said:


> Actually, through my >2 days of debugging and trying to rescue the main BIOS, I discovered probably how @jlp0209 managed to swap the main / backup BIOS switch positions (and like always, it's probably a bug  !):
> 
> It seems that whatever position *BIOS_SW* is on when you try to *cold boot* the PC (complete power removed, WITH CMOS cleared) will be assigned to the "main BIOS" (if & after it successfully POSTs). So *either switch position 1 OR 2* could correspond to "main BIOS"!! And the other switch position is then set as the "backup BIOS". This persists through poweroff, and is only reset when you clear the CMOS.
> 
> This is because whenever you cold boot, the motherboard ALWAYS tries main BIOS first, regardless of what your BIOS_SW specifies.
> This is NOT what the manual says --> the manual says BIOS_SW 1 is always MAIN and BIOS_SW 2 is BACKUP BIOS.


I'm certain I played a lot with both bios switches trying to see what would work haha. Really sorry I can't 100% backtrack and give a more detailed series of steps that I took. Have you had any luck with GB support about this? 



davidm71 said:


> Digging in the latest F7 bios release for the Master and I see its not the latest microcode for the 9900K. All others are latest. Going to have to mod unless Gigabyte releases an updated bios file.
> 
> Thanks


That's disappointing, thanks for looking into this. So far my manual OC is the same on F7 as it was on F6. I need to test adaptive voltage again and see if it's any better for me. On F4 and F6 it was broken, either too much overshoot or too much vdroop no matter what I did. I know my CPU is capable of 5.0ghz on all cores but am stuck at 4.9 at the moment because I don't want to keep manual voltage at 1.30-1.33v all the time. Really regret not going with a different brand. I thought buying based on hardware quality was the way to go this go around and software / bios are just software and can be fixed / tinkered with. Lesson learned.


----------



## DirtyScrubz

Question for @GBT-MatthewH , what is the max amps a fan header puts out on the aorus master? I purchased 5 corsair ml120 fans and plan to plug them into a fan hub which will then connect to a single header. Each fan is around 0.25A I think or close to it.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> I'm certain I played a lot with both bios switches trying to see what would work haha. Really sorry I can't 100% backtrack and give a more detailed series of steps that I took. Have you had any luck with GB support about this?
> 
> 
> 
> That's disappointing, thanks for looking into this. So far my manual OC is the same on F7 as it was on F6. I need to test adaptive voltage again and see if it's any better for me. On F4 and F6 it was broken, either too much overshoot or too much vdroop no matter what I did. I know my CPU is capable of 5.0ghz on all cores but am stuck at 4.9 at the moment because I don't want to keep manual voltage at 1.30-1.33v all the time. Really regret not going with a different brand. I thought buying based on hardware quality was the way to go this go around and software / bios are just software and can be fixed / tinkered with. Lesson learned.


Use VR VOUT to measure the actual voltage.


----------



## davidm71

jlp0209 said:


> I'm certain I played a lot with both bios switches trying to see what would work haha. Really sorry I can't 100% backtrack and give a more detailed series of steps that I took. Have you had any luck with GB support about this?
> 
> 
> 
> That's disappointing, thanks for looking into this. So far my manual OC is the same on F7 as it was on F6. I need to test adaptive voltage again and see if it's any better for me. On F4 and F6 it was broken, either too much overshoot or too much vdroop no matter what I did. I know my CPU is capable of 5.0ghz on all cores but am stuck at 4.9 at the moment because I don't want to keep manual voltage at 1.30-1.33v all the time. Really regret not going with a different brand. I thought buying based on hardware quality was the way to go this go around and software / bios are just software and can be fixed / tinkered with. Lesson learned.


Whats disappointing is that the bios has BiosGuard built in and you can't mod the bios as the Q-Flash utility refused to flash my mod with updated microcodes. Maybe there is a way to force flash it but not familiar. As far as your problem is concerned maybe you got a bad cpu. I mean the main marketing point of this board was that the vrm heatsinks were the best compared to the competition. Speaking of vrms I understood that they werent the most powerful in respect to wattage but chose picking a quality board never the less as far as I understood from reading reviews and such. I personally had no trouble getting my 9900K to 5ghz though at 1.325v and running LLC on step below Turbo and got a waterblock on the cpu. Wish I had one of those 3.0 volt cpus but its the silicon lottery at work here.

Thanks


----------



## jlp0209

davidm71 said:


> Whats disappointing is that the bios has BiosGuard built in and you can't mod the bios as the Q-Flash utility refused to flash my mod with updated microcodes. Maybe there is a way to force flash it but not familiar. As far as your problem is concerned maybe you got a bad cpu. I mean the main marketing point of this board was that the vrm heatsinks were the best compared to the competition. Speaking of vrms I understood that they werent the most powerful in respect to wattage but chose picking a quality board never the less as far as I understood from reading reviews and such. I personally had no trouble getting my 9900K to 5ghz though at 1.325v and running LLC on step below Turbo and got a waterblock on the cpu. Wish I had one of those 3.0 volt cpus but its the silicon lottery at work here.
> 
> Thanks


That is disappointing, fully agree. I am AVX stable at 5.0ghz at 1.320-1.330v at manual voltage. For 4.9ghz I need 1.236v, that's a large power increase and may well be a bad chip. I like using adaptive voltage and don't want to run the CPU at 1.33v all the time. That's my real issue with this board and bios. Adaptive voltage causes way too much vdroop and overshoot from my testing, depending on LLC setting. When I was using my Asus Z370 board adaptive voltage worked just fine with this CPU. The VRM couldn't handle the heat which is why I upgraded.


----------



## davidm71

Which Asus Z370 board?


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Whats disappointing is that the bios has BiosGuard built in and you can't mod the bios as the Q-Flash utility refused to flash my mod with updated microcodes. Maybe there is a way to force flash it but not familiar. As far as your problem is concerned maybe you got a bad cpu. I mean the main marketing point of this board was that the vrm heatsinks were the best compared to the competition. Speaking of vrms I understood that they werent the most powerful in respect to wattage but chose picking a quality board never the less as far as I understood from reading reviews and such. I personally had no trouble getting my 9900K to 5ghz though at 1.325v and running LLC on step below Turbo and got a waterblock on the cpu. Wish I had one of those 3.0 volt cpus but its the silicon lottery at work here.
> 
> Thanks


Use a HW programmer to flash the modded bios.
I don't know of any ami bios editors that will let you disable bios guard by default as this doesn't appear to be a standard raw ami bios capsule, at least not like MSI's laptop bioses, and I'm too lazy to check their Z390 desktop version (AMIBCP 5.02 from tweaktown opens the file but there's a bunch of 'undefined' fields even though you can find Bios Guard its probably not safe to edit, although you can't edit the downloaded file from GB anyway, you would have to see if FPTW64 from win-raid.com can backup and dump the bios capsule first then try to open that. plus Bios Lock is probably enabled too, which would stop FPTW64 from flashing the AMI capsule),

But you can use a Skypro, jumper cables to connect the skypro to the clip (male to female) and a Pomona 5250 clip to force flash the bios. And if the force flash didn't work, just flash the backup (always dump a backup first).


----------



## jlp0209

davidm71 said:


> Which Asus Z370 board?


Maximus X Hero. Stress testing and stability testing the 9900K with AVX load made me uncomfortable. VRM would get up to 115C. No such issue with the Master.


----------



## Timur Born

jlp0209 said:


> That is disappointing, fully agree. I am AVX stable at 5.0ghz at 1.320-1.330v at manual voltage. For 4.9ghz I need 1.236v, that's a large power increase and may well be a bad chip. I like using adaptive voltage and don't want to run the CPU at 1.33v all the time. That's my real issue with this board and bios. Adaptive voltage causes way too much vdroop and overshoot from my testing, depending on LLC setting. When I was using my Asus Z370 board adaptive voltage worked just fine with this CPU. The VRM couldn't handle the heat which is why I upgraded.


Try adaptive voltage with "Low" LLC and -0.02 to -0.04 V Vcore offset.

Try TJMax at 90°C and then *decrease* it step by step until you are stable. If 90°C is stable then increase step by step. This will throttle P95 Small FFTs and maybe even Realbench (depending on your cooling), but most realworld load will average around 5 Ghz. The TJMax will allow short spikes of full power draw and then gradually slow down the CPU to decrease the wattage. Idle package power is below 5 W and most desktop surfing can be done semi-fanless.

Personally I am still testing long term stability using 5.2 for 2 cores and 5.1 for 6 cores, but overall that's what I am aiming for with the use of adaptive power.


----------



## jlp0209

Timur Born said:


> Try adaptive voltage with "Low" LLC and -0.02 to -0.04 V Vcore offset.
> 
> Try TJMax at 90°C and then *decrease* it step by step until you are stable. If 90°C is stable then increase step by step. This will throttle P95 Small FFTs and maybe even Realbench (depending on your cooling), but most realworld load will average around 5 Ghz. The TJMax will allow short spikes of full power draw and then gradually slow down the CPU to decrease the wattage. Idle package power is below 5 W and most desktop surfing can be done semi-fanless.
> 
> Personally I am still testing long term stability using 5.2 for 2 cores and 5.1 for 6 cores, but overall that's what I am aiming for with the use of adaptive power.


Thanks, I will give those things a try.

I just re-installed Windows since I haven't done a clean install since Z170. I noticed the board wasn't recognizing my m.2 pci-e Samsung drive in the bios, so I decided to reinstall Windows. Prior to installing I disabled CSM, switched SATA mode to Intel RST / Optane, and enabled secure boot. I detached all other drives so just my main SSD was enabled. Everything installed just fine and Intel RST is running. But the bios still doesn't detect any NVM-e device and there are no drives listed when it lists the m.2 ports. Just adding to my frustration with this board. Not sure it's a big deal, but frustrating.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Thanks, I will give those things a try.
> 
> I just re-installed Windows since I haven't done a clean install since Z170. I noticed the board wasn't recognizing my m.2 pci-e Samsung drive in the bios, so I decided to reinstall Windows. Prior to installing I disabled CSM, switched SATA mode to Intel RST / Optane, and enabled secure boot. I detached all other drives so just my main SSD was enabled. Everything installed just fine and Intel RST is running. But the bios still doesn't detect any NVM-e device and there are no drives listed when it lists the m.2 ports. Just adding to my frustration with this board. Not sure it's a big deal, but frustrating.


Unscrew the drive, take it out then make sure you reinsert it and apply seesaw pressure to both sides while its still at an angle (I'm guessing 30 degrees). It took some work to make sure it was fully inserted before screwing it down.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Unscrew the drive, take it out then make sure you reinsert it and apply seesaw pressure to both sides while its still at an angle (I'm guessing 30 degrees). It took some work to make sure it was fully inserted before screwing it down.


Everything is installed / seated properly that's not the issue. Windows detected the SSD when I re-installed and it went fine (I made sure to adjust bios to RST mode, disabled CSM, enable secure boot prior to wiping drive and clean installation. I followed the manual's instructions). The issue is the bios doesn't detect any drive in the m.2 slots despite Windows recognizing it and running just fine. 

Intel RST was running properly but also didn't show the SSD. So I re-checked the manual. 

There was another setting I overlooked in the bios, I had to set the PCIe storage Dev on Port (21) item to "RST controlled", within the Peripherals/SATA and RST Config menu, per the manual. Rebooted.

Now when I open Intel RST it shows my PCI-e SSD as it should. Everything looks good in Windows device manager and everywhere else. Installed Samsung NVM-e driver as well.

The bios still doesn't recognize any NVM-e device or any device connected to any m.2 port when I go into "Peripherals." The bios does recognize the SSD as a boot device, so it is being detected here, which is weird.

***EDIT- and now the Samsung NVM-e driver is gone from device manager and I can't install the driver (gives error of no device detected). Yet Intel RST detects the drive as PCI-e.


----------



## Iarwa1N

*ethernet not working*

Hi guys, after setting my Aorus Master, ethernet port was working fine. But after the first attempt of overclocking my 8700k to 5.3 ghz with vcore 1.43 (which was working like that on my previous mobo), now I can not connect to lan. In device manager there is an exclamation over the Intel I219-V with the error "This device cannot start. (Code 10)". I can see an orange light in the port. I tried disabling the controller from bios and re-enabled but it didn't worked. Did I fry the controller on my first overclocking attempt with this motherboard?


----------



## Stockman

davidm71 said:


> Digging in the latest F7 bios release for the Master and I see its not the latest microcode for the 9900K. All others are latest. Going to have to mod unless Gigabyte releases an updated bios file.
> 
> Thanks


When you say "all others are latest" are you referring to the 9700k, 9600k, 8700k, etc? Or earlier BIOS versions? I see on Gigabyte's website that F7 "Updates CPU microcode" - so that's unfortunate they did it for every CPU but 9900k. Thanks.


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> davidm71 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whats disappointing is that the bios has BiosGuard built in and you can't mod the bios as the Q-Flash utility refused to flash my mod with updated microcodes. Maybe there is a way to force flash it but not familiar. As far as your problem is concerned maybe you got a bad cpu. I mean the main marketing point of this board was that the vrm heatsinks were the best compared to the competition. Speaking of vrms I understood that they werent the most powerful in respect to wattage but chose picking a quality board never the less as far as I understood from reading reviews and such. I personally had no trouble getting my 9900K to 5ghz though at 1.325v and running LLC on step below Turbo and got a waterblock on the cpu. Wish I had one of those 3.0 volt cpus but its the silicon lottery at work here.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> Use a HW programmer to flash the modded bios.
> I don't know of any ami bios editors that will let you disable bios guard by default as this doesn't appear to be a standard raw ami bios capsule, at least not like MSI's laptop bioses, and I'm too lazy to check their Z390 desktop version (AMIBCP 5.02 from tweaktown opens the file but there's a bunch of 'undefined' fields even though you can find Bios Guard its probably not safe to edit, although you can't edit the downloaded file from GB anyway, you would have to see if FPTW64 from win-raid.com can backup and dump the bios capsule first then try to open that. plus Bios Lock is probably enabled too, which would stop FPTW64 from flashing the AMI capsule),
> 
> But you can use a Skypro, jumper cables to connect the skypro to the clip (male to female) and a Pomona 5250 clip to force flash the bios. And if the force flash didn't work, just flash the backup (always dump a backup first).
Click to expand...


I do own a couple HW bios programmers but theyre only for emergencies. Not going to force a flash that way. At least Asus boards had Flashback. Going to have to consult with Win-Raid. If Gigabyte reps are listening we the enthusiast community are not happy.

As far as the vrms are concerned and the adaptive voltage issues maybe there are other settings that need to be tweaked to lessen the vcore.

About the pcie nvme drive goes mine also doesnt show up after a fresh bios flash I have to reboot for my Samsung 970 pro to show up. So your not the only one.


----------



## Falkentyne

Iarwa1N said:


> Hi guys, after setting my Aorus Master, ethernet port was working fine. But after the first attempt of overclocking my 8700k to 5.3 ghz with vcore 1.43 (which was working like that on my previous mobo), now I can not connect to lan. In device manager there is an exclamation over the Intel I219-V with the error "This device cannot start. (Code 10)". I can see an orange light in the port. I tried disabling the controller from bios and re-enabled but it didn't worked. Did I fry the controller on my first overclocking attempt with this motherboard?


Set your overclock back to default. Or clear the CMOS and try again.
1.43v vcore is very high. It's not recommend going above 1.35v. Did you have any Loadline Calibration turned on? You can't fry the ethernet port by overclocking the CPU. You were probably not stable.


----------



## jlp0209

davidm71 said:


> As far as the vrms are concerned and the adaptive voltage issues maybe there are other settings that need to be tweaked to lessen the vcore.
> 
> About the pcie nvme drive goes mine also doesnt show up after a fresh bios flash I have to reboot for my Samsung 970 pro to show up. So your not the only one.


In the bios my NVM-e ssd doesn't show up as installed into any of the m.2 slots. It also shows nothing under "NVM-e devices / config." It does however appear under the boot manager. It also appears under Rapid Storage devices. It also appears as a pci-e drive when I open Intel RST while in Windows. It appears as "NVMe Samsung SSD 950" in device manager. 

But there is no NVM-e driver installed under "storage controllers" in device manager and I can't install the Samsung driver; it says "device not connected" when I try. In device manager I see "SATA/PCIe RST Premium Controller" and "Microsoft Storage Spaces Controller". 

Prior to reinstalling Windows I also made sure to clear the secure boot keys. I have no idea what else I can do, I've set up everything according to instructions. Does not having an NVM-e driver installed make any difference?


----------



## Falkentyne

@davidm71

I created a fptw64 direct backup of the APTIO bios capsule for Master (version F7B only) with winraid CSME system tools 11 r17, which worked (v12 just errorred out just trying to run the file).
I have no idea what you would do with this though. It looks like AMIBCP 5.02 can open the capsule without errors, but half the things are in german or some other language, and "undefined" seems to be the same as both "Auto" and "disabled" while that "A...whatever" word means Enabled. (its some German word). I also have no idea if setting an option to "Supervisor" (like Bios Guard) would make it appear in the main bios as an option (This is how you unlock bios menus on other systems, assuming you can reflash the APTIO capsule).

The only thing I have been able to tell is that "Bios Lock" is set to disabled. That would allow FPTW64 to reflash the bios capsule, but then the problem is if Bios Guard can be set to disabled and FPTW64 able to flash it afterwards.


----------



## davidm71

*I am familiar with CSME*



Falkentyne said:


> @davidm71
> 
> I created a fptw64 direct backup of the APTIO bios capsule for Master (version F7B only) with winraid CSME system tools 11 r17, which worked (v12 just errorred out just trying to run the file).
> I have no idea what you would do with this though. It looks like AMIBCP 5.02 can open the capsule without errors, but half the things are in german or some other language, and "undefined" seems to be the same as both "Auto" and "disabled" while that "A...whatever" word means Enabled. (its some German word). I also have no idea if setting an option to "Supervisor" (like Bios Guard) would make it appear in the main bios as an option (This is how you unlock bios menus on other systems, assuming you can reflash the APTIO capsule).
> 
> The only thing I have been able to tell is that "Bios Lock" is set to disabled. That would allow FPTW64 to reflash the bios capsule, but then the problem is if Bios Guard can be set to disabled and FPTW64 able to flash it afterwards.


The question is would fptw64 flash the rom with out bricking or failing. I recently a few days ago flashed a newer ME firmware I constructed using those exact tools that are on Win-Raid. I visit there regularly and I am very familiar with AMIBCP as have used it in the past to add menu items. Going to have to ask around on Win-Raid for further clarification.

Thank you.


PS: If anyone wants my updated ME file to flash it themselves I will post it here. It required using FIT tool to combine another module into the ME and configuring it for flashing. So you just can't take the raw ME file and flash once your on ME ver 12. I had no problems and it worked for me.


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> The question is would fptw64 flash the rom with out bricking or failing. I recently a few days ago flashed a newer ME firmware I constructed using those exact tools that are on Win-Raid. I visit there regularly and I am very familiar with AMIBCP as have used it in the past to add menu items. Going to have to ask around on Win-Raid for further clarification.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> PS: If anyone wants my updated ME file to flash it themselves I will post it here. It required using FIT tool to combine another module into the ME and configuring it for flashing. So you just can't take the raw ME file and flash once your on ME ver 12. I had no problems and it worked for me.


Is there a newer AMIBCP newer than 5.02? (if so can you link me to it?)


----------



## Moparman

Seems like the NVME issues might just be a Samsung thing. I have used Toshiba, Inland, Crucial, Adata all in my master with no issues.


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> Is there a newer AMIBCP newer than 5.02? (if so can you link me to it?)



I got version 5.020023 and 5.02 as well. Will PM it to you.


----------



## jlp0209

Moparman said:


> Seems like the NVME issues might just be a Samsung thing. I have used Toshiba, Inland, Crucial, Adata all in my master with no issues.


I re-installed Windows yet again and switched SATA mode back to AHCI. Windows now uses the MS nvm-e driver by default under storage controllers, and I installed the Samsung driver just fine. I'm not using a RAID setup so I don't need RST. CSM still disabled, secure boot enabled. BIOS still doesn't show the SSD installed into an m.2 slot, but it does show as a Pci-e device as does my GPU. So it all seems to be working fine in AHCI mode and is just a bios issue. 

I couldn't update to Windows 10 build 1809 which is what started this whole thing. Finally done. Thanks all for your input.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

anyone get ram running above 4000mhz on the aorus master? Got a pair of 4266 c19 sticks in today, can't boot above 4000mhz.


----------



## davidm71

jlp0209 said:


> I re-installed Windows yet again and switched SATA mode back to AHCI. Windows now uses the MS nvm-e driver by default under storage controllers, and I installed the Samsung driver just fine. I'm not using a RAID setup so I don't need RST. CSM still disabled, secure boot enabled. BIOS still doesn't show the SSD installed into an m.2 slot, but it does show as a Pci-e device as does my GPU. So it all seems to be working fine in AHCI mode and is just a bios issue.
> 
> I couldn't update to Windows 10 build 1809 which is what started this whole thing. Finally done. Thanks all for your input.


I have my Samsung drive installed in an Anglebird PCI-E card and I can tell you that at first boot, or after first bios flash it did not appear listed as a bootable drive until the system
rebooted. Possibly there is a delay in how nvram gets such devices listed. Probably a bios bug.


----------



## Falkentyne

Edge0fsanity said:


> anyone get ram running above 4000mhz on the aorus master? Got a pair of 4266 c19 sticks in today, can't boot above 4000mhz.


Try raising the TRC setting as high as it can go in your bios.
If you're using XMP try disabling it if you're experienced with DDR tweaking (I'm not).


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Falkentyne said:


> Try raising the TRC setting as high as it can go in your bios.
> If you're using XMP try disabling it if you're experienced with DDR tweaking (I'm not).


i'll give that a shot here in a bit.
I enabled xmp but i have voltage and timings in manual mode. Currently have it stable @ 4000c17. I'm not a ddr guru though, i know enough to figure out voltages and tighten primaries and a few of the secondaries.


----------



## I Am The Stig

If anyone could give me advice, that'd be awesome.

Basically I have my 8700k OC'd to 5ghz @ 1.29v on my z390 Aorus Master. However, whenever I run a stress test, it keeps bumping my voltage to 1.32v. I have my LLC currently set at Turbo.

Also, I would like to have my clocks downclock when I'm just doing basic tasks and not gaming. I enabled my C States, however I'm still at 5ghz regardless.

Any help would be appreciated. I watched videos and followed tutorials but still no answers to my issues.


----------



## Moparman

Edge0fsanity said:


> anyone get ram running above 4000mhz on the aorus master? Got a pair of 4266 c19 sticks in today, can't boot above 4000mhz.



I can run my 3200 Bdie at [email protected] 19-19-19-40-2t 1.5v


----------



## Falkentyne

I Am The Stig said:


> If anyone could give me advice, that'd be awesome.
> 
> Basically I have my 8700k OC'd to 5ghz @ 1.29v on my z390 Aorus Master. However, whenever I run a stress test, it keeps bumping my voltage to 1.32v. I have my LLC currently set at Turbo.
> 
> Also, I would like to have my clocks downclock when I'm just doing basic tasks and not gaming. I enabled my C States, however I'm still at 5ghz regardless.
> 
> Any help would be appreciated. I watched videos and followed tutorials but still no answers to my issues.


Use hwinfo64 and check VR VOUT sensor.
It's impossible for your voltage to go HIGHER at load than idle (with manual vcore).


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> Random LLC tests to confirm VR VOUT is reading voltages accurately.
> 
> 4.7 ghz HT Off, llc high: bios 1.200v
> vrvout 1.193v, vcore 1.188v idle
> vrvout 1.174v, vcore 1.188v load (No AVX), watts 77.500, amps 67.250A, CPU Pakcage 87.6W
> vrvout 1.168v, vcore 1.188v (FMA3) watts 100.5W, amps 87.650, CPU Package 115.0
> 
> 5.1 ghz 1.335v bios, LLC Turbo
> vrvout 1.326v, vcore 1.331v idle
> vrvout 1.273v, vcore 1.331v (no avx), watts 200.5W, amps 159.250v CPU Package 209W
> 1344K AVX: VRvout 1.287v, watts 158W, amps 123.5A


Thanks for doing these measurements! May I ask what your methodology is and how you verified that VR VOUT is more accurate than either of the two Vcore readings (on the IT 8688E and IT 8792E)?
In your results, is "vrvout" the voltage reported by IRF IR35201, as read by HWinfo? Which "vcore" value did you report (from which sensor)?
Did you verify these measurements with a DMM or something too, or how else do you know which reading is the most accurate?

Thanks!


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Thanks for doing these measurements! May I ask what your methodology is and how you verified that VR VOUT is more accurate than either of the two Vcore readings (on the IT 8688E and IT 8792E)?
> In your results, is "vrvout" the voltage reported by IRF IR35201, as read by HWinfo? Which "vcore" value did you report (from which sensor)?
> Did you verify these measurements with a DMM or something too, or how else do you know which reading is the most accurate?
> 
> Thanks!


Elmor told me. I don't have measuring tools. He worked for Asus.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Falkentyne said:


> Try raising the TRC setting as high as it can go in your bios.
> If you're using XMP try disabling it if you're experienced with DDR tweaking (I'm not).


Changing tRC to 64(highest value) did allow me to boot a couple times at 4133 but it was very unstable. Have been unsuccessful in booting into windows 95% of my tries. However, changing that value at 4000 cleared up my cold boot instability and allowed me to drop down to c16 stable.


----------



## nilatac

Hi,
Can somebody tell me what's the level of noise which can be considered as coil whine coming from the motherboard's vrm? I have nothing else to compare ..I hear a distinguish high pitch buzzing noise although is not louder and I have to get close to the top section of the motherboard. This happens when C1E CPU state is Enabled and disappears completely when C1E is Disabled.
Thanks!


----------



## Robbært

@GBT-MatthewH
Q Flash Plus on GIGABYTE X99 do flash both main and backup BIOS.
How to flash both main and backup on Z390 Aorus boards without BIOS switches, like Z390 Aorus Pro?

i9-9900KF, 9400F will be there sooner or later.
4790K was black screen on older boards.
Are we have to keep old CPU to update main bios in case of damage since backup BIOS never updated?


----------



## Jidonsu

Edge0fsanity said:


> Changing tRC to 64(highest value) did allow me to boot a couple times at 4133 but it was very unstable. Have been unsuccessful in booting into windows 95% of my tries. However, changing that value at 4000 cleared up my cold boot instability and allowed me to drop down to c16 stable.


What dram voltage? Newegg sold out of the 4000c17 kit, unfortunately. According to gskill, their own qvl means that they’ve actually tested it at advertised speeds on those boards, so maybe I can get the 4133c17 kit.


----------



## Xylem

New OCer here. i7-9700K and Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro.


Reading through hundreds of posts in this thread, I gather most people are using adaptive voltage vs manual voltage. I was under the impression manual voltage was the way to go. Is this incorrect?


I'm currently at 5.0GHz @ 1.240v LLC=Turbo; all other settings per the Gigabyte z390 Aorus Master 9900K guide.


Cinebench, Realbench (15 min), and overnight x264 (16 thread, normal) without any WHEA errors or any other issues from what I can tell.


This morning I loaded optimized defaults and ran Realbench to get a sense of what default voltage was being used - at 4.6GHz its pushing 1.254v, up to 1.298v max (Vcore, ITE IT8792E sensor). I'm confused how I'm able to run 400MHz faster at a lower voltage. Can a lower voltage do any damage? Should I keep lowering the voltage until it becomes unstable/produces errors?


Thanks!


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Jidonsu said:


> What dram voltage? Newegg sold out of the 4000c17 kit, unfortunately. According to gskill, their own qvl means that they’ve actually treated it at advertised speeds on those boards, so maybe I can get the 4133c17 kit.


about to test 16-17-17-39-2 @1.43v, just failed ram test @ 38tras same voltage after 45 mins. I'm real close to stable, just need to sort out voltages if this fails again.


----------



## Falkentyne

Xylem said:


> New OCer here. i7-9700K and Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro.
> 
> 
> Reading through hundreds of posts in this thread, I gather most people are using adaptive voltage vs manual voltage. I was under the impression manual voltage was the way to go. Is this incorrect?
> 
> 
> I'm currently at 5.0GHz @ 1.240v LLC=Turbo; all other settings per the Gigabyte z390 Aorus Master 9900K guide.
> 
> 
> Cinebench, Realbench (15 min), and overnight x264 (16 thread, normal) without any WHEA errors or any other issues from what I can tell.
> 
> 
> This morning I loaded optimized defaults and ran Realbench to get a sense of what default voltage was being used - at 4.6GHz its pushing 1.254v, up to 1.298v max (Vcore, ITE IT8792E sensor). I'm confused how I'm able to run 400MHz faster at a lower voltage. Can a lower voltage do any damage? Should I keep lowering the voltage until it becomes unstable/produces errors?
> 
> 
> Thanks!


That is based on CPU VID + mOhms boost from IA AC Loadline setting (since there has to be a cushion to guarantee stability up to 100C temps). If you really want to see the original unboosted raw value, set internal VR, Core IA AC, IA DC loadline to 1 for 0.01 mOhms.

(default is 160 for 1.6 mOhms. do NOT go above 210, EVER).
Also notice that the VID seems to be based on the CPU Cache ratio more than the core (i don't know how much of an influence core has over cache). Setting x46 core x46 cache will have a higher VID than x46 core x43 cache.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Xylem said:
> 
> 
> 
> New OCer here. i7-9700K and Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro.
> 
> 
> Reading through hundreds of posts in this thread, I gather most people are using adaptive voltage vs manual voltage. I was under the impression manual voltage was the way to go. Is this incorrect?
> 
> 
> I'm currently at 5.0GHz @ 1.240v LLC=Turbo; all other settings per the Gigabyte z390 Aorus Master 9900K guide.
> 
> 
> Cinebench, Realbench (15 min), and overnight x264 (16 thread, normal) without any WHEA errors or any other issues from what I can tell.
> 
> 
> This morning I loaded optimized defaults and ran Realbench to get a sense of what default voltage was being used - at 4.6GHz its pushing 1.254v, up to 1.298v max (Vcore, ITE IT8792E sensor). I'm confused how I'm able to run 400MHz faster at a lower voltage. Can a lower voltage do any damage? Should I keep lowering the voltage until it becomes unstable/produces errors?
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> That is based on CPU VID + mOhms boost from IA AC Loadline setting (since there has to be a cushion to guarantee stability up to 100C temps). If you really want to see the original unboosted raw value, set internal VR, Core IA AC, IA DC loadline to 1 for 0.01 mOhms.
> 
> (default is 160 for 1.6 mOhms. do NOT go above 210, EVER).
> Also notice that the VID seems to be based on the CPU Cache ratio more than the core (i don't know how much of an influence core has over cache). Setting x46 core x46 cache will have a higher VID than x46 core x43 cache.
Click to expand...

What's default cache frequency on these? Bios indicates 43.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> What's default cache frequency on these? Bios indicates 43.


supposed to be 3 lower than core.


----------



## Timur Born

F4 default to x47 for Uncore, later versions seem to default to x43.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> F4 default to x47 for Uncore, later versions seem to default to x43.


Might explain the high voltages too.
The default VID seems to be based on the cache speed more than the core speed. (i checked this. At x47 core x44 cache, with IA AC DC loadline set to 1, default VID AT idle was 1.135v. At x47 core x47 cache, default VID was 1.215v idle).


----------



## pm1109

Anyone here touch the PCH (Chipset) voltage in the UEFI...I increased it to 1.10 volts from 1.0 (Auto)
Playing around with a few settings


----------



## davidm71

Hey guys,

Was wondering if the corsair LED 120mm fans like the ML120 are compatible with the LED headers on the Gigabyte Z390 Master motherboard?

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

pm1109 said:


> Anyone here touch the PCH (Chipset) voltage in the UEFI...I increased it to 1.10 volts from 1.0 (Auto)
> Playing around with a few settings


Why would you mess with the PCH voltage?
I've never seen instability on SATA / M.2 on these systems. Maybe for BCLK overclocking, but only Der8auer would know about that (or maybe some guys in the sub zero/extreme overclocking forums).


----------



## Xylem

Falkentyne said:


> That is based on CPU VID + mOhms boost from IA AC Loadline setting (since there has to be a cushion to guarantee stability up to 100C temps). If you really want to see the original unboosted raw value, set internal VR, Core IA AC, IA DC loadline to 1 for 0.01 mOhms.
> 
> (default is 160 for 1.6 mOhms. do NOT go above 210, EVER).
> Also notice that the VID seems to be based on the CPU Cache ratio more than the core (i don't know how much of an influence core has over cache). Setting x46 core x46 cache will have a higher VID than x46 core x43 cache.


Sorry, this is all new to me. Are you saying the optimized defaults of the board are not....optimized? Is the board defaulting to providing too much voltage?


----------



## jlp0209

I'm seeing much more stability with adaptive voltage on the F7 bios and 9900K (Z390 Master) compared to F6. So far for a 5.0ghz OC I'm using medium LLC, offset +.100, AC/DC LLC both set to 1. I left uncore ratio at auto. 

Prime95 small ffp avx at 25 minutes in I'm seeing both Vcore sensors average of 1.274 and VR VOUT average of 1.208. My uncore ratio shows 43x in HWinfo. No Prime95 errors but I do have 3 WHEA errors so I cut testing off and will raise my offset voltage a bit. 

Not calling things "stable" yet based on the above but I'm optimistic / feel like I'm making good progress. Just wanted to post that in my case adaptive voltage has been much easier to work with in F7 bios.


----------



## Falkentyne

Xylem said:


> Sorry, this is all new to me. Are you saying the optimized defaults of the board are not....optimized? Is the board defaulting to providing too much voltage?


I don't know what optimized defaults do and I'm not about to find out. I don't like "Auto" settings.

But with adaptive (Gigabyte calls this "Normal") voltage set, the CPU VID is used to link directly to the vcore (with the Core IA AC loadline boosting the VID (via intel's specifications - 1.60 mOhms for 8 core) to provide enough voltage to make sure the CPU is stable up to 100C--as you know more heat=more voltage needed--and the CPU Vcore at the VRM's is then linked to the VID right here, then the IA DC loadline reference value (1.60 mOhms) brings the VID down based on current load (at a 1.60 mOhm loadline). The CPU Vcore should then "droop" 'to match the CPU VID drooping, if loadline calibration is set to Normal or Standard.
Using a higher level of loadline calibration (LLC) will cause the CPU vcore to delink from the VID and be reported higher. 

The IA AC DC values default to 1.60 mOhms for both (160 raw value) in the bios.

Note that the IA DC loadline only makes the VID shown droop by a certain amount based on current, but will NOT affect the cpu voltage (vcore); the default setting is designed to match the default vdroop of the cpu vcore (thus the reference value of 1.60 mOhms).

You can test this yourself (use the more accurate of the 2 vcore sensors, e..g ITE 8792E) and compare CPU VID to CPU Vcore on idle and load--they should be within 20mv of each other.
This will provide the CPU with more voltage than is needed for stability but that's how the chips are designed deliberately. The VID seems to stop scaling at 4.7 ghz (based on cache ratio apparently, not core ratio). I do NOT know if the VID will scale if cache is higher than x47 e.g. 50 core, 50 cache vs 50 core 47 cache. You'll have to do your own tests for that.


----------



## Maident

*Black Screen Crash*

You might try swapping out a different GPU to see if the issue is between the new MB, CPU and the GPU. I discovered that my Z390 Master with an I9 9900k did not get along with my GTX 970. I had frequent crashes to black screen until I put in an old AMD GPU. No more crashes.


----------



## supertreky

Is the issue with everything being seen as an AVX workload still present in F7? If I set the AVX offload to anything it is just permanently underclocking, even sitting idle on desktop on F6.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's default cache frequency on these? Bios indicates 43.
> 
> 
> 
> supposed to be 3 lower than core.
Click to expand...

So 44? Or 47 since core can boost to 5.0?


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Padinn said:


> So 44? Or 47 since core can boost to 5.0?


I noticed at lighter loads at stock cache was 4.7 when core boosted to 5.0. With stress testing it would drop to 4.4 while core sat at 4.7. It seems that cache is always -3 from whatever the peak core frequency is.


----------



## wsnnwa

Has anyone here gotten any WHEA errors (CPU Cache L1 Errors - Event 19 Cache Hierarchy Error)? 
Could this be bad memory or a bad CPU, how do I go about narrowing that down?

I've been breaking my head trying to solve this over the past day. Essentially nothing has fixed it. 
Updated my bios to F7b and I noticed the issue is still there with the default settings. Even without any benchmarks I get 3-5 of these WHEA errors within boot and then 3-5 every minute. 

Build:

CPU: 9900k
Motherboard: Z390 Aorus Master
Memory: TridentZ RGB (F4-3200C16D-32GTZR)

Things Tried:

1. 'Stable' OC of 5GHz, kinda forgot to check for WHEA errors and ran Prime95 for 12 hours without any issues. Noticed the WHEA errors after checking for a few more things. 
2. Tried raising my VCORE value a bit higher, and changing my LLC to all available settings above Turbo. 
3. Happens with and without XMP.


----------



## Falkentyne

wsnnwa said:


> Has anyone here gotten any WHEA errors (CPU Cache L1 Errors - Event 19 Cache Hierarchy Error)?
> Could this be bad memory or a bad CPU, how do I go about narrowing that down?
> 
> I've been breaking my head trying to solve this over the past day. Essentially nothing has fixed it.
> Updated my bios to F7b and I noticed the issue is still there with the default settings. Even without any benchmarks I get 3-5 of these WHEA errors within boot and then 3-5 every minute.
> 
> Build:
> 
> CPU: 9900k
> Motherboard: Z390 Aorus Master
> Memory: TridentZ RGB (F4-3200C16D-32GTZR)
> 
> Things Tried:
> 
> 1. 'Stable' OC of 5GHz, kinda forgot to check for WHEA errors and ran Prime95 for 12 hours without any issues. Noticed the WHEA errors after checking for a few more things.
> 2. Tried raising my VCORE value a bit higher, and changing my LLC to all available settings above Turbo.
> 3. Happens with and without XMP.


Set CPU to 4.7 ghz, take out 1 stick of RAM or run the RAM at 2400 mhz or 2133 mhz.
If you still get that, RMA.

I've seen four reports of bad CPU's so far.
Just wondering, what happens if you disable AVX in prime95 and run small FFT (CPUSupportsAVX=0 in local.txt) ? Does it crash instantly or does it run?


----------



## wsnnwa

Falkentyne said:


> Set CPU to 4.7 ghz, take out 1 stick of RAM or run the RAM at 2400 mhz or 2133 mhz.
> If you still get that, RMA.
> 
> I've seen four reports of bad CPU's so far.
> Just wondering, what happens if you disable AVX in prime95 and run small FFT (CPUSupportsAVX=0 in local.txt) ? Does it crash instantly or does it run?


Thanks for the suggestion. 
The issue occurs with the CPU at 4.7GHz and one RAM stick at 2133MHz. This build has blown. My PSU was DOA, and now my CPU has to be RMAed.  

I am able to run Prime95 with AVX off, no additional issues aside from the WHEA I reported occurring at a faster rate.


----------



## Falkentyne

wsnnwa said:


> Thanks for the suggestion.
> The issue occurs with the CPU at 4.7GHz and one RAM stick at 2133MHz. This build has blown. My PSU was DOA, and now my CPU has to be RMAed.
> 
> I am able to run Prime95 with AVX off, no additional issues aside from the WHEA I reported occurring at a faster rate.


That's bizarre. Prime not erroring out at all but WHEA L1 errors. What PSU are you using if it was DOA? A backup one? Or you got a replacement?
I saw some posts awhile back about WHEA occuring at idle and it was always a bad CPU (besides the haswell microcode bug).


----------



## nyk20z3

Insane pricing and a $350 premium over the regular extreme -


----------



## eliau81

hi guys
did any of you notice the buzzing sound that come out from the VRM Z390 AORUS MASTER






After RMA and switch to new PSU and unplug all fans that buzzing still exist


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Believe it or not, VR VOUT (CPU on-die sense) is the one you should be paying attention to !
> Gigabyte Vcore sensor #2 (ITE 8792E) seems to be following the MLCC socket measurement, which is also where the digital multimeter read points are linked to.
> Sensor #1 is the old traditional sensor with the wild swings people are used to seeing.
> 
> All Asus Maximus XI boards have been recalibrated to follow VR VOUT (which is why so many people are reporting CPU's being stable at lower load voltages and having higher vdroop than competitors).
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html



Just to confirm this is the one under the sensor label IR35201 ?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Just to confirm this is the one under the sensor label IR35201 ?


Yes.


----------



## Padinn

Here is what I see with my new CPU installed when I set the VR IC DC loadlines to 1. This is with ring ratio at 43x and cores locked to 4.7GHz. I haven't been able to get the new CPU to boot with ring ratio of 47x, so can't directly compare to old CPU, but this is a full .11 drop on the VID compared to the old one (which was 1.235 at 47x). Going to try to get this one at 47x to see what I get.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Yes.


Thanks!



Is anyone here using the App center, on my end it keeps telling me a new version is out and clicking okay to update does nothing.


----------



## Mo2k

Hey guys,

I am Prime stable (26.6) with my 9600K on Aorus Pro Wifi! VCore is 1,330 and LLC is Turbo!
XMP Profile of my RAM is 3200 / 15-15-15-35-560-2T with 1,35V! BIOS is F7! AVX Offset 2. NB Clock is 4,3! 

I have this RAM: 

G.Skill Trident Z F4-3200C15D-16GTZ

It should have B-Die Chips. 

As you can See here: 

https://www.overclockers.com/forums...dent-Z-2x8GB-DDR4-3200-CL15-F4-3200C15D-16GTZ

People have no Problem to be stable at 3600+ with CL15/16 and 1,35-1,45V.
VCCIO is 1.100, VCCSA is 1,200! 

I have a lot of Problems overclocking RAM: 

With more than 3600MHz I can‘t even Boot! 
So my aim is to get 3600MHz stable with good Timings. 

I turn off XMP, set clock to 3600 and set Timings to 15-15-15-35-560-2t / 16-16-16-38-580-2t / 17-17-17-42-630-2t and so one. All other timings on Auto! I also tried Setting 


... nothing is stable! Even with 1,5V vDIMM I get BSOD or workers stop with Prime 26.6 1344k!

When I leave XMP Profile 1 on and set clock Manually to 3600MHz the Automatic timings are: 

17-20-20-43-630-2T but even then it freezes After 1:45h with prime 26.6 1344k! Blend test let workers stop After 2 hours. 

Also changing tRC to 64 doesn‘t make it stable! 

Can somebody please help?

Do I have to change anything else than vDIMM, VCCIO and VCCSA? Are there any timings I have to change? Shall I turn XMP on and change just the timings I want to change? I vDIMM of 1,5v dangerous? 

Or did I just get a bad RAM? Is this a reason to RMA? 



Regards 🙂


----------



## Robbært

Mo2k said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I am Prime stable (26.6) with my 9600K on Aorus Pro Wifi! VCore is 1,330 and LLC is Turbo!
> XMP Profile of my RAM is 3200 / 15-15-15-35-560-2T with 1,35V! BIOS is F7! AVX Offset 2. NB Clock is 4,3!
> G.Skill Trident Z F4-3200C15D-16GTZ
> People have no Problem to be stable at 3600+ with CL15/16 and 1,35-1,45V.
> VCCIO is 1.100, VCCSA is 1,200!
> 
> I have a lot of Problems overclocking RAM:
> 
> With more than 3600MHz I can‘t even Boot!
> So my aim is to get 3600MHz stable with good Timings.
> 
> I turn off XMP, set clock to 3600 and set Timings to 15-15-15-35-560-2t / 16-16-16-38-580-2t / 17-17-17-42-630-2t and so one. All other timings on Auto! I also tried Setting
> 
> ... nothing is stable! Even with 1,5V vDIMM I get BSOD or workers stop with Prime 26.6 1344k!
> 
> When I leave XMP Profile 1 on and set clock Manually to 3600MHz the Automatic timings are:
> 
> 17-20-20-43-630-2T but even then it freezes After 1:45h with prime 26.6 1344k! Blend test let workers stop After 2 hours.
> 
> Also changing tRC to 64 doesn‘t make it stable!
> 
> Can somebody please help?
> 
> Do I have to change anything else than vDIMM, VCCIO and VCCSA? Are there any timings I have to change? Shall I turn XMP on and change just the timings I want to change?
> 
> Or did I just get a bad RAM? Is this a reason to RMA?


Last is try VCCSA 1.3, VCCIO 1.250, dram 1.42 (not need dram 1.5)
Try 17-17-all from start

After increasing vccsa and vccio you have to watch cpu temperature too (at least in prime/LinX).
testmem is good one, not really need stress CPU test to test RAM.
It can make memory modules hot. don't set 1.5v dram with memtest86.
This memtest86 is very reliable.
Seen many recommendations to use BattleField 5 as test (but it not free).

Aorus Elite, Pro (WIFI) is 4-layer
Master, Ultra 6-layer
Xtreme - 8 layer
it can make difference with RAM OC too.

Change of motherboard could be more reasonable instead of DIMM modules.
There many posts in Asus thread about RAM OC too.
I'm quite sure if it not motherboard it CPU itself limiting your RAM OC.


----------



## Mo2k

Thank you for your answer! I will try your SA/IO settings the next Time. 

I now have problems getting it stable with XMP Profile 😕 Strange! My CPU was stable, 24 Hours 1344 Prime! Now with standard settings of RAM (3200CL15) its not stable anymore! 

Really strange! tried resetting bios now, maybe it helps!


----------



## Falkentyne

Mo2k said:


> Thank you for your answer! I will try your SA/IO settings the next Time.
> 
> I now have problems getting it stable with XMP Profile 😕 Strange! My CPU was stable, 24 Hours 1344 Prime! Now with standard settings of RAM (3200CL15) its not stable anymore!
> 
> Really strange! tried resetting bios now, maybe it helps!


Did you reset? what happened?


----------



## Padinn

Padinn said:


> Here is what I see with my new CPU installed when I set the VR IC DC loadlines to 1. This is with ring ratio at 43x and cores locked to 4.7GHz. I haven't been able to get the new CPU to boot with ring ratio of 47x, so can't directly compare to old CPU, but this is a full .11 drop on the VID compared to the old one (which was 1.235 at 47x). Going to try to get this one at 47x to see what I get.


Haven't really been able to get this one at 5Ghz stable (even with a relatively high voltage of 1.35). Seems like a lot of memory errors, so I might try it again with XMP on and Auto (I was trying manual VCC IO and SA). I was able to get it to boot into windows at a lower voltage relative to the old one.


----------



## Mo2k

Falkentyne said:


> Did you reset? what happened?





Unfortunately it's still not stable - damn! With settings it was fully stable before ... 



4,9GHz
1,330 vCore
1,150 VCCIO
1,250 VCCSA
RAM at XMP with 1,35V


Was stable before, now it isn't anymore. And I can't explain why. Could it be the change to F7-Bios? 



Or maybe I tested too much with prime which degraded my CPU? Is that possible in about 3 weeks? 



Regards


----------



## OutlawII

Mo2k said:


> Unfortunately it's still not stable - damn! With settings it was fully stable before ...
> 
> 
> 
> 4,9GHz
> 1,330 vCore
> 1,150 VCCIO
> 1,250 VCCSA
> RAM at XMP with 1,35V
> 
> 
> Was stable before, now it isn't anymore. And I can't explain why. Could it be the change to F7-Bios?
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe I tested too much with prime which degraded my CPU? Is that possible in about 3 weeks?
> 
> 
> 
> Regards



Roll back to the bios you used before


----------



## Mo2k

OutlawII said:


> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately it's still not stable - damn! With settings it was fully stable before ...
> 
> 
> 
> 4,9GHz
> 1,330 vCore
> 1,150 VCCIO
> 1,250 VCCSA
> RAM at XMP with 1,35V
> 
> 
> Was stable before, now it isn't anymore. And I can't explain why. Could it be the change to F7-Bios?
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe I tested too much with prime which degraded my CPU? Is that possible in about 3 weeks?
> 
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roll back to the bios you used before
Click to expand...

Just put the bios file on usb (F6) and flash it as usual?


----------



## Falkentyne

Mo2k said:


> Just put the bios file on usb (F6) and flash it as usual?


Yes. But your CPU wouldn't have degraded with 1.330v. Was this "bios" voltage" or was this load voltage (e.g. through hwinfo's VR VOUT voltage sensor under IR 35201?)

Someone also said you can flash the backup bios (usually the backup bios is not flashable) by making it the main bios by clearing cmos:

Switch bios switch to "use 2nd bios". (doesn't matter if its in single bios mode or dual bios mode)
Boot successfully once then shut down.
Unplug AC power and then clear CMOS for 30 seconds to 1 minute.

Then plug back in.
Now the backup bios should have "flipped" to being the main bios and the old main will become backup.
Now you can Q-flash the new "main" bios.


----------



## Mo2k

It was Bios Voltage! Vout is 1,31 on idle and 1,28 on prime! But temperatures reach 85C on load so I think vCore is Fine! 

Regards 🙂


----------



## Falkentyne

Mo2k said:


> It was Bios Voltage! Vout is 1,31 on idle and 1,28 on prime! But temperatures reach 85C on load so I think vCore is Fine!
> 
> Regards 🙂


So you are stable again?
So how did you fix it?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Haven't really been able to get this one at 5Ghz stable (even with a relatively high voltage of 1.35). Seems like a lot of memory errors, so I might try it again with XMP on and Auto (I was trying manual VCC IO and SA). I was able to get it to boot into windows at a lower voltage relative to the old one.


What memory sticks?
Brand? type? model? 2x8 GB? 4x8 GB? or 2x16 GB?

Try VCCIO at 1.10v-1.15v, and VCCSA at 1.20v-1.25v.


----------



## Mo2k

No, not yet! Had to install new windows since I changed ssd and now I reset bios! 

I changed VCCSA to 1,3 and VCCIO to 1,25 and vDIMM to 1,42 but workers stopped After 5 Minutes!

Now I‘m testing the stable cpu oc with XMP profile for RAM and hope its stable! 

Is it possible that I got the worst B-Die Chips Samsung ever made? 😁

But if its not stable now I at least know it seems to be the CPU! Maybe I‘ll change LLC from Turbo to Extreme since vDroop of 0,5V is a bit too much! 

If nothing helps, I‘m going to flash to F6 again!

I‘ll let you know what worked 

Regards!


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> What memory sticks?
> Brand? type? model? 2x8 GB? 4x8 GB? or 2x16 GB?
> 
> Try VCCIO at 1.10v-1.15v, and VCCSA at 1.20v-1.25v.


Yeah, already did that with VCC IO and VCCSA. G.Skill Ripjaws V, 3200, 16-16-16-417. Probably worth noting that this memory was working with the other chip (at a 4.7GHz bus). I think I need to do some more tweaking, I'm expecting this chip to do better since it does run at a lower overall voltage (by about .3mv) stable at 4.7Ghz. I can also boot into windows at 1.3 w/ 5GHz, which the other chip could not do.


----------



## OutlawII

Mo2k said:


> No, not yet! Had to install new windows since I changed ssd and now I reset bios!
> 
> I changed VCCSA to 1,3 and VCCIO to 1,25 and vDIMM to 1,42 but workers stopped After 5 Minutes!
> 
> Now I‘m testing the stable cpu oc with XMP profile for RAM and hope its stable!
> 
> Is it possible that I got the worst B-Die Chips Samsung ever made? 😁
> 
> But if its not stable now I at least know it seems to be the CPU! Maybe I‘ll change LLC from Turbo to Extreme since vDroop of 0,5V is a bit too much!
> 
> If nothing helps, I‘m going to flash to F6 again!
> 
> I‘ll let you know what worked
> 
> Regards!



Just be careful your not trying to do to many things at once. In other words let your memory run at stock speeds (without xmp) try your cpu settings see if its stable. Then go from there


----------



## wsnnwa

Falkentyne said:


> That's bizarre. Prime not erroring out at all but WHEA L1 errors. What PSU are you using if it was DOA? A backup one? Or you got a replacement?
> I saw some posts awhile back about WHEA occuring at idle and it was always a bad CPU (besides the haswell microcode bug).


I only used my backup PSU temporarily. Ran the 24 hour pump test with it, this was just a connection directly to the pump with a PSU jumper. 

The SeaSonic Prime 1000T (SSR-1000TR) ended up being DOA from Newegg, I got a refund and bought the same model from Amazon to cut turnaround time.

I went and got my 9900k exchanged and this new one is displaying one WHEA (CPU Cache L2 Error) a few minutes after boot. No more WHEA's reported at idle or during Prime95 (no AVX).


----------



## OutlawII

wsnnwa said:


> I only used my backup PSU temporarily. Ran the 24 hour pump test with it, this was just a connection directly to the pump with a PSU jumper.
> 
> The SeaSonic Prime 1000T (SSR-1000TR) ended up being DOA from Newegg, I got a refund and bought the same model from Amazon to cut turnaround time.
> 
> I went and got my 9900k exchanged and this new one is displaying one WHEA (CPU Cache L2 Error) a few minutes after boot. No more WHEA's reported at idle or during Prime95 (no AVX).



Screen of the WHEA error


----------



## wsnnwa

OutlawII said:


> Screen of the WHEA error


Attached a screenshot from my most recent boot, without fail it appears once per boot. 
Left my PC running at idle for a few hours and ran Prime95 (no AVX) for about 4 hours and no additional WHEA errors appeared.


----------



## OutlawII

Do you have all the latest drivers for all your hardware? That is what it seems like to me, also what bios are you on? Maybe try a different bios. Windows up to date?


----------



## Falkentyne

wsnnwa said:


> Attached a screenshot from my most recent boot, without fail it appears once per boot.
> Left my PC running at idle for a few hours and ran Prime95 (no AVX) for about 4 hours and no additional WHEA errors appeared.


What's your idle voltage?
Are you using adaptive or manual? Are c-states enabled or disabled? (is CPU downclocking and undervolting at idle?)


----------



## Mo2k

OutlawII said:


> Mo2k said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, not yet! Had to install new windows since I changed ssd and now I reset bios!
> 
> I changed VCCSA to 1,3 and VCCIO to 1,25 and vDIMM to 1,42 but workers stopped After 5 Minutes!
> 
> Now I‘m testing the stable cpu oc with XMP profile for RAM and hope its stable!
> 
> Is it possible that I got the worst B-Die Chips Samsung ever made? 😁
> 
> But if its not stable now I at least know it seems to be the CPU! Maybe I‘ll change LLC from Turbo to Extreme since vDroop of 0,5V is a bit too much!
> 
> If nothing helps, I‘m going to flash to F6 again!
> 
> I‘ll let you know what worked/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Regards!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just be careful your not trying to do to many things at once. In other words let your memory run at stock speeds (without xmp) try your cpu settings see if its stable. Then go from there
Click to expand...


No, of course! Just step by step! Since now its stable with 1,340vCore and LLC Turbo, XMP on! 

If it stays stable, I‘ll try ram oc again! 🙂


----------



## Falkentyne

Mo2k said:


> No, of course! Just step by step! Since now its stable with 1,340vCore and LLC Turbo, XMP on!
> 
> If it stays stable, I‘ll try ram oc again! 🙂


Ok, I've had enough.
Anyone care to tell me what this "🙂" stuff is?


----------



## Padinn

If I wanted to run the 9900k at full stock and just XMP profile at 3200, what would I do?


----------



## wsnnwa

Falkentyne said:


> What's your idle voltage?
> Are you using adaptive or manual? Are c-states enabled or disabled? (is CPU downclocking and undervolting at idle?)


This occurs with the defaults (Whatever Gigabyte sets without any profiles), so C-states enabled. 

It also occurs with my adaptive OC profile which idles at .600v and C-states enabled, this is the profile I used for testing Prime95 (AVX Off) without any additional WHEA. 

I plan on making a manual profile soon so will keep everyone updated with the results on that, first I'm going go through and do a clean windows install along with all the drivers. 

The main WHEA issue at idle I was having has been resolved by getting a new 9900k. In case you want to see how bad it was I attached a HWInfo64 log which shows all the WHEA errors from an overnight run on the old 9900k.

Thank you for the help!


----------



## wsnnwa

OutlawII said:


> Do you have all the latest drivers for all your hardware? That is what it seems like to me, also what bios are you on? Maybe try a different bios. Windows up to date?


My BIOS is on F7b and I also see this issue on F6 so I don't think it's BIOS related issue. 
I am going to do a clean Windows re-install so if its a driver issue this will catch it. Thank you for the help!


----------



## Falkentyne

wsnnwa said:


> This occurs with the defaults (Whatever Gigabyte sets without any profiles), so C-states enabled.
> 
> It also occurs with my adaptive OC profile which idles at .600v and C-states enabled, this is the profile I used for testing Prime95 (AVX Off) without any additional WHEA.
> 
> I plan on making a manual profile soon so will keep everyone updated with the results on that, first I'm going go through and do a clean windows install along with all the drivers.
> 
> The main WHEA issue at idle I was having has been resolved by getting a new 9900k. In case you want to see how bad it was I attached a HWInfo64 log which shows all the WHEA errors from an overnight run on the old 9900k.
> 
> Thank you for the help!


I do have excel but I have no idea how to read that log. I just see the "1" and "1" all the way down the chart on the right. But it doesn't increase.


----------



## wsnnwa

Falkentyne said:


> I do have excel but I have no idea how to read that log. I just see the "1" and "1" all the way down the chart on the right. But it doesn't increase.


My apologies, I attached 12_16_2018 which is the new 9900k, you can see that it was only 1 WHEA error which is the CPU Cache L2 Error I am trying to fix now.

I attached the correct one from 12_15_2018 with the old 9900k. You'll see that bad boy go up to ~5000 errors, this was with Prime95 running.


----------



## Falkentyne

wsnnwa said:


> My apologies, I attached 12_16_2018 which is the new 9900k, you can see that it was only 1 WHEA error which is the CPU Cache L2 Error I am trying to fix now.
> 
> I attached the correct one from 12_15_2018 with the old 9900k. You'll see that bad boy go up to ~5000 errors, this was with Prime95 running.


Ok that's more like it


----------



## davidm71

Anyone experience audio random cut outs or stuttering with the ALC1220-VB sound?

Thanks

Edit: The audio cut outs got so bad it eventually crashed Deus Ex game. So I reset the system to defaults to undo my overclock and at bios reboot my Samsung 970 hooked via PCI-E slot just disappeared! WTH!

Had to shut down and power off for system to reset and find it again!

Serious bios bug here Gigabyte!!!


----------



## Padinn

Still testing overclock with me replacement 9900k on f7 bios. Not much luck in stress tests so far, seems like vdroop is higher even with llc turbo. I can get it to boot @ 5ghz, but not stable even with xmp off


----------



## BradleyW

Hey,
I have a few questions about my Z390 Ultra + 9900K.

1) Why does my Vcore sometimes spike to 1.4v on idle. 
2) My AVX is set to Auto. What should it be set to for maximum AVX performance?

I've followed the Z390 OC guide for 5GHz using offset voltage to hit 1.28v under full load. Apart from using an offset voltage, down bin disabled and multi x50, all other settings are on Auto. 

Thank you.

Edit: From reading the net, it would seem that the Vcore is what voltage is actually being used on the CPU and to ignore the VID. Is this correct? Link: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/821473-vcore-and-vid/


----------



## Padinn

BradleyW said:


> Hey,
> I have a few questions about my Z390 Ultra + 9900K.
> 
> 1) Why does my Vcore sometimes spike to 1.4v on idle.
> 2) My AVX is set to Auto. What should it be set to for maximum AVX performance?
> 
> I've followed the Z390 OC guide for 5GHz using offset voltage to hit 1.28v under full load. Apart from using an offset voltage, down bin disabled and multi x50, all other settings are on Auto.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Edit: From reading the net, it would seem that the Vcore is what voltage is actually being used on the CPU and to ignore the VID. Is this correct? Link: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/821473-vcore-and-vid/


That's right, vid is what CPU is requesting but manual overrides it. Check vcore and vrout


----------



## BradleyW

Padinn said:


> That's right, vid is what CPU is requesting but manual overrides it. Check vcore and vrout


Thank you.


----------



## BradleyW

Strange issue. For days my PC will be fine. All of a sudden it'll crash on idle and I must revert to stock Bios values to stop the crashing on idle. I can then enter my 5GHz OC and the PC will be fine again for a while.

I've tried upping the vcore and updating the Bios. Under load it'll pass prime avx and games all day at 1.25v. Any idea? 

X50 ratio.
X47 uncore.
Vcore offset - 0.100
LLC Auto
Down bin disabled. 
Ram 3700mhz
Dram 1.35v

F6 bios. See sig for specs. 

Thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Strange issue. For days my PC will be fine. All of a sudden it'll crash on idle and I must revert to stock Bios values to stop the crashing on idle. I can then enter my 5GHz OC and the PC will be fine again for a while.
> 
> I've tried upping the vcore and updating the Bios. Under load it'll pass prime avx and games all day at 1.25v. Any idea?
> 
> X50 ratio.
> X47 uncore.
> Vcore offset - 0.100
> LLC Auto
> Down bin disabled.
> Ram 3700mhz
> Dram 1.35v
> 
> F6 bios. See sig for specs.
> 
> Thank you.


-.100 vcore offset is your problem.
This offset applies at both load and idle. It's even worse since you have loadline calibration set to auto since then you have full stock vdroop (which is basically the same as standard and normal. auto would only do something besides standard if it's linked to a multicore enhancement preset (which is supposed to toggle a bunch of options to enabled or certain values).

If your CPU drops to 800 mhz and you have a -100mv offset, if your cpu's default VID was 0.650v at 800 mhz, that would make the voltage 0.650v - 0.1 = 0.550v at idle. That's easily enough to crash a system a vcore that low. Even if it is not, other low VID, possibly linked to other steps like 1200 mhz or 1400 mhz, would is a much larger speed than 800 mhz, but the VID might not have increased enough to offset that 100mv drop.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Strange issue. For days my PC will be fine. All of a sudden it'll crash on idle and I must revert to stock Bios values to stop the crashing on idle. I can then enter my 5GHz OC and the PC will be fine again for a while.
> 
> I've tried upping the vcore and updating the Bios. Under load it'll pass prime avx and games all day at 1.25v. Any idea?
> 
> X50 ratio.
> X47 uncore.
> Vcore offset - 0.100
> LLC Auto
> Down bin disabled.
> Ram 3700mhz
> Dram 1.35v
> 
> F6 bios. See sig for specs.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> -.100 vcore offset is your problem.
> This offset applies at both load and idle. It's even worse since you have loadline calibration set to auto since then you have full stock vdroop (which is basically the same as standard and normal. auto would only do something besides standard if it's linked to a multicore enhancement preset (which is supposed to toggle a bunch of options to enabled or certain values).
> 
> If your CPU drops to 800 mhz and you have a -100mv offset, if your cpu's default VID was 0.650v at 800 mhz, that would make the voltage 0.650v - 0.1 = 0.550v at idle. That's easily enough to crash a system a vcore that low. Even if it is not, other low VID, possibly linked to other steps like 1200 mhz or 1400 mhz, would is a much larger speed than 800 mhz, but the VID might not have increased enough to offset that 100mv drop.
Click to expand...

Sounds right. I'm so jelly of these 5ghz overclocks 🙂


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> -.100 vcore offset is your problem.
> This offset applies at both load and idle. It's even worse since you have loadline calibration set to auto since then you have full stock vdroop (which is basically the same as standard and normal. auto would only do something besides standard if it's linked to a multicore enhancement preset (which is supposed to toggle a bunch of options to enabled or certain values).
> 
> If your CPU drops to 800 mhz and you have a -100mv offset, if your cpu's default VID was 0.650v at 800 mhz, that would make the voltage 0.650v - 0.1 = 0.550v at idle. That's easily enough to crash a system a vcore that low. Even if it is not, other low VID, possibly linked to other steps like 1200 mhz or 1400 mhz, would is a much larger speed than 800 mhz, but the VID might not have increased enough to offset that 100mv drop.


Yeah you might be right. I am struggling though. If I use a high LLC, I need to reduce the offset in order to achieve the desired load voltage. However, this reduces the idle voltage to a very low point, causing instability as you mentioned.

If I use a low LLC to reduce the load voltage, and increase the offset to increase the idle voltage, the load is too high! Ideally I want .7v idle and 1.24v load. I just can't seem to achieve a higher idle vcore and a lower load vcore without one or the other being too high or too low.


----------



## jlp0209

BradleyW said:


> Strange issue. For days my PC will be fine. All of a sudden it'll crash on idle and I must revert to stock Bios values to stop the crashing on idle. I can then enter my 5GHz OC and the PC will be fine again for a while.
> 
> I've tried upping the vcore and updating the Bios. Under load it'll pass prime avx and games all day at 1.25v. Any idea?
> 
> X50 ratio.
> X47 uncore.
> Vcore offset - 0.100
> LLC Auto
> Down bin disabled.
> Ram 3700mhz
> Dram 1.35v
> 
> F6 bios. See sig for specs.
> 
> Thank you.


Agree with Falkentyne, that -.100 offset is behind your crashing at idle. Same thing happened to me when I first got the board and was tinkering with LLC. You should try F7 bios. Adaptive voltage has been much easier to work with in my case compared to F6. Not sure if it is because of the bios or because I've learned to better fine tune the settings, but give it a try. 

*Edit- you said you've updated the bios but also stated you're on F6. Not sure if that means you get the same issue with F7, but if you haven't updated try updating to F7. 

I'm using:
X50 ratio
X47 uncore
Vcore offset +.115
LLC medium
AC/DC LLC both set to 1
RAM at XMP Profile 1 (3000 mhz)
Multicore enhancement (or whatever GB calls it, I forgot at moment) left at Auto
AVX offset 0
SVID disabled

This gives me a Vcore of 1.296 average for both Vcore sensors in HWinfo (both avx and non-avx stress tests). Under max load Prime95 small fft avx the VRVOUT reading average is 1.22 or similar. Non-avx prime goes up to 1.25 average. So still some vdroop with avx load but I'm fine with it. Passes all tests without Prime errors or WHEA errors. I don't get overshoot beyond what I stated above. LLC set to Turbo is way off. Have not tried High because wanted to make sure my voltage at idle stays high enough and not use a negative offset if I can avoid it.


----------



## anthony81212

Sorry for asking a naïve question, but could someone please tell me the benefit of using adaptive voltage vs. a set voltage?

For example, my 5 GHz OC is stable at 1.300 V (LLC High), and the temps are ok under normal use. Only under p95 AVX does it go up to >90 degC.
I notice that idle temps are the same when I am using stock config (idle ~VID) or using a fixed Vcore of 1.300 V.

What would adaptive voltage bring me in terms of benefits in my case?

Is it bad if my Vcore is *always* at 1.300 V even when idle? In other words: is it better for the CPU longevity if the Vcore drops to ~0.7 V when the CPU is idling, or does it not matter?


----------



## Anzial

anthony81212 said:


> Is it bad if my Vcore is *always* at 1.300 V even when idle? In other words: is it better for the CPU longevity if the Vcore drops to ~0.7 V when the CPU is idling, or does it not matter?


No one cancelled electromigration. I think yeah, it's better to have lower voltage at idle.


----------



## mdk4711

jlp0209 said:


> I'm using:
> X50 ratio
> X47 uncore
> *Vcore offset +.115*
> LLC medium
> *AC/DC LLC both set to 1*
> RAM at XMP Profile 1 (3000 mhz)
> Multicore enhancement (or whatever GB calls it, I forgot at moment) left at Auto
> AVX offset 0
> SVID disabled



Hi - thank you for the infos.


Quick questions:
- Where do you set the Vcore offset in the BIOS?


_- _EDIT Scratch this one, earlier in this topic somebody mentioned having exactly this problem with F6: _Did you experience any freeze when changing the AC/DC LLC values to 1 (right in BIOS)?
_

Besh wishes,


Marius


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Yeah you might be right. I am struggling though. If I use a high LLC, I need to reduce the offset in order to achieve the desired load voltage. However, this reduces the idle voltage to a very low point, causing instability as you mentioned.
> 
> If I use a low LLC to reduce the load voltage, and increase the offset to increase the idle voltage, the load is too high! Ideally I want .7v idle and 1.24v load. I just can't seem to achieve a higher idle vcore and a lower load vcore without one or the other being too high or too low.


You can solve this problem by changing the IA AC loadline value rather than the offset. The IA AC loadline setting is linked to the default starting VID and VID is used for vcore when using adaptive voltage. (IA DC loadline is just a power measurement value that makes the VID drop at load to match the vcore dropping (based on loadline calibration being at "Auto" or "Normal", but doesn't actually influence the cpu vcore at all directly!)

Default IA AC loadline value is 160 or 1.6 mOhms. This raises the "starting" VID in some way based on 1.60 mOhms but in a way I don't exactly know. Might be 160mv at full idle.

Changing this value to 1 is 0.01 mOhms. This will keep the VID at the original preprogrammed defaults for that (cache multiplier speed). VID seems to be linked to cache speed rather than core speed (for some reason).
So try lowering the IA AC loadline value instead of changing the offset.

Maybe try a value of 80 or 40. 0 is auto (160 for 8 core cpu's and 210 for 4/6 cores).

DO NOT EVER, EVER, EVER GO ANYWHERE NEAR THE UPPER ACTUAL RANGES FOR THIS SETTING. EVEN MAKING A TYPO LIKE ENTERING 800 INSTEAD OF 80 COULD DESTROY THE CPU FROM EXTREME OVERVOLTAGE BOOST AND EVEN HIGHER VALUES COULD DESTROY THE BOARD.


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Sorry for asking a naïve question, but could someone please tell me the benefit of using adaptive voltage vs. a set voltage?
> 
> For example, my 5 GHz OC is stable at 1.300 V (LLC High), and the temps are ok under normal use. Only under p95 AVX does it go up to >90 degC.
> I notice that idle temps are the same when I am using stock config (idle ~VID) or using a fixed Vcore of 1.300 V.
> 
> What would adaptive voltage bring me in terms of benefits in my case?
> 
> Is it bad if my Vcore is *always* at 1.300 V even when idle? In other words: is it better for the CPU longevity if the Vcore drops to ~0.7 V when the CPU is idling, or does it not matter?


Lower voltage is always better.
No its not bad to idle at 1.3v (try to stay below 1.35v) but yes, longevity will always be hurt by higher voltage than lower, but this seems to be measured in decades at 1.20v and many years at 1.25v. No one has any scientific sheet on this but some thread had extrapolated degradation tests:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html

Yes, the only purpose for adaptive voltage is to downvolt at idle.
Yes it's good for the CPU.

The drawback of adaptive voltage is it requires c-states enabled (afaik) for downvolting to work (i could be wrong;it may be possible to downvolt with cstates disabled if you use Speed Shift instead; try Throttlestop 8.70 to manually control speedshift and downclocking and the green "SST" ratio for downclocking strength with 0=no downclocking), and having the CPU downclock causes a latency penalty which may affect benchmark scores. 

It's also very annoying when you are overclocking past the CPU default turbo multiplier ratio to get correct load voltage for stability. That's because the CPU VID is directly linked to the CPU *CACHE SPEED*, not the cpu core speed, so if you limited your cpu ring speed to x43, at a core speed of x50, your VID would be extremely low, even with default IA AC loadline (1.60 mOhms), compared to a x47 ratio, which means you would have to either increase DVID/offset to compensate or raise the IA AC loadline above the default value of 160. Might even need a value of 250 with a very low ring ratio. And I get afraid of touching IA AC loadline when using adaptive voltage, because while 250 won't cause any damage, if you accidentally entered 2500 with an extra zero and tried to boot..your CPU is going byebye. (25 ohms at 100 amps of load is 2500mv just fyi...).


----------



## jlp0209

mdk4711 said:


> Hi - thank you for the infos.
> 
> 
> Quick questions:
> - Where do you set the Vcore offset in the BIOS?
> - Did you experience any freeze when changing the AC/DC LLC values to 1 (right in BIOS)?
> 
> 
> Besh wishes,
> 
> 
> Marius


You go to "CPU Core Voltage Control" under the MIT main tab. Change CPU Vcore to normal and then you'll see Dynamic DVID become enabled / adjustable. That's the setting to adjust the offset. 

When I first got the board I did experience freezing when changing AC/DC LLC but only after I booted into Windows or ran stress tests using manual voltage. I did not freeze while I was in the bios. This setting is relevant when using adaptive voltage.


----------



## Padinn

I'm gonna to try some more adaptive voltage tweaking tonight or this weekend. I'm more skilled that that then using manuals, which seem to cause me problems.

Yea, I know.


----------



## mdk4711

jlp0209 said:


> You go to "CPU Core Voltage Control" under the MIT main tab. Change CPU Vcore to normal and then you'll see Dynamic DVID become enabled / adjustable. That's the setting to adjust the offset.
> 
> When I first got the board I did experience freezing when changing AC/DC LLC but only after I booted into Windows or ran stress tests using manual voltage. I did not freeze while I was in the bios. This setting is relevant when using adaptive voltage.


Thank you very much.

It worked! Yet I did not yet get a stable result with using "Dynamic DVID".

Setting "IA AC Loadline" and "IA DC Loadline" worked now when directly entering 1, which was suggested a few pages before.


Current setup:
- i9-9900k
- AORUS ULTRA
- 32 GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 CL16 (16-18-18-38)
- Bios Version F6
- Corsair H150 AIO
- Corsair HX750i


Current BIOS settings:


Spoiler



M.I.T.:
-> Advanced Frequency Settings
--> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
--> CPU Clock Ratio: 50
--> Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.): Profile 1
--> Advanced CPU Core Settings
---> AVX Offset: 0
---> TjMAX Temperature: 100°C
---> Uncore Ratio: 47
---> Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
---> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E): Disabled
---> C3 State Support: Disabled
---> C6/C7 Statue Support: Disabled
---> C8 State Support: Disabled
---> C10 State Support: Disabled
---> Ring to Core offset (Down Bin): Disabled
---> CPU EIST Function: Disabled
---> Race To Halt (RTH): Disabled
---> Energy Efficient Turbo: Disabled
-> Advanced Voltage Settings
--> Advacned Power Settings
---> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
--> CPU Core Voltage Control
---> CPU Vcore: 1.300V
--> Internal VR Control
---> IA AC Loadline: 1 (Just user key 1, otherwise BIOS will crash)
---> IA DC Loadline: 1 (Just user key 1, otherwise BIOS will crash)

Chipset: 
-> VT-d: Disabled
-> Internal Graphics: Disabled



Going down with the CPU Vcore below 1.3V leads to instabilities.

Results with Prime95 see attachment - so far stable.


What I mind right now is the 80+C° core temps and the *always *1.320V Core Voltage.

Question is for me - Does the CPU mind?


Best wishes,

Marius


----------



## Falkentyne

mdk4711 said:


> Thank you very much.
> 
> It worked! Yet I did not yet get a stable result with using "Dynamic DVID".
> 
> Setting "IA AC Loadline" and "IA DC Loadline" worked now when directly entering 1, which was suggested a few pages before.
> 
> 
> 
> Current setup:
> - i9-9900k
> - AORUS ULTRA
> - 32 GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 CL16 (16-18-18-38)
> - Bios Version F6
> - Corsair H150 AIO
> - Corsair HX750i
> 
> 
> 
> Current BIOS settings:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> M.I.T.:
> -> Advanced Frequency Settings
> --> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
> --> CPU Clock Ratio: 50
> --> Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.): Profile 1
> --> Advanced CPU Core Settings
> ---> AVX Offset: 0
> ---> TjMAX Temperature: 100°C
> ---> Uncore Ratio: 47
> ---> Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
> ---> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E): Disabled
> ---> C3 State Support: Disabled
> ---> C6/C7 Statue Support: Disabled
> ---> C8 State Support: Disabled
> ---> C10 State Support: Disabled
> ---> Ring to Core offset (Down Bin): Disabled
> ---> CPU EIST Function: Disabled
> ---> Race To Halt (RTH): Disabled
> ---> Energy Efficient Turbo: Disabled
> -> Advanced Voltage Settings
> --> Advacned Power Settings
> ---> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> --> CPU Core Voltage Control
> ---> CPU Vcore: 1.300V
> --> Internal VR Control
> ---> IA AC Loadline: 1 (Just user key 1, otherwise BIOS will crash)
> ---> IA DC Loadline: 1 (Just user key 1, otherwise BIOS will crash)
> 
> Chipset:
> -> VT-d: Disabled
> -> Internal Graphics: Disabled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Going down with the CPU Vcore below 1.3V leads to instabilities.
> 
> 
> Results with Prime95 see attachment - so far stable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I mind right now is the 80+C° core temps and the *always *1.320V Core Voltage.
> 
> 
> I wonder if changing "Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology: Disabled" to Enabled would help out here.
> 
> 
> Did anybody by any chance try these things out?
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> 
> Marius


Don't bother enabling speed shift in the bios. You have very little control over how it works anyway (requires latest build of windows and I don't even think it has anything except stupid presets).
Instead download Throttlestop 8.70 and enable speedshift there. Not only can you set an exact amount and level to downclock or not downclock, you can even set the minimum and maximum multiplier range to be used with speedshift in the TS Speedshift (TPL) window area. Just enable it, click enable when TS starts, then the SST will turn green. Then you can take full control and all values from 0 to 255 are available.

0=no downclocking.
80=downclocking when needed at idle.
128=balanced profile.
255=maximum power savings (heavy downclocking).

give it a try.
(you can still set multipliers manually in the FIVR throttlestop window, but the max multiplier will now be limited by the max speedshift multiplier--this can actually be useful if you had a SST range from 8 to 50 and you accidentally tried to overclock to a x51 multiplier with throttlestop FIVR window).


----------



## Padinn

Realized I never asked, but I'm noticing something strange with my load temperatures. Temperature seems to be 80c even after decreasing voltage - my new CPU at 1.22v is just as hot as old one at 1.275. For kyronaut, what should its consistency be? Never used before and it seems pretty stick, I would say similar in consistency to toothpaste. I put it in hot water which made it a little easier to apply. Does this sound right for this paste?

I'm using an h150i pro with pump and fan set to max.


----------



## mdk4711

Falkentyne said:


> Don't bother enabling speed shift in the bios. You have very little control over how it works anyway (requires latest build of windows and I don't even think it has anything except stupid presets).
> Instead download Throttlestop 8.70 and enable speedshift there. Not only can you set an exact amount and level to downclock or not downclock, you can even set the minimum and maximum multiplier range to be used with speedshift in the TS Speedshift (TPL) window area. Just enable it, click enable when TS starts, then the SST will turn green. Then you can take full control and all values from 0 to 255 are available.
> 
> 0=no downclocking.
> 80=downclocking when needed at idle.
> 128=balanced profile.
> 255=maximum power savings (heavy downclocking).
> 
> give it a try.
> (you can still set multipliers manually in the FIVR throttlestop window, but the max multiplier will now be limited by the max speedshift multiplier--this can actually be useful if you had a SST range from 8 to 50 and you accidentally tried to overclock to a x51 multiplier with throttlestop FIVR window).


Thank you very much Falkentyne! It worked like magic.
CPU is beautifully throttling to 800 Mhz.

Set Throttlestop to autostart with Windows.

I actually tested out SpeedShift from the BIOS inbetween you answering and me editing... and it did not work.

Best wishes,

Marius


----------



## Nizzen

No one is running 4000mhz + memory on this board?


----------



## mdk4711

mdk4711 said:


> Current setup:
> - i9-9900k
> - AORUS ULTRA
> - 32 GB G.Skill RipJaws V DDR4-3200 CL16 (16-18-18-38)
> - Bios Version F6
> - Corsair H150 AIO
> - Corsair HX750i
> 
> 
> Current BIOS settings:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> M.I.T.:
> -> Advanced Frequency Settings
> --> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
> --> CPU Clock Ratio: 50
> --> Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.): Profile 1
> --> Advanced CPU Core Settings
> ---> AVX Offset: 0
> ---> TjMAX Temperature: 100°C
> ---> Uncore Ratio: 47
> ---> Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
> ---> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E): Disabled
> ---> C3 State Support: Disabled
> ---> C6/C7 Statue Support: Disabled
> ---> C8 State Support: Disabled
> ---> C10 State Support: Disabled
> ---> Ring to Core offset (Down Bin): Disabled
> ---> CPU EIST Function: Disabled
> ---> Race To Halt (RTH): Disabled
> ---> Energy Efficient Turbo: Disabled
> -> Advanced Voltage Settings
> --> Advacned Power Settings
> ---> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> --> CPU Core Voltage Control
> ---> CPU Vcore: 1.300V
> --> Internal VR Control
> ---> IA AC Loadline: 1 (Just use key 1, otherwise BIOS will crash)
> ---> IA DC Loadline: 1 (Just use key 1, otherwise BIOS will crash)
> 
> Chipset:
> -> VT-d: Disabled
> -> Internal Graphics: Disabled


Sadly after testing more thouroughly this setup always let to BSODS.

Temperatures of Cores raising to around 80-90C°.

Raising the VCore Voltage from 1.3V to 1.305V to 1.310V only lead to earlier BSODS.

No more ideas for today, will test further.


Best wishes,

Marius


----------



## BradleyW

jlp0209 said:


> Agree with Falkentyne, that -.100 offset is behind your crashing at idle. Same thing happened to me when I first got the board and was tinkering with LLC. You should try F7 bios. Adaptive voltage has been much easier to work with in my case compared to F6. Not sure if it is because of the bios or because I've learned to better fine tune the settings, but give it a try.
> 
> *Edit- you said you've updated the bios but also stated you're on F6. Not sure if that means you get the same issue with F7, but if you haven't updated try updating to F7.
> 
> I'm using:
> X50 ratio
> X47 uncore
> Vcore offset +.115
> LLC medium
> AC/DC LLC both set to 1
> RAM at XMP Profile 1 (3000 mhz)
> Multicore enhancement (or whatever GB calls it, I forgot at moment) left at Auto
> AVX offset 0
> SVID disabled
> 
> This gives me a Vcore of 1.296 average for both Vcore sensors in HWinfo (both avx and non-avx stress tests). Under max load Prime95 small fft avx the VRVOUT reading average is 1.22 or similar. Non-avx prime goes up to 1.25 average. So still some vdroop with avx load but I'm fine with it. Passes all tests without Prime errors or WHEA errors. I don't get overshoot beyond what I stated above. LLC set to Turbo is way off. Have not tried High because wanted to make sure my voltage at idle stays high enough and not use a negative offset if I can avoid it.


Unfortunately your settings won't help me in my case because if I use +.115 it'll send my Vcore to 1.4v+.
I have updated to the F6 BIOS. This is the latest BIOS for my board:
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-ULTRA-rev-10#support-dl-bios 



Falkentyne said:


> You can solve this problem by changing the IA AC loadline value rather than the offset. The IA AC loadline setting is linked to the default starting VID and VID is used for vcore when using adaptive voltage. (IA DC loadline is just a power measurement value that makes the VID drop at load to match the vcore dropping (based on loadline calibration being at "Auto" or "Normal", but doesn't actually influence the cpu vcore at all directly!)
> 
> Default IA AC loadline value is 160 or 1.6 mOhms. This raises the "starting" VID in some way based on 1.60 mOhms but in a way I don't exactly know. Might be 160mv at full idle.
> 
> Changing this value to 1 is 0.01 mOhms. This will keep the VID at the original preprogrammed defaults for that (cache multiplier speed). VID seems to be linked to cache speed rather than core speed (for some reason).
> So try lowering the IA AC loadline value instead of changing the offset.
> 
> Maybe try a value of 80 or 40. 0 is auto (160 for 8 core cpu's and 210 for 4/6 cores).
> 
> DO NOT EVER, EVER, EVER GO ANYWHERE NEAR THE UPPER ACTUAL RANGES FOR THIS SETTING. EVEN MAKING A TYPO LIKE ENTERING 800 INSTEAD OF 80 COULD DESTROY THE CPU FROM EXTREME OVERVOLTAGE BOOST AND EVEN HIGHER VALUES COULD DESTROY THE BOARD.


Sorry if I'm wrong but do I use this instead of using an offset voltage?
Thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Unfortunately your settings won't help me in my case because if I use +.115 it'll send my Vcore to 1.4v+.
> I have updated to the F6 BIOS. This is the latest BIOS for my board:
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-ULTRA-rev-10#support-dl-bios
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if I'm wrong but do I use this instead of using an offset voltage?
> Thank you.


Yes. Exactly. This only applies to Adaptive voltage ("normal" voltage). I don't know the difference between Auto and Normal, however.

You remove the offset voltage then you reduce the IA AC loadline by a small amount, until the VID (and vcore) drop down to the point you want.
The default value for IA AC loadline is 160. DC loadline does not need to be changed as changing DC loadline only affects the VID but not the core (Its some sort of power measurement thing).

Changing AC loadline affects BOTH the vcore and the VID.
AC loadline can go as low as 1 and as high as 210 safely. (please don't go higher than 210). The higher the AC loadline, the more the VID (and vcore) will rise.
So go as low as you can until you find yourself not stable, then raise it slightly. Maybe start with a value of 80.

(on Asus boards, which use the raw "mOhm" value rather than a divider, this would be a value of 0.01 to 2.1, thus a value of "8" would be used on those boards for our test attempt).


----------



## Padinn

SO I'm going back to the drawing board and starting with finding the lowest possible all core 4.7ghz stable setting (with 43 uncore). Right now I am testing a manual settting of 1.2v (down from 1.22v) yesterday. I also turned off MCE and manually enabled turbo and set each individual core to the 9900k default settings. I am running the custom x264 blend test from here:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1621347-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-statistics.html

My temperatures seem improved now (70-76c on package, down from 79-82c at 1.22v). This is confirmed by a CPU power package drop of around 10w (from 160w to ~150w). I left turbo LLC enabled, I show a VROut reading of 1.158v and a Vcore of 1.188-1.99 (almost perfect 1.2v). 

I think the Aorous Master uses pretty aggressive settings if the MCE is enable. I am now basically tweaking everything. I made the mistake of loading optimized defaults at one point and I think that kind of threw everything off , though I have cleared CMOS multiple times and that should fix it.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> SO I'm going back to the drawing board and starting with finding the lowest possible all core 4.7ghz stable setting (with 43 uncore). Right now I am testing a manual settting of 1.2v (down from 1.22v) yesterday. I also turned off MCE and manually enabled turbo and set each individual core to the 9900k default settings. I am running the custom x264 blend test from here:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1621347-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-statistics.html
> 
> My temperatures seem improved now (70-76c on package, down from 79-82c at 1.22v). This is confirmed by a CPU power package drop of around 10w (from 160w to ~150w). I left turbo LLC enabled, I show a VROut reading of 1.158v and a Vcore of 1.188-1.99 (almost perfect 1.2v).
> 
> I think the Aorous Master uses pretty aggressive settings if the MCE is enable. I am now basically tweaking everything. I made the mistake of loading optimized defaults at one point and I think that kind of threw everything off , though I have cleared CMOS multiple times and that should fix it.


That's the proper way to do it.
Just make sure you set all the intel turbo boost ratios to 0 (Auto) so then it will respect the CPU multiplier and not try to override it with a turbo boost setting (however a X36 multiplier reverts to 4700 mhz while x37 is 3700 mhz).

Then once you find what's stable for x47, go for x48 and test and raise vcore slowly until you are finally stable. Then go for x49 etc.
Keep the cache ratio at x43 while you're doing all of this.


----------



## EarlZ

What would be the suggested apps and duration to run for stability testing, I only do gaming on my computer so those AVX workloads are not that important to me. Is there a specific game or benchmark that is very sensitive to overclocking stability that I can use ?


----------



## Markus Hilger

I have a Z390 Aorus Ultra with 9900K and two fans are connected to SYS_FAN5_PUMP and SYS_FAN6_PUMP (with Voltage control, no PWM). I'm have to use these fan headers because my cables are kinda short.
From time to time they just stop spinning for 1-2 minutes.
On other Fan headers like CPU_FAN and SYS_FAN2 (both PWM controlled) I never noticed such a behaviour.

I don't have any fan control software installed. I just use the BIOS SmartFan Control.
I noticed that both fans are missing in HWInfo (RPM measurement) if they are not spinning. Once they start spinning again after 1-2 minutes they show up again.

This issue exists on both BIOS's I've tested: F5 and F6.
Fans are: CoolerMaster MasterFan MF200R RGB
@GBT-MatthewH any Idea? Is this a known issue? Anything I can provide to debug this issue?


----------



## OutlawII

EarlZ said:


> What would be the suggested apps and duration to run for stability testing, I only do gaming on my computer so those AVX workloads are not that important to me. Is there a specific game or benchmark that is very sensitive to overclocking stability that I can use ?


I always used x264 stress test. Worked fine for me


----------



## EarlZ

OutlawII said:


> I always used x264 stress test. Worked fine for me




The same test found on https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1411077-haswell-overclocking-guide-statistics.html ?


----------



## OutlawII

EarlZ said:


> The same test found on https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1411077-haswell-overclocking-guide-statistics.html ?


Yep


----------



## Jidonsu

Nizzen said:


> No one is running 4000mhz + memory on this board?


I believe Edge0fsanity is running 4000mhz right now. I just ordered a 4x8gb set of 4000C17 for my Aorus Master. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.


----------



## Robbært

Markus Hilger said:


> I have a Z390 Aorus Ultra with 9900K and two fans are connected to SYS_FAN5_PUMP and SYS_FAN6_PUMP (with Voltage control, no PWM). I'm have to use these fan headers because my cables are kinda short.
> From time to time they just stop spinning for 1-2 minutes.
> On other Fan headers like CPU_FAN and SYS_FAN2 (both PWM controlled) I never noticed such a behaviour.
> 
> I don't have any fan control software installed. I just use the BIOS SmartFan Control.
> I noticed that both fans are missing in HWInfo (RPM measurement) if they are not spinning. Once they start spinning again after 1-2 minutes they show up again.
> 
> This issue exists on both BIOS's I've tested: F5 and F6.
> Fans are: CoolerMaster MasterFan MF200R RGB
> 
> @GBT-MatthewH any Idea? Is this a known issue? Anything I can provide to debug this issue?


Fan stop fix awail for Master board only here
Since boards use almost same hardware you can try it at own risk and RMA in case.
Normal BIOS not change ITE firmware in any way.



EarlZ said:


> What would be the suggested apps and duration to run for stability testing, I only do gaming on my computer so those AVX workloads are not that important to me. Is there a specific game or benchmark that is very sensitive to overclocking stability that I can use ?


BattleField 5 game


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> Yes. Exactly. This only applies to Adaptive voltage ("normal" voltage). I don't know the difference between Auto and Normal, however.
> 
> You remove the offset voltage then you reduce the IA AC loadline by a small amount, until the VID (and vcore) drop down to the point you want.
> The default value for IA AC loadline is 160. DC loadline does not need to be changed as changing DC loadline only affects the VID but not the core (Its some sort of power measurement thing).
> 
> Changing AC loadline affects BOTH the vcore and the VID.
> AC loadline can go as low as 1 and as high as 210 safely. (please don't go higher than 210). The higher the AC loadline, the more the VID (and vcore) will rise.
> So go as low as you can until you find yourself not stable, then raise it slightly. Maybe start with a value of 80.
> 
> (on Asus boards, which use the raw "mOhm" value rather than a divider, this would be a value of 0.01 to 2.1, thus a value of "8" would be used on those boards for our test attempt).


What Vcore should I expect with a value of 80? Will the Vcore override the VID as normal? Thank you for your detailed information it is highly interesting and I'll be sure to do some tweaking (safely).

For those talking about RAM, my memory is 4000MHz but I run it at 3700MHz. 4000MHz stops the PC from booting to the point where I have to remove the CMOS BAT to reset. I assume I need to use a higher IMC. I have it set to 1.14v currently.


----------



## EarlZ

Robbært said:


> BattleField 5 game


I dont own the game, does it have a canned benchmark that can test the stability ?


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> What Vcore should I expect with a value of 80? Will the Vcore override the VID as normal? Thank you for your detailed information it is highly interesting and I'll be sure to do some tweaking (safely).
> 
> For those talking about RAM, my memory is 4000MHz but I run it at 3700MHz. 4000MHz stops the PC from booting to the point where I have to remove the CMOS BAT to reset. I assume I need to use a higher IMC. I have it set to 1.14v currently.


You have to test these things yourself. No one can tell you what vcore you will have.
VID and vcore are linked to each other with adaptive voltage. You are changing the operating power gain (IA AC) which affects the vcore. You have to run your own tests and see how it affects you with different values. I can't run these tests for you.

You can look at IR 35201 "VR VOUT" to see the accurate vcore voltage in HWinfo for more accuracy.
Default value for IA AC loadline is 160. You can use 1-210 safely. The higher the number the more the VID is boosted and the more voltage. The lower the number the less the VID is boosted from "default" pre-programmed VID.

Also please keep in mind that the default VID is based on the "CPU Cache ratio", not the CPU core ratio. (so as the cache speed increases or decreases the default VID for that speed also changes).
Good luck.


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> You have to test these things yourself. No one can tell you what vcore you will have.
> VID and vcore are linked to each other with adaptive voltage. You are changing the operating power gain (IA AC) which affects the vcore. You have to run your own tests and see how it affects you with different values. I can't run these tests for you.
> 
> You can look at IR 35201 "VR VOUT" to see the accurate vcore voltage in HWinfo for more accuracy.
> Default value for IA AC loadline is 160. You can use 1-210 safely. The higher the number the more the VID is boosted and the more voltage. The lower the number the less the VID is boosted from "default" pre-programmed VID.
> 
> Also please keep in mind that the default VID is based on the "CPU Cache ratio", not the CPU core ratio. (so as the cache speed increases or decreases the default VID for that speed also changes).
> Good luck.


I have AI OC set to 20 which gives me 1.23Vcore. On idle it is .8v and full load it is 1.188v. I will mess around with the LLC to reduce the Vdroop! Looking good so far and very easy way to OC. Thank you. :thumb:


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> I have AI OC set to 20 which gives me 1.23Vcore. On idle it is .8v and full load it is 1.188v. I need to find a way to remove the Vdroop. Upping the regular LLC didn't do anything as far as I can see at this point. I'll continue to test that.


Upping the LLC will reduce the vdroop, but the vcore will then be higher than the VID (logically). You can use LLC Turbo or extreme. Do not use ultra extreme. 0 mOhm loadline does not protect against transient voltage spikes (this is why vdroop is your friend). Remember to use VR VOUT for accurate voltage measurement.


----------



## anthony81212

Falkentyne said:


> ...
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html
> 
> ...
> 
> It's also very annoying when you are overclocking past the CPU default turbo multiplier ratio to get correct load voltage for stability. That's because the CPU VID is directly linked to the CPU *CACHE SPEED*, not the cpu core speed, so if you limited your cpu ring speed to x43, at a core speed of x50, your VID would be extremely low, even with default IA AC loadline (1.60 mOhms), compared to a x47 ratio, which means you would have to either increase DVID/offset to compensate or raise the IA AC loadline above the default value of 160. Might even need a value of 250 with a very low ring ratio. And I get afraid of touching IA AC loadline when using adaptive voltage, because while 250 won't cause any damage, if you accidentally entered 2500 with an extra zero and tried to boot..your CPU is going byebye. (25 ohms at 100 amps of load is 2500mv just fyi...).


Thanks a lot for all of the info, I've RMA'd my board (due to that corrupt main BIOS thing I reported a while back, and Gigabyte support won't just send me a BIOS chip to replace it myself ), so I will try all of those out once I get the board back.

Still am learning lots about OC'ing, and so far have only OC using constant Vcore. Will have to read up on adaptive voltage OC with Gigabyte--is there a complete guide for this somewhere? Reading through the past ~10-20 pages, I could only find snippets of settings that should be changed.

Question regarding VID being based on cache ratio: Let's assume that I have the core multiplier at 50x, will I get a different VID curve (also for the lower frequencies) if I have my uncore at 43x vs. at 47x?

Also I wonder why GB allows such a large number to be input into the IA AC loadline? At the very least they should give a warning when you try to put in a high number? 



Falkentyne said:


> Ok, I've had enough.
> Anyone care to tell me what this "🙂" stuff is?


That is the HTML entity for the emoji "slightly smiling face": http://graphemica.com/🙂


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> Upping the LLC will reduce the vdroop, but the vcore will then be higher than the VID (logically). You can use LLC Turbo or extreme. Do not use ultra extreme. 0 mOhm loadline does not protect against transient voltage spikes (this is why vdroop is your friend). Remember to use VR VOUT for accurate voltage measurement.


I set to IA AC to a value of 10 which gives me a Vcore of 1.22v. Under load it drops to 1.2v (LLC high). However on idle the voltage still fluctuates to around 1.248v now and again. This is the issue I've been having with offset Vcore too.

Edit: Tried a ton of different IA AC and Vcore LLC changes and no matter what, the chip spikes to 1.248v on idle.

My target is 1.2v load, .8v idle. Nothing higher, nothing lower.


----------



## Falkentyne

anthony81212 said:


> Thanks a lot for all of the info, I've RMA'd my board (due to that corrupt main BIOS thing I reported a while back, and Gigabyte support won't just send me a BIOS chip to replace it myself ), so I will try all of those out once I get the board back.
> 
> Still am learning lots about OC'ing, and so far have only OC using constant Vcore. Will have to read up on adaptive voltage OC with Gigabyte--is there a complete guide for this somewhere? Reading through the past ~10-20 pages, I could only find snippets of settings that should be changed.
> 
> Question regarding VID being based on cache ratio: Let's assume that I have the core multiplier at 50x, will I get a different VID curve (also for the lower frequencies) if I have my uncore at 43x vs. at 47x?
> 
> Also I wonder why GB allows such a large number to be input into the IA AC loadline? At the very least they should give a warning when you try to put in a high number?
> 
> 
> 
> That is the HTML entity for the emoji "slightly smiling face": http://graphemica.com/🙂


Hi,
Gigabyte has nothing to do with these ranges. These ranges are set by AMI on instruction from Intel for their voltage regular specifications. Gigabyte limiting ranges would go against Intel and AMI specifications. What they -can- do is hide options from the user, but then you start getting into 'why don't I have access to VR Current Limit, PS Current Threshold 1/2/3, CPU Current Limit (raw value), Imon Slope, Imon Offset, IA AC/IA DC settings, and competitor X/Y/Z does have these options?

It becomes a selling point to have a bios have access to these options.

As far as I know, MSI gives you a UEFI that has all the options available for that chipset.

Also these values are not intended to be changed by normal end users. End users are expected to change vcore and loadline calibration and offsets. The ones who mess with the Internal VR settings are the ones who are supposed to know exactly what they are getting into (meaning: they did their own research so they don't have to ask about it on a forum, etc).


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> I set to IA AC to a value of 10 which gives me a Vcore of 1.22v. Under load it drops to 1.2v (LLC high). However on idle the voltage still fluctuates to around 1.248v now and again. This is the issue I've been having with offset Vcore too.
> 
> Edit: Tried a ton of different IA AC and Vcore LLC changes and no matter what, the chip spikes to 1.248v on idle.
> 
> My target is 1.2v load, .8v idle. Nothing higher, nothing lower.


You can't have your cake and eat it too.
There is ALWAYS going to be vdroop.
You have to deal with that. You can't make the system just give you a certain voltage all the time. Voltage regulators don't work that way.

If you don't want any vdroop, you have to use Ultra Extreme loadline and manual voltages. This is the ONLY way. Want 1.2v? Set bios voltage to 1.2v, manual voltages, c-states and speedshift disabled, set LLC to Ultra Extreme, then you have 1.2v idle 1.2v load (monitored with VR VOUT) and dangerous transient voltage spikes (only found on an oscilloscope). Then if you want to downclock you can use Throttlestop 8.70 and enable Speedshift through there and set the SST value from 0 to 255. But you will be at 1.2v at all times (and dealing with microsecond dangerous transient spikes from Ultra Extreme loadline).

The CPU VID is *designed* to be lower at idle and rise at high currernt because CPU's need higher voltage for stability at load than at idle. (then vdroop functions on the target cpu voltage afterwards). You can see how the VID operates if you set both IA AC loadline to 1 and IA DC loadline to 1 (this removes both VID boosting and VID drooping). But even when you do this, the VID will rise at higher current (but the vcore will drop).

I'm sorry that you can't get what you want. You just have to adapt like the rest of us.
Try Ultra Extreme loadline and see if that gets you closer. And remember what I told you before. Ultra Extreme is dangerous.
If that doesn't work, experiment with IA AC loadline set to 1 and a very small negative DVID. But you are absolutely NOT going to get 1.2v very low load and 1.2v heavy load and 1.2v maximum load.

use VR VOUT to see what the voltage is, not vcore. VR VOUT is accurate. Vcore will always show higher than VR VOUT.


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> You can't have your cake and eat it too.
> There is ALWAYS going to be vdroop.
> You have to deal with that. You can't make the system just give you a certain voltage all the time. Voltage regulators don't work that way.
> 
> If you don't want any vdroop, you have to use Ultra Extreme loadline and manual voltages. This is the ONLY way. Want 1.2v? Set bios voltage to 1.2v, manual voltages, c-states and speedshift disabled, set LLC to Ultra Extreme, then you have 1.2v idle 1.2v load (monitored with VR VOUT) and dangerous transient voltage spikes (only found on an oscilloscope). Then if you want to downclock you can use Throttlestop 8.70 and enable Speedshift through there and set the SST value from 0 to 255. But you will be at 1.2v at all times (and dealing with microsecond dangerous transient spikes from Ultra Extreme loadline).
> 
> The CPU VID is *designed* to be lower at idle and rise at high currernt because CPU's need higher voltage for stability at load than at idle. (then vdroop functions on the target cpu voltage afterwards). You can see how the VID operates if you set both IA AC loadline to 1 and IA DC loadline to 1 (this removes both VID boosting and VID drooping). But even when you do this, the VID will rise at higher current (but the vcore will drop).
> 
> I'm sorry that you can't get what you want. You just have to adapt like the rest of us.
> Try Ultra Extreme loadline and see if that gets you closer. And remember what I told you before. Ultra Extreme is dangerous.
> If that doesn't work, experiment with IA AC loadline set to 1 and a very small negative DVID. But you are absolutely NOT going to get 1.2v very low load and 1.2v heavy load and 1.2v maximum load.
> 
> use VR VOUT to see what the voltage is, not vcore. VR VOUT is accurate. Vcore will always show higher than VR VOUT.


Thank you for the information. The only thing that worries me is that the Vcore will randomly spike to around 1.25v. Dragging my browser across the screen spikes it even higher to around 1.27v. It is the worst behaviour I've ever seen on a board. My Gigabyte X79 didn't do this. At the time of testing, my BIOS reports a VCORE of 1.233v and I achieve that under load.

Edit: I have read VR VOUT. I get different readings. CPU-Z reads 1.3v while dragging my browser around the screen. VR VOUT reports 1.25v. Under load, VR VOUT reports a very modest 1.18v which seems very suspect to me!


----------



## VeritronX

BradleyW said:


> I set to IA AC to a value of 10 which gives me a Vcore of 1.22v. Under load it drops to 1.2v (LLC high). However on idle the voltage still fluctuates to around 1.248v now and again. This is the issue I've been having with offset Vcore too.
> 
> Edit: Tried a ton of different IA AC and Vcore LLC changes and no matter what, the chip spikes to 1.248v on idle.
> 
> My target is 1.2v load, .8v idle. Nothing higher, nothing lower.





BradleyW said:


> Thank you for the information. The only thing that worries me is that the Vcore will randomly spike to around 1.25v. Dragging my browser across the screen spikes it even higher to around 1.27v. It is the worst behaviour I've ever seen on a board. My Gigabyte X79 didn't do this. At the time of testing, my BIOS reports a VCORE of 1.233v and I achieve that under load.
> 
> Edit: I have read VR VOUT. I get different readings. CPU-Z reads 1.3v while dragging my browser around the screen. VR VOUT reports 1.25v. Under load, VR VOUT reports a very modest 1.18v which seems very suspect to me!


This is normal designed behavior, the "idle" spikes are when the cpu suddenly spikes to full speed while doing something in the background, with speedshift it can do that so quickly that monitoring software can miss it, but that is what causes the voltage to spike up like that. Try changing windows' power profile to high performance and you'll see what the voltage normally sits at when at full speed without much load because windows will ask the cpu to stay at it's highest speed when that profile is selected regardless of load.

If the difference in voltage between max speed at low / no load and under load is too big for your liking then that's what the loadline calibration setting is for. I usually do this and target ~10-20mv droop from idle to max load myself.

Also VR VOUT is the accurate reading as has been stated in here many times before. It is the reading given to the voltage controller from the pins on the cpu.


----------



## BradleyW

VeritronX said:


> This is normal designed behavior, the "idle" spikes are when the cpu suddenly spikes to full speed while doing something in the background, with speedshift it can do that so quickly that monitoring software can miss it, but that is what causes the voltage to spike up like that. Try changing windows' power profile to high performance and you'll see what the voltage normally sits at when at full speed without much load because windows will ask the cpu to stay at it's highest speed when that profile is selected regardless of load.
> 
> If the difference in voltage between max speed at low / no load and under load is too big for your liking then that's what the loadline calibration setting is for. I usually do this and target ~10-20mv droop from idle to max load myself.
> 
> Also VR VOUT is the accurate reading as has been stated in here many times before. It is the reading given to the voltage controller from the pins on the cpu.


I understand, however it isn't as easy for me. In order to get the full load voltage down to the required level, my idle voltage also goes down to a point where the system is unstable on idle. 

For instance, offset -.100, LLC High, low load 1.3v, high load 1.28v, idle .67v.
As you can see, the Vdroop has been fixed but the high load is too high.

So then I do the following:
offset -.130, LLC High, low load 1.25v, high load 1.23v, idle .6v.

High load is now fine! However Take note, look at the idle voltage. It has now become .6v. This is too low and results in system crashes.

Do you see my dilemma?


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Thank you for the information. The only thing that worries me is that the Vcore will randomly spike to around 1.25v. Dragging my browser across the screen spikes it even higher to around 1.27v. It is the worst behaviour I've ever seen on a board. My Gigabyte X79 didn't do this. At the time of testing, my BIOS reports a VCORE of 1.233v and I achieve that under load.
> 
> Edit: I have read VR VOUT. I get different readings. CPU-Z reads 1.3v while dragging my browser around the screen. VR VOUT reports 1.25v. Under load, VR VOUT reports a very modest 1.18v which seems very suspect to me!


Please read this.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...load-voltage-main-1-watch-2.html#post27736104

VR VOUT is accurate. Vcore sensors are not. CPU-Z reads the most inaccurate vcore sensor (the SIO sensor, the same one the bios shows). Vcore Sensor #2 shown in HWinfo64 at IT8792E is the MLCC caps sensor; the multimeter read points closely match this one.

I don't think anyone on these forums knows more about Electronics than Elmor (unless an Intel, Renesas or IR employee drops in here).


----------



## BradleyW

Thank you for the links. In addition I am pleased to report that the issue might now be resolved. By setting the IA AC to a value of 1, this allowed me to adjust the Vcore offset via positive numbers as appose from using negative numbers for the offset. This has allowed me to increase the idle voltage. Combined with LLC, the system now runs at 1.26v low load and 1.233v high load whilst keeping .8v idle. I will continue to improve this. Thank you for the help so far and I'll keep you all updated. I am keeping a watchful eye over the VR VOUT results as suggested. :thumb:


----------



## VeritronX

BradleyW said:


> I understand, however it isn't as easy for me. In order to get the full load voltage down to the required level, my idle voltage also goes down to a point where the system is unstable on idle.
> 
> For instance, offset -.100, LLC High, low load 1.3v, high load 1.28v, idle .67v.
> As you can see, the Vdroop has been fixed but the high load is too high.
> 
> So then I do the following:
> offset -.130, LLC High, low load 1.25v, high load 1.23v, idle .6v.
> 
> High load is now fine! However Take note, look at the idle voltage. It has now become .6v. This is too low and results in system crashes.
> 
> Do you see my dilemma?


It might make more sense to run a static voltage in your case, with tighter loadline calibration. If you have all the c-state options enabled it will turn off cores when not in use, and the ~1.2v you're targeting is a perfectly safe voltage to leave it running on all the time anyways.

Alternatively you could change the min cpu speed setting on the windows power plan to 99% which will make it idle at 3.5Ghz or so instead.. but that could still be unstable running that much negative offset. and If you ever go to reinstall windows or something it might be unstable during the install etc.


----------



## porksmuggler




----------



## porksmuggler

RGB Fusion 2.0 Released

https://www.gigabyte.com/MicroSite/512/rgb2.html


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> SO I'm going back to the drawing board and starting with finding the lowest possible all core 4.7ghz stable setting (with 43 uncore). Right now I am testing a manual settting of 1.2v (down from 1.22v) yesterday. I also turned off MCE and manually enabled turbo and set each individual core to the 9900k default settings. I am running the custom x264 blend test from here:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1621347-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-statistics.html
> 
> My temperatures seem improved now (70-76c on package, down from 79-82c at 1.22v). This is confirmed by a CPU power package drop of around 10w (from 160w to ~150w). I left turbo LLC enabled, I show a VROut reading of 1.158v and a Vcore of 1.188-1.99 (almost perfect 1.2v).
> 
> I think the Aorous Master uses pretty aggressive settings if the MCE is enable. I am now basically tweaking everything. I made the mistake of loading optimized defaults at one point and I think that kind of threw everything off , though I have cleared CMOS multiple times and that should fix it.
> 
> 
> 
> That's the proper way to do it.
> Just make sure you set all the intel turbo boost ratios to 0 (Auto) so then it will respect the CPU multiplier and not try to override it with a turbo boost setting (however a X36 multiplier reverts to 4700 mhz while x37 is 3700 mhz).
> 
> Then once you find what's stable for x47, go for x48 and test and raise vcore slowly until you are finally stable. Then go for x49 etc.
> Keep the cache ratio at x43 while you're doing all of this.
Click to expand...

Bumped back to 1.23 due to L0 cache errors. Need to test this setting. I manually set the cores to default boost settings (50,50,49,48,48,47,47,47).


----------



## Padinn

Padinn said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> SO I'm going back to the drawing board and starting with finding the lowest possible all core 4.7ghz stable setting (with 43 uncore). Right now I am testing a manual settting of 1.2v (down from 1.22v) yesterday. I also turned off MCE and manually enabled turbo and set each individual core to the 9900k default settings. I am running the custom x264 blend test from here:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1621347-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-statistics.html
> 
> My temperatures seem improved now (70-76c on package, down from 79-82c at 1.22v). This is confirmed by a CPU power package drop of around 10w (from 160w to ~150w). I left turbo LLC enabled, I show a VROut reading of 1.158v and a Vcore of 1.188-1.99 (almost perfect 1.2v).
> 
> I think the Aorous Master uses pretty aggressive settings if the MCE is enable. I am now basically tweaking everything. I made the mistake of loading optimized defaults at one point and I think that kind of threw everything off , though I have cleared CMOS multiple times and that should fix it.
> 
> 
> 
> That's the proper way to do it.
> Just make sure you set all the intel turbo boost ratios to 0 (Auto) so then it will respect the CPU multiplier and not try to override it with a turbo boost setting (however a X36 multiplier reverts to 4700 mhz while x37 is 3700 mhz).
> 
> Then once you find what's stable for x47, go for x48 and test and raise vcore slowly until you are finally stable. Then go for x49 etc.
> Keep the cache ratio at x43 while you're doing all of this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bumped back to 1.23 due to L0 cache errors. Need to test this setting. I manually set the cores to default boost settings (50,50,49,48,48,47,47,47).
Click to expand...

To add: it was close to stable at 1.2v, did 18 loops of blender without issue, but an L0 error sprung up. Then I got a bsod whea error. This new chip spots out tons of whea errors - which seem to be memory related. even at low memory speeds (I'm rated for 3200) Never had issues with the memory before.


----------



## davidm71

*Hits almost 1.4v Stress testing*



BradleyW said:


> Hey,
> I have a few questions about my Z390 Ultra + 9900K.
> 
> 1) Why does my Vcore sometimes spike to 1.4v on idle.
> 2) My AVX is set to Auto. What should it be set to for maximum AVX performance?
> 
> I've followed the Z390 OC guide for 5GHz using offset voltage to hit 1.28v under full load. Apart from using an offset voltage, down bin disabled and multi x50, all other settings are on Auto.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Edit: From reading the net, it would seem that the Vcore is what voltage is actually being used on the CPU and to ignore the VID. Is this correct? Link: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/821473-vcore-and-vid/



I have noticed almost the same thing. Setting vcore to 1.325v and LLC to 'HIGH' the vcore spikes to almost 1.4v under load priming. Bios F7. I also followed the gigabyte 5ghz guide. Any way to limit the peak voltages?

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> I have noticed almost the same thing. Setting vcore to 1.325v and LLC to 'HIGH' the vcore spikes to almost 1.4v under load priming. Bios F7. I also followed the gigabyte 5ghz guide. Any way to limit the peak voltages?
> 
> Thanks


Remember that VR VOUT is the proper vcore sensor. Elmor told me specifically to use that.
The IT 8792E Vcore sensor seems to be reading from the MLCC socket caps (the same reading the DMM read points get on the motherboard)

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27736104-post17.html

Only issue is some people's boards are reading 65.534v from this sensor sometimes (may be a conflict with other software).


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> Remember that VR VOUT is the proper vcore sensor. Elmor told me specifically to use that.
> The IT 8792E Vcore sensor seems to be reading from the MLCC socket caps (the same reading the DMM read points get on the motherboard)
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27736104-post17.html
> 
> Only issue is some people's boards are reading 65.534v from this sensor sometimes (may be a conflict with other software).


I was using Coretemp to follow the cpu voltages. Would setting AC/DC to 1 help me?

Isn't AC DC a band?

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> I was using Coretemp to follow the cpu voltages. Would setting AC/DC to 1 help me?
> 
> Isn't AC DC a band?
> 
> Thanks


The IA AC and IA DC values have no effect whatsoever on manual voltage settings as they influence the CPU VID.

AC loadline and DC loadline are power supply and power measurement VR settings.

It's been recommended to set them to the lowest non-zero value (usually 1 or 0.01) to stop the VID from being raised significantly higher than the default VID for the CPU multiplier when using override voltages, so the VID won't be significantly higher than the CPU vcore (more specifically it's tied to cache speed). That's just to stop people from freaking out about a VID looking like it's too high. When using adaptive voltage however, setting IA AC loadline to 1 (DC doesn't affect actual vcore) must be done with care as you could wind up with a too low vcore, especially when overclocking.

It has no effect on CPU voltages when using manual vcore settings, only when using adaptive, as adaptive is linked directly to the CPU VID. The vcore itself is linked to the base VID plus the "boost" from the IA AC loadline value. DC loadline has no effect on the cpu voltage as that's just for power measurements. DC loadline is by default set to the same vdroop response as "Loadline calibration" is on standard or normal settings (thus the reference value of 1.60 mOhms or 160 in the bios which is Auto for 8 core chips). AC loadline's default value (Also 160 for 8 core chips) causes the base VID to rise by some certain amount (seems to be again related to 160 mOhms). I don't know why. You could ask Elmor if he knows, but I suspect the AC loadline "boost" value is to guarantee chips are stable up to 100C up to their highest default turbo boost multipliers.

When using adaptive settings, setting IA AC loadline to 1 (0.01 on Asus) can cause instability if you don't know what you're doing and aren't sure if the resulting CPU Vcore is stable or not, so it's best left at auto until you understand how to fine tune it properly. BradleyW found a nice combination of IA AC loadline of 1 combined with a small positive DVID setting to get the vcore he wanted but this requires direct testing for each chip's capabilities.

In some early Z370 bios releases (at least on Asrock boards), the IA AC setting was incorrectly influencing override (manual) voltages when it's only supposed to influence adaptive voltages, so in order for those boards to not overvolt excessively (e.g. setting 1.30 in bios giving you 1.43v at load), you had to set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 1. That bug was later reportedly fixed.

The higher possible ranges of IA AC loadline can potentially destroy a CPU or motherboard if used with adaptive voltage. Not recommended to ever go past 2.1 mOhms for any reason (2.1 mOhms is the default value for 4 and 6 core chips on coffee lake).


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> The IA AC and IA DC values have no effect whatsoever on manual voltage settings as they influence the CPU VID.
> 
> AC loadline and DC loadline are power supply and power measurement VR settings.
> 
> It's been recommended to set them to the lowest non-zero value (usually 1 or 0.01) to stop the VID from being raised significantly higher than the default VID for the CPU multiplier when using override voltages, so the VID won't be significantly higher than the CPU vcore (more specifically it's tied to cache speed). That's just to stop people from freaking out about a VID looking like it's too high. When using adaptive voltage however, setting IA AC loadline to 1 (DC doesn't affect actual vcore) must be done with care as you could wind up with a too low vcore, especially when overclocking.


I have never been an offset adaptive overclocker. Just manual override settings for VCore. So what your saying is the AC DC loadline values have no effect in manual settings or in my case and what is causing the high overshoot is just the LLC values being too high? Also quite frankly I am a little hesitant to mess with them considering a typo or too high value could blow your cpu. What are your suggestions though as far as getting good vdroop compensation and a narrow envelope for vcore to stay within?

According to your quote setting IA and IA DC to 1 is recommended to keep the VID at the set Vcore setting?

Also what do you think a good CPU VRM Switching Frequency is? 

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> I have never been an offset adaptive overclocker. Just manual override settings for VCore. So what your saying is the AC DC loadline values have no effect in manual settings or in my case and what is causing the high overshoot is just the LLC values being too high? Also quite frankly I am a little hesitant to mess with them considering a typo or too high value could blow your cpu. What are your suggestions though as far as getting good vdroop compensation and a narrow envelope for vcore to stay within?
> 
> According to your quote setting IA and IA DC to 1 is recommended to keep the VID at the set Vcore setting?
> 
> Also what do you think a good CPU VRM Switching Frequency is?
> 
> Thanks


The overshoot you see in the sensors is not overshoot. Its inaccurate sensors. True overshoot happens in microseconds and cannot be picked up by sensors. Did you read Elmor's post? He explained and made a graph about the SIO sensor that cpuz reads (the first vcore sensor in hwinfo64).


----------



## BradleyW

Firstly thank you again for all the help. I've found some settings which have enabled me good stability with voltage which are reasonably close to what I want.

Settings 1:

LLC HIGH
IA AC Loadline 20
Offset (Vcore) -0.010v

Results:

Idle = .75v (CPUID)
Light Load = 1.25v (CPUID)
Full Load = 1.23v (CPUID)
VR VOUT Full Load = 1.16v (HWINFO)

Settings 2:

LLC HIGH
IA AC Loadline 40
Offset (Vcore) -0.040v

Results:

Idle = .7v (CPUID)
Light Load = 1.25v (CPUID)
Full Load = 1.25v (CPUID)
VR VOUT Full Load = 1.19v (HWINFO)

I've found that using an IA AC value that is too low causes idle crashing and boot crashing. Same applies for offset Vcore. Too low and it'll go! Above settings seem to work fine. Not sure if the believe the VR VOUT reading, looks too good to be true at 5GHz and AVX at Auto.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Firstly thank you again for all the help. I've found some settings which have enabled me good stability with voltage which are reasonably close to what I want.
> 
> Settings 1:
> 
> LLC HIGH
> IA AC Loadline 20
> Offset (Vcore) -0.010v
> 
> Results:
> 
> Idle = .75v (CPUID)
> Light Load = 1.25v (CPUID)
> Full Load = 1.23v (CPUID)
> VR VOUT Full Load = 1.16v (HWINFO)
> 
> Settings 2:
> 
> LLC HIGH
> IA AC Loadline 40
> Offset (Vcore) -0.040v
> 
> Results:
> 
> Idle = .7v (CPUID)
> Light Load = 1.25v (CPUID)
> Full Load = 1.25v (CPUID)
> VR VOUT Full Load = 1.19v (HWINFO)
> 
> I've found that using an IA AC value that is too low causes idle crashing and boot crashing. Same applies for offset Vcore. Too low and it'll go! Above settings seem to work fine. Not sure if the believe the VR VOUT reading, looks too good to be true at 5GHz and AVX at Auto.


The VR VOUT setting is completely accurate.
Try it with a LOW manual vcore (DO NOT use 1.25v). I'll prove it to you.

Save your good profiles and make a new setting:
Intel turbo boost core ratios: all auto (required).
CPU clock ratio: x37
CPU ring ratio (not important, it can't go above core anyway).
CPU Vcore: Override: 1.15v
MCE: Off
C-states: off (please turn off all c-states).
EIST: Off
Speedstep: off
Speed Shift: Off

CPU must NOT downclock at idle. 

IA AC and IA DC settings are not important.

Loadline Calibration: Turbo (LOOK at the graphic chart in the UEFI for the loadline slope, pay attention to it).

Boot to windows, open UP HWinfo64. Look at the idle voltage in ITE 8792E (please ignore ITE 8688E) and VR VOUT.
Now run prime95 maximum load (FMA3 if possible: open the file local.txt and add CPUSupportsAVX=1 and CPUSupportsFMA3=1 to make sure--prime version 29.4 build 8).

Notice 8792E idle and load voltage is almost the same?
Now look at VR VOUT. See it drooped? 
Do you remember the graph in bios?

Now, when you're done testing (write down the Vcore and VOUT values if you want), go back in bios and set Loadline calibration to Ultra Extreme.
Look at the loadline graph. Do you notice it is flat? 
Now go back to windows. Load hWinfo64.
Look at ITE 8792E and VR VOUT. compare the values.
Notice that 8792E vcore is now higher than 1.15v?
But what is VR VOUT?

Now run FMA3 prime95.
What happens to 8792E? See?
Now look at VR VOUT? 
Flat as a rock. Did not move one bit. 
Remember the bios graph?

Now, compare what you just saw with Elmor's post about "CPU ON DIE SENSE". (this is VR VOUT--he told me that in a reply).
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
Asus LLC8 is equal to gigabyte's LLC Ultra Extreme.
Notice the "purple" bar? Voltage rise right? That's ITE 8792E.
Notice the light blue bar? That's the IT8688E.
VR VOUT is CPU ON DIE SENSE--exact same as bios voltage set, or idle=load.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...load-voltage-main-1-watch-2.html#post27736104

Do you not trust a well-liked former Asus employee?


----------



## davidm71

@Falkentyne

What are your thoughts on setting CPU VRM Switching frequency? Appropriate settings?

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> What are your thoughts on setting CPU VRM Switching frequency? Appropriate settings?
> 
> Thanks


No idea. But it should only improve something if it does improve anything. Should ask Elmor or an engineer about this. All I can see from posts is it lessens ripple.


----------



## Padinn

Decided to redo my bios update since I had previously done it through Windows. Don't know if it made a difference, but I did the "Intact" one as that is supposed to update Intel ME as well - since I don't know if windows version does that. It helped in that it reset all settings and cleared my profiles, so I can start fresh with overclocking.


----------



## clucernoni

Hey all, quick question.

I was doing some over clocking with my 9900k on the aorus master and my computer crashed. When it booted back and I got into the bios, my f7 bios was now on f4 and all my saved settings were gone. What exactly happened and did my main bios corrupt and this is the back up bios? Or did my main bios just reset to the stock f4? Should I just reupgrade to the latest bios and redo the overclock or do I need to make sure I recover the main bios.

Thanks!


----------



## rv8000

So I don't know if anyone else has run into a similar issue, but DDR4000 will not boot no matter what I set on F7. Swapped back to F6 it instantly boots if I key in timings, or just leave everything auto.


----------



## Jidonsu

rv8000 said:


> So I don't know if anyone else has run into a similar issue, but DDR4000 will not boot no matter what I set on F7. Swapped back to F6 it instantly boots if I key in timings, or just leave everything auto.


That's not comforting. I have a 4000C17 kit coming. Which set of ram is yours?


----------



## EarlZ

Im planning on getting a 970evo nvme.m2, which is the best slot to use that on to avoid the loss od SAT ports and still keeping 16X for the gpu


----------



## porksmuggler

EarlZ said:


> Im planning on getting a 970evo nvme.m2, which is the best slot to use that on to avoid the loss od SAT ports and still keeping 16X for the gpu


http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/Manual/mb_manual_z390-aorus-master_1001_181113_e.pdf

page 33-34


----------



## EarlZ

porksmuggler said:


> http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/Manual/mb_manual_z390-aorus-master_1001_181113_e.pdf
> 
> page 33-34


If my understanding is correct I need to use the bottom slot for best performance so that none of the sata ports are affected , has no effect on GPU pcie lanes but shares with the 4x pcie slot. Since I have a sound card the very last slot does the nvme still get all the lanes for maximum speeds?


----------



## KedarWolf

Got my Z390 Aorus Xtreme 9900k RAM stable at 4133MHZ with some BIOS tweaks, tested by Ram Test. 18-18-18-34 2T 4x8GB G.Skill 3200 CL14

BRB, I'll post BIOS screens, should work with the Master too. 

BIOS Screenshots in Spoilers

Edit: Changed the CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline from Turbo to Performance so VID sits at 1.34v instead of 1.39v, the only thing different from screenshots.



Spoiler


----------



## porksmuggler

EarlZ said:


> If my understanding is correct I need to use the bottom slot for best performance so that none of the sata ports are affected , has no effect on GPU pcie lanes but shares with the 4x pcie slot. Since I have a sound card the very last slot does the nvme still get all the lanes for maximum speeds?


Your understanding is not correct, but that's okay. The 970 EVO is a NVMe M.2 PCIe SSD. Use connector M2A for no bandwidth sharing. Use connector M2P, and bandwidth for PCIEX4 is reduced to x2. The 970 EVO will function the same for either.

If you were to use a 860 EVO M.2 SATA SSD in connector M2A for example, only then would SATA3 _1 not be available.

Reading back through the thread, other forum members have misunderstood or advised incorrectly (along with several other actively discussed topics). Please reference the manual, or PM if needed.


----------



## EarlZ

porksmuggler said:


> Your understanding is not correct, but that's okay. The 970 EVO is a NVMe M.2 PCIe SSD. Use connector M2A for no bandwidth sharing. Use connector M2P, and bandwidth for PCIEX4 is reduced to x2. The 970 EVO will function the same for either.
> 
> If you were to use a 860 EVO M.2 SATA SSD in connector M2A for example, only then would SATA3 _1 not be available.
> 
> Reading back through the thread, other forum members have misunderstood or advised incorrectly (along with several other actively discussed topics). Please reference the manual, or PM if needed.


I am now even more confused on why it is not correct, the manual indicates PCIE SSD can be used for the M2P slot but it shares bandwidth with the 4x slot. I have a sound card on the 4x slot so that drops down to 2x for the sound card and 2x for the PCIE nvme and you've told me that it will function the same for either, the way I understand that is bandwidth is not affected. Does the 2x bandwidth affect the 970Evo ?

I also understand that the M2A slot has no lane sharing when a PCIE nvme is used.


----------



## porksmuggler

EarlZ said:


> If my understanding is correct I need to use the bottom slot for best performance so that none of the sata ports are affected


This is the part that was incorrect. You do not need to use the bottom slot for best performance with a NVMe M.2 PCIe SSD. You can use the M2A connector with no bandwidth sharing. There is only bandwidth sharing on the M2A connector if a M.2 SATA SSD is used.


----------



## BradleyW

clucernoni said:


> Hey all, quick question.
> 
> I was doing some over clocking with my 9900k on the aorus master and my computer crashed. When it booted back and I got into the bios, my f7 bios was now on f4 and all my saved settings were gone. What exactly happened and did my main bios corrupt and this is the back up bios? Or did my main bios just reset to the stock f4? Should I just reupgrade to the latest bios and redo the overclock or do I need to make sure I recover the main bios.
> 
> Thanks!


My ultra does the same. It's the back up bios. However I don't know how to enter the main bios. I just flashed it to F6 and each time I really crash hard, it'll switch from bios to bios. I know it's switching between the two because I have profiles saved on one of them.


----------



## Padinn

clucernoni said:


> Hey all, quick question.
> 
> I was doing some over clocking with my 9900k on the aorus master and my computer crashed. When it booted back and I got into the bios, my f7 bios was now on f4 and all my saved settings were gone. What exactly happened and did my main bios corrupt and this is the back up bios? Or did my main bios just reset to the stock f4? Should I just reupgrade to the latest bios and redo the overclock or do I need to make sure I recover the main bios.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!


It booted to backup bios. Unplug pc, hit power button to drain capacitors, then hit reset cmos button on back.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> Got my Z390 Aorus Xtreme 9900k RAM stable at 4133MHZ with some BIOS tweaks, tested by Ram Test. 18-18-18-34 2T 4x8GB G.Skill 3200 CL14
> 
> BRB, I'll post BIOS screens, should work with the Master too. /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> BIOS Screenshots in Spoilers
> 
> Edit: Changed the CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline from Turbo to Performance so VID sits at 1.34v instead of 1.39v, the only thing different from screenshots.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


How are your temps under load? Appreciate the info.


----------



## Robbært

BradleyW said:


> My ultra does the same. It's the back up bios. However I don't know how to enter the main bios.


Power psu off for idk 10-20s. It will boot back to main.
I think it only way to upgrade backup bios atm.


----------



## BradleyW

Why do the CPU-Z developers and BIOS's insist on reading from the ITE IT8688E chip if it is so widely inaccurate? Same goes for ITE IT8792E.

I have a multi meter what I use for my car, so I'm more than happy to read off the Motherboard, but I don't know where the read points are. Hopefully I can find an in-depth review somewhere which highlights this.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Why do the CPU-Z developers and BIOS's insist on reading from the ITE IT8688E chip if it is so widely inaccurate? Same goes for ITE IT8792E.
> 
> I have a multi meter what I use for my car, so I'm more than happy to read off the Motherboard, but I don't know where the read points are. Hopefully I can find an in-depth review somewhere which highlights this.


Send a PM to Elmor about how to read the on die sense.. I don't think many people here know. Most just read from the marked read points. You can try testing for continuity behind the socket with one side of a resistor and the other end next to a VRM VCCore pin to find which one reads vcore (there was an article on gamersnexus on that) but I don't know if that's the MLCC cap reading or "on die sense". You want on die sense. The socket MLCC caps will probably match 8792E. As I said, send a PM to @elmor . I don't have the tools or hardware for this.


----------



## flowfaster

Hey Guys. I have a couple of questions. Stats: 9900k, 3200CL14, Z390 Aorus Master, SLI 1080 FTWs.

I found my maximum manual voltage needed at 48x is 1.185V LLC Turbo. Now, I want to apply an adaptive voltage and have been somewhat successful.

My question is that when I set an adaptive voltage DVID of -0.015 LLC default, AC DC set to 1. My Vcore sometimes shoots up to 1.28/1.308 on idle. Is that normal? Under load my vcore is fine 1.1xx-1.224 etc. (still don't like that it shoots to 1.224 under load) Temps are awesome with DVID compared to a fixed offset but my vcore seems to act crazy. 

Can anyone advise? I want to run DVID but I don't want my idle voltage up to 1.308. I would rather stick to a fixed vcore of 1.185V LLC Turbo if the above issue is not fixable. 

My chip seems to be a fairly decent one. All I do is game and I really like keeping temps low opposed to a 50x+ core speed. Although my chip does 50x 1.285V LLC High all day I would rather leave it at 48x with an DVID undervolt.

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

flowfaster said:


> Hey Guys. I have a couple of questions. Stats: 9900k, 3200CL14, Z390 Aorus Master, SLI 1080 FTWs.
> 
> I found my maximum manual voltage needed at 48x is 1.185V LLC Turbo. Now, I want to apply an adaptive voltage and have been somewhat successful.
> 
> My question is that when I set an adaptive voltage DVID of -0.015 LLC default, AC DC set to 1. My Vcore sometimes shoots up to 1.28/1.308 on idle. Is that normal? Under load my vcore is fine 1.1xx-1.224 etc. (still don't like that it shoots to 1.224 under load) Temps are awesome with DVID compared to a fixed offset but my vcore seems to act crazy.
> 
> Can anyone advise? I want to run DVID but I don't want my idle voltage up to 1.308. I would rather stick to a fixed vcore of 1.185V LLC Turbo if the above issue is not fixable.
> 
> My chip seems to be a fairly decent one. All I do is game and I really like keeping temps low opposed to a 50x+ core speed. Although my chip does 50x 1.285V LLC High all day I would rather leave it at 48x with an DVID undervolt.
> 
> Thanks


What sensor?
ITE 8688? ITE 8792? Or VR VOUT?


----------



## flowfaster

Falkentyne said:


> What sensor?
> ITE 8688? ITE 8792? Or VR VOUT?


Honestly I'm not sure. I'm going off of the aida64 Vcore reading , I know its not exactly super accurate.

Thanks for all of your help in this thread, Falkentyne. Been reading and learning a lot from your posts.


----------



## Majek

Hi guys,

Does your vr vout reading ever drop below 1.2v?

Fully stock settings on F6 BIOS and both ite sensors show below 0.7v at idle but vr vout oscilates around 1.2v.

Doesn't seem right, does it?


----------



## Falkentyne

Majek said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Does your vr vout reading ever drop below 1.2v?
> 
> Fully stock settings on F6 BIOS and both ite sensors show below 0.7v at idle but vr vout oscilates around 1.2v.
> 
> Doesn't seem right, does it?


Normal. But I can't help with this since you're using c-states.
C-states cause the Cpu to go into a deep sleep so lots of things get disabled.
But the VR is feeding 1.2v into the CPU itself. But what happens to it I don't know. I'm not an engineer.
C-states throw a lot of things into complicated areas. 
I've had VR VOUT below 1.0v when I was doing 3700 mhz testing with bios voltage as low as it would go (1.05v IIRC).


----------



## jlp0209

flowfaster said:


> Hey Guys. I have a couple of questions. Stats: 9900k, 3200CL14, Z390 Aorus Master, SLI 1080 FTWs.
> 
> I found my maximum manual voltage needed at 48x is 1.185V LLC Turbo. Now, I want to apply an adaptive voltage and have been somewhat successful.
> 
> My question is that when I set an adaptive voltage DVID of -0.015 LLC default, AC DC set to 1. My Vcore sometimes shoots up to 1.28/1.308 on idle. Is that normal? Under load my vcore is fine 1.1xx-1.224 etc. (still don't like that it shoots to 1.224 under load) Temps are awesome with DVID compared to a fixed offset but my vcore seems to act crazy.
> 
> Can anyone advise? I want to run DVID but I don't want my idle voltage up to 1.308. I would rather stick to a fixed vcore of 1.185V LLC Turbo if the above issue is not fixable.
> 
> My chip seems to be a fairly decent one. All I do is game and I really like keeping temps low opposed to a 50x+ core speed. Although my chip does 50x 1.285V LLC High all day I would rather leave it at 48x with an DVID undervolt.
> 
> Thanks


Try running lower LLC. I've found that for manual voltage LLC set to Turbo works best. For adaptive at 4.9ghz I use medium LLC. For adaptive at 5.0ghz I use high LLC. This way I use a positive offset rather than negative. It helps make sure your idle voltage isn't too low (like below .700v) and avoids overshoot like you are experiencing. I am talking about the traditional Vcore readings. Taking into account VOUT throws a tool box full of wrenches into the equation.


----------



## Majek

Falkentyne said:


> Normal. But I can't help with this since you're using c-states.
> C-states cause the Cpu to go into a deep sleep so lots of things get disabled.
> But the VR is feeding 1.2v into the CPU itself. But what happens to it I don't know. I'm not an engineer.
> C-states throw a lot of things into complicated areas.
> I've had VR VOUT below 1.0v when I was doing 3700 mhz testing with bios voltage as low as it would go (1.05v IIRC).



Thank you as always. Get it!


----------



## Mdtape

hi, i want to buy an aorus pro z390 and was wondering if the Ram on the qvl is guaranteed to work with xmp settings. i was going to buy a F4-3600C16D-16GVK kit,


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> How are your temps under load? Appreciate the info.


Running Prime95 with AVX and SSE enabled, no AVX Offset in BIOS, 1344 FFT's, Run In Place, 15-minute interval I get at max on a few cores about 68C. :h34r-smi


----------



## KedarWolf

Nizzen said:


> No one is running 4000mhz + memory on this board?


On my Aorus Xtreme I'm at 4133MHZ Ram Test 16000% stable.

See newer post by me for BIOS screenshots, should be good for a Master too if your IMC is decent.


----------



## KedarWolf

How do you manually tune the RTL's and IOL's on a Master, Xtreme?

No IOL Offset in BIOS like Asus has and if I manually set them in the BIOS Timing Configurator says they are much higher and not at what I set.


----------



## KedarWolf

Mo2k said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I am Prime stable (26.6) with my 9600K on Aorus Pro Wifi! VCore is 1,330 and LLC is Turbo!
> XMP Profile of my RAM is 3200 / 15-15-15-35-560-2T with 1,35V! BIOS is F7! AVX Offset 2. NB Clock is 4,3!
> 
> I have this RAM:
> 
> G.Skill Trident Z F4-3200C15D-16GTZ
> 
> It should have B-Die Chips.
> 
> As you can See here:
> 
> https://www.overclockers.com/forums...dent-Z-2x8GB-DDR4-3200-CL15-F4-3200C15D-16GTZ
> 
> People have no Problem to be stable at 3600+ with CL15/16 and 1,35-1,45V.
> VCCIO is 1.100, VCCSA is 1,200!
> 
> I have a lot of Problems overclocking RAM:
> 
> With more than 3600MHz I can‘t even Boot!
> So my aim is to get 3600MHz stable with good Timings.
> 
> I turn off XMP, set clock to 3600 and set Timings to 15-15-15-35-560-2t / 16-16-16-38-580-2t / 17-17-17-42-630-2t and so one. All other timings on Auto! I also tried Setting
> 
> 
> ... nothing is stable! Even with 1,5V vDIMM I get BSOD or workers stop with Prime 26.6 1344k!
> 
> When I leave XMP Profile 1 on and set clock Manually to 3600MHz the Automatic timings are:
> 
> 17-20-20-43-630-2T but even then it freezes After 1:45h with prime 26.6 1344k! Blend test let workers stop After 2 hours.
> 
> Also changing tRC to 64 doesn‘t make it stable!
> 
> Can somebody please help?
> 
> Do I have to change anything else than vDIMM, VCCIO and VCCSA? Are there any timings I have to change? Shall I turn XMP on and change just the timings I want to change? I vDIMM of 1,5v dangerous?
> 
> Or did I just get a bad RAM? Is this a reason to RMA?
> 
> 
> 
> Regards 🙂


This is what I use with BIOS screenshots for 4133MHZ Ram Test stable to 16000%. G-Skill b-dies. See this post.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...-z390-aorus-owners-thread-2.html#post27767960


----------



## I Am The Stig

Anyone using a z390 Aorus Master + Dark Rock Pro 4? I tried using my 3 on it but the backplate prevented the mounting plate to fit. I know that the DRP4 has a new mounting mechanism + the website says its compatible, but just wanted to hear it from people that are using it so far.


----------



## rv8000

Jidonsu said:


> That's not comforting. I have a 4000C17 kit coming. Which set of ram is yours?


Trident Z RGB 3600 c17. Got it booting finally, it kept trying to set 1T when set to auto at anything above 3800. Training seems to behave a bit differently from F6 to F7.

Quick 100% metest86 coverage at 4000 16-18-18-38 2T, gonna see if I can push 4133 with c18 under 1.5 and then call it quits as I plan to run it daily.


----------



## KedarWolf

rv8000 said:


> Trident Z RGB 3600 c17. Got it booting finally, it kept trying to set 1T when set to auto at anything above 3800. Training seems to behave a bit differently from F6 to F7.
> 
> Quick 100% metest86 coverage at 4000 16-18-18-38 2T, gonna see if I can push 4133 with c18 under 1.5 and then call it quits as I plan to run it daily.


MemTest86 is really an outdated not a reliable memory test anymore.

Get Memtest here. https://hcidesign.com/memtest/ It's free.

Get AutoHotKey here. https://hcidesign.com/memtest/ Install it, right click in the MemTest folder, 'New' Create New AutoHotKey script.

Edit the script and add this code for 32GB. 9900k CPU. Right click the script and choose 'Run Script'.

It'll open 16 instances of HCI MemTest Free spaced neatly and evenly using 90% of your RAM for 32GB of RAM. for 16GB of RAM try changing 1731 to 751.

If you can get to 400% in MemTest you can be sure you're stable. It tests your cache overclock as well.



Code:


xpos = 3
ypos = 5
Loop, 16
{
  if (A_Index == 9) || (A_Index == 18)
  {
    xpos = 4
    ypos += 370
  }

  Run, memtest.exe
  WinWaitActive, Welcome`, New MemTest User
  Send {Enter}
  sleep 100
  WinMove, A, , xpos, ypos
  Send 1731{Tab}{Enter}
  WinWaitActive, Message for first-time users
  Send {Enter}

   xpos += 222
}


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> MemTest86 is really an outdated not a reliable memory test anymore.
> 
> Get Memtest here. https://hcidesign.com/memtest/ It's free.
> 
> Get AutoHotKey here. https://hcidesign.com/memtest/ Install it, right click in the MemTest folder, 'New' Create New AutoHotKey script.
> 
> Edit the script and add this code for 32GB. 9900k CPU. Right click the script and choose 'Run Script'.
> 
> It'll open 16 instances of HCI MemTest Free spaced neatly and evenly using 90% of your RAM for 32GB of RAM. for 16GB of RAM try changing 1731 to 751.
> 
> If you can get to 400% in MemTest you can be sure you're stable. It tests your cache overclock as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> xpos = 3
> ypos = 5
> Loop, 16
> {
> if (A_Index == 9) || (A_Index == 18)
> {
> xpos = 4
> ypos += 370
> }
> 
> Run, memtest.exe
> WinWaitActive, Welcome`, New MemTest User
> Send {Enter}
> sleep 100
> WinMove, A, , xpos, ypos
> Send 1731{Tab}{Enter}
> WinWaitActive, Message for first-time users
> Send {Enter}
> 
> xpos += 222
> }


Memtest86 is absolutely required to use.
I'm aware it doesn't load all cells like an extensive windows program, but it does test to make sure they work. HCI Memtest won't save you if your RAM is so unstable you BSOD trying to load windows and hose your boot sector (or worse).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Memtest86 is absolutely required to use.
> I'm aware it doesn't load all cells like an extensive windows program, but it does test to make sure they work. HCI Memtest won't save you if your RAM is so unstable you BSOD trying to load windows and hose your boot sector (or worse).



https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html

Go here, DDR4 Stability Testing thread and you'll see people use GSAT in Linux, Ram Test 1.1.0.0 which isn't free, and HCI MemTest as the three reliable ways to test memory overclocks. memtest86, no, outdated and not very effective at all. 

Edit: Those three methods are the only ones accepted in that thread.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html
> 
> Go here, DDR4 Stability Testing thread and you'll see people use GSAT in Linux, Ram Test 1.1.0.0 which isn't free, and HCI MemTest as the three reliable ways to test memory overclocks. memtest86, no, outdated and not very effective at all.


I've been in that thread for years.
I'm not a RAM tweaker. I just play videogames. I'm aware of Gsat (tried it once but I can't be bothered dealing with making Linux work as I don't use linux. Had enough problems getting an engineering version of NVflash running (which still didn't bypass the Falcon protection)
Gsat is fine. But I don't like doing all that extra work. I like to just throw memtest86 on a flash drive, boot and make sure I won't hose my OS. It's not for stability testing. Just to make sure I can actually boot into the OS. Prime95 is what I use. But to each his own. 

There's no such thing as a perfect way..everyone has their own way of doing things.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I've been in that thread for years.
> I'm not a RAM tweaker. I just play videogames. I'm aware of Gsat (tried it once but I can't be bothered dealing with making Linux work as I don't use linux. Had enough problems getting an engineering version of NVflash running (which still didn't bypass the Falcon protection)
> Gsat is fine. But I don't like doing all that extra work. I like to just throw memtest86 on a flash drive, boot and make sure I won't hose my OS. It's not for stability testing. Just to make sure I can actually boot into the OS. Prime95 is what I use. But to each his own.
> 
> There's no such thing as a perfect way..everyone has their own way of doing things.


From that thread.

"memtest 86 is only good to see if a stick is bad. It really does not test the ram for stability."


----------



## rv8000

KedarWolf said:


> MemTest86 is really an outdated not a reliable memory test anymore.
> 
> Get Memtest here. https://hcidesign.com/memtest/ It's free.
> 
> Get AutoHotKey here. https://hcidesign.com/memtest/ Install it, right click in the MemTest folder, 'New' Create New AutoHotKey script.
> 
> Edit the script and add this code for 32GB. 9900k CPU. Right click the script and choose 'Run Script'.
> 
> It'll open 16 instances of HCI MemTest Free spaced neatly and evenly using 90% of your RAM for 32GB of RAM. for 16GB of RAM try changing 1731 to 751.
> 
> If you can get to 400% in MemTest you can be sure you're stable. It tests your cache overclock as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> xpos = 3
> ypos = 5
> Loop, 16
> {
> if (A_Index == 9) || (A_Index == 18)
> {
> xpos = 4
> ypos += 370
> }
> 
> Run, memtest.exe
> WinWaitActive, Welcome`, New MemTest User
> Send {Enter}
> sleep 100
> WinMove, A, , xpos, ypos
> Send 1731{Tab}{Enter}
> WinWaitActive, Message for first-time users
> Send {Enter}
> 
> xpos += 222
> }


I don't know why I said memtest86, I meant memtest (currently using the version you linked). I was just doing quick runs to check whether or not 4133 or 4000 was going to happen. I generally shoot for 800% coverage.

Anyways I don't think kit/cpu is gong to do anything higher than 4000 under 1.5vdimm (2x8 tridentz 3600 17-18-18-38 b-die), at least with my tweaking knowledge.


----------



## KedarWolf

rv8000 said:


> I don't know why I said memtest86, I meant memtest (currently using the version you linked). I was just doing quick runs to check whether or not 4133 or 4000 was going to happen. I generally shoot for 800% coverage.
> 
> Anyways I don't think kit/cpu is gong to do anything higher than 4000 under 1.5vdimm (2x8 tridentz 3600 17-18-18-38 b-die), at least with my tweaking knowledge.


Do you run an instance for each thread of your CPU?


----------



## KedarWolf

Question, is VR VOUT the accurate CPU voltage?

I ask because I can do 5.1GHZ at 1.38v but the HWInfo Vcore voltage spikes as high as 1.4v in IT8688E but VR VOUT is quite a bit lower. IT8792E is just a bit higher than VROUT though.


----------



## Jidonsu

rv8000 said:


> Trident Z RGB 3600 c17. Got it booting finally, it kept trying to set 1T when set to auto at anything above 3800. Training seems to behave a bit differently from F6 to F7.
> 
> Quick 100% metest86 coverage at 4000 16-18-18-38 2T, gonna see if I can push 4133 with c18 under 1.5 and then call it quits as I plan to run it daily.


Great! I'm hoping since my 4000C17 will have XMP, it'll just load and run.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Question, is VR VOUT the accurate CPU voltage?
> 
> I ask because I can do 5.1GHZ at 1.38v but the HWInfo Vcore voltage spikes as high as 1.4v in IT8688E but VR VOUT is quite a bit lower. IT8792E is just a bit higher than VROUT though.


Almost 100% accurate (gets a little bit iffy with small FFT AVX load due to extreme stress on the voltage regulators and vdroop but spot on with small FFT with AVX disabled). Please look at my reply to jlp0209 in the 9900k thread. I posted screenshots and stats.

Difference between IT 8792E and VR Vout get much higher with extremely high current draw (>150 amps). Using Ultra Extreme loadline calibration results in a chart alot like this at the end.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

Tested with much safer voltages so transient spikes wouldn't kill my CPU.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Almost 100% accurate (gets a little bit iffy with small FFT AVX load due to extreme stress on the voltage regulators and vdroop but spot on with small FFT with AVX disabled). Please look at my reply to jlp0209 in the 9900k thread. I posted screenshots and stats.
> 
> Difference between IT 8792E and VR Vout get much higher with extremely high current draw (>150 amps). Using Ultra Extreme loadline calibration results in a chart alot like this at the end.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> Tested with much safer voltages so transient spikes wouldn't kill my CPU.


I'm confused. How do I get idle voltages down? Lower VCore voltage in BIOS with Ultra Loadline?

Tested it, with Turbo I get 1.38v VROUT at idle with it set 1.38v in BIOS, 1.32 VROUT in Prime95 under load. 

With it set at Ultra ExtremeBIOS set at 1.32v I get 1.32 VROUT at idle, 1.32 with prime95 running. :h34r-smi


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I'm confused. How do I get idle voltages down? Lower VCore voltage in BIOS with Ultra Loadline?


Yes but you risk transient overshoots happening. That's the problem.
No one here seems to have or knows how to use an oscilloscope to measure this. Elmor is too busy. I've asked multiple people to measure the voltage response with "Ultra Extreme" loadline and going from heavy load to idle, but no one has done it. Until then, you're playing russian roulette with your CPU if you try to use Ultra Extreme loadline at high voltage just to keep the idle voltage down.
It's sort of a nasty situation.

With Loadline calibration disabled, if your CPU needed 1.30v to be stable at 5 ghz load, you would need to set the bios voltage to 1.45v (at least). This is pretty much guaranteed to slowly degrade your CPU. But there would be zero risk of any transient spikes this way. So you need a balance. Like 1.34v bios setting with LLC Turbo for 1.30v load. But now there WILL be transient spikes, but how much? No one knows. 

But if you set Ultra Extreme loadline for 1.30v bios and 1.30v load, yes, the idle voltage is nice and low, but the transient spikes when you go from heavy load to idle can be up to 200mv (!!!) on bad boards if the Loadline is set to 0 mOhms (maximum=flat loadline). The less the droop, the larger the transient spikes.

Picture of transient spikes on default loadline calibration:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-266.html#post27685780


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Yes but you risk transient overshoots happening. That's the problem.
> No one here seems to have or knows how to use an oscilloscope to measure this. Elmor is too busy. I've asked multiple people to measure the voltage response with "Ultra Extreme" loadline and going from heavy load to idle, but no one has done it. Until then, you're playing russian roulette with your CPU if you try to use Ultra Extreme loadline at high voltage just to keep the idle voltage down.
> It's sort of a nasty situation.
> 
> With Loadline calibration disabled, if your CPU needed 1.30v to be stable at 5 ghz load, you would need to set the bios voltage to 1.45v (at least). This is pretty much guaranteed to slowly degrade your CPU. But there would be zero risk of any transient spikes this way. So you need a balance. Like 1.34v bios setting with LLC Turbo for 1.30v load. But now there WILL be transient spikes, but how much? No one knows.
> 
> But if you set Ultra Extreme loadline for 1.30v bios and 1.30v load, yes, the idle voltage is nice and low, but the transient spikes when you go from heavy load to idle can be up to 200mv (!!!) on bad boards if the Loadline is set to 0 mOhms (maximum=flat loadline). The less the droop, the larger the transient spikes.
> 
> Picture of transient spikes on default loadline calibration:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-266.html#post27685780


Yeah, but I'm thinking if I only need 1.32v idle and on load with Ultra Extreme for 5.1GHZ a transient spike of 200mv isn't bad? Don't make me math, but a transient spike of 200MV would raise 1.32v to what? 1.52v? And that would be terrible. Is that right?

Edit: And if I'm at 1.38v on idle with Turbo do I need to worry about transient spikes?


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, but I'm thinking if I only need 1.32v idle and on load with Ultra Extreme for 5.1GHZ a transient spike of 200mv isn't bad? Don't make me math, but a transient spike of 200MV would raise 1.32v to what? 1.52v? And that would be terrible. Is that right?
> 
> Edit: And if I'm at 1.38v on idle with Turbo do I need to worry about transient spikes?


That's what I'm saying, man.
*no one knows* unless someone measures the spikes with an Oscilloscope.
Everything else is just guessing.

I'll leave what Elmor said to me in PM right here. (hope he doesn't mind). @jlp0209



> Scope images for reference: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...90-vrm-discussion-thread-67.html#post27685780
> 
> Overshoot spike amplitude will depend on the VRM design, controller performance and load scenario. Cheaper boards will typically have higher overshoot due to lower output capacitance. Inductor choice also affects how fast the controller can compensate. The worst scenario is from very heavy load to idle state. At this point is that the high-side mosfets are operating at a high duty cycle and feed a lot of power to the output to maintain the output voltage. When the load disappears, this power is still being fed into the system which results in increased output voltage before the controller can compensate and reduce the output power. This rapid increase in output voltage is the overshoot spike. If the output voltage is already 200mV below the idle set point (whatever voltage you have set), the system has time available to compensate and the overshoot can be reduced. The voltage will start increasing from for example 1.200V (load voltage) and takes a couple of microseconds to reach 1.400V (idle voltage). If the output voltage is already the same as the idle voltage (0mOhm load-line) when the load is released, there's no grace period and the overshoot will be large.
> 
> On cheaper boards I've seen upwards of 200mV spikes when really pushing the VRM.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> That's what I'm saying, man.
> *no one knows* unless someone measures the spikes with an Oscilloscope.
> Everything else is just guessing.
> 
> I'll leave what Elmor said to me in PM right here. (hope he doesn't mind).
> @jlp0209


I have an Aorus Xtreme, so I'm pretty sure I'm okay on Turbo with 1.38v in the BIOS, 1.38v on idle and 1.32v on load?

I dunno why I'm only getting 1.32v on load though. My CPU voltage is Manual and my LLC is Turbo.

Can you look at my BIOS settings here and suggest anything?

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...-z390-aorus-owners-thread-2.html#post27767960

The only difference from the screens is I'm at 1.38v VCore and CPU is at 5.1GHZ.

The Loadline is a few pics from the bottom.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I have an Aorus Xtreme, so I'm pretty sure I'm okay on Turbo with 1.38v in the BIOS, 1.38v on idle and 1.32v on load?
> 
> I dunno why I'm only getting 1.32v on load though. My CPU voltage is Manual and my LLC is Turbo.
> 
> Can you look at my BIOS settings here and suggest anything?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...-z390-aorus-owners-thread-2.html#post27767960
> 
> The only difference from the screens is I'm at 1.38v VCore and CPU is at 5.1GHZ.
> 
> The Loadline is a few pics from the bottom.


I saw your settings. I can't suggest anything. I don't know what maxing the PWM switch rate and phase control does. All i can find on google is something about reducing ripple but I don't know if that makes overshoots worse or transient recovery better. Again someone needs to just grab an oscilloscope and test it. 
I can't suggest anything. Every CPU is different.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I saw your settings. I can't suggest anything. I don't know what maxing the PWM switch rate and phase control does. All i can find on google is something about reducing ripple but I don't know if that makes overshoots worse or transient recovery better. Again someone needs to just grab an oscilloscope and test it.
> I can't suggest anything. Every CPU is different.


On my Asus board it helped my memory overclock and on this board, I've gotten my 4x8GB memory on my 9900k Ram Test 1.1.0.0 and HCI MemTest stable at 4133MHZ.  My Maximus X Formula would only do 3900MHZ without BSOD's. 

I need to update my signature, so tired, another day.


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> I have an Aorus Xtreme, so I'm pretty sure I'm okay on Turbo with 1.38v in the BIOS, 1.38v on idle and 1.32v on load?
> 
> I dunno why I'm only getting 1.32v on load though. My CPU voltage is Manual and my LLC is Turbo.
> 
> Can you look at my BIOS settings here and suggest anything?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...-z390-aorus-owners-thread-2.html#post27767960
> 
> The only difference from the screens is I'm at 1.38v VCore and CPU is at 5.1GHZ.
> 
> The Loadline is a few pics from the bottom.


You'd have to run the LLC higher to reduce or remove the drop, but it can cause a risk of voltage spikes.


----------



## Vrool

I have a Z390 Aorus Pro, F5 BIOS, 8700K CPU.

I've found that the BIOS does not have the list of Loadline Calibration options for me to choose. The LLC graph is also not displayed.
I've also seen that it should show you the 'Last Modified' values as you save. Mine does not do that.
Is this a bug?

Thanks.


----------



## Anzial

Mdtape said:


> hi, i want to buy an aorus pro z390 and was wondering if the Ram on the qvl is guaranteed to work with xmp settings. i was going to buy a F4-3600C16D-16GVK kit,


No guarantees with XMP, while a certain RAM module maybe on the QVL list for the motherboard, it doesn't mean that any given CPU on that mobo will be able to handle that RAM at XMP settings without issues.


----------



## Phantomas 007

It's possible to change the led and from A0 edition to have the CPU temps ?


----------



## davidm71

Hi,

Was wondering if you guys don't mind posting your stable 5.0ghz dynamic overclock settings on the Z390 Master 9900K? Looking to go dynamic and not look back..

Thanks


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I've noticed that the new F7 bios really screws with my memory OCing..


----------



## Luckbad

Wanted to see if anyone else is seeing this on their boards. I'm using a Z390 Aorus Ultra.

With my memory using its XMP profile, the XMP voltage in the BIOS says 1.35V (F4-3600C15D-16GTZ). However, the reading after reboot says ~1.38V both in the right hand menu of the BIOS and HWInfo.

If I change DRAM Voltage to 1.35V, that goes down to ~1.343V.

Any idea what's up there?

I used the same RAM in my previous build for a couple of years with a Gigabyte Z170X Designare and don't recall the voltage setting itself incorrectly.

This happened with both the F5 and F6 BIOS. I haven't tried older versions.


----------



## jlp0209

davidm71 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Was wondering if you guys don't mind posting your stable 5.0ghz dynamic overclock settings on the Z390 Master 9900K? Looking to go dynamic and not look back..
> 
> Thanks


I'm running with:

CPU multiplier 50x
Uncore 47x
Multicore enhancement left at Auto
IA AC/DC LLC both set to 1
CPU LLC set to High
Vcore set to Normal
DVID offset +.115

These settings give me Vcore (HWinfo) of 1.284 - 1.296 when running Prime95 small fft avx. VOUT is at 1.22. Non-avx the VOUT goes to about 1.25.

I'm now experiencing the audio bug people commented on before. I get crackling when clicking on the Windows volume icon to change the volume. My girlfriend is using a guest account on my PC and the speakers / sound work when I click on the sound icon but there's no sound coming from YouTube or any other media. Tested with Chrome and MS Edge. If I test my speakers within the Realtek control panel no sound comes from them. I've updated to the latest Realtek drivers from Gigabyte's website. This board has been the gift that keeps on giving...


----------



## davidm71

*Settings appreciated*



jlp0209 said:


> I'm running with:
> 
> CPU multiplier 50x
> Uncore 47x
> Multicore enhancement left at Auto
> IA AC/DC LLC both set to 1
> CPU LLC set to High
> Vcore set to Normal
> DVID offset +.115
> 
> These settings give me Vcore (HWinfo) of 1.284 - 1.296 when running Prime95 small fft avx. VOUT is at 1.22. Non-avx the VOUT goes to about 1.25.
> 
> I'm now experiencing the audio bug people commented on before. I get crackling when clicking on the Windows volume icon to change the volume. My girlfriend is using a guest account on my PC and the speakers / sound work when I click on the sound icon but there's no sound coming from YouTube or any other media. Tested with Chrome and MS Edge. If I test my speakers within the Realtek control panel no sound comes from them. I've updated to the latest Realtek drivers from Gigabyte's website. This board has been the gift that keeps on giving...


Hi,

Appreciate you sharing your settings. Wonder do you have all C-States disabled? I followed Kedarwolfs settings slightly with manual voltage entered, and C-States disabled, but EIST enabled and at 4.8ghz with cpu idling and feels stable with Prime. I disabled the onboard audio and my stuttering issues are gone as using my monitors speakers through the graphic card. Maybe theres a conflict with the gpu?

Thanks


----------



## jlp0209

davidm71 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Appreciate you sharing your settings. Wonder do you have all C-States disabled? I followed Kedarwolfs settings slightly with manual voltage entered, and C-States disabled, but EIST enabled and at 4.8ghz with cpu idling and feels stable with Prime. I disabled the onboard audio and my stuttering issues are gone as using my monitors speakers through the graphic card. Maybe theres a conflict with the gpu?
> 
> Thanks


I have not touched any other setting in the bios other than secure boot and disabling CSM. Re: my audio issue, I simply logged out and back into the guest account, all good.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Appreciate you sharing your settings. Wonder do you have all C-States disabled? I followed Kedarwolfs settings slightly with manual voltage entered, and C-States disabled, but EIST enabled and at 4.8ghz with cpu idling and feels stable with Prime. I disabled the onboard audio and my stuttering issues are gone as using my monitors speakers through the graphic card. Maybe theres a conflict with the gpu?
> 
> Thanks


Yes, all C-States I can disabled.


----------



## davidm71

*Settings appreciated*



KedarWolf said:


> Yes, all C-States I can disabled.


But you have EIST enabled so the frequency go up and down as does the VID in Coretemp, but the 8792E Vcore is slightly less than set in bios and cpu-z slightly more. So I assume 8792E Vcore is correct showing effects of vdroop?

Thanks

EDIT:

You also have CPU Internal AC/DC Load line to Turbo, VAXG Loadline Cal to High, Cpu Vcore and VAXG protection to 400mv, Current Protections to Low, Switch Rate to 500, and Phase Controls to eXm Perf. Why???

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> But you have EIST enabled so the frequency go up and down as does the VID in Coretemp, but the 8792E Vcore is slightly less than set in bios and cpu-z slightly more. So I assume 8792E Vcore is correct showing effects of vdroop?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> You also have CPU Internal AC/DC Load line to Turbo, VAXG Loadline Cal to High, Cpu Vcore and VAXG protection to 400mv, Current Protections to Low, Switch Rate to 500, and Phase Controls to eXm Perf. Why???
> 
> Thanks


8792E is MLCC caps and is still not showing full effect of vdroop.
VR VOUT shows full effect of vdroop.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
notice that the purple line (8792E, also these same values are read via the DMM read points, matching 8792E, is very close to bios voltage at LLC Turbo (somewhere between Maximus XI LLC6 and LLC7).

That's why if you set LLC8 (Ultra Extreme on gigabyte) VR VOUT becomes the same as bios idle and full load (0 mOhm loadline).

I posted extensive screenshots in the 9900K thread proving that.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Got my Z390 Aorus Xtreme 9900k RAM stable at 4133MHZ with some BIOS tweaks, tested by Ram Test. 18-18-18-34 2T 4x8GB G.Skill 3200 CL14
> 
> BRB, I'll post BIOS screens, should work with the Master too.
> 
> BIOS Screenshots in Spoilers
> 
> Edit: Changed the CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline from Turbo to Performance so VID sits at 1.34v instead of 1.39v, the only thing different from screenshots.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Someone asked me.

I really care more about having a stable 5.0 ghz with low volts and low temps as possible. Curious about why you set certain settings on the page that had your load line and other items such as CPU Internal AC/DC Load line to Turbo, VAXG Loadline Cal to High, Cpu Vcore and VAXG protection to 400mv, Current Protections to Low, Switch Rate to 500, and Phase Controls to eXm Perf. Why??? Safe for me to the same? Benefits??

Thanks

Answer:

Switch Rate and Phase Controls will get you a higher overclock with lower voltages. Switch Rate especially helps with memory. 400mv and Current Protections Low just removes the overcurrent protections, you don't necessarily need to do that, just your voltages will stay at full under load or stress testing if you do and not fluctuate as they might set on default. Only issue you'd have is if you fat finger a voltage wrong and way too high in the BIOS, then you could fry your CPU. Otherwise it just insures your voltages stay at max of what they are set under load.

Edit: Max after Vdroop I mean, with Turbo CPU Loadline I get 1.32v VROUT under load, 1.38 at idle with my voltage set at 1.38 in BIOS.

VAXG Loadline just affects your I-GPU in your 9900k. I enable it and use it for my second screen so it takes any load off my 1080 Ti. Probably don't need to change it but i do to ensure no I-GPU crashes.

AC/DC Loadline I put on Performance, not Turbo, I mentioned that in the text of the post. It puts the VID at a much more reasonable readout measure, not too high.

I know from my long time Asus days the Switch Rate, Phase Controls and overcurrent protection removal just a means to help your overclock remain stable at the lowest possible voltages and should have no ill effects on the life of your CPU or components unless you use too high voltages for CPU, System Agent, VCCIO and RAM. I try to stay with my 9900k under load with Prime95 1344 FTTs Run In Place with AVX, FMA and SMA enabled, 15 minute interval, no AVX Offset in BIOS. Under 1.32v VROUT max CPU, under 1.25 System Agent, under 1.25 VCCIO and under 1.45v b-dies RAM.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> But you have EIST enabled so the frequency go up and down as does the VID in Coretemp, but the 8792E Vcore is slightly less than set in bios and cpu-z slightly more. So I assume 8792E Vcore is correct showing effects of vdroop?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> You also have CPU Internal AC/DC Load line to Turbo, VAXG Loadline Cal to High, Cpu Vcore and VAXG protection to 400mv, Current Protections to Low, Switch Rate to 500, and Phase Controls to eXm Perf. Why???
> 
> Thanks


I just left EIST enabled out of habit, but I don't think it affects anything is your CPU voltage is on Manual. I'm going to go Offset eventually once I figure it out with Gigabyte better, I'm coming from years of Asus only. Once I go Offset, EIST without C-States is the way to go for a maximum stable OC.

I'll do Offset soon with a bit of help.

Edit: Or maybe until I figure out Offset voltages enable C-States and hope it doesn't affect my stability which usually it's okay these days to use.

See my last post about those other settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I just left EIST enabled out of habit, but I don't think it affects anything is your CPU voltage is on Manual. I'm going to go Offset eventually once I figure it out with Gigabyte better, I'm coming from years of Asus only. Once I go Offset, EIST without C-States is the way to go for a maximum stable OC.
> 
> I'll do Offset soon with a bit of help.
> 
> Edit: Or maybe until I figure out Offset voltages enable C-States and hope it doesn't affect my stability which usually it's okay these days to use.
> 
> See my last post about those other settings.


Hi,


> Cpu Vcore and VAXG protection to 400mv, Current Protections to Low


Have you tested the VR VOUT for any changes if CPU Vcore protection were set to 'Auto' compared to 400mv? I never changed this from auto and haven't seen anything strange yet.

I have current protections set to high. I thought if current protection were too low (or auto), the computer simply turns itself off at FMA3/AVX small FFT prime95, etc?
You saw actual VR VOUT flutuations before changing these? What were the values before that you saw it fluctuating to?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> Have you tested the VR VOUT for any changes if CPU Vcore protection were set to 'Auto' compared to 400mv? I never changed this from auto and haven't seen anything strange yet.
> 
> I have current protections set to high. I thought if current protection were too low (or auto), the computer simply turns itself off at FMA3/AVX small FFT prime95, etc?
> You saw actual VR VOUT flutuations before changing these? What were the values before that you saw it fluctuating to?


You right, I assumed falsely Low removed the current protection but it needs to be set on High or to stop current protection the highest level. 

Still learning about Gigabyte.


----------



## BradleyW

davidm71 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Was wondering if you guys don't mind posting your stable 5.0ghz dynamic overclock settings on the Z390 Master 9900K? Looking to go dynamic and not look back..
> 
> Thanks


I'll post mine later. Not at my PC right now. I use z390 Ultra so should be similar.


----------



## Cdr_Archangel

Finally on holidays, so I can play a little with me new toys.

CPU: *i5 9600K*
MB: *Z390 Aorus Elite*
RAM: *2x 8GB Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO*
Cooler: *Prolimatech Megahalems rev.b* (cause I'm retro) with 1x *Corsair ML140 fan*
Case: *Coolermaster HAF XB EVO*

The rig is a daily driver, so the target is a 24/7 stable OC. I have no need for AVX on this machine.

I managed to get the 9600k to hit 5GHz all core turbo with 1.33V static voltage in bios (VR OUT ~1.27 under load), LLC at Turbo, MCE disabled, AVX offset 4, and XMP profile 1 enabled.

It passes 10 minutes of powerdraw virus (aka p95 no avx small fft) with temps in the 80s, and 5 minutes of powerdraw *super* virus (aka p95 FMA3 small fft) with temps in the low to mid 90s.

Next plan is to play with the Uncore and try to see if I can get the same results with Dynamic Offsets and MCE enabled.


----------



## BradleyW

Cdr_Archangel said:


> Finally on holidays, so I can play a little with me new toys.
> 
> CPU: *i5 9600K*
> MB: *Z390 Aorus Elite*
> RAM: *2x 8GB Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO*
> Cooler: *Prolimatech Megahalems rev.b* (cause I'm retro) with 1x *Corsair ML140 fan*
> Case: *Coolermaster HAF XB EVO*
> 
> The rig is a daily driver, so the target is a 24/7 stable OC. I have no need for AVX on this machine.
> 
> I managed to get the 9600k to hit 5GHz all core turbo with 1.33V static voltage in bios (VR OUT ~1.27 under load), LLC at Turbo, MCE disabled, AVX offset 4, and XMP profile 1 enabled.
> 
> It passes 10 minutes of powerdraw virus (aka p95 no avx small fft) with temps in the 80s, and 5 minutes of powerdraw *super* virus (aka p95 FMA3 small fft) with temps in the low to mid 90s.
> 
> Next plan is to play with the Uncore and try to see if I can get the same results with Dynamic Offsets and MCE enabled.


Sounds like a sweet rig. You might be able to reduce your vcore if you don't use an avx offset, because when an offset is used, more vcore is required. But people try and use an offset to reduce the voltage required. You cant win lol. I'd test longer than 10 minutes before doing any more fine tweaking because my system would normally take around 2 hours before an error. If you play with too many variables, you won't know what caused the problem or what to change. If you hit 85c after 10 minutes then you can expect at least 95c or even 100c during a prolonged test so watch out for that.


----------



## Cdr_Archangel

BradleyW said:


> Sounds like a sweet rig. You might be able to reduce your vcore if you don't use an avx offset, because when an offset is used, more vcore is required. But people try and use an offset to reduce the voltage required. You cant win lol. I'd test longer than 10 minutes before doing any more fine tweaking because my system would normally take around 2 hours before an error. If you play with too many variables, you won't know what caused the problem or what to change. If you hit 85c after 10 minutes then you can expect at least 95c or even 100c during a prolonged test so watch out for that.


Thank you. I decided in favor of the offset so that in case I have to run something with avx (once in a blue moon) I don't get an instant crash. It is more of a safety feature for my use case than a way to try and drop vcore. Also, my gift-list this year includes an AIO for this machine to see if I can get the temps under even more control. As for longer stress testing, I would run a colder one, like x264.


----------



## FailHaze

I have a G.Skill F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK set on my Z390 Aorus Master with a 9900K, but I can only get this stable at 3600C15. It won't even POST above 3866 Mhz. Any tips?


----------



## Robbært

FailHaze said:


> So I have a G.Skill F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK set, but I can only get this stable at 3600C15. It won't even POST above 3866 Mhz. Any tips?


motherboard, vcore, vccsa, vccio, xmp/settings, cpu?


----------



## FailHaze

Robbært said:


> motherboard, vcore, vccsa, vccio, xmp/settings, cpu?


I was just editing my post to add some of that info. VCore is set to Normal with DVID -0.075V, 9900K @ 5.0Ghz, AVX Offset 2. VCCSA & VCCIO are at 1.25V now, but tried up to 1.35V. Using the XMP profile of the kit, which sets DDR Voltage at 1.4V and 4400 C19-19-19-39. I'm running 3600 C15-15-15-35 now. LLC on Auto.


----------



## KedarWolf

FailHaze said:


> I have a G.Skill F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK set on my Z390 Aorus Master with a 9900K, but I can only get this stable at 3600C15. It won't even POST above 3866 Mhz. Any tips?


This is what I use for memory at 4133MHZ 18-18-18-34 2T (did you try 2T?). Usually it's 1T that keeps your memory from booting above what you said.


----------



## Falkentyne

FailHaze said:


> I was just editing my post to add some of that info. VCore is set to Normal with DVID -0.075V, 9900K @ 5.0Ghz, AVX Offset 2. VCCSA & VCCIO are at 1.25V now, but tried up to 1.35V. Using the XMP profile of the kit, which sets DDR Voltage at 1.4V and 4400 C19-19-19-39. I'm running 3600 C15-15-15-35 now. LLC on Auto.


Try:
19-19-19-45.
Change tRP to 7
Change tWR to 14
Make sure tRC is 64

Set DDR training voltage to 1.5v

Tell me if this works.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> This is what I use for memory at 4133MHZ 18-18-18-34 2T (did you try 2T?). Usually it's 1T that keeps your memory from booting above what you said.


Question.
Did you ever test what happens if you set PWM switch rate back to 400 and PWM Phase control back to auto?
do you lose stability?
if so, in what way? How much more voltage do you need?
Is this repeatable?
And how much can you reduce voltage by using PWM switch rate 500 and PWM phase control extreme perf?

Thank you!


----------



## FailHaze

Falkentyne said:


> Try:
> 19-19-19-45.
> Change tRP to 7
> Change tWR to 14
> Make sure tRC is 64
> 
> Set DDR training voltage to 1.5v
> 
> Tell me if this works.


Unfortunately this didn't work. What do you mean with tRP to 7? tRP should be 19 right?


----------



## tatmMRKIV

Has this product been addressed already???
900$ is the most expensive mobo I have seen.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...iption=3866&cm_re=3866-_-13-145-131-_-Product

LIke dont gert me wrong it might be the sexiest RGB monster i have seen and Id definitely get it before a GODLIKE but HOT DAMN




Ram issues dude: try 19-26-26-46 4266 @ 1.4v (xmp for my 4gb sticks) then just lower numbers till u have issues should be much looser in comparison


----------



## Falkentyne

FailHaze said:


> Unfortunately this didn't work. What do you mean with tRP to 7? tRP should be 19 right?


Oops.
Change **tRTP** to 7
Then change tWR to 14.

Tell me if it posts then at 19-19-19-45
(make sure tRC is manually set to 64 when you do this).


----------



## Xylem

I've got 9700K stable at 5.0GHz at manual voltage of 1.210v (LLC Turbo). I'd like to "convert" this to adaptive OC. Knowing my manual OC voltage, what should be my starting settings in "Normal" mode?

Also, the Gigabyte OC guide had me disable C States and SST. Should any/all of these be re-enabled? Essentially, I'd like 5.0GHz when under load (gaming) and lower clocks/voltages when tooling around the internet or what have you.


----------



## Falkentyne

Xylem said:


> I've got 9700K stable at 5.0GHz at manual voltage of 1.210v (LLC Turbo). I'd like to "convert" this to adaptive OC. Knowing my manual OC voltage, what should be my starting settings in "Normal" mode?
> 
> Also, the Gigabyte OC guide had me disable C States and SST. Should any/all of these be re-enabled? Essentially, I'd like 5.0GHz when under load (gaming) and lower clocks/voltages when tooling around the internet or what have you.


No one can tell you what your starting settings should be.
This depends on your CPU default VID. Which gets even MORE complicated because your CPU's default VID is based on the cache speed. (i have not done sufficient testing to see if the core speed has a factor in this, but in everything I've seen so far, the cache speed is what affects this.

The best way to find your CPU default VID is to set Internal IA AC DC loadline to 1 in VR Settings (don't use the CPU Internal Load Line presets, they influence IA AC and IA DC with some custom values which are unknown but something between 1 and 210 for each preset).

Once you do that, it gets a bit more tricky (but can be fun if you don't mind getting a BSOD).
First, go into your bios and set a voltage you know for sure is stable. For now we can do 1.35v, LLC Turbo. You can do LLC Extreme for extra insurance, but NOT Ultra Extreme. We are NOT stress testing the processor! We are only going to cycle through core/cache ratios (if possible, setting cache equal to core while in WINDOWS) to record the VID shown.

So let's try 5 ghz, 4.7 ghz cache, 1.35v voltage, Loadline Calibration= Extreme.

Download, install and use Throttlestop 8.70 and allow it to control speed shift and multipliers. Set your speed shift from 8 to 51 or whatever you want your highest OC to ever be. Note that in the FIVR window, you can't manually set a multiplier below x36 or x35 whatever your "base" ratio is. You would have to set speedshift to the same min and max value in the "TPL" window and then apply it. (to make your speedshift ratio active in Throttlestop, make sure SST is in green and enter 0, which is no downclocking. (Example if u want your CPU to run at 800 mhz all the time, you would set speed shift min and max to 800 mhz  But for now set it to 8 to 51.

Anyway, cycle through the multiplier steps in the FIVR window. Start at x36 and go up, pay attention to the cache ratio shown in TS, and write down that idle VID somewhere. Make sure you record the cache ratio VID and speed. Example: If your core speed is 4.7 ghz, your cache is 4.4 ghz and your VID is 1.18v at idle (IA AC / IA DC MUST be set to 1), then you can be pretty sure that setting a manual voltage of 1.18v, with CORE AND CACHE at 4.4 ghz will be fully stable with LLC=Turbo. (yes I know we are using extreme for now).

You can manually force the cache ratio to be the core ratio (or 1 or 2 lower) by setting the minimum and maximum cache ratio in Throttlestop FIVR window to be the same. (this should also affect the VID).

Ideally, you want a cache ratio of x47 to get a BASIC idea of what your x50 VID would actually be. The problem is the VID shown will be your 4700 mhz ratio (assuming here both cache and core are set to 4700 mhz).
So setting CPU to 50 and cache to 47 with a VID for x47 may not be stable. But you at least will get an idea.

If the cache vid keeps scaling past 4.7 ghz, if you can set core to 50 and cache to 48 and the vid scales up still from 47 to 48 and not BSOD, great. write that down. (remember in TS, you set min and max cache speed to x48).
Then if you can set core to 50 and cache to 49 and not crash and the cache VID keeps increasing, great. do that. record it. and so on.

If the VID stops increasing as the cache ratio keeps increasing, then you cant go on anymore.

doing x50/x50 would be gravy.

Once you now know your default VID, you want that (cache) VID to be your core voltage for your CPU, to insure stability.(IF the cache VID kept scaling).
Example if you ever managed to set x50/x50 and it said your VID was 1.28v at idle, that would be a starting point for your adaptive +offset tweaking (Normal + DVID).

just remember the starting VID will be linked to the CACHE SPEED. so for example: lets say it was like this:
x50/x47 = 1.215v. x50/x48=1.235v. x50/x49=1.260v. x50/x50=1.295v.

You would know that 5 ghz core would "probably" need 1.295v to be stable.
So since setting core and cache to the same speed is sometimes not stable, lets say you wanted x50/x47 ok?
In that case, your starting VID for normal+dvid would be 1.215v.

Then you need to apply enough DVID to raise your voltage to 1.295v.

If you leave loadline calibration (LLC) at Auto or Standard, the CPU Voltage and CPU VID (if using ITE 8792E's sensor) should closely match up at both idle and load. If you use loadline calibration=turbo, the vcore will be higher. Tweak as necessary.

AGAIN YMMV. I DID **NOT** test this. This is just a GUESS on how it works. You have to do your own testing. I don't use adaptive voltage right now.


----------



## Markus Hilger

FYI: It looks like VID does not go up for every cache step.

My small experiments show the following (Aorus ULTRA @ F6 BIOS with 9900K @ 4.9GHz Core adaptive Voltage (-0.45V)):



Code:


Cache      IT8792E      VR VOUT    Package Power
4300MHz    1.23V	1.20V	   158W
4600MHz    1.23V	1.20V	   158W
4700MHz    1.26V	1.22V	   167W

VID should be +0.45V as I use a negative offset of 0.45V. Yes my CPU isn't the best one 
As you can see Vcore is the same for 4300 MHz and 4600 MHz cache, but goes up at 4700 MHz.

Furthermore Gigabyte seems to do some strange things if the Cache Ratio is on Auto.
Sometimes it's 4600, sometimes it's 4300 MHz (changes between boots etc.). Therefore if you use adaptive Voltage you should set a specific Cache Ratio so your VID/Vcore stays "the same" for all your stability tests.

---

Imo *adaptive voltage* is super easy. All you have to do is:
*Mandatory*
- Load XMP Profile
- Disable Enhanced Multi-Core Performance
- Set CPU Clock Ratio [ex: 50]
- Set Uncore Ratio (keep in mind that this can influence your VID a lot (see above), do some tests with different ratios and check VID/Vcore) [ex: 47]
- Max out all Turbo Limits (probably not needed but doesn't hurt)
- Set CPU Vcore to Normal
- Set Dynamic Vcore(DVID) to -x.xxxV [ex: start with -0.100V test stability and go up or down etc. (see below)]
- Keep LLC etc. at Auto!
- Leave everything else like C-States etc. on Auto if you want to keep all the power saving features

*Optional*
- Disable VT-d and Internal Graphics (In my tests it didn't really make a difference but I don't need it anyways)
- Set CPU VCCIO and CPU System Agent Voltage. The default values with a loaded XMP profile are usually higher than needed (1.2V/1.3V iirc). I set mine to 1.1/1.2V @ 3200Mhz XMP @ CR 1T and did extensive Memory tests. This isn't needed at all and just optional fine tuning.

With these settings you CPU behaves almost like a stock CPU (Dynamic Core Clock, Dynamic Cache Clock, Dynamic Vcore, C-States etc.). Just at higher frequencies.
Just keep in mind to test Idle or single/dual core etc. stability, too. The VID offset is applied every time, even if the CPU is idle. Basically just use your PC normally after you found stable OC settings and check Windows Event Viewer for WHEA errors.

---

For instance on my 9900K I use the following settings for 4900 Core, 4600 Cache:
- 3200 MHz XMP @ CR 1T
- Disabled Enhanced Multi-Core Performance
- CPU Clock Ratio 50
- Uncore Ratio 46
- Maxed out all Turbo Limits
- CPU Vcore Normal
- Dynamic Vcore(DVID) to -0.045V
- CPU VCCIO 1.100V
- CPU System Agent Voltage 1.200V
- Everything else like C-States, LLC etc. on Auto

This is rock solid and stable in every stability test I've tested (AIDA64, Prime95 w/wo AVX/FMA3, Cinebench, LinpackXtreme, OCCT, PowerMax, RealBench, y-cruncher, Games like BF V, ...)

---

One last *stability test tip*:
I found that PowerMax was (at least for me) by far the fastest quick stability test. Just run it with SSE and AVX for several minutes and look at HWInfo Windows Hardware Errors (WHEA). In my experience (several days of stability testing with all the tools mentioned above) PowerMax throws WHEA in <5min. Other tools needed several hours to detect/throw an error (or mostly didn't even detect an error at all). And it doesn't draw insane amounts of power like Prime95 with FMA3 does.

What I did to *find correct DVID*:
- Start at high negative DVID offset (like -0.100V). This should still boot fine and may run Cinebench but is probably unstable.
- Quick performance/stability check with Cinebench
- 5min PowerMax + HWInfo (check for WHEA errors)
- If unstable --> Lower DVID offset in 0.020V steps (-0.080V, -0.060V, ...)
- If stable --> LinpackXtreme, Prime95, AIDA64, ... for an hour --> If stable try to increase DVID offset by 5mV again and retest
- Finally do some long running stability tests, game, use PC etc.


----------



## Falkentyne

Markus Hilger said:


> FYI: It looks like VID does not go up for every cache step.
> 
> My small experiments show the following (Aorus ULTRA @ F6 BIOS with 9900K @ 4.9GHz adaptive Voltage (-0.45V)):
> 
> Cache IT8792E VR VOUT Package Power
> 4300	MHz 1.23 V	1.20 V	158 W
> 4600	MHz 1.23 V	1.20 V	158 W
> 4700	MHz 1.26 V	1.22 V	167 W
> 
> VID should be +0.45V as I use a negative offset of 0.45V. Yes my CPU isn't the best one
> 
> Furthermore Gigabyte seems to do some strange things if the Cache Ratio is on Auto.
> Sometimes it's 4600, sometimes it's 4300 MHz (changes between boots etc.). Therefore if you use adaptive Voltage you should set a specific Cache Ratio so your VID/Vcore stays "the same" for all your stability tests.
> 
> ---
> 
> Imo *adaptive voltage* is super easy. All you have to do is:
> *Mandatory*
> - Load XMP Profile
> - Disable Enhanced Multi-Core Performance
> - Set CPU Clock Ratio [ex: 50]
> - Set Uncore Ratio (keep in mind that this can influence your VID a lot (see above), do some tests with different ratios and check VID/Vcore) [ex: 47]
> - Max out all Turbo Limits (probably not needed but doesn't hurt)
> - Set CPU Vcore to Normal
> - Set Dynamic Vcore(DVID) to -x.xxxV [ex: start with -0.120V test stability and go up or down etc. (see below)]
> - Keep LLC etc. at Auto!
> - Leave everything else like C-States etc. on Auto if you want to keep all the power saving features
> 
> *Optional*
> - Disable VT-d and Internal Graphics (In my tests it didn't really make a difference but I don't need it anyways)
> - Set CPU VCCIO and CPU System Agent Voltage. The default values with a loaded XMP profile are usually higher than needed (1.2V/1.3V iirc). I set mine to 1.1/1.2V @ 3200Mhz XMP @ CR 1T and did extensive Memory tests. This isn't needed at all and just optional fine tuning.
> 
> With these settings you CPU behaves almost like a stock CPU (Dynamic Core Clock, Dynamic Cache Clock, Dynamic Vcore, C-States etc.). Just at higher frequencies.
> Just keep in mind to test Idle or single/dual core etc. stability, too. The VID offset is applied every time, even if the CPU is idle. Basically just use your PC normally after you found stable OC settings and check Windows Event Viewer for WHEA errors.
> 
> ---
> 
> For instance on my 9900K I use the following settings for 4900 Core, 4600 Cache:
> - 3200 MHz XMP @ CR 1T
> - Disabled Enhanced Multi-Core Performance
> - CPU Clock Ratio 50
> - Uncore Ratio 46
> - Maxed out all Turbo Limits
> - CPU Vcore Normal
> - Dynamic Vcore(DVID) to -0.045V
> - CPU VCCIO 1.100V
> - CPU System Agent Voltage 1.200V
> - Everything else like C-States, LLC etc. on Auto
> 
> This is rock solid and stable in every stability test I've tested (AIDA64, Prime95 w/wo AVX/FMA3, Cinebench, LinpackXtreme, OCCT, PowerMax, RealBench, y-cruncher, Games like BF V, ...)
> 
> ---
> 
> One last *stability test tip*:
> I found that PowerMax was (at least for me) by far the fastest quick stability test. Just run it with SSE and AVX for several minutes and look at HWInfo Windows Hardware Errors (WHEA). In my experience (several days of stability testing with all the tools mentioned above) PowerMax throws WHEA in <5min. Other tools needed several hours to detect/throw an error (or mostly didn't even detect an error at all). And it doesn't draw insane amounts of power like Prime95 with FMA3 does.
> 
> What I did to *find correct DVID*:
> - Start at high negative DVID offset (like -0.120V). This should still boot fine and may run Cinebench but is probably unstable.
> - Quick performance/stability check with Cinebench
> - 5min PowerMax + HWInfo (check for WHEA errors)
> - If unstable --> Lower DVID offset in 0.020V steps (-0.080V, -0.060V, ...)
> - If stable --> LinpackXtreme, Prime95, AIDA64, ... for an hour --> If stable try to increase DVID offset by 5mV again and retest
> - Finally do some long running stability tests, game, use PC etc.


Did you have any luck if you set Internal VR IA AC, IA DC loadline to 1 ?
(you would probably have to use a positive offset at 4.9 ghz though).



> I found that PowerMax was (at least for me) by far the fastest quick stability test. Just run it with SSE and AVX for several minutes and look at HWInfo Windows Hardware Errors (WHEA). In my experience (several days of stability testing with all the tools mentioned above) PowerMax throws WHEA in <5min.


I think Powermax is influenced by hyperthreading causing less performance as lots multiple hyperthreaded threads conflict with each other at higher FFT sizes. Same issue happens with Linpack.
When I tested Powermax on a 7820HK laptop, it ran hotter than FMA3 small FFT and it tripped the VRM protection and the laptop just shut off at 4.5 ghz.

FMA3 didn't do that (until a higher vcore/speed or until the 15K FFT test (@ 4.5 ghz 1.18v)). 
Linpack did the same thing as Powermax. But that was on 4 cores 8 threads.

You would have to disable HT and then compare Powermax to FMA3...


----------



## dpap

Hey guys,
long time OCer, mostly Asus. I just got my 9900k (5.1 SL binned) and Aorus Extreme (F4 bios). Custom WL setup with 2x480 rads. 64gb DDR4 3200CL14 memory running at xmp.

Now, my question: I have to say, I am not sure how LLC works in this motherboard.

IA 80, Normal (offset voltage) with -0.065 DVID. LLC at Medium. All C-states and EIST enabled (I leave my pc on all the time, so need the cpu to downclock)
At low power, VRVOUT=0.67, at IDLE=1.13, at OCCT_load=1.256 (VID=1.35). Power draw at 160W. So far so good. When I load RealBench 2.43, it crashes in an instant (VRVOUT at 1.15)

Now, I bump the LLC to High and DVID at -0.05. Now RB runs (30 mins so far) but VRVOUT is now at 1.20 (VID=1.25). Power draw t 165W

Why is VRVOUT lower at RB full load than at OCCT? How does LLC determine how much to mitigate vdroop? Is it a function of the amperage that goes through the CPU? 

As I am writing this, the only thing that I can think of is that RB pushes more amperage to the CPU than OCCT (they generate similar power draw at very different voltage), hence it generates larger vdroop. Hence the need for higher LLC.

Does this make sense?

Also, what does LLC auto do?


----------



## KedarWolf

-.100 Offset with both VR IA AC DC Loadline at 0 instant BSOD in Windows at 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache. -.090 Offset it'll boot but CPU VR VOUT too high at 1.36v while running Prime95. This is with LLC on Auto.

To get an Offset to work with Auto LLC, I set both VR IA AC Loadline to 1, +.180 Offset. Running prime95 with AVX no AVX Offset in the BIOS, I now get 1.299 VR VOUT at 5.1GHZ CPU. 4.7GHZ cache.

This is with all C States on Auto.


----------



## Falkentyne

dpap said:


> Hey guys,
> long time OCer, mostly Asus. I just got my 9900k (5.1 SL binned) and Aorus Extreme (F4 bios). Custom WL setup with 2x480 rads. 64gb DDR4 3200CL14 memory running at xmp.
> 
> Now, my question: I have to say, I am not sure how LLC works in this motherboard.
> 
> IA 80, Normal (offset voltage) with -0.065 DVID. LLC at Medium. All C-states and EIST enabled (I leave my pc on all the time, so need the cpu to downclock)
> At low power, VRVOUT=0.67, at IDLE=1.13, at OCCT_load=1.256 (VID=1.35). Power draw at 160W. So far so good. When I load RealBench 2.43, it crashes in an instant (VRVOUT at 1.15)
> 
> Now, I bump the LLC to High and DVID at -0.05. Now RB runs (30 mins so far) but VRVOUT is now at 1.20 (VID=1.25). Power draw t 165W
> 
> Why is VRVOUT lower at RB full load than at OCCT? How does LLC determine how much to mitigate vdroop? Is it a function of the amperage that goes through the CPU?
> 
> As I am writing this, the only thing that I can think of is that RB pushes more amperage to the CPU than OCCT (they generate similar power draw at very different voltage), hence it generates larger vdroop. Hence the need for higher LLC.
> 
> Does this make sense?
> 
> Also, what does LLC auto do?


LLC Auto seems to be the exact same as standard and normal.
It may be able to be changed by something in the bios (maybe MCE enabled) but I have MCE disabled and never saw any difference between LLC Normal, Standard and Auto (did some tests with adaptive voltage awhile back in this thread and posted screenshots).

And Let me explain about loadline.
Loadline is a vdroop "slope" specification of resistance, on how much vdroop the vcore will drop.
The default resistance for 4/6/8 core CFL is in the intel spec sheet here.

But 4 and 6 core loadline is 2.10 mOhms and 8 core is 1.60 mOhms.
That means, vdroop is going to be based on amps * resistance.
so at 100 amps of current, you get 100 * 1.60=160mv.

That means the voltage will drop by 160mv at full load with a 1.60 mOhm loadline at 100 amps, and 320mv at 200 amps of current.
So auto/normal/standard should be 1.60 mOhms loadline.

This is also where the "DC Loadline" CPU VR setting comes from. DC loadline doesn't affect vcore--it's just a power measurement, which affects how the *CPU VID* will droop.
DC loadline is to CPU VID, as "Loadline Calibration" is to CPU Vcore.

So with DC loadline at default (1.60 mOhms), the CPU idle and load vcore readouts should match the CPU VID pretty closely.
However changing the DC loadline to something else like 1 (this stops the VID from drooping at load) will **NOT** affect the CPU Vcore from drooping, as "Loadline Calibration level" affects that !
They are just preset by default to match the same value as they are designed to be used with adaptive voltage.

You may even get a more accurate reading without VID BOOST with adaptive voltage, by setting IA AC loadline to 1 and keeping DC loadline at the default value. (provided LLC is also set to standard).

The IA AC loadline is operating voltage. This *directly* affects vcore, because when using adaptive voltage, adaptive gets its vcore from the base + AC boosted VID. (IA AC is ignored when using override voltage).
I do not known how the IA AC setting affects VID, if its affected at idle or at load. But the default IA AC setting is also 1.60 mOhms.

I do know that a 1.60 mOhm (Bios value=160) AC loadline value makes the VID go much higher than setting it to 0.01 mOhms (bios value=1).
If you do play with the AC and DC values make very absolutely sure you do not exceed maximum rated values for the AC value, ever (160 and 210).



> 10. LL measured at sense points.
> 13. LL specification values should not be exceeded. If exceeded, power, performance and reliability penalty are expected.
> 14. Load Line (AC/DC) should be measured by the VRTT tool and programmed accordingly via the BIOS Load Line override setup
> options. AC/DC Load Line BIOS programming directly affects operating voltages (AC) and power measurements (DC). A
> superior board design with a shallower AC Load Line can improve on power, performance, and thermals compared to boards
> designed for POR impedance.


Changing loadline calibration to a higher level reduces the resistance. Ultra Extreme is a 0 mOhm (flat) loadline, meaning vcore will not drop (or rise) at idle to load (but transient voltage spikes in the microseconds can be up to 200mv---MUST use an OSCILLOSCOPE to detect this!! Multimeter and sensors can NOT detect this. Ultra Extreme is NOT safe to use at high voltage because of this!)


----------



## dpap

thank you, this is useful.

I think I am pretty happy with my settings so far. P95 /avx goes to 1.27 vrvout, and so far runs with no errors (but my cpu is at 90C+)

Next step is memtest and a 8 hours of RB. If that passes, then will call it a day.



Falkentyne said:


> LLC Auto seems to be the exact same as standard and normal.
> It may be able to be changed by something in the bios (maybe MCE enabled) but I have MCE disabled and never saw any difference between LLC Normal, Standard and Auto (did some tests with adaptive voltage awhile back in this thread and posted screenshots).
> 
> And Let me explain about loadline.
> Loadline is a vdroop "slope" specification of resistance, on how much vdroop the vcore will drop.
> The default resistance for 4/6/8 core CFL is in the intel spec sheet here.
> 
> But 4 and 6 core loadline is 2.10 mOhms and 8 core is 1.60 mOhms.
> That means, vdroop is going to be based on amps * resistance.
> so at 100 amps of current, you get 100 * 1.60=160mv.
> 
> That means the voltage will drop by 160mv at full load with a 1.60 mOhm loadline at 100 amps, and 320mv at 200 amps of current.
> So auto/normal/standard should be 1.60 mOhms loadline.
> 
> This is also where the "DC Loadline" CPU VR setting comes from. DC loadline doesn't affect vcore--it's just a power measurement, which affects how the *CPU VID* will droop.
> DC loadline is to CPU VID, as "Loadline Calibration" is to CPU Vcore.
> 
> So with DC loadline at default (1.60 mOhms), the CPU idle and load vcore readouts should match the CPU VID pretty closely.
> However changing the DC loadline to something else like 1 (this stops the VID from drooping at load) will **NOT** affect the CPU Vcore from drooping, as "Loadline Calibration level" affects that !
> They are just preset by default to match the same value as they are designed to be used with adaptive voltage.
> 
> You may even get a more accurate reading without VID BOOST with adaptive voltage, by setting IA AC loadline to 1 and keeping DC loadline at the default value. (provided LLC is also set to standard).
> 
> The IA AC loadline is operating voltage. This *directly* affects vcore, because when using adaptive voltage, adaptive gets its vcore from the base + AC boosted VID. (IA AC is ignored when using override voltage).
> I do not known how the IA AC setting affects VID, if its affected at idle or at load. But the default IA AC setting is also 1.60 mOhms.
> 
> I do know that a 1.60 mOhm (Bios value=160) AC loadline value makes the VID go much higher than setting it to 0.01 mOhms (bios value=1).
> If you do play with the AC and DC values make very absolutely sure you do not exceed maximum rated values for the AC value, ever (160 and 210).
> 
> 
> 
> Changing loadline calibration to a higher level reduces the resistance. Ultra Extreme is a 0 mOhm (flat) loadline, meaning vcore will not drop (or rise) at idle to load (but transient voltage spikes in the microseconds can be up to 200mv---MUST use an OSCILLOSCOPE to detect this!! Multimeter and sensors can NOT detect this. Ultra Extreme is NOT safe to use at high voltage because of this!)


----------



## dpap

I have to say though, this is a cpu that does not dissipate heat well. On die temp is 90C+ while the water temp is barely above ambient...this is with a delidded sample and heatkiller IV waterblock


----------



## KedarWolf

dpap said:


> I have to say though, this is a cpu that does not dissipate heat well. On die temp is 90C+ while the water temp is barely above ambient...this is with a delidded sample and heatkiller IV waterblock


With all the AVX's, SSE's and FMA's enabled in the local.txt I run Prime95 with no AVX Offset in BIOS, 1344 min/max FFT's, Run In Place, 15 minute interval and only get around 70-75C the hottest core with 1.306v VR VOUT. 

And this is totally fine to stress test your PC with Prime95 for stability. 

Edit: Have HWInfo open and watch for WHEA Errors.


----------



## scaramonga

OK, strange one here guys.

AORUS Master all up and running fine, now...

I have a 970 Pro 512 NvME in the top slot (M2M), all good, and it shows so in BIOS, and works great in Windows.

I have a 950 Pro 512 NvME in second slot (M2A), all good, but it does NOT show in BIOS??, but works fine regardless? - aka Windows etc.

I have an 860 Evo 1Tb on SATA 2, which is picked up and works just great also.

Why is BIOS showing that the 950 drive does not even exist, but works just fine otherwise?

Any explanation?


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> OK, strange one here guys.
> 
> AORUS Master all up and running fine, now...
> 
> I have a 970 Pro 512 NvME in the top slot (M2M), all good, and it shows so in BIOS, and works great in Windows.
> 
> I have a 950 Pro 512 NvME in second slot (M2A), all good, but it does NOT show in BIOS??, but works fine regardless? - aka Windows etc.
> 
> I have an 860 Evo 1Tb on SATA 2, which is picked up and works just great also.
> 
> Why is BIOS showing that the 950 drive does not even exist, but works just fine otherwise?
> 
> Any explanation?


Dunno, my two 960 Pro's in bottom two M.2 slots show up just fine.

Nice getting over 4000MB/sec read over 3000 write in RAID 0!


----------



## dpap

ah, ok. With that setting, I get 50C in the hottest core (with 2 offset) vs 80C in the small FFT...

right now, the hardest one to pass seems for some reason realbench...



KedarWolf said:


> With all the AVX's, SSE's and FMA's enabled in the local.txt I run Prime95 with no AVX Offset in BIOS, 1344 min/max FFT's, Run In Place, 15 minute interval and only get around 70-75C the hottest core with 1.306v VR VOUT.
> 
> And this is totally fine to stress test your PC with Prime95 for stability.
> 
> Edit: Have HWInfo open and watch for WHEA Errors.


----------



## Markus Hilger

Falkentyne said:


> Did you have any luck if you set Internal VR IA AC, IA DC loadline to 1 ?
> (you would probably have to use a positive offset at 4.9 ghz though).


What kind of luck do you mean?
What kind of improvements/advantages should I see?


----------



## KedarWolf

dpap said:


> ah, ok. With that setting, I get 50C in the hottest core (with 2 offset) vs 80C in the small FFT...
> 
> right now, the hardest one to pass seems for some reason realbench...


Try with no Offset. If you're not going to use intensive AVX programs you'll get a higher overclock with lower voltages no Offset. RealBench uses AVX btw. But you'll be under 80C no Offset with Prime95 AVX with those settings.
.


----------



## KedarWolf

This is my Offset settings for 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 1.306v VR VOUT under Prime95 1344 FFTs. DON'T forget the IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline at 1 or your voltages will be too high. With those at 0 I couldn't boot into Windows with a negative -.100 Offset without BSODs and negative -.080 would boot but my VR VOUT was at 1.37, too high. 

*EDIT: Put IA DC Loadline at 0 like suggested and my temps stress testing are down quite a bit. *


----------



## Falkentyne

Markus Hilger said:


> What kind of luck do you mean?
> What kind of improvements/advantages should I see?


Tighter control over the voltage.
Actually if you are using "Auto/Standard/Normal" loadline calibration, only set IA AC loadline to 1. Leave DC loadline at default..


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> This is my Offset settings for 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 1.306v VR VOUT under Prime95 1344 FFTs. DON'T forget the IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline at 1 or your voltages will be too high. With those at 0 I couldn't boot into Windows with a negative -.100 Offset without BSODs and negative -.080 would boot but my VR VOUT was at 1.37, too high.


It's much much faster to set the 1-8 core turbo multiplier ratios to "0"
instead of setting them all to 51.

That stops them from ever overriding the main core ratio you set far above that.
Took me some time to figure that out and saves a LOT of time.


----------



## KedarWolf

​


Falkentyne said:


> Tighter control over the voltage.
> Actually if you are using "Auto/Standard/Normal" loadline calibration, only set IA AC loadline to 1. Leave DC loadline at default..


Thanks, DC Loadline now at default.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> It's much much faster to set the 1-8 core turbo multiplier ratios to "0"
> instead of setting them all to 51.
> 
> That stops them from ever overriding the main core ratio you set far above that.
> Took me some time to figure that out and saves a LOT of time.


If I try to set the Turbo Ratios to '0' they just go as Default.


----------



## KedarWolf

I just noticed with C-states etc. on Auto my VID, CPU speeds and VCore lowers but my VR VOUT stays static at 1.380v with a +.190 Offset and AC Loadline at 1.

Why would this happen?

Edit: My voltages must be really low because my idle CPU temps are 13C instead of 27C on static VCore voltages.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> If I try to set the Turbo Ratios to '0' they just go as Default.


Mine go to "Auto".
Yours goes to default, as in "numbers" like 50, 49, 48 , 48 etc? 
What if you use the menus to set it to Auto manually? Can you do that?
When I press 0 for the ratios, each one goes to "Auto", then when I set the global multiplier, the global one takes priority over "Auto."


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I just noticed with C-states etc. on Auto my VID, CPU speeds and VCore lowers but my VR VOUT stays static at 1.380v with a +.190 Offset and AC Loadline at 1.
> 
> Why would this happen?
> 
> Edit: My voltages must be really low because my idle CPU temps are 13C instead of 27C on static VCore voltages.


I can't help with c-states but cstates are some sort of low power thing where parts of the CPU goes to sleep
Apparently the voltage regulator is trying to send 1.380v, but the CPU isn't receiving it, and since there's no load and no vdroop it's showing max voltage. I don't know at that point which voltage is right. I can't help with c-states, sorry.
Maybe PM Elmor?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Mine go to "Auto".
> Yours goes to default, as in "numbers" like 50, 49, 48 , 48 etc?
> What if you use the menus to set it to Auto manually? Can you do that?
> When I press 0 for the ratios, each one goes to "Auto", then when I set the global multiplier, the global one takes priority over "Auto."


I meant Auto.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I meant Auto.


That's all you need to do. Then you can just enter any multiplier you want globally.


----------



## dpap

I tried your settings and I had the same thing happen: vrvout at idle was 1.36, which seemed too high for me. But temps were low, so mabe w Th c states enabled, vrvout is not accurate?

I know rb uses avs, but I am using the 2.43 version I dont think does.

Is avx offset still borked, or has this been fixed? Was this only for the master or was it broken for all MBs in the aorus line? The extreme bios is still in its early stages (f4 is the latest version)...




Falkentyne said:


> I can't help with c-states but cstates are some sort of low power thing where parts of the CPU goes to sleep
> Apparently the voltage regulator is trying to send 1.380v, but the CPU isn't receiving it, and since there's no load and no vdroop it's showing max voltage. I don't know at that point which voltage is right. I can't help with c-states, sorry.
> Maybe PM Elmor?


----------



## UniverseN

Hi, guys. Which connector on Aorus Master to use best for m.2 in your opinion? As far as I know, m2m disables 2 SATA ports, m2a disables 1 SATA port and m2p disables PCI lanes? I have my m.2 on m2a, and +5 SSD discs. Is any of these connectors faster than the other? For example, is m2m faster than m2a? Thanks!


----------



## The Pook

UniverseN said:


> Hi, guys. Which connector on Aorus Master to use best for m.2 in your opinion? As far as I know, m2m disables 2 SATA ports, m2a disables 1 SATA port and m2p disables PCI lanes? I have my m.2 on m2a, and +5 SSD discs. Is any of these connectors faster than the other? For example, is m2m faster than m2a? Thanks!



is your M2 NVME or AHCI? If it's NVME, use M2P. If it's AHCI, probably m2a unless you don't like SATA ports.


----------



## shaolin95

Hey guys am I the only one getting an annoying upgrade alert for USB DAC-UP 2 yet you upgrade it and it STILL happens after reboot? I tried deleting the app and installing again. tried finding the version mentioned there but nothing helps as the latest version on the website is B18.0808.1 and the update app says B18.0912.1 which I cannot find for this particular program.
Anyone?


----------



## UniverseN

The Pook said:


> is your M2 NVME or AHCI? If it's NVME, use M2P. If it's AHCI, probably m2a unless you don't like SATA ports.


It's NVME. Why M2P is better than M2A?


----------



## The Pook

UniverseN said:


> It's NVME. Why M2P is better than M2A?



Because it's tied to your PCI-E lanes instead of your SATA controller?


----------



## flowfaster

OK so I had some time last night to get all of my DVID profiles set up. Stayed up until 230am  I did one for 4.7, 4.8 and 5.0ghz. Please try these settings out as I have found them to have excellent temps. For example @ 4.7 (Stock multiplier), aida64 stress tests only top out at 60c. and up to 72c @ 5.0ghz.
Stats:
9900K
Z390 Aorus Master F6 bios
EVGA CLC 280
EVGA 1000W P2
EVGA GTX 1080 FTW x2 in SLI
970 Pro NVMe SSD
32GB Corsair RGB Pro @ 3800 CL16

I am not going to list out every bios setting but here are the pertinent ones I can think of.

4.7ghz:
CPU Multiplier @ auto, DVID offset -0.075, VR IA AC/DC Loadline 1, LLC Turbo, MCE off, AVX offset 0. 

4.8ghz:
CPU Multiplier 48, DVID offset -0.055, VR IA AC/DC loadline 1, LLC Turbo, MCE off, AVX offset 0.

5.0ghz:
CPU Multiplier 50, DVID offset -0.025, VR IA AC/DC loadline 1, LLC Turbo, MCE off, AVX offset 0.

These settings have been validated by: 2 30min. sessions of BF5 tides of war 64 PVP, 30 min of Just cause 4, 30 min. of Star Wars Battlefront Single player, 30 min. of Shadow of the Tomb Raider, CinebenchR15 and Aida64 stress tests until my Rad got heat soaked.

So as you can see, extremely scientific tests : l. I found BF5 and JC4 to be better at checking stability than synthetic tests. I can run Cinebench and aida64 FPU tests all day long and crash within 5 minutes of playing BF5 or JC4. But hey take that for what it is. 

Of course YMMV with what - offset your CPU can hit. Please post your results!


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf,

I set my AC/DC internal loadline to 'performance' like you had set in your profile. Noticed that my VID droop is slightly less such that the vid is a little higher than before but not by much. Peak 100% frequency idle vid is also a tiny bit higher. Should I leave it for 5ghz now? Expect better stability? Lower vcore values now to see how low I can go?

Thanks


----------



## flowfaster

davidm71 said:


> KedarWolf,
> 
> I set my AC/DC internal loadline to 'performance' like you had set in your profile. Noticed that my VID droop is slightly less such that the vid is a little higher than before but not by much. Peak 100% frequency idle vid is also a tiny bit higher. Should I leave it for 5ghz now? Expect better stability? Lower vcore values now to see how low I can go?
> 
> Thanks


Hey, I have not been following your posts but I was experiencing high idle voltage when using DVID and a negative VCORE offset. EXP. @ 4.8ghz DVID offset to -0.015 I was seeing idle voltage up to 1.320V, under load it was 1.212-1.224.

I fixed that and have been pretty pleased with my idle temps and voltage. I, 1. set a much larger negative DVID offset (seems to drop/stop idle voltage spikes), 2. set LLC to turbo (that really helped stability and allowed the negative DVID to be much much larger), 3. set VR IA AC/DC to 1 (that really helped my VID to stay under control) now the idle voltage never shoots up to the 1.3v+ territory and I am fully stable under load.

Not sure if that helps any. Please keep in mind that I am not an expert at any of this. However I have spent the last month messing around with the Aorus master and 9900k. Way too many hours  It has been fun.


----------



## KedarWolf

flowfaster said:


> OK so I had some time last night to get all of my DVID profiles set up. Stayed up until 230am  I did one for 4.7, 4.8 and 5.0ghz. Please try these settings out as I have found them to have excellent temps. For example @ 4.7 (Stock multiplier), aida64 stress tests only top out at 60c. and up to 72c @ 5.0ghz.
> Stats:
> 9900K
> Z390 Aorus Master F6 bios
> EVGA CLC 280
> EVGA 1000W P2
> EVGA GTX 1080 FTW x2 in SLI
> 970 Pro NVMe SSD
> 32GB Corsair RGB Pro @ 3800 CL16
> 
> I am not going to list out every bios setting but here are the pertinent ones I can think of.
> 
> 4.7ghz:
> CPU Multiplier @ auto, DVID offset -0.075, VR IA AC/DC Loadline 1, LLC Turbo, MCE off, AVX offset 0.
> 
> 4.8ghz:
> CPU Multiplier 48, DVID offset -0.055, VR IA AC/DC loadline 1, LLC Turbo, MCE off, AVX offset 0.
> 
> 5.0ghz:
> CPU Multiplier 50, DVID offset -0.025, VR IA AC/DC loadline 1, LLC Turbo, MCE off, AVX offset 0.
> 
> These settings have been validated by: 2 30min. sessions of BF5 tides of war 64 PVP, 30 min of Just cause 4, 30 min. of Star Wars Battlefront Single player, 30 min. of Shadow of the Tomb Raider, CinebenchR15 and Aida64 stress tests until my Rad got heat soaked.
> 
> So as you can see, extremely scientific tests : l. I found BF5 and JC4 to be better at checking stability than synthetic tests. I can run Cinebench and aida64 FPU tests all day long and crash within 5 minutes of playing BF5 or JC4. But hey take that for what it is.
> 
> Of course YMMV with what - offset your CPU can hit. Please post your results!


You'll get lower temps stress testing with VR IA DC Loadlinne set at default, 0, only need to set the VR IA AC Loadline to 1. :h34r-smi


----------



## flowfaster

KedarWolf said:


> You'll get lower temps stress testing with VR IA DC Loadlinne set at default, 0, only need to set the VR IA AC Loadline to 1. :h34r-smi


Damn it. I'm going to retest my profiles with the VR IA DC set to 0 now. Will report back.


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> KedarWolf,
> 
> I set my AC/DC internal loadline to 'performance' like you had set in your profile. Noticed that my VID droop is slightly less such that the vid is a little higher than before but not by much. Peak 100% frequency idle vid is also a tiny bit higher. Should I leave it for 5ghz now? Expect better stability? Lower vcore values now to see how low I can go?
> 
> Thanks


The droop on the "VID" is controlled by the DC loadline setting. This does not affect CPU voltage at all. Just VID reporting. For people who are trying to make their vcore and VID match as closely as possible (on adaptive voltage), DC loadline can actually be left at default.

The IA AC setting is what affects CPU voltage (adaptive only).


----------



## flowfaster

KedarWolf said:


> You'll get lower temps stress testing with VR IA DC Loadlinne set at default, 0, only need to set the VR IA AC Loadline to 1. :h34r-smi


So I just ran a couple of tests. Very interesting results.

CPU multiplier Auto and just changing the VR IA DC from 1 to 0 has some dramatic effects on things. I left the rest of my profile the same from my above post.

When VR IA DC is set to 1 and running cinebench R15 I draw 128W and hit a temp of 61C peak after three runs. Scores were around the 2010 range in cinebench.

When VR IA DC is set to 0 and everything else is the same I was drawing 118W and hit a peak temp of 60C after three runs. Scores were around the 1960-1970 range in cinebench.

What does this all mean.....? I have no idea because I have to do yardwork now. Yay!


----------



## Falkentyne

flowfaster said:


> So I just ran a couple of tests. Very interesting results.
> 
> CPU multiplier Auto and just changing the VR IA DC from 1 to 0 has some dramatic effects on things. I left the rest of my profile the same from my above post.
> 
> When VR IA DC is set to 1 and running cinebench R15 I draw 128W and hit a temp of 61C peak after three runs. Scores were around the 2010 range in cinebench.
> 
> When VR IA DC is set to 0 and everything else is the same I was drawing 118W and hit a peak temp of 60C after three runs. Scores were around the 1960-1970 range in cinebench.
> 
> What does this all mean.....? I have no idea because I have to do yardwork now. Yay!


DC loadline affects power measurements, however the only tests I did with DC loadline were with very low ( < 1.15v) voltages.
I know that the DC loadline setting affects power measurements (it's on the intel documentation sheet) but when i tested DC loadline=1 and DC loadline=0, there was no effect on CPU voltages.
I did not test benchmarks. But in my brief tests, I did not test what happens if AC is also set to 1.

If you're getting different results, then use whatever works for you.

Here were tests I did in prime95.
First two pics: AC=160, DC=1, idle and load.
Second two: AC=160, DC=160, idle and load.

I did not do any tests with AC=1 because I was not using offsets and I felt it would be unstable, and I didn't want to deal with BSOD's trying to find a DVID that would be stable. AC=160 guarantees the system will be stable with adaptive voltage (without offsets) up to 4.7 ghz.

The only tests where I compared AC=1 to AC=160 (in combinations with DC=1, DC, 160 for both) were with static voltages (way up at 1.265v) just to see how the VID changed.


----------



## BradleyW

According to VR VOUT I'm stable at 1.18v (5GHz, HT, AVX no offset) and CPU Z reports 1.3v, and VOUT suggests that the voltage doesn't reduce on idle, but CPU Z states that it does. I really am skeptical with VR VOUT because CPU Z seems to be more believable and 90% of users and reviewers read off CPU Z. My settings are llc auto and - 0.090 dvid. Using IA Ac changes make the system unstable unless I use a higher voltage. Same goes for using an offset, I require much higher vcore.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> According to VR VOUT I'm stable at 1.18v (5GHz, HT, AVX no offset) and CPU Z reports 1.3v, and VOUT suggests that the voltage doesn't reduce on idle, but CPU Z states that it does. I really am skeptical with VR VOUT because CPU Z seems to be more believable and 90% of users and reviewers read off CPU Z. My settings are llc auto and - 0.090 dvid. Using IA Ac changes make the system unstable unless I use a higher voltage. Same goes for using an offset, I require much higher vcore.


You're using cstates.
cstates makes the CPU shut down part of its functions and use less voltage. This isn't part of the voltage regulator.
You can only rely on VR VOUT at *load*, not when using cstates.


----------



## Cdr_Archangel

BradleyW said:


> I really am skeptical with VR VOUT because CPU Z seems to be more believable and 90% of users and reviewers read off CPU Z.


Although Renesas ISL69138 is not a new PWM and it is used in previous generation MBs by ASRock, Asus, and Gigabyte, it just got added to the HWinfo64 sensors with version 5.92 just last month. In comparison, IR35201 (the pwm in aorus xtreme and master) has support since HWinfo64 5.20 back in 2016. From my understanding, CPU-z still gets vcore from the ITE PC I/O chip because that is a standard class of chips that you can find in any MB, so you can read a "vcore" for any configuration. Not all PWMs offer monitoring.

We, as overclockers are used to the ITE reading as well, and most of us understand what vdroop is and why the reading is not exactly the same with the value we set in bios. For the amateur/first timer, he only cares about what setting he must dial in bios. Reporting that you get 5GHz at 1.24v VR OUT is nice, and you look elite with golden chips, but you still dialed 1.3v in the bios. (This is a generalization and by no mean a personal attack on anyone)

In conclusion. It is nice to now the accurate voltage the core gets, after the impedance of the powerplane, and can be a metric to calculate losses, efficiencies, thermals etc. but for general reporting, my personal opinion is that we should state the value we dialed in bios.


----------



## KedarWolf

Been messing with Offsets.


If I put VR IA AC Loadline at 1, VR IA DC Loadline at 0, my VID is like 1.1 running Prime95, way too low. If I put both on 1 my VID is 1.264 which I think is fine, it'll boot reliably etc.


So VR IA DC Loadline I need at 1 as well, someone suggested 0, but I don't think that's really okay.


Here are my current settings for 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory, memory voltage Eventual at 1.44v.


On idle my VR VOUT is at 1.364, on load, 1.306.


----------



## Falkentyne

Cdr_Archangel said:


> Although Renesas ISL69138 is not a new PWM and it is used in previous generation MBs by ASRock, Asus, and Gigabyte, it just got added to the HWinfo64 sensors with version 5.92 just last month. In comparison, IR35201 (the pwm in aorus xtreme and master) has support since HWinfo64 5.20 back in 2016. From my understanding, CPU-z still gets vcore from the ITE PC I/O chip because that is a standard class of chips that you can find in any MB, so you can read a "vcore" for any configuration. Not all PWMs offer monitoring.
> 
> We, as overclockers are used to the ITE reading as well, and most of us understand what vdroop is and why the reading is not exactly the same with the value we set in bios. For the amateur/first timer, he only cares about what setting he must dial in bios. Reporting that you get 5GHz at 1.24v VR OUT is nice, and you look elite with golden chips, but you still dialed 1.3v in the bios. (This is a generalization and by no mean a personal attack on anyone)
> 
> In conclusion. It is nice to now the accurate voltage the core gets, after the impedance of the powerplane, and can be a metric to calculate losses, efficiencies, thermals etc. but for general reporting, my personal opinion is that we should state the value we dialed in bios.


That's true, but then this leads to a new can of worms, because different loadline calibration settings will give a different vcore at load. It's the load voltage that causes stability or lack of stability.
For example if you set loadline calibration to disabled and your CPU needs 1.3v heavy load voltage to be stable, you would have to enter 1.46v in the bios, which over long term, could cause very slow degradation (proof: 8 core default loadline= 1.60 mOhms, 100 amps=common load current for non stress testing in multithreaded games, 100 * 1.60=160mv=160mv (0.160v) vdroop at 100 amps., 1.46-.160=1.30v. For example.

Yet entering 1.30v in bios for 0 mOhm loadline (maximum loadline calibration) for 1.30v true load would "look" ideal but then transient overshoots could exceed 100mv-150mv whenever the CPU goes from load to idle, and every time a load changes there could be an overshoot (or undershoot). And you still need a cushion for the undershoot (which will always be greatest with a 0 mOhm loadline).

Anyway as I said someone who is well off enough really needs to take an Oscilloscope or Scopemeter to the read points and test for how bad overshoots and undershoots are with Ultra Extreme loadline calibration (the intel documents say that maximum overshoot in "Virus Mode" is 200mv (Virus mode=extreme high current, up to 193 amps on 8 core, I assume).


T_OVS_TD
P_MAX
Max Overshoot time
TDP/virus mode — — — 10/30 s (says "us" on the datasheet...what is this? microseconds? nanoseconds?)

V_OVS
TDP_MAX/
virus_MAX
Max Overshoot at
TDP/virus mode — — — 70/200 mV 

(of course this probably still makes no sense to anyone).
@elmor merry christmas!
If you do have any time to do any 0 mOhm loadline tests (even on just one decent board) please let us know 
(i'm aware you probably may not have access to a GB board).


----------



## Cdr_Archangel

Falkentyne said:


> TDP/virus mode — — — 10/30 s (says "us" on the datasheet...what is this? microseconds? nanoseconds?)


Microsecond. In general the micro prefix in SI is the Greek lowercase *μ*, but it is commonly simplified to *u* when Unicode is not available.

*Addendum:* This reminds me of the Tdiode vs Tcase vs TJunction back in the day of Core Duo (and still there are people that are confused). It will take some time to educate ourselves and the more accurate measurements to become part of the mainstream.


----------



## flowfaster

Just double checked the 0 (Auto) vs. 1 IA DC Loadline. I can say for sure using "1" pulls more watts than using "0". While under load, the voltages look to be in the same range, so nothing to tell from monitoring voltage while under load.

4.7Ghz DVID -0.075 offset, LLC turbo, IA AC 1: IA DC 1=128W in cinebench vs. IA DC 0=118W in cinebech

5.0ghz DVID -0.025 offset, LLC turbo, IA AC 1: IA DC 1=162W in cinebench vs. IA DC 0=148W in cinebench

I can say for certain that using a 1 IA DC value uses more power and will create more heat. (at least in cinebench)


----------



## porksmuggler

UniverseN said:


> It's NVME. Why M2P is better than M2A?


Continue to use M2A, the will provide the best performance. I've supplied the link to the manual and diagram further back in the thread. The other user advising you clearly does not understand the flex I/O.



Cdr_Archangel said:


> Although Renesas ISL69138 is not a new PWM and it is used in previous generation MBs by ASRock, Asus, and Gigabyte, it just got added to the HWinfo64 sensors with version 5.92 just last month. In comparison, IR35201 (the pwm in aorus xtreme and master) has support since HWinfo64 5.20 back in 2016. From my understanding, CPU-z still gets vcore from the ITE PC I/O chip because that is a standard class of chips that you can find in any MB, so you can read a "vcore" for any configuration. Not all PWMs offer monitoring.
> 
> We, as overclockers are used to the ITE reading as well, and most of us understand what vdroop is and why the reading is not exactly the same with the value we set in bios. For the amateur/first timer, he only cares about what setting he must dial in bios. Reporting that you get 5GHz at 1.24v VR OUT is nice, and you look elite with golden chips, but you still dialed 1.3v in the bios. (This is a generalization and by no mean a personal attack on anyone)
> 
> In conclusion. It is nice to now the accurate voltage the core gets, after the impedance of the powerplane, and can be a metric to calculate losses, efficiencies, thermals etc. but for general reporting, my personal opinion is that we should state the value we dialed in bios.


BradleyW should be skeptical, VROUT is not Vcore, period. Users should continue to reference Vcore as indicated by IT8792E, despite other indications in this thread, for the the reasons you have listed above, and many others.


----------



## Falkentyne

flowfaster said:


> Just double checked the 0 (Auto) vs. 1 IA DC Loadline. I can say for sure using "1" pulls more watts than using "0". While under load, the voltages look to be in the same range, so nothing to tell from monitoring voltage while under load.
> 
> 4.7Ghz DVID -0.075 offset, LLC turbo, IA AC 1: IA DC 1=128W in cinebench vs. IA DC 0=118W in cinebech
> 
> 5.0ghz DVID -0.025 offset, LLC turbo, IA AC 1: IA DC 1=162W in cinebench vs. IA DC 0=148W in cinebench
> 
> I can say for certain that using a 1 IA DC value uses more power and will create more heat. (at least in cinebench)


Please check your actual temps as well as the power usage in "Current iout" and Power Pout and Input.
The reason is, DC loadline directly affects power measurements.
Unclewebb explained that the VID is factored in (in some way) with calculating CPU power draw.

A DC loadline of 0 is going to report less wattage because the VID is going to be lower (1.60 mOhms of droop). a DC loadline of 1 will report less because now there's 0 mOhms of droop on the VID itself.

Its a bit similar in a backward way to using IMON SLOPE (<100) to make the CPU report substantially less power draw than it's actually using (Only purpose to change Imon slope/imon offset (negative/prefix) is for CPU's with completely locked down power limits.


----------



## Falkentyne

porksmuggler said:


> Continue to use M2A, the will provide the best performance. I've supplied the link to the manual and diagram further back in the thread. The other user advising you clearly does not understand the flex I/O.
> 
> 
> 
> BradleyW should be skeptical, VROUT is not Vcore, period. Users should continue to reference Vcore as indicated by IT8792E, despite other indications in this thread, for the the reasons you have listed above, and many others.


So you're calling Elmor a liar, then?

So explain this to me.
How come the bios itself shows a flat loadline with Ultra Extreme loadline and a 'small' loadline slope with Extreme loadline?
How come VR VOUT reads exactly the same as bios idle and load voltage with LLC Ultra Extreme, matching the bios graph, while vcore is over 50mv higher?
Also explain why there are two vcore sensosr if 'vcore is vcore'? 
Why aren't they both the same then?
You just completely contradicted yourself.

I'm waiting for you to explain this.


----------



## flowfaster

Falkentyne said:


> Please check your actual temps as well as the power usage in "Current iout" and Power Pout and Input.
> The reason is, DC loadline directly affects power measurements.
> Unclewebb explained that the VID is factored in (in some way) with calculating CPU power draw.
> 
> A DC loadline of 0 is going to report less wattage because the VID is going to be lower (1.60 mOhms of droop). a DC loadline of 1 will report less because now there's 0 mOhms of droop on the VID itself.
> 
> Its a bit similar in a backward way to using IMON SLOPE (<100) to make the CPU report substantially less power draw than it's actually using (Only purpose to change Imon slope/imon offset (negative/prefix) is for CPU's with completely locked down power limits.


OK. I think I'm sort of starting to understand how this works. So, if stable, you want IA DC set to 0 when using DVID? Setting it to 1 affects the vid and power reporting in some way is that right? Or does any of that matter at all? Not sure if I understand you correctly.

Also will a IA DC value of 1 cause higher transient spikes in voltage? Because of the limited vdroop?

Another question, might be dumb but how do I check "actual temps"? Obviously I am only using software to check them currently. thanks


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> Running Prime95 with AVX and SSE enabled, no AVX Offset in BIOS, 1344 FFT's, Run In Place, 15-minute interval I get at max on a few cores about 68C. :h34r-smi



Wow, that's incredible. Mine is hitting upper 79 package temp at 4.7 all core. Congrats!


----------



## jlp0209

UniverseN said:


> Hi, guys. Which connector on Aorus Master to use best for m.2 in your opinion? As far as I know, m2m disables 2 SATA ports, m2a disables 1 SATA port and m2p disables PCI lanes? I have my m.2 on m2a, and +5 SSD discs. Is any of these connectors faster than the other? For example, is m2m faster than m2a? Thanks!





The Pook said:


> is your M2 NVME or AHCI? If it's NVME, use M2P. If it's AHCI, probably m2a unless you don't like SATA ports.





porksmuggler said:


> Continue to use M2A, the will provide the best performance. I've supplied the link to the manual and diagram further back in the thread. The other user advising you clearly does not understand the flex I/O.


 @UniverseN - If you have one m.2 PCI-e NVM-e ssd, and 5 SATA ssd's as you said you have, you can use the M2P port. All SATA ports will be enabled. The only issue is the M2P port shares PCI-e bandwidth with PCIEX4 slot on the board. If you don't have anything in the PCIEX4 port, you'll have no issues. 

You can also use M2A port. All SATA ports will be enabled and you'll have no shared bandwidth with PCIEX4 port. 

Using M2M with your m.2 PCI-e NVM-e ssd will disable SATA ports 4 and 5. So this is out if you have 5 SATA ssd's. 

Bottom line: If you do not have any PCI-e card in the PCIEX4 port, there will be no difference if you use M2A or M2P for your PCI-e NVM-e ssd. If you have a card inserted into PCIEX4 port, you should use M2A for your m.2 PCI-e NVM-e ssd. 

Here's a photo of the page of the manual.


----------



## Falkentyne

flowfaster said:


> OK. I think I'm sort of starting to understand how this works. So, if stable, you want IA DC set to 0 when using DVID? Setting it to 1 affects the vid and power reporting in some way is that right? Or does any of that matter at all? Not sure if I understand you correctly.
> 
> Also will a IA DC value of 1 cause higher transient spikes in voltage? Because of the limited vdroop?
> 
> Another question, might be dumb but how do I check "actual temps"? Obviously I am only using software to check them currently. thanks


VID droop is not vdroop (cpu vcore droop). I'm just using the words interchangeably.
VID droop is supposed to be -linked- to vcore droop as the DC loadline value is supposed to equal the LLC loadline value! (Default loadline setting for "standard/normal" is 1.60 mOhms on 8 core chips).

Except we don't use loadline calibration (LLC) in mOhms. We do it in 'levels'.
The DC VID rating is theoretically not supposed to have any influence at all in CPU Vcore (or VRM VR VOUT) itself. only on power measurements.
Also if DC loadline is set to 0 (or 1) when using static (override) voltages, neither it (nor AC loadline) will have any effect on cpu voltages whatsoever or power measurements (on static voltages-I just checked this just now).

However with adaptive voltages, DC loadline may affect reporting somewhat. There MAY also be a very very minor effect on actual cpu vcore but you would have to do a more dangerous test to test that.

Try setting DC loadline to 500.
DO NOT SET AC LOADLINE to 500!! YOU MAY DAMAGE THE PROCESSOR. AC LOADLINE=500 i ESTIMATE would cause about between 300mv to 500mv higher CPU voltage!! 5 mOhms * 100 amps=500mv.

DC loadline should cause a VID droop of 5 mOhms (500 mv of VID droop), but CPU voltages, and temps should not be affected. Power draw may be. The VID may be lower than 0.9v. (Do not change offsets or anything else, as only AC loadline affects cpu voltages, unless you find that DC is 'weakly' linked to it).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> VID droop is not vdroop (cpu vcore droop). I'm just using the words interchangeably.
> VID droop is supposed to be -linked- to vcore droop as the DC loadline value is supposed to equal the LLC loadline value! (Default loadline setting for "standard/normal" is 1.60 mOhms on 8 core chips).
> 
> Except we don't use loadline calibration (LLC) in mOhms. We do it in 'levels'.
> The DC VID rating is theoretically not supposed to have any influence at all in CPU Vcore (or VRM VR VOUT) itself. only on power measurements.
> Also if DC loadline is set to 0 (or 1) when using static (override) voltages, neither it (nor AC loadline) will have any effect on cpu voltages whatsoever or power measurements (on static voltages-I just checked this just now).
> 
> However with adaptive voltages, DC loadline may affect reporting somewhat. There MAY also be a very very minor effect on actual cpu vcore but you would have to do a more dangerous test to test that.
> 
> Try setting DC loadline to 500.
> DO NOT SET AC LOADLINE to 500!! YOU MAY DAMAGE THE PROCESSOR. AC LOADLINE=500 i ESTIMATE would cause about between 300mv to 500mv higher CPU voltage!! 5 mOhms * 100 amps=500mv.
> 
> DC loadline should cause a VID droop of 5 mOhms (500 mv of VID droop), but CPU voltages, and temps should not be affected. Power draw may be. The VID may be lower than 0.9v. (Do not change offsets or anything else, as only AC loadline affects cpu voltages, unless you find that DC is 'weakly' linked to it).


So you're saying a big droop in VID isn't a problem as it really doesn't affect your actual voltage output much at all?

Edit: I ask because I thought low VID can cause boot issues but if it really doesn't, I get lower temps with a 0 DC Loadline.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> So you're saying a big droop in VID isn't a problem as it really doesn't affect your actual voltage output much at all?
> 
> Edit: I ask because I thought low VID can cause boot issues but if it really doesn't, I get lower temps with a 0 DC Loadline.


Yeah I haven't tested it.
But on my LAPTOP, a higher DC loadline actually raises the CPU voltage slightly and thus temps but makes power draw get reported lower.
I tried a 600 loadline before on my laptop with static voltage and it was 100mv higher......because on laptops, VID is linked to STATIC voltage too as there is no vcore sensor (meaning you need to use an AC/DC loadline value of 1 on MSI laptops as they already have a built in hardwired loadline calibration !)


----------



## Timur Born

Why is there no Intel RST "Dynamic Storage Accelerator" option available in BIOS?


----------



## dpap

Ok, I found a set of settings that work: 5.1 cpu / 4.7 uncore, no avx offset, 3200c14t1 (64gb)

Normal with -0.02 offset
Llc high
Vr ia ac/dc at 80
SA at 1.25
VCCIO at 1.2
Rest at xmp profile
Emp off
C states and eist enabled
Tjmax 90

I get vrvout of 1.26 (no avx, i.e rb 2.46) to 1.29 (p95, rb 2.56, powermax) at load. Temps at 70c, unless I hit p95 small fft in which case throttling kicks in at 90). P95 at 1344 I get temps in the 50s. This is with an open case though, so temps may increase when I close everything...


----------



## Cdr_Archangel

I want to point out a couple of things.

According to the official Intel datasheet the absolute max Vcc is:


Code:


S-Processor Line - 6-Core GT2/GT0 ---- 1.52V
S-Processor Line - (95W) 8-Core GT2 ---- 1.52V + Offset voltage = 1.72V

This is the absolute limit that your Vcc must *NEVER* exceed (spikes and overshoots included).

The special notes on the datasheet read:


> 2. Each processor is programmed with a maximum valid voltage identification value (VID) that is set at manufacturing and cannot be altered. Individual maximum VID values are calibrated during manufacturing such that two processors at the same frequency may have different settings within the VID range. Note that this differs from the VID employed by the processor during a power management event (Adaptive Thermal Monitor, Enhanced Intel® SpeedStep Technology, or low-power states).





> 3. The voltage specification requirements are measured across Vcc_SENSE and Vss_SENSE as near as possible to the processor with an oscilloscope set to 100-MHz bandwidth, 1.5 pF maximum probe capacitance, and 1 MΩ minimum impedance. The maximum length of ground wire on the probe should be less than 5 mm. Ensure external noise from the system is not coupled into the oscilloscope probe.


Given those notes, neither the SuperIO nor the PWM voltage reading should be a gospel. Both are approximations that we would have to work with. As to which is more accurate, there are people here more qualified than me to explain.

For those that want to learn more about LLC and how it affects Vcc, both 



 and 



 have excelent videos on the matter. 

Unfortunately we do not have datasheets from MB manufacturers with what each level of LLC truly represent.


----------



## KedarWolf

I asked this before. But how do you manually tune the RTL's and IOL's? 

There is no IOL Offset setting to change in the BIOS and if I manually set the RTL's etc. they don't change in Asrock Timing Configurator.


----------



## davidm71

*CPU AC DC Internal Loadline Values*

Falk,

Do you know what the actual offsets are in Ohms if you set your AC-DC Internal Cpu Loadline values via the Auto-Performance-Turbo menu as opposed to dialing them in by hand?

Feels safer to use the menu options as opposed to typing it in manually in the sub menu. 

Thanks.


----------



## Sheyster

I went over to a good friend's house yesterday and dialed in his system for him: ASRock Taichi mobo, has a great BIOS and great memory support. I have to say I regret rolling with a Z390 Gigabyte. Should have just stuck with ASRock. I really can't recommend these boards to anyone after owning one for a month. BIOS is pretty crap and so is memory support.


----------



## Jidonsu

Well, I'm pleased to report that my 4000 C17 kit from Gskill booted right up and loaded into windows with XMP. It's at 17 17 17 37 700 2. DRAM Voltage is 1.35V per XMP, but VCCIO and VCCSA are both at 1.36ish. Not sure if I want to mess with it yet. This is with the 9700K at 5.2hz 1.35V. I had very little faith considering that it's 4 sticks.


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Falk,
> 
> Do you know what the actual offsets are in Ohms if you set your AC-DC Internal Cpu Loadline values via the Auto-Performance-Turbo menu as opposed to dialing them in by hand?
> 
> Feels safer to use the menu options as opposed to typing it in manually in the sub menu.
> 
> Thanks.


*edit*
Use HWinfo64 6.00
it reports the IA AC and IA DC settings.
See if the Gigabyte internal setting influences this setting (set the VR settings on auto, then use the presets).


----------



## Sheyster

Jidonsu said:


> Well, I'm pleased to report that my 4000 C17 kit from Gskill booted right up and loaded into windows with XMP. It's at 17 17 17 37 700 2. DRAM Voltage is 1.35V per XMP, but VCCIO and VCCSA are both at 1.36ish. Not sure if I want to mess with it yet. This is with the 9700K at 5.2hz 1.35V. I had very little faith considering that it's 4 sticks.


Be sure to run HCI Memtest (multiple instances of it up to your memory limit) for an hour or two to ensure stability at that speed and CL level. Gigabyte claims that these Aorus boards do better with 4 sticks than 2, as counter-intuitive as that seems.


----------



## Jidonsu

Sheyster said:


> Be sure to run HCI Memtest (multiple instances of it up to your memory limit) for an hour or two to ensure stability at that speed and CL level. Gigabyte claims that these Aorus boards do better with 4 sticks than 2, as counter-intuitive as that seems.


Running 8 instances of it now. I just take the actually available memory (29.2gb) and divide by 8, right? Or do I divide 32 by 8?


----------



## Sheyster

Jidonsu said:


> Running 8 instances of it now. I just take the actually available memory (29.2gb) and divide by 8, right? Or do I divide 32 by 8?


I usually just run each instance at 2048 memory (2GB). I typically run 7 instances with 16GB of memory. You can run more since you have 32GB.


----------



## Timur Born

1-2 hours of HCI does not necessarily reveal all instabilities. I often find errors way above 2000%.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jidonsu said:


> Running 8 instances of it now. I just take the actually available memory (29.2gb) and divide by 8, right? Or do I divide 32 by 8?



I have AutoHotKey scripts i copied from another user, I forget who, and edited them for a 9900k. It'll open 16 instances of HCI MemTest Free or Pro spaced neatly and evenly using 90% of your RAM for 32GB of RAM. For 16GB of RAM try changing 1731 to 751. 

You want to run once instance for each thread of your CPU.

Download and install AutoHotKey from here. https://www.autohotkey.com/

Right click on your Memtest folder and 'New' "AutoHotKey Script'. Right click on the script and choose 'Run Script'.

*Edit the script and add the below code for the free version of Memtest.
*



Code:


xpos = 3
ypos = 5
Loop, 16
{
  if (A_Index == 9) || (A_Index == 18)
  {
    xpos = 4
    ypos += 370
  }

  Run, memtest.exe
  WinWaitActive, Welcome`, New MemTest User
  Send {Enter}
  sleep 100
  WinMove, A, , xpos, ypos
  Send 1731{Tab}{Enter}
  WinWaitActive, Message for first-time users
  Send {Enter}

   xpos += 222
}

*For the pro version.*



Code:


memory = 1731
rows = 4
columns = 4
hspacing = 0.8
vspacing = 0.8

y = 5
Loop, %rows%
{
  x = 3
  Loop, %columns%
  {
    Sleep 500
    Run, memTestPro.exe /nice /t%memory%, , , pid
    Sleep 500
    WinWait, ahk_pid %pid%
    Sleep 500
    WinActivate, ahk_pid %pid%
    Sleep 500
    WinMove, ahk_pid %pid%, , x, y
    x := x + floor(hspacing*261)
  }
  y := y + floor(vspacing*322)
}


----------



## KedarWolf

Timur Born said:


> 1-2 hours of HCI does not necessarily reveal all instabilities. I often find errors way above 2000%.


I let it run overnight at least eight hours.


----------



## Falkentyne

So the Gigabyte CPU Internal AC DC Loadline values use these presets (if internal VR control, AC / DC loadline are set to 0 (Auto):

Extreme: 2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms, (210/210) (this is the default raw values for 4 and 6 core CFL processors).
Turbo: 1.6 mOhms / 1.6 mOhms (160 / 160) (default raw values for 8 core CFL processors).
Performance: 1.3 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms (130 / 130) (what?)
Power Saving: 0.4 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms (40 / 130) (jeez why not just set AC to 1 (0.01 mOhms?).

There you have it.
Big question is if the DC value actually affects actual cpu voltage or not as the DC value directly affects the VID drooping (in my tests, it either doesn't at all, or "barely" affects it, on adaptive voltage--the AC value directly affects vcore however).


----------



## Jidonsu

KedarWolf said:


> I have AutoHotKey scripts i copied from another user, I forget who, and edited them for a 9900k. It'll open 16 instances of HCI MemTest Free or Pro spaced neatly and evenly using 90% of your RAM for 32GB of RAM. For 16GB of RAM try changing 1731 to 751.
> 
> You want to run once instance for each thread of your CPU.
> 
> Download and install AutoHotKey from here. https://www.autohotkey.com/
> 
> Right click on your Memtest folder and 'New' "AutoHotKey Script'. Right click on the script and choose 'Run Script'.
> 
> *Edit the script and add the below code for the free version of Memtest.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> xpos = 3
> ypos = 5
> Loop, 16
> {
> if (A_Index == 9) || (A_Index == 18)
> {
> xpos = 4
> ypos += 370
> }
> 
> Run, memtest.exe
> WinWaitActive, Welcome`, New MemTest User
> Send {Enter}
> sleep 100
> WinMove, A, , xpos, ypos
> Send 1731{Tab}{Enter}
> WinWaitActive, Message for first-time users
> Send {Enter}
> 
> xpos += 222
> }
> 
> *For the pro version.*
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> memory = 1731
> rows = 4
> columns = 4
> hspacing = 0.8
> vspacing = 0.8
> 
> y = 5
> Loop, %rows%
> {
> x = 3
> Loop, %columns%
> {
> Sleep 500
> Run, memTestPro.exe /nice /t%memory%, , , pid
> Sleep 500
> WinWait, ahk_pid %pid%
> Sleep 500
> WinActivate, ahk_pid %pid%
> Sleep 500
> WinMove, ahk_pid %pid%, , x, y
> x := x + floor(hspacing*261)
> }
> y := y + floor(vspacing*322)
> }


I noticed that memtest wouldn’t let me go above 2800mb for some reason. Should I just divide it by 16?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jidonsu said:


> I noticed that memtest wouldn’t let me go above 2800mb for some reason. Should I just divide it by 16?


Yes, for a 9900k, 16 instances, you want to run one for each of the 16 threads, even for a 9700k, which would mean two for each thread.

Edit: But try those scripts, automates it all for you, so easy.


----------



## davidm71

*Presets*



Falkentyne said:


> So the Gigabyte CPU Internal AC DC Loadline values use these presets (if internal VR control, AC / DC loadline are set to 0 (Auto):
> 
> Extreme: 2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms, (210/210) (this is the default raw values for 4 and 6 core CFL processors).
> Turbo: 1.6 mOhms / 1.6 mOhms (160 / 160) (default raw values for 8 core CFL processors).
> Performance: 1.3 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms (130 / 130) (what?)
> Power Saving: 0.4 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms (40 / 130) (jeez why not just set AC to 1 (0.01 mOhms?).
> 
> There you have it.
> Big question is if the DC value actually affects actual cpu voltage or not as the DC value directly affects the VID drooping (in my tests, it either doesn't at all, or "barely" affects it, on adaptive voltage--the AC value directly affects vcore however).


Thanks for the explanation!


----------



## Jidonsu

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, for a 9900k, 16 instances, you want to run one for each of the 16 threads, even for a 9700k, which would mean two for each thread.
> 
> Edit: But try those scripts, automates it all for you, so easy.


Thank you! I just got the pro version because why not. It's working well so far.


----------



## KedarWolf

I ran Prime95 no offset in BIOS, all AVX, SSE and FMA's enabled in the local.txt, 1344 both FFT's, Run In Place, 15 minute interval, overnight, with HWInfo open, no threads stopped and no WHEA errors.

Also ran 16 instances of HCI MemTest overnight the night before, zero errors.

This at CPU 5.1GHz, cache 4.7GHZ, memory 4x8GB 4133MHZ 18-18-18-34 2T, CPU/cache at 1.36v idle, 1.314v with Prime95, memory at 1.23 VCCIO and SA, 1.44v Eventual RAM voltage.

I disabled C-States and rely on EIST only to downclock my voltages and core clocks with the Ultimate Power profile in Windows 10 LTSC, but with minimum CPU speed at 0%.

Probably can get away with C-States enabled but used to be EIST and them disabled helped keep your OC stable.


----------



## scaramonga

Sheyster said:


> I went over to a good friend's house yesterday and dialed in his system for him: ASRock Taichi mobo, has a great BIOS and great memory support. I have to say I regret rolling with a Z390 Gigabyte. Should have just stuck with ASRock. I really can't recommend these boards to anyone after owning one for a month. BIOS is pretty crap and so is memory support.


I agree.


----------



## Timur Born

VR VOUT still doesn't make sense to me during idle times?!


----------



## scaramonga

So how is the new F8b BIOS? More 'fluff'?

'Fix Easy mode display issue'

What issue? lol


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I ran Prime95 no offset in BIOS, all AVX, SSE and FMA's enabled in the local.txt, 1344 both FFT's, Run In Place, 15 minute interval, overnight, with HWInfo open, no threads stopped and no WHEA errors.
> 
> Also ran 16 instances of HCI MemTest overnight the night before, zero errors.
> 
> This at CPU 5.1 GHZ, cache 4.7 GHZ, memory 4x8GB 4133 MHZ 18-18-18-34 2T, CPU/cache at 1.36v idle, 1.314v with Prime95, memory at 1.23 VCCIO and SA, 1.44v Eventual RAM voltage.
> 
> I disabled C-States and rely on EIST only to down-clock my voltages and core clocks with the Ultimate Power profile in Windows 10 LTSC, but with minimum CPU speed at 0%.
> 
> Probably can get away with C-States enabled but used to be EIST and them disabled helped keep your OC stable.


I'm going to post screens of all my related BIOS settings again when I get home. I pretty much have this figured out and dialed in. Some of the related RAM voltages I had to raise some to get 4133 MHZ stable but nothing dangerous or troublesome. 

My Z370 Asus Maximus X Formula which is consider almost the tier Asus Z370 board, top tier 4 DIMM Asus Z370 board would only do 5 GHZ CPU, 4.5 GHZ cache and 3900 MHZ memory without BSOD's and stress tested stable so I'm very happy with my Aorus Xtreme!!


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> VR VOUT still doesn't make sense to me during idle times?!


As I said before, you're using c-states instead of speed shift (controlled manually in Throttlestop).

C-states throws VR-VOUT out the window during idle because c-states actually put the CPU into a deep sleep.
I haven't tested c-states at all.

Setting the CPU manually to let's say, 800 mhz, with adaptive voltage and c-states disabled, and using "Speed Shift" in Throttlestop to force the CPU down to 800 mhz would then show a very low VR VOUT.
If you want your adaptive voltage to properly drop at idle from VR VOUT, you use adaptive + speed shift and downclocking that way.
I am not skilled enough to tell you how c-states differ, except that it cuts power consumption to lower than 1 watt (if you can drop down to C10).


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> So how is the new F8b BIOS? More 'fluff'?
> 
> 'Fix Easy mode display issue'
> 
> What issue? lol


f8b? You mean f8a? There is no f8b.
Or rather f8a beta bios?

Um okay there's both a f8a and f8b and no one said anything? 
Yet f8a was never posted on their website....


https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios

So let me guess.
"Fix easytune display issue" was a bug in f8a, then?
Is that why f8b got released so fast?


----------



## scaramonga

Falkentyne said:


> f8b? You mean f8a? There is no f8b.
> Or rather f8a beta bios?


https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios


----------



## pm1109

scaramonga said:


> So how is the new F8b BIOS? More 'fluff'?
> 
> 'Fix Easy mode display issue'
> 
> What issue? lol


Exactly what i was thinking haha


----------



## scaramonga

pm1109 said:


> Exactly what i was thinking haha



https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios



Unless I'm blind?


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios


Yeah except they also released f8a without telling anyone, apparently.
It's still available too.

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html

https://www.mediafire.com/file/d9rn1021f8hh05h/Z390AORUSMASTER.F8a/file


----------



## scaramonga

See, I'm not blind


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> See, I'm not blind


So are there any actual differences in the menus or anything?


----------



## scaramonga

Not that I can tell, but I feel more important things need attention, for myself anyway.

1. Error 66 on first boot always, A0 till the end of the day, regardless if I boot system 500 times in that day, but always 66 at first power on, no sleep states on. (Memory @ stock - 3200)

2. My 2nd NVMe drive still non-existent in BIOS, but working great in Windows, regardless? <--- A damned weird one that!, niggling, and it's keeping me awake at night.


----------



## davidm71

scaramonga said:


> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios
> 
> 
> 
> Unless I'm blind?


Still not include latest microcode for 9900K!


----------



## Jidonsu

HCI Memtest is currently at around 400% without errors. Should I be concerned about VCCIO and SA voltages being at 1.364V? Do I try to drop those to 1.25 each and retest without touching dimm voltage? I'm guessing I might need to up my dimm voltage from 1.35V to compensate.


----------



## pm1109

Jidonsu said:


> HCI Memtest is currently at around 400% without errors. Should I be concerned about VCCIO and SA voltages being at 1.364V? Do I try to drop those to 1.25 each and retest without touching dimm voltage? I'm guessing I might need to up my dimm voltage from 1.35V to compensate.


I think you can use up to 1.45v for the memory for 24/7 usage 
On the other hand for VCCIO and SA voltages you would want to keep them below 1.3v


----------



## KedarWolf

DDR VPP and DRAM Termination I raised a bit for RAM stability. Switch Rate as well helps RAM stability.

The Phase Controls ensure the VRM's are working at max efficiency. probably can leave VAGX Switch Rate at default, I'm pretty sure that just affects the built-in i-GPU on the CPU but I use it on my second screen to take any load off of my 1080 Ti and zero crashes on that screen so far.

1 VR AC Loadline because I need to use a positive offset, negative crashes booting into Windows if I try to set it as low as I need. 0 VR DC Loadline as it reduces temps stress testing. My VID is quite low but it doesn't really affect my voltages in Vcore and VR VOUT so I'm still okay.

With these settings, I'm Prime95, HCI MemTest and RAM Test stable.

With these settings, I get 1.364v idle, 1.314v VR VOUT with Prime95 running.

Lastly, VT-d off, it affects stability.










*BIOS settings screenshots in Spoiler!*



Spoiler


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> DDR VPP and DRAM Termination I raised a bit for RAM stability. Switch Rate as well helps RAM stability.
> 
> The Phase Controls ensure the VRM's are working at max efficiency. probably can leave VAGX Switch Rate at default, I'm pretty sure that just affects the built-in i-GPU on the CPU but I use it on my second screen to take any load off of my 1080 Ti and zero crashes on that screen so far.
> 
> 1 VR AC Loadline because I need to use a positive offset, negative crashes booting into Windows if I try to set it as low as I need. 0 VR DC Loadline as it reduces temps stress testing. My VID is quite low but it doesn't really affect my voltages in Vcore and VR VOUT so I'm still okay.
> 
> With these settings, I'm Prime95, HCI MemTest and RAM Test stable.
> 
> With these settings, I get 1.364v idle, 1.314v VR VOUT with Prime95 running.
> 
> Lastly, VT-d off, it affects stability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *BIOS settings screenshots in Spoiler!*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Looking good.


----------



## pm1109

KedarWolf said:


> DDR VPP and DRAM Termination I raised a bit for RAM stability. Switch Rate as well helps RAM stability.
> 
> The Phase Controls ensure the VRM's are working at max efficiency. probably can leave VAGX Switch Rate at default, I'm pretty sure that just affects the built-in i-GPU on the CPU but I use it on my second screen to take any load off of my 1080 Ti and zero crashes on that screen so far.
> 
> 1 VR AC Loadline because I need to use a positive offset, negative crashes booting into Windows if I try to set it as low as I need. 0 VR DC Loadline as it reduces temps stress testing. My VID is quite low but it doesn't really affect my voltages in Vcore and VR VOUT so I'm still okay.
> 
> With these settings, I'm Prime95, HCI MemTest and RAM Test stable.
> 
> With these settings, I get 1.364v idle, 1.314v VR VOUT with Prime95 running.
> 
> Lastly, VT-d off, it affects stability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *BIOS settings screenshots in Spoiler!*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Do you have the settings for your 4000 MHz stable settings and 17 timmings?
No matter what I do it doesn’t boot using 4133 ram speed but 4000 ram speed boots no problem


----------



## bastian

Why the hell can you not control the RGB from within the BIOS? I don't want to use RGB Fusion software and I'd really like my RGB on the Master to not be a static ugly blue color!


----------



## KedarWolf

pm1109 said:


> Do you have the settings for your 4000 MHz stable settings and 17 timmings?
> No matter what I do it doesn’t boot using 4133 ram speed but 4000 ram speed boots no problem


Try those settings at 4000 MHZ with that RAM you have with 17-17-17-32 2T and maybe even 1T.

These are the mains ones to focus on.

*Not Vcore and Offset that one page, VCCIO and System Agent, those two.*


----------



## Jidonsu

bastian said:


> Why the hell can you not control the RGB from within the BIOS? I don't want to use RGB Fusion software and I'd really like my RGB on the Master to not be a static ugly blue color!


You can download Fusion, load the color you want, reboot it, then uninstall. It's coded on the hardware level. I'm not actually sure if it even needs a reboot, to be honest.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Try those settings at 4000 MHZ with that RAM you have with 17-17-17-32 2T and maybe even 1T.
> 
> These are the mains ones to focus on.
> 
> *Not Vcore and Offset that one page, VCCIO and System Agent, those two.*


What exactly does "Memory enhancement settings:-->Enhanced performance" even do?
What's the difference between that and leaving it at Auto ?
Also why do you have XMP disabled? What does that do for you over having it enabled? What does it change since you can still enable it and still change timings anyway?

Thanks and merry christmas.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> What exactly does "Memory enhancement settings:-->Enhanced performance" even do?
> What's the difference between that and leaving it at Auto ?
> Also why do you have XMP disabled? What does that do for you over having it enabled? What does it change since you can still enable it and still change timings anyway?
> 
> Thanks and merry christmas.


I believe Enhanced Performance tightens the sub timings so your memory performs some better. I always disable XMP so it doesn't set, change my manual settings or Auto sub timings.


----------



## kati

Made me register so i can thank everyone in this thread, such good source to get my aorus master going. 

On auto the temps and spiky vcore made me try to understand this bios, after 2 decades asus boards its sure different.
Running a 9700k and i think its not the best, but still got lots to try; everything auto temps went to 70° heavy load(bench etc), fixing vcore at 1,275v and its max 60° about.
My prior 4790k was always slight undervolted and hence the temps and power usage were amazing, ran 3+ years 24/7 without one hiccup; so i tried to go with negative offset too but i always went BSOD, guess when he downclocked the core voltage was just too low. Not happy yet, 1,275v seems so much without any oc.

My goal would be same with 4790k, but maybe new bios versions help in this adventure too.

Which brings us to... arous master is a new f8a, is there anywhere a changelog?
edit. just saw official website got f8b, Fix Easy mode display issue, thats all? -.-


----------



## Beggisch

Is anyone else on F8b here?
I think I found a bug, every time I want to change VR IA AC Loadline the Bios freezes as soon as I press enter.

edit: same on F7


----------



## Jidonsu

XMP definitely overvolts vssca and vccio. I turned them down to 1.25V each and got to 1000% on HCI Memtest. I clearly can do more tweeking over the next couple days with the voltage and timing as well. Thank you for all the great info here.


----------



## Robbært

Beggisch said:


> Is anyone else on F8b here?
> I think I found a bug, every time I want to change VR IA AC Loadline the Bios freezes as soon as I press enter.
> 
> edit: same on F7


not set it via menu
enter numbers instead


----------



## Falkentyne

Beggisch said:


> Is anyone else on F8b here?
> I think I found a bug, every time I want to change VR IA AC Loadline the Bios freezes as soon as I press enter.
> 
> edit: same on F7


Type the value then move the arrow key over.


----------



## Madness11

new f8b is out ..Some one check it ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Madness11 said:


> new f8b is out ..Some one check it ?


it doesn't have the newest microcode. I updated it to the latest microcode with UBU Tool, then flashed it from a DOS USB with the Efiflash that came with the BIOS with the /X parameter.


----------



## KedarWolf

Madness11 said:


> new f8b is out ..Some one check it ?


It doesn't have the newest microcode. I updated it to the latest microcode with UBU Tool, then flashed it from a DOS USB with the Efiflash that came with the BIOS with the /X parameter. 

Use UBU Tool from here.

https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html read how to update microcodes from the OP of the thread.

Put these files from the attached .zip on your USB (the included BIOS is already modded so you don't need to mod it with UBU Tool). Boot from USB not UEFI, you likely have to enable CSM in the BIOS.

Type 'efiflash Z390AOXT.F5b /X' without the single quotations.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> It doesn't have the newest microcode. I updated it to the latest microcode with UBU Tool, then flashed it from a DOS USB with the Efiflash that came with the BIOS with the /X parameter.
> 
> Use UBU Tool from here.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html read how to update microcodes from the OP of the thread.
> 
> Put these files from the attached .zip on your USB (the included BIOS is already modded so you don't need to mod it with UBU Tool). Boot from USB not UEFI, you likely have to enable CSM in the BIOS.
> 
> Type 'efiflash Z390AOXT.F5b /X' without the single quotations.


Why is your file called f5b instead of f8b ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Why is your file called f5b instead of f8b ?


Oh wait, yes, brain fart. I have an Aorus Xtreme. So you'll need to mod yours with UBU Tool from that link. 

Edit: If you need help, PM me, but instructions are in OP of that thread.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Oh wait, yes, brain fart. I have an Aorus Xtreme. So you'll need to mod yours with UBU Tool from that link.
> 
> Edit: If you need help, PM me, but instructions are in OP of that thread.


Thank you for your help. I'll keep that in mind.
I'm still using good old windows 10 1703 (and my 7820HK laptop has 1607) so I doubt the microcodes would be useful. But do you know what was changed in the 9900K microcode? I'll mod it if it's something actually important that doesn't require that crappy 1803 or 1809 build.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you for your help. I'll keep that in mind.
> I'm still using good old windows 10 1703 (and my 7820HK laptop has 1607) so I doubt the microcodes would be useful. But do you know what was changed in the 9900K microcode? I'll mod it if it's something actually important that doesn't require that crappy 1803 or 1809 build.


New microcodes usually contain minor performance fixes, sometimes security fixes.


----------



## Timur Born

My combination of Aorus Master + b-die doesn't seem to like 1T command rate. Auto chooses 2T and manually changing to 1T results in less HCI stability. Too bad.


----------



## davidm71

*New updates and performances fixes*

Kedarwolf next you got to update your ME firmware. I already updated mine though those microcode updates don't always yield positive performance fixes as they can sometimes slow down a system. I am hesitant however to update everything to the latest being new hardware. Will wait it out til Gigabyte runs out of bios updates till I update my own microcodes.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Kedarwolf next you got to update your ME firmware. I already updated mine though those microcode updates don't always yield positive performance fixes as they can sometimes slow down a system. I am hesitant however to update everything to the latest being new hardware. Will wait it out til Gigabyte runs out of bios updates till I update my own microcodes.


What version of the ME firmware did you use? MEInfo says I have a 12.0*** firmware but when I try to update to the latest 12 I get an error.


----------



## davidm71

I'm on 12.0.10.1127. Going to update to 12.0.20.1307 in a minute. To update you need to use FIT tool to configure the ME and combine it with the right PMC firmware. Only then can you flash. Instructions are on Win-Raid. If all goes well I'll share my 12.0.20.1307.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> I'm on 12.0.10.1127. Going to update to 12.0.20.1307 in a minute. To update you need to use FIT tool to configure the ME and combine it with the right PMC firmware. Only then can you flash. Instructions are on Win-Raid. If all goes well I'll share my 12.0.20.1307.


Make sure you use the PRD file, not the EXTR file. EXTR needs more configuring and it's quite complex. Never could figure it out. 

Done with the PRD file on my system though. 

Edit: So you need to use 1301, not 1307, unless you follow this thread and it's terribly complex. 

https://www.win-raid.com/t1658f39-G...-CS-TXE-Regions-with-Data-Initialization.html

Second edit: Reason why is EXTR firmwares are not 'clean' and contain optimizations for specific systems, very likely not the same as your motherboard.


----------



## davidm71

Alright I just configured 12.0.20.1307 on my Auros Master Z390 and flashed without issue. Heres the preconfigured file if anyone wants it: 
http://www.mediafire.com/file/o709qrz93fh0de3/cse_image_FWU_Full.zip


Recommend you run it through MEAnalyzer to verify:

ME Analyzer v1.76.2 r149 ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════╝

╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ cse_image_FWU_Full.bin (1/1) ║
╟───────────────────────────┬─────────────────────╢
║ Family │ CSE ME ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Version │ 12.0.20.1307 ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Release │ Production ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Type │ Region, Extracted ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ SKU │ Consumer H ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Chipset Stepping │ B, A ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Security Version Number │ 1 ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Version Control Number │ 14 ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Production Version │ Yes ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ OEM RSA Signature │ No ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ OEM Unlock Token │ No ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ FWUpdate Support │ Yes ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Date │ 2018-11-13 ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ File System State │ Configured ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Size │ 0x273000 ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Flash Image Tool │ 12.0.20.1301 ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Chipset Support │ CNP ║
╟───────────────────────────┼─────────────────────╢
║ Latest │ Yes ║
╚═══════════════════════════╧═════════════════════╝
╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Power Management Controller ║
╟─────────────────────────┬───────────────╢
║ Family │ PMC ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Version │ 300.2.11.1018 ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Release │ Production ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Type │ Independent ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Chipset SKU │ H ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Chipset Stepping │ B ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Security Version Number │ 3 ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Date │ 2018-09-04 ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Size │ 0xE000 ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Chipset Support │ CNP ║
╟─────────────────────────┼───────────────╢
║ Latest │ Yes ║
╚═════════════════════════╧═══════════════╝


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Alright I just configured 12.0.20.1307 on my Auros Master Z390 and flashed without issue. Heres the preconfigured file if anyone wants it:
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/o709qrz93fh0de3/cse_image_FWU_Full.zip
> 
> 
> Recommend you run it through MEAnalyzer to verify:



Make sure you use the PRD file, not the EXTR file. EXTR needs more configuring and it's quite complex. Never could figure it out. 

Done with the PRD file on my system though. 

Edit: So you need to use 1301, not 1307, unless you follow this thread and it's terribly complex. 

https://www.win-raid.com/t1658f39-G...-CS-TXE-Regions-with-Data-Initialization.html

Second edit: Reason why is EXTR firmwares are not 'clean' and contain optimizations for specific systems, very likely not the same as your motherboard. 

Here's the version you SHOULD use on our motherboards, I flashed it just fine. 

Below file should be the fixed version.


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf said:


> Make sure you use the PRD file, not the EXTR file. EXTR needs more configuring and it's quite complex. Never could figure it out.
> 
> Done with the PRD file on my system though.
> 
> Edit: So you need to use 1301, not 1307, unless you follow this thread and it's terribly complex.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t1658f39-G...-CS-TXE-Regions-with-Data-Initialization.html
> 
> Second edit: Reason why is EXTR firmwares are not 'clean' and contain optimizations for specific systems, very likely not the same as your motherboard.


Kedar which version did you download???

The only 1301 version they have on their site is CORPORATE! DO NOT USE THAT ONE!!!

Use the CON_H version!

I made sure certain settings were the same as the stock firmware in FIT tool in anycase.

Worked for me!


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Kedar which version did you download???
> 
> The only 1301 version they have on their site is CORPORATE! DO NOT USE THAT ONE!!!
> 
> Use the CON_H version!
> 
> I made sure certain settings were the same as the stock firmware in FIT tool in anycase.
> 
> Worked for me!


I used the Con H version. I have the 1301.

Check with Lost_N_BIOS on the Winraid forums. He's the Winraid god at this stuff. NEVER use an EXTR version unless it came from the same motherboard BIOS as your system.

Always use the RGN version, unless you follow the instructions on the link I provided. 

I learned about that on the forum with my Z370, yes, it flashes, but not a good idea. 

Con H version of 1301 here. it comes from the Firmware Repository Pack on Winraid. That's the unconfigured one though, the PMC firmware not added


----------



## davidm71

*Caution*



KedarWolf said:


> I used the Con H version. I have the 1301.
> 
> Check with Lost_N_BIOS on the Winraid forums. He's the Winraid god at this stuff. NEVER use an EXTR version unless it came from the same motherboard BIOS as your system.
> 
> Always use the RGN version, unless you follow the instructions on the link I provided.
> 
> I learned about that on the forum with my Z370, yes, it flashes, but not a good idea.


I just noticed that you indeed did use the Con-H version. In anycase I flashed the Extr version after I configured it myself. Seems to be working so far so good. Posted my verbose Meinfo detail on Win-raid for Plutomaniac to take a look at it and see if it was a true success or not.

In other news I had a hiccup with my 5.0 ghz overclock at 1.320 volts. Playing Deus Ex video game crashed on me and locked up after an hour. Now at 1.325 volts and set CPU ACDC loadline internal calibration to performance. Voltages peaking at 1.36 volts now though I have EIST enabled so it seems to down clock a lot and save on the volts. Worse comes to worse I'll disable EIST.

Thanks

EDIT: Kedar,

According to FIT your ME is set to QM370 platform so I wouldn't use that either.


----------



## BradleyW

Why doesn't the F8b BIOS contain the F7 microcode?


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> I just noticed that you indeed did use the Con-H version. In anycase I flashed the Extr version after I configured it myself. Seems to be working so far so good. Posted my verbose Meinfo detail on Win-raid for Plutomaniac to take a look at it and see if it was a true success or not.
> 
> In other news I had a hiccup with my 5.0 ghz overclock at 1.320 volts. Playing Deus Ex video game crashed on me and locked up after an hour. Now at 1.325 volts and set CPU ACDC loadline internal calibration to performance. Voltages peaking at 1.36 volts now though I have EIST enabled so it seems to down clock a lot and save on the volts. Worse comes to worse I'll disable EIST.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> EDIT: Kedar,
> 
> According to FIT your ME is set to QM370 platform so I wouldn't use that either.


From Intel CSME System Tools v12, run Flash Image Tool (FIT) and adjust the PCH Platform drop-down menu at the top to either "H Series Chipset" or "LP Series Chipset" based on your system's PCH Platform. For the purposes of FWUpdate, there is no need to further adjust the PCH SKU.

You were right, I fixed it.


----------



## davidm71

Kedar,

Your absolutely right. Shouldn't have used the EXTR version. Fortunately it still boots up without issues that I can tell. At this point I am going to have to wait it out until a newer configured version is released because there is nothing I can do short of switching onto another bios version and reflashing the entire thing.

Thanks for the heads up on that. I really hate how they throw the EXTR ME files into the same pot along with the other files at Win-Raid. Makes it so easy to make a mistake.

Thanks


----------



## davidm71

*Mislabeled*



KedarWolf said:


> I used the Con H version. I have the 1301.
> 
> Check with Lost_N_BIOS on the Winraid forums. He's the Winraid god at this stuff. NEVER use an EXTR version unless it came from the same motherboard BIOS as your system.
> 
> Always use the RGN version, unless you follow the instructions on the link I provided.
> 
> I learned about that on the forum with my Z370, yes, it flashes, but not a good idea.
> 
> Con H version of 1301 here. it comes from the Firmware Repository Pack on Winraid. That's the unconfigured one though, the PMC firmware not added


KedarWolf,

Your ME file according to ME Analyzer is also Region Extracted just like my ME File such that it must be mislabeled and incorrectly named. I ran another ME Region ver 11.11.55.1509 through ME Analyzer and that said 'Region Stock' as opposed to 'Region Extracted'. So I wonder where you got your file from? Did they run it through FIT tool to transfer the settings needed prior?

Thanks

PS: Not trying to be obnoxious or anything here. Just sharing what I found and if I'm wrong I'm wrong.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> KedarWolf,
> 
> Your ME file according to ME Analyzer is also Region Extracted just like my ME File such that it must be mislabeled and incorrectly named. I ran another ME Region ver 11.11.55.1509 through ME Analyzer and that said 'Region Stock' as opposed to 'Region Extracted'. So I wonder where you got your file from? Did they run it through FIT tool to transfer the settings needed prior?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> PS: Not trying to be obnoxious or anything here. Just sharing what I found and if I'm wrong I'm wrong.


The first one I uploaded was a renamed modded one. The second one I said was not modded was the original. That one says Region/Stock when I checked in ME Analyzer.

Do me a favor, please, check this one for me, make sure I never messed it up. Attached file below picture.

I just renamed it 1.bin so I never had to type the whole thing out in ME Analyzer.


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf said:


> The first one I uploaded was a renamed modded one. The second one I said was not modded was the original. That one says Region/Stock when I checked in ME Analyzer.
> 
> Do me a favor, please, check this one for me, make sure I never messed it up. Attached file below picture.
> 
> I just renamed it 1.bin so I never had to type the whole thing out in ME Analyzer.


My version of ME Analyzer is calling every file you uploaded Region-Extracted.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> My version of ME Analyzer is calling every file you uploaded Region-Extracted.


This is the file I used. ME Analyzer says it's Region/Stock.

Oh, you're checking my modded file. I'm pretty sure because it's modded it'll say Extracted.

Yes, I checked. Modded files say Extracted. The original, Stock.


----------



## davidm71

Kedarwolf,

Can you please post your MEinfo -verbose on Win-Raid?? 

Thanks a million..

David


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> I just noticed that you indeed did use the Con-H version. In anycase I flashed the Extr version after I configured it myself. Seems to be working so far so good. Posted my verbose Meinfo detail on Win-raid for Plutomaniac to take a look at it and see if it was a true success or not.
> 
> In other news I had a hiccup with my 5.0 ghz overclock at 1.320 volts. Playing Deus Ex video game crashed on me and locked up after an hour. Now at 1.325 volts and set CPU ACDC loadline internal calibration to performance. Voltages peaking at 1.36 volts now though I have EIST enabled so it seems to down clock a lot and save on the volts. Worse comes to worse I'll disable EIST.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> EDIT: Kedar,
> 
> According to FIT your ME is set to QM370 platform so I wouldn't use that either.


I fixed the Fit issue, my modded file now says Z390.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Kedarwolf,
> 
> Can you please post your MEinfo -verbose on Win-Raid??
> 
> Thanks a million..
> 
> David


Done.


----------



## KedarWolf

With C-Stated and SpeedShift disabled, EIST enabled, 0% minimum CPU speed in Windows Power options, my VR VOUT now downclocks when my CPU does.

I don't think it really makes a difference, my CPU temps are insanely low C-States enabled and VR VOUT stick at 1.36v or disabled with EIST, just I prefer no C States as it might help with having a more stable overclock. :drum:


----------



## Timur Born

Dual BIOS is no fun on the Aorus Master. It keeps switching to the other BIOS on some failed OC attempts regardless of whether it's set to auto or manual. And the switches are placed so that I cannot reach them by hand while using the lowest PCIe slot for my X-Fi (either have to remove the card or try with a screwdriver).


----------



## KedarWolf

Timur Born said:


> Dual BIOS is no fun on the Aorus Master. It keeps switching to the other BIOS on some failed OC attempts regardless of whether it's set to auto or manual. And the switches are placed so that I cannot reach them by hand while using the lowest PCIe slot for my X-Fi (either have to remove the card or try with a screwdriver).


When my overclock has failed it gives me the option to enter the BIOS with the existing settings, fix the BIOS setting that is causing the issue and reboots with all my BIOS settings intact. 

I choose 'Enter BIOS' instead of loading defaults. 

As well it has the option of loading the last working BIOS configuration, which was all of my BIOS settings that worked intact.


----------



## Alex11223

Is Master more likely to have coil whine than other Z390 boards? (e.g. Taichi Ultimate)

I was planning to buy it for 9900k but now saw a lot of coil whine reports in this thread 
I have not found any reports about coil whine in Asus and Asrock threads (and only 1 via google).


----------



## Beggisch

Alex11223 said:


> Is Master more likely to have coil whine than other Z390 boards? (e.g. Taichi Ultimate)
> 
> I was planning to buy it for 9900k but now saw a lot of coil whine reports in this thread
> I have not found any reports about coil whine in Asus and Asrock threads (and only 1 via google).


I also saw some reports of coil whine but mine has no coil whine at all.
I guess you have to be lucky and if you aren't RMA.

Or you could go with the ultra instead, I think all the coil whine reports I have seen were with the Master.


----------



## Alex11223

Beggisch said:


> Or you could go with the ultra instead, I think all the coil whine reports I have seen were with the Master.


Could be simply because it is less popular, here is one report:


Stockman said:


> Literally went through the same thing. I wish I could find some explanation for why this is happening on the higher-end Z390 boards. My first guess was higher power requirements with 8 core chips, but I'm ONLY hearing whine at idle. Disabling c-states helps, but doesn't eliminate. Gaming is fine, but when web browsing or just sending email the coil whine is unbearable.
> 
> 1st board: Maximus Hero XI - returned
> 2nd board: Aorus Master - returned
> 3rd board: Aorus Ultra - still own - VRM whine is still present, but less so than previous Master
> 
> I have another Master board on the way. Will report back after testing.


----------



## Beggisch

Well if he gets it on 3 different boards maybe the board is not the issue? (PSU maybe)


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> As I said before, you're using c-states instead of speed shift (controlled manually in Throttlestop).
> 
> C-states throws VR-VOUT out the window during idle because c-states actually put the CPU into a deep sleep.


This is not a function of C-states, the same happens when C-states are disabled. It is a function of the Windows power profile, but not the minimum CPU clock setting (I tried that). If I find enough time and motivation I may try to find out which setting affects it most.

The question still remains, though, why would VR VOUT read a completely different value than both Vcore sensors and VID?


----------



## Timur Born

Alex11223 said:


> Is Master more likely to have coil whine than other Z390 boards? (e.g. Taichi Ultimate)


My Asus Crosshair VI Hero had the same problem, maybe even worse.

The Aorus Master makes some funny (albeit quiet) ticking noises on top of the usual zipping when you run the Winrar benchmark test.


----------



## Beggisch

I'm trying to get my 9900k OC stable right now.
I want to go for a fixed voltage with AVX at 4700MHz (because of Temps) and a CPU Clock of 5000Mhz.

Most of the settings I found in guides and in this Thread.
I'm not sure what to do with:

CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline
VAXG Loadline calibration

I left them on Auto (default)


I'm testing right now with prime95 AVX and it seems stable for now.

HWinfo readouts:
Core VIDs at 1.125V
Core Temps at 82-90°c
Vcore 1.320V
VR VOUT 1.236V

It crashed before with BIOS Vcore set to1.28V so I'm testing 1.29V right now, I don't want to go with 5000Mhz AVX, I don't think I have enough cooling for that.

Vcore is subject to change but other than that are these settings fine for a fixed vcore OC?


----------



## Timur Born

Timur Born said:


> This is not a function of C-states, the same happens when C-states are disabled. It is a function of the Windows power profile, but not the minimum CPU clock setting (I tried that). If I find enough time and motivation I may try to find out which setting affects it most.
> 
> The question still remains, though, why would VR VOUT read a completely different value than both Vcore sensors and VID?


With Speedshift the Speedshift settings determins VR VOUT behavior. Minimum frequency determins the minimum voltage, but VR VOUT voltages even increase when frequency remains at minimum according to HWInfo.

Without Speedshift the increases in voltages correspond to increases in frequency (as determined by the active Windows power profile). Because of this I suspect that Speedshift increases frequency in intervals too short for HWinfo to measure even at 100 ms polling rate. This is still rather strange, because both the VR VOUT voltage and current are measured to increase by HWinfo even while the multiplier doesn't budge a bit.


----------



## Timur Born

KedarWolf said:


> When my overclock has failed it gives me the option to enter the BIOS with the existing settings, fix the BIOS setting that is causing the issue and reboots with all my BIOS settings intact.
> 
> I choose 'Enter BIOS' instead of loading defaults.
> 
> As well it has the option of loading the last working BIOS configuration, which was all of my BIOS settings that worked intact.


Yes, that sometimes works. Sometimes you just get a black screen with a half-failed memory OC and need to restart/reset a dozen times to get the option to enter BIOS (which may freeze again). And often with failed OC (both CPU and memory) the Dual BIOS controller switches over to the other BIOS even when you set the switch to manual instead of Auto.

When this happens then sometimes it helps to cut the power, but most of the time I need to reach the BIOS switch below the PCIe x4 slot. You can either switch the BIOS (1/2) back and forth then or you switch from Manual to Auto or Auto to Manual in order to get back to the BIOS you want. This should not happen when Dual Bios is set to manual switching, but it does.

On Asus OC boards there is a button to make the mainboard boot with default BIOS settings, but without clearing the CMOS. This is about the same as the "Enter BIOS" option, but since it is connected to a physical button it works better than Gigabyte's half automatic approach.


----------



## Timur Born

Timur Born said:


> Without Speedshift the increases in voltages correspond to increases in frequency (as determined by the active Windows power profile). Because of this I suspect that Speedshift increases frequency in intervals too short for HWinfo to measure even at 100 ms polling rate. This is still rather strange, because both the VR VOUT voltage and current are measured to increase by HWinfo even while the multiplier doesn't budge a bit.


Indeed, HWinfo is not able to keep up with CPU frequency changes. You need to disable HPET (and maybe bus-clock based CPU measurements, but that comes with drawbacks) in its "Safety" options in order to get a better picture of frequency changes. Or use Throttlestop to measure CPU multipliers more accurately and have them line up with VR VOUT measurements.

Still the question remains why VR VOUT differs so considerably from the other sensors measurements during "idle" phases?!


----------



## Timur Born

I measured wattage at the wall and based on that I suspect that the "OUT" measurements done by HWinfo are mostly useless. Either the polling rate is too low or the averaging is too coarse.

During idle times POUT (in combination with VOUT and IOUT) suggest over 20 watts average load - with peaks over 40 watts - at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt average at Speedshift 100%.

The real difference at the wall is much closer to what "CPU Package Power" measures, aka more like 2 - 4 watts higher average draw at 0% compared to 100% during Idle.

Turning off C-states pushes this to even more dramatic differences. Idle wattage according to POUT is around 35 watts at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt at Speedshift 100%. So 15 watts more compared to using C-states... not! Because according to the wall meter the difference is less than 2 watts, not 15 watts.

No idea what those "OUT" numbers are meant to measure, but I suggest to take these with a big grain of salt.


----------



## Robbært

Timur Born said:


> I measured wattage at the wall and based on that I suspect that the "OUT" measurements done by HWinfo are mostly useless. Either the polling rate is too low or the averaging is too coarse.


CPU is not load resistor.
CPU load (ampere) measured via voltage drop. V*I=wattage. There no real ampere meter.
Single VRM phase is too powerful for idle CPU.
You found energy loss.


----------



## Sheyster

Timur Born said:


> Dual BIOS is no fun on the Aorus Master. It keeps switching to the other BIOS on some failed OC attempts regardless of whether it's set to auto or manual. And the switches are placed so that I cannot reach them by hand while using the lowest PCIe slot for my X-Fi (either have to remove the card or try with a screwdriver).



I agree, I'm not a fan of the way Gigabyte implemented dual BIOS on these boards. Just give me a simple A/B BIOS switch near the back edge of the board next to the case switch/LED connector block area. That is all that is really needed IMHO. They are overthinking it.


----------



## Timur Born

Robbært said:


> CPU is not load resistor.
> CPU load (ampere) measured via voltage drop. V*I=wattage. There no real ampere meter.
> Single VRM phase is too powerful for idle CPU.
> You found energy loss.


Which means? If the whole systems draws 2 - 4 watts more power, but the POUT value reports 34 watts more power draw then what does POUT (and IOUT and VOUT) tell me exactly?

Where is the power loss, or rather where does the power come from and where does it go to?


----------



## davidm71

*Security flaw found in Gigabyte software*

https://bit-tech.net/news/tech/software/asus-gigabyte-software-hit-by-security-flaws/1/


----------



## pm1109

davidm71 said:


> https://bit-tech.net/news/tech/software/asus-gigabyte-software-hit-by-security-flaws/1/


So should we delete the software from our PCs than?


----------



## KedarWolf

pm1109 said:


> So should we delete the software from our PCs than?


I heard here you can install the software, set the RGB you want, then delete the software. Unless you reset the BIOS to defaults it should stick.


----------



## Falkentyne

pm1109 said:


> So should we delete the software from our PCs than?


Real men don't let men use software (Except MSI Afterburner and HWinfo64).


----------



## davidm71

pm1109 said:


> So should we delete the software from our PCs than?


The article stated version below 2.0 were affected. Also stated that Gigabyte was slow to fix these issues despite releasing new versions so who knows..


----------



## pm1109

Falkentyne said:


> Real men don't let men use software (Except MSI Afterburner and HWinfo64).[/quot
> 
> ????


----------



## Timur Born

Matthew's last post was on 12-12. Is he still around?


----------



## VeritronX

probably with family for christmas or something


----------



## Phantomas 007

To install a M2 drive the best place it's the M2P on Aorus Master ?


----------



## Vesimas

Phantomas 007 said:


> To install a M2 drive the best place it's the M2P on Aorus Master ?


I still need to complete the build but i installed mine in m2p and m2a (both nvme drive)


----------



## BradleyW

I'm struggling to get my G-Skill Trident-Z 2x8GB DDR4 4000MHz to run at 4000MHz.
The fastest I can go is 3700MHz with XMP enabled. Anything higher causes system hang. 
VCCIO and VCCIA are at 1.3v.
9900K HT is at 5GHz (1.33v AVX, 1.3v normal load, CPU-Z readings).
Using latest F6 BIOS for my Z390 Ultra. 
C States Enabled, Vcore Offset.

Thank you.


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> I'm struggling to get my G-Skill Trident-Z 2x8GB DDR4 4000MHz to run at 4000MHz.
> The fastest I can go is 3700MHz with XMP enabled. Anything higher causes system hang.
> VCCIO and VCCIA are at 1.3v.
> 9900K HT is at 5GHz (1.33v AVX, 1.3v normal load, CPU-Z readings).
> Using latest F6 BIOS for my Z390 Ultra.
> C States Enabled, Vcore Offset.
> 
> Thank you.


Try to keep VCCIO and SA 1.25v or under, higher can cause instability. Try Eventual RAM voltage from 1.43 to 1.45v and RAM boot voltage 1.46.


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> Try to keep VCCIO and SA 1.25v or under, higher can cause instability. Try Eventual RAM voltage from 1.43 to 1.45v and RAM boot voltage 1.46.


Not sure what RAM boot voltage is. Here are all my available voltage settings for RAM. See attachments.


----------



## Moparman

Timur Born said:


> Matthew's last post was on 12-12. Is he still around?


 He probably won't be on until after the new year.


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> Not sure what RAM boot voltage is. Here are all my available voltage settings for RAM. See attachments.


DRAM Training Voltage, 1.45 or 1.46,

DRAM Voltage 1.43 to 1.45.

Likely why your OC is unstable. 

Edit: And play with SA and VCCIO from 1.21 up to 1.25v. Mine works well at 1.23v but higher I get instability.


----------



## jlp0209

Phantomas 007 said:


> To install a M2 drive the best place it's the M2P on Aorus Master ?


You do know the motherboard comes with a manual where you can easily find this info? No one can answer your question because it depends if you have nvm-e or sata m.2 drive, a pci-e card in your PCIEX4 slot, or other sata drives connected. It really is not difficult. 

See my post #1428 where I took a screen shot of the manual for someone else who had this exact same question. Read the manual people.


----------



## spyshagg

How far could a stock 3333mhz CL16 Ram overclock on intel systems? been on ryzen a long time.


----------



## KedarWolf

jlp0209 said:


> @UniverseN
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> - If you have one m.2 PCI-e NVM-e ssd, and 5 SATA ssd's as you said you have, you can use the M2P port. All SATA ports will be enabled. The only issue is the M2P port shares PCI-e bandwidth with PCIEX4 slot on the board. If you don't have anything in the PCIEX4 port, you'll have no issues.
> 
> You can also use M2A port. All SATA ports will be enabled and you'll have no shared bandwidth with PCIEX4 port.
> 
> Using M2M with your m.2 PCI-e NVM-e ssd will disable SATA ports 4 and 5. So this is out if you have 5 SATA ssd's.
> 
> Bottom line: If you do not have any PCI-e card in the PCIEX4 port, there will be no difference if you use M2A or M2P for your PCI-e NVM-e ssd. If you have a card inserted into PCIEX4 port, you should use M2A for your m.2 PCI-e NVM-e ssd.
> 
> Here's a photo of the page of the manual.


If you use the M2A port and a 1x PCI-e sound card in the PCIE4 port, will your M.2 run at 2x or 4x?

Edit: Actually, how would that work with two M.2s in the bottom ports? I know my old Asus had issues. Like bottom 1x pci-e port would not work with two M.2s at 4x.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> If you use the M2A port and a 1x PCI-e sound card in the PCIE4 port, will your M.2 run at 2x or 4x?
> 
> Edit: Actually, how would that work with two M.2s in the bottom ports? I know my old Asus had issues. Like bottom 1x pci-e port would not work with two M.2s at 4x.


It will run at 4x because the card runs at 1x.
I have an old x-fi PCIE in the x1 slot.
I just checked just now in HWinfo64.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> It will run at 4x because the card runs at 1x.
> I have an old x-fi PCIE in the x1 slot.
> I just checked just now in HWinfo64.


Question for you peeps? 

I have an AE-5 RGB sound card, really decent card.

But my Aorus Xtreme already has a built in sound card with a Sabre DAC I believe it is.

If I only play game and watch Twitch, no 24 bit FLAC music or anything, I may as well sell the AE-5, right?


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Question for you peeps?
> 
> I have an AE-5 RGB sound card, really decent card.
> 
> But my Aorus Xtreme already has a built in sound card with a Sabre DAC I believe it is.
> 
> If I only play game and watch Twitch, no 24 bit FLAC music or anything, I may as well sell the AE-5, right?


I'm not a sound guy. But I'm still using my X-fi (even though I have a Sennheiser GSX-1000 and the ess realtek stuff) since it's convenient for me to switch to 5.1 mode and use the Creative i/o panel for headphones, and I don't want to be bothered as I know the 5.1 on the realtek won't sound as good. And the ESS Sabre is for headphones only. But if you never use the analog inputs....

Do you need to sell it ? Are you short on cash? Why not just keep it around for a rainy day?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I'm not a sound guy. But I'm still using my X-fi (even though I have a Sennheiser GSX-1000 and the ess realtek stuff) since it's convenient for me to switch to 5.1 mode and use the Creative i/o panel for headphones, and I don't want to be bothered as I know the 5.1 on the realtek won't sound as good. And the ESS Sabre is for headphones only. But if you never use the analog inputs....
> 
> Do you need to sell it ? Are you short on cash? Why not just keep it around for a rainy day?


I only use a HyperX Alpha headset plugged directly into the motherboard but yes, the cash would come in handy and it's just sitting there not being used. Plus with two M.2s and no room to pop anything in the top 1x PCI-e port I don't like my video card at 8x when I plug it into the PCIX4X slot.


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what RAM boot voltage is. Here are all my available voltage settings for RAM. See attachments.
> 
> 
> 
> DRAM Training Voltage, 1.45 or 1.46,
> 
> DRAM Voltage 1.43 to 1.45.
> 
> Likely why your OC is unstable. /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif
> 
> Edit: And play with SA and VCCIO from 1.21 up to 1.25v. Mine works well at 1.23v but higher I get instability.
Click to expand...

Will these suggested voltages cause any degradation on the RAM and CPU for 24/7 use? What is the auto voltage for DRAM training voltage?


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Will these suggested voltages cause any degradation on the RAM and CPU for 24/7 use? What is the auto voltage for DRAM training voltage?


BradleyW:
These voltages are for 'training' the RAM timings when the computer is first turned on.
They won't degrade anything (unless they're set WAY too high).
After the RAM is successfully trained, it will use the 'regular' voltages in the other DDR section.
Sometimes, when overclocking memory, it needs a bit higher voltage for the training process to complete.


----------



## Knjaz136

Any ideas why would 9900k never turbo itself up to 5ghz, despite being only loaded on a single core by an old purely single-core process? (even made sure windows won't mess up the threading so I assigned process to CPU 2 in task manager).
https://puu.sh/CotqI/67dfd61b5e.png

Z390 Aorus Ultra, no OC, all package/power limits are set to 300.


----------



## Falkentyne

Knjaz136 said:


> Any ideas why would 9900k never turbo itself up to 5ghz, despite being only loaded on a single core by an old purely single-core process? (even made sure windows won't mess up the threading so I assigned process to CPU 2 in task manager).
> https://puu.sh/CotqI/67dfd61b5e.png
> 
> Z390 Aorus Ultra, no OC, all package/power limits are set to 300.


Impossible. Windows will always reserve at least one thread for itself. "At least".
The instant something even takes up 1% of a system process, as soon as something else tries to use the CPU, it's instantly going to drop down to the 2 core CPU ratio.
You may have better results using Linux for that.
This was discussed way back even with the older 4 core CPU's when trying to do 1 thread superPI runs.
Only way to force 1 thread is to just disable hyperthreading and enable 1 or 2 cores.


----------



## Knjaz136

Falkentyne said:


> Impossible. Windows will always reserve at least one thread for itself. "At least".
> The instant something even takes up 1% of a system process, as soon as something else tries to use the CPU, it's instantly going to drop down to the 2 core CPU ratio.
> You may have better results using Linux for that.
> This was discussed way back even with the older 4 core CPU's when trying to do 1 thread superPI runs.
> Only way to force 1 thread is to just disable hyperthreading and enable 1 or 2 cores.


so despite 9900k having 5.0ghz 2 core turbo, if other threads have even the slightest load on them (0.5-1%, doens't matter how much), it'll go down to whatever amount of threads are actually "active" ? 
thought I had something wrong in the mobo config, thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Timur Born

Knjaz136 said:


> Any ideas why would 9900k never turbo itself up to 5ghz, despite being only loaded on a single core by an old purely single-core process? (even made sure windows won't mess up the threading so I assigned process to CPU 2 in task manager).


Because it's never loaded on a single core. You need to activate Core Parking with an aggressive setting (like 0%) to achieve that and then all processes share the same core with may counter the higher clock speed.


----------



## davidm71

*Confused about vid vs vcore still..*

Hi,

Still confused a little about what is the real vcore and how that is different than VID. As I understand VID is what the voltage the CPU requests for a given Cache frequency. The VCore you manually dial in bios is what you request from the board to get from the cpu, and the VROUT is what the cpu is actually set at in vcore levels?

Took a photo of priming my system with small TFTTs AVX Disabled. Not sure how to set 1344 you guys had mentioned. Confused which vcore is accurate from the IT8688E and IT8792E sensors and why my VID is so low as reported by Coretemp. Note I have set the CPU AC Internal LLC to Power Saving Mode and the regular LLC to 'Turbo'. 

Thanks


----------



## Moparman

davidm71 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Still confused a little about what is the real vcore and how that is different than VID. As I understand VID is what the voltage the CPU requests for a given Cache frequency. The VCore you manually dial in bios is what you request from the board to get from the cpu, and the VROUT is what the cpu is actually set at in vcore levels?
> 
> Took a photo of priming my system with small TFTTs AVX Disabled. Not sure how to set 1344 you guys had mentioned. Confused which vcore is accurate from the IT8688E and IT8792E sensors and why my VID is so low as reported by Coretemp. Note I have set the CPU AC Internal LLC to Power Saving Mode and the regular LLC to 'Turbo'.
> 
> Thanks



Since you have the Master get a multi meter and measure the Vcore read point above the mem slots. Then you will 100% know what Voltage you're looking at.


----------



## davidm71

Moparman said:


> Since you have the Master get a multi meter and measure the Vcore read point above the mem slots. Then you will 100% know what Voltage you're looking at.




How do you do that?? Theres nothing in the manual that says how. I assume one is ground and the other VROUT?

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

Moparman said:


> Since you have the Master get a multi meter and measure the Vcore read point above the mem slots. Then you will 100% know what Voltage you're looking at.


The read points will measure the MLCC reading (the same reading behind the caps), NOT the CPU on die-sense voltage.
VR Vout is the most accurate voltage unless you find custom read points (not the labeled ones).


----------



## davidm71

Just wanted to add that I have noticed less voltage spikes with setting Internal CPU LLC to 'Power Saving' Mode and have not noticed any instability so far.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Just wanted to add that I have noticed less voltage spikes with setting Internal CPU LLC to 'Power Saving' Mode and have not noticed any instability so far.


I put Internal LLC from Turbo to Power Saving and instant errors in Prime95.


----------



## davidm71

*Not me*



KedarWolf said:


> I put Internal LLC from Turbo to Power Saving and instant errors in Prime95.


I didn't experience that at all. Was still pretty stable at 5.0ghz. Perhaps its because your running your cache and memory frequency higher than mine and stressing your memory controller more than mine.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I put Internal LLC from Turbo to Power Saving and instant errors in Prime95.


Use HWinfo64 to find the 'values' that those settings do for IA AC and IA DC.
I posted the exact settings earlier. Each one. It's some posts up.
needless to say, the extreme value is 2.10 mOhms and 2.10 mOhms and turbo is 1.60 mOhs, 1.60 mOhms, and keeps going down from there (but AC winds up different than DC, and I found DC doesn't affect vcore at all (at least when I tested it, it BARELY affects it, while AC massively affects it).


----------



## jlp0209

Is there any way to prevent the Vcore from dropping down to under .700v when at idle using adaptive voltage? I'm trying to further tune my OC on adaptive voltage and want to disable enhanced core performance. I need to raise my LLC from medium to high but also lower my DVID offset. Gets rid of all vdroop under load which is great, but also now causes voltage to go down to .690 or so at idle. 

Is this an issue on an Asus XI Hero for example? I don't recall this being an issue on my Z370 Hero but I could be wrong.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Is there any way to prevent the Vcore from dropping down to under .700v when at idle using adaptive voltage? I'm trying to further tune my OC on adaptive voltage and want to disable enhanced core performance. I need to raise my LLC from medium to high but also lower my DVID offset. Gets rid of all vdroop under load which is great, but also now causes voltage to go down to .690 or so at idle.
> 
> Is this an issue on an Asus XI Hero for example? I don't recall this being an issue on my Z370 Hero but I could be wrong.


No, you have to choose either 1 of two things:
1) downclock and keep your voltage the same as the original voltage (e.g. use manual override voltage, and speed shift (in Throttlestop) to manually downclock, which isn't what you want.
2) dont downclock. :/
Since adaptive voltage is based on the CPU VID, you are pretty limited in the ranges.

You could also just use speedshift (maybe without c-states?) and forcibly set a minimum speed shift multiplier, like x16, so your CPU won't downclock below 1600 mhz. You can do that in Throttlestop.
I can't really help more than this. You have to just experiment.


----------



## Timur Born

Why would we trust VOUT when POUT and IOUT cannot be trusted for idle times, at least not as measured by HWInfo?


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> You could also just use speedshift (maybe without c-states?) and forcibly set a minimum speed shift multiplier, like x16, so your CPU won't downclock below 1600 mhz. You can do that in Throttlestop.
> I can't really help more than this. You have to just experiment.


No need to use Throttlestop, the Windows power profile setting for "Minimum" CPU frequency also handles Speedshift's minimum. Power profiles always override Speedshift anyway and you have to make sure that "Autonomous" mode is even active in your power profile to make use of Speedshift (or use Throttlestop).

I am currently trying to use Speedshift without C-states (other than C1E) and the minimum power draw at the wall seems to be about the same as using C3. This only is a viable option if you clock all cores to the same frequency, though, because without C3 (or lower) there will be no higher clock for fewer cores being active (all remain active all the time without C3).


----------



## scaramonga

BradleyW said:


> I'm struggling to get my G-Skill Trident-Z 2x8GB DDR4 4000MHz to run at 4000MHz.
> The fastest I can go is 3700MHz with XMP enabled. Anything higher causes system hang.
> VCCIO and VCCIA are at 1.3v.
> 9900K HT is at 5GHz (1.33v AVX, 1.3v normal load, CPU-Z readings).
> Using latest F6 BIOS for my Z390 Ultra.
> C States Enabled, Vcore Offset.
> 
> Thank you.


On the new BIOS F8b, there is a new setting under 'Memory Enhancement Settings', called 'Frequency', and a few have reported great success in getting their RAM to run at desired speed with this. Give it a shot


----------



## pm1109

scaramonga said:


> On the new BIOS F8b, there is a new setting under 'Memory Enhancement Settings', called 'Frequency', and a few have reported great success in getting their RAM to run at desired speed with this. Give it a shot


What are you running your g.skill ram at on the Gigabyte Master Z390 board?


----------



## BradleyW

jlp0209 said:


> Is there any way to prevent the Vcore from dropping down to under .700v when at idle using adaptive voltage? I'm trying to further tune my OC on adaptive voltage and want to disable enhanced core performance. I need to raise my LLC from medium to high but also lower my DVID offset. Gets rid of all vdroop under load which is great, but also now causes voltage to go down to .690 or so at idle.
> 
> Is this an issue on an Asus XI Hero for example? I don't recall this being an issue on my Z370 Hero but I could be wrong.


Yes I had the same issue. Set AI AC to 1 and set the offset to 0.000v and test your vcore again. Adjust via positive or negative offset if needed. It'll fix your 0.69v idle issue.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Feliz navidad boys i have one question in my z390 aorus xtreme i have see the thermistor sensor cable 2 i put this cable in the rgb commander and 2 in the motherboard right?


----------



## KedarWolf

intulor said:


> Just wanted to say thanks. Been following your progress in this thread and I've been able to use your numbers to push my 4000mhz 18-19-19-39 kit to 4133mhz 17-17-17-32 stable. Tried various things on my own to get various configurations stable and wasn't having much luck, so I used ones you posted and everything fell in place.


Here's my final 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory 17-17-17-32 2T.

Try on the Xtreme or Master.

BIOS screens below in Spoiler.



Spoiler


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> No, you have to choose either 1 of two things:
> 1) downclock and keep your voltage the same as the original voltage (e.g. use manual override voltage, and speed shift (in Throttlestop) to manually downclock, which isn't what you want.
> 2) dont downclock. :/
> Since adaptive voltage is based on the CPU VID, you are pretty limited in the ranges.
> 
> You could also just use speedshift (maybe without c-states?) and forcibly set a minimum speed shift multiplier, like x16, so your CPU won't downclock below 1600 mhz. You can do that in Throttlestop.
> I can't really help more than this. You have to just experiment.


Thanks, yeah I figured there is really not much more I can do outside of using TS. 



BradleyW said:


> Yes I had the same issue. Set AI AC to 1 and set the offset to 0.000v and test your vcore again. Adjust via positive or negative offset if needed. It'll fix your 0.69v idle issue.


Haven't crashed yet at idle @ .69v, fingers crossed. I already set AC to 1. I can't set offset to 0.000v because that will not work (Vcore will be too low). Already have a +.055 offset, LLC set at high. CPU is 49x, uncore auto (43x). If I use higher LLC I will need to further decrease the offset voltage which will crash at idle. I was stable with medium LLC with the multicore enhancement enabled but wanted to disable that and re-test. High LLC works best now. I'll have to post in an Asus forum to ask if this is a similar issue on their Z390 boards. I can't remember my old Hero giving me these headaches, I may be mistaken and have just forgotten. Thank you.


----------



## Jidonsu

This might be the best I can do for now. It's at 4133 16-17-17-37 with 1.45V DRAM and 1.25 IO/SA using the 4000 17-17-17-37 kit. IIRC, the current secondary and tertiary timings are from the training at 4200. Retraining at 4133 causes errors in Ram Test before 100%, but these settings can run to 18000%. I'm hesitant to touch anything else.

9700K at 5.2 core and 4.8 cache at 1.35V on the Aorus Master.

EDIT: Oops, meant to stick this in the DDR4 thread. Haha.


----------



## Artroxa

Hey! 

So i purchased the z390 aorus master to go with my new 9900k and i realized while updating my pcpart picker that my PSU ( Corsair RM750x v2 ) only has 1 port for 2x4 ATX but the master has 2 ports. 
Now i realize that having 2 plugged in is probably more for overclocking on the higher end, but how screwed am i if im going for 5.1Ghz and such? Does it reduce Stability? 


Thanks in advance, Artroxa.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

What is the best timings for corsair vengeance rgb pro 3600 16gb cl16?
I have buy this memory i have make a good choice?


----------



## Jidonsu

Artroxa said:


> Hey!
> 
> So i purchased the z390 aorus master to go with my new 9900k and i realized while updating my pcpart picker that my PSU ( Corsair RM750x v2 ) only has 1 port for 2x4 ATX but the master has 2 ports.
> Now i realize that having 2 plugged in is probably more for overclocking on the higher end, but how screwed am i if im going for 5.1Ghz and such? Does it reduce Stability?
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance, Artroxa.


You're fine with just one 8pin for the CPU power. The second one is there for extreme overclocking with LN2. I have mine plugged in just for the heck of it, but it's entirely unnecessary.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

@Jidonsu i have one question in my z390 aorus xtreme i have see the thermistor sensor cable 2 i put this cable in the rgb commander and 2 in the motherboard right?


----------



## Jidonsu

FedeX299I57640X said:


> @Jidonsu i have one question in my z390 aorus xtreme i have see the thermistor sensor cable 2 i put this cable in the rgb commander and 2 in the motherboard right?


I'm not sure what you mean. You have two temperature headers on that board, right? It should come with two cables. I used one of the headers for my water temp probe. I then used one of the temp cables with one the other header on the mobo for intake air temp. You can probably use the cable with the RGB Commander (Corsair?) for fan control.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Jidonsu said:


> I'm not sure what you mean. You have two temperature headers on that board, right? It should come with two cables. I used one of the headers for my water temp probe. I then used one of the temp cables with one the other header on the mobo for intake air temp. You can probably use the cable with the RGB Commander (Corsair?) for fan control.


Yes in my motherboard i have found 2 inside the box of the motherboard and 2 inside the box of aorus rgb commander


----------



## Falkentyne

Artroxa said:


> Hey!
> 
> So i purchased the z390 aorus master to go with my new 9900k and i realized while updating my pcpart picker that my PSU ( Corsair RM750x v2 ) only has 1 port for 2x4 ATX but the master has 2 ports.
> Now i realize that having 2 plugged in is probably more for overclocking on the higher end, but how screwed am i if im going for 5.1Ghz and such? Does it reduce Stability?
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance, Artroxa.


As long as you aren't trying to run small FFT AVX/FMA3 stress testing, you're fine.
The single 8 pin is rated for 235W sustained power long term. Absolute maximum 336W (meaning cable damage can possibly occur at 336W).


----------



## Falkentyne

So I had my first ever "Hello, Clear CMOS" today.
Was trying to mess around to see if the CPU VID scaled past 4.7 ghz cache.
So I tried x50 core, x50 cache at the 1.275v I was using for x50 core, x47 cache, and the system kept freezing on CSM initialization and USB initialization over and over. One time out of 10, I got a post BEEP but the system froze before the bios screen came up.

Yuck.
Pressed the clear CMOS, and the system powered on as soon as I pressed it, and did boot loops a few times, then got a "bios settings reset."

So I loaded my profile and tried x50/x48 and the VID was the same as x50/x47. Tried x51/x48 for good measure and still no change in VID. (I did NOT stress test x48 cache, probably would crash and burn).
Ok that was fun. So I learned my clear CMOS button works. And clearing cmos doesn't erase saved profiles.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> So I had my first ever "Hello, Clear CMOS" today.
> Was trying to mess around to see if the CPU VID scaled past 4.7 ghz cache.
> So I tried x50 core, x50 cache at the 1.275v I was using for x50 core, x47 cache, and the system kept freezing on CSM initialization and USB initialization over and over. One time out of 10, I got a post BEEP but the system froze before the bios screen came up.
> 
> Yuck.
> Pressed the clear CMOS, and the system powered on as soon as I pressed it, and did boot loops a few times, then got a "bios settings reset."
> 
> So I loaded my profile and tried x50/x48 and the VID was the same as x50/x47. Tried x51/x48 for good measure and still no change in VID. (I did NOT stress test x48 cache, probably would crash and burn).
> Ok that was fun. So I learned my clear CMOS button works. And clearing cmos doesn't erase saved profiles.


It’s super convenient, isn’t it? I had to do that the other night when it would only boot to the backup BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> It’s super convenient, isn’t it? I had to do that the other night when it would only boot to the backup BIOS.


Yeah, quite convenient. Didn't know it powered on the system by itself though. Eventually I'll probably on my next actual bios flash, clear cmos with the bios jumper switched to backup to force the backup to become the main bios, so I can flash it from F4 or whatever it came with. Then I'll have to do the same thing again to force the original main bios to be main again. Too much work.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

@Jidonsu i say this aorus rgb commander


----------



## Jidonsu

FedeX299I57640X said:


> @Jidonsu i say this aorus rgb commander


Oh, that’s really cool. So it’ll give you four temp sensors then. Plug them all in, I suppose. What does the manual say?


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Jidonsu said:


> Oh, that’s really cool. So it’ll give you four temp sensors then. Plug them all in, I suppose. What does the manual say?


The manual say connect the thermistor cable to the header for temperature detection.
I hope that i have make the good choice for the ram vengeance rgb pro 16gb 3600 cl16 because in the qvl i see the model of the ram that i have buy but the 32gb was tested and i have see top 1x8 and if i out 2 don't make nothong right?


----------



## DirtyScrubz

KedarWolf said:


> With C-Stated and SpeedShift disabled, EIST enabled, 0% minimum CPU speed in Windows Power options, my VR VOUT now downclocks when my CPU does.
> 
> I don't think it really makes a difference, my CPU temps are insanely low C-States enabled and VR VOUT stick at 1.36v or disabled with EIST, just I prefer no C States as it might help with having a more stable overclock. :drum:


I've done the same thing with EIST active and the power plan set to 0% for min and it works nicely. I don't see my voltage adjusting but the core clock does and the temps are a bit better too. My OC is stable right now at 5 ghz core + avx with realbench stress test, ibt, black ops 4 (surprisingly this game is more stressful than a lot of tests) so I'm happy with it. Voltage in the bios is set to 1.32 but VR OUT shows around 1.28v-1.30 under load. Max CPU temps under realbench stress test after 15 mins was 85C on one core during a quick peak and the rest in the low 80s (this is with a 360mm + 240mm rad cooling it and my gpu).


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

For overclock thermal grizzly hydronaut or mastergel of cooler master?


----------



## Falkentyne

FedeX299I57640X said:


> For overclock thermal grizzly hydronaut or mastergel of cooler master?


Mastergel Maker Nano.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Falkentyne said:


> Mastergel Maker Nano.


So mastergel is not ideal also mastergel maker nano or pro is ideal right?


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> DRAM Training Voltage, 1.45 or 1.46,
> 
> DRAM Voltage 1.43 to 1.45.
> 
> Likely why your OC is unstable.
> 
> Edit: And play with SA and VCCIO from 1.21 up to 1.25v. Mine works well at 1.23v but higher I get instability.


Superb my friend! I set the training voltage to 1.45v and I can run at 4000MHz @ 1.35v DRAM, VCCIO 1.2v, System Agent 1.25v.

Edit: Cancel that. Unstable. Tried VRAM voltage up to 1.4v, training to 1.46v and IMC, VCCIO to 1.3 each. No joy.


----------



## KedarWolf

FedeX299I57640X said:


> For overclock thermal grizzly hydronaut or mastergel of cooler master?


I swear by Cooler Master MasterGel Maker Nano. This stuff is great and non-conductive.


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> Superb my friend! I set the training voltage to 1.45v and I can run at 4000MHz @ 1.35v DRAM, VCCIO 1.2v, System Agent 1.25v.
> 
> Edit: Cancel that. Unstable. Tried VRAM voltage up to 1.4v, training to 1.46v and IMC, VCCIO to 1.3 each. No joy.


Try DRAM voltage from 1.43 to 1.45. And see my other post with my BIOS settings, other DRAM voltages you can adjust as well that help.


----------



## Falkentyne

FedeX299I57640X said:


> So mastergel is not ideal also mastergel maker nano or pro is ideal right?


http://www.coolermaster.com/cooling/thermal-compound/mastergel-maker/
https://www.amazon.com/MasterGel-Maker-Nano-High-performance-MGZ-NDSG-N15M-R1/dp/B019BZENY8/


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> http://www.coolermaster.com/cooling/thermal-compound/mastergel-maker/
> https://www.amazon.com/MasterGel-Maker-Nano-High-performance-MGZ-NDSG-N15M-R1/dp/B019BZENY8/


Nano is the best, I like it even better than Grizzly.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

KedarWolf said:


> Nano is the best, I like it even better than Grizzly.


Ok thanks and for the ram corsair vengeance rgb pro 16gb cl16 3600 are one good choice?


----------



## KedarWolf

FedeX299I57640X said:


> Ok thanks and for the ram corsair vengeance rgb pro 16gb cl16 3600 are one good choice?


Can't beat G.Skill for best RAM. Trident Z CL16 3600 great choice!!

Edit: Don't get RBG though, issues overclocking RGB versions.


----------



## Bronson

Hi, I couldn't find the Aorus Extreme Board in AAMAZON, thought I hate AMAZON's search engine so I dunno if it actually is sell there...anyone knows if it will be avaiable? thanxs in advanace


----------



## Falkentyne

Leemarvin said:


> Hi, I couldn't find the Aorus Extreme Board in AAMAZON, thought I hate AMAZON's search engine so I dunno if it actually is sell there...anyone knows if it will be avaiable? thanxs in advanace


Not there. Only on newegg (and some other places).
Newegg's warehouse is right next to Gigabyte's warehouse so that's understandable.


----------



## KedarWolf

Leemarvin said:


> Hi, I couldn't find the Aorus Extreme Board in AAMAZON, thought I hate AMAZON's search engine so I dunno if it actually is sell there...anyone knows if it will be avaiable? thanxs in advanace


https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145103


----------



## Jidonsu

My computer instant crashed when I accidentally slid the MSI afterburner core clock slider a bit too far and clicked the check mark. It booted to the backup bios. Is that normal behavior? 

Really getting acquainted with the rear IO Clear Cmos button these days. Haha.


----------



## Robbært

Jidonsu said:


> My computer instant crashed when I accidentally slid the MSI afterburner core clock slider a bit too far and clicked the check mark. It booted to the backup bios. Is that normal behavior?
> 
> Really getting acquainted with the rear IO Clear Cmos button these days. Haha.


I think you've found how to flash backup bios on Gigabyte boards.
You have to power off PSU for 5-10s to stop Intel ME boot you in backup.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> My computer instant crashed when I accidentally slid the MSI afterburner core clock slider a bit too far and clicked the check mark. It booted to the backup bios. Is that normal behavior?
> 
> Really getting acquainted with the rear IO Clear Cmos button these days. Haha.


I never had it boot to the backup bios and I've had multiple BSOD's before.
Had a few stop 3B (thread stuck in device driver) errors from undervolting my Vega "globally" too far in MSI afterburner (not sure how to undervolt each power state yet) and some machine check exceptions and one BSOD from too low VCCSA after using command rate 1T and another from Stop 0x101 (whatever that is). Never went to the backup bios.


----------



## Jidonsu

Robbært said:


> I think you've found how to flash backup bios on Gigabyte boards.
> You have to power off PSU for 5-10s to stop Intel ME boot you in backup.


You mean i can just force a crash and then flash the backup bios that way? Hmmmm....that sounds risky.

I'll try to just disconnect the PSU for a short while before trying to reboot again next time and see what happens. I usually disconnect the power before I hit the Clear CMOS per the manual anyways.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> I never had it boot to the backup bios and I've had multiple BSOD's before.
> Had a few stop 3B (thread stuck in device driver) errors from undervolting my Vega "globally" too far in MSI afterburner (not sure how to undervolt each power state yet) and some machine check exceptions and one BSOD from too low VCCSA after using command rate 1T and another from Stop 0x101 (whatever that is). Never went to the backup bios.


Weird, mine did that the both times it was a hard crash that doesn't result in a BSOD. I'm talking full system lockup. 

BSODs just boots normally into the main bios for me as well.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> Weird, mine did that the both times it was a hard crash that doesn't result in a BSOD. I'm talking full system lockup.
> 
> BSODs just boots normally into the main bios for me as well.


When you get a full system lockup, do you press the RESET button or do you hold the power button down for 5 seconds?


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> When you get a full system lockup, do you press the RESET button or do you hold the power button down for 5 seconds?


Damn, that's a good question. I honestly can't remember. I'm leaning towards RESET. Should I be powering down?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> Damn, that's a good question. I honestly can't remember. I'm leaning towards RESET. Should I be powering down?


The reset button has always caused boot loops on gigabyte boards in the past. I always use the power down button. When I had my vcore overclock fails and the system wouldn't even POST, or it froze before the bios screen, I always did the power button 5 seconds to power off. Never reset.
See if that stops your problem.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> The reset button has always caused boot loops on gigabyte boards in the past. I always use the power down button. When I had my vcore overclock fails and the system wouldn't even POST, or it froze before the bios screen, I always did the power button 5 seconds to power off. Never reset.
> See if that stops your problem.


Thanks. I hope I never have to deal with it again, but I give it a day or two before I try to make this thing even faster...I just don't learn.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Leemarvin said:


> Hi, I couldn't find the Aorus Extreme Board in AAMAZON, thought I hate AMAZON's search engine so I dunno if it actually is sell there...anyone knows if it will be avaiable? thanxs in advanace


You must search z390 aorus xtreme in Amazon


----------



## Falkentyne

FedeX299I57640X said:


> You must search z390 aorus xtreme in Amazon


As I said twice now, it's *NOT* on amazon.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

KedarWolf said:


> Can't beat G.Skill for best RAM. Trident Z CL16 3600 great choice!!
> 
> Edit: Don't get RBG though, issues overclocking RGB versions.


Ok make nothing i have buy the item and hop e that the issue is resolved! @Falkentyne mine i have buy in Amazon.de the z390 aorus xtreme


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Superb my friend! I set the training voltage to 1.45v and I can run at 4000MHz @ 1.35v DRAM, VCCIO 1.2v, System Agent 1.25v.
> 
> Edit: Cancel that. Unstable. Tried VRAM voltage up to 1.4v, training to 1.46v and IMC, VCCIO to 1.3 each. No joy.
> 
> 
> 
> Try DRAM voltage from 1.43 to 1.45. And see my other post with my BIOS settings, other DRAM voltages you can adjust as well that help.
Click to expand...

I'll try that. One way I knew 4000MHz wasn't stable was because my memory benchmarks shown worse performance.


----------



## Jidonsu

This thing is out of control. Cinebench 1852 at 5.4ghz 1.391V on the 9700K. Kinda wish I could get a 9900K that I know for sure will overclock as well.


----------



## Hercule Poirot

Afternoon All. Got a couple odd issues goin' on with my board. Got the Xtreme, with 2 NVME drives, and 1 SATA SSD installed. An ADATA in the M2M, and a Samsung 970 Pro in M2A slot. The SSD is in SATA 1. Never had any issue with the ADATA, or the SSD, also a Samsung. The issue is that the 970 will only appear in the device manager after waking from sleep. This happens no matter what slot it is in. Thinking that it was a bad drive I sent it back for a new one, but the issue remains. The first cold boot after installing it, it appeared in BIOS and then in device manager just fine. The Samsung util also saw it, but after the first reboot, it is gone again. BIOS doesn't see it, nor device manager. I am currently running the F4 BIOS, as I don't wanna run the F5b just yet, (unless I have to) as it is still beta, and there was no mention of this issue as being included in the update.


Second issue is concerning fans. I should be seeing a total of 5 fans, but am only seeing 3. All are 3 pin. I see the CPU FAN, System 1, and SystemFAN6 which is where I have the AIO connected. All the FAN/Pump headers are populated save for SYS_FAN2, 3 and 4, as they are out of reach at the moment. May have to pop into MicroCenter and get a couple extenders. All the fans do power up, but only the 3 listed above can be controlled in BIOS. I haven't used the RGB commander as of yet. Is this normal, as they will just act the same as the CPU fan? I did change the CPU fan speed in BIOS as a test, but the others did not speed up with it.


Suggestions? BTW...I am an old azz newbie, doing his first build, so pull your punches if you please. It would be much appreciated .


----------



## EarlZ

I just did a quick overclock test on my 9700K @ 5Ghz with 1.300v and LLC Turbo and I am only getting 1600-1619 in Cinebench R15, seems a little to low or is this the expected score? I see those 9900K's getting 2200 but must be because of Hyper Threading ?
Temps are spread from 70-75c on all cores.

EDIT:

All stock gives me around 1480

EDIT 2:

I noticed that with a high performance power plan and minimum processor state at 5%, my CPU mostly stays at full clock speeds and only enters 800Mhz for a very brief moment. Do I get a performance loss by using 'balanced' power state ?


----------



## Jidonsu

Hercule Poirot said:


> Afternoon All. Got a couple odd issues goin' on with my board. Got the Xtreme, with 2 NVME drives, and 1 SATA SSD installed. An ADATA in the M2M, and a Samsung 970 Pro in M2A slot. The SSD is in SATA 1. Never had any issue with the ADATA, or the SSD, also a Samsung. The issue is that the 970 will only appear in the device manager after waking from sleep. This happens no matter what slot it is in. Thinking that it was a bad drive I sent it back for a new one, but the issue remains. The first cold boot after installing it, it appeared in BIOS and then in device manager just fine. The Samsung util also saw it, but after the first reboot, it is gone again. BIOS doesn't see it, nor device manager. I am currently running the F4 BIOS, as I don't wanna run the F5b just yet, (unless I have to) as it is still beta, and there was no mention of this issue as being included in the update.
> 
> 
> Second issue is concerning fans. I should be seeing a total of 5 fans, but am only seeing 3. All are 3 pin. I see the CPU FAN, System 1, and SystemFAN6 which is where I have the AIO connected. All the FAN/Pump headers are populated save for SYS_FAN2, 3 and 4, as they are out of reach at the moment. May have to pop into MicroCenter and get a couple extenders. All the fans do power up, but only the 3 listed above can be controlled in BIOS. I haven't used the RGB commander as of yet. Is this normal, as they will just act the same as the CPU fan? I did change the CPU fan speed in BIOS as a test, but the others did not speed up with it.
> 
> 
> Suggestions? BTW...I am an old azz newbie, doing his first build, so pull your punches if you please. It would be much appreciated .


Did you install the 970 NVME drivers directly from Samsung? Let's rule that out first.


----------



## Hercule Poirot

Jidonsu said:


> Did you install the 970 NVME drivers directly from Samsung? Let's rule that out first.



Thank you for the reply. I did install the driver, Samsung NVME Express Driver 3. In looking at the device manager, it is currently using the built in windows driver, when the drive is not available, and the Samsung driver when available as shown in the screen caps attached. Maybe a driver conflict? Should I disable the standard NVM controller? Windows is not my first language.


----------



## Jidonsu

Hercule Poirot said:


> Thank you for the reply. I did install the driver, Samsung NVME Express Driver 3. In looking at the device manager, it is currently using the built in windows driver, when the drive is not available, and the Samsung driver when available as shown in the screen caps attached. Maybe a driver conflict? Should I disable the standard NVM controller? Windows is not my first language.


Try uninstalling the windows driver.


----------



## Pasbags

*CPU temps in correlation with Smart Fan 5 profiles in BIOS*

Having a rather annoying issue with my Z390 AORUS Master when it comes to Fan curves and how they ramp up or down with regards to CPU temps. I've used a couple of different BIOS versions left everything at auto or set it manually. set the fans to either Auto PWM or Voltage depending on the type. set the Fan curve or used the default. but the issue i'm finding is that Smart Fan 5 in the BIOS is using an offset of between 10-14C meaning that I have to factor this in to all of my Fan curve adjustments to keep the CPU running at the temps I want. 

I don't know if this is intentional or just an oversight I've seen a few other Z390 Gigabyte boards that seem to be reporting correctly and ramping fans with the Package temp but it seems the master doesn't i'll link to a forum post on the gigabyte forum if I can find it. apart from that the board has been rock solid and I don't really have any complaints but it would be nice that the fan curve follows my CPU temp without this annoying offset. None of my previous MSI or Asus boards did this. hopefully it's something that can be easily fixed in BIOS.


but anyway happy new year everyone 


Connor


----------



## Jidonsu

Quick question, my VR VOUT (IR35201) shows a drop from ~1.34V at idle to ~1.30V during load (Prime95, Realbench, etc) while the Vcore sensor on IR8792E stays pretty steady around 1.34. Which one is more accurate? Has anyone measured from the motherboard during load to see what happens yet? If not, I suppose I can remove some fans that are blocking the measure points and give it a whirl.

My LLC is on Turbo, btw.

Edit: Buildzoid says VR VOUT is more accurate. https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...h_vcore_vcore_or_vr_vout_gigabyte_aorus_z390/

So I'm getting ~40 to 50mV of vdroop?


----------



## davidm71

*Gigabyte Auros Master Z390 - 970 Pro Samsung Compatibility issue*



Hercule Poirot said:


> Thank you for the reply. I did install the driver, Samsung NVME Express Driver 3. In looking at the device manager, it is currently using the built in windows driver, when the drive is not available, and the Samsung driver when available as shown in the screen caps attached. Maybe a driver conflict? Should I disable the standard NVM controller? Windows is not my first language.


Bet you any thing the motherboard has an issue with 970 Pro Samsungs drives. Mine randomly disappears from bios. Probably a bios bug.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> Quick question, my VR VOUT (IR35201) shows a drop from ~1.34V at idle to ~1.30V during load (Prime95, Realbench, etc) while the Vcore sensor on IR8792E stays pretty steady around 1.34. Which one is more accurate? Has anyone measured from the motherboard during load to see what happens yet? If not, I suppose I can remove some fans that are blocking the measure points and give it a whirl.
> 
> My LLC is on Turbo, btw.
> 
> Edit: Buildzoid says VR VOUT is more accurate. https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...h_vcore_vcore_or_vr_vout_gigabyte_aorus_z390/
> 
> So I'm getting ~40 to 50mV of vdroop?


I told you guys like 20 times VR Vout is more accurate.
Elmor told me in private message directly.
Elmor also posted this:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

But the instant buildzoid posts it everyone believes him instantly.

8792E is the MLCC caps reading, the same reading you would get if you used the onboard multimeter read points.
Gigabyte's "turbo" puts it between the Asus level 6 and level 7 shown on Elmor's chart.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> I told you guys like 20 times VR Vout is more accurate.
> Elmor told me in private message directly.
> Elmor also posted this:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> But the instant buildzoid posts it everyone believes him instantly.
> 
> 8792E is the MLCC caps reading, the same reading you would get if you used the onboard multimeter read points.
> Gigabyte's "turbo" puts it between the Asus level 6 and level 7 shown on Elmor's chart.


I knew you'd respond. Haha. That's exactly the link I needed to see. Thanks!


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> I knew you'd respond. Haha. That's exactly the link I needed to see. Thanks!


Maybe this was better.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...load-voltage-main-1-watch-2.html#post27736104


----------



## Timur Born

If VOUT is accurate, why is POUT inaccurate during idle? I assume that it is a derived value from VOUT and IOUT?! Where is the culprit?


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> Maybe this was better.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...load-voltage-main-1-watch-2.html#post27736104


That lines up perfectly with the voltage drop you and I both see at load. Superb.


----------



## Hercule Poirot

Jidonsu said:


> Did you install the 970 NVME drivers directly from Samsung? Let's rule that out first.





Jidonsu said:


> Try uninstalling the windows driver.



I tried all kinds of combinations to try and get the standard driver to uninstall, but after reboot, it just pops right back, and the 970 disappears. I'll take another crack at it tomorrow after I sober up. :thumb:


----------



## Hercule Poirot

davidm71 said:


> Bet you any thing the motherboard has an issue with 970 Pro Samsungs drives. Mine randomly disappears from bios. Probably a bios bug.



Quite possible. I haven't tried the f5b BIOS yet. Trying to keep things as stable as possible before OC'ing.


----------



## Phantomas 007

Just complete my new bulid 9900k - Z390 Aorus Master. I don't want to push the new CPU. Just to be near to 5GHz. So I will appreciate any stable oc settings for this purpose.

Thanks you - I wish you a Happy New Year !!!


----------



## pm1109

Phantomas 007 said:


> Just complete my new bulid 9900k - Z390 Aorus Master. I don't want to push the new CPU. Just to be near to 5GHz. So I will appreciate any stable oc settings for this purpose.
> 
> Thanks you - I wish you a Happy New Year !!!


This guide helped me a lot and is quite easy to follow

https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf


Goodluck.


----------



## Padinn

Going to try my overclock again now that I have my 4.7GHz all core stabilized. I am going to aim for 4.9GHz all core with no AVX offset since it seems like almost all chips should hit that. Currently testing it with a VR Vout reading of 1.242v (VCore shows 1.287v, which matches Silicone Lottery). 
For what its worth, going from 4.7GHz to 4.9Ghz so far has required about .05v. Still trying to iron out L0 Cache errors, just bumped my VCC SA to 1.18 with VCC IO at 1.12. Wish me luck in the new year!

Update:
Increased Voltage, now testing at 1.31v (VROut = 1.26, VCore = 1.309)


----------



## Padinn

So what temperatures do you guys get with a VR Vout reading of around 1.26v? This is where my chip hits 90c under the x264 custom stress test in the Kaby Lake overclocking thread. To clarify - I am looking for a VR Vout reading, not VCore (which in my case shows 1.31v). My CPU Package Power draw is around 180-190w.


----------



## Chief_rawka

Hello, and Happy New Year z390 AORUS community!


I'm a complete beginner when it comes to OCing, so I've been trying to do a lot of reading forums/guides and watching videos as to how I might be able to flex my 9700k / Aorus Ultra combo a bit more than stock. I've specifically been trying to follow this Gigabyte Guide, that I've seen linked here a number of times.



I've not messed with TJmax as of yet (110C sounds insanely hot), and any crashes I've seen have come at temps in the 80-90C range as per HWmonitor. I'm not sure that the crashes are heat related, just indicating the range the monitor had me in when the system would BSOD or lock up.



I'm curious as to what kind of temps I should expect following the Gigabyte Guide on my air cooled (Dark Rock 4) 9700k? (build)



I have used AIDA64 on a couple of configs for 10mins + successfully and still had BFV tank my machine.
Prime95 scares the hell out of me as it does things to the temperature that even AIDA64 doesn't seem to. All Prime95 tests have either tanked the system, or I chicken out at 80-90C and cancel it.


I _may_ have found a somewhat stable 5ghz OC for my setup where BFV doesn't tank my system after a while, AND temps stay below 80C (using an AVX offset of 2). I haven't tested Prime95 or AIDA64 with this config as of yet.


Am I being too conservative with my temps? The guide shows 90C+ (albeit on a 9900k) though I'm not sure it specifies what kind of water cooling solution is in place.


Is 5Ghz too much for the DR4 to handle? Am I being too conservative? Did I mess up the cooler/thermal paste installation somehow resulting in poorer cooling performance? Is AVX just too damn much to try and cool this way? How hot is _too_ hot?



Sorry, a lot of questions I know, I'm just getting frustrated here, and I'm sure some (if not all) is my naivety.


Help / guidance would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks.


- CR


----------



## Jidonsu

Padinn said:


> So what temperatures do you guys get with a VR Vout reading of around 1.26v? This is where my chip hits 90c under the x264 custom stress test in the Kaby Lake overclocking thread. To clarify - I am looking for a VR Vout reading, not VCore (which in my case shows 1.31v). My CPU Package Power draw is around 180-190w.


Not the same test or voltage, but Realbench with vr vout of 1.305v (1.348V vcore) and the package power draw of 188W or spikes to low to mid 80s, but generally stay right below 80 itself on average. Custom water loop though.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> So what temperatures do you guys get with a VR Vout reading of around 1.26v? This is where my chip hits 90c under the x264 custom stress test in the Kaby Lake overclocking thread. To clarify - I am looking for a VR Vout reading, not VCore (which in my case shows 1.31v). My CPU Package Power draw is around 180-190w.


Pretty much close to you there in temps. But pretty close to 100C if not exceeding it.
200W package power with a VR Vout of 1.29V. That was tested in prime95 with AVX disabled although with LLC=Extreme at 1.310v bios voltage at 5.1 ghz.


----------



## jlp0209

Padinn said:


> So what temperatures do you guys get with a VR Vout reading of around 1.26v? This is where my chip hits 90c under the x264 custom stress test in the Kaby Lake overclocking thread. To clarify - I am looking for a VR Vout reading, not VCore (which in my case shows 1.31v). My CPU Package Power draw is around 180-190w.


Here's my HWInfo capture of my 5Ghz OC running Prime95 v29 small fft avx for 1 hour. Average VOUT was 1.227 and my average core temp was 97c. Vcore readings showed average of 1.297v. 

I finally got around to re-doing my OC. In the BIOS I set offset to +.100, no AVX offset. My max cpu package power went from 245w to 212w from disabling multicore enhancement and setting IA DC LLC to 0 rather than 1. Set AC LLC to 1. CPU LLC is set to medium instead of high.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Here's my HWInfo capture of my 5Ghz OC running Prime95 v29 small fft avx for 1 hour. Average VOUT was 1.227 and my average core temp was 97c. Vcore readings showed average of 1.297v.
> 
> I finally got around to re-doing my OC. In the BIOS I set offset to +.100, no AVX offset. My max cpu package power went from 245w to 212w from disabling multicore enhancement and setting IA DC LLC to 0 rather than 1. Set AC LLC to 1. CPU LLC is set to medium instead of high.


Can you do me a favor ?
IA DC loadline is a power measurement setting.
Can you take note of the temps you just now got, and then set IA DC (Not IA AC) LLC back to 1 (rather than 0), and then record the temps again? This is extremely important.

I have a feeling your power draw will go back to 245W but your temps will remain the same (which is because the VID is not dropping now).
Thank you for checking this for me.


----------



## Djso455

Love this board


----------



## Kipps

Z390 Ultra owner checking in here - I appear to missing the VRVOUT sensor reading everyone keeps mentioning to monitor for Vcore. Am I just being dumb, or does my MB not support that readout etc ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kipps said:


> Z390 Ultra owner checking in here - I appear to missing the VRVOUT sensor reading everyone keeps mentioning to monitor for Vcore. Am I just being dumb, or does my MB not support that readout etc ?


Update your HWinfo version. That fixed it not being reported for some other users.

The Ultra does support it however I've seen it being reported inconsistently with garbage values (like 65.536v) on both the Pro and Ultra randomly, then reported correctly later, from several users. I have no idea what is causing dummy values to be reported, unless something else is interfering with the reading, or maybe it only reports right on a reboot or a cold boot ?


----------



## Jidonsu

So my system is previously stable at 1.35v with Turbo LLC. Any utility to dropping to 1.33v with LLC Extreme? I’m trying it now and vr VOUT is reading the same at 1.33 Extreme as it was with 1.35 Turbo during Prime95 1344k Fma3=0 but avx=1. 1.33 with LLC extreme shows 1.299 vr vout while 1.35 with LLC Turbo shows 1.297 most of the time.

Vcore on the IT8792E is showing 1.353 vs 1.342 during 1.35 Turbo though.

Edit: One worker failed within 12 minutes. Interesting.


----------



## EarlZ

I was very happy that I passed the X264 bench for 64 loops with 5Ghz @ 1.280v and only to get a WHEA uncorrectable error in Monster Hunter World in less than 1 hour. Back to 1.30v in bios to see if that gives me a more stable result.


----------



## Kipps

Falkentyne said:


> Update your HWinfo version. That fixed it not being reported for some other users.
> 
> The Ultra does support it however I've seen it being reported inconsistently with garbage values (like 65.536v) on both the Pro and Ultra randomly, then reported correctly later, from several users. I have no idea what is causing dummy values to be reported, unless something else is interfering with the reading, or maybe it only reports right on a reboot or a cold boot ?


Ive tried installing the latest version, resetting the cmos and uninstalling most other programs that could interfere (Have 'end tasked' all other utilities) - But still no joy. Oh well


----------



## Jidonsu

Well this is depressing. My 8 hr Realbench stable setting is suddenly failing Prime95 1344K, with or without AVX. This is at 1.35V. Degradation? It previously ran the 1344K test without trouble.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Can you do me a favor ?
> IA DC loadline is a power measurement setting.
> Can you take note of the temps you just now got, and then set IA DC (Not IA AC) LLC back to 1 (rather than 0), and then record the temps again? This is extremely important.
> 
> I have a feeling your power draw will go back to 245W but your temps will remain the same (which is because the VID is not dropping now).
> Thank you for checking this for me.


I've done this already, and my temps are 2-3C less with IA DC Loadline at 0 instead of 1 and IA AC Loadline at 1.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> Well this is depressing. My 8 hr Realbench stable setting is suddenly failing Prime95 1344K, with or without AVX. This is at 1.35V. Degradation? It previously ran the 1344K test without trouble.


PWM switching frequency at 500 khz and PWM Phase control at extreme ? 1344K without AVX shouldn't be failing for sure.
Try checking it with override voltages (manual voltages) to make sure. That's the only way to know for certain.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> PWM switching frequency at 500 khz and PWM Phase control at extreme ? 1344K without AVX shouldn't be failing for sure.
> Try checking it with override voltages (manual voltages) to make sure. That's the only way to know for certain.


Changing those two and retesting.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> PWM switching frequency at 500 khz and PWM Phase control at extreme ? 1344K without AVX shouldn't be failing for sure.
> Try checking it with override voltages (manual voltages) to make sure. That's the only way to know for certain.


What's bugging me is that it never failed those tests before. I always ran for an hour, so maybe it just never caught it. I literally ran Realbench for 8 hours last night.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> What's bugging me is that it never failed those tests before. I always ran for an hour, so maybe it just never caught it. I literally ran Realbench for 8 hours last night.


Sent a PM btw.


----------



## EarlZ

I am running on 3200Mhz C16 Trident Z rams (8Gbx2) and noticed that VCCSA is 1.30 and VCCIO is 1.20, those seem to be a tad high for auto? Should I reduce them SA to 1.20 and IO to 1.10?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I am running on 3200Mhz C16 Trident Z rams (8Gbx2) and noticed that VCCSA is 1.30 and VCCIO is 1.20, those seem to be a tad high for auto? Should I reduce them SA to 1.20 and IO to 1.10?


IO can probably be set 1.05 and be fine. 1.20v SA is a good choice.
All auto voltages suck. Remember that.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> IO can probably be set 1.05 and be fine. 1.20v SA is a good choice.
> All auto voltages suck. Remember that.


Thanks!


----------



## flowfaster

EarlZ said:


> I was very happy that I passed the X264 bench for 64 loops with 5Ghz @ 1.280v and only to get a WHEA uncorrectable error in Monster Hunter World in less than 1 hour. Back to 1.30v in bios to see if that gives me a more stable result.


Try Star Wars battlefront 2 for even faster results. You won't have to wait an hour to check stability. That game will crash my pc in 5-20 min. if my OC is not stable. I find it way faster and cooler (literally) to check OC stability. 

I used to hate running prime, aida, realbench for hours and then crash within minutes of playing a game.


----------



## EarlZ

flowfaster said:


> Try Star Wars battlefront 2 for even faster results. You won't have to wait an hour to check stability. That game will crash my pc in 5-20 min. if my OC is not stable. I find it way faster and cooler (literally) to check OC stability.
> 
> I used to hate running prime, aida, realbench for hours and then crash within minutes of playing a game.



Unfortunately I dont own that game.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Can you do me a favor ?
> IA DC loadline is a power measurement setting.
> Can you take note of the temps you just now got, and then set IA DC (Not IA AC) LLC back to 1 (rather than 0), and then record the temps again? This is extremely important.
> 
> I have a feeling your power draw will go back to 245W but your temps will remain the same (which is because the VID is not dropping now).
> Thank you for checking this for me.


Tried this and ran Prime95 again and got 1 WHEA error after about 13 minutes. Temps were a little cooler, Vcore lower and VOUT lower. CPU package power went up to 233w. Screen capture attached.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Can you do me a favor ?
> IA DC loadline is a power measurement setting.
> Can you take note of the temps you just now got, and then set IA DC (Not IA AC) LLC back to 1 (rather than 0), and then record the temps again? This is extremely important.
> 
> I have a feeling your power draw will go back to 245W but your temps will remain the same (which is because the VID is not dropping now).
> Thank you for checking this for me.


*IA DC Loadline 0*










*IA DC Loadline 1*


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> *IA DC Loadline 0*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *IA DC Loadline 1*


Thank you very much for testing this. 
But why do you have the opposite result ? Your temps went down with DC loadline=0 while @jlp0209 's temps went UP with DC loadline 0...(compared to 1).


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Tried this and ran Prime95 again and got 1 WHEA error after about 13 minutes. Temps were a little cooler, Vcore lower and VOUT lower. CPU package power went up to 233w. Screen capture attached.


See this is what I'm talking about :/
Your temps went DOWN, VR VOUT went DOWN, but your power draw went UP :/ (mainly because DC Loadline=1 makes the VID itself stop dropping at load, which means the power draw measurement is higher.
But why this is somehow affecting voltages is beyond me.

Yet @KedarWolf has the opposite result?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> See this is what I'm talking about :/
> Your temps went DOWN, VR VOUT went DOWN, but your power draw went UP :/ (mainly because DC Loadline=1 makes the VID itself stop dropping at load, which means the power draw measurement is higher.
> But why this is somehow affecting voltages is beyond me.
> 
> Yet @KedarWolf has the opposite result?


I've also tested it with Prime95 1344 FFT's at +.150v Vcore at 5.1GHZ CPU/4.7GHZ cache and with IA DC Loadline 1 my temps went up 3-4C.


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> *IA DC Loadline 0*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *IA DC Loadline 1*


How long did you test for? Based on your time stamps alone, you may have gotten cooler results because you tested for only a 1/4 of the time. 8min vs 2min.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> See this is what I'm talking about :/
> Your temps went DOWN, VR VOUT went DOWN, but your power draw went UP :/ (mainly because DC Loadline=1 makes the VID itself stop dropping at load, which means the power draw measurement is higher.
> But why this is somehow affecting voltages is beyond me.
> 
> Yet @KedarWolf has the opposite result?


Yeah, it's interesting for sure. My temps may have continued to rise had I let the test run, not sure. I stopped it after 14 mins due to the WHEA error. Surprised I didn't crash at that voltage, prob would've eventually. Does this issue occur on other brands' boards?

I ran Prime95 v29 small fft avx testing, KedarWolf didn't run the same test, that could explain the difference.

(Edit) I learned throughout my testing that MX-4 thermal paste is not ideal. I re-pasted prior to doing these last couple tests and used NT-H1 instead. My max core temp dropped 7c when doing small fft avx testing. Maybe my first paste was just a bad paste job.


----------



## Moparman

flowfaster said:


> Try Star Wars battlefront 2 for even faster results. You won't have to wait an hour to check stability. That game will crash my pc in 5-20 min. if my OC is not stable. I find it way faster and cooler (literally) to check OC stability.
> 
> I used to hate running prime, aida, realbench for hours and then crash within minutes of playing a game.



Good example of testing here. My 5.2ghz OC was stable in everything but Battle front 2 and had to go to 5.1 and down to 3400C14 mem.


----------



## doom26464

I sorta stopped following whats been going on with this board. 

I been on f5 bios for awhile all with a very stable 5.1ghz overclock on my 9900k. I see however there has been quite a few bios updates as of late(believe now its on f7b or something) fyi z390 aurous master

Worth updating too? Whats changed?


----------



## Falkentyne

doom26464 said:


> I sorta stopped following whats been going on with this board.
> 
> I been on f5 bios for awhile all with a very stable 5.1ghz overclock on my 9900k. I see however there has been quite a few bios updates as of late(believe now its on f7b or something) fyi z390 aurous master
> 
> Worth updating too? Whats changed?


Some extra settings in memory enhancement to improve training with high speed sticks.
4700 mhz cache speed is no longer set by default.
Boot loops to backup bios improved when on main bios and set to single bios mode (now should never do it).
Not sure what happens if you invert main and backup though; on F5 it still reverts if you make the backup your main and have a POST failure. Not sure about f8b.


----------



## doom26464

So nothing worth upgrading for. Thanks for the info!


----------



## stirxthexpot

Newbie question here, built a gaming PC with my son, if he installs his GPU in the top slot, does it matter which slot the M2 NVME card is in if we want the GPU to remain with 16 PCI lanes? (only one M2 card is in use, and no plans for any future M2 cards) . Currently its in the top slot, M2M, but thinking it should get moved to the bottom slot. Any help is appreciated, and yes I read the manual but still not 100% clear which is why I came here. Thanks in advance.


----------



## flowfaster

doom26464 said:


> I sorta stopped following whats been going on with this board.
> 
> I been on f5 bios for awhile all with a very stable 5.1ghz overclock on my 9900k. I see however there has been quite a few bios updates as of late(believe now its on f7b or something) fyi z390 aurous master
> 
> Worth updating too? Whats changed?


I think there is a very important fix that is mandatory to upgrade from F5/6 to F8b. When/if your PC goes to sleep or sometimes when you cold boot the vcore was at 1.4+ in windows. A reset would fix the problem. Not sure if it was for real or just a reporting issue. That was on the Z390 Master btw.

The issue seems fixed on F8b and now my PC can go to sleep in peace. I really could care less about the other changes. I am able to get my bdie memory to post at 4000 C18 on 1.35v so I am happy with that.


----------



## flowfaster

Falkentyne said:


> See this is what I'm talking about :/
> Your temps went DOWN, VR VOUT went DOWN, but your power draw went UP :/ (mainly because DC Loadline=1 makes the VID itself stop dropping at load, which means the power draw measurement is higher.
> But why this is somehow affecting voltages is beyond me.
> 
> Yet @KedarWolf has the opposite result?


I have been doing IA DC Loadline 1 vs. 0 testing and it is driving me insane. This is using dynamic VCORE btw.

Here is my experience. With the value of 1, the VCORE seems to follow the vid more faithfully. With a negative offset my VCORE never rose above the VID and seemed less sporadic. MY OC did seem a hair more stable and it did run a little hotter with more power draw. Those are with either high or turbo LLC.

With a value of 0 my VCORE was more sporadic a shot up way higher than when IA DC Loadline is set to 1. For an example, with DVID offset at -0.065, 48x CPU multiplier, Turbo LLC, IA DC Loadline 0, my VCORE would shoot up to 1.254v momentarily but would usually hover around 1.18-1.224 when gaming. When using a value of 1 my VCORE would never shoot above 1.212 but would stay there more often and draw more power.

Of course when you experiment with other variables the different combinations of everything becomes maddening. I feel a little defeated. Now I am browsing the web on the lowest VCORE I can manage without crashing just to spite my PC.


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> How long did you test for? Based on your time stamps alone, you may have gotten cooler results because you tested for only a 1/4 of the time. 8min vs 2min.


*Temps taken at 5 minutes in. Water pump and fans fixed at 60% in Smart Fan.*

*IA DC Loadline 1.*



















*IA DC Loadline 0*



















*BIOS Voltage Settings. Only IA DC Loadline changed for the first test.*


----------



## Padinn

So I found I can get my chip stable at 4.9GHz all core, with no AVX offset, using 1.31v with Turbo LLC. I am running VCC IO at 1.05 and VCC SA at 1.17v. The VCC IO and VCC SA don't seem to have a huge impact on power draw. I could boot and run stress test at lower settings but it would give me L0 Cache errors eventually (but PC did not crash). 

While playing BF:V and OBS streaming w/ CPU encoding, temperature maxed out around 90c and I have no stability issues. How are these settings for long term use? I think this should be okay and not cause degradation, just wanted to check in. 

My RTX 2080ti adds about 4c to liquid temperatures while gaming since my H150i is an exhaust - the liquid temperatures were hitting around 40.5c after a few hours of gaming (after running a stress test benchmark for an hour, so this is an extreme case) and I believe maxed out the potential cooling of my H150i Pro - this was with it at extreme settings. I have 4x 12cm high air flow fans as a side intake next to the RTX 2080ti so I don't think I can cool this further unless I run them at full blast (at about 70%). 

If anyone else an H150i pro and can comment on how theirs is performing I'd appreciate it - seems like it can handle about 185w max.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> So I found I can get my chip stable at 4.9GHz all core, with no AVX offset, using 1.31v with Turbo LLC. I am running VCC IO at 1.05 and VCC SA at 1.17v. The VCC IO and VCC SA don't seem to have a huge impact on power draw. I could boot and run stress test at lower settings but it would give me L0 Cache errors eventually (but PC did not crash).
> 
> While playing BF:V and OBS streaming w/ CPU encoding, temperature maxed out around 90c and I have no stability issues. How are these settings for long term use? I think this should be okay and not cause degradation, just wanted to check in.
> 
> My RTX 2080ti adds about 4c to liquid temperatures while gaming since my H150i is an exhaust - the liquid temperatures were hitting around 40.5c after a few hours of gaming (after running a stress test benchmark for an hour, so this is an extreme case) and I believe maxed out the potential cooling of my H150i Pro - this was with it at extreme settings. I have 4x 12cm high air flow fans as a side intake next to the RTX 2080ti so I don't think I can cool this further unless I run them at full blast (at about 70%).
> 
> If anyone else an H150i pro and can comment on how theirs is performing I'd appreciate it - seems like it can handle about 185w max.


Those voltages are just fine for 4.9 ghz overclock.
Is that 1.31v set in bios with turbo LLC? Or 1.31v via VR VOUT at full load?


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> So I found I can get my chip stable at 4.9GHz all core, with no AVX offset, using 1.31v with Turbo LLC. I am running VCC IO at 1.05 and VCC SA at 1.17v. The VCC IO and VCC SA don't seem to have a huge impact on power draw. I could boot and run stress test at lower settings but it would give me L0 Cache errors eventually (but PC did not crash).
> 
> While playing BF:V and OBS streaming w/ CPU encoding, temperature maxed out around 90c and I have no stability issues. How are these settings for long term use? I think this should be okay and not cause degradation, just wanted to check in.
> 
> My RTX 2080ti adds about 4c to liquid temperatures while gaming since my H150i is an exhaust - the liquid temperatures were hitting around 40.5c after a few hours of gaming (after running a stress test benchmark for an hour, so this is an extreme case) and I believe maxed out the potential cooling of my H150i Pro - this was with it at extreme settings. I have 4x 12cm high air flow fans as a side intake next to the RTX 2080ti so I don't think I can cool this further unless I run them at full blast (at about 70%).
> 
> If anyone else an H150i pro and can comment on how theirs is performing I'd appreciate it - seems like it can handle about 185w max.


I try to keep my temps under 80C while stress testing 1344 FFT's in Prime95 but they are much lower while gaming though I don't use OBS. And isn't OBS better using Nvidia encoding?

But those temps don't seem right for that cooler. On my H110i when I used it I was under 60C on load while gaming and around 80C with RealBench with my 8700k at 5.1GHZ with 1.365v. I used it briefly when I had lost my 1151 mounting kit for my Supremacy EVO block.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I found I can get my chip stable at 4.9GHz all core, with no AVX offset, using 1.31v with Turbo LLC. I am running VCC IO at 1.05 and VCC SA at 1.17v. The VCC IO and VCC SA don't seem to have a huge impact on power draw. I could boot and run stress test at lower settings but it would give me L0 Cache errors eventually (but PC did not crash).
> 
> While playing BF:V and OBS streaming w/ CPU encoding, temperature maxed out around 90c and I have no stability issues. How are these settings for long term use? I think this should be okay and not cause degradation, just wanted to check in.
> 
> My RTX 2080ti adds about 4c to liquid temperatures while gaming since my H150i is an exhaust - the liquid temperatures were hitting around 40.5c after a few hours of gaming (after running a stress test benchmark for an hour, so this is an extreme case) and I believe maxed out the potential cooling of my H150i Pro - this was with it at extreme settings. I have 4x 12cm high air flow fans as a side intake next to the RTX 2080ti so I don't think I can cool this further unless I run them at full blast (at about 70%).
> 
> If anyone else an H150i pro and can comment on how theirs is performing I'd appreciate it - seems like it can handle about 185w max.
> 
> 
> 
> Those voltages are just fine for 4.9 ghz overclock.
> Is that 1.31v set in bios with turbo LLC? Or 1.31v via VR VOUT at full load?
Click to expand...

That's in bios with turbo llc. VR out under load is around 1.28, will double check tomorrow but there is a small droop.


----------



## Bronson

Falkentyne said:


> Not there. Only on newegg (and some other places).
> Newegg's warehouse is right next to Gigabyte's warehouse so that's understandable.





KedarWolf said:


> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145103


Thanxs!


----------



## Amanbra

Hi Everyone


I've just read from page 55 - 60 of this thread on IA AC DC Loadline. 



I had set my dynamic vcore using ac/dc 1 and LLC on Turbo and got satisfactory results. Every now and then though BF V crashed that disappeared when I upped the offset. Deep down I suspected this was instability under partial load when my 9900k was running at mid boost using only say 6 cores etc as I had tested all core stability at 4.7. 



I can catagorically confirm that LLC does work with dynamic vcore but the slope must be different from the Intel's own if you leave LLC and AC/DC on auto. Reading Falkentyne's comments on this I've gone back and sent LCC and AC/DC to auto and adjusted back the offset to match my previous real bench stability Vcore. Set this way the non-avx workloads are pulling lower voltages but still stable and when avx2 kicks in it pulls in higher vcore than my previous settings. Overall it appears to be more stable. 



I'm using the Z390 ITX board. I've just updated to F4 and I did have to up my voltage ever so slightly... not sure if it's due to the bios or the 3 hours of hevc encoding I did with the CPU sitting at 95 degrees that caused instability. 



Also why does Gigabyte set vccio and sa to 1.3v under xmp? That's too high isn't it? i've manually overridden to 1.25v just to make me feel a bit better about it. 



Finally, i'm running 3200 ram, jdec spec is 1.35 volts and the mobo recognises this. However, once loaded in and HWINFO is up it shows 1.38v, anyone else see this? I've had to set at 1.34v to have HWINFO show 1.356. It's passing memtest on these settings...


----------



## Falkentyne

Amanbra said:


> Hi Everyone
> 
> 
> I've just read from page 55 - 60 of this thread on IA AC DC Loadline.
> 
> 
> 
> I had set my dynamic vcore using ac/dc 1 and LLC on Turbo and got satisfactory results. Every now and then though BF V crashed that disappeared when I upped the offset. Deep down I suspected this was instability under partial load when my 9900k was running at mid boost using only say 6 cores etc as I had tested all core stability at 4.7.
> 
> 
> 
> I can catagorically confirm that LLC does work with dynamic vcore but the slope must be different from the Intel's own if you leave LLC and AC/DC on auto. Reading Falkentyne's comments on this I've gone back and sent LCC and AC/DC to auto and adjusted back the offset to match my previous real bench stability Vcore. Set this way the non-avx workloads are pulling lower voltages but still stable and when avx2 kicks in it pulls in higher vcore than my previous settings. Overall it appears to be more stable.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm using the Z390 ITX board. I've just updated to F4 and I did have to up my voltage ever so slightly... not sure if it's due to the bios or the 3 hours of hevc encoding I did with the CPU sitting at 95 degrees that caused instability.
> 
> 
> 
> Also why does Gigabyte set vccio and sa to 1.3v under xmp? That's too high isn't it? i've manually overridden to 1.25v just to make me feel a bit better about it.
> 
> 
> 
> Finally, i'm running 3200 ram, jdec spec is 1.35 volts and the mobo recognises this. However, once loaded in and HWINFO is up it shows 1.38v, anyone else see this? I've had to set at 1.34v to have HWINFO show 1.356. It's passing memtest on these settings...


Who summoned me? 
glad you got settings that work for you.

Looking through the APTIO Bios, it appears that the default mOhm for DC loadline is 2.10 mOhms. This is in some strange section of "Overclocking Performance Menu" that no one has access to. Gigabyte puts all of the accessible options in their own custom menu called "MIT" that has its own submenus, rather than using the normal APTIO menu settings. I believe MSI just uses the regular aptio menus, which means changing the permissions to supervisor would unhide them--if you could flash the aptio menu back after dumping it with FPTW64. 
What's interesting is that only "DC Loadline" is mentioned in this section in "overclocking performance menu". There is no mention of AC loadline, but we already know that AC loadline is operating voltages. But I still do not understand how that 2.10 default AC loadline actually works. The 2.10 mOhm DC loadline drops the "VID" higher based on current (by 2.10 mOhms, e.g. 100 amps of current * 2.10= 210mv of vdroop at 100 amps on the VID itself), but the AC loadline seems to do the exact opposite, that is, it seems to RAISE the VID initially by something related to 2.10, but it does it at IDLE. How that works is beyond me, but when both AC and DC loadline are set to "1", the VID will rise higher at higher temps/current than at lower temps/current.

I got tired of getting confused and am just using override voltages for now.


----------



## Timur Born

There is an older overclocking guide by Asus that says to set AC/DC loadlines to 0.1.


----------



## scaramonga

Does maxing out the power limits (4090) really have much effect?, as per this guide:


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> Does maxing out the power limits (4090) really have much effect?, as per this guide:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3tQ1jkf1M4&t=359s


No. 500 watts is enough. Even 300W is enough unless you are on subzero.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I found I can get my chip stable at 4.9GHz all core, with no AVX offset, using 1.31v with Turbo LLC. I am running VCC IO at 1.05 and VCC SA at 1.17v. The VCC IO and VCC SA don't seem to have a huge impact on power draw. I could boot and run stress test at lower settings but it would give me L0 Cache errors eventually (but PC did not crash).
> 
> While playing BF:V and OBS streaming w/ CPU encoding, temperature maxed out around 90c and I have no stability issues. How are these settings for long term use? I think this should be okay and not cause degradation, just wanted to check in.
> 
> My RTX 2080ti adds about 4c to liquid temperatures while gaming since my H150i is an exhaust - the liquid temperatures were hitting around 40.5c after a few hours of gaming (after running a stress test benchmark for an hour, so this is an extreme case) and I believe maxed out the potential cooling of my H150i Pro - this was with it at extreme settings. I have 4x 12cm high air flow fans as a side intake next to the RTX 2080ti so I don't think I can cool this further unless I run them at full blast (at about 70%).
> 
> If anyone else an H150i pro and can comment on how theirs is performing I'd appreciate it - seems like it can handle about 185w max.
> 
> 
> 
> I try to keep my temps under 80C while stress testing 1344 FFT's in Prime95 but they are much lower while gaming though I don't use OBS. And isn't OBS better using Nvidia encoding?
> 
> But those temps don't seem right for that cooler. On my H110i when I used it I was under 60C on load while gaming and around 80C with RealBench with my 8700k at 5.1GHZ with 1.365v. I used it briefly when I had lost my 1151 mounting kit for my Supremacy EVO block.
Click to expand...

I prefer the quality of cpu encoding, I will try gpu again at next one update. I think given the power draw of the 9900k with an avx workload that my temperatures are correct. Ambient is around 27c.


----------



## Mp0wer

How do you know if your in the backup BIOS ?

My PC crashed and my settings reset or maybe it sent me to the backup BIOS

I'm running F4 in the Main BIOS


----------



## BradleyW

scaramonga said:


> Does maxing out the power limits (4090) really have much effect?, as per this guide:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3tQ1jkf1M4&t=359s


I've just tried this and it made no difference. My AUTO power limit settings must be allowing enough room for my overclock and voltage.


----------



## Sheyster

BradleyW said:


> I've just tried this and it made no difference. My AUTO power limit settings must be allowing enough room for my overclock and voltage.


Gigabyte does not recommend altering these power settings. As stated, it's probably not an issue except for the most extreme overclockers (using LN2).


----------



## Falkentyne

Did someone somewhere ask why AVX offsets require MORE vcore for stability for non AVX loads?
Actually this happens when you're trying to run AVX code. Using an AVX offset of -10 would cause the same instability as an AVX offset of 1, because the AVX downclock keeps shooting back up to "0" offset repeatedly and then downclocking again. 

Raja explained it.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97277-Troubles-with-the-AVX-Negative-Offset


----------



## SDBolts619

Okay, there's a lot to process in this thread. I've gone through quite a bit of it, but no way to read all pages in a realistic amount of time.

I have an Aorus Z390 Ultra on the way along with a 9900k. Looks like the overclock guide link from the OP here doesn't work, so if there's some baseline recommendations for me, I'd be appreciative.

I do have another question about RGB and PWM control via the motherboard. It looks like the mobo (and possibly desktop app / mobile app) can control RGB effects for anything plugged into the 4pin RGB headers on the mobo. Is this correct? What about controlling third party fans in terms of RGB effects? Can this all be linked together for a single control source? I currently have simple blue LED fans, but the concept of doing variable RGB based on temps is an intriguing one. However, I don't want to sacrifice fan CFM to get any extra effects, so I'm not sure about changing out my fans. 

For reference, here's my system as it sits now, waiting for the new components to arrive:


----------



## KedarWolf

Timur Born said:


> There is an older overclocking guide by Asus that says to set AC/DC loadlines to 0.1.


Asus and Gigabyte settings are different. I'm pretty sure .1 Asus is NOT the same as setting .1 on Gigabyte.

And actually, on Asus it's .01.


----------



## Amanbra

Mp0wer said:


> How do you know if your in the backup BIOS ?
> 
> My PC crashed and my settings reset or maybe it sent me to the backup BIOS
> 
> I'm running F4 in the Main BIOS



I always leave 1 bios on the old version so in the event of a crash I go in go BIOS and press F8


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Those voltages are just fine for 4.9 ghz overclock.
> Is that 1.31v set in bios with turbo LLC? Or 1.31v via VR VOUT at full load?


So at full load the VR VOut is at 1.258 to 1.264v, with 1.31 being what is set in the bios, with turbo LLC. It generally stabilizes around 1.26v, so I have a VDroop of about .05v, which seems normal from what others have said. This is also where my CPU Package temp will hit around 90c, with a max of 94c on my h150i pro. Ambient temperature is 26 to 27c.

I am going to test with higher vcc sa and lower vcore to see if this helps, since it appears the memory controller is the weak link in my current chip


----------



## Moparman

SDBolts619 said:


> Okay, there's a lot to process in this thread. I've gone through quite a bit of it, but no way to read all pages in a realistic amount of time.
> 
> I have an Aorus Z390 Ultra on the way along with a 9900k. Looks like the overclock guide link from the OP here doesn't work, so if there's some baseline recommendations for me, I'd be appreciative.
> 
> I do have another question about RGB and PWM control via the motherboard. It looks like the mobo (and possibly desktop app / mobile app) can control RGB effects for anything plugged into the 4pin RGB headers on the mobo. Is this correct? What about controlling third party fans in terms of RGB effects? Can this all be linked together for a single control source? I currently have simple blue LED fans, but the concept of doing variable RGB based on temps is an intriguing one. However, I don't want to sacrifice fan CFM to get any extra effects, so I'm not sure about changing out my fans.
> 
> For reference, here's my system as it sits now, waiting for the new components to arrive:


First Nice UD5H in your pic. Next the OC guide works just fine just takes a little bit to load. Click on it and wait a bit. https://redirect.viglink.com/?forma...redirect.viglink.com/?format...F525%2F946.pdf


----------



## SDBolts619

Moparman said:


> First Nice UD5H in your pic. Next the OC guide works just fine just takes a little bit to load. Click on it and wait a bit. https://redirect.viglink.com/?forma...redirect.viglink.com/?format...F525%2F946.pdf


Thanks Moparman - I was able to get the guide from that link.

That UD5H has served me well - it's time to move it on to my daughter and replace her Q9550 system since she's doing a fair bit of content creation.

I also did some more research and splurged on the Antec Prizm RGB fan kit. Given the good flow and very good static pressure from those fans, I'll use them as the pull fans on my radiator. I also got a CM HF fan for the top exhaust.


----------



## Maident

stirxthexpot said:


> Newbie question here, built a gaming PC with my son, if he installs his GPU in the top slot, does it matter which slot the M2 NVME card is in if we want the GPU to remain with 16 PCI lanes? (only one M2 card is in use, and no plans for any future M2 cards) . Currently its in the top slot, M2M, but thinking it should get moved to the bottom slot. Any help is appreciated, and yes I read the manual but still not 100% clear which is why I came here. Thanks in advance.


Short answer is, bottom slot.


----------



## Sheyster

Maident said:


> Short answer is, bottom slot.


If it's the only storage device installed in the system it really doesn't matter.


----------



## Padinn

Can anyone recommend a test that I can use to test my RAM stability? I do notice I get a lot of L0 cache errors at 4.9Ghz if I try to lower voltage below 1.31v even while playing with some other settings. It seems better at 1.315 or 1.32 (Really only Timespy is causing the errors). The PC isn't crashing or BSOD and since raising the voltage removes the errors I assume it's my CPU hitting limits. Ideally I wanted to try to lower the voltage a little so I'm not spiking in the low 90s, but maybe that isn't realistic with this particular chip.

I also notice that even if I manually set all the multipliers to stock none of the cores ever go above 4.7 Ghz. MCE is disabled. Do I need to enable the turbo per core limit option?


----------



## EarlZ

Any other fixes on the F8b bios for the Z390 Master?
"Fix Easy mode display issue" is the only thing written on the change log.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Can anyone recommend a test that I can use to test my RAM stability? I do notice I get a lot of L0 cache errors at 4.9Ghz if I try to lower voltage below 1.31v even while playing with some other settings. It seems better at 1.315 or 1.32 (Really only Timespy is causing the errors). The PC isn't crashing or BSOD and since raising the voltage removes the errors I assume it's my CPU hitting limits. Ideally I wanted to try to lower the voltage a little so I'm not spiking in the low 90s, but maybe that isn't realistic with this particular chip.
> 
> I also notice that even if I manually set all the multipliers to stock none of the cores ever go above 4.7 Ghz. MCE is disabled. Do I need to enable the turbo per core limit option?


Hi,
that's because you probably have the per core multis set already.
Just go through each one and set them to "0" which is auto
that will fix that problem right away.
And your CPU probably is capped at 4.9 ghz.

What happens if you lower the cache ratio to 4.3 ghz though?
Does that help?


----------



## Aznboy1993

Don't want to sound stupid, but does anyone have any idea how to take off the M.2 heatsinks for the bottom two slots (M2P and M2A) on the Z390 Aorus Xtreme? The top M2M slot comes off easily by taking off the screw that goes into the standoff. However, the middle and bottom slots aren't so easy. If I take the screws (to the left of the heatsink) off, it won't come off. It seems like the heatsinks are actually one piece with the PCH heatsink. Does this mean I have to take off the entire PCH heatsink to get access to these two M.2 slots? The back of the board offers easy access to two screws to take the PCH heatsink off, but there is one (or two) more screws under the backplate that I cannot access without taking it off. This seems like a major design oversight...am I doing this wrong? Any help is greatly appreciated!


----------



## Falkentyne

Aznboy1993 said:


> Don't want to sound stupid, but does anyone have any idea how to take off the M.2 heatsinks for the bottom two slots (M2P and M2A) on the Z390 Aorus Xtreme? The top M2M slot comes off easily by taking off the screw that goes into the standoff. However, the middle and bottom slots aren't so easy. If I take the screws (to the left of the heatsink) off, it won't come off. It seems like the heatsinks are actually one piece with the PCH heatsink. Does this mean I have to take off the entire PCH heatsink to get access to these two M.2 slots? The back of the board offers easy access to two screws to take the PCH heatsink off, but there is one (or two) more screws under the backplate that I cannot access without taking it off. This seems like a major design oversight...am I doing this wrong? Any help is greatly appreciated!


I can't find any information on this. I'm guessing you're supposed to install the m.2 drives before installing the board, if the bottom shroud has to be removed? I have no idea. What does that thing cover? the PCH heatsink also?


----------



## Aznboy1993

Falkentyne said:


> I can't find any information on this. I'm guessing you're supposed to install the m.2 drives before installing the board, if the bottom shroud has to be removed? I have no idea. What does that thing cover? the PCH heatsink also?


Nevermind...I'm stupid...it was the two screws on the right side holding the acrylic piece down. At first glance, it looks like those screws only hold the acrylic piece down to the metal below, but apparently it actually holds the M.2 heatsinks down onto the PCH heatsink and they are indeed two separate pieces. It took me taking off the entire backplate and PCH heatsink to think that those two screws were the answer. Now, at least, I know...and hopefully will help others in the future.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Hi,
> that's because you probably have the per core multis set already.
> Just go through each one and set them to "0" which is auto
> that will fix that problem right away.
> And your CPU probably is capped at 4.9 ghz.
> 
> What happens if you lower the cache ratio to 4.3 ghz though?
> Does that help?


This is at 4.3Ghz cache ratio. This chip will not boot into windows no matter what I do if I set it to 4.7GHz. (This is my replacement chip too). Should I be worried about that? I can exchange again before end of January. I am okay with a 4.9Ghz OC, just was hoping it wouldn't be near 90c. That is fairly typical though right?

Little disappointed in the sense that my first chip took 1.27v to be stable and boot (with a 47x cache ratio) at 4.7Ghz, while this one takes about 1.235 to be stable at 4.7Ghz all core with a 4.3 GHz ratio. 

I had tried setting my per core multipliers to the defaults (50, 50, 49, 49, 48, 47, 47, 47) - never see any cores go above 47 when set that way even with MCE off and CStates on. Basically it doesn't seem to matter if I manually set them or set them to auto, it always runs at 4.7. This is with MCE off too. Not a huge deal, I thought it might be a nice compromise to keep my temperatures in the 80s.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> This is at 4.3Ghz cache ratio. This chip will not boot into windows no matter what I do if I set it to 4.7GHz. (This is my replacement chip too). Should I be worried about that? I can exchange again before end of January. I am okay with a 4.9Ghz OC, just was hoping it wouldn't be near 90c. That is fairly typical though right?
> 
> Little disappointed in the sense that my first chip took 1.27v to be stable and boot (with a 47x cache ratio) at 4.7Ghz, while this one takes about 1.235 to be stable at 4.7Ghz all core with a 4.3 GHz ratio.
> 
> I had tried setting my per core multipliers to the defaults (50, 50, 49, 49, 48, 47, 47, 47) - never see any cores go above 47 when set that way even with MCE off and CStates on. Basically it doesn't seem to matter if I manually set them or set them to auto, it always runs at 4.7. This is with MCE off too. Not a huge deal, I thought it might be a nice compromise to keep my temperatures in the 80s.


If you're going to do that, just buy a chip from Silicon Lottery pre-binned. But then you would have to sell your current chip since you can't get a refund.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is at 4.3Ghz cache ratio. This chip will not boot into windows no matter what I do if I set it to 4.7GHz. (This is my replacement chip too). Should I be worried about that? I can exchange again before end of January. I am okay with a 4.9Ghz OC, just was hoping it wouldn't be near 90c. That is fairly typical though right?
> 
> Little disappointed in the sense that my first chip took 1.27v to be stable and boot (with a 47x cache ratio) at 4.7Ghz, while this one takes about 1.235 to be stable at 4.7Ghz all core with a 4.3 GHz ratio.
> 
> I had tried setting my per core multipliers to the defaults (50, 50, 49, 49, 48, 47, 47, 47) - never see any cores go above 47 when set that way even with MCE off and CStates on. Basically it doesn't seem to matter if I manually set them or set them to auto, it always runs at 4.7. This is with MCE off too. Not a huge deal, I thought it might be a nice compromise to keep my temperatures in the 80s.
> 
> 
> 
> If you're going to do that, just buy a chip from Silicon Lottery pre-binned. But then you would have to sell your current chip since you can't get a refund.
Click to expand...

Yea I'm not planning to return.


----------



## Artroxa

So, i finally recieved my z390 AORUS master board and my g.skill ripjaws V 3200mhz 14CL ram. 

So first off i just tried clocking my 9900k up to 5.0 without changing any other bios settings and it ran comfortably albeit abit hotter than i would have liked, so i decided to try to follow the gigabyte overclock pdf they have up on their website and the computer refuses to boot on those settings? It just ends up not lighting up any of my peripherals like mouse and keyboard and screens wont turn on either, fans will spin at full speed.

Not sure what exactly to take away from that but if anyone have another great guide to overclocking the 9900k on gigabyte that would be nice as im struggling abit to manouver gigabytes bios  

Also after just testing some userbenchmarks i notice my ram ranks really low, but dual channel is running, XMP is smooth and it looks ok but im ending up on 34th percentile which seems low, but im gonna guess that people just overclock these sticks to high heavens very often.


----------



## Robbært

Artroxa said:


> So, i finally recieved my z390 AORUS master board and my g.skill ripjaws V 3200mhz 14CL ram.
> 
> So first off i just tried clocking my 9900k up to 5.0 without changing any other bios settings and it ran comfortably albeit abit hotter than i would have liked, so i decided to try to follow the gigabyte overclock pdf they have up on their website and the computer refuses to boot on those settings? It just ends up not lighting up any of my peripherals like mouse and keyboard and screens wont turn on either, fans will spin at full speed.
> 
> Not sure what exactly to take away from that but if anyone have another great guide to overclocking the 9900k on gigabyte that would be nice as im struggling abit to manouver gigabytes bios


good OC example is post1569
as AVX 0 it better to test with AVX disabled or limit package temp.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

How i can use the oc touch panel.I insert the cable in the motherboard and then?


----------



## Hercule Poirot

Aznboy1993 said:


> Nevermind...I'm stupid...it was the two screws on the right side holding the acrylic piece down. At first glance, it looks like those screws only hold the acrylic piece down to the metal below, but apparently it actually holds the M.2 heatsinks down onto the PCH heatsink and they are indeed two separate pieces. It took me taking off the entire backplate and PCH heatsink to think that those two screws were the answer. Now, at least, I know...and hopefully will help others in the future.





Had the same issue. Those screws are too tiny. BTW what M.2's sticks are you using? I have a Samsung 970 Pro and there seems to be a compatibility issue, even thought it is on the QVL list. I won't show up in the bios, but will show up n Win after waking from sleep. I have an Adata in the top slot and it work perfectly fine. Moving the 970 around makes no difference. Currently running the f4 bios. Just wondering.


----------



## warbucks

Using the Aorus Master, with LLC on Turbo, I get quite a bit of vdroop. Vcore is set to 1.33V in BIOS and under load it's down to 1.28V in HWInfo (VR_OUT). I was under the impression Turbo is supposed to be close to what you set in the bios.


----------



## Falkentyne

warbucks said:


> Using the Aorus Master, with LLC on Turbo, I get quite a bit of vdroop. Vcore is set to 1.33V in BIOS and under load it's down to 1.28V in HWInfo (VR_OUT). I was under the impression Turbo is supposed to be close to what you set in the bios.


If you're referring to the bios, the bios uses the most inaccurate sensor (8688E).
The sensor where "turbo" keeps the vcore very close to idle/what you set in the bios is 8792E.
However this sensor is still inaccurate because it reads from the MLCC caps area, which is still affected by impedance.
Did you ever notice why, when in the bios, if you set "Turbo" loadline, there is STILL a negative slope?
That's why (VR Vout is accurate enough to read that negative slope).

VR Vout is the CPU on-die sense voltage (ADC die sense value from the VRM). The problem is regular sensors aren't calibrated to match this. Asus changed this on their XI boards so their SIO sensors are very close to VR VOUT now.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

Extreme loadline may be safe to use (some vdroop), but try to avoid Ultra Extreme. Don't use UE unless you have an oscilloscope to check how bad the transient voltage overshoots are (from heavy load to idle), 20 to 50ms sampling and 100+ mhz, and you do even better if you can solder wires to the CPU on-die sense for perfect measurements.


----------



## Falkentyne

Some people were saying the backup bios on the Aorus Master was not flashable without clearing CMOS with the bios jumper switched.
Well all I had to do to flash the backup bios (to F8b from F4) was turn off the computer, set bios jumper to Bios #2 (still in single bios mode), power on, booted to F4 bios, then Qflashed F4 to F8b, 
Booted again after the boot loops to verify the bios was now at F8b, with no saved profiles (confirming it was the backup), then powered off, switched the bios jumper back to bios #1, booted, was back on main bios again, with all my saved profiles (F8b).

Some other people were saying that they were unable to flash the backup bios at all when doing this, and booting to the backup bios and running Qflash would flash the main instead (unless you cleared CMOS with the backup bios set as primary, which caused the backup to become the "new" main).


----------



## warbucks

Falkentyne said:


> If you're referring to the bios, the bios uses the most inaccurate sensor (8688E).
> The sensor where "turbo" keeps the vcore very close to idle/what you set in the bios is 8792E.
> However this sensor is still inaccurate because it reads from the MLCC caps area, which is still affected by impedance.
> Did you ever notice why, when in the bios, if you set "Turbo" loadline, there is STILL a negative slope?
> That's why (VR Vout is accurate enough to read that negative slope).
> 
> VR Vout is the CPU on-die sense voltage (ADC die sense value from the VRM). The problem is regular sensors aren't calibrated to match this. Asus changed this on their XI boards so their SIO sensors are very close to VR VOUT now.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> Extreme loadline may be safe to use (some vdroop), but try to avoid Ultra Extreme. Don't use UE unless you have an oscilloscope to check how bad the transient voltage overshoots are (from heavy load to idle), 20 to 50ms sampling and 100+ mhz, and you do even better if you can solder wires to the CPU on-die sense for perfect measurements.


I'm using HWInfo VR_OUT on the IR35201 sensor to measure vcore during idle/load. I may test LLC Extreme and see where it land as far as vdroop.


----------



## SaLaDiN666

Did anyone even care about those "transient overshoots" because I do not remember anyone mentioning them ever before the Asus z390 VRM fiasco. Then somehow people started parroting it here and on reddit because of the Asus marketing overshoot campaign.



For example, AsRock boards are terrible when comes to their LLC, you more or less are forced to use LLC1 all the time when overclocking and don't want to use ~90mV higher voltage than needed to make it stable under load, the drop on Z390 Taichi Ultimate is 50-60 mV under load with LLC1, 70-90 with LLC2 and way worse with with other LLCs. And I do not remember a single case of a cpu having degradated because of the spikes.




Also another thing, 9900k and how you shouldn't 1.35V+.. ??? Silicon Lottery themself were selling 7700ks and 8700ks at 5.0ghz and they were rated at 1.4+, often 1.42, 1.44 even. And let's not ignore the fact the majority of 7700k,8700ks needed way more than 1.35v to reach 5.0ghz stable. Don't see people massively complaining either how they high OC are not stable anymore.


----------



## Falkentyne

SaLaDiN666 said:


> Did anyone even care about those "transient overshoots" because I do not remember anyone mentioning them ever before the Asus z390 VRM fiasco. Then somehow people started parroting it here and on reddit because of the Asus marketing overshoot campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> For example, AsRock boards are terrible when comes to their LLC, you more or less are forced to use LLC1 all the time when overclocking and don't want to use ~90mV higher voltage than needed to make it stable under load, the drop on Z390 Taichi Ultimate is 50-60 mV under load with LLC1, 70-90 with LLC2 and way worse with with other LLCs. And I do not remember a single case of a cpu having degradated because of the spikes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also another thing, 9900k and how you shouldn't 1.35V+.. ??? Silicon Lottery themself were selling 7700ks and 8700ks at 5.0ghz and they were rated at 1.4+, often 1.42, 1.44 even. And let's not ignore the fact the majority of 7700k,8700ks needed way more than 1.35v to reach 5.0ghz stable. Don't see people massively complaining either how they high OC are not stable anymore.


Transient overshoots have been discussed off and on for the last 10 years, ever since Anand did his article on voltage overshoots with maximum loadline calibration.
However I took logical "Chess master that I am" beef with the Anandtech article, because if the overshoots were really that LOW on his chart, you would gain no loss at all and no risk, by increasing LLC to the maximum and LOWERING bios voltage to compensate for the overshoots in that anandtech chart.

What Elmor mentioned however, is that those overshoots on that article were just a weak approximation, and true overshoots can go as high as 150mv (or even higher on bad boards) at maximum LLC. Especially if there is still heavy current being used during the transition. The real issue here is that no one has actually done oscilloscope measurements of overshoots with maximum loadline calibration! They've always referred to the bios voltage spiking by 150mv, which is *NOT* overshoot at all, as that's inaccuracy from the traditional SIO chip sensors (As Elmor mentioned), and not oscilloscope measurements. Plus very few people here have good scopes. Scopes are expensive. Some cost as much as a cheap car. And you think people were complaining about people buying Titan RTX and Titan V vidoe cards to game on....

And about your last point: Some people refer to voltage needed as "Bios" voltage while others talk about "load voltage". And that makes things worse.
Silicon lottery's binning mentions now that the voltage they list is *LOAD* voltage, not what you set in the bios.


----------



## Moparman

My findings after a few months of using the Master. I have only ran into one odd problem and that is BSOD on start up randomly. Can be Overclocked or set to default and every now and then if i cold boot the system it will get to the windows screen and then BSOD. no issues with anything in the system. 



The goods.... I am very happy with the board as a whole. Currently running a [email protected] with a Mugen 4 with push pull fans. The mem is sub par Bdie [email protected] 3600c15 and a pair of 980ti Windforce G1 cards in sli. I have a RD400 128GB NVME and a couple 256gb Adata SU800 drives in Raid 0 with a 1tb storage drive. Although I regret selling my 2700x and X470 Taichi to go with the overpriced Intel cpu it is a pretty good setup. As Jensen Huang would say "It Just Works" and it does well. Gigabyte has come a long way with their Bioses and designs and i have to give them credit for that. As happy as I have been with the board I do have to say I will give the new AMD boards from Giga a look instead of going straight back with ASRock. What kind of opinions and thoughts do you have on your current Gigabyte Z390 setups??


----------



## Aznboy1993

Hercule Poirot said:


> Had the same issue. Those screws are too tiny. BTW what M.2's sticks are you using? I have a Samsung 970 Pro and there seems to be a compatibility issue, even thought it is on the QVL list. I won't show up in the bios, but will show up n Win after waking from sleep. I have an Adata in the top slot and it work perfectly fine. Moving the 970 around makes no difference. Currently running the f4 bios. Just wondering.


Agreed. It's asinine that is how they designed it, but oh well.

With regard to the NVMe drives, I am using the Samsung 970 Pro 512GB...so that is not good news to hear that you've been having issues. I put it in the bottom slot (M2P). I plan on using it as my OS drive, so I will keep you posted when I get it all installed. Are you using it as your main drive?


----------



## Falkentyne

Moparman said:


> My findings after a few months of using the Master. I have only ran into one odd problem and that is BSOD on start up randomly. Can be Overclocked or set to default and every now and then if i cold boot the system it will get to the windows screen and then BSOD. no issues with anything in the system.
> 
> 
> 
> The goods.... I am very happy with the board as a whole. Currently running a [email protected] with a Mugen 4 with push pull fans. The mem is sub par Bdie [email protected] 3600c15 and a pair of 980ti Windforce G1 cards in sli. I have a RD400 128GB NVME and a couple 256gb Adata SU800 drives in Raid 0 with a 1tb storage drive. Although I regret selling my 2700x and X470 Taichi to go with the overpriced Intel cpu it is a pretty good setup. As Jensen Huang would say "It Just Works" and it does well. Gigabyte has come a long way with their Bioses and designs and i have to give them credit for that. As happy as I have been with the board I do have to say I will give the new AMD boards from Giga a look instead of going straight back with ASRock. What kind of opinions and thoughts do you have on your current Gigabyte Z390 setups??


BSOD when desktop loads?

Check your system agent voltage or your iMC settings.
I had this happen once (i think it was an IRQ_L ?) after i set my system agent voltage to 1.15v after tightening tRFC to 270 and CR to 1T. I set it to 1.20 and it never happened again.


----------



## Sheyster

Moparman said:


> What kind of opinions and thoughts do you have on your current Gigabyte Z390 setups??


If I could go back I'd just roll with an ASRock Taichi. Not a fan of Gigabytes's BIOS or memory support at higher speeds. JMHO - take it for FWIW.


----------



## Falkentyne

Sheyster said:


> If I could go back I'd just roll with an ASRock Taichi. Not a fan of Gigabytes's BIOS or memory support at higher speeds. JMHO - take it for FWIW.


Newest beta bios has extra options for faster memory.


----------



## pm1109

Falkentyne said:


> Newest beta bios has extra options for faster memory.


You saying that Bios F8b has improved performance for memory at higher frequency 3866 MHz and above 
No matter what I do cannot get 4000mhz stable on my Gigabyte z390 Master.


----------



## Falkentyne

pm1109 said:


> You saying that Bios F8b has improved performance for memory at higher frequency 3866 MHz and above
> No matter what I do cannot get 4000mhz stable on my Gigabyte z390 Master.


There's extra options in one of the memory configurations for "High speed memory" and something else.
Someone said they used it and it made their system stable at 4133.


----------



## pm1109

Falkentyne said:


> There's extra options in one of the memory configurations for "High speed memory" and something else.
> Someone said they used it and it made their system stable at 4133.


Running at 3800 MHz now with 16-16-16-36 timings now.Not sure I will see a huge performance increase going to 4000 or 4133 speed.Not sure I want to touch a beta bios maybe wait for the next non beta bios update.


----------



## EarlZ

pm1109 said:


> Running at 3800 MHz now with 16-16-16-36 timings now.Not sure I will see a huge performance increase going to 4000 or 4133 speed.Not sure I want to touch a beta bios maybe wait for the next non beta bios update.


F8b is downloadable on the gigabytes product website, Not sure if the "b" denotes as beta


----------



## doom26464

I gambled on f8b and it is kind broken. 

Its has silly long reboot times and for some reason wont show a post screen just goes straight into windows?? Making getting into the bios next to impossible.

Going to go back to f5 or maybe try f7 since it is not a bet bios

Edit:never mind trying to load my profiles is making a mess of everything is why. Ill have to go back and manual do everything again 😞


----------



## doom26464

Ok now im in big trouble and need help. 


I can't get into my bios no matter what I do. Restarting the pc is just blank screen for like 25 seconds(even pressing DEL or f12) and it does nothing but it does go into windows after enough time. 

Once in windows I tried even flashing the bios using the gigabyte @BIOS utility but it fails every time(tried f5/f7/f8b)

Tried using the advance recovery feature even in windows 10 settings to go into it from there and nothing just takes me back to 25 second black screen then into windows again. 

Lesson learned DONT try to use a saved profile from another bios on a newer one. Really messing things up. 


Anyways any help??


Edit:cleared cmos all good again. Guess ill just re do all my fan profiles and overclocks from scratch..... what a pain in the bum.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> If I could go back I'd just roll with an ASRock Taichi. Not a fan of Gigabytes' BIOS or memory support at higher speeds. JMHO - take it for FWIW.


My Aorus Xtreme has my 4x8GB 3200 CL14 G.Skill HCI MemTest stable at 4133MHZ 17-17-17-38 2T. 

On my old Maximus X Formula, I had trouble getting 3900 stable and that's the top of the line 4x8GB Asus Z370 board.


----------



## Falkentyne

How do you guys enable the iGPU on this thing?
I tried enabling it and the only thing that appeared is "Intel video controller" which wouldn't even allow the drivers to be installed manually (it just said "code 10, this device cannot start"), and the Intel display adapter wasn't anywhere to be seen.

Does the dedicated GPU have to be completely removed for the iGPU to work?
Has anyone even bothered testing the iGPU?


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> My Aorus Xtreme has my 4x8GB 3200 CL14 G.Skill HCI MemTest stable at 4133MHZ 17-17-17-38 2T.


The Xtreme is no Master or Pro; they put A LOT more work into it since it's their flagship board. If I had paid $600 (tax included) for a mobo and gotten bad results, it would have got sent back so quick. The ONLY reason I'm keeping the Aorus Pro I have is because I paid $161 for it in a bundle with the 9900K. For the price you paid you should be running that memory at 4400+ speeds.


----------



## pm1109

Falkentyne said:


> How do you guys enable the iGPU on this thing?
> I tried enabling it and the only thing that appeared is "Intel video controller" which wouldn't even allow the drivers to be installed manually (it just said "code 10, this device cannot start"), and the Intel display adapter wasn't anywhere to be seen.
> 
> Does the dedicated GPU have to be completely removed for the iGPU to work?
> Has anyone even bothered testing the iGPU?


Wouldn’t hurt to remove the dedicated GPU and test it out.Let us know how you go


----------



## Falkentyne

pm1109 said:


> Wouldn’t hurt to remove the dedicated GPU and test it out.Let us know how you go


I'm not willing to go as far as that. Sorry. It's hard enough to service my computer with my medical issues. I'll save that for the next time I have to repaste something.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> How do you guys enable the iGPU on this thing?
> I tried enabling it and the only thing that appeared is "Intel video controller" which wouldn't even allow the drivers to be installed manually (it just said "code 10, this device cannot start"), and the Intel display adapter wasn't anywhere to be seen.
> 
> Does the dedicated GPU have to be completely removed for the iGPU to work?
> Has anyone even bothered testing the iGPU?


I run my second screen on my iGPU to take the load off my 1080 Ti.

It might be your OC is causing the iGPU to be unstable.

Does it work at BIOS defaults?


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I run my second screen on my iGPU to take the load off my 1080 Ti.
> 
> It might be your OC is causing the iGPU to be unstable.
> 
> Does it work at BIOS defaults?


The iGPU doesn't even appear in the first place.
Only the 'intel video controller (or maybe it's called intel audio controller, I don't remember), but the drivers can't be installed (just says code 10 and driver install failed)..
Wondering if it's a bios bug.
But enabling the iGPU causes a long slow reset like something's being enabled.

And I'm not overclocked right now. In fact I'm downclocked (below base clocks).
Also aren't you on a different motherboard?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> The iGPU doesn't even appear in the first place.
> Only the 'intel video controller (or maybe it's called intel audio controller, I don't remember), but the drivers can't be installed (just says code 10 and driver install failed)..
> Wondering if it's a bios bug.
> But enabling the iGPU causes a long slow reset like something's being enabled.
> 
> And I'm not overclocked right now. In fact I'm downclocked (below base clocks).
> Also aren't you on a different motherboard?


Aorus Xtreme.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> The Xtreme is no Master or Pro; they put A LOT more work into it since it's their flagship board. If I had paid $600 (tax included) for a mobo and gotten bad results, it would have got sent back so quick. The ONLY reason I'm keeping the Aorus Pro I have is because I paid $161 for it in a bundle with the 9900K. For the price you paid you should be running that memory at 4400+ speeds.


To get 4133MHZ on a 9900k with 4x8GB is pretty exceptional. Not the same IMC as an 8700k which likely would go quite a bit higher.

And four DIMM boards don't OC the memory near as good as two DIMM boards.

I'm very happy with my board. 

I don't think anyone is going to get 4400MHZ stable on a 9900k even with an exceptional IMC. 4200 maybe, 4266 unlikely, 4400, no.  :h34r-smi


----------



## Jidonsu

My 9700K wasn't 100% happy at 4133 16-17-17-37, for some reason. It was failing 1344K Prime95. I think it would've been fine at Cas 17 instead, but I went a different route. I've been tweaking it at 4000mhz with better primaries and much tighter secondary and tertiary timings.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I run my second screen on my iGPU to take the load off my 1080 Ti.
> 
> It might be your OC is causing the iGPU to be unstable.
> 
> Does it work at BIOS defaults?


I got the iGPU "enabled" by setting display priority on "integrated graphics", and then the iGPU worked in the bios, but a nice fat "system service exception" trying to load windows. (there was no output to the dGPU at all either). I give up 

At least I know there's probably a way to make it work somehow.


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> I got the iGPU "enabled" by setting display priority on "integrated graphics", and then the iGPU worked in the bios, but a nice fat "system service exception" trying to load windows. (there was no output to the dGPU at all either). I give up
> 
> At least I know there's probably a way to make it work somehow.


That's a really weird error. Windows is currently pissing me off as well.


----------



## KedarWolf

Gigabyte boards are T-Topology for the memory configuration.

I did a test with my 9900k. Only two sticks the first and third slots in with my current settings at 4133MHZ, no boot. 

All four sticks in, it boots instantly at 4133MHZ. 

T-Topology works better with four sticks of RAM so if you're going to buy RAM, buy a 4x8GB kit to max out your overclocking abilities.

It was the same with my T-Topology Asus board, a 2x8GB 4400 kit I couldn't get stable at 4000MHZ on my 8700k. My 4x8GB CL14 3200 would run at 4200MHZ stress tested stable. :drool:

You did buy a four DIMM kit for your Master or Xtreme, right? :h34r-smi


----------



## Timur Born

KedarWolf said:


> Asus and Gigabyte settings are different. I'm pretty sure .1 Asus is NOT the same as setting .1 on Gigabyte.
> 
> And actually, on Asus it's .01.


Could well be that it was .01, best to check the corresponding OC guide to make sure.

Why are the values different for different mainboard manufacturers? Are they trying to confuse us on purpose?


----------



## techjesse

Anybody run this board with Ln2 yet?
Received today  Nice looking board.....


----------



## techjesse

Up & Running


----------



## Hercule Poirot

Aznboy1993 said:


> Nevermind...I'm stupid...it was the two screws on the right side holding the acrylic piece down. At first glance, it looks like those screws only hold the acrylic piece down to the metal below, but apparently it actually holds the M.2 heatsinks down onto the PCH heatsink and they are indeed two separate pieces. It took me taking off the entire backplate and PCH heatsink to think that those two screws were the answer. Now, at least, I know...and hopefully will help others in the future.





Aznboy1993 said:


> Agreed. It's asinine that is how they designed it, but oh well.
> 
> With regard to the NVMe drives, I am using the Samsung 970 Pro 512GB...so that is not good news to hear that you've been having issues. I put it in the bottom slot (M2P). I plan on using it as my OS drive, so I will keep you posted when I get it all installed. Are you using it as your main drive?



I currently have an Adata XPG 128G as the boot drive. The Sammy would not show up on a consistent basis. I thought about getting another Adata or a WD Black, but am kinda concerned about the lifespan. Kinda hard to beat the Samsung record. I hope this can be resolved with a bios update.


----------



## Falkentyne

Hercule Poirot said:


> I currently have an Adata XPG 128G as the boot drive. The Sammy would not show up on a consistent basis. I thought about getting another Adata or a WD Black, but am kinda concerned about the lifespan. Kinda hard to beat the Samsung record. I hope this can be resolved with a bios update.


I have the 970 evo (1G) as my boot drive. Never had a problem with it not showing up.


----------



## davidm71

*Does not like Samsungs*



Falkentyne said:


> I have the 970 evo (1G) as my boot drive. Never had a problem with it not showing up.



How have you connected your 970 EVO to your Master? Mine is through the last PCI-E slot and after bios update saves it consistently will disappear until a cold reboot cycle is performed. There must be something this board doesn't like with Samsung drives.


----------



## techjesse

I'll ask again, Anybody run this board with Ln2 yet?


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> How have you connected your 970 EVO to your Master? Mine is through the last PCI-E slot and after bios update saves it consistently will disappear until a cold reboot cycle is performed. There must be something this board doesn't like with Samsung drives.


Mine is also in the very last M.2 slot below the x1 PCIE slot. I have a 860 evo m.2 1 TB drive in the middle slot.


----------



## scaramonga

My 950 Pro NVMe drive (512) will NOT show in ANY slot, in ANY BIOS thus far, despite the drive having latest firmware. It works just fine regardless, no problems, it's just non-existent in BIOS. My other two 970 Pro's do not have such a problem. Is it the boards fault, maybe?, but I suspect not, and probably a reporting problem with certain drives, most likely due to the drive firmware itself.

The 950 Pro is not 'ancient', and has been the backbone of my laptop for a couple of years, yes, but strange it just does not get picked up by this board whatsoever.

Get's picked up on my wife's ASUS Z390 XI Hero in BIOS, so definitely not a fault with the drive.


----------



## techjesse

I'm starting to like this board...easy mem oc 

NVMe drivers not showing...Drivers! Yep sammy needs to update firmware.


----------



## scaramonga

Cracking board, amazing, yup, but let down by a poorly implemented BIOS, and God damn awful software.


----------



## techjesse

mem overclocking, works great


----------



## Sheyster

techjesse said:


> mem overclocking, works great


How is this impressive exactly?? Also, get your cache multi up higher than 43x.


----------



## scaramonga

I'd never overclock memory, what benefit is one gonna see?, lol, really?, apart from seeing your 3200 RAM now showing 4000+?, lol, OK, plus, it affects the instability of the system more than anything  For what?


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> I'd never overclock memory, what benefit is one gonna see?, lol, really?, apart from seeing your 3200 RAM now showing 4000+?, lol, OK, plus, it affects the instability of the system more than anything  For what?


Looks at forum name. overclock.net. Hmmmmmm.


----------



## techjesse

Sheyster said:


> How is this impressive exactly?? Also, get your cache multi up higher than 43x.


It's only a test..... I'll start overclocking after testing more software and getting to know the board


----------



## Moparman

techjesse said:


> I'll ask again, Anybody run this board with Ln2 yet?


I plan on it. Shows like it will do great just not as well with mem like the Z170 Mocf does.


----------



## techjesse

Moparman said:


> I plan on it. Shows like it will do great just not as well with mem like the Z170 Mocf does.


Thanks Moparman, I like this board, right now it's testing time.....then this 
I'm looking for stand alone overclocking software a "lite" easytune. Do you know of any?


----------



## Moparman

techjesse said:


> Thanks Moparman, I like this board, right now it's testing time.....then this
> I'm looking for stand alone overclocking software a "lite" easytune. Do you know of any?


 I don't. Might need to ask Matt GBT. Mem will be the tough one on here since going tight over 3800 is very very hard.


----------



## Sheyster

techjesse said:


> It's only a test..... I'll start overclocking after testing more software and getting to know the board


Gotcha.. I was confused since your screenshot with 3200 CL15 and 4300 NB frequency is pretty much standard stuff.. LOL.


----------



## techjesse

Moparman, I'll ask Matt GBT, see if he can help, Thanks

Noprob Sheyster, just testing....Ln2 demands it LoL


----------



## Timur Born

I find (memory) overclocking rather frustrating on the Aorus Master. Oftentimes it does not recover gracefully from a failed OC, especially when it comes to memory timings. Most of the time I get a black screen with the debug LED not being of much use (currently it's showing A0 "IDE Initialization started" while I am typing this in Windows). The Reset switch fails to work far too often, too, and there is no way to boot at default settings without clearing CMOS (no jumper provided?!) or trying a dozen restarts.

The subtimings presets are only useful for quick and dirty frequency testing. Don't even think to use the "Enhanced Stability" or "Relax OC" presets for normal use, they decrease memory throughput substantially, as in going from 50 gb/s down to 16 gb/s (Relax OC).

I cannot count how many times I had to remove the PCIe in the lowest slot in order to reach the Dual BIOS switches. Even worse, everytime this bugged feature switches from the secondary to the primary BIOS after a failed OC I switch the "BIOS Switch" from one position to the other. And every time I do that the board switches to the other BIOS, regardless of what the position was beforehand. So depending on the latest OC failures the switch may be in position 1 or 2 while I keep using the secondary BIOS. So the mainboard completely disregards its own documentation for manual BIOS switching (1 = main BIOS, 2 = secondary BIOS).

The realtime memory overclocking feature is useless and bugged. Easytune only offers 7 memory timing settings to change and then it asks you to reboot when you do so (so much for realtime). Furthermore it only changes part of the settings, like changing frequency (to the wrong value) without changing timings, which results in another black screen reboot orgy.


----------



## Edge0fsanity

scaramonga said:


> My 950 Pro NVMe drive (512) will NOT show in ANY slot, in ANY BIOS thus far, despite the drive having latest firmware. It works just fine regardless, no problems, it's just non-existent in BIOS. My other two 970 Pro's do not have such a problem. Is it the boards fault, maybe?, but I suspect not, and probably a reporting problem with certain drives, most likely due to the drive firmware itself.
> 
> The 950 Pro is not 'ancient', and has been the backbone of my laptop for a couple of years, yes, but strange it just does not get picked up by this board whatsoever.
> 
> Get's picked up on my wife's ASUS Z390 XI Hero in BIOS, so definitely not a fault with the drive.


change the storage boot option from uefi to legacy and it'll show up. Same problem with my 950 pro, doing that will get it to show in the bios.


----------



## identitycrisis

Hi guys. Picked up a z390 pro and 9700k from microcenter. I have a packing question for you guys. My clear film over the heatsink along the IO shield was poorly put on. There was no clear plastic on the heatsink behind the pcie slot and the case badge was loose in the box and the static bag was sealed with clear tape.

Is this how you guys received your boards? Either seems sloppy on gigabytes end or I got an open box that microcenter didn't know was open.

Board seems to work fine. Boots with ram at 3200mhz and win 10 installed, but I haven't run any updates or tested the pcie slot. I miss the power button on my ud5 while I'm bench testing.

Thanks.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I find (memory) overclocking rather frustrating on the Aorus Master. Oftentimes it does not recover gracefully from a failed OC, especially when it comes to memory timings. Most of the time I get a black screen with the debug LED not being of much use (currently it's showing A0 "IDE Initialization started" while I am typing this in Windows). The Reset switch fails to work far too often, too, and there is no way to boot at default settings without clearing CMOS (no jumper provided?!) or trying a dozen restarts.
> 
> The subtimings presets are only useful for quick and dirty frequency testing. Don't even think to use the "Enhanced Stability" or "Relax OC" presets for normal use, they decrease memory throughput substantially, as in going from 50 gb/s down to 16 gb/s (Relax OC).
> 
> I cannot count how many times I had to remove the PCIe in the lowest slot in order to reach the Dual BIOS switches. Even worse, everytime this bugged feature switches from the secondary to the primary BIOS after a failed OC I switch the "BIOS Switch" from one position to the other. And every time I do that the board switches to the other BIOS, regardless of what the position was beforehand. So depending on the latest OC failures the switch may be in position 1 or 2 while I keep using the secondary BIOS. So the mainboard completely disregards its own documentation for manual BIOS switching (1 = main BIOS, 2 = secondary BIOS).
> 
> The realtime memory overclocking feature is useless and bugged. Easytune only offers 7 memory timing settings to change and then it asks you to reboot when you do so (so much for realtime). Furthermore it only changes part of the settings, like changing frequency (to the wrong value) without changing timings, which results in another black screen reboot orgy.


I never once had it switch bioses unless I used the switch, and I had a lot of failed overclocks and NO posts. Not once did it ever switch.
I also don't use the RESET button, ever. That button has caused nice boot loops and bios switching on past gigabyte boards.
If you're getting bios switching and you are NOT using reset, have you considered just RMA'ing?
Some people even said you can't flash the backup bios. I had no problem flashing the backup bios. I set it to single bios mode, set bios switch to 2, boot to 2nd bios, run Qflash, 2nd bios updates perfectly, power off, switch to primary, primary boots with all my saved profiles.


----------



## Phantomas 007

My Z390 Master came with the F4 bios. I'm thinking to update. What version must select and what kind of update (direct online update)?


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Some people even said you can't flash the backup bios. I had no problem flashing the backup bios. I set it to single bios mode, set bios switch to 2, boot to 2nd bios, run Qflash, 2nd bios updates perfectly, power off, switch to primary, primary boots with all my saved profiles.


I am using the backup BIOS, the main BIOS still uses F4.


----------



## KedarWolf

In the Spoiler is my BIOS settings for 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.6GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory.
Don't forget to set the IA AC Loadline to 1 or your voltages will be way too high. To set it, scroll to it and hit '1' on your keyboard. Your BIOS will freeze if you try to hit Enter and set it. 



Spoiler


----------



## SDBolts619

Getting close to first boot and Windows install. Stuck waiting for the FedEx to get here Monday...









Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## DirtyScrubz

100% stable with vcore at 1.315v and turbo llc in all games/benchmarks tested. 5 ghz + 5 ghz avx, I don't know why Afterburner showed 70C on CPU when all of them were in the 50s to low 60s and that was also shown in hwinfo but it never peaked at 70: 



Spoiler



https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd....200/2716A8469C096B2B0762028559D2ABF4768C7CB9/


----------



## Padinn

Found this video on Youtube, he is using the 9900k, Aorus Master, and Corsair H150i pro with DDR4 3200 memory. While it's fairly basic in terms of what he does to overclock, this matches my hardware exactly. I found it helpful for looking at the temperatures he is getting and comparing them to my own.


----------



## Jidonsu

KedarWolf said:


> In the Spoiler is my BIOS settings for 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.6GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory.
> Don't forget to set the IA AC Loadline to 1 or your voltages will be way too high. To set it, scroll to it and hit '1' on your keyboard. Your BIOS will freeze if you try to hit Enter and set it.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Any reason why you have Fast Boot Disabled for the RAM? Wouldn’t that force the motherboard to retrain every boot?


----------



## LucaSarge4

*CMOS reset every time*

Hi all, I have the problem described in the following figure. The pieces all already worked with another configuration and I changed cpu and motherboard. 

Question:	I have a problem with the motherboard. Every time I restart the PC after a complete shutdown, in which I go to disconnect the power cord, the motherboard automatically performs a cmos cleaning and restarts losing all my saves on the bios. I have already tried to change the battery without any result.
Answer:	
Dear LucaSarge4,

Thank you for emailing GIGABYTE.
We are delighted with your interest in our products.

Did the system already work normal? What did you change before the error occurred?

Please try test it with a simple environment this means, only install CPU, single memory, single HDD, VGA onboard power (simple environment), and see if it also happens?


Regards

GIGABYTE Team

Obviously the PC works without any problem, if I unplug the power supply then load the overclocked profile saved and everything starts as before. (The problem also occurs without oc).

The configuration is:
- z390 aorus master;
- i9 9900k;
- 2x nvme;
- 32gb ram (4 x 8gb) F4-3200C16D-16GTZR https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c16d-16gtzr
- asus dual rtx 2080
- evga p2 1200w
- bios f7

Tonight I'm going to try the procedure suggested by gigabyte, but I had already tried to move the ram by myself and once had not given me this problem after changing the position of the 4 banks. Any further suggestions besides that of gigabytes?
Also in case there was a compatibility problem, can someone recommend me a rbg model that definitely works? Most of the ram codes that I find in the local amazon store (Italy) are not present in the compatibility compatibility pdf (not even those I currently have) and I would like to avoid having the same problem.


----------



## Artroxa

Does the bios have individual fan volt control? 
Ive looked around abit in the smartfan5 program but i can't seem to set individual voltages? 


Regards Artroxa


----------



## KedarWolf

Jidonsu said:


> Any reason why you have Fast Boot Disabled for the RAM? Wouldn’t that force the motherboard to retrain every boot?


I only had that because I was tweaking my RAM timings and wanted it to retrain every reboot. 

But yes, I can put it on Auto now.


----------



## Falkentyne

LucaSarge4 said:


> Hi all, I have the problem described in the following figure. The pieces all already worked with another configuration and I changed cpu and motherboard.
> 
> Question:	I have a problem with the motherboard. Every time I restart the PC after a complete shutdown, in which I go to disconnect the power cord, the motherboard automatically performs a cmos cleaning and restarts losing all my saves on the bios. I have already tried to change the battery without any result.
> Answer:
> Dear LucaSarge4,
> 
> Thank you for emailing GIGABYTE.
> We are delighted with your interest in our products.
> 
> Did the system already work normal? What did you change before the error occurred?
> 
> Please try test it with a simple environment this means, only install CPU, single memory, single HDD, VGA onboard power (simple environment), and see if it also happens?
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> GIGABYTE Team
> 
> Obviously the PC works without any problem, if I unplug the power supply then load the overclocked profile saved and everything starts as before. (The problem also occurs without oc).
> 
> The configuration is:
> - z390 aorus master;
> - i9 9900k;
> - 2x nvme;
> - 32gb ram (4 x 8gb) F4-3200C16D-16GTZR https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c16d-16gtzr
> - asus dual rtx 2080
> - evga p2 1200w
> - bios f7
> 
> Tonight I'm going to try the procedure suggested by gigabyte, but I had already tried to move the ram by myself and once had not given me this problem after changing the position of the 4 banks. Any further suggestions besides that of gigabytes?
> Also in case there was a compatibility problem, can someone recommend me a rbg model that definitely works? Most of the ram codes that I find in the local amazon store (Italy) are not present in the compatibility compatibility pdf (not even those I currently have) and I would like to avoid having the same problem.


Remove the LED jumper from the clear CMOS jumper. It is badly labeled. You have an incorrect cable on the clear CMOS jumper.


----------



## I Am The Stig

I’m starting to feel like my Aorus Master has coil whine or something going on. I thought it was my cooler at first but I unplugged it to make sure that wasn’t the case. But around that area, specifically the back end of the board, I’m hearing what sounds like a high pitch whistle. Not exactly coil whine sounding but more like a constant high pitch noise. Cstates are disabled and everything.

Any ideas?


----------



## Anzial

I Am The Stig said:


> I’m starting to feel like my Aorus Master has coil whine or something going on. I thought it was my cooler at first but I unplugged it to make sure that wasn’t the case. But around that area, specifically the back end of the board, I’m hearing what sounds like a high pitch whistle. Not exactly coil whine sounding but more like a constant high pitch noise. Cstates are disabled and everything.
> 
> Any ideas?


Change PSU.


----------



## I Am The Stig

Anzial said:


> I Am The Stig said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m starting to feel like my Aorus Master has coil whine or something going on. I thought it was my cooler at first but I unplugged it to make sure that wasn’t the case. But around that area, specifically the back end of the board, I’m hearing what sounds like a high pitch whistle. Not exactly coil whine sounding but more like a constant high pitch noise. Cstates are disabled and everything.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> 
> 
> Change PSU.
Click to expand...

I did. I’ve used an EVGA G3 and G2 as well as an rm750x


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> In the Spoiler is my BIOS settings for 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.6GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory.
> Don't forget to set the IA AC Loadline to 1 or your voltages will be way too high. To set it, scroll to it and hit '1' on your keyboard. Your BIOS will freeze if you try to hit Enter and set it.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Thanks for sharing! Very helpful, I am playing around with getting this stable at 4.7Ghz all core (before going further) and already dropped 6-10c in the x264 blend test using these settings (with a lower offset since I am at 4.7Ghz). Still too early to get super hype, but it's been going for 10 loops and still stable with no cache errors - that's huge.


----------



## Padinn

Just had something mildly terrifying happen, after reloading my stock manual 4.7Ghz profile settings my core voltage and VrVOUT shotup to 1.42v under load. No idea why that happened - I quickly rebooted back into bios and disabled the IA/DC loadline settings (which were at default anyway). wanted to give a heads up in case anyone else tries this.


----------



## LucaSarge4

Falkentyne said:


> Remove the LED jumper from the clear CMOS jumper. It is badly labeled. You have an incorrect cable on the clear CMOS jumper.


Thank you so much, I solved. I had connected the temperature sensor on that jumper. In the manual, the image indicated this jumper as a temp sensor that I was not using yet


----------



## Falkentyne

LucaSarge4 said:


> Thank you so much, I solved. I had connected the temperature sensor on that jumper. In the manual, the image indicated this jumper as a temp sensor that I was not using yet


Ok I see the manual now.
They circled the Clear CMOS jumper with "EC_TEMP 2" when EC temp 2 is actually above it and to the left.
Big huge typo there.
and a lot of people (that's not an exaggeration) have run into this issue...

Now it's labeled on the motherboard itself properly, just that bad circle in the manual is bad...


----------



## wsnnwa

KedarWolf said:


> In the Spoiler is my BIOS settings for 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.6GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory.
> Don't forget to set the IA AC Loadline to 1 or your voltages will be way too high. To set it, scroll to it and hit '1' on your keyboard. Your BIOS will freeze if you try to hit Enter and set it.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Thanks for your settings, will give them a shot to see how they compare to my current OC settings. I'm running at 5GHz but with a negative offset.

What bios version are you on? 

Do you have the following figures? 

Idle VrVOUT ?
Peak VrVOUT ?
Average VrVOUT over a few hour period?


----------



## KedarWolf

wsnnwa said:


> Thanks for your settings, will give them a shot to see how they compare to my current OC settings. I'm running at 5GHz but with a negative offset.
> 
> What bios version are you on?
> 
> Do you have the following figures?
> 
> Idle VrVOUT ?
> Peak VrVOUT ?
> Average VrVOUT over a few hour period?


*VRVout idle*










*VRVout Prime95 1344 FFT's.*


----------



## Padinn

wsnnwa said:


> Thanks for your settings, will give them a shot to see how they compare to my current OC settings. I'm running at 5GHz but with a negative offset.
> 
> What bios version are you on?
> 
> Do you have the following figures?
> 
> Idle VrVOUT ?
> Peak VrVOUT ?
> Average VrVOUT over a few hour period?


Using similar settings, with an offset of +.04v with 4.7 GHz /4.3Ghz Ring Ratio I get an average Vout of 1.197 with a peak of 1.24v (which is perfect, I think since I believe default is 1.2v). My lowest VCore .715.


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> Using similar settings, with an offset of +.04v with 4.7 GHz /4.3Ghz Ring Ratio I get an average Vout of 1.197 with a peak of 1.24v (which is perfect, I think since I believe default is 1.2v). My lowest VCore .715.


I forgot to set the Windows Power options minimum CPU speed to 0%.

This is at a +.150 Offset, IA AC Loadline 1, IA DC Loadline 0. CPU 5.1GHZ, cache 4.7GHZ, memory 4133MHZ. 

*Idle*










*Prime95 1344 FFT's.*


----------



## wsnnwa

KedarWolf said:


> I forgot to set the Windows Power options minimum CPU speed to 0%.
> 
> This is at a +.150 Offset, IA AC Loadline 1, IA DC Loadline 0. CPU 5.1GHZ, cache 4.7GHZ, memory 4133MHZ.
> 
> *Idle*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prime95 1344 FFT's.*


Thanks dude! What bios version?


----------



## KedarWolf

wsnnwa said:


> Thanks dude! What bios version?


Latest Xtreme BIOS, F5b, which I think for a Master the latest is F8b.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> Latest Xtreme BIOS, F5b, which I think for a Master the latest is F8b.


Nice, I saw your VRout max is 1.35v too - which seems consistent with a default of 1.2 and adding .15 (mine is at .04 and maxes at 1.24). I think Falk mentioned this earlier in the thread.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Nice, I saw your VRout max is 1.35v too - which seems consistent with a default of 1.2 and adding .15 (mine is at .04 and maxes at 1.24). I think Falk mentioned this earlier in the thread.


Hello.

I see someone's happy.

I got bored and went to 5.1 ghz again (btw 5.0 ghz with AVX enabled with small FFT is a nogo, even at 1.310v set in bios and VR showing 1.242v at load, temps got to 100C+ and prime threads 7 and 9 both crashed--it's just too hot. I could probably set LLC=extreme and 1.310v bios and not crash a thread, but if that works, that's going to be 110C+, nope not doing that until I someday delid. I'm already at 186 amps anyway),

Bios voltage 1.335v (Turbo LLC),
1344K fixed in place FFT: AVX: 1.287v VR OUT, passed 15 minutes then got bored.

small FFT (AVX disabled): 1.272v.: passed full iteration (25 minutes, 8k->16K range) then got bored, max temp 97C.

I get similar results with bios voltage 1.310v with Extreme LLC (VR reports the same with small FFT AVX disabled, but slightly different with AVX 1344K in place fixed).

5 ghz with hyperthreading off at 1.285v (LLC turbo) is ok with AVX small FFT, still gets hot though.


----------



## Padinn

Yeah this made a really big improvement for me in temps, even at just stock 4.7 all core. I'll mess around with overclocking it next weekend. I did notice that I seem *mostly* stable, but I did get a WHEA error just now while idling in desktop. I'm guessing that is because the core is dropping a bit to low on voltage at some point, so I'm going to bump it another .01.


----------



## FroofyBatwyvern

Is it normal for VR VOUT to just not exist in HWinfo's display for a Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (ATX)? I couldn't find anything with regard to that, though I do have a second Vcore readout that's a bit lower than the first Vcore readout. (For reference, CPU-Z's readout appears to use the higher, first Vcore readout.)

This would help in my seeking a good stopping point for overclocking my new 9600K.


----------



## Falkentyne

FroofyBatwyvern said:


> Is it normal for VR VOUT to just not exist in HWinfo's display for a Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (ATX)? I couldn't find anything with regard to that, though I do have a second Vcore readout that's a bit lower than the first Vcore readout. (For reference, CPU-Z's readout appears to use the higher, first Vcore readout.)
> 
> This would help in my seeking a good stopping point for overclocking my new 9600K.


Is the second one ITE 8792E? If so use that. That's not as accurate as VR Vout but it's better than the first one (which wildly swings and overshoots at higher LLC too).


----------



## FroofyBatwyvern

Falkentyne said:


> Is the second one ITE 8792E? If so use that. That's not as accurate as VR Vout but it's better than the first one (which wildly swings and overshoots at higher LLC too).


Ah, nice. Guess I'll hide the first Vcore readout, as the second one is off the ITE 8792E.

Is the VRM MOS temp readout accurate, too? As hard as I try it seems to never go past 59C, but I'm not sure if it means I'm well within safe limits.

For tweaking the delivered volts to the processor and making sure things are stable, should I only bother with the manually set voltage and LLC and don't bother with other knobs? (Basically, after loading defaults and enabling XMP, change just the frequency multiplier, LLC, and manually set voltage?)

This is actually my first time poking around with a fully OCable platform, so I expect to make some goof-ups here and there


----------



## VeritronX

Voltage monitoring on Gigabyte Z390 motherboards - Buildzoid

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8na-dENz6Ag


----------



## warbucks

FroofyBatwyvern said:


> Is it normal for VR VOUT to just not exist in HWinfo's display for a Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (ATX)? I couldn't find anything with regard to that, though I do have a second Vcore readout that's a bit lower than the first Vcore readout. (For reference, CPU-Z's readout appears to use the higher, first Vcore readout.)
> 
> This would help in my seeking a good stopping point for overclocking my new 9600K.


If you don't see the sensor, you likely need to update your version of HWInfo.


----------



## Anzial

FroofyBatwyvern said:


> Is it normal for VR VOUT to just not exist in HWinfo's display for a Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (ATX)? I


Try rebooting, it might show up then. Something is bugged in either HWinfo or z390 pro, VR Vout doesn't always show up but it does after a reboot (or 2 lol)


----------



## Falkentyne

Anzial said:


> Try rebooting, it might show up then. Something is bugged in either HWinfo or z390 pro, VR Vout doesn't always show up but it does after a reboot (or 2 lol)


Make sure you do NOT have any other monitoring tools installed. That includes ANY Gigabyte utilities or anything else. I never had a problem with the VR not appearing on the Aorus Master, but I've seen some people get readings of 65.536v from it instead of proper voltage (the 0.004 one is a dummy register).


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Make sure you do NOT have any other monitoring tools installed. That includes ANY Gigabyte utilities or anything else. I never had a problem with the VR not appearing on the Aorus Master, but I've seen some people get readings of 65.536v from it instead of proper voltage (the 0.004 one is a dummy register).


65.536v - that's like 1.21 jigawatts!


----------



## Xylem

Falkentyne said:


> I never once had it switch bioses unless I used the switch, and I had a lot of failed overclocks and NO posts. Not once did it ever switch.
> I also don't use the RESET button, ever. That button has caused nice boot loops and bios switching on past gigabyte boards.


How do you get back into BIOS when it doesn't POST? 

I upgraded from F6 to F7 (z390 Aorus Pro) forgetting to undo my OC/factory default before I did. I then applied my saved OC profile in BIOS, and my PC would essentially boot straight to Windows from a black screen (also, the VGA LED was RED on the bottom right corner of the board). I was not able to press DEL to get into BIOS. I ended up ejecting the CMOS battery and starting fresh.

Possibly a non-issue, but now sometimes in BIOS the M.I.T. screen will show something like "BIOS not loaded. Updated Denied". If I arrow right, then back again, it shows the regular MIT list. I've since upgraded to F8 but have see this "error" once since then. Is my BIOS boinked and/or do I need to RMA? Seems to be working otherwise, and I only get that message occasionally.


----------



## Padinn

So I notice periodically WHEA errors...usually when idling. They are pretty rare. The PC doesn't crash or BSOD. It doesn't seem to happen when CPU is under load, so I'm guessing voltage on low end is dipping a little too much. How much of a problem is this? Should I be super worried about it?

This is the error in event viewer:

A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
Processor APIC ID: 4

The details view of this entry contains further information.


----------



## FroofyBatwyvern

Anzial said:


> Try rebooting, it might show up then. Something is bugged in either HWinfo or z390 pro, VR Vout doesn't always show up but it does after a reboot (or 2 lol)


Using the latest non-beta version of HWinfo and the F8 BIOS. Oddly enough, rebooting won't help.



Falkentyne said:


> Make sure you do NOT have any other monitoring tools installed. That includes ANY Gigabyte utilities or anything else. I never had a problem with the VR not appearing on the Aorus Master, but I've seen some people get readings of 65.536v from it instead of proper voltage (the 0.004 one is a dummy register).


I'm assuming this includes RGB Fusion and SIV? I can temporarily uninstall them in addition to other Gigabyte utils to see if VR Vout shows up. (If nothing else, I'm going to assume that I'll have to uninstall Afterburner, too, in addition to everything Gigabyte.)

---

As an aside, how intense are the voltage spikes with LLC setting of Turbo and Extreme? I know that UltraExtreme should be avoided, and High appears to not do a good job of preventing spurious crashes on my current setup.


----------



## Falkentyne

FroofyBatwyvern said:


> Using the latest non-beta version of HWinfo and the F8 BIOS. Oddly enough, rebooting won't help.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm assuming this includes RGB Fusion and SIV? I can temporarily uninstall them in addition to other Gigabyte utils to see if VR Vout shows up. (If nothing else, I'm going to assume that I'll have to uninstall Afterburner, too, in addition to everything Gigabyte.)
> 
> ---
> 
> As an aside, how intense are the voltage spikes with LLC setting of Turbo and Extreme? I know that UltraExtreme should be avoided, and High appears to not do a good job of preventing spurious crashes on my current setup.


That's the problem.
No one knows.
You need an oscilloscope for that.
I asked multiple people already to measure Ultra Extreme and Extreme LLC (turbo is safe), but no one has done it yet.
Oscilloscopes are expensive.

one person took a dirty oscilloscope reading of the Asrock Z390 board and level 1 LLC came up with not a lot of overshoot. Elmor even replied to his post. It was a dirty reading with a bad ground, though.

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...kz390_voltage_confusion_severe_vr_vout_droop/


----------



## SDBolts619

I've just about got my upgrade done. However...

When I'm in Device Manager, I'm seeing three items that are listed in Other Devices and Windows can't find drivers on it's own. I apparently also have issues with my old optical drive crapping out, so I can't run the install disk. What drivers do I need from the Gigabyte site to fix these:

1) PCI Data Acquisition and Signal Processing Controller
2) PCI Device (Oh boy, this one's not very specific eh?)
3) SM Bus Controller

Thanks for any help!

Nevermind, figured it out. Just in case anyone does a search for these, the driver install needed is the Intel INF Installation from the Gigabyte website.


----------



## I Am The Stig

So I had posted before about my issue. I switched over to an Aorus Ultra to see if the issue would go away, but still the same. Is this normal? It's almost like a weird ringing noise coming from the motherboard.

https://imgur.com/a/Nm31da0

Top one is the noise under load, bottom video is the noise on idle (which I can oddly still here). The noise is pretty irritating tbh. I'm oc'd currently to 5ghz and my cstates are disabled.

Any help??? I have never had this with any boards I've used in the past until I started using these Gigabyte boards.


----------



## OutlawII

Honestly i cant hear a thing but im on crappy laptop speakers


----------



## I Am The Stig

OutlawII said:


> Honestly i cant hear a thing but im on crappy laptop speakers


Sometimes on imgur you have to manually turn the sound on haha.


----------



## Jidonsu

I Am The Stig said:


> So I had posted before about my issue. I switched over to an Aorus Ultra to see if the issue would go away, but still the same. Is this normal? It's almost like a weird ringing noise coming from the motherboard.
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/Nm31da0
> 
> Top one is the noise under load, bottom video is the noise on idle (which I can oddly still here). The noise is pretty irritating tbh. I'm oc'd currently to 5ghz and my cstates are disabled.
> 
> Any help??? I have never had this with any boards I've used in the past until I started using these Gigabyte boards.


Are you sure that’s not the psu fan?


----------



## I Am The Stig

Jidonsu said:


> Are you sure that’s not the psu fan?


Yeah I’ve tried 3 different psus. Couldn’t hear anything down there


----------



## rv8000

For memory overclocking, is SA or VCCIO more of a factor? 

I've been setting them 1:1 while trying to dial in memory OC. I currently have 1200% coverage in memtest @ 4000 18-19-19-38 2T 1.46 vdimm 1.25 SA/VCCIO. Setting SA/VCCIO to 1.2v failed AIDA combined in 3 mins, 1.22v for both failed in 40mins.

Also I haven't altered and vdroop settings in the bios, and as far as hwinfo is concerned, theres a large discrepancy/overshoot for SA (around +16-30mV higher than what is set). This typical behavior on the z390 Gigabyte boards, potentially just a software reporting error?


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> So I notice periodically WHEA errors...usually when idling. They are pretty rare. The PC doesn't crash or BSOD. It doesn't seem to happen when CPU is under load, so I'm guessing voltage on low end is dipping a little too much. How much of a problem is this? Should I be super worried about it?
> 
> This is the error in event viewer:
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor APIC ID: 4
> 
> The details view of this entry contains further information.


Try lowering your LLC level and raising your CPU voltage until you get the same stable voltage on load. 

If I run Turbo LLC and lower CPU voltage I get the odd BSOD idling. If I raise voltages a bit and have Medium LLC my voltages are a bit higher on idle and I get the same load voltage while stress testing with Prime95 1344 FFT's.

The higher idle voltage helps prevent those BSOD's.


----------



## kati

Finaly found my time to test settings(thx to KedarWolf for his bios shots, using mostly his settings adapted to mine) on my [email protected] on aorus master f7b with 1,2v -0.015 with short term stress max 70°C and in Games like AC:O not passing 60°C(room 26°) on air(n-dh15 on silent) vrm staying idle on desktop at 30° is so impressive.

Running the rig 24/7 like my 4790k prior i prefer good temp balance with slight underclock to make my power bill less sad, reached that point with the input of this thread, now i gotta wait and see in summer when i got room temps of 32-35°C.


----------



## EarlZ

kati said:


> Finaly found my time to test settings(thx to KedarWolf for his bios shots, using mostly his settings adapted to mine) on my [email protected] on aorus master f7b with 1,2v -0.015 with short term stress max 70°C and in Games like AC:O not passing 60°C(room 26°) on air(n-dh15 on silent) vrm staying idle on desktop at 30° is so impressive.
> 
> Running the rig 24/7 like my 4790k prior i prefer good temp balance with slight underclock to make my power bill less sad, reached that point with the input of this thread, now i gotta wait and see in summer when i got room temps of 32-35°C.


Can you link that here please, I may have missed that


----------



## kati

EarlZ said:


> Can you link that here please, I may have missed that


KedarWolfs bios screenies?
4 pages back https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-177.html#post27791250

im still using all c-states though as my goal is different, running stock with slight underclock for 24/7 at balanced temp/power consumption.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I notice periodically WHEA errors...usually when idling. They are pretty rare. The PC doesn't crash or BSOD. It doesn't seem to happen when CPU is under load, so I'm guessing voltage on low end is dipping a little too much. How much of a problem is this? Should I be super worried about it?
> 
> This is the error in event viewer:
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor APIC ID: 4
> 
> The details view of this entry contains further information.
> 
> 
> 
> Try lowering your LLC level and raising your CPU voltage until you get the same stable voltage on load.
> 
> If I run Turbo LLC and lower CPU voltage I get the odd BSOD idling. If I raise voltages a bit and have Medium LLC my voltages are a bit higher on idle and I get the same load voltage while stress testing with Prime95 1344 FFT's.
> 
> The higher idle voltage helps prevent those BSOD's. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Thanks I'll give this a shot. I did get two bsods yesterday night idling and had upped offset to .06v - guess I jinxed myself and it didn't seem to hel. Also tried upping vcc io and vcc slightly to 1.15 and 1.20 as but that appeared to make thinks worse. Also set vrms to 500kHz but that didn't do much.


----------



## Chief_rawka

Posted this on Reddit as well, but thought I'd try here as well as it's a Z390 AORUS community.


Mentioned before, but I'm new to this whole OCing thing, but have been trying to do it right-ish.
I've been using this Gigabyte Guide to direct me through the process of trying to get my 9700k to a stable 5Ghz if at all possible on the following build. (more after the build).
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

*CPU:* Intel - Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor (Purchased For $531.00) 
*CPU Cooler:* be quiet! - Dark Rock 4 CPU Cooler (Purchased For $115.00) 
*Motherboard:* Gigabyte - Z390 AORUS ULTRA ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (Purchased For $299.00) 
*Memory:* Corsair - Vengeance RGB Pro 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory (Purchased For $179.99) 
*Storage:* Samsung - 860 Evo 1 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive (Purchased For $179.99) 
*Video Card:* EVGA - GeForce RTX 2070 8 GB XC ULTRA GAMING Video Card (Purchased For $689.99) 
*Case:* NZXT - H500i (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case (Purchased For $99.99) 
*Power Supply:* EVGA - SuperNOVA G1+ 850 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (Purchased For $119.99) 
*Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 pwm 59.5 CFM 140mm Fan ($38.60 @ Amazon Canada) 
*Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 pwm 59.5 CFM 140mm Fan ($38.60 @ Amazon Canada) 
*Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 PWM High-Speed 77.57 CFM 140mm Fan ($39.52 @ Amazon Canada) 
*Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 PWM High-Speed 73.33 CFM 120mm Fan ($38.48 @ Amazon Canada) 
*Total:* $2370.15
_Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available_
_Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-01-09 11:19 EST-0500_

Currently, I believe I've followed that guide and included an AVX offset of 1. XMP Profile of 1 (3200Mhz) is set, disabled what needs disabling, using 50 as my multiplier, 1.300V, using Turbo LLC. I tend to stay away from PRIME95 because the temps it generates instantly terrify me. RealBench and Intel XTU have performed in shorter runs without issue and returned temps I'm comfortable with. Temps get closer to what I expect to see gaming, which is what this will primarily be, a gaming machine. As I mentioned, thus far RealBench and XTU have performed CPU stress testing fine, however, I tried running XTUs memory stress test, and saw the system freeze about 85% of the way through the test. No BSOD, no auto reboot, just a complete lockup of the UI and windows in general. The fans kept spinning to keep things cool, LEDs stayed on, system was just entirely non-responsive. I hard booted, ran Windows memory diagnostic which returned without issue.

I'm hoping someone can help me understand the system hang / freeze and what it might indicate in regards to my current instability. Not enough power (@1.300V)? Shouldn't be too much heat as we never broke 80C, but did reach mid 70s, and HWMonitor and XTU both indicated zero throttling due to thermals or anything else. ****ty luck where 5.0ghz just isn't in the cards for me?

Any help would be great.
Thanks.
CR.


----------



## davidm71

Any of you guys using any of the Gigabyte apps? All I got is the RGBFusion. Any others of note?

Thanks


----------



## davidm71

Apologies on double posting but noticed that the Auros Pro boards are following a similar bios release rollout as the Master with same bios release notes. Their latest notes state "Enhance factory automation process". Wonder what that means. I assume this is coming out for the Master real soon?

Thanks.


----------



## Padinn

Chief_rawka said:


> Posted this on Reddit as well, but thought I'd try here as well as it's a Z390 AORUS community.
> 
> 
> Mentioned before, but I'm new to this whole OCing thing, but have been trying to do it right-ish.
> I've been using this Gigabyte Guide to direct me through the process of trying to get my 9700k to a stable 5Ghz if at all possible on the following build. (more after the build).
> PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
> 
> *CPU:* Intel - Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor (Purchased For $531.00)
> *CPU Cooler:* be quiet! - Dark Rock 4 CPU Cooler (Purchased For $115.00)
> *Motherboard:* Gigabyte - Z390 AORUS ULTRA ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (Purchased For $299.00)
> *Memory:* Corsair - Vengeance RGB Pro 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory (Purchased For $179.99)
> *Storage:* Samsung - 860 Evo 1 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive (Purchased For $179.99)
> *Video Card:* EVGA - GeForce RTX 2070 8 GB XC ULTRA GAMING Video Card (Purchased For $689.99)
> *Case:* NZXT - H500i (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case (Purchased For $99.99)
> *Power Supply:* EVGA - SuperNOVA G1+ 850 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (Purchased For $119.99)
> *Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 pwm 59.5 CFM 140mm Fan ($38.60 @ Amazon Canada)
> *Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 pwm 59.5 CFM 140mm Fan ($38.60 @ Amazon Canada)
> *Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 PWM High-Speed 77.57 CFM 140mm Fan ($39.52 @ Amazon Canada)
> *Case Fan:* be quiet! - SilentWings 3 PWM High-Speed 73.33 CFM 120mm Fan ($38.48 @ Amazon Canada)
> *Total:* $2370.15
> _Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available_
> _Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-01-09 11:19 EST-0500_
> 
> Currently, I believe I've followed that guide and included an AVX offset of 1. XMP Profile of 1 (3200Mhz) is set, disabled what needs disabling, using 50 as my multiplier, 1.300V, using Turbo LLC. I tend to stay away from PRIME95 because the temps it generates instantly terrify me. RealBench and Intel XTU have performed in shorter runs without issue and returned temps I'm comfortable with. Temps get closer to what I expect to see gaming, which is what this will primarily be, a gaming machine. As I mentioned, thus far RealBench and XTU have performed CPU stress testing fine, however, I tried running XTUs memory stress test, and saw the system freeze about 85% of the way through the test. No BSOD, no auto reboot, just a complete lockup of the UI and windows in general. The fans kept spinning to keep things cool, LEDs stayed on, system was just entirely non-responsive. I hard booted, ran Windows memory diagnostic which returned without issue.
> 
> I'm hoping someone can help me understand the system hang / freeze and what it might indicate in regards to my current instability. Not enough power (@1.300V)? Shouldn't be too much heat as we never broke 80C, but did reach mid 70s, and HWMonitor and XTU both indicated zero throttling due to thermals or anything else. ****ty luck where 5.0ghz just isn't in the cards for me?
> 
> Any help would be great.
> Thanks.
> CR.


You could try upping vcc io and vcc sa a little bit to see if that helps. If left on auto the board runs little high imo when xmp profiles are used.


----------



## Sheyster

davidm71 said:


> Apologies on double posting but noticed that the Auros Pro boards are following a similar bios release rollout as the Master with same bios release notes. Their latest notes state "Enhance factory automation process". Wonder what that means. I assume this is coming out for the Master real soon?
> 
> Thanks.


I just saw the new F8 BIOS they posted for the Pro boards. I assume this phrase means they’ve fine-tuned the “Auto” settings in the BIOS. Anyone know for sure?


----------



## Sheyster

rv8000 said:


> For memory overclocking, is SA or VCCIO more of a factor?
> 
> I've been setting them 1:1 while trying to dial in memory OC. I currently have 1200% coverage in memtest @ 4000 18-19-19-38 2T 1.46 vdimm 1.25 SA/VCCIO. Setting SA/VCCIO to 1.2v failed AIDA combined in 3 mins, 1.22v for both failed in 40mins.
> 
> Also I haven't altered and vdroop settings in the bios, and as far as hwinfo is concerned, theres a large discrepancy/overshoot for SA (around +16-30mV higher than what is set). This typical behavior on the z390 Gigabyte boards, potentially just a software reporting error?


Try 1.23v for SA/VCCIO and re-test memory.


----------



## Moparman

davidm71 said:


> Any of you guys using any of the Gigabyte apps? All I got is the RGBFusion. Any others of note?
> 
> Thanks



I use the RGB software as well as the OC software for testing. I think it could be improved a little but overall it is nice software to have to really dial in settings in windows for testing and then go change them in the bios. Really cuts down on restarts.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I notice periodically WHEA errors...usually when idling. They are pretty rare. The PC doesn't crash or BSOD. It doesn't seem to happen when CPU is under load, so I'm guessing voltage on low end is dipping a little too much. How much of a problem is this? Should I be super worried about it?
> 
> This is the error in event viewer:
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor APIC ID: 4
> 
> The details view of this entry contains further information.
> 
> 
> 
> Try lowering your LLC level and raising your CPU voltage until you get the same stable voltage on load.
> 
> If I run Turbo LLC and lower CPU voltage I get the odd BSOD idling. If I raise voltages a bit and have Medium LLC my voltages are a bit higher on idle and I get the same load voltage while stress testing with Prime95 1344 FFT's.
> 
> The higher idle voltage helps prevent those BSOD's. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Do you also set the vr DC to 1, or leave that at 0 for auto?

Tonight I made ually entered my memory timings and didnt have any whea errors. I'm going to keep testing things.


----------



## techjesse

davidm71 said:


> Any of you guys using any of the Gigabyte apps? All I got is the RGBFusion. Any others of note?
> 
> Thanks


I'm using RGBFusion2 software (flashing red mobo) and easytune OC software for testing, you must have easytune installed to use the OC button on the mobo. It works  OC 5.0 to 5.2 when button is pushed and lights up. Nice


----------



## KedarWolf

techjesse said:


> I'm using RGBFusion2 software (flashing red mobo) and easytune OC software for testing, you must have easytune installed to use the OC button on the mobo. It works  OC 5.0 to 5.2 when button is pushed and lights up. Nice


I can imagine the voltages I'd have on an Auto Overclock to 5.2 GHZ.


----------



## flowfaster

KedarWolf said:


> I can imagine the voltages I'd have on an Auto Overclock to 5.2 GHZ.


It's a shame you can not set the OC button settings yourself. Or can you? It may be cool to use in places with high temp swings or just a winter/summer setting scenario.


----------



## KedarWolf

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html

Beta BIOS's if anyone wants them for testing.

Edit: If you try them and get an error flashing, make a FreeDOS USB disk with Rufus, put the beta BIOS and Efiflash.exe from your latest BIOS on the Gigabyte website on the USB drive, and boot non CSM into the DOS USB and use this command.

https://rufus.ie/



Code:


efiflash yourbiosname.withext /X

Like for my Auros Xtreme I used.



Code:


efiflash z390aorusxtreme.f5e /X

This also works if you use the UBU Tool BIOS Updater to update the microcode to the latest before you flash.

See this thread.

https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html


----------



## Aznboy1993

KedarWolf said:


> DDR VPP and DRAM Termination I raised a bit for RAM stability. Switch Rate as well helps RAM stability.
> 
> The Phase Controls ensure the VRM's are working at max efficiency. probably can leave VAGX Switch Rate at default, I'm pretty sure that just affects the built-in i-GPU on the CPU but I use it on my second screen to take any load off of my 1080 Ti and zero crashes on that screen so far.
> 
> 1 VR AC Loadline because I need to use a positive offset, negative crashes booting into Windows if I try to set it as low as I need. 0 VR DC Loadline as it reduces temps stress testing. My VID is quite low but it doesn't really affect my voltages in Vcore and VR VOUT so I'm still okay.
> 
> With these settings, I'm Prime95, HCI MemTest and RAM Test stable.
> 
> With these settings, I get 1.364v idle, 1.314v VR VOUT with Prime95 running.
> 
> Lastly, VT-d off, it affects stability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *BIOS settings screenshots in Spoiler!*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


How are your temps under Prime95 stress testing?

Also, I have a very similar setup to you and am trying to dial in my overclock using your settings (sans memory) as a baseline. Using your LLC at Medium and +0.150V offset, I get a CPU VR OUT voltage of around 1.27V. Is this due to my VID curve being different than yours? I do not think I am stable at 1.27V and thus want to bump it closer to 1.3V. Can I adjust LLC to High/Turbo or should I change the offset value?


----------



## KedarWolf

Aznboy1993 said:


> How are your temps under Prime95 stress testing?
> 
> Also, I have a very similar setup to you and am trying to dial in my overclock using your settings (sans memory) as a baseline. Using your LLC at Medium and +0.150V offset, I get a CPU VR OUT voltage of around 1.27V. Is this due to my VID curve being different than yours? I do not think I am stable at 1.27V and thus want to bump it closer to 1.3V. Can I adjust LLC to High/Turbo or should I change the offset value?


If you're stable idling with no BSOD's raise the LLC. If you get BSOD's idling it's better to raise your Offset. 

Lower LLC with higher offset is mainly to raise idling voltages to stop BSOD's on idle or just web browsing etc. :drum:

If you have no issues that then Turbo LLC with a lower Offset is the way to go. :thumb:

I get about 68C max stress testing with a zero AVX Offset using the 1344 FFT's Prime95 method with all the AVX's, SSE's and FMA's enabled in the local.txt in Prime95.


----------



## Aznboy1993

KedarWolf said:


> If you're stable idling with no BSOD's raise the LLC. If you get BSOD's idling it's better to raise your Offset.
> 
> Lower LLC with higher offset is mainly to raise idling voltages to stop BSOD's on idle or just web browsing etc. :drum:
> 
> If you have no issues that then Turbo LLC with a lower Offset is the way to go. :thumb:
> 
> I get about 68C max stress testing with a zero AVX Offset using the 1344 FFT's Prime95 method with all the AVX's, SSE's and FMA's enabled in the local.txt in Prime95.


Thanks. Yeah, seems ok on idle. I will keep testing.

Also, that is both your 9900K and 1080 Ti on a single 360mm rad (the EK MLC 360)? Nvm..just saw that you are using a 360mm rad on each component.


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm using the F5e beta Aorus Xtreme BIOS and the first time my latency has been under 40ms.


----------



## KedarWolf

Aznboy1993 said:


> Thanks. Yeah, seems ok on idle. I will keep testing.
> 
> Also, that is both your 9900K and 1080 Ti on a single 360mm rad (the EK MLC 360)?



My 9900k is on an EK Predator 360 and my 1080 Ti on a separate EK MLC 360. :cheers:

I put a Supremacy Evo block on the Predator 360 and the 1080 Ti has the EK full block and backplate. :drool:


----------



## KedarWolf

On the Aorus Xtreme F5e beta BIOS I'm 5.1GHZ 4.7GHZ cache 1344 FFT's Prime95 stable with a +.135 Offset and IA AC Loadline of 1, LLC Medium. I needed +.150 on the F5b BIOS. 

Any lower I get cache errors though in HWInfo even if I lower the cache from 47 to 46 so I think it's really a CPU instability issue more than a cache issue. :drunken:

Never mind. Got a BSOD five minutes in and at +.150 I got one cache error letting Prime95 run overnight. 

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## SaLaDiN666

So one of the sensors on z390 Master is always showing a 0,004 value on VROUT..




https://i.imgur.com/mrwMfae.png




I guess the sensor is just broken and I should just return it and get a new one?




Hwinfo 6.00.-3620, older versions behave the same.


----------



## Falkentyne

SaLaDiN666 said:


> So one of the sensors on z390 Master is always showing a 0,004 value on VROUT..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/mrwMfae.png
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the sensor is just broken and I should just return it and get a new one?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hwinfo 6.00.-3620, older versions behave the same.


Each and every one is like that. It's a dummy sensor. Just hide it.
There is only *ONE* IR 35201 on the board, not two.


----------



## Fallout323f

davidm71 said:


> Any of you guys using any of the Gigabyte apps? All I got is the RGBFusion. Any others of note?
> 
> Thanks


I cant make any other app work besides the rgbfusion app.


----------



## techjesse

KedarWolf said:


> I can imagine the voltages I'd have on an Auto Overclock to 5.2 GHZ.


No volt increase just a jump up on the CPU, you have to set the volts before you push the OC button.

I pushed the OC button with easytune installed and the volts increased also 5.0 GHz 1.28v to 5.2 GHz 1.38v. however I would rather manually set my oc....


----------



## Jidonsu

KedarWolf said:


> I'm using the F5e beta Aorus Xtreme BIOS and the first time my latency has been under 40ms.


Damn it!

Did you just load your previously saved profile or manually changed everything again? I guess there really isn't that many settings to change.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jidonsu said:


> Damn it!
> 
> Did you just load your previously saved profile or manually changed everything again? I guess there really isn't that many settings to change.


Manually changed everything.

Loading profiles from different BIOS's is NOT a good idea.


----------



## SaLaDiN666

Falkentyne said:


> Each and every one is like that. It's a dummy sensor. Just hide it.
> There is only *ONE* IR 35201 on the board, not two.





Was it always like that? Because I do not remember seeing it in hwinfo a month ago before I decided to return it because of coil whine and sound crackling.


----------



## Falkentyne

SaLaDiN666 said:


> Was it always like that? Because I do not remember seeing it in hwinfo a month ago before I decided to return it because of coil whine and sound crackling.


I just hide the second one. Notice they are called exactly the same thing, except temp 1 and temp 2 are inverted?
But the 2nd VR sensor shows 0.004v. So I just hid the entire thing (disable monitoring) then hide the main 2nd field.


----------



## rv8000

Sheyster said:


> Try 1.23v for SA/VCCIO and re-test memory.


Looks like im in the clear at 1.23v.

Is it typical to run both SA and VCCIO at the same voltage, or can one generally be lower than the other? (Use to oc'ing ryzen atm).


----------



## Sheyster

rv8000 said:


> Looks like im in the clear at 1.23v.
> 
> Is it typical to run both SA and VCCIO at the same voltage, or can one generally be lower than the other? (Use to oc'ing ryzen atm).


I do, but this said I've seen folks run SA a little higher than IO. At 1.23v for both you should be perfectly safe.


----------



## FroofyBatwyvern

While I remove and recheck my mounting hardware's tightness as a part of a "try repasting" later tonight, any tips on making a 5.0GHz no-AVX-offset overclock less hot?

I'm using a 9600K right now, and it appears that I could hold it stably enough at 1.340V Turbo LLC on a Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (ATX version).

It took me adding until 1.420V (1.400V with Extreme LLC) before I switched from BSODing/Handbrake exiting itself during a custom Handbrake encode test I've done to thermal throttling (neither are good). CPU and rear case fans are maxed out atm, and the front intake fans are set to blow at 60% speed. Top exhaust atm are also blowing at 60% speed, too.
Cooler is Scythe Fuma rev.B and the paste in use is Kryonaut.

There's a bunch of things I've been itching to try, in no particular order:

- vary top exhaust fans' speeds, from off/minimum speed/40%/60%/80%/max speed
- raise front intake fan speed
- cutting VCCIO voltage
- cutting VCCSA voltage
- cutting DRAM voltage
- retightening cooler mounting hardware to "won't move" levels (pretty sure they aren't moving though, never hurts to check again)
- repasting with a smaller dot than last time (I think I slightly overdid it, will know when the cooler is removed. I have a bad sense of 3mm, after all! Felt like I pasted more like a 5mm ball there.)

Anything else I should think of, too? Or am I already at my limits of my current cooler? (I can't reliably get my room temp below 24C even when air-conditioned, and it's probably closer to 26C judging from the room thermometer.)

Of course, I suspect I'm already non-AVX stable by 1.400V for 5GHz, but there's always fun in trying to probe at absolute limits with AVX left as is.


----------



## rv8000

Jidonsu said:


> Damn it!
> 
> Did you just load your previously saved profile or manually changed everything again? I guess there really isn't that many settings to change.


What kit do you have and what vdimm?


----------



## Jidonsu

rv8000 said:


> What kit do you have and what vdimm?


https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4000c17q-32gtzr

1.45v vdimm, though i really want to see what i can get away with at 1.5 daily.


----------



## Phantomas 007

Finally update the BIOS from F4 to F7. Keep this or update to F8B ? B=Beta ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Phantomas 007 said:


> Finally update the BIOS from F4 to F7. Keep this or update to F8B ? B=Beta ?


*Edit: Oh wait, for the Master I think it's the same BIOS as on Gigabyte site, it's a different revision for the Xtreme though.* 

F8b isn't a beta but a full release.

Beta BIOS's below.


https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html

Beta BIOS's if anyone wants them for testing.

Edit: If you try them and get an error flashing, make a FreeDOS USB disk with Rufus, put the beta BIOS and Efiflash.exe from your latest BIOS on the Gigabyte website on the USB drive, and boot non CSM into the DOS USB and use this command.

https://rufus.ie/



Code:


efiflash yourbiosname.withext /X

Like for my Auros Xtreme I used.



Code:


efiflash z390aorusxtreme.f5e /X

This also works if you use the UBU Tool BIOS Updater to update the microcode to the latest before you flash.

See this thread.

https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html


----------



## OutlawII

Just got most my parts and pieces ordered ! Will be overclocking soon I hope. How is the sound on the Master?


----------



## BradleyW

OutlawII said:


> Just got most my parts and pieces ordered ! Will be overclocking soon I hope. How is the sound on the Master?


If it's anything like the Ultra, crap! My ancient Sound Blaster Z completely outperforms it.


----------



## Moparman

OutlawII said:


> Just got most my parts and pieces ordered ! Will be overclocking soon I hope. How is the sound on the Master?


I think the sound on the master is very good and i haven't had any issues with it.


----------



## frankth3frizz

Parts coming in today, the gigabyte OC guide is safe? or is there a better route?


----------



## Moparman

frankth3frizz said:


> Parts coming in today, the gigabyte OC guide is safe? or is there a better route?


 Why wouldn't it be safe and yes it works well. However every single setup will be different as no 2 chips or mem are the same. Just give it a go and see what you get.


----------



## BradleyW

frankth3frizz said:


> Parts coming in today, the gigabyte OC guide is safe? or is there a better route?


Specific adjustments might be needed to get your memory stable if it's very high speed and start off with very low vcore to avoid overshoot until you figure out the best vcore and LLC combinations to prevent massive vcore, huge overshoot and terrible vdroop. Play around. Try an offset voltage if your an experienced overclocker. Lots of info on that on this thread. We can also help you with settings. Good luck.


----------



## I Am The Stig

Hey all - having an issue where my clocks aren't downclocking on idle. I'm on an Aorus Ultra.

Currently my BIOS settings are on default after removing my overclocks. My PC power management is at Balanced, and I have all these settings currently enabled. But for some reason my PC still stays at 4.3 ghz.

Any ideas?


----------



## rv8000

Anyone happen to have an issue with the sound on the Aorus Master dropping volume levels, I guess not being amplified correctly from cold boots or restarts?

For instance my windows volume will be set to 14 and it's typically my preferred level, and I'll reboot or come home from work and cold boot it will take up to 90% windows volume to even come close to the same level (typically 14% windows volume). Currently using the generic 1220 drivers v8606; same issue happens with the realtek drivers on the driver page from gigabyte (v8475).


----------



## BradleyW

I Am The Stig said:


> Hey all - having an issue where my clocks aren't downclocking on idle. I'm on an Aorus Ultra.
> 
> Currently my BIOS settings are on default after removing my overclocks. My PC power management is at Balanced, and I have all these settings currently enabled. But for some reason my PC still stays at 4.3 ghz.
> 
> Any ideas?


Set all power saving features in the BIOS to auto, use an offset voltage, enable turbo multiplyer, set each core speed seperatly, disable enhance multi core performance. In Windows set the power option to balanced.


----------



## Mknopfler

I Am The Stig said:


> Hey all - having an issue where my clocks aren't downclocking on idle. I'm on an Aorus Ultra.
> 
> 
> 
> Currently my BIOS settings are on default after removing my overclocks. My PC power management is at Balanced, and I have all these settings currently enabled. But for some reason my PC still stays at 4.3 ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> Any ideas?


Set "Minimum processor state" to 0%

Enviado desde mi Moto G (5S) mediante Tapatalk


----------



## Phantomas 007

Here is mine results after the settings 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache from @KedarWolf post #1569

How it looks ?


----------



## Ewokki

Hi,
I have had a lot of minor problems during my computer assembly, luckily I have solved those and after strugling long time. I was happy that atlast I can instal games and enjoy my new PC. However I left my PC ON last night to dowload games from steam and this morning when I came to check if all is ready. I first noticed my monitor won’t get signal, but PC is ON and running and keypord and mouse has lights and caps lock works. Then I just restarted. Then it tried to go to windows, but some error accured didn’t notice what it was because next thing I notice im at bios. In bios I check some settings and all is fine except in NVMI I don’t see my samsung M.2 anymore and boot option 1 wasn’t windows boot manager anymore or what was it called. I tried some settings but always went to bios and I also tried to repair it with diasnostig tool, but no success. Then I removed my hard drive and ssd which I had just installed yesterday and cleared CMOS. Then new problems occurred. My main bios didn’t work and then it tried to go to back up bios, but in both cenarios there is error code 7F (Reserved for AMI use) and DRAM error LED is ON and NO monitor signal anymore and keyboard and mouse leds are OFF.
I have also tried to switch ram slots and to use only 1 DIMM 
Some help would be great!

My Setup
Bios F4, No OC only performance power setting on
i9-9900k
Aorus Master Z390
Corsair vengeance RGB Pro 16 GB (2x8GB) DDR4 3000Mhz CL15
H115 Platinum AIO
Asus ROG Strix 2080 OC edition
Corsair RM850x
Samsumg 970 EVO SSD 500GB NVME
Fractal Design Define R6


----------



## Padinn

So I found an interesting...bug? Feature? Not sure how to describe it. I've manually set my core ratios (first 2 at x50, rest at x49). MCE Off. All power savings on, when I run under heavy load my max boost is 4.8Ghz. When idling it will go up to 4.9Ghz. This is with balanced plan on in Windows. I have tried with AVX Offset set to 0 and to Auto. I am on the adaptive mode, normal, with a .06v offset. 

Any ideas what might be causing it? I did leave the CPU ratio at its default of 36.

*EDIT* With windows set to High Performance power plan everything runs at 4.9Ghz under load. With balanced, it boosts to 4.8GHz under load.


----------



## Neodammerung333

Phantomas 007 said:


> Here is mine results after the settings 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache from @KedarWolf post #1569
> 
> How it looks ?


Don't know if I'm seeing things wrong but here's mine that looks like the same config but with no overclock whatsoever :








or maybe did I miss something


----------



## Padinn

Ewokki said:


> Hi,
> I have had a lot of minor problems during my computer assembly, luckily I have solved those and after strugling long time. I was happy that atlast I can instal games and enjoy my new PC. However I left my PC ON last night to dowload games from steam and this morning when I came to check if all is ready. I first noticed my monitor won’t get signal, but PC is ON and running and keypord and mouse has lights and caps lock works. Then I just restarted. Then it tried to go to windows, but some error accured didn’t notice what it was because next thing I notice im at bios. In bios I check some settings and all is fine except in NVMI I don’t see my samsung M.2 anymore and boot option 1 wasn’t windows boot manager anymore or what was it called. I tried some settings but always went to bios and I also tried to repair it with diasnostig tool, but no success. Then I removed my hard drive and ssd which I had just installed yesterday and cleared CMOS. Then new problems occurred. My main bios didn’t work and then it tried to go to back up bios, but in both cenarios there is error code 7F (Reserved for AMI use) and DRAM error LED is ON and NO monitor signal anymore and keyboard and mouse leds are OFF.
> I have also tried to switch ram slots and to use only 1 DIMM
> Some help would be great!
> 
> My Setup
> Bios F4, No OC only performance power setting on
> i9-9900k
> Aorus Master Z390
> Corsair vengeance RGB Pro 16 GB (2x8GB) DDR4 3000Mhz CL15
> H115 Platinum AIO
> Asus ROG Strix 2080 OC edition
> Corsair RM850x
> Samsumg 970 EVO SSD 500GB NVME
> Fractal Design Define R6


Sounds to me like some kind of hardware failure is occurring, hard to narrow down. Based on your description it likely crashed overnight and froze. The SSD wasn't detected on your initial reboot - to fix this, power down the entire PC, unplug from wall, hit power button, reboot and try again. Happens to my SSD sometimes. It sounds like your voltage at idle might be too low if you are using adaptive mode - this is the crash I've was having. Turning on LLC helped me out, but you want to be careful about that and set a manual voltage. Ultimately I ended up RMA my first 9900k because I couldn't get it stable at under 1.27v at default clocks and it was still causing issues even then.

*EDIT* Thinking about it more, I would try updating to latest BIOS before doing anything else - use a USB stick to do so.


----------



## KedarWolf

Phantomas 007 said:


> Here is mine results after the settings 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache from @KedarWolf post #1569
> 
> How it looks ?


There's something very wrong.

This is me at those clocks.


----------



## Phantomas 007

KedarWolf said:


> There's something very wrong.
> 
> This is me at those clocks.


 What I must check ?


----------



## khemist

Phantomas 007 said:


> What I must check ?


Looks like a 9700k score, have you turned HT off by accident?.


----------



## Phantomas 007

khemist said:


> Looks like a 9700k score, have you turned HT off by accident?.


No. HT enabled.


----------



## Jidonsu

Phantomas 007 said:


> No. HT enabled.


That's definitely not right. I'm scoring 1795 on my 9700k at 5.2.


----------



## Falkentyne

Phantomas 007 said:


> Here is mine results after the settings 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache from @KedarWolf post #1569
> 
> How it looks ?


Looks like you're throttling somewhere.


----------



## BradleyW

I score 2180 on CB with 9900k @ 5ghz HT and ram at 3866MHz. No process adjustments or tweaks.

For those having issues make sure the ram is set up correctly and each core is running at the desired speed. Ensure all power limits are removed so it can draw as much wattage and amperage as needed. Check temps for thermal throttling.


----------



## Padinn

With all apps closed I'm at about 2040. 1940s with apps running in background


----------



## Phantomas 007

I had noticed in some settings the second value didn't change f.e. Uncore Ratio When add 46 the other it's 43 (rather than 46)

For the moment I had returned to stock settings. Here a new bench


----------



## Timur Born

My Gigabyte GTX 780 Ghz Edition doesn't work properly in the Aorus Master. It may be that the card itself got broken now, I would have to check in another PC. Anyway, I had to remove it and use the integrated graphic, just to notice that the Aorus Master only offers a single (!) display output in form of a HDMI port. Sorry, Gigabyte, but this is weak! My own fault that I did not check before, but still...


----------



## OutlawII

Timur Born said:


> My Gigabyte GTX 780 Ghz Edition doesn't work properly in the Aorus Master. It may be that the card itself got broken now, I would have to check in another PC. Anyway, I had to remove it and use the integrated graphic, just to notice that the Aorus Master only offers a single (!) display output in form of a HDMI port. Sorry, Gigabyte, but this is weak! My own fault that I did not check before, but still...



How is that weak? Who the hell uses on board gpu anyway? Except if they have hardware issues.


----------



## Swifty220

i have a 9700k at 1.35 volts and high LLC. Just one core keeps failing on Prime95, blend. 32 gig of ram (4 sticks), XMP profile. Thoughts?


----------



## Timur Born

OutlawII said:


> How is that weak? Who the hell uses on board gpu anyway? Except if they have hardware issues.


It's weak, because other boards come with both a Displayport and a HDMI connector, not just a single HDMI one. In order to switch between my display and my TV I now have to switch cables, because I can only connect one at a time. Not exactly what you expect from a premium board. Some boards at less than half the price come with up to three connectors. Of course they save money in other departments instead.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> It's weak, because other boards come with both a Displayport and a HDMI connector, not just a single HDMI one. In order to switch between my display and my TV I now have to switch cables, because I can only connect one at a time. Not exactly what you expect from a premium board. Some boards at less than half the price come with up to three connectors. Of course they save money in other departments instead.


Sounds like first world problems to me.


----------



## OutlawII

Timur Born said:


> It's weak, because other boards come with both a Displayport and a HDMI connector, not just a single HDMI one. In order to switch between my display and my TV I now have to switch cables, because I can only connect one at a time. Not exactly what you expect from a premium board. Some boards at less than half the price come with up to three connectors. Of course they save money in other departments instead.



To each there own i guess


----------



## Sheyster

OutlawII said:


> How is that weak? Who the hell uses on board gpu anyway? Except if they have hardware issues.


One on-board HDMI only is a non-issue. High speed memory support and wonky BIOS on the other hand...  I like the hardware on these boards. Over on the Gigabyte support forums the main issues seem to be BIOS, bundled software and memory issues. Even memory listed on the QVL list is problematic.


----------



## Padinn

So question. I notice in adaptive mode that my CPU VID (this is with the AC set to 1 and DC set to 0) is around 1.175v maximum. However, to be stable at 4.7Ghz all core requires closer to 1.23v. Is this weird? I know VID isn't reliable, however I thought the idea was it would be requesting what the CPU needs to be stable at any given frequency.


----------



## OutlawII

Sheyster said:


> One on-board HDMI only is a non-issue. High speed memory support and wonky BIOS on the other hand...  I like the hardware on these boards. Over on the Gigabyte support forums the main issues seem to be BIOS, bundled software and memory issues. Even memory listed on the QVL list is problematic.


I hope i dont have them issues should be building over the next couple weeks


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> So question. I notice in adaptive mode that my CPU VID (this is with the AC set to 1 and DC set to 0) is around 1.175v maximum. However, to be stable at 4.7Ghz all core requires closer to 1.23v. Is this weird? I know VID isn't reliable, however I thought the idea was it would be requesting what the CPU needs to be stable at any given frequency.


VID is based on CPU cache ratio.
Looks like your cache speed is 4.4 ghz. Most likely if you set your cache speed to 4.7 ghz, your VID would be around 1.23v.


----------



## Ewokki

Padinn said:


> Sounds to me like some kind of hardware failure is occurring, hard to narrow down. Based on your description it likely crashed overnight and froze. The SSD wasn't detected on your initial reboot - to fix this, power down the entire PC, unplug from wall, hit power button, reboot and try again. Happens to my SSD sometimes. It sounds like your voltage at idle might be too low if you are using adaptive mode - this is the crash I've was having. Turning on LLC helped me out, but you want to be careful about that and set a manual voltage. Ultimately I ended up RMA my first 9900k because I couldn't get it stable at under 1.27v at default clocks and it was still causing issues even then.
> 
> *EDIT* Thinking about it more, I would try updating to latest BIOS before doing anything else - use a USB stick to do so.


Hi,

I tried your method on the SSD problem, but no luck on that. I cant update BIOS or get in BIOS because my monitor wont get the signal anymore and this happened after i cleared CMOS.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So question. I notice in adaptive mode that my CPU VID (this is with the AC set to 1 and DC set to 0) is around 1.175v maximum. However, to be stable at 4.7Ghz all core requires closer to 1.23v. Is this weird? I know VID isn't reliable, however I thought the idea was it would be requesting what the CPU needs to be stable at any given frequency.
> 
> 
> 
> VID is based on CPU cache ratio.
> Looks like your cache speed is 4.4 ghz. Most likely if you set your cache speed to 4.7 ghz, your VID would be around 1.23v.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. I'm at 4.3.


----------



## Robbært

Intel 9x00KF support added since BIOS Version F8
How to update backup BIOS to F8 on boards without bios switches?
What worse it partially covered with chipset radiator.


----------



## Artroxa

So, on to some more basic stuff. 

I have the fractal design define r6 which comes with 3 case fans per default, altough they are 3 pin connectors. 
The issue im having is that my aorus master just dont seem to wanna pump voltage into the 3 pins even tho i noticed the sys fan connectors seem to have 3pin orientation. 

So trying to use the case pwm hub ( i know, ****ty ) the only way i could get the motherboard to even spin the case fans was by popping the all the case fans + cpu fan into the PWM hub, and then connecting that to the CPU fan, however this REALLY cranks up the volume of the fans as the case fans seems to be either be off or going full RPM mode. 

Has anyone else had issues with this or is everyone just running 4 pin PWM fans? 
11 days til paycheck....


----------



## KedarWolf

Artroxa said:


> So, on to some more basic stuff.
> 
> I have the fractal design define r6 which comes with 3 case fans per default, altough they are 3 pin connectors.
> The issue im having is that my aorus master just dont seem to wanna pump voltage into the 3 pins even tho i noticed the sys fan connectors seem to have 3pin orientation.
> 
> So trying to use the case pwm hub ( i know, ****ty ) the only way i could get the motherboard to even spin the case fans was by popping the all the case fans + cpu fan into the PWM hub, and then connecting that to the CPU fan, however this REALLY cranks up the volume of the fans as the case fans seems to be either be off or going full RPM mode.
> 
> Has anyone else had issues with this or is everyone just running 4 pin PWM fans?
> 11 days til paycheck....


In BIOS need to change the fans settings from Auto or PWM to Voltage.


----------



## Artroxa

KedarWolf said:


> In BIOS need to change the fans settings from Auto or PWM to Voltage.


JFC, you just saved me alot of headache and some dollars, surprised i couldnt find this in the manual or by googling at all tbh.


----------



## KedarWolf

Artroxa said:


> JFC, you just saved me alot of headache and some dollars, surprised i couldnt find this in the manual or by googling at all tbh.


Glad to help. In your Inbox, you'll find my invoice for $49.99 plus applicable taxes for tech support services rendered.


----------



## Artroxa

KedarWolf said:


> Glad to help. In your Inbox, you'll find my invoice for $49.99 plus applicable taxes for tech support services rendered.


Then il have to request a full looktrough as to why my comp refuses to boot with any sort devation from "auto" on the cpu power settings, vcore, LLC, any of that. 

No guide will make it boot but for some reason i can just crank up the core multiplier to 5.1 on the otherwise default settings and its relatively stable, fully stable on 5.0 but im not a big fan of the temps im getting...


----------



## talexxx

Hi!

Really loving the content on this thread! I have been going trough my own OC'ing challanges with the Z390 and 9900K and i've kinda hit a wall, but cant figure out what is going on...

I am running a 9900k on a Z390 Aorus Master with a 2080TI.
I have two kits or RAM - one 2 x 8 Corsair 3200C16 and one 4 x 8 Corsair 3600C16.
My PSU is a Enermax Digifanless 550w, it's rail specification are here: https://www.enermaxusa.com/product.php?pid=72075659#!/Digifanless 550W/p/72075659
I initially had an upgaded PSU in mind - a 750W Seasonic - but removed it as it made funny fan noises, so i went back to my trusty Enermax that is dead quiet. 
I am afraid the PSU might be too small, but looking at it's specs and the wall consumption while doing stress testing on CPU + GPU, i dont seem to be going over it's overall rated power. I also dont seem to be going over some specific rail power but i cant tell for sure.

Once i go over 1.35V LLC Turbo with the 9900k on the Z390 Master i'm getting instant shutdowns in Prime95.
If i enable XMP profile on the 3600C16 kit - this seems to push my VCCSA and VCCIO voltages - i'm getting shutdowns ever since 1.3V with LLC Turbo in Prime95.
Here's a clip of it in action: 




I'm clearly hitting a limit but i dont know which one - may it be a PSU rail limit or a motherboard limit. 
I've removed power limits from the BIOS by setting them to the highest value.
CPU and VRM temps are well in check.

Could you please help me figure out where i'm going wrong?
I really cant figure out where/how to look to understand why i'm getting the instant shutdowns.

Thanks!


----------



## Padinn

Sounds like power supply unit limit to me. 2080ti recommends 600 or 650w and 9900k can consume 160+ watts easily when overclocked.


----------



## KedarWolf

Artroxa said:


> Then il have to request a full looktrough as to why my comp refuses to boot with any sort devation from "auto" on the cpu power settings, vcore, LLC, any of that.
> 
> No guide will make it boot but for some reason i can just crank up the core multiplier to 5.1 on the otherwise default settings and its relatively stable, fully stable on 5.0 but im not a big fan of the temps im getting...



5GHZ settings. https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...-z390-aorus-owners-thread-7.html#post27791250

5.1GHZ https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...z390-aorus-owners-thread-16.html#post27779912

DON'T forget IA AC Loadline to 1 or your voltages will be way too high. And you may need more voltage than me, I'm lucky to get the volts that low for CPU Offset for my clocks.


----------



## Robbært

Padinn said:


> Sounds like power supply unit limit to me. 2080ti recommends 600 or 650w and 9900k can consume 160+ watts easily when overclocked.


9900k can consume near 275W on ambient cooling
140-160W is MCE without OC


----------



## talexxx

Padinn said:


> Sounds like power supply unit limit to me. 2080ti recommends 600 or 650w and 9900k can consume 160+ watts easily when overclocked.





Robbært said:


> 9900k can consume near 275W on ambient cooling
> 140-160W is MCE without OC


I'm getting these shutdowns in Prime95 on the CPU, so there is no GPU load involved, only CPU.

Does the CPU draw power off the 12v or 5v PSU rail? 
If the CPU draws power from the 12v rail, my PSU is rated for 30A on the 12V that would be 360W: https://www.enermaxusa.com/product.php?pid=72075659#!/Digifanless 550W/p/72075659
Also, i was surprised to see that real gaming load with 9900K OC'ed and 2080ti OC'ed - 3dMark, Tomb Raider maxed out, etc. barely scratches 500W power consumption at the wall.... 

So if my understanding of all this is very wrong i dont understand why the PSU would be the limiting factor here. I also subjectively feel it might be a "small" PSU but i cant objectively find what of its limits is being surpassed.
It's also a very expensive PSU, so i'm expecting it to deliver on it's rated power specs.


----------



## Robbært

talexxx said:


> I'm getting these shutdowns in Prime95 on the CPU, so there is no GPU load involved, only CPU.
> 
> Does the CPU draw power off the 12v or 5v PSU rail?
> If the CPU draws power from the 12v rail, my PSU is rated for 30A on the 12V that would be 360W: https://www.enermaxusa.com/product.php?pid=72075659#!/Digifanless 550W/p/72075659


Yes, from 12V and CPU alone can 275W
PSU 360W 12V
It all about PSU short circuit and overload protection as power rise.


----------



## OutlawII

Robbært;27805880 said:


> talexxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm getting these shutdowns in Prime95 on the CPU, so there is no GPU load involved, only CPU.
> 
> Does the CPU draw power off the 12v or 5v PSU rail?
> If the CPU draws power from the 12v rail, my PSU is rated for 30A on the 12V that would be 360W:
> 
> https://www.enermaxusa.com/product.php?pid=72075659#!/Digifanless 550W/p/72075659
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, from 12V and CPU alone can 275W
> PSU 360W 12V
> It all about PSU short circuit and overload protection as power rise.
Click to expand...

Yes dude your running out of power... I was worried about a 750 Watt and your on 550 👎👎


----------



## talexxx

Thank you for the feedback guys!
Ok, so it's obvious that i'm running out of power... Glad to hear it because i really didnt know what else it could be.

I guess i'm just frustrated because i cant figure out _how_ i'm running out of power... I would expect to see something happening just before the crash either in HWMonitor or the PSU monitoring software.

The PSU has monitoring software and no over current protection even comes close to triggering before the shutdown.
I'm not going over the 12v rail rated power consumption, nor past the overall PSU rated capacity. 
The PSU monitoring software is showing below 300W power consumption when the crash happens and that includes all power consumption from all components, not only the 12v rail that is rated by itself at 360W.
So i guess i'm writing Enermax an email about this....


----------



## Luck100

talexxx said:


> Thank you for the feedback guys!
> Ok, so it's obvious that i'm running out of power... Glad to hear it because i really didnt know what else it could be.
> 
> I guess i'm just frustrated because i cant figure out _how_ i'm running out of power... I would expect to see something happening just before the crash either in HWMonitor or the PSU monitoring software.
> 
> The PSU has monitoring software and no over current protection even comes close to triggering before the shutdown.
> I'm not going over the 12v rail rated power consumption, nor past the overall PSU rated capacity.
> The PSU monitoring software is showing below 300W power consumption when the crash happens and that includes all power consumption from all components, not only the 12v rail that is rated by itself at 360W.
> So i guess i'm writing Enermax an email about this....


It's never the sustained load that shuts you down, it's the rapid transient spikes. You won't see those in your software.


----------



## talexxx

Luck100 said:


> It's never the sustained load that shuts you down, it's the rapid transient spikes. You won't see those in your software.


Thank you for the feedback mate!

I did have a Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum 750W before but i gave it back because the fan had a horrible grinding sound when running, it was not extremely loud but very noticeable.... This is when i switched back to my trusty Digifanless...
Now that i think of it i dont remember this kind of shut downs with the 750W PSU so i guess this is it....
How is your 1000W PRIME? Does it have the "trademark" grinding sound when the fan spins?


----------



## BradleyW

Any tips on stabilizing an overclocked un-core frequency on a 9900K?

Cheers.


----------



## Falkentyne

talexxx said:


> I'm getting these shutdowns in Prime95 on the CPU, so there is no GPU load involved, only CPU.
> 
> Does the CPU draw power off the 12v or 5v PSU rail?
> If the CPU draws power from the 12v rail, my PSU is rated for 30A on the 12V that would be 360W: https://www.enermaxusa.com/product.php?pid=72075659#!/Digifanless 550W/p/72075659
> Also, i was surprised to see that real gaming load with 9900K OC'ed and 2080ti OC'ed - 3dMark, Tomb Raider maxed out, etc. barely scratches 500W power consumption at the wall....
> 
> So if my understanding of all this is very wrong i dont understand why the PSU would be the limiting factor here. I also subjectively feel it might be a "small" PSU but i cant objectively find what of its limits is being surpassed.
> It's also a very expensive PSU, so i'm expecting it to deliver on it's rated power specs.


Did you increase CPU Current protection? (not VAXG Vcore protection).
I can't believe there have been 10 replies yet not a single person mentioning this very basic setting.
It's even in the gigabyte overclocking guide as well as that video.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> Artroxa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then il have to request a full looktrough as to why my comp refuses to boot with any sort devation from "auto" on the cpu power settings, vcore, LLC, any of that.
> 
> No guide will make it boot but for some reason i can just crank up the core multiplier to 5.1 on the otherwise default settings and its relatively stable, fully stable on 5.0 but im not a big fan of the temps im getting...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5GHZ settings. https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...-z390-aorus-owners-thread-7.html#post27791250
> 
> 5.1GHZ https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...z390-aorus-owners-thread-16.html#post27779912
> 
> DON'T forget IA AC Loadline to 1 or your voltages will be way too high. And you may need more voltage than me, I'm lucky to get the volts that low for CPU Offset for my clocks. /forum/images/smilies/redface.gif
Click to expand...

Do you se DC loadline to 0 or 1?


----------



## Padinn

Probably worth noting that PSU does decline with age too.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Probably worth noting that PSU does decline with age too.


My Seasonic 1000W Platinum I purchased on December 2011 is having no problems with my 9900K + Vega64 system. 7 years old.


----------



## talexxx

Falkentyne said:


> Did you increase CPU Current protection? (not VAXG Vcore protection).
> I can't believe there have been 10 replies yet not a single person mentioning this very basic setting.
> It's even in the gigabyte overclocking guide as well as that video.


Hi mate, thanks for the reply!
indeed i havent touched that!
how does it work? havent found it in the gigabyte oc guide and the manual is very cryptic about it...


----------



## Falkentyne

talexxx said:


> Hi mate, thanks for the reply!
> indeed i havent touched that!
> how does it work? havent found it in the gigabyte oc guide and the manual is very cryptic about it...


Stops the VRM's from tripping. Which is why your computer turns off when you run prime95.


----------



## talexxx

will definitively try that!
what do you tyoically set it to for your 9900k?


----------



## Falkentyne

talexxx said:


> will definitively try that!
> what do you tyoically set it to for your 9900k?


Turbo or High, I forgot


----------



## BradleyW

My Z390 Ultra's BIOS is corrupt by the looks of it.

I failed an overclock, so the system swapped to the back up BIOS. 
I turned the PC and PSU switch off, held the power button in for 10 seconds and turned everything back on in order to switch back to the first BIOS. 
It failed to boot. It keeps switching to the back up BIOS all the time.


----------



## talexxx

i think you can reflash the other bios from the functional bios using qflash
that should reset all settings
if not, cmos clear switch?


----------



## BradleyW

talexxx said:


> i think you can reflash the other bios from the functional bios using qflash
> that should reset all settings
> if not, cmos clear switch?


I've managed to get it working by repeating the process of turning the PC on and off whilst holding the power button for 10 seconds in between. I also randomly flashed via Q-Flash. Don't know if it helped but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

In Q-Flash, as far as I'm aware, you can only flash the current functional BIOS.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Sounds like first world problems to me.


At 275 EUR it is a first world product that I expected to deliver first world features without checking prior. My fault, especially now that I really have use for more than a single display output. Still rather surprised that board with only single outputs are still manufactured, even more so in this price range.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably worth noting that PSU does decline with age too.
> 
> 
> 
> My Seasonic 1000W Platinum I purchased on December 2011 is having no problems with my 9900K + Vega64 system. 7 years old.
Click to expand...

I've got an 8 year old xfx 850w that still chugs along. They don't necessarily die instantly, but tend to fade a but overtime. Basically I'm saying his 550 might have pulled it off earlier but I think its borderline anyway.


----------



## Luck100

talexxx said:


> Thank you for the feedback mate!
> 
> I did have a Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum 750W before but i gave it back because the fan had a horrible grinding sound when running, it was not extremely loud but very noticeable.... This is when i switched back to my trusty Digifanless...
> Now that i think of it i dont remember this kind of shut downs with the 750W PSU so i guess this is it....
> How is your 1000W PRIME? Does it have the "trademark" grinding sound when the fan spins?


I have yet to hear the fan on my prime, or the Seasonic X-series I had before that (still running no issues...).


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> My Z390 Ultra's BIOS is corrupt by the looks of it.
> 
> I failed an overclock, so the system swapped to the back up BIOS.
> I turned the PC and PSU switch off, held the power button in for 10 seconds and turned everything back on in order to switch back to the first BIOS.
> It failed to boot. It keeps switching to the back up BIOS all the time.


On my Xtreme I can switch the single BIOS switch, switch it to the corrupt BIOS with the BIOS switch, have the BIOS I want on a USB in the right USB port. It says in the manual what to rename it for BIOS recovery 'Gigabyte.bin' or something. The manual has the correct USB port as well. You start the PC, the BIOS flashing light will flash a few minutes if you do everything right, then it will boot into the recovered BIOS.

It worked for me when my BIOS became corrupted.


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> Do you set DC loadline to 0 or 1?


0, lower temps that way.


----------



## sdch

Gigabyte owners, do you have a "Thermal Velocity Boost" (TVB) option in the BIOS? Asus has a sticky thread that says this feature is supposed to be enabled by default but I'm having a hard time finding anything that says this applies to the i9-9900K. I only found references to the mobile i9-8950HK and Xeon E-2186M, but the description of how the feature works for those processors seems different.

Sources:
1. Datasheet says thermal velocity boost is only for mobile processors (page 64)
2. Feature not listed for desktop processors
3. Description of feature is different (last page)


----------



## OutlawII

KedarWolf said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you set DC loadline to 0 or 1?
> 
> 
> 
> 0, lower temps that way.
Click to expand...

I thought messing with just just made the temp sensor inaccurate? Maybe I'm thinking of something else IDK. Falk needs to chime in


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> 0, lower temps that way.


I've seen others try this and the temps where higher.


----------



## Padinn

In continuing my mad science I think I'd like to turn off xmp and focus on core clock again. I should be able to run at stock vcc io and vcc sa if I run my ram at 2666, correct?


----------



## Falkentyne

sdch said:


> Gigabyte owners, do you have a "Thermal Velocity Boost" (TVB) option in the BIOS? Asus has a sticky thread that says this feature is supposed to be enabled by default but I'm having a hard time finding anything that says this applies to the i9-9900K. I only found references to the mobile i9-8950HK and Xeon E-2186M, but the description of how the feature works for those processors seems different.
> 
> Sources:
> 1. Datasheet says thermal velocity boost is only for mobile processors (page 64)
> 2. Feature not listed for desktop processors
> 3. Description of feature is different (last page)


There was another article on this.
The TVB for mobile processors is completely different from desktop processors.
The mobile processor one basically allows a turbo boost to be much higher (like up to 5 ghz) if the CPU temperature is <50C, which clearly is stupid on a laptop as how often are you going to keep a CPU under 50C on a laptop? (talking about a i9 8950HK here).

TVB exists for desktop processors but functions completely differently. Here is simply relates to the CPU VID, if the processor is under a certain temperature, the VID rises (rather than the frequency), and as it gets higher, the VID drops. And this is intended to be used with adaptive voltage. I actually posted a link to this awhile ago. There is a MSR you can poll where you can see if this is enabled or not and then write it with RW Everything and disable it. The reason why this isn't labeled as "enabled" for desktop processors is because that TVB is completely different and only deals with VID response. If you open the Gigabyte bios with AMIBCP 5.02.0031 (don't use .0023), you will see it in "Overclocking Performance menu".

if you can find my previous post on this (check notebookreview, either in the i9 9900K section or the clevo section--I forgot where), I should have the original article linked which explains exactly how this operates on *DESKTOP* processors.


----------



## Ewokki

Ewokki said:


> Hi,
> I have had a lot of minor problems during my computer assembly, luckily I have solved those and after strugling long time. I was happy that atlast I can instal games and enjoy my new PC. However I left my PC ON last night to dowload games from steam and this morning when I came to check if all is ready. I first noticed my monitor won’t get signal, but PC is ON and running and keypord and mouse has lights and caps lock works. Then I just restarted. Then it tried to go to windows, but some error accured didn’t notice what it was because next thing I notice im at bios. In bios I check some settings and all is fine except in NVMI I don’t see my samsung M.2 anymore and boot option 1 wasn’t windows boot manager anymore or what was it called. I tried some settings but always went to bios and I also tried to repair it with diasnostig tool, but no success. Then I removed my hard drive and ssd which I had just installed yesterday and cleared CMOS. Then new problems occurred. My main bios didn’t work and then it tried to go to back up bios, but in both cenarios there is error code 7F (Reserved for AMI use) and DRAM error LED is ON and NO monitor signal anymore and keyboard and mouse leds are OFF.
> I have also tried to switch ram slots and to use only 1 DIMM
> Some help would be great!
> 
> My Setup
> Bios F4, No OC only performance power setting on
> i9-9900k
> Aorus Master Z390
> Corsair vengeance RGB Pro 16 GB (2x8GB) DDR4 3000Mhz CL15
> H115 Platinum AIO
> Asus ROG Strix 2080 OC edition
> Corsair RM850x
> Samsumg 970 EVO SSD 500GB NVME
> Fractal Design Define R6


Hi again,

First i removed all except CPU and Mobo and it gave me error code 50 so i added 1 RAM stick and after that second one after these in place the next error code i had was 78 or 79 and Boot LED was RED so i tried to put back my M.2 NVME memory and again i got the same error what i had in the beginning (7F and DRAM LED ON).
So I removed my M.2 Memory from M2P slot to M2A and then i got in the BIOS at last, but BIOS code A6 and Boot LED ON and i can't find my M.2 Memory anywhere in Bios.

I also noticed little strange black area near M2P slot so could it be melted somehow. So any idea what to do next or just RMA or Return ?


----------



## Dalfandor

I was wondering what cooler you are using and what settings you used for overclocking? Any guide did you follow?


----------



## sdch

Falkentyne said:


> There was another article on this.
> The TVB for mobile processors is completely different from desktop processors.
> The mobile processor one basically allows a turbo boost to be much higher (like up to 5 ghz) if the CPU temperature is <50C, which clearly is stupid on a laptop as how often are you going to keep a CPU under 50C on a laptop? (talking about a i9 8950HK here).
> 
> TVB exists for desktop processors but functions completely differently. Here is simply relates to the CPU VID, if the processor is under a certain temperature, the VID rises (rather than the frequency), and as it gets higher, the VID drops. And this is intended to be used with adaptive voltage. I actually posted a link to this awhile ago. There is a MSR you can poll where you can see if this is enabled or not and then write it with RW Everything and disable it. The reason why this isn't labeled as "enabled" for desktop processors is because that TVB is completely different and only deals with VID response. If you open the Gigabyte bios with AMIBCP 5.02.0031 (don't use .0023), you will see it in "Overclocking Performance menu".
> 
> if you can find my previous post on this (check notebookreview, either in the i9 9900K section or the clevo section--I forgot where), I should have the original article linked which explains exactly how this operates on *DESKTOP* processors.


Thanks, I was able to figure it out. It looks like there's two features associated with TVB: "ratio clipping" and "voltage optimizations". After piecing together the information, it seems both are supposed to be enabled by default if the processor supports TVB. In reality, board vendors have been setting them to whatever they want, both on laptops and desktops. "Ratio clipping" seems to be universally disabled on desktops and not exposed in the BIOS, while "voltage optimizations" is typically set to disabled except with Asus. Since it makes testing for OC stability more complex, the recommendation is to disable it when overclocking, which Asus does automatically when a custom multiplier is set.


----------



## Dalfandor

Is anyone else having issues with the rear audio port? my speakers won't work when I plug them in there, but they will when I plug it into the front


----------



## Falkentyne

Dalfandor said:


> Is anyone else having issues with the rear audio port? my speakers won't work when I plug them in there, but they will when I plug it into the front


Power cycle the computer with the 3.5mm plugs plugged in if this happens and it should work.
The realtek seems to only default to 2.1 sound with the rear/side channels deactivated unless it's power cycled.


----------



## kati

F8d for Master, guess we can use now use 128gb ram too; just wondering if theres any changes besides that too(nothing changed f8b to f8c so we get now f8d?)


----------



## FroofyBatwyvern

Same thing with the Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi. The F8c lists support for 32GB UDIMMs, too. I'm not sure if it means the usual 32GB from higher density or if it also means double capacity DIMMs like the ones that are supposed to go into Asus boards with 2 slots.

If nothing else I'll grab the BIOS update. And hopefully OC stability doesn't change.


----------



## Phantomas 007

Last days I had noticed the system sometimes freezes. I had only a Samsung 970 EVO 500GB and I had installed only the Samsung NVME drivers. Maybe I must install intel drivers such us Intel Rapid Storage Technology (RST) and Intel Chipset Device Software Version ?


----------



## BradleyW

Phantomas 007 said:


> Last days I had noticed the system sometimes freezes. I had only a Samsung 970 EVO 500GB and I had installed only the Samsung NVME drivers. Maybe I must install intel drivers such us Intel Rapid Storage Technology (RST) and Intel Chipset Device Software Version ?


You don't need IRST with the S 970 E.


----------



## Falkentyne

So two bioses releases in 2 days for Master, both with the exact same changelog
"Support 32GB UDIMM"
F8D lasted a total of 1 day.

So anyone know what else was changed? Because clearly something was....


----------



## Phantomas 007

BradleyW said:


> You don't need IRST with the S 970 E.


Neither Intel Chipset Device Software ? Only the Samsung drivers ?

Another matter. Gigabyte Bios have choice for secure erase SSD ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> So two bioses releases in 2 days for Master, both with the exact same changelog
> "Support 32GB UDIMM"
> F8D lasted a total of 1 day.
> 
> So anyone know what else was changed? Because clearly something was....


Newest BIOS has the latest microcode. One from a few days ago never.

Edit: It also has the latest ME firmware. I don't think the previous one had that.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Newest BIOS has the latest microcode. One from a few days ago never.
> 
> Edit: It also has the latest ME firmware. I don't think the previous one had that.


Don't you have the Xtreme, though?
I have the Master.


----------



## Mysterion90

It seems that RTL tuning settings are broken on the Master. No matter what I set in bios it is ignored and the board trains some very lose RTLs.

So far I'm struggling to get 4x8GB 4000-16-17-37 stable, which I know the kit is capable of.


----------



## ruro

And now F8E is available for the Master... Wonder why they are releasing so many revisions so quickly. I think i'll wait a bit before updating.


----------



## Padinn

When I look the F8 bios is now completely pulled from their website. eep!!!


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> When I look the F8 bios is now completely pulled from their website. eep!!!


There hasn't been a F8 bios yet.
What motherboard are you referring to?

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios


----------



## ruro

Falkentyne said:


> There hasn't been a F8 bios yet.
> What motherboard are you referring to?
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios


Er, did you look at the page you linked? F8e is the first BIOS in the list.


----------



## Falkentyne

ruro said:


> Er, did you look at the page you linked? F8e is the first BIOS in the list.


Did you read the post I was quoting? Or are you just trying to cause problems with me?
He was asking about F8 bios, not F8E. I replied saying there has not been a F8 released yet. F8 is the final version. Lettered ones at the end are betas.
I'm the one who posted there was an F8e earlier today.


----------



## FroofyBatwyvern

To add onto the mystery rapid BIOS updates: now the Pro Wifi is on F9a. With the exact same changelog, but a much newer date.


----------



## talexxx

Falkentyne said:


> Did you increase CPU Current protection? (not VAXG Vcore protection).
> I can't believe there have been 10 replies yet not a single person mentioning this very basic setting.
> It's even in the gigabyte overclocking guide as well as that video.


Hi Falkentyne, glad to report you were right on this one.

You might remember a few pages back that i was reporting instant shutdowns in Prime95 on my 9900k over 1.3Vcore, LLC Turbo with all Power limits raised in the BIOS.
Me and everyone else blamed my PSU, a 550W Enermax Digifanless, so i went and upgraded to a Seasonic Prime Ultra 100W.

Suprise, surprise, first test under load instant shutdown....
Changed VCore current Protection to "Turbo" from "Auto" - no more shutdowns....
So yeah... this PSU was an expensive not needed upgrade it seems ????

------------------

I've run into two more issues that i'm trying to debug now...
I'd appreciate any help i can get... Already lost too much sleep to my 9900K overclocking adventures 

1. I'm getting random occurrences of fans not spinning on the Z390 Aorus Master after a restart.

When stress testing the 9900K i guess everyone goes into a crash / bios changes / stress testing / crash cycle...
I've had the nasty surprise to see that not all my fans were properly spinning after a reboot cycle...
If i shutdown and restart the computer, all fans work ok.
So actually in some of the stress testing i was operating with some of the fans (one time the cpu fan!) off, as they had not started properly.
This seems to me like a motherboard/bios bug of the Z390 Aorus Master.
Anyone else had this happen? Fans not properly operating after a restart?

2. My memory seems to be holding back my overclock?

I have a 4 x 8GB kit of Corsair Dominator Platinum 3600C16.
I went trough an overclocking test with my 9900k by gradually increasing clocks/voltage to find the voltage sweet spot at each frequency starting at 4.9GHZ and testing with Prim95 Blend for stability.
I basically failed all the tests and stopped at 1.4VCore because the temps were getting ridiculous anyway.
All this time I was testing with XMP ON....
At a certain moment i though about turning XMP off and guess what... 9900k prime95 AVX stable at 4.9GHZ at just 1.275V vcore, LLC Turbo.
Not sure what to learn from this... I should try to see 9900k frequency / voltage curve without loading the memory controller first and than see what memory i can support?
How does one approach stabilisation of the memory controller after seeing what can work without XMP ON. I thought 3600C16 was a very easy speed to support by any 9900k....


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> When I look the F8 bios is now completely pulled from their website. eep!!!
> 
> 
> 
> There hasn't been a F8 bios yet.
> What motherboard are you referring to?
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios
Click to expand...

When I looked last night all F8 versions had been removed, I didn't realize they posted beta to main sight. I see f8e now.


----------



## ScomComputers

Hi..... Please help me!
What is the real vcore? vcore 1 or vcore 2 or vrvout?
Thanks...

I see the video from Buildzoid, he says: the real vcore = vr out, is that true?


----------



## derx

ScomComputers said:


> Hi..... Please help me!
> What is the real vcore? vcore 1 or vcore 2 or vrvout?
> Thanks...
> 
> I see the video from Buildzoid, he says: the real vcore = vr out, is that true?


Jep, VR Out is the one that is showing the real voltage that goes into your CPU.


----------



## mAnBrEaTh

Mysterion90 said:


> It seems that RTL tuning settings are broken on the Master. No matter what I set in bios it is ignored and the board trains some very lose RTLs.
> 
> So far I'm struggling to get 4x8GB 4000-16-17-37 stable, which I know the kit is capable of.


This is my experience as well. RTLs and IOLs are very relaxed compared to other boards. As you mentioned, no matter the bios value input, nothing changes. Hopefully this is resolved soon, maybe one of these newer bios's have already fixed it. I believe this to be impacting my Copy speeds reported in Aida64. Read = 58000+MB/s, Write = 61000+MB/s, but Copy = 45000 MB/s. Should be 50000 MB/s at the minimum. Latency 39-40ns BTW. I'm RAMTest 4000%+ coverage stable so far with these timings.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

RE: 32GB BIOS versions - We found a few boards that would fail to update. So we pulled them (IE F8C), cleaned up a line or two of code, and re-uploaded them (IE F8E). The end result should be the same on F8C & F8E, but E should flash properly on all boards


----------



## Pasbags

*CPU temps in correlation with Smart Fan 5 profiles in BIOS still not fixed*

Still has that 10c offset on my Z390 master pain in the Donkey having to account for that when setting up the fan curve


----------



## Kipps

So I flashed the new bios to my Ultra, it then failed boot and kicked into the backup bios .... Hoiw the fudge do I change back ? Tried power cycling the PSU etc. Cant change back ... Why would Gigabyte not put a dam manual switch on the board like they used to ???


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Kipps said:


> So I flashed the new bios to my Ultra, it then failed boot and kicked into the backup bios .... Hoiw the fudge do I change back ? Tried power cycling the PSU etc. Cant change back ... Why would Gigabyte not put a dam manual switch on the board like they used to ???


Master/Xtreme have the switch. The backup BIOS should re-write the primary BIOS if it fails. You can just re-flash and try again.


----------



## Kipps

Didn't expect such a fast reply - Thank you. Just one more question - How do I know which Bios I am in ?


----------



## Robbært

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Master/Xtreme have the switch. The backup BIOS should re-write the primary BIOS if it fails. You can just re-flash and try again.


What to do if I have unsupported by F4 backup BIOS 9700KF and main failed (aorus pro)?

Can we get backup BIOS updater for boards without switch?


----------



## BradleyW

derx said:


> Jep, VR Out is the one that is showing the real voltage that goes into your CPU.


Only when using a fixed voltage. And the VR VOUT was originally recommended for the ASUS boards.


----------



## talexxx

*In need of advice regarding memory support on OC'ed 9900k*

I'm Prime95 Blend & SmalFFT and RealBench stable on my 9900K @ 4.9ghz with 1.3v LLC Turbo XMP Off.

If i enable XMP, i start failing those tests. I have a kit of 4 x 8GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 3600C16.

What voltage should i be tweaking? Not sure why the memory controller isn't liking the RAM speed.

The kit is known to be good... With the 9900K stock, no problem passing any test with XMP ON.

Voltages set my the board also seem kind of high with XMP ON, even thou the memory KIT is in the QVL list for my Aorus Master. Do they seem ok for you?


----------



## BradleyW

F7f BIOS released today for Z390 AORUS ULTRA.

Does it contain the updated microcode as seen on the F6 BIOS?

Again, this is for the Z390 AORUS ULTRA. Not any other board!


----------



## Smokediggity

Falkentyne said:


> So two bioses releases in 2 days for Master, both with the exact same changelog
> "Support 32GB UDIMM"
> F8D lasted a total of 1 day.
> 
> So anyone know what else was changed? Because clearly something was....



F8D fixed the issue where the BIOS would lockup when pressing Enter when setting the IA AC/DC Loadline settings


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> F8D fixed the issue where the BIOS would lockup when pressing Enter when setting the IA AC/DC Loadline settings


And of course that fix was undocumented. I figured that out it must have been fixed when I randomly decided to press enter on F8E and it doesn't even "try" to bring up a pull down menu of 6250 values (0-6249), which is what caused the lockup to begin with. It just ignores the enter completely so you have to enter a value directly. But glad it's been addressed.
Now I wonder if pressing enter on tREFI RAM timing does the same thing (65534 possible values).


----------



## Timur Born

talexxx said:


> You might remember a few pages back that i was reporting instant shutdowns in Prime95 on my 9900k over 1.3Vcore, LLC Turbo with all Power limits raised in the BIOS.
> ...
> Suprise, surprise, first test under load instant shutdown....
> Changed VCore current Protection to "Turbo" from "Auto" - no more shutdowns....


To add to this: When I try to find a Vcore voltage + LLC combination without changing overcurrent protection I either get blue screens or instant shutdowns. I can workaround these without changing overcurrent protection by a combination of internal LLC ("Performance") + LLC "Low" + negative voltage offset (-0.07v atm). This allows for a short spike over 190 A and then thermal throttling kicks in and decreases current along the way.


----------



## Timur Born

@BIOS still lists F5 as latest update. What's up with that application still being so useless after all these years (my last GB board was using Haswell)?

Did any of the new versions fix the Dual BIOS switching in manual mode?


----------



## mAnBrEaTh

talexxx said:


> I'm Prime95 Blend & SmalFFT and RealBench stable on my 9900K @ 4.9ghz with 1.3v LLC Turbo XMP Off.
> 
> If i enable XMP, i start failing those tests. I have a kit of 4 x 8GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 3600C16.
> 
> What voltage should i be tweaking? Not sure why the memory controller isn't liking the RAM speed.
> 
> The kit is known to be good... With the 9900K stock, no problem passing any test with XMP ON.
> 
> Voltages set my the board also seem kind of high with XMP ON, even thou the memory KIT is in the QVL list for my Aorus Master. Do they seem ok for you?


VCCSA and VCCIO look good for initial stability testing. 1.35v for both of these (vccsa / vccio) is my comfortable maximum when considering 24/7 settings. Bump DRAM to 1.450v. Vcore could also require a bump to stabilize due to the added stresss on the IMC from the increased RAM speed.


----------



## Smokediggity

Falkentyne said:


> And of course that fix was undocumented. I figured that out it must have been fixed when I randomly decided to press enter on F8E and it doesn't even "try" to bring up a pull down menu of 6250 values (0-6249), which is what caused the lockup to begin with. It just ignores the enter completely so you have to enter a value directly. But glad it's been addressed.
> Now I wonder if pressing enter on tREFI RAM timing does the same thing (65534 possible values).



Yes, it would be nice if Gigabyte would put a little more effort into the release notes for both their BIOS and software updates.


I have a preview of F8F that fixes an issue where setting the Uncore Ratio back to Auto from a non-default value will cause the Uncore Ratio to stay set at the previously set value instead of returning to the default value. (In case its not included in the official release notes)


I also just reported an issue where setting the CPU Vcore from Normal to Auto would cause any previously set voltage offset to be applied despite the DVID option being disabled.


I'll try pressing enter on tREFI to see if it locks up. If it does, i'll go ahead and report it to support too.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> @BIOS still lists F5 as latest update. What's up with that application still being so useless after all these years (my last GB board was using Haswell)?
> 
> Did any of the new versions fix the Dual BIOS switching in manual mode?


I never had this happen to me and I even just now tested it for you by pressing the reset button (a button I haven't pressed on my case in about 4 years now), while I was in windows, risking corruption.
System turned off and on and didn't switch bioses. Then I went ahead and manually flashed the backup to f8e.


----------



## FroofyBatwyvern

GBT-MatthewH said:


> RE: 32GB BIOS versions - We found a few boards that would fail to update. So we pulled them (IE F8C), cleaned up a line or two of code, and re-uploaded them (IE F8E). The end result should be the same on F8C & F8E, but E should flash properly on all boards /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Heh, that mostly explains it!

The version number outright increasing by 1 for the Pro Wifi kind of screams "and there's more" though. Yesterday we are already at F9a, while I think the first ones I saw are F8c or something?


----------



## Falkentyne

FroofyBatwyvern said:


> Heh, that mostly explains it!
> 
> The version number outright increasing by 1 for the Pro Wifi kind of screams "and there's more" though. Yesterday we are already at F9a, while I think the first ones I saw are F8c or something?


Possibly.

http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/6176/latest-bios-z390-ultra-broken


----------



## scaramonga

Smokediggity said:


> Yes, it would be nice if Gigabyte would put a little more effort into the release notes for both their BIOS and software updates.


It's the same effort they put into their ghastly software - ZERO.


----------



## kadirbaba

*5.1 fail*



KedarWolf said:


> Here's my final 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory 17-17-17-32 2T.
> 
> Try on the Xtreme or Master.
> 
> BIOS screens below in Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


i did your all settings cpu working 5.1ghz but when i test with cinebench r15 cpu working 800-4600mhz max, sometimes going to 5.1ghz. what is wrong? @KedarWolf
anyone can help me pls?


----------



## derx

Holy crap... You noticed your CPU got to a temp of 110C right? 
First rule of OC is make sure you have ample cooling. You don't seem to have any cooling


----------



## kadirbaba

i have corsair h110i gtx but temp is instantly rising 
may be voltage is high?


----------



## talexxx

mAnBrEaTh said:


> VCCSA and VCCIO look good for initial stability testing. 1.35v for both of these (vccsa / vccio) is my comfortable maximum when considering 24/7 settings. Bump DRAM to 1.450v. Vcore could also require a bump to stabilize due to the added stresss on the IMC from the increased RAM speed.


Although my 9900k is stable at 4.9ghz with 1.3vcore, no matter what i do, i cant get my ram working at the rated xmp speed of 3600c16. I keep failing stress tests.

I tried:
vcore / vccsa / vccio
1.3 / 1.3 / 1.3
1.35 / 1.3 / 1.3
1.35 / 1.2 / 1.2
1.135 / 1.35 / 1.35

the last one was a bit scary, vccsa and vccio at 1.35, even the bios was highlighting them yellow
i only did a quick prime95 blend run that failed, hope i did not degrade something...

so it seems that no matter what i do my 4.9ghz overclock cant run 3600c16 memory
quite the bummer....
dont really know what to do...


----------



## derx

kadirbaba said:


> i have corsair h110i gtx but temp is instantly rising
> may be voltage is high?


Your voltage is too high indeed. Look at the max VR VOUT value, the other Vcore values are not accurate. But still even this is too high. A max value of 1.35-1.37 would be what you're looking for. I guess you made a mistake somewhere in your bios settings, because Kedarwolf settings give him lower Vcore than you have.

Also I'd suggest looking at the mounting and cooling paste application on your cooler. I run a Scythe Mugen 2b aircooler, and don't get into the temperature territories you seem to be hitting. There must be something wrong there, as the H110i should perform better than my aircooler...


----------



## Nammi

Woah, something good must've happened between F8b and F8e... I was able to to load xmp on my 4133cl17 kit and boot into windows after upping some volts, while before 4133 any timings would not pass training and 4000cl17 I just couldn't manage to get error free so I've been running 3600cl15 untill now.
While I'm able to pass the aida benchmark with xmp, memtest errors between 1-5%. Time to try to get it error free.


----------



## Padinn

Have you tried lower vcc io and vcc sa? I put mine at stock recently in stable with 3200 memory. Top high can negatively impact stability and I think anything over 1.3 sa is risky. Something is definitely wrong there, make sure your aio cooler is working.


----------



## EarlZ

5Ghz @ 1.315v on bios (LLC Turbo) and 1.270v VR OUT with x264 stability, is that amount of vdroop expected?


----------



## BradleyW

New chipset drivers dated 17 Jan 19 released for Z390 Ultra, for Win 10 Build 1809 only. I've noticed better performance all round.


----------



## Mp0wer

Luckbad said:


> Inspired by the quality of the Aorus Master, I also grabbed the Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi. Lovely board.
> 
> My only issue I've seen so far is that when I boot, my subwoofer pops loud as hell twice.
> 
> EDIT: Seems to be a Realtek driver issue. Since the Gigabyte support site only has a partial driver with no Realtek Audio Manager included, I scoured the internet and found one that has it and doesn't make the thump on startup.


Do you have a link to these drivers, mine is making a slight popping noise when windows starts.


----------



## KedarWolf

kadirbaba said:


> i did your all settings cpu working 5.1ghz but when i test with cinebench r15 cpu working 800-4600mhz max, sometimes going to 5.1ghz. what is wrong? @KedarWolf
> anyone can help me pls?


Did you set IA AC Loadline to 1? If you never your voltages will be way too high.

Edit: And my cooler is a EK Predator 360 with an EK Supremacy EVO block with a 360 rad so is pretty much a custom water loop with quick disconnects.


----------



## jlp0209

kadirbaba said:


> i did your all settings cpu working 5.1ghz but when i test with cinebench r15 cpu working 800-4600mhz max, sometimes going to 5.1ghz. what is wrong? @KedarWolf
> anyone can help me pls?


As others have said your voltage is far too high and you should also check your CPU cooler and re-seat if need be. Next reset your BIOS to default settings asap. 

No disrespect to anyone here or to you. (If you are fairly new to overclocking) do not copy settings people post and hope they stick. You can kill or degrade your components. For starters, *never* start an overclock using adaptive voltage. You should set a target frequency, say 5 ghz all core OC, and use manual voltage to find your lowest stable voltage. If you crash at 5 ghz, go for 4.9. When comfortable and stable then experiment with adaptive voltage. 

Don't expect a fully stable all core 5.1 OC, no AVX offset, on the 9900K at reasonable voltage regardless of what people post here. Five runs of Cinebench don't count. You can get WHEA errors galore and / or crash instantly running other benchmarks and games. The few who are truly stable have won the silicon lottery. 

My suggestion is to follow these guides first:

https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf







Then test stability using RealBench and Prime95 v29 avx custom test fft size 1344 and run fft in place. If you want to get nuts and test absolute worst load, run Prime95 small fft using avx. Do not use FMA3, you can edit the local settings file to just use avx. 

To disable avx in Prime95 you need to edit that local.txt file. Insert exactly this to disable avx - CpuSupportsAVX=0

When you want to test avx change the 0 to a 1. You want to make sure CpuSupportsFMA is set to 0. 

Good luck and have fun.


----------



## Artroxa

So after spending a few hours in bios ive managed to get the cpu relatively stable ( no overnight yet ) @ 5.0ghz 1.30V.


But suddenly vr vout shows dropping to 1.250 V when doing any sort of stresstest, did i accidently change a setting and which would that be? im too tired for this atm


----------



## flowfaster

Artroxa said:


> So after spending a few hours in bios ive managed to get the cpu relatively stable ( no overnight yet ) @ 5.0ghz 1.30V.
> 
> 
> But suddenly vr vout shows dropping to 1.250 V when doing any sort of stresstest, did i accidently change a setting and which would that be? im too tired for this atm


It's normal, it's called vdroop. Check your LLC settings. Set LLC to turbo to eliminate vdroop but the trade off is extra heat and higher transient spikes.


----------



## Artroxa

flowfaster said:


> It's normal, it's called vdroop. Check your LLC settings. Set LLC to turbo to eliminate vdroop but the trade off is extra heat and higher transient spikes.


Already got it running on turbo, do i dare push it to extreme?


----------



## kati

Hm really wish they had a more detailed changelog, F8e on Master...besides many driver updates on their support page.


----------



## Padinn

Vdroop is not bad. It protects transient voltage spikes that could kill the CPU. Much of this happens to fast to see without an oscilloscope. I wouldn't go above turbo LLC personally, definitely not ultra extreme unless on liquid nitrogen. Try leaving at turbo and increasing vcore slightly if crashing


----------



## Padinn

EarlZ said:


> 5Ghz @ 1.315v on bios (LLC Turbo) and 1.270v VR OUT with x264 stability, is that amount of vdroop expected.


Sounds right to me.


----------



## Padinn

Anyone know why I never see my 9900k at 5ghz even briefly with all apps closed and on balanced power plan. Best I see is 4.8, which is my 4 core or less frequency.


----------



## Timur Born

jlp0209 said:


> Do not use FMA3, you can edit the local settings file to just use avx.


What's wrong with using FMA3 other than being slightly less demanding than AVX? It's still a high load.


----------



## Timur Born

Padinn said:


> Anyone know why I never see my 9900k at 5ghz even briefly with all apps closed and on balanced power plan. Best I see is 4.8, which is my 4 core or less frequency.


Because Windows never utilizes only 1-2 cores unless you set up aggressive core parking. Based on that practice the whole 5 GHz thing is pretty much a marketing gimmick.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

kati said:


> Hm really wish they had a more detailed changelog, F8e on Master...besides many driver updates on their support page.


At this point in the development cycle unless there is a specific bug fix, or new microcode, most of the changes between A->Z versions will be to tune voltages/timings for memory as we test/validate and fine tune XMP.


----------



## kati

GBT-MatthewH said:


> At this point in the development cycle unless there is a specific bug fix, or new microcode, most of the changes between A->Z versions will be to tune voltages/timings for memory as we test/validate and fine tune XMP.


Nice, thanks for that specific answer!


----------



## Falkentyne

Artroxa said:


> Already got it running on turbo, do i dare push it to extreme?


Extreme can work but it will actually make the minimum required vcore MORE unstable (which means you need a HIGHER VR Vout!) for AVX/FMA3 heavy current loads at the same load, compared to a matching VR VOUT for Turbo, even if the power draw (amps) and VR VOUT is higher than LLC Turbo (with a higher bios voltage on Turbo and lower with Extreme), which you think would mean more stability, since the current and temps show the voltage is higher. I don't know why this is. There's no way at all to know or guess without an Oscilloscope to check the vcore stability at LLC Extreme and LLC Ultra Extreme, and I doubt anyone here has one (I've asked multiple times).

It seems fine with SSE2 loads (e.g. prime95 with AVX disabled).

I did some testing at 4.7 ghz. FMA3 small FFT prime95 only.

LLC Turbo: Mininum required VR VOUT voltage: 1.123v for FMA3 small FFT loads (Bios voltage=1.185v).
LLC Ultra Extreme: minimum required VR VOUT voltage for FMA3 small FFT loads: 1.145v-1.150v (Bios voltage 1.145v-1.150v).

Yes, it's less stable below VR VOUT 1.145v with Ultra Extreme, than it is with VR Vout 1.123v with LLC Turbo, even though I verified the amps, power draw to the CPU, heat to the CPU, and power draw to the VRM's is higher
(Ultra Extreme, VR VOUT and Bios 1.145v, VR Amps=167.5 Amps. LLC Turbo (Bios 1.185v), VR Vout 1.123v, VR Amps 160.250 amps, CPU more stable despite lower voltage, lower power draw, lower temps).

An Oscilloscope must be used to find out if there is excessive ripple or undershoot or stability issues with Ultra extreme with the same "target" VR Vout as LLC Turbo. 

AVX disabled prime95 seems to not be affected but I did not test that extensively (example: 5.1 ghz, 1.335v bios voltage, LLC Turbo, AVX disabled small FFT prime95 needs 1.273v VR VOUT for minimum required stability), which seemed to be the same as 5.1 ghz 1.310v bios voltage, LLC Extreme, VR Vout 1.273v'ish, again AVX disabled).

You guys are on your own, folks, unless you can get an Oscilloscope!


----------



## Timur Born

@GBT-MatthewH

Would you please explain the discrepancy between BIOS LLC settings and EasyTune LLC settings? Which one is correct and why is EasyTune not able to work with BIOS settings between Low and High?


----------



## kadirbaba

Thanks you for comments guys, @KedarWolf @jlp0209
yes i did all your setting "Ia ac loadline 1" and others same. but just not ram overclock, im using xmp 3200.
i changed my corsair h110i gtx's thermal paste and now not 100C, its 70-90C at load. (for 4.8ghz, im not stabil with 5ghz)
You are using cpu vcore normal and dynamic vcore 0.150 for 5.1 ghz with turbo llc. but this values too much for my 9900k,
if i even reduce voltage to 0.100, my cpu temp instantly rising with this values at 5 or 5.1ghz, hmm i didnt overlock ram, using xmp, but I CHANGED VCCIO AND VCCSA to 1.23v, Could the cpu temperature be rising for this?
i think my silicon lottery is bad, i must try 4.9 or 4.8 with stabil voltages.
@jlp0209 which LLC are you talking about? i must change to turbo llc with "cpu internal ac/dc load line?"
or only "cpu vcore loadline calib."? or "vaxg loadline calib." too? most guides says change only "cpu vcore loadline calib."
sorry for my bad english. regards..


----------



## Falkentyne

kadirbaba said:


> Thanks you for comments guys, @KedarWolf @jlp0209
> yes i did all your setting "Ia ac loadline 1" and others same. but just not ram overclock, im using xmp 3200.
> i changed my corsair h110i gtx's thermal paste and now not 100C, its 70-90C at load. (for 4.8ghz, im not stabil with 5ghz)
> You are using cpu vcore normal and dynamic vcore 0.150 for 5.1 ghz with turbo llc. but this values too much for my 9900k,
> if i even reduce voltage to 0.100, my cpu temp instantly rising with this values at 5 or 5.1ghz
> i think my silicon lottery is bad, i must try 4.9 or 4.8 with stabil voltages.
> @jlp0209 which LLC are you talking about? i must change to turbo llc with "cpu internal ac/dc load line?"
> or only "cpu vcore loadline calib."? or "vaxg loadline calib." too? most guides says change only "cpu vcore loadline calib."
> sorry for my bad english. regards..


CPU internal AC DC loadline are PRESETS for Internal VR IA AC DC Loadline, if internal VR AC/DC are set to 0 (Auto).
I posted the values for each preset back in this thread earlier. You have to go search for them.
The only ones I remember are the highest presets are 2.10 mOhms AC and 2.10 mOhms DC, and Turbo being 1.60 mOhms AC and 1.60 mOhms DC.
(equal to Internal VR Values of 210 and 160).

These are only used for ADAPTIVE voltages (normal) not for static /override voltages.

Note:
Changing AC and DC loadlines when using static voltages affects the reported power draw and the CPU VID shown, but NOT the actual voltages used. (DC Loadline causes the VID to drop at load by a factor of the mOhms, but will NOT affect static voltage temps or current load. AC loadline causes the VID to rise at IDLE, which is linked directly to CPU VCORE on adaptive (normal) voltages but NOT static voltages).


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Timur Born said:


> @GBT-MatthewH
> 
> Can you please explain the discrepancy between BIOS LLC settings and EasyTune LLC settings? Which one is correct and why is EasyTune not able to work with BIOS settings between Low and High?


Can you expand on this? Are you saying BIOS High/Turbo/etc != Easytune High/Turbo/etc? If so that's a discrepancy between BIOS programming and Easytune. I always lean BIOS, I dislike using software in windows to adjust BIOS settings. That being said I can ask if we can realign them.


----------



## Falkentyne

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Can you expand on this? Are you saying BIOS High/Turbo/etc != Easytune High/Turbo/etc? If so that's a discrepancy between BIOS programming and Easytune. I always lean BIOS, I dislike using software in windows to adjust BIOS settings. That being said I can ask if we can realign them.


 @Timur Born wrote a very long post when you were on vacation, explaining that I think, 1) One of the settings shown in Easytune can NOT be set in the bios, and 2) one of the settings set in the bios show a different value in Easytune. Hopefully he can find that post again.


----------



## kadirbaba

I didnt overlock ram, using xmp, but I CHANGED VCCIO AND VCCSA to 1.23v, Could the cpu temperature be rising for this? @Falkentyne


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Can you expand on this? Are you saying BIOS High/Turbo/etc != Easytune High/Turbo/etc? If so that's a discrepancy between BIOS programming and Easytune. I always lean BIOS, I dislike using software in windows to adjust BIOS settings. That being said I can ask if we can realign them.


Thanks for the quick reply. Here is what I reported earlier:

Normal and Standard seem to do the very same thing. EasyTune only offers "Standard" (plus all others), but not "Normal". This makes more sense than offering two entries for the same setting as is done in BIOS.

When you set BIOS to Normal/Standard then EasyTune will display "Low" instead. When you use anything above Standard but below Turbo then EasyTune will display a grayed out "Standard". "Grayed out" is the important part, because that means that you cannot change the setting in EasyTune.

Any BIOS setting lower than Turbo results in LLC being one step higher than the corresponding setting in EasyTune. So Low in BIOS applies the same LLC as Medium in EasyTune, Medium in BIOS applies LLC corresponding to High in EasyTune.

High in BIOS is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via EasyTune (higher than ET High, but lower than Turbo).

Standard in EasyTune is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via BIOS (lower than BIOS Standard/Normal).


----------



## jlp0209

Timur Born said:


> What's wrong with using FMA3 other than being slightly less demanding than AVX? It's still a high load.


Nothing's wrong with it I've always felt it was just unnecessary for testing and have been using AVX. In other words, no point in testing with both FMA3 and AVX if you're going to use Prime. 



kadirbaba said:


> Thanks you for comments guys, @KedarWolf @jlp0209
> yes i did all your setting "Ia ac loadline 1" and others same. but just not ram overclock, im using xmp 3200.
> i changed my corsair h110i gtx's thermal paste and now not 100C, its 70-90C at load. (for 4.8ghz, im not stabil with 5ghz)
> You are using cpu vcore normal and dynamic vcore 0.150 for 5.1 ghz with turbo llc. but this values too much for my 9900k,
> if i even reduce voltage to 0.100, my cpu temp instantly rising with this values at 5 or 5.1ghz, hmm i didnt overlock ram, using xmp, but I CHANGED VCCIO AND VCCSA to 1.23v, Could the cpu temperature be rising for this?
> i think my silicon lottery is bad, i must try 4.9 or 4.8 with stabil voltages.
> @jlp0209 which LLC are you talking about? i must change to turbo llc with "cpu internal ac/dc load line?"
> or only "cpu vcore loadline calib."? or "vaxg loadline calib." too? most guides says change only "cpu vcore loadline calib."
> sorry for my bad english. regards..


No worries, yes change cpu vcore LLC. Adaptive voltage is very tricky because the higher LLC you use, the lower Vcore offset you set in the bios. Which could result in BSOD or crashing at idle. I've had the best luck with medium LLC and adaptive voltage. I also have the Master. 

Have you tried manual voltage at all? You may not have a bad chip. You should find your ideal voltage this way and then switch to adaptive. At least then you'll know what you're dealing with in terms of voltage targets for a given frequency.


----------



## Moparman

Has anyone been able to run over 4133 on any of the Aorus boards with decent timings?


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

Timur Born said:


> Thanks for the quick reply. Here is what I reported earlier:
> 
> Normal and Standard seem to do the very same thing. EasyTune only offers "Standard" (plus all others), but not "Normal". This makes more sense than offering two entries for the same setting as is done in BIOS.
> 
> When you set BIOS to Normal/Standard then EasyTune will display "Low" instead. When you use anything above Standard but below Turbo then EasyTune will display a grayed out "Standard". "Grayed out" is the important part, because that means that you cannot change the setting in EasyTune.
> 
> Any BIOS setting lower than Turbo results in LLC being one step higher than the corresponding setting in EasyTune. So Low in BIOS applies the same LLC as Medium in EasyTune, Medium in BIOS applies LLC corresponding to High in EasyTune.
> 
> High in BIOS is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via EasyTune (higher than ET High, but lower than Turbo).
> 
> Standard in EasyTune is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via BIOS (lower than BIOS Standard/Normal).


I have a theory on this - because Easy tune does not see "Normal" it creates a 1 level offset. IE 

Low = 1 in BIOS & Easy tune
Normal = 2 in BIOS, N/A in Easy Tune.
...
High = 3 in BIOS, 2 in Easy Tune

I just made up the numbers and levels to demonstrate the offset. Anyways I will ask the team to look at it and find the actual reason.


----------



## Timur Born

Thanks, I am still concerned that BIOS "Standard" equals ET "Low" and even more so that EZ "Standard" is lower than anything BIOS. This leaves the impression that the BIOS LLC is one pin too high.

Two other questions (that I posted before):

- One thing I am missing from my previous Asus board is the ability to use multiple temperature sensors as source for fan settings. Did I miss it somewhere or does Gigabyte not offer such a feature?

- Is there no Intel RST "Dynamic Storage Accelerator" option available in BIOS? This would allow to (ab)use Intel RST to switch C3 and C7 states on/off in Windows.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Thanks for the quick reply. Here is what I reported earlier:
> 
> Normal and Standard seem to do the very same thing. EasyTune only offers "Standard" (plus all others), but not "Normal". This makes more sense than offering two entries for the same setting as is done in BIOS.
> 
> When you set BIOS to Normal/Standard then EasyTune will display "Low" instead. When you use anything above Standard but below Turbo then EasyTune will display a grayed out "Standard". "Grayed out" is the important part, because that means that you cannot change the setting in EasyTune.
> 
> Any BIOS setting lower than Turbo results in LLC being one step higher than the corresponding setting in EasyTune. So Low in BIOS applies the same LLC as Medium in EasyTune, Medium in BIOS applies LLC corresponding to High in EasyTune.
> 
> High in BIOS is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via EasyTune (higher than ET High, but lower than Turbo).
> 
> Standard in EasyTune is special, because it applies an LLC that cannot be applied via BIOS (lower than BIOS Standard/Normal).


 @Timur Born @GBT-MatthewH

Just something to mention:
As you know the Asus bios makes mention of two things:

IA AC/DC loadline and "VRM loadline", which Gigabyte calls IA AC DC loadline (as expected) and CPU Internal Loadline (which is a preset for IA AC DC loadline), and then Loadline Calibration (LLC).

VRM loadline is "Loadline calibration", or LLC. This directly affects the VCORE.
IA AC DC Loadline is the CPU internal VR settings. This directly affects the CPU VID.

The Asus bios has an option of "Sync VRM loadline to AC/DC loadline".

The default IA AC loadline mOhms reference value is 2.10 mOhms for 4 and 6 core CFL processors and 1.60 mOhms for 8 core CFL processors.
I know for a fact right now that the Gigabyte setting "CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline" setting of "Extreme" OR--the highest value--whatever it's called--sets a value of 2.10mOhms (210) for both IA AC and IA DC loadline (assuming they are set to auto).

The CPU internal AC/DC loadline of "Turbo" OR--the 2nd highest value, sets a value of 1.60 mOhms for both AC and DC loadline.
(Sorry I do not remember the labels).

These can be shown in HWinfo64 detailed system information under CPU (v6.00 and newer).

The other values, like balanced, max power savings, etc, set different values for IA AC And IA DC separately. Obviously none of these particular settings are useful if you are using manual voltages.

However, what I think is that the "Loadline Calibration" settings, or the Easytune settings, may be setting different "Auto" or maximum mOhm values, which may be because of the different in CPU SKU.
As I said, the reference value for 8 core processors is 1.60 mOhms. For 6 core it's 2.10 mOhms.
Yet the highest value for CPU internal loadline" is 2.10 mOhms.

Loadline Calibration (LLC) is supposed to be defaulted to the CPU defaults for the SKU, but this is VRM loadline. VRM loadline affects the CPU vcore from the VRM's.
Internal IA AC/DC loadline (aka CPU Internal loadline) affects the CPU VID.

Loadline calibration (LLC) may be defaulting at Auto or normal, to the 6 core coffee lake version (2.10 mOhms) instead of the 8 core version (1.60 mOhms). If the Bios LLC is using different defaults (e.g. 1.60 mOhms) and Easytune is using 2.10 mOhms for the "Most vdroop" setting, that could cause a discrepancy.


----------



## techjesse

GBT-MatthewH, I sent you a PM.... have you read it?  
You read and answered...... Great!


----------



## Timur Born

GBT-MatthewH said:


> I have a theory on this - because Easy tune does not see "Normal" it creates a 1 level offset. IE


Could be, but anything Turbo and higher works properly, the discrepancy only happens up to "High". So there seems to be more going on.


----------



## EarlZ

Padinn said:


> Sounds right to me.


Thanks for confirming. A bit surprised that my temps from stock is around 60-65 on full load now its at 80-83


----------



## warbucks

BradleyW said:


> New chipset drivers dated 17 Jan 19 released for Z390 Ultra, for Win 10 Build 1809 only. I've noticed better performance all round.


Did you by chance install the new Intel MEI drivers? I attempted to but got a fatal error on installation. I'm also running bios F8E which supposedly has an update MEI firmware.


----------



## BradleyW

I have an issue as I'm no longer stable at 5GHz 1.33v. It fails Prime small FFT. I hope its not degrading. I've only ran the chip for a month with all the eco settings turned on. It all started when the PC kept crashing randomly recently. 



warbucks said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> New chipset drivers dated 17 Jan 19 released for Z390 Ultra, for Win 10 Build 1809 only. I've noticed better performance all round.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you by chance install the new Intel MEI drivers? I attempted to but got a fatal error on installation. I'm also running bios F8E which supposedly has an update MEI firmware.
Click to expand...

No error and I'm on F7f bios which is the latest for the Ultra according to their website.


----------



## Jidonsu

BradleyW said:


> I have an issue as I'm no longer stable at 5GHz 1.33v. It fails Prime small FFT. I hope its not degrading. I've only ran the chip for a month with all the eco settings turned on. It all started when the PC kept crashing randomly recently.
> 
> 
> 
> No error and I'm on F7f bios which is the latest for the Ultra according to their website.


What happens if you set your ram to run slower?


----------



## scaramonga

BradleyW said:


> New chipset drivers dated 17 Jan 19 released for Z390 Ultra, for Win 10 Build 1809 only. I've noticed better performance all round.


LOL!

......and how would better chipset drivers improve that?, more to the point, how would one even notice?

Utter bull****, sorry, but LOL!


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> @Timur Born
> @GBT-MatthewH
> 
> Just something to mention:
> ...
> The other values, like balanced, max power savings, etc, set different values for IA AC And IA DC separately. Obviously none of these particular settings are useful if you are using manual voltages.


I am using the "Performance" value in combination with LLC "Low". This allows me to overclock the CPU without running into the overcurrent protection. Of course I can lift the protection (and do, because occasionally it could still trigger), but knowing that I can achieve my overclock with less peak current seems preferable.

What this means is that any reasonable combination of Vcore + LLC runs me into the overcurrent protection when I start P95 AVX Small FFT, I get an instant reboot. But once I combine internal LLC "Performance" with LLC "Low" I can even apply a negative VCore offset and still don't get reboots using the same test situation.

That is unless AC/DC loadline setting mess with the whole measurement of voltage, current and power and thus only make the protection "believe" that it's still below the threshold?!


----------



## BradleyW

Jidonsu said:


> What happens if you set your ram to run slower?


It's at 3866MHz. Vcore is at 1.33v. VCCIO 1.16v, VCCIA 1.23v. Failed SmallFFT after 6 hours 14 minutes. Gutted. I've upped VCCIO to 1.18v and VCCIA to 1.25v and retesting currently. Hopefully that will do the trick. Not sure how helpful the VCCIO voltage increase is. Thoughts?

Edit: Upping those voltages made it fail after only 10 minutes. Not really sure where to go from here.



scaramonga said:


> LOL!
> 
> ......and how would better chipset drivers improve that?, more to the point, how would one even notice?
> 
> Utter bull****, sorry, but LOL!


CB score increased by at least 20CB during consistent testing. Each test had a fresh install of Windows and several runs of CB was made for a wide range of results to compare.

It's unfortunate you've found OCN. You seem better suited for reddit. Give it a try. Here's a link:
https://www.reddit.com/


----------



## Scoundrel

Hi  (new here) 
I finally got some stable results for my super challenging 9900K I simply cant get stable at a fixed voltage, so my compromise is a positive "+" offset to "Normal" 
I had no issues getting Prime95 AVX with an offset of 2 stable (4.8Ghz) , but Prime95 without AVX would fail pretty fast @ 5GHz.
Finally thought i got both stable, and tried starting both Prime AVX & NON AVX at the same time and it the the computer would crash instantly.
Also Uncore is unstable at anything over x45.
tried with negative offset to normal but even at - 0,010 i fail. 
Any ideas ?

These are my current stable BIOS settings + voltages and temps.

Load Optimized defaults

M.I.T tab
Advanced Frequency Settings:
Enhanced Multicore Performance = Auto (default)
Extreme Memory Profile (XMP) = Profile1 (DDR4-3200)
System Memory Multiplier = 3600

M.I.T tab
Advanced Frequency Settings:
/Advanced CPU Core Settings: 
---------------------------: AVX Offset = 2 
---------------------------: TjMax Temperature = 110c
---------------------------: Uncore Ratio = 45
---------------------------: Turbo Ratio (Core 1-8 Core Active) = 50 (manually set on all 8)

M.I.T tab
Advanced Memory Settings:
/Chanel A Memory Sub Timings:
---------------------------: Memory Timing Mode	= Manual
Chanel A Standard Timing Control:
---------------------------: CAS Latency	= 17
---------------------------: tRCD	= 19
---------------------------: tRP	= 19
---------------------------: tRAS	= 39

M.I.T tab
Advanced Voltage Settings: 
/Advanced Power Settings: 
---------------------------: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal

M.I.T tab
Advanced Voltage Settings: 
/CPU Core Voltage Control: 
---------------------------: CPU Vcore	= Normal (1.200V)
---------------------------: Dynamic Vcore(DVID) = +0.025 V 


Chipset tab
VT-d = Disabled
Internal Graphics = Disabled

Minimum Vcore Idle in Windows = 0.660
Prime95 (v29) Vcore AVX Load @ 4800 (max temps on 1 core 95c)	= 1.320 - 1.332
Prime95 (v26.6) Vcore NON AVX Load @ 5GHz (max temps on 1 core 90c)	= 1.344 - 1.380
Cinebench Vcore max (max temp on 1 core 80c)	= 1.380
Cinebench R15 Score = 2180
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


EDIT: Changed the below 2 settings back to AUTO since they didnt seem to affect stability/voltage in any way, and I want it kept as simple as possible:


------------------------------EDITED/REMOVED--------------------------------------------

M.I.T tab
Advanced Voltage Settings: 
/Advanced Power Settings: 
---------------------------: CPU internal AC/DC Load Line = Performance
---------------------------: CPU Vcore Current Protection = Turbo

------------------------------EDITED/REMOVED--------------------------------------------


----------



## OutlawII

BradleyW said:


> I have an issue as I'm no longer stable at 5GHz 1.33v. It fails Prime small FFT. I hope its not degrading. I've only ran the chip for a month with all the eco settings turned on. It all started when the PC kept crashing randomly recently.
> 
> 
> 
> No error and I'm on F7f bios which is the latest for the Ultra according to their website.



No blue screen error ? Have you tried taking it back to factory defaults?


----------



## BradleyW

OutlawII said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an issue as I'm no longer stable at 5GHz 1.33v. It fails Prime small FFT. I hope its not degrading. I've only ran the chip for a month with all the eco settings turned on. It all started when the PC kept crashing randomly recently.
> 
> No error and I'm on F7f bios which is the latest for the Ultra according to their website.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No blue screen error ? Have you tried taking it back to factory defaults?
Click to expand...

No blue screen. Just a single worker failing. Worker can be random. I've reduced vccio to 1.15 and vccia at 1.2 and memory reduced to 3800 mhz. Cores hitting peak 92c despite having a 360 and 420 rad, custom loop, ambient 18c. Average 88c.


----------



## EarlZ

All of a sudden my PC rebooted twice and I am no longer able to boot into windows, getting all sorts of BSOD errors like WHEA uncorrectable, IRQ not less than equal. So I removed all other hardware leaving only the board, processor ram ( no SSD/HDD ) attempted to boot a USB windows 10 ( tried 4 different drives ) i always get a WHEA uncorrectable error. I've tried my DDR4 sticks individually and I've cleared the CMOS multiple times. I dont have another set of DDR4 sticks to try out but I find it unlikely that both sticks went bad at the same time. It could either be the motherboard or the CPU that may have 'died' on me.


----------



## OutlawII

BradleyW said:


> No blue screen. Just a single worker failing. Worker can be random. I've reduced vccio to 1.15 and vccia at 1.2 and memory reduced to 3800 mhz. Cores hitting peak 92c despite having a 360 and 420 rad, custom loop, ambient 18c. Average 88c.


Wow that sucks ...Ive had one cpu do this back in the day {i7-920] but it ended up being a bios issue cleared the bios reset and reentered settings and it worked fine.Sorry i couldnt help more but thats all i got bro


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> No blue screen. Just a single worker failing. Worker can be random. I've reduced vccio to 1.15 and vccia at 1.2 and memory reduced to 3800 mhz. Cores hitting peak 92c despite having a 360 and 420 rad, custom loop, ambient 18c. Average 88c.





EarlZ said:


> All of a sudden my PC rebooted twice and I am no longer able to boot into windows, getting all sorts of BSOD errors like WHEA uncorrectable, IRQ not less than equal. So I removed all other hardware leaving only the board, processor ram ( no SSD/HDD ) attempted to boot a USB windows 10 ( tried 4 different drives ) i always get a WHEA uncorrectable error. I've tried my DDR4 sticks individually and I've cleared the CMOS multiple times. I dont have another set of DDR4 sticks to try out but I find it unlikely that both sticks went bad at the same time. It could either be the motherboard or the CPU that may have 'died' on me.


Can both of you please set the core clocks lower until you can get into windows or run prime95 (AVX off) and then post which speed and voltages you needed to go down to in order to be stable? This also includes decreasing cache speed too, even as low as x36.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Can both of you please set the core clocks lower until you can get into windows or run prime95 (AVX off) and then post which speed and voltages you needed to go down to in order to be stable? This also includes decreasing cache speed too, even as low as x36.


I am running at stock speeds (cleared cmos) and still getting the bsod even on a windows10 usb install attempt, do you still need me to run it lower?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I am running at stock speeds (cleared cmos) and still getting the bsod even on a windows10 usb install attempt, do you still need me to run it lower?


Yes go down to x37 if possible until you can actually stop crashing.
Then note the issue and file a RMA. But at least you may be able to get into windows that way.


----------



## BradleyW

EarlZ said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can both of you please set the core clocks lower until you can get into windows or run prime95 (AVX off) and then post which speed and voltages you needed to go down to in order to be stable? This also includes decreasing cache speed too, even as low as x36.
> 
> 
> 
> I am running at stock speeds (cleared cmos) and still getting the bsod even on a windows10 usb install attempt, do you still need me to run it lower?
Click to expand...

I'm stable at stock. 1.17vcore reported by CPUZ and uncore at x43. Ram defaults at 2133 with xmp off.


----------



## Djso455

its currently on sale on newegg for 239.99 after rebate


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> I'm stable at stock. 1.17vcore reported by CPUZ and uncore at x43. Ram defaults at 2133 with xmp off.


Now leave the RAM at 2133 and slowly increase core speed and vcore until you get issues again.


----------



## evilseed1

Hello guys, that's my OC. Could you're give be some recommendations?
My goal was get not only 5Ghz, but 100% stable RAM with complete any Prime95 tests.

AVX Offset -2 can get with 1.3v on Core, AVX-0 only with 1.35v and a lot of heat.
Uncore ratio 45, any number higher, make ram unstable.
I was trying get RAM faster then just XMP profile of 3600, but gained errors in Blend test Prime95 or BSOD, so i finded only 16-16-16-36 CR2 at 3600 stable for me. Finding values for VCCIO, VCCSA was huge pain...

Intel Core i7-9700K, GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO, GIGABYTE AORUS GTX 1080 Ti, Kingston HyperX Predator HX436C17PB3K2/16, Corsair HX850.


----------



## Timur Born

Timur Born said:


> I am using the "Performance" value in combination with LLC "Low". This allows me to overclock the CPU without running into the overcurrent protection. Of course I can lift the protection (and do, because occasionally it could still trigger), but knowing that I can achieve my overclock with less peak current seems preferable.


Well, I solved that riddle. When Internal AC LL "Performance" is combined with LLC "Low" then overcurrent protection "Auto" is automatically increased by the BIOS. I may have to check if EasyTune is in line with BIOS settings, too.

I also spent some time trying various combinations of internal AC loadlines with VRM loadlines and VCore offsets. At least for peak loads (P95 AVX Small FFTs) it doesn't seem to matter much which combinations you use to achieve the final load voltage, the results are more or less the same. On that basis I fail to see the benefit of setting AC LL to 1 (from 0/auto) just to crank up VRM loadlines and Vcore offsets. AC LL 1 + VRM LLC "Standard" needs up to +0.2 V offset to get the similar results to AC LL 0/Auto or "Performance" in combination with various VRM LLC settings and negative Vcore offsets. So forcing VID to ridiculously low values may just cause confusion without much of a benefit. I would have to check other load scenarios, but currently I am only interested in the extremes (idle and maximum load).


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> I never had this happen to me and I even just now tested it for you by pressing the reset button (a button I haven't pressed on my case in about 4 years now), while I was in windows, risking corruption.
> System turned off and on and didn't switch bioses. Then I went ahead and manually flashed the backup to f8e.


I am currently using BIOS 2 (Backup) with the Bios_SW being in position 1 (Main) and the SB switch being in position 2 (Single). This should not be possible/happen at all.


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> Now leave the RAM at 2133 and slowly increase core speed and vcore until you get issues again.


Worker failed after 5 hours 30 mins!

Currently testing the following:
5GHz HT, AVX Auto, x47 uncore.
XMP OFF (2133MHz).
C States Enabled.
VCCIO Auto (1v)
VCCIA Auto (1v)
LLC Turbo
CPU Vcore @ 1.32v (FMA3 load, Small-FFT)

IA AC 0, offset +.0.25v (1.32v load, CPU-Z)

CPU @90c peak, 87c avg.
VR VVC (SVID) 100.c.
VR Loop 1 100c.

Fingers crossed it passes!


----------



## renji1337

I'm using a Z390 Aorus Pro and my HWINfo isn't showing VRVOUT at all, just VRVIN. It does show the IT8688E and IT8792E sensors. Why isn't VR VOUT showing?


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I am currently using BIOS 2 (Backup) with the Bios_SW being in position 1 (Main) and the SB switch being in position 2 (Single). This should not be possible/happen at all.


The main and backup bios is set by hardware on original initialization. When the CMOS is cleared fully, I believe the switch that is active becomes the primary bios. I don't know if this requires RTC reset (pulling battery) or not.
But I did test pressing RESET while windows was running (this is dangerous, if something's being written to) and it just shut off and on without changing bioses.

The reason IA AC Loadline should be set to 1 is that, especially if your cache speed is high, on a high VID chip, the CPU's idle VID is boosted up by some formula of mOhms based on the IA AC loadline. And the default VID is based on CPU cache speed, not core speed. So if you tried setting cache to x47 and your x47 cache VID would default to 1.3v for example, then an IA AC loadline value of 1.60 or 2.10 mOhms would probably set your idle VID (CPU Vcore) at 1.4v+, if you were not downclocking at idle. WIth IA AC loadline set to 0.01 mOhms, then the idle VID would be 1.3v instead.

The thing is, you want downclocking while some others don't want downclocking. You need to run the CPU at max speed all the time to see how the IA AC loadline affects idle and load CPU vcores (with adaptive voltage).
The IA DC loadline is power measurements only, with a higher IA DC mOhm loadline value causing the CPU VID to *drop* at load (aka vid droop), in the same way that NOT using loadline calibration makes the CPU Vcore drop at load. I tried to explain this earlier.

At static voltages, changing the IA AC loadline setting does nothing but change the starting CPU default VID. Changing the IA DC loadline value affects power draw measurements greatly (and VID droop, after the default VID is set by (cpu cache ratio VID+moHms rating of IA AC loadline)

Asus has a setting "Sync AC DC Loadline to VRM loadline", so that the CPU VID will follow the vdroop of the CPU Vcore. Gigabyte doesn't have this setting.

The rest is up to you.


----------



## Performer81

renji1337 said:


> I'm using a Z390 Aorus Pro and my HWINfo isn't showing VRVOUT at all, just VRVIN. It does show the IT8688E and IT8792E sensors. Why isn't VR VOUT showing?


It does, scroll down a bit.


----------



## Falkentyne

renji1337 said:


> I'm using a Z390 Aorus Pro and my HWINfo isn't showing VRVOUT at all, just VRVIN. It does show the IT8688E and IT8792E sensors. Why isn't VR VOUT showing?


Are you using version 6.00+? If you didn't update, that's why.
I've seen several posts about the Z390 Aorus Pro and Aorus Ultra showing VR Vout properly, then later on, it showing a value of 65.536V for VR Vout instead of the real value. No idea why and I can't help with that.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Worker failed after 5 hours 30 mins!
> 
> Currently testing the following:
> 5GHz HT, AVX Auto, x47 uncore.
> XMP OFF (2133MHz).
> C States Enabled.
> VCCIO Auto (1v)
> VCCIA Auto (1v)
> LLC Turbo
> CPU Vcore @ 1.32v (FMA3 load, Small-FFT)
> 
> IA AC 0, offset +.0.25v (1.32v load, CPU-Z)
> 
> CPU @90c peak, 87c avg.
> VR VVC (SVID) 100.c.
> VR Loop 1 100c.
> 
> Fingers crossed it passes!


Didn't you say you were randomly crashing at idle?
Did you fix the random crashing already?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I am running at stock speeds (cleared cmos) and still getting the bsod even on a windows10 usb install attempt, do you still need me to run it lower?


It's been several hours.
Did you try 3700 mhz and gain any increased stability?


----------



## Swifty220

I am having a heck of a time getting my 9700k and my 9900k to 5.0. I am running 4 dimms of 8 gig. Corsair DDR4 3000. Anyone have an opinion on these IMC. Do they like two dimms populated only? Suggestion what I should run VCCIO and VCCSA?


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> Didn't you say you were randomly crashing at idle?
> Did you fix the random crashing already?


Yeah, that was the idle voltage being too low. I've managed to get the VRM's down from 104c to around 70c by placing some 40mm fans over the heat sink. I've just failed after 25 minutes of Small FFT @ 1.32vcore. I'm now at 1.344v with a peak of 1.356v. Perhaps it was just the Vcore all along.

I might try an offset in the future seen as I don't really need AVX. I assume I run Prime95 small FFT with SSE only to test 5GHz stability, then run it again with FMA3 at say 4.7GHz? (offset of 3 for example).

Cheers.


----------



## renji1337

Falkentyne said:


> Are you using version 6.00+? If you didn't update, that's why.
> I've seen several posts about the Z390 Aorus Pro and Aorus Ultra showing VR Vout properly, then later on, it showing a value of 65.536V for VR Vout instead of the real value. No idea why and I can't help with that.


I'm using v6.01-3630 beta

don't see it anywhere on the screen. Looked all over for it.


attached photo below, it's not there


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Yes go down to x37 if possible until you can actually stop crashing.
> Then note the issue and file a RMA. But at least you may be able to get into windows that way.


I decided to try X30 for cpu multi and cache it is now booting on windows at 0.875v while running 8 instances of HCI memory test. 

Does this mean my processor needs an RM? I havent ran this past 1.330v @ 5Ghz for more than a 4hrs.

edit:
Testing it now at x40 cpu and 37x cache seems to run fine.
I guess there is no point in testing for a higher multi as it gets a bsod on all stock.


----------



## BradleyW

I'm using an AVX offset of 3 and my 9900K is clocked to 5GHz (4.7GHz AVX).

When I run Prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled in the local.txt file, the core frequencies change between 4700 to 5000 MHz randomly during testing. How do I fix that? 

I'm using an offset voltage. Disabling C states and using high perf profile in Windows didn't help.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> The main and backup bios is set by hardware on original initialization. When the CMOS is cleared fully, I believe the switch that is active becomes the primary bios. I don't know if this requires RTC reset (pulling battery) or not.


I am back to BIOS 2 being on BIOS_SW position 1. And no, a normal Clear CMOS does not switch BIOS (LED) positions.

The bug is easily reproduced: Set wrong voltage (too low), see failed POST (black screen), keep power button pressed until PC switches off, turn back on and voila: BIOS just switched positions on the switch despite being set to manual. 



> WIth IA AC loadline set to 0.01 mOhms, then the idle VID would be 1.3v instead.


If your idle voltage is too high then lower Vcore accordingly. With IA AC 1 you need to use a high positive Vcore offset in order to be stable, the result is the same as if you were using IA AC 0 with lower Vcore. The combination of increased VRM LLC + lowered Vcore (offset) leads to lower idle voltage, both at IA AC 0 and 1.

That being said, the difference between 1.4 V and 1.2x V at idle is about 5 - 10 W total package power. This save some energy, but less than C1E and going from 20+ to 30+ W idle power is not going to kill your CPU. This is also bought at the cost of more aggressive VRM LLC, so a good balance has to be struck.

For optical reasons (during measurement) it may be useful to try an IA AC value that matched VID with Vcore as close as possible. But performance and wattage wise VID doesn't seem to matter, only the resulting Vcore does (by whatever combination it was derived).


----------



## Kipps

renji1337 said:


> I'm using v6.01-3630 beta
> 
> don't see it anywhere on the screen. Looked all over for it.
> 
> 
> attached photo below, it's not there



Ive got the Ultra board - Ive found if you have any of the Gigabytes apps installed in Windows (App Centre, SIV, @BIOS etc) Hwinfo wont show VRVout. With them uninstalled it shows the value every time


----------



## Jidonsu

BradleyW said:


> I'm using an AVX offset of 3 and my 9900K is clocked to 5GHz (4.7GHz AVX).
> 
> When I run Prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled in the local.txt file, the core frequencies change between 4700 to 5000 MHz randomly during testing. How do I fix that?
> 
> I'm using an offset voltage. Disabling C states and using high perf profile in Windows didn't help.


What if you set Prime95 to Real-time Priority?


----------



## Timur Born

BradleyW said:


> I'm using an AVX offset of 3 and my 9900K is clocked to 5GHz (4.7GHz AVX).
> 
> When I run Prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled in the local.txt file, the core frequencies change between 4700 to 5000 MHz randomly during testing. How do I fix that?


That is because background processes use AVX and thus invoke the AVX offset. Windows Defender and Search Indexing are two examples of this that seem to use AVX.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kipps said:


> Ive got the Ultra board - Ive found if you have any of the Gigabytes apps installed in Windows (App Centre, SIV, @BIOS etc) Hwinfo wont show VRVout. With them uninstalled it shows the value every time


You have won the internet award for the week. Well played, sir. Well played!


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I am back to BIOS 2 being on BIOS_SW position 1. And no, a normal Clear CMOS does not switch BIOS (LED) positions.
> 
> The bug is easily reproduced: Set wrong voltage (too low), see failed POST (black screen), keep power button pressed until PC switches off, turn back on and voila: BIOS just switched positions on the switch despite being set to manual.
> 
> 
> If your idle voltage is too high then lower Vcore accordingly. With IA AC 1 you need to use a high positive Vcore offset in order to be stable, the result is the same as if you were using IA AC 0 with lower Vcore. The combination of increased VRM LLC + lowered Vcore (offset) leads to lower idle voltage, both at IA AC 0 and 1.
> 
> That being said, the difference between 1.4 V and 1.2x V at idle is about 5 - 10 W total package power. This save some energy, but less than C1E and going from 20+ to 30+ W idle power is not going to kill your CPU. This is also bought at the cost of more aggressive VRM LLC, so a good balance has to be struck.
> 
> For optical reasons (during measurement) it may be useful to try an IA AC value that matched VID with Vcore as close as possible. But performance and wattage wise VID doesn't seem to matter, only the resulting Vcore does (by whatever combination it was derived).


The bios switching of the dip switch version of "Bios 1" has to be done with the CMOS battery unplugged first, with the PSU switched off or unplugged also, THEN a clear CMOS done with the battery removed, then reinserted.
Also I already tried what you said, even though it was a total accident. I mentioned this a few weeks ago but you disregarded my post, it seems. 

I tried booting my CPU at 4.7 ghz @ 1.10v, because I set a x36 multiplier in the bios (i was trying to see how low of voltage i could boot at at base CPU frequency, which is why I tried that), not knowing that setting x36 makes it boot at x47, and setting x37 and it boots at x37. Probably because 3600 mhz is "base clocks" and to make it boost at 3600 mhz, all you do is disable turbo boost, which I did NOT know at the time. Anyway trying to boot at 4700 mhz at 1.10v caused a bunch of "USB initialization" POST code stuck errors and some other errors and repeated black screens, and one "beep" post with a black screen (Bios crashed before boot logo), and each time I had to hold the power button down 5 seconds to power off. After like 10 times of doing that, the system managed to POST and get into bios at 4.7 ghz @ 1.10v and I managed to load a profile and save and reboot without it crashing again.

Not once did it revert to the backup bios.

I had *TEN* failed posts in a row, 4.7 ghz @ 1.10v. And remember, 1.10v is the lowest manual voltage possible. (I was not using adaptive). It never switched bioses on me.
I don't intend to brute force test this thing to make it switch either. I was even able to flash the backup bios by booting to the backup and running Qflash. Some others who tried kept saying it tried to flash the main bios when they tried this.


----------



## Kipps

Falkentyne said:


> You have won the internet award for the week. Well played, sir. Well played!


To be exact - It appears to be APP centre that causes the issue (You have to install this one first anyway) Just the base version of APP centre is ok, but then it installs 'easytune engine service' and a couple of other programs - This is when you lose the VRVout reading

Easy solution is just dont install any of that garbage to begin with  (Took me 2 weeks, and 2 fresh installs to work this out !!)


----------



## scaramonga

BradleyW said:


> CB score increased by at least 20CB during consistent testing. Each test had a fresh install of Windows and several runs of CB was made for a wide range of results to compare.
> 
> It's unfortunate you've found OCN. You seem better suited for reddit. Give it a try. Here's a link:
> https://www.reddit.com/



I'm stepping on to my 'reddit box', for a second....

The Intel Chipset Software does not include ANY drivers, but rather an INF file, that gives the operating system information about the hardware on one's system. Now, this could be last years INF, or in your case, yesterday's, regardless, it will certainly not result in any change to the performance of one's system.

Your 'device manager' may be a little more up to date though, lol, name wise 


Placebo muchas gracias.

/gets back down from 'reddit box'.


P.S
I don't use Reddit, never have, and never will, as I've forgotten more than they will all ever know


----------



## talexxx

Swifty220 said:


> I am having a heck of a time getting my 9700k and my 9900k to 5.0. I am running 4 dimms of 8 gig. Corsair DDR4 3000. Anyone have an opinion on these IMC. Do they like two dimms populated only? Suggestion what I should run VCCIO and VCCSA?


Hi mate,

Going from single rank dual channel to dual rank dual channel (look a bit into what that is) there's quite some performance hidden there as i've found out after a lot of benchmarking.

4 x 8 single rank dimm sticks performs in 1440p anywhere between 5% and 8% better than 2 x 8 single rank dimm sticks (assassins creed origins, far cry 5 in game benchmarks) considering something like the 2080ti that puts a lot of pressure on cpu/ram
this is better than 100mhz on the core clock of the cpu 

so it's best to keep all slots populated with ram on the 9900k/9700k if you're using 8GB single rank sticks, or to use 2 x 16GB sticks dual rank (but those usually come with lower timings)

i got stupid lucky and i have an old kit 2 x 8GB corsair 3200C16 that is dual rank inside (using old memory chips that were small so they had to go dual rank).
In benchmarks, it is within 1% to a 4x more expensive 4 x 8GB corsair 3600C16 kit, because it is already dual rank inside and the extra speed 3200->3600 is not a lot of help in these games

surprisingly, removing two sticks from the 4 x 8GB corsair 3600C16 kit to 2 x 8GB 3600C16 (so going from dual rank dual channel to single rank dual channel) makes it perform significantly worse than my 3 year old 2 x 8GB 3200C16 just because my old kit is dual rank on the inside
in all these tests of course, taking care to keep dual channel functionality by placing the sticks where they should be placed

memory matters!
almost dropped my pen while doing the benchmarks and finding out this one


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> The bios switching of the dip switch version of "Bios 1" has to be done with the CMOS battery unplugged first, with the PSU switched off or unplugged also, THEN a clear CMOS done with the battery removed, then reinserted.
> Also I already tried what you said, even though it was a total accident. I mentioned this a few weeks ago but you disregarded my post, it seems.


I don't understand why this information is important to my bug report? I have no intentions of switching BIOS positions, on the contrary, I want it to stop doing that.

According to the manual when the SB switch is set to "Single BIOS" (position 2) then the board should use the BIOS_SW to switch between BIOS versions, it should *not* do so automatically. I have experienced automatic switching multiple times yesterday. When this happened I could switch back by changing the BIOS_SW from one position to the other. This is not how it is documented and I assume that this is not how it is supposed to work.

It is inconvenient to have the BIOS switch automatically when you are experimenting with overclocking and it's confusing to have the BIOS_SW position not remain consistent with the currently active BIOS.



> Not once did it revert to the backup bios.


So you were not able to reproduce the issue, good for you. The difference may be that I am using BIOS 2 (backup) for tinkering, while you are using BIOS 1. But that should not have any impact on automatic BIOS switching when manual (Single BIOS) mode is selected. So it remains to be a bug.


----------



## Sheyster

talexxx said:


> 4 x 8 single rank dimm sticks performs in 1440p anywhere between 5% and 8% better than 2 x 8 single rank dimm sticks (assassins creed origins, far cry 5 in game benchmarks) considering something like the 2080ti that puts a lot of pressure on cpu/ram
> this is better than 100mhz on the core clock of the cpu



Proof? :thinking:



talexxx said:


> memory matters!



Not that much for games. 3200+ is usually just fine. Minimal FPS gains above that in most games.


----------



## ScomComputers

Hello...pls help me.
How to revert my motherboard bios if it's corrupt or wrong?
Z390 Aorus Pro,this mobo does not use bios switches.
Thanks.


----------



## talexxx

Sheyster said:


> Proof? :thinking:
> 
> Not that much for games. 3200+ is usually just fine. Minimal FPS gains above that in most games.


I've been spending the last 2 weeks bench marking different configurations, so you can either believe me or somehow get the parts and test yourself too 

Test configuration was all possible combinations of 
- CPU: [email protected], [email protected]
- RAM: 3200C16 (an old 2x8 dual rank kit) and 3600C16 (4 x 8 dual rank) ram kits
- GPU was 2080TI.
I am doing two builds in the same time so i got some chance to play around.

I've bench marked Assassins Creed Odyssey, Far Cry 5, Shadow of Tomb Raider and Battlefield V in 5k, 4k, 1440p and 1080p.
Except BFV i've used the in-game benchmarks and looked at average fps as i dont have the means to easily record and measure 1% low.

Very little to choose from between all the configurations at 4k and 5k, all within 1% of each other. 
9700k vs 9900k also a wash, even in low resolutions, when keeping memory constant. Most often in 9700k's favor due to the higher achieved overclock.

Funny enough the RAM made all the difference in 1440p and 1080p with the single rank configuration performing by far the worst:
Ex: ACO 1440p 9700k
3600c16 single rank 2 x 8GB: 91 fps average
3600c16 dual rank 4 x 8GB: 95 fps average
3200c16 dual rank 2 x 8GB: 94 fps average

ACO 1080p 9700k:
3600c16 single rank 2 x 8GB: 92 fps average
3600c16 dual rank 4 x 8GB: 100 fps average
3200c16 dual rank 2 x 8GB: 97 fps average

Tomb raider on the other hand doesn't care and scores the same regardless of ram kit. 
Far Cry 5 does care and behaves like ACO. 
BF V is very difficult to count on the results as there's no in game benchmark so i'm leaving that out.

I guess it's a matter of how the engine uses the CPU/RAM subsystem.
Also the 2080TI helps brings this out as its more of a chance to be CPU bound instead of GPU bound at a "normal" resolution like 1440p. These things usually stand out more in 1080p but no one realistically uses 1080p.

What really got me thinking was this video: 
When they stumbled on this by pure mistake... They were benchmarking 8GB vs 16GB vs 32GB in games and found out advantages of going to 32GB without really understanding why.
In fact they probably had a 4 x 8GB dual rank kit that was performing poorly in 16GB configuration due to going from double channel dual rank to dual channel single rank... Go figure...

Given that all the 2 x 8GB kits being sold now are basically dual channel / single rank, i'd say this is a pretty relevant finding...


----------



## Robbært

ScomComputers said:


> How to revert my motherboard bios if it's corrupt or wrong?
> Z390 Aorus Pro,this mobo does not use bios switches.


Only option is warranty it.
There inboard flash chip programmers if you have another PC and want to fix it self.


----------



## KedarWolf

Robbært said:


> Only option is warranty it.
> There inboard flash chip programmers if you have another PC and want to fix it self.


https://www.ebay.com/itm/SPI-USB-To...abcb6282d:m:m_HCsaCBzGvEidphzeq3cGA:rk:6:pf:0

This is on the way to recover my Aorus Xtreme BIOS but I don't think the Pro's are socketed which makes it more complicated.


----------



## ScomComputers

Robbært said:


> Only option is warranty it.
> There inboard flash chip programmers if you have another PC and want to fix it self.


The pro uses dual bios, I read somewhere that it automatically loads the good bios if something is wrong. This is true?


----------



## luets

talexxx said:


> ACO 1080p 9700k:
> 3600c16 single rank 2 x 8GB: 92 fps average
> 3600c16 dual rank 4 x 8GB: 100 fps average
> 3200c16 dual rank 2 x 8GB: 97 fps average


So 3200 c16 > 3600 c16? you did something wrong here.


----------



## talexxx

luets said:


> So 3200 c16 > 3600 c16? you did something wrong here.


no i havent 
i did the benchmarks a few times as i did not believe it myself

as i was writing above, i have an old corsair lpx 2x8gb 3200c16 kit from 3 years ago
why this matters is because it is dual rank inside, they used really small memory chips that were standard at the time so they had to go dual rank to get to 8GB

the new 3600c16 kit is a corsair dominator platinum kit that is single rank per stick because they use newer chips so it's easy to go to 8GB per stick

so than....

2 x 8gb 3200c16 dual rank (my old kit) is significantly faster than 2 x 8gb 3600c16 single rank (2 dimms from the new kit means dual channel but single rank); despite the frequency and latency disadvantage, the "dual rankiness" more than makes up for it and leads to a convincing win
however 2 x 8gb 3200c16 dual rank (my old kit) looses by a smaller margin of course to 4 x 8gb 3600c16 because the new kit now becomes itself dual rank (4 single rank sticks=dual channel dual rank) and it has faster frequency and latency

what i'm trying to say is that for anyone that uses the newer single rank dimm sticks (basically everyone), there is performance to be had when memory bound (ex: 1440p gaming with 2080ti) by going from 2 x 8 to 4 x 8 because it's moving from single rank to dual rank
given that we all here are trying to get that last x%, it seems a significant finding...


----------



## luets

Yeah, I know that dual rank is faster, but the difference you have here seems like a lot considering your single rank comparison is running at 3600 vs 3200. all the sub timings were the same?


----------



## Padinn

Just wanted to post a quick update, my PC does upclock to 5Ghz when idling, its just very rare. However I can see 4 of my cores did it on HWInfo(I left it idling for about an hour)


----------



## Falkentyne

luets said:


> So 3200 c16 > 3600 c16? you did something wrong here.


I trust @talexxx . You really shoudn't be so quick to just attack people without doing your own research and getting your own counter-proof. The same type of people said 'degradation doesn't exist' until someone actually did their research, like talexxx did and proved degradation can happen with IDLE voltages and no load.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html
I mean look,
We're seeing these Z390 boards (maybe Gigabyte is at fault, IDK), not posting with DDR 3600 mhz with 2x8 GB, when higher than 2800 mhz, then the same person sticks 2x8 GB of the Corsair (which wouldn't boot past 2800) and 2x8 GB of the Geil that was RMA'd for being bad, and all four happily post at 3733 mhz and work stable. When the Corsair by itself didn't work at 2800 mhz.

If that can happen, anything's possible.
Stop hating, please.

In your defense, however, subtimings and tertiary timings can definitely cause this to happen. But that still doesn't explain why Corsair 3600 mhz doesn't boot past 2733 by itself, but stick the 3600 mhz with another brand, all four sticks suddenly work at 3733 mhz...


----------



## luets

talexxx said:


> I've been spending the last 2 weeks bench marking different configurations, so you can either believe me or somehow get the parts and test yourself too
> 
> Test configuration was all possible combinations of
> - CPU: [email protected], [email protected]
> - RAM: 3200C16 (an old 2x8 dual rank kit) and 3600C16 (4 x 8 dual rank) ram kits
> - GPU was 2080TI.
> I am doing two builds in the same time so i got some chance to play around.
> 
> I've bench marked Assassins Creed Odyssey, Far Cry 5, Shadow of Tomb Raider and Battlefield V in 5k, 4k, 1440p and 1080p.
> Except BFV i've used the in-game benchmarks and looked at average fps as i dont have the means to easily record and measure 1% low.
> 
> Very little to choose from between all the configurations at 4k and 5k, all within 1% of each other.
> 9700k vs 9900k also a wash, even in low resolutions, when keeping memory constant. Most often in 9700k's favor due to the higher achieved overclock.
> 
> Funny enough the RAM made all the difference in 1440p and 1080p with the single rank configuration performing by far the worst:
> Ex: ACO 1440p 9700k
> 3600c16 single rank 2 x 8GB: 91 fps average
> 3600c16 dual rank 4 x 8GB: 95 fps average
> 3200c16 dual rank 2 x 8GB: 94 fps average
> 
> ACO 1080p 9700k:
> 3600c16 single rank 2 x 8GB: 92 fps average
> 3600c16 dual rank 4 x 8GB: 100 fps average
> 3200c16 dual rank 2 x 8GB: 97 fps average
> 
> Tomb raider on the other hand doesn't care and scores the same regardless of ram kit.
> Far Cry 5 does care and behaves like ACO.
> BF V is very difficult to count on the results as there's no in game benchmark so i'm leaving that out.
> 
> I guess it's a matter of how the engine uses the CPU/RAM subsystem.
> Also the 2080TI helps brings this out as its more of a chance to be CPU bound instead of GPU bound at a "normal" resolution like 1440p. These things usually stand out more in 1080p but no one realistically uses 1080p.
> 
> What really got me thinking was this video:
> When they stumbled on this by pure mistake... They were benchmarking 8GB vs 16GB vs 32GB in games and found out advantages of going to 32GB without really understanding why.
> In fact they probably had a 4 x 8GB dual rank kit that was performing poorly in 16GB configuration due to going from double channel dual rank to dual channel single rank... Go figure...
> 
> Given that all the 2 x 8GB kits being sold now are basically dual channel / single rank, i'd say this is a pretty relevant finding...
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcJI5H3fQlE&t=445s





Falkentyne said:


> I trust @talexxx . You really shoudn't be so quick to just attack people without doing your own research and getting your own counter-proof. The same type of people said 'degradation doesn't exist' until someone actually did their research, like talexxx did and proved degradation can happen with IDLE voltages and no load.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html
> I mean look,
> We're seeing these Z390 boards (maybe Gigabyte is at fault, IDK), not posting with DDR 3600 mhz with 2x8 GB, when higher than 2800 mhz, then the same person sticks 2x8 GB of the Corsair (which wouldn't boot past 2800) and 2x8 GB of the Geil that was RMA'd for being bad, and all four happily post at 3733 mhz and work stable. When the Corsair by itself didn't work at 2800 mhz.
> 
> If that can happen, anything's possible.
> Stop hating, please.
> 
> In your defense, however, subtimings and tertiary timings can definitely cause this to happen. But that still doesn't explain why Corsair 3600 mhz doesn't boot past 2733 by itself, but stick the 3600 mhz with another brand, all four sticks suddenly work at 3733 mhz...


Hating? I can't question his results? 

Anyways, I had two kits of corsair 3200 b-die. Both were awful. Neither would boot ant ANYTHING cr1. Both would error at some point in ramtest. This is with only the xmp profile enabled. I bought a teamgroup pro dark 3200 cl14 kit and it worked flawlessly. I bought a 3600 cl15 kit from gskill and it worked flawlessly.

Corsair uses the lowest binned chips they can get their hands on.


----------



## Falkentyne

luets said:


> Hating? I can't question his results?
> 
> Anyways, I had two kits of corsair 3200 b-die. Both were awful. Neither would boot ant ANYTHING cr1. Both would error at some point in ramtest. This is with only the xmp profile enabled. I bought a teamgroup pro dark 3200 cl14 kit and it worked flawlessly. I bought a 3600 cl15 kit from gskill and it worked flawlessly.
> 
> Corsair uses the lowest binned chips they can get their hands on.


You sort of passively attacked him, IMO
That's almost like saying "he's clueless" or something.
We all know that RAM training is totally messed up on these boards.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> I don't understand why this information is important to my bug report? I have no intentions of switching BIOS positions, on the contrary, I want it to stop doing that.
> 
> According to the manual when the SB switch is set to "Single BIOS" (position 2) then the board should use the BIOS_SW to switch between BIOS versions, it should *not* do so automatically. I have experienced automatic switching multiple times yesterday. When this happened I could switch back by changing the BIOS_SW from one position to the other. This is not how it is documented and I assume that this is not how it is supposed to work.
> 
> It is inconvenient to have the BIOS switch automatically when you are experimenting with overclocking and it's confusing to have the BIOS_SW position not remain consistent with the currently active BIOS.
> 
> 
> So you were not able to reproduce the issue, good for you. The difference may be that I am using BIOS 2 (backup) for tinkering, while you are using BIOS 1. But that should not have any impact on automatic BIOS switching when manual (Single BIOS) mode is selected. So it remains to be a bug.


Ok @Timur Born , I can't do this sort of testing for you anymore. I'm literally risking my hardware and my OS for this and I gain absolutely nothing and you gain everything. This doesn't help me one bit.

I just booted to the backup bios. Set switch to bios 2 to activate backup bios beforehand (with power unplugged). Second switch is set to single bios mode.

Both main and backup are already flashed to F8E.
I know it's backup because there are no saved profiles on it. 
So tests are done on backup bios. Verified each time.

First test:
Booted into Bios.
Pressed case RESET button.
Board reset off and on quickly, booted right back up to backup bios checking with DEL key.

second test:
Booted into windows.
Pressed case RESET button, making sure nothing was being loaded (sort of hard because my HDD light on my 760T case is dead).
Board reset off and on, booted and entered Bios, still on backup Bios.

Third test:
Booted into windows.
Flipped the PSU off switch, waited 30 seconds.
Flipped it on, powered on, board booted into backup bios.

Powered off manually, flipped PSU switch, set switch to bios 1, powered on, booted into main with all my profiles.

No issues to report.
Everything is working as expected on my system.


----------



## luets

Falkentyne said:


> You sort of passively attacked him, IMO
> That's almost like saying "he's clueless" or something.
> We all know that RAM training is totally messed up on these boards.


If he had done 3200 c16 single rank vs 3200 c16 dual rank it would be a lot more believable but he reported a pretty big difference, even with single rank having the speed advantage. If the difference between single and dual rank was this much nobody would be buying single rank.


----------



## BradleyW

My 9900k is stable at 5GHz, 1.3v, AVX 3. I'm repeating tests with the RAM set to 3866MHz, VCCIO 1.16v, VCCIA 1.22v via Small FFT. If it passes, I'll run blend with custom memory size to ensure overall stability.


----------



## talexxx

luets said:


> If he had done 3200 c16 single rank vs 3200 c16 dual rank it would be a lot more believable but he reported a pretty big difference, even with single rank having the speed advantage. If the difference between single and dual rank was this much nobody would be buying single rank.


When posting the results, i've included three results, including comparison between 3600c16 single and dual rank. This was achieved by only using 2 of the 4 sticks from the 4 x 8gb kit while taking care to preserve dual channel.
So i think that the results are conclusive because they are also looking at the same type of sticks (so same timings) besides comparing with my old dual rank 2x8GB.

The primary ratings are the same for both kits 16-18-18-36, which obviously favors the 3600 kit.

The new kit is a Corsair Dominator Platinum that is on the QVL of the Aorus Master, and the secondary timings were spot on with what i read on the SPD of the sticks. 
Did not bother looking at the tertiaries, nor would i have understood them.

My old 3200C16 kit, i basically considered junk. But suprise it's also on the QVL of the Aorus Master.
Given that both kits were QVL and i used XMP and F7 bios, i dont expect the board messing things up too bad.

I tried to keep to my test plan and keep things fixed, ran the tests multiple times, i controlled CPU&GPU thermals to avoid throttle in the later benchmark runs due to heat accumulation, etc. but who knows what i might have missed...
I welcome anyone challenging my results, i did not believe them myself.

Why i think this is happening - at least in gaming benchmarks - is because the 2080ti is showing to be cpu bound in many scenarios in 1440p. 
So the pressure is on the cpu and ram subsystem and any advantage shows.
It also depends on how the game engine is hammering the cpu/ram subsystem because for example Tomb Raider was more insensitive to ram speed and rankiness.

It's also easy to double check... If anyone has a 4 x 8gb kit and a 2080ti, run some benchmarks in 1080p and 1440p than pull out two sticks while still keeping dual channel and run them again. 
AC O and Far Cry 5 were quick to show the difference...

As for why would anyone buy single rank, well, dual rank is tougher on the IMC and may not clock as high or time as tight. But at 3600C16 this is not yet so much of an issue...
It also requires spending 2x as much on 4 sticks just to get single digit performance boost in some scenarios. The other option 2 x dual rank 16GB dimms is not perfect either, they usually time worse. 
So i wouldn't call it an easy choice. But when you're already maxed out and looking for more... hmm 

Anyway, would be nice if someone can retest and confirm...


----------



## mAnBrEaTh

Has anyone figured out how to set RTL and IOL values on the Aorus Master? Is this a bug with the current bios revision? I am not sure if the other models are also experiencing this. I'm using F8E. No matter the RTL and IOL value set in bios the timings do not change. The auto dram training values this board is giving is very relaxed.


----------



## talexxx

nice analysis showing the impact of various ram matters to gaming performance, including ranking: https://community.amd.com/community...emory-oc-showdown-frequency-vs-memory-timings (its for ryzen but intereseting nonetheless)


----------



## BradleyW

talexxx said:


> luets said:
> 
> 
> 
> So 3200 c16 > 3600 c16? you did something wrong here.
> 
> 
> 
> no i havent 🙂
> i did the benchmarks a few times as i did not believe it myself
> 
> as i was writing above, i have an old corsair lpx 2x8gb 3200c16 kit from 3 years ago
> why this matters is because it is dual rank inside, they used really small memory chips that were standard at the time so they had to go dual rank to get to 8GB
> 
> the new 3600c16 kit is a corsair dominator platinum kit that is single rank per stick because they use newer chips so it's easy to go to 8GB per stick
> 
> so than....
> 
> 2 x 8gb 3200c16 dual rank (my old kit) is significantly faster than 2 x 8gb 3600c16 single rank (2 dimms from the new kit means dual channel but single rank); despite the frequency and latency disadvantage, the "dual rankiness" more than makes up for it and leads to a convincing win
> however 2 x 8gb 3200c16 dual rank (my old kit) looses by a smaller margin of course to 4 x 8gb 3600c16 because the new kit now becomes itself dual rank (4 single rank sticks=dual channel dual rank) and it has faster frequency and latency
> 
> what i'm trying to say is that for anyone that uses the newer single rank dimm sticks (basically everyone), there is performance to be had when memory bound (ex: 1440p gaming with 2080ti) by going from 2 x 8 to 4 x 8 because it's moving from single rank to dual rank
> given that we all here are trying to get that last x%, it seems a significant finding...
Click to expand...

I could've saved you a job. I did a thread on OCN showing the difference between single and dual rank memory in CPU intensive sections of certain games. I personally found that if you are GPU bound entirely in a game, the memory shouldn't matter too much. In your case the system is so powerful that the only bottleneck left is the memory, and that's why you saw an increase with dual rank.


----------



## OutlawII

BradleyW said:


> My 9900k is stable at 5GHz, 1.3v, AVX 3. I'm repeating tests with the RAM set to 3866MHz, VCCIO 1.16v, VCCIA 1.22v via Small FFT. If it passes, I'll run blend with custom memory size to ensure overall stability.


What did you do to get it back up and running?


----------



## luets

3600c16 single rank 2 x 8GB: 92 fps average
3600c16 dual rank 4 x 8GB: 100 fps average


8% difference is a lot. If that was the difference between dual and single rank you would see way more people with dual rank, even if it doesn't apply to every game.


----------



## OutlawII

luets said:


> 3600c16 single rank 2 x 8GB: 92 fps average
> 3600c16 dual rank 4 x 8GB: 100 fps average
> 
> 
> 8% difference is a lot. If that was the difference between dual and single rank you would see way more people with dual rank, even if it doesn't apply to every game.


But your also comparing 32gigs to 16 gigs maybe that also makes a difference


----------



## luets

talexxx said:


> nice analysis showing the impact of various ram matters to gaming performance, including ranking: https://community.amd.com/community...emory-oc-showdown-frequency-vs-memory-timings (its for ryzen but intereseting nonetheless)



Fair enough. Their conclusions reinforce your findings. 

Conclusion #1: Dual rank DIMMs (yellow) offered the best performance amongst “set and forget” (light blue, orange, yellow) memory configured automatically by XMP profiles.
Conclusion #1a: But the increased overclocking headroom of single rank modules was more than enough to overpower the benefits of rank interleaving, so manually-tuned single rank DDR4-3200 and 3466 won the day (dark blue and green).

All the more reason to completely forget about xmp and set timings manually.


----------



## Falkentyne

luets said:


> Fair enough. Their conclusions reinforce your findings.
> 
> Conclusion #1: Dual rank DIMMs (yellow) offered the best performance amongst “set and forget” (light blue, orange, yellow) memory configured automatically by XMP profiles.
> Conclusion #1a: But the increased overclocking headroom of single rank modules was more than enough to overpower the benefits of rank interleaving, so manually-tuned single rank DDR4-3200 and 3466 won the day (dark blue and green).
> 
> All the more reason to completely forget about xmp and set timings manually.


Now aren't we glad everyone made up and kissed each other?
I'm so happy.
Now let's go kill some zombies. Back to the Walking Dead I go.


----------



## BradleyW

OutlawII said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> My 9900k is stable at 5GHz, 1.3v, AVX 3. I'm repeating tests with the RAM set to 3866MHz, VCCIO 1.16v, VCCIA 1.22v via Small FFT. If it passes, I'll run blend with custom memory size to ensure overall stability.
> 
> 
> 
> What did you do to get it back up and running?
Click to expand...

I used an avx offset because I wasn't stable at 5ghz under AVX load. My settings are in the post you quoted. For those struggling at stock settings, it'll be an RMA provided that the RAM isn't faulty and there isn't an issue with the motherboard or output from the power supply. As a precaution, check the wires for heat damage or melted plastic. Unplug and plug in wires connected to the motherboard and VGA. I've had melted sockets cause instability believe it or not.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Ok @Timur Born , I can't do this sort of testing for you anymore. I'm literally risking my hardware and my OS for this and I gain absolutely nothing and you gain everything. This doesn't help me one bit.


That's ok, thanks. I would not expect the BIOS itself to be responsible for the switching, but maybe it is. Because one difference between out setups is that my main BIOS is still using F4. So that's something to look into.


----------



## luets

Timur Born said:


> That's ok, thanks. I would not expect the BIOS itself to be responsible for the switching, but maybe it is. Because one difference between out setups is that my main BIOS is still using F4. So that's something to look into.


I was getting this switching when I was trying to boot with 4000+ memory speeds. I forced it back to the other bios by asking it to boot on the second bios with equally bad memory settings that i knew would fail.


----------



## BradleyW

I'm failing blend within seconds. Lowing uncore from 47 to 46 helped. I still had crashes after a few minutes so I upped vccio/ia to 1.2/1.25 and its been running 20 minutes so far.

At least I've nailed small FFT. I can now concentrate on memory and uncore.


----------



## Falkentyne

luets said:


> I was getting this switching when I was trying to boot with 4000+ memory speeds. I forced it back to the other bios by asking it to boot on the second bios with equally bad memory settings that i knew would fail.


When I was trying to boot at >3466 mhz memory timings, it would either post at 3200 mhz (if I tried to boot at 3600 mhz CAS 16), or when I tried 4000 mhz CAS 19-19-19-39, I would get 3 loud beeps and then the system would power off by itself, power back on and boot at 2133 mhz with XMP Disabled. Didn't switch to backup.

Did you get these beeps? Either of you? @Timur Born ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> That's ok, thanks. I would not expect the BIOS itself to be responsible for the switching, but maybe it is. Because one difference between out setups is that my main BIOS is still using F4. So that's something to look into.


Why didn't you update to F8E?
F4 is garbo.
I do know that there was a verified bug with F4 auto switching bioses when a failed overclock happened. This was actually posted on the gigabyte forums.
This bug was addressed with the main bios in F6 or one one of the F7 bioses completely, but it still happened to the backup bios on that person's system.
I flashed both my main and back to F8E and i was unable to make it happen under the backup bios, at least under the tests I did. 
I'm not going to overclock my RAM though. Not after what happened before. 3 loud beeps scare me. I mean I've been watching The Walking Dead Telltale seasons on youtube all weekend. Of course I'm going to be scared.


----------



## luets

Falkentyne said:


> When I was trying to boot at >3466 mhz memory timings, it would either post at 3200 mhz (if I tried to boot at 3600 mhz CAS 16), or when I tried 4000 mhz CAS 19-19-19-39, I would get 3 loud beeps and then the system would power off by itself, power back on and boot at 2133 mhz with XMP Disabled. Didn't switch to backup.
> 
> Did you get these beeps? Either of you?
> @Timur Born ?


Sometimes it fails and reverts back to default settings. I was getting these reporting errors when I was figuring out what worked. I would tell it to boot at 3800. Task manager would actually report that its at 3800 but hwinfo64 would tell me that it was actually at 3200 or 2133. It seems like the MB doesn't know what to do with itself if your settings are too far out there.

This is still an improvement over my crosshair 7, so I'm not going to complain much.


----------



## rv8000

I've been having random restarts recently, and I thought a lot of it was due to memory instabilities while I've been pushing my kit, but I think my issue may be because of a grounding problem.

In the past week unplugging any cord aux or swapping usb devices will cause my monitor to lose signal/gpu to reset, I still get audio for about a minute then the pc crashes and restarts. Has anyone been having a similar issue?


----------



## BradleyW

Failed blend again. I'm now up to 1.3v on the vccio/ia at 3866mhz.

Xmp sets those voltages to 1.34v. I don't know if these voltages are too high or not, and how much each of the two voltages helps with ram speed and possibly the uncore.


----------



## luets

BradleyW said:


> Failed blend again. I'm now up to 1.3v on the vccio/ia at 3866mhz.
> 
> Xmp sets those voltages to 1.34v. I don't know if these voltages are too high or not, and how much each of the two voltages helps with ram speed and possibly the uncore.



According to Gigabyte, 1.35 is high, but ok. So I wouldn't go higher then that. Is your overclock stable with ram at 2133?


----------



## BradleyW

luets said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Failed blend again. I'm now up to 1.3v on the vccio/ia at 3866mhz.
> 
> Xmp sets those voltages to 1.34v. I don't know if these voltages are too high or not, and how much each of the two voltages helps with ram speed and possibly the uncore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Gigabyte, 1.35 is high, but ok. So I wouldn't go higher then that. Is your overclock stable with ram at 2133?
Click to expand...

Where did you get that information from? Yes it was stable but I only tested small FFT.


----------



## luets

BradleyW said:


> Where did you get that information from? Yes it was stable but I only tested small FFT.


Page 9. There isn't much else that you'll find useful there.

CPU VCCIO and CPU System Agent Voltage: Both of these settings help with DRAM
frequency overclocking. Values up to 1.3-1.35V are high but they are ok if you are using aircooling.
Since we used X.M.P. profiles for our memory these voltages will be automatically set. 

https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf


----------



## Padinn

Been stressing my memory with memtest 86+. No CPU overclock and at stock vcc sa and vcc io I got 62 errors on its third run throuhh


----------



## Padinn

Padinn said:


> Been stressing my memory with memtest 86+. No CPU overclock and at stock vcc sa and vcc io I got 62 errors on its third run throuhh


Bumped vcc io to 1.12 and vcc sa to 1.18 and got 50 errors almost my immediatly. Now testing both at 1.2. This is with no oc and ram at 3200, 16 16 16 36 2t (stock). If this keeps failing i may replace board while I can.


----------



## BradleyW

Padinn said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Been stressing my memory with memtest 86+. No CPU overclock and at stock vcc sa and vcc io I got 62 errors on its third run throuhh
> 
> 
> 
> Bumped vcc io to 1.12 and vcc sa to 1.18 and got 50 errors almost my immediatly. Now testing both at 1.2. This is with no oc and ram at 3200, 16 16 16 36 2t (stock). If this keeps failing i may replace board while I can.
Click to expand...

If it is failing under complete stock settings then that means it is faulty.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> When I was trying to boot at >3466 mhz memory timings, it would either post at 3200 mhz (if I tried to boot at 3600 mhz CAS 16), or when I tried 4000 mhz CAS 19-19-19-39, I would get 3 loud beeps and then the system would power off by itself, power back on and boot at 2133 mhz with XMP Disabled. Didn't switch to backup.
> 
> Did you get these beeps? Either of you?
> @Timur Born ?


No beeps and the switching doesn't happen with every bad overclock. Is there even a speaker on the board? I did not connect an external speaker.

It can happen with both failed CPU and memory overclocks. The Aorus Master really does not recover gracefully from wrong BIOS settings and I wish it had the Asus button to start with default BIOS settings once, but without clearing CMOS settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> No beeps and the switching doesn't happen with every bad overclock. Is there even a speaker on the board? I did not connect an external speaker.
> 
> It can happen with both failed CPU and memory overclocks. The Aorus Master really does not recover gracefully from wrong BIOS settings and I wish it had the Asus button to start with default BIOS settings once, but without clearing CMOS settings.


There is a "PC speaker" connection on the board (which all boards usually have) on the jumper blocks (around power, HDD LED, reset, etc) and I still have a speaker from an old case which still works so I use that. Very useful.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> There is a "PC speaker" connection on the board (which all boards usually have) on the jumper blocks (around power, HDD LED, reset, etc) and I still have a speaker from an old case which still works so I use that. Very useful.


Of course there is. Still begs the question why there is no onboard speaker on such a "premium" board? Cheap boards feature those for years already.


----------



## EarlZ

Just wanting to share my 9700K *died* all of a sudden, it will bsod on anything including a usb boot to install windows.

This was ran with 1.33v @ 5Ghz, LLC Turbo xmp profile for 3200Mhz 1.100 Vccio and 1.200 Vccsa all other voltages are left in auto. It runs fine at 40cpu multi and 37x cache anything higher will trigger the bsod. I already had it replaced from the store that I bought it from. This has me concerned a little bit 

Ive probably had that overclock for 2hrs while playing monster hunter world.


----------



## talexxx

BradleyW said:


> I could've saved you a job. I did a thread on OCN showing the difference between single and dual rank memory in CPU intensive sections of certain games. I personally found that if you are GPU bound entirely in a game, the memory shouldn't matter too much. In your case the system is so powerful that the only bottleneck left is the memory, and that's why you saw an increase with dual rank.


Link please? 

Managed to finally put mine together in a nice chart.

All results are average fps as reported by the ingame benchmark
aco = assassins creed odyssey close to ultra settings
fc5 = far cry 5 ultra
tr = shadow of tomb raider ultra with TAA

CPUs are running at their stable max AVX frequency (AVX offset 0)


----------



## KedarWolf

So, on my Aorus Xtreme I've managed to corrupt both BIOS's and BIOS recovery from USB not working. Black screen on boot, 4F error which means corrupt BIOS. Not one, both. 

But at least this board (the Master too) has socketed BIOS's. On my backup motherboard for now, I'm really glad I hadn't sold my Maximus X Formula yet. 

I ordered a two piece LCD Flash SOIC8 Adapter CH341A SOIC8 Clip EEPROM BIOS Writer USB Programmer and BIOS puller pliers which I don't really know why I never had them ages ago. :h34r-smi

I'll be able to pull the BIOS's, erase them, reflash them, with a bit of help from some threads on the WinRaid forums. :thumb:


----------



## Padinn

BradleyW said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Been stressing my memory with memtest 86+. No CPU overclock and at stock vcc sa and vcc io I got 62 errors on its third run throuhh
> 
> 
> 
> Bumped vcc io to 1.12 and vcc sa to 1.18 and got 50 errors almost my immediatly. Now testing both at 1.2. This is with no oc and ram at 3200, 16 16 16 36 2t (stock). If this keeps failing i may replace board while I can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If it is failing under complete stock settings then that means it is faulty.
Click to expand...

It faulted again overnight with 110 errors. Testing now at stock vcc io/sa and ran at 2666, since that is stock for cpu. CPU remains at stock as well with 4.3ghz cache


----------



## luets

talexxx said:


> Link please?
> 
> Managed to finally put mine together in a nice chart.
> 
> All results are average fps as reported by the ingame benchmark
> aco = assassins creed odyssey close to ultra settings
> fc5 = far cry 5 ultra
> tr = shadow of tomb raider ultra with TAA
> 
> CPUs are running at their stable max AVX frequency (AVX offset 0)



Why? The link you provided me with explained what is happening. Dual rank is better if you are going to do nothing but enable xmp. Clock the single rank kit higher and time it manually and it will be faster. You need to give this up.


----------



## Swifty220

Update: populating 4 dimms didn't seem to be the issue. I used XMP profile and ran my chip at 4.9 ghz, 1.296 vid, for 11 hours of Prime95 Blend, AVX on, with no errors. Highest core temp was 77 after 11 hours. I just think my chip doesn't like 5ghz without massive voltage increase and my AIO probably won't handle that anyway. ill settle on 4.9, but 5.0 was what I really wanted.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Why didn't you update to F8E?
> F4 is garbo.


Because it is good practice to keep a release version around as backup, especially since F5 brought big changes to the whole UEFI UI.



> I do know that there was a verified bug with F4 auto switching bioses when a failed overclock happened. This was actually posted on the gigabyte forums.


I did not expect the BIOS to be responsible for switching the BIOS, but assumed that this was done externally (via its own controller/watchdog).



> This bug was addressed with the main bios in F6 or one one of the F7 bioses completely, but it still happened to the backup bios on that person's system.


I will flash the main BIOS to a later version then.



> I'm not going to overclock my RAM though. Not after what happened before. 3 loud beeps scare me. I mean I've been watching The Walking Dead Telltale seasons on youtube all weekend. Of course I'm going to be scared.


Beeps shouldn't scare you when you are overclocking. My 3200C14 B die memory is currently running at 3500C15 on F8B with somewhat tight timings.


----------



## OutlawII

Swifty220 said:


> Update: populating 4 dimms didn't seem to be the issue. I used XMP profile and ran my chip at 4.9 ghz, 1.296 vid, for 11 hours of Prime95 Blend, AVX on, with no errors. Highest core temp was 77 after 11 hours. I just think my chip doesn't like 5ghz without massive voltage increase and my AIO probably won't handle that anyway. ill settle on 4.9, but 5.0 was what I really wanted.



Just remember overclocking is not gauranteed. Also could you run a couple cores at 5.0 and the res at 4.9 would that might help you out.


----------



## Padinn

Padinn said:


> Been stressing my memory with memtest 86+. No CPU overclock and at stock vcc sa and vcc io I got 62 errors on its third run throuhh


Errored out again at 2666 stock vcc io and vcc sa. Time to RMA....glad I finally figured out what was wrong. I am going to test with the Google Stress App just to verify that is issue.


----------



## KedarWolf

Timur Born said:


> Because it is good practice to keep a release version around as backup, especially since F5 brought big changes to the whole UEFI UI.
> 
> 
> I did not expect the BIOS to be responsible for switching the BIOS, but assumed that this was done externally (via its own controller/watchdog).
> 
> 
> I will flash the main BIOS to a later version then.
> 
> 
> 
> Beeps shouldn't scare you when you are overclocking. My 3200C14 B die memory is currently running at 3500C15 on F8B with somewhat tight timings.


You might want to revisit your memory overclock. My 3200 CL14 b die does 4133MHZ stress tested stable with HCI MemTest at 17-17-17-40 2T.

4000MHZ 16-16-16-38 2T should be a breeze on those kits and higher if you have a decent IMC on your CPU.


----------



## Sheyster

Timur Born said:


> Of course there is. Still begs the question why there is no onboard speaker on such a "premium" board? Cheap boards feature those for years already.


If you're basing your new mobo buying decision on the old legacy speaker connector (or a tiny on-board speaker) then you have your priorities messed up. Just sayin'...


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> You might want to revisit your memory overclock. My 3200 CL14 b die does 4133MHZ stress tested stable with HCI MemTest at 17-17-17-40 2T.
> 
> 4000MHZ 16-16-16-38 2T should be a breeze on those kits and higher if you have a decent IMC on your CPU.


Kedar, keep in mind that the Pro and Master boards won't do this. You're getting your $600 worth of flagship mobo in this instance. I've settled for 3600 15-15-15-35 1T @ 1.37v for gaming. Real latency is higher than 4000 CL18; good enough for me!


----------



## Timur Born

Sheyster said:


> If you're basing your new mobo buying decision on the old legacy speaker connector (or a tiny on-board speaker) then you have your priorities messed up. Just sayin'...


I obviously didn't, else I would have known if there is a speaker or not.  I should have looked at the video outputs, though, because offering only a single HDMI output is a bit pathetic and is currently causing me real practical problems.

Which goes to show: basing busying decisions mainly on VRM design isn't the best idea neither.


----------



## Sheyster

Timur Born said:


> Which goes to show: basing busying decisions mainly on VRM design isn't the best idea neither.


I agree! My BFF's ASRock Taichi Z390 is a stellar board. Wish I'd gone that route instead. (I know, I've already said this.)


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> Kedar, keep in mind that the Pro and Master boards won't do this. You're getting your $600 worth of flagship mobo in this instance. I've settled for 3600 15-15-15-35 1T @ 1.37v for gaming. Real latency is higher than 4000 CL18; good enough for me!


Oh, btw, I have my Core X9 stripped down to be like an open bench as well.


----------



## BradleyW

Well it looks like anything higher than the default uncore frequency fails blend test! As for the RAM, anything above 3700MHz also fails despite upping the vccio/ia up to 1.3v! Its a 4000mhz kit. 

So far I'm stable at 5GHz HT 1.3v, 3700MHz RAM, AVX 3, uncore x43, vccio/ia 1.25v each.

I'm now testing the same speeds but with much lower vccio/ia (1.15/1.2v). I'd love to get a higher uncore but I might need way too much vcore for that. I'm also certain that my chip doesn't need 1.3v at the current speed when AVX isn't involved. I don't mind running AVX at 4.7GHz seen as I don't use or need it and 4.7GHz is still very quick on this very powerful CPU.



talexxx said:


> Link please? 🙂
> 
> Managed to finally put mine together in a nice chart.
> 
> All results are average fps as reported by the ingame benchmark
> aco = assassins creed odyssey close to ultra settings
> fc5 = far cry 5 ultra
> tr = shadow of tomb raider ultra with TAA
> 
> CPUs are running at their stable max AVX frequency (AVX offset 0)


Here's the link. My results will vary to yours seen as it's a completely different platform (X79-3930K, R9 290X GPU).
https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...t-fps-during-high-cpu-overhead-scenarios.html


----------



## Padinn

Padinn said:


> Errored out again at 2666 stock vcc io and vcc sa. Time to RMA....glad I finally figured out what was wrong. I am going to test with the Google Stress App just to verify that is issue.


Just an update, I installed Linux Mint with Google Stress App on a USB bootable drive. Interestingly enough it passed without any errors after 1 hour. Granted, I could only test about 14GB of my 16GB of memory, but I think this points towards the memory being more stable. I know Memtest86+ is out of date, so I find this very intriguing.


----------



## KedarWolf

ScomComputers said:


> Hello...pls help me.
> How to revert my motherboard bios if it's corrupt or wrong?
> Z390 Aorus Pro,this mobo does not use bios switches.
> Thanks.


https://www.ebay.com/itm/SPI-USB-To...abcb6282d:m:m_HCsaCBzGvEidphzeq3cGA:rk:6:pf:0

This is on the way to recover my Aorus Xtreme BIOS but I don't think the Pro's are socketed which makes it more complicated. 

Link how to recover soldered BIOS's with pictures.

https://www.win-raid.com/t4287f16-G...H-A-SPI-Programmer-Flasher-With-Pictures.html

Edit, no wait, the USB programmer is upside down from what I thought, it should be the right socket, the 25xx in the picture.


----------



## BradleyW

Padinn said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Errored out again at 2666 stock vcc io and vcc sa. Time to RMA....glad I finally figured out what was wrong. I am going to test with the Google Stress App just to verify that is issue.
> 
> 
> 
> Just an update, I installed Linux Mint with Google Stress App on a USB bootable drive. Interestingly enough it passed without any errors after 1 hour. Granted, I could only test about 14GB of my 16GB of memory, but I think this points towards the memory being more stable. I know Memtest86+ is out of date, so I find this very intriguing.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the Google stress test isn't as powerful as Memtest86+. However on the flip side I've heard in passing that Memtest86+ may show false positives due to incompatibility with newer architecture. I don't know if this is true. Probably not.


----------



## BradleyW

ScomComputers said:


> Hello...pls help me.
> How to revert my motherboard bios if it's corrupt or wrong?
> Z390 Aorus Pro,this mobo does not use bios switches.
> Thanks.


If you have dual BIOS without a switch, turn the PC off, unplug it, hold down the ON button for 10 seconds, plug it back in and turn the PC on. This will boot the second BIOS if you have one.


----------



## OutlawII

Padinn said:


> Errored out again at 2666 stock vcc io and vcc sa. Time to RMA....glad I finally figured out what was wrong. I am going to test with the Google Stress App just to verify that is issue.


Have you tried the windows 10 memory diagnostic test?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Just an update, I installed Linux Mint with Google Stress App on a USB bootable drive. Interestingly enough it passed without any errors after 1 hour. Granted, I could only test about 14GB of my 16GB of memory, but I think this points towards the memory being more stable. I know Memtest86+ is out of date, so I find this very intriguing.


Why aren't you using Memtest86?
Why memtest86+?
memtest86 is current.
Don't use outdated programs.
Memtest86 should give NO errors.
If it does, RMA your RAM.

After RMA'ing your RAM, try it again and if you still have issues, I hate to say it but you may have gotten another bad CPU.
Anyway:

https://www.memtest86.com/

Try it.


----------



## Kipps

BradleyW said:


> If you have dual BIOS without a switch, turn the PC off, unplug it, hold down the ON button for 10 seconds, plug it back in and turn the PC on. This will boot the second BIOS if you have one.


This does not work with my Z390 Ultra


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.ebay.com/itm/SPI-USB-To...abcb6282d:m:m_HCsaCBzGvEidphzeq3cGA:rk:6:pf:0
> 
> This is on the way to recover my Aorus Xtreme BIOS but I don't think the Pro's are socketed which makes it more complicated.
> 
> Link how to recover soldered BIOS's with pictures.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t4287f16-G...H-A-SPI-Programmer-Flasher-With-Pictures.html
> 
> Edit, no wait, the USB programmer is upside down from what I thought, it should be the right socket, the 25xx in the picture.




















https://www.win-raid.com/t4175f16-GUIDE-Flash-BIOS-with-CH-A-programmer.html


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.ebay.com/itm/SPI-USB-To...abcb6282d:m:m_HCsaCBzGvEidphzeq3cGA:rk:6:pf:0
> 
> This is on the way to recover my Aorus Xtreme BIOS but I don't think the Pro's are socketed which makes it more complicated.
> 
> Link how to recover soldered BIOS's with pictures.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t4287f16-G...H-A-SPI-Programmer-Flasher-With-Pictures.html
> 
> Edit, no wait, the USB programmer is upside down from what I thought, it should be the right socket, the 25xx in the picture.


Please don't use cheap chinese SOIC8 clips.
They are too fat and the capacitors around the bios chips on some boards may prevent you from reading a chip. One user on win-raid had this issue and I mentioned it there.
Also sometimes the plastic teeth are too fat too, and sometimes even the metal connectors are bad.

This is what you want to use.

https://www.amazon.com/CPT-063-Test-Clip-SOIC8-Pomona/dp/B00HHH65T4/

Notice it is very slender and gives you a lot more working room. One of the two chinese clips I had wouldn't even let me read my vbios chip to flash a modded vbios to my GTX 1070 MXM card, because it was being blocked by a tiny SMD or resistor. Pomona 5250=easy reads.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_7?smid=A2WWHQ25ENKVJ1&psc=1

You use these for hooking the Pomona clip to the programmer.
On the Master and Extreme boards, the socketed chip is "DIP8", which means it can be removed, and put into the programmer by an adapter without soldering (there are various adapters, some programmers come with them, some don't); I do NOT know if the Pomona clip will fit on a dip8 chip, but I don't think it can. They are socketed for a reason.

The soldered chip is SOIC8, and that's what the Pomona clip will work on.


----------



## Bartoszek

*Z390 Àorus Pro Wifi RAM red led*

I have a problem with my Z390 Aorus Pro wifi
it was working fine for 2 months untill it Froze mid day. After a reboot I suddenly have a red error LED for DRAM. What worries me is: it wont post or give any sound error via the speaker.


I Tried with a different RAM stick that worked in this build, same result. What is interesting since i got the mobo i had an issue with it not posting. After booting it up with the mentioned different RAM stick and updating the BIOS it started working with my usuall G. Skill stick. But now it stopped working for both RAMs and wont POST.



Reseated CPU (delidded) and checked for bend pins, did a CMOS reset many times, tried different stick combinations, removed mobo and disconnected everything leaving only cpu&cooling, ram and psu connected, same result.
If i take the CPU out it shows on the LED that there is a CPU problem, if i place the CPU in and take out ram it is the same errr code as when i try to boot with RAM.


CPU failure, psu failure, RAM of Mobo is possible. Any ideas? At any of the tries, no sound error was given by the speaker (and it was working up till now).



What i did notice is since day 1 when i power on the PSU the mobo did flash white for half a second before going dark (or sometimes a different color).
Giphy: https://giphy.com/gifs/z390-aorus-pro-wi-fi-39nnvEQUuVeLGV1iYP


I usually got rgb lights and so on after post so im not sure if it is how it usually works or was it broken since start. Or was it my PSU that was broken. Can't find any video of someone connecting a PSU to the mobo to see if it is normal behaviour.




I ordered a new PSU, am in the process of RMA of the G. Skill RAM, leaves Mobo or CPU.
PSU was working with a different system, but it was a low power one so it could affect the result (but i doubt it).


Meaning, it is either Mobo or CPU. But since this is the second Mobo i have with this kind of issues (had a Asus Z170 Pro gaming, simillar issue with RAM and no POST, but i had sound, after mobo switch it was fine till now), it means something else is going bad (CPU or PSU, or i have bad luck with mobos).


Any ideas or suggestions?


SPECS:
i7 8086k, was running fine at 5.1GHz with AIO water cooling

Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi, F6 BIOS.

G.Skill 2x8GB 3200 Ripjaws V CL16
Thermaltake Smart RGB 700w psu
GTX 1080 Zotac Amp Extreme
Couple of SSD's and HDD's and one NVME


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Please don't use cheap chinese SOIC8 clips.
> They are too fat and the capacitors around the bios chips on some boards may prevent you from reading a chip. One user on win-raid had this issue and I mentioned it there.
> Also sometimes the plastic teeth are too fat too, and sometimes even the metal connectors are bad.
> 
> This is what you want to use.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/CPT-063-Test-Clip-SOIC8-Pomona/dp/B00HHH65T4/
> 
> Notice it is very slender and gives you a lot more working room. One of the two chinese clips I had wouldn't even let me read my vbios chip to flash a modded vbios to my GTX 1070 MXM card, because it was being blocked by a tiny SMD or resistor. Pomona 5250=easy reads.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_7?smid=A2WWHQ25ENKVJ1&psc=1
> 
> You use these for hooking the Pomona clip to the programmer.
> On the Master and Extreme boards, the socketed chip is "DIP8", which means it can be removed, and put into the programmer by an adapter without soldering (there are various adapters, some programmers come with them, some don't); I do NOT know if the Pomona clip will fit on a dip8 chip, but I don't think it can. They are socketed for a reason.
> 
> The soldered chip is SOIC8, and that's what the Pomona clip will work on.


TY, good advice. I think the person that was asking has a board with a soldered chip.


----------



## talexxx

BradleyW said:


> Well it looks like anything higher than the default uncore frequency fails blend test! As for the RAM, anything above 3700MHz also fails despite upping the vccio/ia up to 1.3v! Its a 4000mhz kit.
> 
> So far I'm stable at 5GHz HT 1.3v, 3700MHz RAM, AVX 3, uncore x43, vccio/ia 1.25v each.
> 
> I'm now testing the same speeds but with much lower vccio/ia (1.15/1.2v). I'd love to get a higher uncore but I might need way too much vcore for that. I'm also certain that my chip doesn't need 1.3v at the current speed when AVX isn't involved. I don't mind running AVX at 4.7GHz seen as I don't use or need it and 4.7GHz is still very quick on this very powerful CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the link. My results will vary to yours seen as it's a completely different platform (X79-3930K, R9 290X GPU).
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...t-fps-during-high-cpu-overhead-scenarios.html


Thanks for the link mate, really interesting read!

Can your PC run the 4000mhz memory at stock CPU and board settings (ex: not overclocked)?
Are you saying that the CPU IMC + board doesnt work well enough to reach that speed?
I'm asking because i was also contemplating a 4000C17 kit and i was wondering if i'm doomed to get into trouble with this board...

Or is the overclocked CPU no longer able to run 4000mhz RAM?


----------



## BradleyW

Kipps said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you have dual BIOS without a switch, turn the PC off, unplug it, hold down the ON button for 10 seconds, plug it back in and turn the PC on. This will boot the second BIOS if you have one.
> 
> 
> 
> This does not work with my Z390 Ultra
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to hear that. It works perfectly well on my Ultra.


----------



## Kipps

BradleyW said:


> I'm sorry to hear that. It works perfectly well on my Ultra.


The only way I can get to switch bios is to purposely input voltages and core frequencies that I know it wont boot at (Like 5ghz @ 1volt) - Which is not the ideal situation


----------



## ocococ

*2 mins to get into bios*

I'm having some temperature issues with this board even at stock settings. If anyone can help, the thread is here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-master-temp-issues-stock-oc-help-please.html

However, specific to the Z390 Aorus Master, my boot times are very very slow. I don't think this is normal because when I first got the board I don't recall it being so slow.
Powering on the computer to get into the BIOS (tried with both F8b and F8e) it's taking 2 minutes. Then after I get past bios, it's taking another minute for Win10 (up to login screen) to load. My boot drive is a sata SSD. When used on my old build, it took ~30 secs from boot to windows login. This is happening with a fresh bios flash or with load optimized defaults.

Any ideas what could be making the boot time so slow, even to get into the bios?

Thanks!


----------



## BradleyW

talexxx said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well it looks like anything higher than the default uncore frequency fails blend test! As for the RAM, anything above 3700MHz also fails despite upping the vccio/ia up to 1.3v! Its a 4000mhz kit.
> 
> So far I'm stable at 5GHz HT 1.3v, 3700MHz RAM, AVX 3, uncore x43, vccio/ia 1.25v each.
> 
> I'm now testing the same speeds but with much lower vccio/ia (1.15/1.2v). I'd love to get a higher uncore but I might need way too much vcore for that. I'm also certain that my chip doesn't need 1.3v at the current speed when AVX isn't involved. I don't mind running AVX at 4.7GHz seen as I don't use or need it and 4.7GHz is still very quick on this very powerful CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the link. My results will vary to yours seen as it's a completely different platform (X79-3930K, R9 290X GPU).
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...t-fps-during-high-cpu-overhead-scenarios.html
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the link mate, really interesting read!
> 
> Can your PC run the 4000mhz memory at stock CPU and board settings (ex: not overclocked)?
> 
> Or is the overclocked CPU no longer able to run 4000mhz RAM?
Click to expand...

It can't run at the rated speed at stock settings, xmp enabled. Neither could my 3930k combined with 2666mhz ram. Had to run it at 2400mhz.

I think it comes down to the IMC. I can run at 3866 but I need around 1.35v on the vccio and vccia compared to a cool 1.15/1.2v at 3700mhz. 4000mhz will probably require 1.4v and that's way too high for my liking. Not sure if the board has anything to do with it. I've heard of asrock boards not going over 2600mhz. I'd probably buy a high quality 3600mhz kit with dual rank for added benefit and just see how it goes. You may need to adjust the dram training voltage to 1.46 if it struggles to boot.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just an update, I installed Linux Mint with Google Stress App on a USB bootable drive. Interestingly enough it passed without any errors after 1 hour. Granted, I could only test about 14GB of my 16GB of memory, but I think this points towards the memory being more stable. I know Memtest86+ is out of date, so I find this very intriguing.
> 
> 
> 
> Why aren't you using Memtest86?
> Why memtest86+?
> memtest86 is current.
> Don't use outdated programs.
> Memtest86 should give NO errors.
> If it does, RMA your RAM.
> 
> After RMA'ing your RAM, try it again and if you still have issues, I hate to say it but you may have gotten another bad CPU.
> Anyway:
> 
> https://www.memtest86.com/
> 
> Try it.
Click to expand...


Didnt realize 86 was dated till later on. I did get through one hour of Google stress app. I'll try memtest now


----------



## ocococ

ocococ said:


> I'm having some temperature issues with this board even at stock settings. If anyone can help, the thread is here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-master-temp-issues-stock-oc-help-please.html
> 
> However, specific to the Z390 Aorus Master, my boot times are very very slow. I don't think this is normal because when I first got the board I don't recall it being so slow.
> Powering on the computer to get into the BIOS (tried with both F8b and F8e) it's taking 2 minutes. Then after I get past bios, it's taking another minute for Win10 (up to login screen) to load. My boot drive is a sata SSD. When used on my old build, it took ~30 secs from boot to windows login. This is happening with a fresh bios flash or with load optimized defaults.
> 
> Any ideas what could be making the boot time so slow, even to get into the bios?
> 
> Thanks!


ok I'll answer my own question. I have 4 other sata drives, 3 of which were configured in raid. I unplugged all those drives, along with the dvd and now it gets through the bios screen in 7 seconds into the windows boot screen 13 seconds later. Any ideas why?


----------



## Falkentyne

ocococ said:


> ok I'll answer my own question. I have 4 other sata drives, 3 of which were configured in raid. I unplugged all those drives, along with the dvd and now it gets through the bios screen in 7 seconds into the windows boot screen 13 seconds later. Any ideas why?


Slow drive detection can happen for various reasons. It can be anything between incompatibilities, bad SATA drives, bad cables, and so on. Slow posts have been discussed about on pretty much all the sections and there's no way to determine the exact problem until you find out exactly what drive makes things "break".

Once you find out which drive makes things 'break', then you have to divide and conquer. Like, having only that drive installed (or in the case of a DVD drive, removing that drive). But obviously, installing windows on only that drive causing the problem may not be possible unless you have the data backed up. Needless to say this isn't something you can get a cookbook answer for here. But in most cases, it's usually ONE drive (or connection) causing the issue. And yes, it can indeed be bios related too.


----------



## Sheyster

Kipps said:


> The only way I can get to switch bios is to purposely input voltages and core frequencies that I know it wont boot at (Like 5ghz @ 1volt) - Which is not the ideal situation


Try the method he mentioned but first go into the BIOS and shut off the power switch on the power supply while the BIOS screen is still on-screen. Then proceed with holding down the power button and rebooting as he mentioned.


----------



## Timur Born

Sheyster said:


> Kedar, keep in mind that the Pro and Master boards won't do this. You're getting your $600 worth of flagship mobo in this instance. I've settled for 3600 15-15-15-35 1T @ 1.37v for gaming. Real latency is higher than 4000 CL18; good enough for me!


And I am meticulous about being at least 3000% HCI stable in the long run and also use Karhu RAM Test. I just finished a run lowering down my VCCSA to 1.15v and VSSIO to 1.05v, which I both started with at 1.2v. Vdimm was still at 1.4v and needs to be lowered next. At the moment I need to increase CR to 2 once I go above 3200 MT.

I did not succeed at getting 3600-C15 stable with somewhat tight timings yet and I am not sure that it would be worth the effort compared to my solid 3500-C15. The primary timings equivalency would be 3733-C16, 4000-C17 and 4200-C18. I may try these when I have extra time spare to search for working voltages and secondary + tertiary timings.


----------



## ocococ

Thanks for the suggestion. It wasn't the boot drive as it was booting fine with only that SSD connected. I then plugged in the DVD and that was taking a long time (though still not the full 3 mins). I swapped out the DVD sata cable and it fixed the problem! (at least for now). Next I'll try plugging the other drives back in.



Falkentyne said:


> Slow drive detection can happen for various reasons. It can be anything between incompatibilities, bad SATA drives, bad cables, and so on. Slow posts have been discussed about on pretty much all the sections and there's no way to determine the exact problem until you find out exactly what drive makes things "break".
> 
> Once you find out which drive makes things 'break', then you have to divide and conquer. Like, having only that drive installed (or in the case of a DVD drive, removing that drive). But obviously, installing windows on only that drive causing the problem may not be possible unless you have the data backed up. Needless to say this isn't something you can get a cookbook answer for here. But in most cases, it's usually ONE drive (or connection) causing the issue. And yes, it can indeed be bios related too.


----------



## Kipps

Sheyster said:


> Try the method he mentioned but first go into the BIOS and shut off the power switch on the power supply while the BIOS screen is still on-screen. Then proceed with holding down the power button and rebooting as he mentioned.


Unfortunately that doesnt work either - Getting close to RMA'ing this board now and swapping to a different vendor. This is utterly stupid - How am I meant to know which BIOS i am currently booting into ?


----------



## wsnnwa

This might be my last time ever buying a Gigabyte motherboard, whomever they contract to make their BIOS is absolute horse **** at it. 

Anyway, I've had a stable OC for a about a month. I come home and try to boot up my PC and nada. I haven't touched or entered my BIOS in a month and all of a sudden it fails to post. 

Clearing the CMOS let my PC boot, but I can't enter the BIOS as I just get a black screen whenever I try to enter it.


----------



## OutlawII

Can anyone explain what IA AC loadline does by setting it to 1?


----------



## Hawkeye360

Is there a block diagram available for the Z390 Aorus Xtreme?


----------



## krizby

Hi guys can you post your AIDA64 cache and memory benchmark ? I want to see how my memory stack up . 4x8GB Corsair Vengeance 3466mhz 15-15-15-30 2T.


----------



## scaramonga

Anyone notice tjmax temp option is missing on BIOS f8e?, unless I'm blind?


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> Anyone notice tjmax temp option is missing on BIOS f8e?, unless I'm blind?


You're blind. I set my tjmax to 110C.
Check advanced frequency options.


----------



## scaramonga

Falkentyne said:


> You're blind. I set my tjmax to 110C.
> Check advanced frequency options.


Just did, not there?


Usually sits between AVX offset & uncore ratio, but it no longer resides there, lol ?


----------



## Timur Born

Timur Born said:


> And I am meticulous about being at least 3000% HCI stable in the long run and also use Karhu RAM Test. I just finished a run lowering down my VCCSA to 1.15v and VSSIO to 1.05v, which I both started with at 1.2v. Vdimm was still at 1.4v and needs to be lowered next. At the moment I need to increase CR to 2 once I go above 3200 MT.


Lowering voltages worked for 3500-C15, good to know.



> I did not succeed at getting 3600-C15 stable with somewhat tight timings yet and I am not sure that it would be worth the effort compared to my solid 3500-C15. The primary timings equivalency would be 3733-C16, 4000-C17 and 4200-C18. I may try these when I have extra time spare to search for working voltages and secondary + tertiary timings.


4000-C17 trains easily, boots flawlessly, but is not stable even with loose sub-timings.

Between 3700 and 3800 there seems to be a memory training hole. Unfortunately I do not know which voltage I have to change on Intel systems to shift the range. 3800-C16 does train with loose timings, but there are no benefits to that.

I will give 3600-C15 another try using F8E.


----------



## Timur Born

scaramonga said:


> Just did, not there?
> 
> Usually sits between AVX offset & uncore ratio, but it no longer resides there, lol ?


I just updated to F8E and still see TJmax sitting right there. Strange issue. Did you load optimized/default settings before flashing the BIOS?


----------



## Timur Born

OutlawII said:


> Can anyone explain what IA AC loadline does by setting it to 1?


Setting the VID loadline to (somewhat ridiculously) low values.


----------



## Dim3nsi0N

warbucks said:


> If you don't see the sensor, you likely need to update your version of HWInfo.


Hi!

When you boot up, load up the app centre from Gigabyte and install Easy OC Tuner, then reboot.
When rebooted, fire up HWinfo, the sensor will not be there. Then fire up app centre and load Easy OC Tuner.

The sensor will then appear in HWinfo, you can then close the app centre and Easy OC Tuner.

Took me three days to figure out, but here we are! Enjoy your higher OCs!


----------



## Driller au

I have the same problem that Moparman describes back on page 110 where if the PC is off overnight on cold boot all i get is a black screen no bios logo or anything.Fast startup in windows is off, bios is F8e,default settings xmp enabled.Samsung nvme drivers uninstalled makes no difference if they are installed, Fresh install of Win 10. also happened on old install.
I have two samsung M.2 installed a 950 pro with windows on it in the M2P slot and a samsung 970 pro in the M2A slot and two sata drives.
When this happens the boot led is on i think only because windows is not loading as stated in the manual and bug led AO it is always on A0 even when system is running think is just normal
A quick press of the reboot button and the system will start normally and runs fine for the rest of the day with re starts and shutdowns 
Gigabyte master with a 9900k, 2 x 8 gig g skill memory @ 3200 Mhz

EDIT:For me turning off the deep sleep option in the monitors OSD seems to have fixed the problem, only two days (full cold boots) of testing but yesterday i enabled the option left the PC for a few hours and on restart i got the black screen and no signal.
I have a AGON AG352UCG monitor. Will need a longer time to fully test


----------



## Hawkeye360

Is there a block diagram available for the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme?


----------



## Jidonsu

Timur Born said:


> Lowering voltages worked for 3500-C15, good to know.
> 
> 
> 4000-C17 trains easily, boots flawlessly, but is not stable even with loose sub-timings.
> 
> Between 3700 and 3800 there seems to be a memory training hole. Unfortunately I do not know which voltage I have to change on Intel systems to shift the range. 3800-C16 does train with loose timings, but there are no benefits to that.
> 
> I will give 3600-C15 another try using F8E.


How about sticks of ram are we talking about here?


----------



## shaolin95

Timur Born said:


> I obviously didn't, else I would have known if there is a speaker or not.  I should have looked at the video outputs, though, because offering only a single HDMI output is a bit pathetic and is currently causing me real practical problems.
> 
> Which goes to show: basing busying decisions mainly on VRM design isn't the best idea neither.


So you bought a mobo without really knowing what it had? Really you needed one than more HDMI output..ok. knew exactly what mine had and bough necessary parts to provide what I needed (extra Sata ports for example). But hey, whatever works for you.


----------



## Moparman

Driller au said:


> I have the same problem that Moparman describes back on page 110 where if the PC is off overnight on cold boot all i get is a black screen no bios logo or anything.Fast startup in windows is off, bios is F8e,default settings xmp enabled.Samsung nvme drivers uninstalled makes no difference if they are installed, Fresh install of Win 10. also happened on old install.
> I have two samsung M.2 installed a 950 pro with windows on it in the M2P slot and a samsung 970 pro in the M2A slot and two sata drives.
> When this happens the boot led is on i think only because windows is not loading as stated in the manual and bug led AO it is always on A0 even when system is running think is just normal
> A quick press of the reboot button and the system will start normally and runs fine for the rest of the day with re starts and shutdowns
> Gigabyte master with a 9900k, 2 x 8 gig g skill memory @ 3200 Mhz



Ok so I think I have found my issue. It seems like if my screen is in stand by it causes this. If i power on the screen then the pc have no issues. Maybe try this the next few days and let us know.


----------



## stl_wrx

I have a second 2080 i plan on adding to my system. Does the z390 master support 16x8 or does adding a second card drop it to 8x8?


----------



## Falkentyne

stl_wrx said:


> I have a second 2080 i plan on adding to my system. Does the z390 master support 16x8 or does adding a second card drop it to 8x8?


There is only x16 for both PCIE lanes.
Having one card in and it runs at X16. Having two cards in, both slots run at x8.


----------



## stl_wrx

Falkentyne said:


> There is only x16 for both PCIE lanes.
> Having one card in and it runs at X16. Having two cards in, both slots run at x8.


That's what I thought. Just watched GamerNexuses video and there was only a 1% difference between 16x16 and 8x8 when using the NVlink bridge so not worried there, thanks.


----------



## Driller au

Moparman said:


> Ok so I think I have found my issue. It seems like if my screen is in stand by it causes this. If i power on the screen then the pc have no issues. Maybe try this the next few days and let us know.


thanks for the answer Moparman. I have had some other issues with ICC profiles and not loading the display driver not loading with this monitor which i think i have got sorted now will try these tomorrow morning if that does not work there is also a deep sleep option for the monitor in the osd which may be linked to your answer.
Will test them all over the next few days and report back 
And what can i say but "MOPAR OR NO CAR"


----------



## Timur Born

shaolin95 said:


> So you bought a mobo without really knowing what it had? Really you needed one than more HDMI output..ok. knew exactly what mine had and bough necessary parts to provide what I needed (extra Sata ports for example). But hey, whatever works for you.


I did not plan for my graphic-card to go bye bye and assumed that checking for integrated graphic outputs was not necessary. I cannot even remember when was the last time I owned a mainboard with only a single GPU output, so it came completely unexpected. Obviously I did not care enough for this feature to check it beforehand, else I would have noticed earlier.


----------



## Timur Born

Jidonsu said:


> How about sticks of ram are we talking about here?


3600-C15 is not stable, so I am back to 3500-C15-2T.

Gskill F4-3200C14D-16GTZ Memory 2x 8GB, 1,35V, TridentZ


----------



## scaramonga

Timur Born said:


> I just updated to F8E and still see TJmax sitting right there. Strange issue. Did you load optimized/default settings before flashing the BIOS?


Loaded before, flashed 'intact', then loaded after. It's missing, so I'm probably gonna have to go back to F8b, which is a pain, profile wise.


----------



## OutlawII

scaramonga said:


> Timur Born said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just updated to F8E and still see TJmax sitting right there. Strange issue. Did you load optimized/default settings before flashing the BIOS?
> 
> 
> 
> Loaded before, flashed 'intact', then loaded after. It's missing, so I'm probably gonna have to go back to F8b, which is a pain, profile wise.
Click to expand...

Just save profile to a USB 👍👍


----------



## scaramonga

OutlawII said:


> Just save profile to a USB 👍👍


I have, but it never works. Complains profile was from a different BIOS version, so can't be used.


----------



## Phantomas 007

How can disable the LED light on the usb LAN etc ports at the backside of the board ?


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> I have, but it never works. Complains profile was from a different BIOS version, so can't be used.


First of all, don't complain about the bios profiles.
It only takes 5 minutes to set up all your profiles. Just write down the old settings on paper or something.
I used to get annoyed to, but not anymore. I realized the more time I waste typing on forums about profiles, the more time I could have used to make the new profiles instead of complaining about it 
But as always, don't fix what isn't broken. F8E is a good bios because it also stops the freezing when you press "Enter" on the IA AC and IA DC loadline settings, and has the extra memory tweaking presets, so it's worth it to flash anyway. There are still a couple of bugs, like having a DVID offset applied and then setting vcore from Normal to Auto keeping the preset you had. I don't know if this happens for static (manual) voltages however, but it might. This might actually not be a true bug, as this same thing happens in "overclocking performance menu" (if it were accessible), if you switch to override voltage and enter a static voltage and had a core voltage offset already entered previously (from adaptive mode), it adds the offset to the static voltage (happens on my MSI laptop), so that's on AMI.

But anyway let's try something, shall we?
Power off and unplug your system, then set the bios switch to "single bios mode" and the bios selector to bios #2 (backup).
Then boot into it, and then flash F8E
After it's successful, check to see if you have TJMAX. You should.
If you do, report back here.

And please make sure you actually flashed the Master bios and not a different model. This is not the first time someone accidentally downloaded the wrong model bios. Even for people who think they aren't capable of such a thing.

I also never load optimized defaults, ever.
All I do before flashing is just set the cpu to 4700 mhz and then flash. Never had an issue.


----------



## Vesimas

At last i had time to build the new rig (the one in signature) :/ What do you think about the screen? At the moment in bios (F8e) i just set XMP profile, TjMax 110, Package Power Limit 1/2 - TDP to 4096 and Core Current Limit 255 and nothing more. It idle at 800Mhz and 0.720v and boost to 4.7Ghz at 1.140v. Idle temp from 25 to 29 and boost under 65. Should i set manual vcore anyway?


----------



## Jidonsu

Has anyone gotten 4 sticks above 4133mhz yet?


----------



## ferinhone

Hy guys!
I have a problem with the vcore "z390 Aorus Pro", i tried solved with update bios version F5 to the last (F9b) , but dont solved..
All settings defaults in bios, only profile XMP (dont change the results)

help me please


----------



## Falkentyne

ferinhone said:


> Hy guys!
> I have a problem with the vcore "z390 Aorus Pro", i tried solved with update bios version F5 to the last (F9b) , but dont solved..
> All settings defaults in bios, only profile XMP (dont change the results)
> 
> help me please


I don't see any problem.
You're using default settings.
Core voltage is linked to CPU VID when using default settings (Adaptive voltage) and the internal IA AC/IA DC loadlines influence the VID (and will make it higher/lower based on load/current in a complicated way, with AVX loads boosting the VID even more).


----------



## rv8000

So beware of grounding issues on the master folks. I've finally figured out my "memory oc instability"; more like bad design! 

Every time I stood up from my pc gpu would crash, screen would black out, and pc would eventually restart, it was the WEIRDEST thing I've ever experienced. Turns out the stand-offs in my Evolv X are the same height as the backplate depth, and where the i/o shield connects through the backplate, the screws touch the motherboard tray. Less of a problem in my Coolermaster CM5, but I just put the case panel on and the pc restarted. Never have I been so frustrated in my life!


----------



## Falkentyne

Now you guys can burn up your CPU's with an even MORE stressful version of Prime95 !
Enjoy, folks.

https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=23723&page=15

Waiting for some magic smoke stories.


----------



## Bartoszek

Update about broken Mobo or CPU from page 212, #2111.

I got a new mobo, new psu, 4 different RAM sticks.
It was the same, still no boot so it was the processor for sure.
I also noticed that the white flash happens on the new mobo, with new psu. So it must be basic behaviour.
As i was giving up, and thinking about putting the cpu into a frame (i mean its a 8086k, dellided, but a 8086).
I also watched a Linus Tech tips sleeper PC build, where they also thought 2 mobos or CPU are dead, but it turned out to be bad luck with placing the CPU inside the Mobo.
I cleaned up the cpu die and IHS a bit, as the liquid metal was also on the sides of the cpu die.
After that, i reseated it a couple of times but still nothing.


Then i started pressing down on the aio cooling holding the cpu, i heard a click (could be AIO holders as i didnt have all screws in and was partially using my hands to hold it down before reseating it again) and boom. Yellow light and boot.
I was suprised. Turned it off, and cleaned up ALL the Liquid metal.
After that, another test run, and it works.
1h later, all my pc parts were in the case, did some test boots in between. And after that did some updates and OC'ed the cput to 5.0Ghz,
Everything is working, i need longer testing to be sure OC is stable, but i got my pc back.

TLDR:
Mobo gives red led light for RAM failure.
Reseating the cpu didnt help, as well as new mobo and psu or different ram.
Turned out, it was in fact bad luck with reseating the CPU, and after around 30 of them it worked again (plus removing liquid metal from the cpu, but possible it would still run fine with it)


Thoughts:

Most strange about this: it is the second time something like this (DRAM issues on mobo, no post) happened (while using a cpu with liquid metal). It is possible the simillar issue i had with my previous mobo could have the same problem source (cpu? LM? Bad luck).
And strange is the fact it happened (bsod, crash, no boot after that) on a running, not moving, lying on the side system. To be sure, im keeping the new PSU (Corsair), and stay away from LM for now.


----------



## EarlZ

I just got around and putting my PC back together after the 9700K replacement. I am getting 70-73c while this is on stock speed with an ambient temp of 30c and VR OUT is at 1.206 when running the X264 benchmark cooled with a D15S I cant exactly recall how much I was getting before but feels a little to high or is this normal ?


----------



## Pauliesss

Anyone with AVX enabled (0 offset) and can do Prime95 Small FFTs without crashing at [email protected]? Care to share your settings, please?

I tried everything, with LLC / VCC / ACDC Extreme, voltage up to 1.380V but I crash immediately at Small FFTs with AVX enabled. Now I know, most of you probably don't even test this, but I would like to get it stable there.

I have Z390 Master / NH-D15.

Thanks.


----------



## scaramonga

Falkentyne said:


> First of all, don't complain about the bios profiles.
> It only takes 5 minutes to set up all your profiles. Just write down the old settings on paper or something.
> I used to get annoyed to, but not anymore. I realized the more time I waste typing on forums about profiles, the more time I could have used to make the new profiles instead of complaining about it
> But as always, don't fix what isn't broken. F8E is a good bios because it also stops the freezing when you press "Enter" on the IA AC and IA DC loadline settings, and has the extra memory tweaking presets, so it's worth it to flash anyway. There are still a couple of bugs, like having a DVID offset applied and then setting vcore from Normal to Auto keeping the preset you had. I don't know if this happens for static (manual) voltages however, but it might. This might actually not be a true bug, as this same thing happens in "overclocking performance menu" (if it were accessible), if you switch to override voltage and enter a static voltage and had a core voltage offset already entered previously (from adaptive mode), it adds the offset to the static voltage (happens on my MSI laptop), so that's on AMI.
> 
> But anyway let's try something, shall we?
> Power off and unplug your system, then set the bios switch to "single bios mode" and the bios selector to bios #2 (backup).
> Then boot into it, and then flash F8E
> After it's successful, check to see if you have TJMAX. You should.
> If you do, report back here.
> 
> And please make sure you actually flashed the Master bios and not a different model. This is not the first time someone accidentally downloaded the wrong model bios. Even for people who think they aren't capable of such a thing.
> 
> I also never load optimized defaults, ever.
> All I do before flashing is just set the cpu to 4700 mhz and then flash. Never had an issue.



OK, will try this when I get a minute, thx.

Out of curiosity though, I had a quick flip through the manual again, and I noticed the TJMAX setting is missing there also, not listed as an option, although the manual is probably based on the old F4 bios? Was this a feature that was added in a later bios for the master?, or could it be CPU related?, mines is 8700k.


----------



## ferinhone

Falkentyne said:


> I don't see any problem.
> You're using default settings.
> Core voltage is linked to CPU VID when using default settings (Adaptive voltage) and the internal IA AC/IA DC loadlines influence the VID (and will make it higher/lower based on load/current in a complicated way, with AVX loads boosting the VID even more).


really? vcore al settings default 1.344? oh my god..


----------



## InHartWeTrust

My amateur understanding is that power is fed to the VRMs by a single 8-pin EPS 12V connection with the second being optional -- is there any good reason to use the second one?


----------



## OutlawII

InHartWeTrust said:


> My amateur understanding is that power is fed to the VRMs by a single 8-pin EPS 12V connection with the second being optional -- is there any good reason to use the second one?


Only reason would be for ln2 overclocking or something like that. Or just for looks I plugged mine in just because


----------



## InHartWeTrust

OutlawII said:


> Only reason would be for ln2 overclocking or something like that. Or just for looks I plugged mine in just because


Roger that, thanks. The white sleeved cable set I ordered only came with one 8 pin EPS, that's why I was trying to decide if I needed to order another or not. Appreciate the quick response. Given I'll only be running a 115i RGB Platinum I will probably forego it, the less cables the better for me.

Is there a dummy guide anywhere in this thread for which settings to change when OC'ing on this Gigabyte mobo? Either tonight or tomorrow I will be putting my 9700K in and trying to get to 5.1ghz or higher, stable. Then I'll be trying my first ever RAM OC, but I can come back for tips and tricks on that when the time comes. I've begun reading through the thread from the office today, but there's little to chance of me getting through all 217 pages by tonight haha.

I have my 4790K running at 5.0ghz currently for the last 3-4 years, and I've OC'ed prior to that...but I have the same system each time. Come here, ask the experts for a dummy guide, follow their advice until I squeak ever bit out of my hardware...it works well, but sadly I never really LEARN all the in's and out's.


----------



## OutlawII

There is a couple guides to follow I actually watched the one from tweaktown. Just look on YouTube


----------



## Vesimas

I have a question: what could be that sometime the monitor is not receiving any signal and i need to reset the computer? I can say that it's not booting in Windows from the color of the rgb fan  Could be the mobo or the videocard? Anyway it did also before installing any os


----------



## kati

How much volt do cores need minimum? Asking cause when downclocking HwInfo shows as low as 0,610V sometimes, dunno though how accurate.
(9700k on aorus master F7b)

Because i still get a sporadic instant hard reboot per week, and im pretty clueless why; everything seems ok, the reboot is never under heavy load, but still occured with slight load or desktop idle.
And as said its very rare, runs a whole week fine after i pushed some voltage by 0,01 to see if it was that... then reboot.


----------



## Scoundrel

Pauliesss said:


> Anyone with AVX enabled (0 offset) and can do Prime95 Small FFTs without crashing at [email protected]? Care to share your settings, please?
> 
> I tried everything, with LLC / VCC / ACDC Extreme, voltage up to 1.380V but I crash immediately at Small FFTs with AVX enabled. Now I know, most of you probably don't even test this, but I would like to get it stable there.
> 
> I have Z390 Master / NH-D15.
> 
> Thanks.


I dont think it's possible unless you have a CPU that can run at extremely low vcore, or maybe a custom water-loop
Maybe you could try with a + offset to your normal vcore here is a link to my settings:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-201.html#post27814212

I'm not able to run AVX=0, as the heat becomes too much i think when vcore shoots up around 1.4v
I'm completely stable at those settings 4.8 AVX Prime95 (v29) for 12 hours, and 5.0 Prime96 (v26.6) for 12 hours too.


----------



## Driller au

Vesimas said:


> I have a question: what could be that sometime the monitor is not receiving any signal and i need to reset the computer? I can say that it's not booting in Windows from the color of the rgb fan  Could be the mobo or the videocard? Anyway it did also before installing any os





Moparman said:


> Ok so I think I have found my issue. It seems like if my screen is in stand by it causes this. If i power on the screen then the pc have no issues. Maybe try this the next few days and let us know.


For me turning off the deep sleep option in the monitors OSD seems to have fixed the problem, only two days (full cold boots) of testing but yesterday i enabled the option left the PC for a few hours and on restart i got the black screen and no signal.
I have a AGON AG352UCG monitor. Will need a longer time to fully test


----------



## Falkentyne

kati said:


> How much volt do cores need minimum? Asking cause when downclocking HwInfo shows as low as 0,610V sometimes, dunno though how accurate.
> (9700k on aorus master F7b)
> 
> Because i still get a sporadic instant hard reboot per week, and im pretty clueless why; everything seems ok, the reboot is never under heavy load, but still occured with slight load or desktop idle.
> And as said its very rare, runs a whole week fine after i pushed some voltage by 0,01 to see if it was that... then reboot.


Are you using IA AC DC loadline=1? Or default (Auto)?
Are you using a negative DVID offset?
if you're using a negative DVID, then that's a common problem when you are downclocking. Very common from laptop world. The offset applies equally at load and at idle, so the magnitude of the undervolt is going to be much higher at lower volts--example, at 0.70v VID, a -150mv offset is going to have a significantly larger effect than at 1.40v VID.

If you are downclocking and downvolting, you have to be careful with the undervolt if you are using IA AC DC loadline=1. Sometimes its best to just remove the undervolt in that case.


----------



## Vesimas

Driller au said:


> For me turning off the deep sleep option in the monitors OSD seems to have fixed the problem, only two days (full cold boots) of testing but yesterday i enabled the option left the PC for a few hours and on restart i got the black screen and no signal.
> I have a AGON AG352UCG monitor. Will need a longer time to fully test


Ok i have disable it on my LG 32GK850G and i'll test it. But, out of curiosity, if that was/is the problem why the pc won't go to Windows?


----------



## kati

Falkentyne said:


> Are you using IA AC DC loadline=1? Or default (Auto)?
> Are you using a negative DVID offset?
> if you're using a negative DVID, then that's a common problem when you are downclocking. Very common from laptop world. The offset applies equally at load and at idle, so the magnitude of the undervolt is going to be much higher at lower volts--example, at 0.70v VID, a -150mv offset is going to have a significantly larger effect than at 1.40v VID.
> 
> If you are downclocking and downvolting, you have to be careful with the undervolt if you are using IA AC DC loadline=1. Sometimes its best to just remove the undervolt in that case.


IA AC DC loadline is set to 1,
it was a slight undervolt but to figure out the reboots im now at the point of
vcore set to normal (1,200) and offset +0,06v. So im actually not undervolting anymore.

Thanks for that hint though, atm im monitoring if reset ever occur again, and if so ill try loadline to 0 and undervolt slightly again how my system behaves.


----------



## Driller au

Vesimas said:


> Ok i have disable it on my LG 32GK850G and i'll test it. But, out of curiosity, if that was/is the problem why the pc won't go to Windows?


Will need someone smarter than me to answer that. A quick test is to shutdown PC,turn off power,press power button for about 15 seconds, turn on power and restart but really need to wait till cold boot to fully test
let us know if it works for you just out of curiosity


----------



## Pasbags

Can I get an ETA on the 10c offset getting fixed on the Z390 Master such a pain when doing the fan curve in BIOS having to always factor in that offset...

Even the Smart Fan 5 software is using a 10c offset. 

https://imgur.com/a/GbDVBbK


----------



## KedarWolf

Pasbags said:


> Can I get an ETA on the 10c offset getting fixed on the Z390 Master such a pain when doing the fan curve in BIOS having to always factor in that offset...
> 
> Even the Smart Fan 5 software is using a 10c offset.
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/GbDVBbK


if you watch in HWInfo the fans don't ramp up and down from the temp of CPU cores but rather the CPU temp where the CPU and VCCSA voltages etc. are.


----------



## Pasbags

KedarWolf said:


> if you watch in HWInfo the fans don't ramp up and down from the temp of CPU cores but rather the CPU temp where the CPU and VCCSA voltages etc. are.


But surely you want the fan curve doing it's ramp up ramp down with the CPU package temp or core temps rather than the temp listed in that section of hardware info, all my other motherboards have always based the fan curve on the package temp and gone up and down accordingly. but perhaps i'm missing something obvious or gigabyte does it differently.

https://imgur.com/a/r1H94HE


----------



## Civers

Vesimas said:


> Ok i have disable it on my LG 32GK850G and i'll test it. But, out of curiosity, if that was/is the problem why the pc won't go to Windows?


Did you try any other cable like HDMI to see if it actually goes into windows?

I had this problem with old asus VG248QE using DP. When i powered up after night. All i got was no signal and blank screen. Noticed that MB gave code A0 so i connected the display with HDMI and it was actually in windows, so the problem was in the Display port on my Asus. I also tested the DP with my old PC, same thing, DP not giving signal and hdmi working perfectly.


----------



## Vesimas

Ok i can confirm that disabling deep sleep doesn't solve the issue. I can also say that today happened after i shut off the computer using the psu button after new positioning.
@Civers i tryed 2 DP cable and 1 HDMI the first time i turned on (so no windows installed) the rig with the same result. I'm sure it doesn't go to windows because if i reset the computer doesn't prompt for safe mode or the rgb fans don't change color because the TT program isn't loaded


----------



## Padinn

So after much wailing, gnashing of teeth, ethical dilemmas, and absurd amounts of testing I decided to throw in the towel and request replacement of my motherboard (Aorus Master) from Newegg and CPU (9900k) from Amazon. My return window closes on January 31st and I didn't want to risk extended downtime as I do use my PC for some business purposes.They were both understanding and Newegg even offered, without my request, to overnight a replacement to minimize my downtime. I installed them Wednesday.

So far, things are much, much improved. I did stability testing with manual voltage and everything went fine. This chip seems to need much less power, or perhaps the motherboard power delivery is better. I am stability testing now (no overclock, just 4.7GHz all core) and so far I am stable with VR VOUT reading 1.145v to 1.15v - this is in the custom x264 blend test with 43x cache and XMP on (DDR4 3200). I have completed 10 loops successfully, which is a good sign - normally it crashes near instantly if there is an issue. I am using similar adaptive voltage settings as before, with my offset at +.04. Based on how this is going, I may be able to lower it, but I need to make sure I am stable at idle as well. All power saving features are on and my CPU temperature is at 72c. I removed the power limits, set VRMs to extreme performance, and VRM frequency to 500Khz. 

I also learned a trick that helped me apply Kyronaut better (this was my fourth time using it) - spread the past with the "backside" of the squeegee - the pulling the past with the side that it does *not* exit the tube from. It's a little firmer and easier to deal with.

Thanks for everyone who has helped me through this process. I'll update with final results in a few days.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> So after much wailing, gnashing of teeth, ethical dilemmas, and absurd amounts of testing I decided to throw in the towel and request replacement of my motherboard (Aorus Master) from Newegg and CPU (9900k) from Amazon. My return window closes on January 31st and I didn't want to risk extended downtime as I do use my PC for some business purposes.They were both understanding and Newegg even offered, without my request, to overnight a replacement to minimize my downtime. I installed them Wednesday.
> 
> So far, things are much, much improved. I did stability testing with manual voltage and everything went fine. This chip seems to need much less power, or perhaps the motherboard power delivery is better. I am stability testing now (no overclock, just 4.7GHz all core) and so far I am stable with VR VOUT reading 1.145v to 1.15v - this is in the custom x264 blend test with 43x cache and XMP on (DDR4 3200). I have completed 10 loops successfully, which is a good sign - normally it crashes near instantly if there is an issue. I am using similar adaptive voltage settings as before, with my offset at +.04. Based on how this is going, I may be able to lower it, but I need to make sure I am stable at idle as well. All power saving features are on and my CPU temperature is at 72c. I removed the power limits, set VRMs to extreme performance, and VRM frequency to 500Khz.
> 
> I also learned a trick that helped me apply Kyronaut better (this was my fourth time using it) - spread the past with the "backside" of the squeegee - the pulling the past with the side that it does *not* exit the tube from. It's a little firmer and easier to deal with.
> 
> Thanks for everyone who has helped me through this process. I'll update with final results in a few days.


Excellent! Let's see how good your chip is.
Now it's time to see if you can graduate from Jedi Apprentice school now!
Do the following:
Set cache to x44
set multiplier to x47.
max all turbo power limits, increase cpu current protection, disable MCE, flash your bios to latest f8e (do this before you do your tweaks though).

Ok once your bios is flashed and you set your settings, lets see how stable you can get 4.7 ghz.

Set your CPU to 1.185v.
LLC to Turbo
cache x44.
Disable all c-states and speedshift, speed step, C1E.
And oh yeah, go to internal VR settings and set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 1 (so i can see what your default VID is).

Boot to windows and download this new version of prime95.
https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=506780#post506780
ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v295b9.win64.zip

Load HWinfo64 for me and tell me your IDLE VID. Make sure you have IA AC and IA DC set to 1 though and cache multi must be x44. (this is important; default VID is based on cache ratio!).

Do a stress test, click smallest FFT then immediately click custom (this will checkbox in place for you automatically),
Set min and max FFT to 15K and let it loop.

Can you pass this 8c/16t FMA3 test without crashing for 30 minutes?  
if you crash, try 1.190v and do it again and keep going up until you can pass 30 minutes.
Then we'll know if my chip is better or worse than yours.


----------



## scaramonga

Falkentyne said:


> First of all, don't complain about the bios profiles.
> It only takes 5 minutes to set up all your profiles. Just write down the old settings on paper or something.
> I used to get annoyed to, but not anymore. I realized the more time I waste typing on forums about profiles, the more time I could have used to make the new profiles instead of complaining about it
> But as always, don't fix what isn't broken. F8E is a good bios because it also stops the freezing when you press "Enter" on the IA AC and IA DC loadline settings, and has the extra memory tweaking presets, so it's worth it to flash anyway. There are still a couple of bugs, like having a DVID offset applied and then setting vcore from Normal to Auto keeping the preset you had. I don't know if this happens for static (manual) voltages however, but it might. This might actually not be a true bug, as this same thing happens in "overclocking performance menu" (if it were accessible), if you switch to override voltage and enter a static voltage and had a core voltage offset already entered previously (from adaptive mode), it adds the offset to the static voltage (happens on my MSI laptop), so that's on AMI.
> 
> But anyway let's try something, shall we?
> Power off and unplug your system, then set the bios switch to "single bios mode" and the bios selector to bios #2 (backup).
> Then boot into it, and then flash F8E
> After it's successful, check to see if you have TJMAX. You should.
> If you do, report back here.
> 
> And please make sure you actually flashed the Master bios and not a different model. This is not the first time someone accidentally downloaded the wrong model bios. Even for people who think they aren't capable of such a thing.
> 
> I also never load optimized defaults, ever.
> All I do before flashing is just set the cpu to 4700 mhz and then flash. Never had an issue.



OK, done what you said, and also done what you said over on Gigabyte forums , as regards to powering off and switching this and that, saving a profile to make sure etc. BIOS flashed (F8E - MASTER) and still no TJMAX, so there ya go. Both backup BIOS and MAIN have exactly the same now, just missing that option?

It is what it is I guess


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> OK, done what you said, and also done what you said over on Gigabyte forums , as regards to powering off and switching this and that, saving a profile to make sure etc. BIOS flashed (F8E - MASTER) and still no TJMAX, so there ya go. Both backup BIOS and MAIN have exactly the same now, just missing that option?
> 
> It is what it is I guess


What processor is this?
Only 9900K and 9700K (maybe 9600K) have adjustable TJmax.
But you said you had tjmax in the F4 original bios?


----------



## Aznboy1993

@KedarWolf and others with the Aorus Xtreme

Have you had issues with the Aorus Fan Commander randomly disconnecting and re-connecting after booting into Windows? It does not happen all of the time, but when it does (roughly 25% of the time) it is quite annoying as the Windows device re-connect sound will play over and over again until I reboot the PC. I have narrowed down the problem to the Fan Commander because when I completely disconnect it the problem goes away.

Also, does anyone know how to change the default color for RGB Fusion? During bootup it is always orange regardless of what I set it up in RGB Fusion.


----------



## scaramonga

Falkentyne said:


> What processor is this?
> Only 9900K and 9700K (maybe 9600K) have adjustable TJmax.
> But you said you had tjmax in the F4 original bios?



https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...78-gigabyte-z390-aorus-owners-thread-217.html


----------



## luets

Does anyone have any luck adjusting RTL with the aorus pro? Mine do not change at all no matter what values I try.


----------



## Jidonsu

luets said:


> Does anyone have any luck adjusting RTL with the aorus pro? Mine do not change at all no matter what values I try.


It will only auto set, AFAIK.


----------



## KedarWolf

Aznboy1993 said:


> @KedarWolf and others with the Aorus Xtreme
> 
> Have you had issues with the Aorus Fan Commander randomly disconnecting and re-connecting after booting into Windows? It does not happen all of the time, but when it does (roughly 25% of the time) it is quite annoying as the Windows device re-connect sound will play over and over again until I reboot the PC. I have narrowed down the problem to the Fan Commander because when I completely disconnect it the problem goes away.
> 
> Also, does anyone know how to change the default color for RGB Fusion? During bootup it is always orange regardless of what I set it up in RGB Fusion.


I gave up on the Fan Commander when sometimes my fans wouldn't ramp up during stress testing.

I use two quality 8 port SATA PWM fan hubs now.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So after much wailing, gnashing of teeth, ethical dilemmas, and absurd amounts of testing I decided to throw in the towel and request replacement of my motherboard (Aorus Master) from Newegg and CPU (9900k) from Amazon. My return window closes on January 31st and I didn't want to risk extended downtime as I do use my PC for some business purposes.They were both understanding and Newegg even offered, without my request, to overnight a replacement to minimize my downtime. I installed them Wednesday.
> 
> So far, things are much, much improved. I did stability testing with manual voltage and everything went fine. This chip seems to need much less power, or perhaps the motherboard power delivery is better. I am stability testing now (no overclock, just 4.7GHz all core) and so far I am stable with VR VOUT reading 1.145v to 1.15v - this is in the custom x264 blend test with 43x cache and XMP on (DDR4 3200). I have completed 10 loops successfully, which is a good sign - normally it crashes near instantly if there is an issue. I am using similar adaptive voltage settings as before, with my offset at +.04. Based on how this is going, I may be able to lower it, but I need to make sure I am stable at idle as well. All power saving features are on and my CPU temperature is at 72c. I removed the power limits, set VRMs to extreme performance, and VRM frequency to 500Khz.
> 
> I also learned a trick that helped me apply Kyronaut better (this was my fourth time using it) - spread the past with the "backside" of the squeegee - the pulling the past with the side that it does *not* exit the tube from. It's a little firmer and easier to deal with.
> 
> Thanks for everyone who has helped me through this process. I'll update with final results in a few days.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent! Let's see how good your chip is.
> Now it's time to see if you can graduate from Jedi Apprentice school now!
> Do the following:
> Set cache to x44
> set multiplier to x47.
> max all turbo power limits, increase cpu current protection, disable MCE, flash your bios to latest f8e (do this before you do your tweaks though).
> 
> Ok once your bios is flashed and you set your settings, lets see how stable you can get 4.7 ghz.
> 
> Set your CPU to 1.185v.
> LLC to Turbo
> cache x44.
> Disable all c-states and speedshift, speed step, C1E.
> And oh yeah, go to internal VR settings and set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 1 (so i can see what your default VID is).
> 
> Boot to windows and download this new version of prime95.
> https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=506780#post506780
> ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v295b9.win64.zip
> 
> Load HWinfo64 for me and tell me your IDLE VID. Make sure you have IA AC and IA DC set to 1 though and cache multi must be x44. (this is important; default VID is based on cache ratio!).
> 
> Do a stress test, click smallest FFT then immediately click custom (this will checkbox in place for you automatically),
> Set min and max FFT to 15K and let it loop.
> 
> Can you pass this 8c/16t FMA3 test without crashing for 30 minutes? /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> if you crash, try 1.190v and do it again and keep going up until you can pass 30 minutes.
> Then we'll know if my chip is better or worse than yours.
Click to expand...

games all night and completed 50 loops of blend test overnight without issue so those settings I posted are stable. I'll get back to you with info requested. I am on f8e.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Excellent! Let's see how good your chip is.
> Now it's time to see if you can graduate from Jedi Apprentice school now!
> Do the following:
> Set cache to x44
> set multiplier to x47.
> max all turbo power limits, increase cpu current protection, disable MCE, flash your bios to latest f8e (do this before you do your tweaks though).
> 
> Ok once your bios is flashed and you set your settings, lets see how stable you can get 4.7 ghz.
> 
> Set your CPU to 1.185v.
> LLC to Turbo
> cache x44.
> Disable all c-states and speedshift, speed step, C1E.
> And oh yeah, go to internal VR settings and set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 1 (so i can see what your default VID is).
> 
> Boot to windows and download this new version of prime95.
> https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=506780#post506780
> ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v295b9.win64.zip
> 
> Load HWinfo64 for me and tell me your IDLE VID. Make sure you have IA AC and IA DC set to 1 though and cache multi must be x44. (this is important; default VID is based on cache ratio!).
> 
> Do a stress test, click smallest FFT then immediately click custom (this will checkbox in place for you automatically),
> Set min and max FFT to 15K and let it loop.
> 
> Can you pass this 8c/16t FMA3 test without crashing for 30 minutes?
> if you crash, try 1.190v and do it again and keep going up until you can pass 30 minutes.
> Then we'll know if my chip is better or worse than yours.


With those settings my lowest VID is 1.14v. I saw .64v using the settings I posted earlier, not sure how useful that is. This is with all energy savings off and balanced power plan in windows. Running your test now.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So after much wailing, gnashing of teeth, ethical dilemmas, and absurd amounts of testing I decided to throw in the towel and request replacement of my motherboard (Aorus Master) from Newegg and CPU (9900k) from Amazon. My return window closes on January 31st and I didn't want to risk extended downtime as I do use my PC for some business purposes.They were both understanding and Newegg even offered, without my request, to overnight a replacement to minimize my downtime. I installed them Wednesday.
> 
> So far, things are much, much improved. I did stability testing with manual voltage and everything went fine. This chip seems to need much less power, or perhaps the motherboard power delivery is better. I am stability testing now (no overclock, just 4.7GHz all core) and so far I am stable with VR VOUT reading 1.145v to 1.15v - this is in the custom x264 blend test with 43x cache and XMP on (DDR4 3200). I have completed 10 loops successfully, which is a good sign - normally it crashes near instantly if there is an issue. I am using similar adaptive voltage settings as before, with my offset at +.04. Based on how this is going, I may be able to lower it, but I need to make sure I am stable at idle as well. All power saving features are on and my CPU temperature is at 72c. I removed the power limits, set VRMs to extreme performance, and VRM frequency to 500Khz.
> 
> I also learned a trick that helped me apply Kyronaut better (this was my fourth time using it) - spread the past with the "backside" of the squeegee - the pulling the past with the side that it does *not* exit the tube from. It's a little firmer and easier to deal with.
> 
> Thanks for everyone who has helped me through this process. I'll update with final results in a few days.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent! Let's see how good your chip is.
> Now it's time to see if you can graduate from Jedi Apprentice school now!
> Do the following:
> Set cache to x44
> set multiplier to x47.
> max all turbo power limits, increase cpu current protection, disable MCE, flash your bios to latest f8e (do this before you do your tweaks though).
> 
> Ok once your bios is flashed and you set your settings, lets see how stable you can get 4.7 ghz.
> 
> Set your CPU to 1.185v.
> LLC to Turbo
> cache x44.
> Disable all c-states and speedshift, speed step, C1E.
> And oh yeah, go to internal VR settings and set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 1 (so i can see what your default VID is).
> 
> Boot to windows and download this new version of prime95.
> https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=506780#post506780
> ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v295b9.win64.zip
> 
> Load HWinfo64 for me and tell me your IDLE VID. Make sure you have IA AC and IA DC set to 1 though and cache multi must be x44. (this is important; default VID is based on cache ratio!).
> 
> Do a stress test, click smallest FFT then immediately click custom (this will checkbox in place for you automatically),
> Set min and max FFT to 15K and let it loop.
> 
> Can you pass this 8c/16t FMA3 test without crashing for 30 minutes? /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> if you crash, try 1.190v and do it again and keep going up until you can pass 30 minutes.
> Then we'll know if my chip is better or worse than yours.
Click to expand...




Padinn said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent! Let's see how good your chip is.
> Now it's time to see if you can graduate from Jedi Apprentice school now!
> Do the following:
> Set cache to x44
> set multiplier to x47.
> max all turbo power limits, increase cpu current protection, disable MCE, flash your bios to latest f8e (do this before you do your tweaks though).
> 
> Ok once your bios is flashed and you set your settings, lets see how stable you can get 4.7 ghz.
> 
> Set your CPU to 1.185v.
> LLC to Turbo
> cache x44.
> Disable all c-states and speedshift, speed step, C1E.
> And oh yeah, go to internal VR settings and set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 1 (so i can see what your default VID is).
> 
> Boot to windows and download this new version of prime95.
> https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=506780#post506780
> ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v295b9.win64.zip
> 
> Load HWinfo64 for me and tell me your IDLE VID. Make sure you have IA AC and IA DC set to 1 though and cache multi must be x44. (this is important; default VID is based on cache ratio!).
> 
> Do a stress test, click smallest FFT then immediately click custom (this will checkbox in place for you automatically),
> Set min and max FFT to 15K and let it loop.
> 
> Can you pass this 8c/16t FMA3 test without crashing for 30 minutes? /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> if you crash, try 1.190v and do it again and keep going up until you can pass 30 minutes.
> Then we'll know if my chip is better or worse than yours.
> 
> 
> 
> With those settings my lowest VID is 1.14v. I saw .64v using the settings I posted earlier, not sure how useful that is. This is with all energy savings off and balanced power plan in windows. Running your test now.
Click to expand...

A quick update five minutes into stress test. VID is now 1.199. VRout showing 1.123v. Package power 203w. 88c. I did get an L0/WHEA error though about 5 min in - didn't crash, it was able to correct and keep running. I'll try 1.19. I never ran this test on my old CPUs, but I will say this - at 160w package power they were thermally loaded and in the mid to upper 90s. This one capped at 88c with over 200w package power draw - so that's a good sign.

What level of CPU current protection did you want me to test? I set CPU and VAXG current protection to High.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> A quick update five minutes into stress test. VID is now 1.199. VRout showing 1.123v. Package power 203w. 88c. I did get an L0/WHEA error though about 5 min in - didn't crash, it was able to correct and keep running. I'll try 1.19. I never ran this test on my old CPUs, but I will say this - at 160w package power they were thermally loaded and in the mid to upper 90s. This one capped at 88c with over 200w package power draw - so that's a good sign.
> 
> What level of CPU current protection did you want me to test? I set CPU and VAXG current protection to High.


Very interesting.
My VID is 1.135v at idle and yours is 1.140v. So 5mv higher.
So looks like you can do 1.19v (bios) while I can do 1.185v (bios).
The cpu current protection is set correctly.

But are you sure threads aren't crashing? There are 16 windows, and they will be very tiny.
If you get a L0 / whea error, it means a thread must have already crashed.
If you want to see the thread status, here is a little trick you can do.
Either set it to cascade (which still doesn't help fully), or you have to do some LONG work with the following:

1) start a new instance of prime95, make the main prime95 window bigger on a new run (but don't run the stress test yet!), then run an 8 thread test, click TILE in the window setting, then cancel it.
This will make 8 big windows for you with the worker status clearly visible. Exit and restart prime95 now.
2) Now run a 16 thread test. Now the first 8 threads will be shown, but the threads 9-16 will have tiny windows. You need to fix that.
3) manually resize threads 9-16 and make them the same width as threads 1-8, then move them over partially to the right side, so that while threads 1-8 are full length, threads 9-16 are smaller windows.

This way you can see each thread and clearly see if it errors out and which thread crashes.
here is an example.

Also, the prime95 window in the bottom right system tray will turn red if a thread crashes I THINK (not sure), but remains green in the taskbar.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Very interesting.
> My VID is 1.135v at idle and yours is 1.140v. So 5mv higher.
> So looks like you can do 1.19v (bios) while I can do 1.185v (bios).
> The cpu current protection is set correctly.
> 
> But are you sure threads aren't crashing? There are 16 windows, and they will be very tiny.
> If you get a L0 / whea error, it means a thread must have already crashed.
> If you want to see the thread status, here is a little trick you can do.
> Either set it to cascade (which still doesn't help fully), or you have to do some LONG work with the following:
> 
> 1) start a new instance of prime95, make the main prime95 window bigger on a new run (but don't run the stress test yet!), then run an 8 thread test, click TILE in the window setting, then cancel it.
> This will make 8 big windows for you with the worker status clearly visible. Exit and restart prime95 now.
> 2) Now run a 16 thread test. Now the first 8 threads will be shown, but the threads 9-16 will have tiny windows. You need to fix that.
> 3) manually resize threads 9-16 and make them the same width as threads 1-8, then move them over partially to the right side, so that while threads 1-8 are full length, threads 9-16 are smaller windows.
> 
> This way you can see each thread and clearly see if it errors out and which thread crashes.
> here is an example.
> 
> Also, the prime95 window in the bottom right system tray will turn red if a thread crashes I THINK (not sure), but remains green in the taskbar.


Looks like I was really close at 1.19v, but didn't quite make it. 15 out of 16 threads passed for 30 minutes - thread 8 failed 25 minutes. Here is a pic I took, you can see start time at top and the pass for 15/16 threads. No l0 errors were caught during this run, you can see that in the total errors graph in HWInfo below. In my book this qualifies as "pretty dang close!"

*Edit* I am running the test again with the window trick you gave me.


----------



## Padinn

Worker 7 crashed about 11 minutes in at 1.195v, I'm guessing this would point to that core being the "weaker" one since core 8 crashed earlier. That said this is a pretty stressful test and getting to that point I think I am on good ground. I'm going to go back to my adaptive settings and drop the offset a bit (I am now testing with 0 offset) in the x264 blend test from the Kaby Lake OC Thread (https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1621347-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-statistics.html). I find if I am stable in this particular test I am generally stable in games, it's not quite as demanding but does a pretty good job simulating the workloads I get frequently on my PC. 

Much appreciate all your help Falk. If I decide to overclock (which I am probably going to try again) I will follow up.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Worker 7 crashed about 11 minutes in at 1.195v, I'm guessing this would point to that core being the "weaker" one since core 8 crashed earlier. That said this is a pretty stressful test and getting to that point I think I am on good ground. I'm going to go back to my adaptive settings and drop the offset a bit (I am now testing with 0 offset) in the x264 blend test from the Kaby Lake OC Thread (https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1621347-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-statistics.html). I find if I am stable in this particular test I am generally stable in games, it's not quite as demanding but does a pretty good job simulating the workloads I get frequently on my PC.
> 
> Much appreciate all your help Falk. If I decide to overclock (which I am probably going to try again) I will follow up.


So 1.20v should be stable.
Funny enough I found 1.185v fail a thread if I have other stuff running in the background but when I closed everything, it passed for 30 minutes.
So (in my case), 1.190v shouldn't fail anything.

Also, yes you are right, worker 7 and 8 are the same core. Hyperthreaded.
I chose 15k fixed to test because that seems to be the most stressful FMA3 test. You can notice the amps load in the VR sensor area. It's always highest at 15K FMA3/AVX.
When I was doing a normal small FFT test (with older versions of prime before they improved the test greatly in the last build), which started at 12k then went to 8k, etc (testing 8k to 16k),
I always found that 15K was where I was most likely to drop a thread in AVX or FMA3.
For AVX/FMA disabled, it doesn't really matter. Can't tell a difference between 14k and 20k. If you fail a thread with AVX disabled, you are extremely close to BSOD'ing.

Edit min VID was 1.130v not 1.135v so if yours was 1.140v pretty sure you should pass everything at 1.20v bios.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> So 1.20v should be stable.
> Funny enough I found 1.185v fail a thread if I have other stuff running in the background but when I closed everything, it passed for 30 minutes.
> So (in my case), 1.190v shouldn't fail anything.
> 
> Also, yes you are right, worker 7 and 8 are the same core. Hyperthreaded.
> I chose 15k fixed to test because that seems to be the most stressful FMA3 test. You can notice the amps load in the VR sensor area. It's always highest at 15K FMA3/AVX.
> When I was doing a normal small FFT test (with older versions of prime before they improved the test greatly in the last build), which started at 12k then went to 8k, etc (testing 8k to 16k),
> I always found that 15K was where I was most likely to drop a thread in AVX or FMA3.
> For AVX/FMA disabled, it doesn't really matter. Can't tell a difference between 14k and 20k. If you fail a thread with AVX disabled, you are extremely close to BSOD'ing.
> 
> Edit min VID was 1.130v not 1.135v so if yours was 1.140v pretty sure you should pass everything at 1.20v bios.


Thanks for info, much appreciated!


----------



## robertr1

I have a pro z390 board and trying to tune my RAM. Bdie kit. 

What is a safe range for VCCIO?
What is a safe range for VCCSA?
What is a safe range for DRAM Voltage?

Weird bug: trying run run 13-13-13-30 3600mhz set the frequency to 3200? Any guesses at to why? CPU = 9900k @ 5ghz all core 1.3vcore


----------



## Padinn

Whats the stock uncore/cache ratio on a 9900k? My motherboard is showing it as 4.4Ghz, however I am 100% positive my previous one on the same bios showed 4.3Ghz. What gives?


----------



## robertr1

Padinn said:


> Whats the stock uncore/cache ratio on a 9900k? My motherboard is showing it as 4.4Ghz, however I am 100% positive my previous one on the same bios showed 4.3Ghz. What gives?


I thought all the GB boards set uncore to 47 by default? I think Asus sets it to 43.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Whats the stock uncore/cache ratio on a 9900k? My motherboard is showing it as 4.4Ghz, however I am 100% positive my previous one on the same bios showed 4.3Ghz. What gives?


Default on fresh (current) Bios is x43 for cache.
Normal limit is 3 under cpu core ratio.
So at x47, it is limited to x44 by design.
This can be overridden via a bios setting (ring ratio down bin?) but is not advisable. Setting clock ratio and cache ratio to the exact same speed is just asking for a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT BSOD to happen and needs a LOT more voltage to work.
I can't even enter bios if I set core and cache to x50 at 1.275v. But no problem at core x50, cache x47.


----------



## Falkentyne

robertr1 said:


> I thought all the GB boards set uncore to 47 by default? I think Asus sets it to 43.


It was set to x47 on original F4 bios, which caused big problems, because since VID is based on cache ratio, this was causing a lot of high auto voltages, and requiring more voltage to be stable.
Now it's x43 by default. When set manually, if the ring ratio down bin limit is in place, it's 3 below core ratio.


----------



## robertr1

Falkentyne said:


> It was set to x47 on original F4 bios, which caused big problems, because since VID is based on cache ratio, this was causing a lot of high auto voltages, and requiring more voltage to be stable.
> Now it's x43 by default. When set manually, if the ring ratio down bin limit is in place, it's 3 below core ratio.


-3 is the rule of thumb I've been using. Current at 50x core and 47x uncore at 1.3v which is fine. 

What's the value of setting IA DC/AC to 1?


----------



## Falkentyne

robertr1 said:


> -3 is the rule of thumb I've been using. Current at 50x core and 47x uncore at 1.3v which is fine.
> 
> What's the value of setting IA DC/AC to 1?


Very useful for finding your CPU's default VID. Otherwise the VID gets put much higher based on idle (by some strange formula based on 1.60 mOhms), then gets 'drooped' down at load based on current, which makes things even more confusing. An AVX load throws a spanner into this and makes things even more confusing.

With IA AC and IA DC set to 1, the VID will be a certain baseline at idle and then slowly rise higher based on load. However when using adaptive voltage, I do NOT know if the CPU Vcore will rise with the VID or not. That depends if the VID rise is caused by the IA AC loadline value (this is where the vcore comes from here) or from the IA DC loadline value (this is just power measurements, but this affects the drop in VID at load--cpu wattage is based on this).

Also makes tuning with positive offsets easier without putting too much volts through the processor. But remember VID is based on cache ratio, not core ratio.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whats the stock uncore/cache ratio on a 9900k? My motherboard is showing it as 4.4Ghz, however I am 100% positive my previous one on the same bios showed 4.3Ghz. What gives?
> 
> 
> 
> Default on fresh (current) Bios is x43 for cache.
> Normal limit is 3 under cpu core ratio.
> So at x47, it is limited to x44 by design.
> This can be overridden via a bios setting (ring ratio down bin?) but is not advisable. Setting clock ratio and cache ratio to the exact same speed is just asking for a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT BSOD to happen and needs a LOT more voltage to work.
> I can't even enter bios if I set core and cache to x50 at 1.275v. But no problem at core x50, cache x47.
Click to expand...

Interesting, its defaulting to 44 for me since I tried out the stuff earlier today.


----------



## Smokediggity

Padinn said:


> Interesting, its defaulting to 44 for me since I tried out the stuff earlier today.


There is currently a bug in the BIOS where setting the Uncore Ratio to Auto does not reset it to the default, but instead leaves it at whatever value you last set it to. You will either need to explicitly set it back to 43x or Load Optimized Defaults. This should be fixed in the next BIOS release.


----------



## Padinn

I did set my adaptive settings back, increased CPU LLC to high (from medium), high on overcurrent protection, and dropped cache to default of 43, offset to -.05v. Just about passed the prime torture test with VRR Out showing 1.10v - one thread failed but the rest were fine after 28 minutes. This is a big power savings, around 40 watts. Gonna test with +.05v now.


----------



## robertr1

Falkentyne said:


> Very useful for finding yous CPU's default VID. Otherwise the VID gets put much higher based on idle (by some strange formula based on 1.60 mOhms), then gets 'drooped' down at load based on current, which makes things even more confusing. An AVX load throws a spanner into this and makes things even more confusing.
> 
> With IA AC and IA DC set to 1, the VID will be a certain baseline at idle and then slowly rise higher based on load. However when using adaptive voltage, I do NOT know if the CPU Vcore will rise with the VID or not. That depends if the VID rise is caused by the IA AC loadline value (this is where the vcore comes from here) or from the IA DC loadline value (this is just power measurements, but this affects the drop in VID at load--cpu wattage is based on this).
> 
> Also makes tuning with positive offsets easier without putting too much volts through the processor. But remember VID is based on cache ratio, not core ratio.


So if I'm running a fixed vcore, does the IA AC/DC still apply? or is it to find your baseline if you plan to run offset/adaptive? so you know how much of a delta you need to apply.


----------



## Falkentyne

robertr1 said:


> So if I'm running a fixed vcore, does the IA AC/DC still apply? or is it to find your baseline if you plan to run offset/adaptive? so you know how much off a delta you need.


For fixed voltage, no, but changing the IA DC loadline setting affects power draw measurements (power draw is calculated based on VID and some other factors). But temps/voltage are not affected at all.


----------



## robertr1

Falkentyne said:


> For fixed voltage, no, but changing the IA DC loadline setting affects power draw measurements (power draw is calculated based on VID and some other factors). But temps/voltage are not affected at all.


Thank you for that detail. If there's no material change on temps/voltages or an ability to gain more performance, I'll sit it out for now.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> For fixed voltage, no, but changing the IA DC loadline setting affects power draw measurements (power draw is calculated based on VID and some other factors). But temps/voltage are not affected at all.


Ah so perhaps that is why I was seeing the power draw change, since it was I think the IA DC was set to 0 - temps were a little lower (about 5c at max).


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Ah so perhaps that is why I was seeing the power draw change, since it was I think the IA DC was set to 0 - temps were a little lower (about 5c at max).


IA DC loadline =0 is auto, equal to IA DC loadline=160 (or 210 if Gigabyte isn't following the proper 8 core defaults). IA DC loadline is basically "internal vdroop on the VID", which Asus calls "CPU loadline" (intercepting the CPU VID, but AC loadline affects the VID first, or is supposed to), while loadline calibration (LLC) is VRM loadline (intercepting the cpu vcore signal at the VRM).

I still can't get solid reliable tests on how DC loadline affects the actual vcore however. It's invalid with static voltage, but with adaptive voltage, the higher the DC Loadline resistance (mOhm) value is, the more the VID will droop at load, which drops the resulting VID. However I am not sure if the CPU vcore follows this. When I did my own tests with adaptive voltage, using IA DC loadline=1 and IA DC loadline=0, the CPU Vcore was *barely* affected at all, even though the VID was 100mv lower at full load. On my laptop (which only has VID and no vcore sensor whatsoever), raising the DC loadline setting dropped the VID lower and lower (i went as high as 600 or 6 mOhms), however the temps actually kept increasing even though the power draw kept increasing, so the actual voltage was -higher-.

At least on the desktops, it seems to be....sort of working in a logical way, even though it isn't a direct 100% relation to VID->Vcore when you raise DC loadline.

Literally makes no sense.

Unless you are willing to do a test? But I take no responsiblity.

Set DC loadline to 320 (3.2 mOhms), and see if the cpu vcore decreases by the same amount as the CPU VID. I recommend using something like 3700 mhz for this test.


----------



## EarlZ

9700K
1.206V on VR OUT
XMP Enabled - 3200Mhz Trident Z 
Noctua D15s
28c ambient
Getting 70-73c on X264 Benchmark, is this an expected temperature? I honestly think it is very high was expecting around 60-64. Can anyone chime in.


----------



## -Techgeek-

*Here is the best setting after extensive testing for i9-9900k 4.9gh core and 4.6 cache with 3200mhz c14 ddr4*

clear bios before you change the settings..

load xmp 
set the ram to high performance 
set cpu vcore to normal
ofset to - 0,050
vccsa to 1.15
vccio to 1.2
core to 49x 
disable multi core enhancement
disable all the power savings on the cpu
voltage optimizing on auto
vrm to extreme 
cpu current protection to turbo
llc to normal
AC DC loadline to performance
idle temp is 28c on the package and Max temp with these settings on latest prime95 29.5 avx 90 c on the package, room temp at 24c and using ek water cooling with cpu and gpu blocks (EVGA2080ti ftw3)
also i found the best stability test to be LinpackXtreme_x64 1.1.1 it was max temp at 90 c (sometimes it passes on prime95 but it fails instantly on LinpackXtreme_x64 

also keep hwinfo running to check for WHEA errors and keep an eye on the temp and voltages 
Gigabyte z390 master

power supply evga 1000g3 gold
CINEBENCH score 2184


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ah so perhaps that is why I was seeing the power draw change, since it was I think the IA DC was set to 0 - temps were a little lower (about 5c at max).
> 
> 
> 
> IA DC loadline =0 is auto, equal to IA DC loadline=160 (or 210 if Gigabyte isn't following the proper 8 core defaults). IA DC loadline is basically "internal vdroop on the VID", which Asus calls "CPU loadline" (intercepting the CPU VID, but AC loadline affects the VID first, or is supposed to), while loadline calibration (LLC) is VRM loadline (intercepting the cpu vcore signal at the VRM).
> 
> I still can't get solid reliable tests on how DC loadline affects the actual vcore however. It's invalid with static voltage, but with adaptive voltage, the higher the DC Loadline resistance (mOhm) value is, the more the VID will droop at load, which drops the resulting VID. However I am not sure if the CPU vcore follows this. When I did my own tests with adaptive voltage, using IA DC loadline=1 and IA DC loadline=0, the CPU Vcore was *barely* affected at all, even though the VID was 100mv lower at full load. On my laptop (which only has VID and no vcore sensor whatsoever), raising the DC loadline setting dropped the VID lower and lower (i went as high as 600 or 6 mOhms), however the temps actually kept increasing even though the power draw kept increasing, so the actual voltage was -higher-.
> 
> At least on the desktops, it seems to be....sort of working in a logical way, even though it isn't a direct 100% relation to VID->Vcore when you raise DC loadline.
> 
> Literally makes no sense.
> 
> Unless you are willing to do a test? But I take no responsiblity.
> 
> Set DC loadline to 320 (3.2 mOhms), and see if the cpu vcore decreases by the same amount as the CPU VID. I recommend using something like 3700 mhz for this test.
Click to expand...

Read a little on loadlines on Wikipedia for semiconductors. It looks like they interact to find the operating voltage . Check it out
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_line_(electronics)

I'm not going to test anything since I'm comfortable where it's at. However, knowing without setting both AC and DC to 1 will give incorrect power readings (or at least, calculate them based on stock VID and not current voltage) is helpful, it probably explains why I thought my temps were out of whack for a 160w draw - it was likely actually drawing 200w.


----------



## Padinn

EarlZ said:


> 9700K
> 1.206V on VR OUT
> XMP Enabled - 3200Mhz Trident Z
> Noctua D15s
> 28c ambient
> Getting 70-73c on X264 Benchmark, is this an expected temperature? I honestly think it is very high was expecting around 60-64. Can anyone chime in.


I'm not certain how it should be on 9700k, but I get around same temps at 1.15v on VR Out on my 9900k. However, my previous chips would get around 82c at 1.18v. We have similar ambient temperatures, so I think you are about right for that voltage.


----------



## Vesimas

Driller au said:


> Will need someone smarter than me to answer that. A quick test is to shutdown PC,turn off power,press power button for about 15 seconds, turn on power and restart but really need to wait till cold boot to fully test
> let us know if it works for you just out of curiosity


Atm i never experienced that problem again. Maybe it happen when i turn off the power completely to the pc?


----------



## EarlZ

My replacement 9700K cant hit 5Ghz (cache @ 43x) with 1.350v at bios, looks like I lost the lottery on this.


----------



## bigmike35

Been scanning through a lot of pages, about a 100 down lol. I am wondering a few things as I am trying to understand them correctly. I have seen a few things on the IA AC/DC Load line , set both to 1 or only AC to 1 only. Is this to keep voltage closer to what is set in BIOS (I know this voltage is not correct) in order to not get high voltage spikes and keep droop within reason? Second, I am not seeing VROUT in my HwInfo, am I missing something here? To set adaptive voltage; "Normal" V Core voltage; is there a way to control or being around the set voltage (with an off-set), or is that the voltage flex (up/down) to help with AVX Instructions or how Gigabyte board(s) handle load? I had an ASUS previously and you could set the Adaptive Voltage; little different here. Is it worth trying to keep Cache (-3) behind clock or leave around 47-48x if you can save some voltage increase? 

Specs:
9900k (Trying for and at 5.2; AVX 0; Cache 49x; MCE off; +.110 Voltage Offset; LLC Turbo 
Aorus Z390 Ultra 
2080ti Aorus Xtreme
G Skill 3600 16 16 16 36 
SuperNova G2 750W
Fresh Install Win 10 Pro


----------



## Smokediggity

Anyone else having strange issues with changing their memory timings on the Aorus Master? I currently have XMP enabled and my memory is running at the correct 16-18-18-38 timings, however, trying to decrease tRCD by 1 doesn't do anything. Increasing it by 1 changes both it and tRP. Changing tRP changes both itself and tRCD. I can't really tell if this is a BIOS bug or if my motherboard or cpu's memory controller are malfunctioning. The behavior is the same across the 3 BIOS versions I tested. Disabling XMP doesn't help either.


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> Anyone else having strange issues with changing their memory timings on the Aorus Master? I currently have XMP enabled and my memory is running at the correct 16-18-18-38 timings, however, trying to decrease tRCD by 1 doesn't do anything. Increasing it by 1 changes both it and tRP. Changing tRP changes both itself and tRCD. I can't really tell if this is a BIOS bug or if my motherboard or cpu's memory controller are malfunctioning. The behavior is the same across the 3 BIOS versions I tested. Disabling XMP doesn't help either.


tRCD and tRP are set to the same value on DDR4 and cannot be changed separately.
MSI and some others actually call this tRCD/tRP in the bios under one setting.
If changing one lower prevents any from changing, just change them both. I call this a "first world problem" on the low priority bug.


----------



## Smokediggity

Falkentyne said:


> tRCD and tRP are set to the same value on DDR4 and cannot be changed separately.
> MSI and some others actually call this tRCD/tRP in the bios under one setting.
> If changing one lower prevents any from changing, just change them both. I call this a "first world problem" on the low priority bug.


Thanks. Good to know.


----------



## EarlZ

bigmike35 said:


> Been scanning through a lot of pages, about a 100 down lol. I am wondering a few things as I am trying to understand them correctly. I have seen a few things on the IA AC/DC Load line , set both to 1 or only AC to 1 only. Is this to keep voltage closer to what is set in BIOS (I know this voltage is not correct) in order to not get high voltage spikes and keep droop within reason? Second, I am not seeing VROUT in my HwInfo, am I missing something here? To set adaptive voltage; "Normal" V Core voltage; is there a way to control or being around the set voltage (with an off-set), or is that the voltage flex (up/down) to help with AVX Instructions or how Gigabyte board(s) handle load? I had an ASUS previously and you could set the Adaptive Voltage; little different here. Is it worth trying to keep Cache (-3) behind clock or leave around 47-48x if you can save some voltage increase?
> 
> Specs:
> 9900k (Trying for and at 5.2; AVX 0; Cache 49x; MCE off; +.110 Voltage Offset; LLC Turbo
> Aorus Z390 Ultra
> 2080ti Aorus Xtreme
> G Skill 3600 16 16 16 36
> SuperNova G2 750W
> Fresh Install Win 10 Pro


I am also trying to understand the AI AC/DC load line properly as it might help me get a stable overclock past 4.8Ghz as my issue is with low and medium load my system crashes into WHEA or watchdog error.

Maybe if anyone can explain in a more laymans terms with examples on what the AI AC/DC actually does as I am uncertain if I understood it perfectly.


----------



## Padinn

I did notice a couple BSODs using my adaptive settings when under light/moderate loads. I'm running at 1.2v manual right now, but I may play around with it again. I remember a while back that someone was running with medium LLC which allowed more drop at higher loads, but less at lower...so might try that again.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

One question about the thermistor sensor cable are necessarily to insert in the motherboard aorus z390 xtreme?


----------



## yerebakan

I connect these cables on my aorus z390 pro. One is in front of intake fan, other one is in exhaust fan. So these are measuring intake/exhaust temperature in/out case. Also I can set fan curve via this sensor in SmartFan5.


----------



## yerebakan

Hi all,

I am new here. 
My spec is: 
i7-9700k
corsair h100i v2 extreme (push/pul)
gigabyte z390 aorus pro
gskill tridentz 2*8gb cl14 3200Mhz
evga 1080ti ftw3 hybrid
evga supernova 1000 p2

So I installed this system yesterday. I want to overclock 5.0GHz.
I read some topics on internet and watched guide on youtube.

So here is my settings:
Bios Version: F9b (latest)
Cpu Ratio: 50
Uncore Ratio: 43 (Default)
Vcore: 1.260V
LLC: Turbo
AVX: 0
XMP: Active
Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
TjMax Temp: 95C
Core Current Limit: 255
Package Power Limit 1&2: 4090 (Max)

-- I connect 8+4 cpu power cable.

@Falkentyne said prime95 with fixed 1344K test is enough. 
Before I tried settings which is different Vcore:1.250V, I get BSOD(whea_uncorrectable...) while restarting or shutting down pc. I passed all benchmarks like aida64, prime95 26.6 default smallfft, x264 encode... So Vcore is raised up to 1.260. Now I am testing Prime95 NoFma3 and 1344K fixed size. No errors until 35 min. Got Clock Watchdog Timeout BSOD. :Snorkle:

My temps never pass 70C. 

What will you advise to me for stability? I don't want to see BSOD of course. 

Need to vcore 1.30V and start point here? 

Note:
HWinfo64 Values:
Vcore Min: 1.248V
Vcore Max: 1.308V
Vcore Current: 1.272V
VR VOUT Min: 1.207V
VR VOUT Max: 1.247V
VR Vout Current: 1.219V


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

yerebakan said:


> I connect these cables on my aorus z390 pro. One is in front of intake fan, other one is in exhaust fan. So these are measuring intake/exhaust temperature in/out case. Also I can set fan curve via this sensor in SmartFan5.


When i buy the motherboard i have found 2 thermistor sensor cable inside the motherboard and 2 thermistor sensor cable inside the box aorus rgb commander


----------



## Falkentyne

yerebakan said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I am new here.
> My spec is:
> i7-9700k
> gigabyte z390 aorus pro
> gskill tridentz 2*8gb cl14 3200Mhz
> evga 1080ti ftw3 hybrid
> evga supernova 1000 p2
> 
> So I installed this system tomorrow. I want to overclock to 5.0GHz.
> I read some topics on internet and watched guide on youtube.
> 
> So here is my settings:
> Bios Version: F9b (latest)
> Cpu Ratio: 50
> Uncore Ratio: 43 (Default)
> Vcore: 1.260V
> LLC: Turbo
> AVX: 0
> XMP: Active
> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
> TjMax Temp: 95C
> Core Current Limit: 255
> Package Power Limit 1&2: 4090 (Max)
> 
> -- I connect 8+4 cpu power cable.
> 
> @Falkentyne said prime95 with fixed 1344K test is enough.
> Before I tried settings which is different Vcore:1.250V, I get BSOD(whea_uncorrectable...) while restarting or shutting down pc. I passed all benchmarks like aida64, prime95 26.6 default smallfft, x264 encode... So Vcore is raised up to 1.260. Now I am testing Prime95 NoFma3 and 1344K fixed size. No errors until 35 min. Got Clock Watchdog Timeout BSOD. :Snorkle:
> 
> My temps never pass 70C.
> 
> What will you advise to me for stability? I don't want to see BSOD of course.
> 
> Need to vcore 1.30V and start point here?
> 
> Note:
> HWinfo64 Values:
> Vcore Min: 1.248V
> Vcore Max: 1.308V
> Vcore Current: 1.272V
> VR VOUT Min: 1.207V
> VR VOUT Max: 1.247V
> VR Vout Current: 1.219V


1344K is for AVX/FMA3 enabled only.
1344K is not stressful enough for AVX/FMA3 disabled.
Use small FFT for that.
And there's a new prime95 build out now with improved testing (although I recommend using a custom size of in place fixed FFT's, with range of 4k-20k)
Prime95 29.5 beta 9 I think it is (check the skylake-x thread in "Software" on the prime95 forums!).


----------



## Falkentyne

So what does the Master f8g bios change or improve?
I assume the issue with DVID offset being still applied when changing Vcore from Normal to Auto is addressed, and I'm not sure about the issue with Ring Ratio being kept at the previous value, instead of being set back to x43, when changing Ring ratio from a custom value back to Auto...(these were mentioned by someone on forums as being reported/looked into).

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## Vesimas

What do you think about my temp at stock with a TT Floe Riing 360: 25/29 at idle, 65/72 gaming?


----------



## yerebakan

Falkentyne said:


> 1344K is for AVX/FMA3 enabled only.
> 1344K is not stressful enough for AVX/FMA3 disabled.
> Use small FFT for that.
> And there's a new prime95 build out now with improved testing (although I recommend using a custom size of in place fixed FFT's, with range of 4k-20k)
> Prime95 29.5 beta 9 I think it is (check the skylake-x thread in "Software" on the prime95 forums!).


Downloaded it and will try it.
So new torture screen is available. 
Smallest FFTs with your suggested range 4k-21k. 

Do I need disable AVX and AVX2?

In few minutes worker 6 stopped and then freeze my pc and get bsod. (clock_watchdog_timeout)

Need raise Vcore? 

While testing, hwinfo says vcore is about 1.29 and vr vout 1.275.
Vcore set 1.270 in bios.


----------



## Falkentyne

yerebakan said:


> Downloaded it and will try it.
> So new torture screen is available.
> Smallest FFTs with your suggested range 4k-21k.
> 
> Do I need disable AVX and AVX2?


Enabling AVX/AVX2 with small FFT is a power virus.


----------



## yerebakan

Falkentyne said:


> Enabling AVX/AVX2 with small FFT is a power virus.


Avx is ''0''
Thanks. I am trying w/o AVX sets.

Also crashed with AVX.


----------



## SirCanealot

Hey everyone, I was hoping someone could give me some advice on memory overclocking on this mobo. I have an Aorus Pro with a 8086k.

I have this memory: https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...-3600mhz-dual-channel-kit-blac-my-0a3-tg.html (got a pretty decent price on it).

I currently have it at:
3400mhz
16-18-18-36 timings
Memory enhancement mode: Normal

Voltages at:
VCCIO: 1.1v
System Agent: 1.1v
DDR voltage: 1.3v

I initially had these voltages a bit higher, but I've been lowering them to try and figure out where I am on this. Got to this level and decided I'm stable and I'll leave these be for a while. I'm perfectly stable at these settings.

However, if I go any further in any way, I am not stable, even if I boost voltage massively. For instance, last thing I tried was lowering tRCD and tRP from 18 to 17 and my board refused to boot and I had to clear the CMOS. (I did increase all the voltages a decent bit when I tried this)

Am I just unlucky and the mobo and RAM aren't too fond of each other, or I don't have a great memory controller? Or should I try seeing what timings I can hit at 3200mhz maybe? Or should I turn the XML profile off and set everything manually and see if that's different?

Please let me know what other information I can provide. I'm pretty crappy at memory overclocking as you may notice!  

Thanks!


----------



## Falkentyne

SirCanealot said:


> Hey everyone, I was hoping someone could give me some advice on memory overclocking on this mobo. I have an Aorus Pro with a 8086k.
> 
> I have this memory: https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...-3600mhz-dual-channel-kit-blac-my-0a3-tg.html (got a pretty decent price on it).
> 
> I currently have it at:
> 3400mhz
> 16-18-18-36 timings
> Memory enhancement mode: Normal
> 
> Voltages at:
> VCCIO: 1.1v
> System Agent: 1.1v
> DDR voltage: 1.3v
> 
> I initially had these voltages a bit higher, but I've been lowering them to try and figure out where I am on this. Got to this level and decided I'm stable and I'll leave these be for a while. I'm perfectly stable at these settings.
> 
> However, if I go any further in any way, I am not stable, even if I boost voltage massively. For instance, last thing I tried was lowering tRCD and tRP from 18 to 17 and my board refused to boot and I had to clear the CMOS. (I did increase all the voltages a decent bit when I tried this)
> 
> Am I just unlucky and the mobo and RAM aren't too fond of each other, or I don't have a great memory controller? Or should I try seeing what timings I can hit at 3200mhz maybe? Or should I turn the XML profile off and set everything manually and see if that's different?
> 
> Please let me know what other information I can provide. I'm pretty crappy at memory overclocking as you may notice!
> 
> Thanks!


If these are not samsung B-die, you're running 3600 mhz CAS 19-19-19-39 RAM at 3400 16-18-36 and unhappy with the result? What die/chips is this stuff?
If you have memory enhancement settings in the bios, try messing around with those, set at least a 5 difference between CAS latency+TRP and TRAS, set tRTP to that difference (example 5) and tWR to double this value (example 10). 16/18/36 is only a 2 difference which is rather optimistic. Try 16/18/18/39 (5 difference, e.g. 16+18+(5)=39, set tRTP to 5 and TWR to 10.

Bench your current results first before doing this. Then try the new values, bench it (use AIDA64 bandwidth test), then try tightening command rate (1T), tRFC (270 to 400; going lower than 270 may be impossible) and tREFI (as high as it can go stable, but 32768 is a nice value). Do one setting at a time, starting with command rate.

If this is not B-die, that's probably the best chance. You are most likely not getting 3200 mhz cas 14-14-14-34 without B-die here.


----------



## Driller au

Anyone got any info on the new F8g bios on tweaktown ? or is it the usual "suck it and see"


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> Anyone got any info on the new F8g bios on tweaktown ? or is it the usual "suck it and see"


Did you ignore my post on the last page?
And another person a few pages back who said what 'f8f' was fixing, which was a beta beta bios.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Did you ignore my post on the last page?
> And another person a few pages back who said what 'f8f' was fixing, which was a beta beta bios.


No. just thought after a few days someone might have some info or tried it


----------



## deniskos

Hi guys, amazing thread and info.I've read over the last 100 pages. Last night i tried some settings on my 9900K, based on some bios photos of an active member. Didn't recall the username, but he uses normal +0.150 on Dvid. 
Mine actually needs about +0.030 to +0.035. The thing is that on idle i get BSOD. With those settings i'm at aprox 1.20-1.27 vcore depending the test. 
But not stable on idle. 
I have c-states enabled, 
uncore 46, 
Internal AC/DC Load Line turbo,
Vcore Loadline Calibration Turbo,
IA AC Loadline 1,
IA DC LOadline 0
and rest voltages on auto (System Agent,VCCIO etc). 
Also im on latest Bios , F9b on Z390 Aorus Pro. 
If i bump DVID to +60 i 'm stable on IDLE but my vcore gets above 1.30 and i dont want that. So, i 'd like to have vcore < 1.28 without having trouble on idle. I think its been discused before, but i can't find it. Any advice? Thanks in advance


----------



## KedarWolf

deniskos said:


> Hi guys, amazing thread and info.I've read over the last 100 pages. Last night i tried some settings on my 9900K, based on some bios photos of an active member. Didn't recall the username, but he uses normal +0.150 on Dvid.
> Mine actually needs about +0.030 to +0.035. The thing is that on idle i get BSOD. With those settings i'm at aprox 1.20-1.27 vcore depending the test.
> But not stable on idle.
> I have c-states enabled,
> uncore 46,
> Internal AC/DC Load Line turbo,
> Vcore Loadline Calibration Turbo,
> IA AC Loadline 1,
> IA DC LOadline 0
> and rest voltages on auto (System Agent,VCCIO etc).
> Also im on latest Bios , F9b on Z390 Aorus Pro.
> If i bump DVID to +60 i 'm stable on IDLE but my vcore gets above 1.30 and i dont want that. So, i 'd like to have vcore < 1.28 without having trouble on idle. I think its been discused before, but i can't find it. Any advice? Thanks in advance


Try a higher offset with lower LLC like Medium or Low.

Edit: Then on load it will be 1.28v or lower.


----------



## Mknopfler

Edit


----------



## deniskos

KedarWolf said:


> Try a higher offset with lower LLC like Medium or Low.
> 
> Edit: Then on load it will be 1.28v or lower.


Thanks mate, i ll try that. I think i got your settings actually.


----------



## EarlZ

deniskos said:


> Hi guys, amazing thread and info.I've read over the last 100 pages. Last night i tried some settings on my 9900K, based on some bios photos of an active member. Didn't recall the username, but he uses normal +0.150 on Dvid.
> Mine actually needs about +0.030 to +0.035. The thing is that on idle i get BSOD. With those settings i'm at aprox 1.20-1.27 vcore depending the test.
> But not stable on idle.
> I have c-states enabled,
> uncore 46,
> Internal AC/DC Load Line turbo,
> Vcore Loadline Calibration Turbo,
> IA AC Loadline 1,
> IA DC LOadline 0
> and rest voltages on auto (System Agent,VCCIO etc).
> Also im on latest Bios , F9b on Z390 Aorus Pro.
> If i bump DVID to +60 i 'm stable on IDLE but my vcore gets above 1.30 and i dont want that. So, i 'd like to have vcore < 1.28 without having trouble on idle. I think its been discused before, but i can't find it. Any advice? Thanks in advance


May I ask what the AI DC loadline does and will it affect stability in anyway if left to 0 or set to 1 ?



KedarWolf said:


> Try a higher offset with lower LLC like Medium or Low.
> 
> Edit: Then on load it will be 1.28v or lower.


I am currently on Low LLC with +0.100 offset which still spikes to 1.355v and stays around 1.309~1.320 on X264 benchmark (this is what I normally use for stability) I'm looking at a settings that wont BSOD on idle ~ medium load that limits the peak voltage to 1.330 and have around the same 1.309 ~1.320 on load.


----------



## yerebakan

I own 9700k + gigabyte z390 aorus pro + gskill tridentz 3200mhz cl14 2*8 

What is best choice?

Vcore 1.290v & Turbo LLC 
or 
VCore 1.30v & High LLC

and IO and SA are default on bios. 
HWinfo read average 1.265V for SA and 1.243V for IO.
Is lowering these values cause instability? (Manual 1.1v for example)


----------



## Jack051

*Offset voltage and other settings*

Hello, so I just upgraded to the 9700k and Z390 Aorus pro, 16gb 3000mhz Corsair Ram (XMP turned on) (Bios version f7)

I'm trying to understand exactly how the offset feature works and how to set it properly as well as the other settings. 

So far I can OC to 4.8ghz @1.29v (Manual), Turbo Boost off and enhancement off, AVX set to 0 since any games I play trigger the AVX 2 offset to take affect (Still really not sure if BIOS bug or actual games using AVX [Destiny 2, Battlefield 1 and Forza Horizon 4]). I used Prime 26.6 for temps more than anything as well as Cinebench and Realbench and temps don't really exceed 73c using Prime. During normal use the temps stay around 60-65c when playing games.

I have been taking the vcore readings for a while from the vcore part of HWInfo but understand now that it's the VR Vout I should be looking at. Whilst this is fine it does look like the voltage is a lot lower and likely due to the vdroop and thus I need to change the LLC to Turbo as I understand it. Trouble is with Turbo the voltage goes up significantly. I will try further testing with Medium and High LLC testing when I'm back at home since I'm still new to the LLC settings etc. 

Now, I don't want to run it with Manual voltage since I want it to automatically lower during idle use and save power/thermals. 
Here's the question though: How do I properly setup the Offset Voltage? I have tried setting the Voltage to Normal and leaving the Offset on auto to see what kind of voltage it runs at and then as I understand it lower/up the offset to what I want it to run at? When looking at the vcore (I know it's the VR Vout I should be looking at but I'm talking about before I knew of this) it was hover around 1.302/332 Current, 1.344 Max. Which reading do I base the offset on? See I saw the 1.344 and thought, well I want it to be around 1.29 so I set the offset to -0.050/-0.006 if I round it up to account for the 1.344 minus 1.29. Is this even the correct way of doing since the reading vary all the time when testing?

Overall, what are the settings I should be using as a baseline for everything so I can then dial in the numbers according to the 9700k chip I got? I would like to run it around 4.8ghz since it sounds like a good number and as far as I can see doesn't run too hot, I could be wrong though. Any instructions for all the settings would be amazing


----------



## bigmike35

Is anyone using a negative offset? For round numbers/example, I need 1.3V in BIOS (VROUT shows less) for 51X CPU and 48X Cache. To set adaptive, "Normal" + some offset to compensate. For now left offset at 0 to see what the CPU Voltage would be. It was wanting like 1.35-1.42V, so I adjusted LLC to medium and Internal AC/DC to turbo and it did drop the voltages down but still having high voltages overall compared to what is needed. Is it weird to add a negative offset for this or am I missing something?

Specs: 
9900k
Aorus Z390 Ultra
G Skill 3600 16 16 16 36
Aorus 2080ti Xtreme
Supernova 750 G2


----------



## yerebakan

Jack051 said:


> Hello, so I just upgraded to the 9700k and Z390 Aorus pro, 16gb 3000mhz Corsair Ram (XMP turned on) (Bios version f7)
> 
> I'm trying to understand exactly how the offset feature works and how to set it properly as well as the other settings.
> 
> So far I can OC to 4.8ghz @1.29v (Manual), Turbo Boost off and enhancement off, AVX set to 0 since any games I play trigger the AVX 2 offset to take affect (Still really not sure if BIOS bug or actual games using AVX [Destiny 2, Battlefield 1 and Forza Horizon 4]). I used Prime 26.6 for temps more than anything as well as Cinebench and Realbench and temps don't really exceed 73c using Prime. During normal use the temps stay around 60-65c when playing games.
> 
> I have been taking the vcore readings for a while from the vcore part of HWInfo but understand now that it's the VR Vout I should be looking at. Whilst this is fine it does look like the voltage is a lot lower and likely due to the vdroop and thus I need to change the LLC to Turbo as I understand it. Trouble is with Turbo the voltage goes up significantly. I will try further testing with Medium and High LLC testing when I'm back at home since I'm still new to the LLC settings etc.
> 
> Now, I don't want to run it with Manual voltage since I want it to automatically lower during idle use and save power/thermals.
> Here's the question though: How do I properly setup the Offset Voltage? I have tried setting the Voltage to Normal and leaving the Offset on auto to see what kind of voltage it runs at and then as I understand it lower/up the offset to what I want it to run at? When looking at the vcore (I know it's the VR Vout I should be looking at but I'm talking about before I knew of this) it was hover around 1.302/332 Current, 1.344 Max. Which reading do I base the offset on? See I saw the 1.344 and thought, well I want it to be around 1.29 so I set the offset to -0.050/-0.006 if I round it up to account for the 1.344 minus 1.29. Is this even the correct way of doing since the reading vary all the time when testing?
> 
> Overall, what are the settings I should be using as a baseline for everything so I can then dial in the numbers according to the 9700k chip I got? I would like to run it around 4.8ghz since it sounds like a good number and as far as I can see doesn't run too hot, I could be wrong though. Any instructions for all the settings would be amazing


i7-9700k - Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro - Gskill TridentZ 2*8GB 3200Mhz CL14
Here is my settings;
Bios: F9b (Latest)
Cpu Ratio : 50
Uncrore Ratio : 43 (Default)
Vcore: 1.300V or 1.290V (Testing with daily use. Also passed all benchmarks errors.)
LLC : High or Turbo (Testing with daily use. Also passed all benchmarks without errors.)
VCCIO and VCCSA : Auto (I will test lower value.)
Multi-Core Enhancment : Disabled
AVX: 0
XMP: Enabled
TjMax: 95
Core Current Limit: 255
Package Power Limit 1&2 : 4090

HWINFO Shows:
VCore Min: 1.260V
VCore Max: 1.320V
Vcore Avg: 1.299V
VR VOUT Min: 1.219V
VR VOUT Max: 1.283V
VR VOUT Avg: 1.260V
VCCIO Min: 1.232V
VCCIO Max: 1.243V
VCCIO Avg: 1.243V
VCCSA Min:1.248V
VCCSA Max: 1.272v
VCCSA Avg: 1.264V


----------



## Jack051

yerebakan said:


> i7-9700k - Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro - Gskill TridentZ 2*8GB 3200Mhz CL14
> Here is my settings;
> Bios: F9b (Latest)
> Cpu Ratio : 50
> Uncrore Ratio : 43 (Default)
> Vcore: 1.300V or 1.290V (Testing with daily use. Also passed all benchmarks errors.)
> LLC : High or Turbo (Testing with daily use. Also passed all benchmarks without errors.)
> VCCIO and VCCSA : Auto (I will test lower value.)
> Multi-Core Enhancment : Disabled
> AVX: 0
> XMP: Enabled
> TjMax: 95
> Core Current Limit: 255
> Package Power Limit 1&2 : 4090
> 
> HWINFO Shows:
> VCore Min: 1.260V
> VCore Max: 1.320V
> Vcore Avg: 1.299V
> VR VOUT Min: 1.219V
> VR VOUT Max: 1.283V
> VR VOUT Avg: 1.260V
> VCCIO Min: 1.232V
> VCCIO Max: 1.243V
> VCCIO Avg: 1.243V
> VCCSA Min:1.248V
> VCCSA Max: 1.272v
> VCCSA Avg: 1.264V


Thanks for the info on your system. The only thing is though is that you running with the voltage solely on manual? I would like to run it with the 'Offset' feature so that it downclocks both the mhz and voltage when idling etc but I am unsure if the method I use is the correct one. I will however try the same settings as you and see what I end up with roughly, it does seem though I need at least 1.29v for 4.8ghz since when I was testing with manual voltages it wouldn't boot without that amount.

Also what temps are you seeing at those settings?


----------



## yerebakan

Jack051 said:


> Thanks for the info on your system. The only thing is though is that you running with the voltage solely on manual? I would like to run it with the 'Offset' feature so that it downclocks both the mhz and voltage when idling etc but I am unsure if the method I use is the correct one. I will however try the same settings as you and see what I end up with roughly, it does seem though I need at least 1.29v for 4.8ghz since when I was testing with manual voltages it wouldn't boot without that amount.
> 
> Also what temps are you seeing at those settings?


My cooler is Corsair H100i V2 Extreme (Push/Pull)

idle:27-30C
in game: 45-55C
benchmark: ~75C


----------



## SirCanealot

Falkentyne said:


> If these are not samsung B-die, you're running 3600 mhz CAS 19-19-19-39 RAM at 3400 16-18-36 and unhappy with the result? What die/chips is this stuff?


To be honest, I'm not sure what's good really! I have very little knowledge about memory past speed and basic timings! Not unhappy at all, just mostly messing around for fun; maybe a lil unhappy to at least not try and get that final 5% out of my system like all overclockers  

It's Hynix A-die, just checked.

I've managed to input all of your settings and am currently running a memory stress test. 

But from the benchmark it's taken me from: 
Read: 46040, Write: 47450, Copy: 41598 
To:
Read: 47959, Write: 47804, Copy: 40716

Copy seems down a bit. I believe that might be normal?

So things seem a little better. Seems like I have a lot more reading to do! :/ 

Thanks so much for your reply! Every little helps me understand! (I have some minor learning difficulties, so trying to get my head around modern DDR4 timings is quite painful)


----------



## Smokediggity

Had some time to play around with F8g. It doesn't fix the DVID offset bug, however, it seems to have fixed the bug where setting Uncore Ratio to Auto did not reset it to the default. I also see it added a new Aperture Size setting in the Chipset tab.


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> Had some time to play around with F8g. It doesn't fix the DVID offset bug, however, it seems to have fixed the bug where setting Uncore Ratio to Auto did not reset it to the default. I also see it added a new Aperture Size setting in the Chipset tab.


If you want to get pure and direct, the DVID offset bug may be an issue on AMI's end. If you set adaptive mode with a 100mv offset on every laptop with an unlocked AMI Bios (this means Clevo, MSI, eVGA) and then change the voltage mode to override, the offset remains there at the same value you left it at (except it can be changed still).


----------



## Jack051

*9700k OC*

Ok so I have had some time to test out the overclock for my 9700k using these settings:

Ran Realbench for 1 hour with no crashes (Image attahed is with Realbench). Prime95 26.6 runs fine, Cinebench runs fine with a score of 1500 and aida64 ran fine for a short amount of time.

4.8ghz
Voltage: Normal
Offset: -0.070v

LLC: Standard (Turbo just doesn't work, it gives way too much voltage)

Core Current Limit: 255
Package Power Limit 1&2 : 4090
XMP for the ram at 3000mhz
Multi-Core Enhancment : Disabled
AVX: 0
Latest bios: f9b
C states are enabled to allow idle numbers to lower in-line with the offset

So with this in mind due to the fact that I really still do no understand offset voltage and there aren't good guides out there other than saying load into windows and see what the voltage is. It makes no sense when I do that since If I leave it Auto then the voltage goes up to 1.5v which is obviously unsafe, however, if I then think well the offset should be -0.20v to lower it to 1.29/3v then it doesn't work so for now and for whatever reason I think -0.070 works. Based on the image attached, do my temps and voltages look ok since I'm still finding it really hard to get my head around VR Vout being the right voltage.


Any help will be greatly appreicated


----------



## Falkentyne

Jack051 said:


> Ok so I have had some time to test out the overclock for my 9700k using these settings:
> 
> Ran Realbench for 1 hour with no crashes. Prime95 26.6 runs fine, Cinebench runs fine with a score of 1500 and aida64 ran fine for a short amount of time.
> 
> 4.8ghz
> Voltage: Normal
> Offset: -0.070v
> 
> LLC: Standard (Turbo just doesn't work, it gives way too much voltage)
> 
> Core Current Limit: 255
> Package Power Limit 1&2 : 4090
> XMP for the ram at 3000mhz
> Multi-Core Enhancment : Disabled
> AVX: 0
> Latest bios: f9b
> C states are enabled to allow idle numbers to lower in-line with the offset
> 
> So with this in mind due to the fact that I really still do no understand offset voltage and there aren't good guides out there other than saying load into windows and see what the voltage is. It makes no sense when I do that since If I leave it Auto then the voltage goes up to 1.5v which is obviously unsafe, however, if I then think well the offset should be -0.20v to lower it to 1.29/3v then it doesn't work so for now and for whatever reason I think -0.070 works. Based on the image attached, do my temps and voltages look ok since I'm still finding it really hard to get my head around VR Vout being the right voltage.
> 
> 
> Any help will be greatly appreicated


You should not use Turbo LLC in combination with default IA AC/IA DC loadline! You will overshoot pretty epically without a huge negative offset, and then if you make a negative offsets, you will BSOD at idle probably.
Set IA AC loadline and IA DC loadline to 1, then try testing with turbo LLC.
If the voltage is still too high, try IA AC loadine =1 and IA DC loadline=0.

Whatever you do, never ever go anywhere close to the upper manual number ranges of IA AC loadline, ever.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jack051 said:


> Ok so I have had some time to test out the overclock for my 9700k using these settings:
> 
> Ran Realbench for 1 hour with no crashes (Image attahed is with Realbench). Prime95 26.6 runs fine, Cinebench runs fine with a score of 1500 and aida64 ran fine for a short amount of time.
> 
> 4.8ghz
> Voltage: Normal
> Offset: -0.070v
> 
> LLC: Standard (Turbo just doesn't work, it gives way too much voltage)
> 
> Core Current Limit: 255
> Package Power Limit 1&2 : 4090
> XMP for the ram at 3000mhz
> Multi-Core Enhancment : Disabled
> AVX: 0
> Latest bios: f9b
> C states are enabled to allow idle numbers to lower in-line with the offset
> 
> So with this in mind due to the fact that I really still do no understand offset voltage and there aren't good guides out there other than saying load into windows and see what the voltage is. It makes no sense when I do that since If I leave it Auto then the voltage goes up to 1.5v which is obviously unsafe, however, if I then think well the offset should be -0.20v to lower it to 1.29/3v then it doesn't work so for now and for whatever reason I think -0.070 works. Based on the image attached, do my temps and voltages look ok since I'm still finding it really hard to get my head around VR Vout being the right voltage.
> 
> 
> Any help will be greatly appreicated


Why do you have POUT unmonitored?
That's the true wattage coming from the CPU.
Current IOUT is true current from the VRMs (amps), and since VR VOUT is true cpu voltage, watts=current * volts, see?


----------



## Jack051

Falkentyne said:


> Why do you have POUT unmonitored?
> That's the true wattage coming from the CPU.


Ok so after attempting to change the IA AC and DC 3 times due the bios freezing on me for some reason and changing the LLC changed to Turbo it then reverted my settings I guess due to being unstable so I put everything back except left the voltage as Normal without any offset (0.00mhz). I have attached the results again to see what you think.

In regards to the POUT, I just figured out how to change this and have enabled both. Have no idea why they weren't enabled.


----------



## Jack051

Jack051 said:


> Ok so after attempting to change the IA AC and DC 3 times due the bios freezing on me for some reason and changing the LLC changed to Turbo it then reverted my settings I guess due to being unstable so I put everything back except left the voltage as Normal without any offset (0.00mhz). I have attached the results again to see what you think.
> 
> In regards to the POUT, I just figured out how to change this and have enabled both. Have no idea why they weren't enabled.


Whilst I was typing this message my PC BSOD. I guess it was probably what you were talking about with idle etc. I put the offset to +0.010?

Edit: i have attached a screenshot of the info with POUT and Input enabled now, ran prime95 for a couple of minutes to see roughly the voltage etc, does this look correct now roughly?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jack051 said:


> Whilst I was typing this message my PC BSOD. I guess it was probably what you were talking about with idle etc. I put the offset to +0.010?
> 
> Edit: i have attached a screenshot of the info with POUT and Input enabled now, ran prime95 for a couple of minutes to see roughly the voltage etc, does this look correct now roughly?


Do you notice how the CPU package power is 20W higher than POUT?
Look at the VID and compare that to VR VOUT. That's where the difference comes from.
CPU package power is based on CPU internal measurements of VID and current (I don't know what current value is used). POUT is based on VRM amp power (VRM current) and VRM CPU ON-die voltage.


----------



## OutlawII

Falkentyne said:


> You should not use Turbo LLC in combination with default IA AC/IA DC loadline! You will overshoot pretty epically without a huge negative offset, and then if you make a negative offsets, you will BSOD at idle probably.
> Set IA AC loadline and IA DC loadline to 1, then try testing with turbo LLC.
> If the voltage is still too high, try IA AC loadine =1 and IA DC loadline=0.
> 
> Whatever you do, never ever go anywhere close to the upper manual number ranges of IA AC loadline, ever.


Not to say your wrong Falk but mine never overshot at all i set turbo llc and a manual voltage of 1.26 and vr out was usually around 1.24. Never changed IA AC OR IA DC


----------



## Jack051

Falkentyne said:


> Do you notice how the CPU package power is 20W higher than POUT?
> Look at the VID and compare that to VR VOUT. That's where the difference comes from.
> CPU package power is based on CPU internal measurements of VID and current (I don't know what current value is used). POUT is based on VRM amp power (VRM current) and VRM CPU ON-die voltage.


This is great info but honestly, I don't understand it fully and still unsure whether or not I am overclocking correctly. Is there anything I should change in particular to that this oc is safe since Yes it's 20w higher but in reality I don't know that means in regarding to change settings for this.


----------



## Moparman

Have any of you taken the Master subzero?


----------



## Falkentyne

OutlawII said:


> Not to say your wrong Falk but mine never overshot at all i set turbo llc and a manual voltage of 1.26 and vr out was usually around 1.24. Never changed IA AC OR IA DC


You know this depends on your uncore ratio, right?
CPU VID is based on uncore, not on core ratio, but each CPU has a different 'default' at each uncore speed step, which stops scaling at 4.7 ghz.


----------



## Jack051

Just tested using +0.01 offset and brief runs of stress tests were fine. Played a game pretty BSOD instantly. Trying again with +0.03. Are there any standard settings you guys use in particular since doing all this is just becoming tiresome, I'm trying hard to understand it all but it's difficult to know what's right and wrong. Sure there's Guide but they never properly explain offset and what's right, of course my cpu will be different but still..


----------



## OutlawII

Falkentyne said:


> You know this depends on your uncore ratio, right?
> CPU VID is based on uncore, not on core ratio, but each CPU has a different 'default' at each uncore speed step, which stops scaling at 4.7 ghz.


Thanks for all the help you give everyone much appreciated


----------



## Mick Becker

*Allegedly my Master killed my i9...*

Recently put together an i9 9900k with 16gb HyperX 4000mhz on a Master, Bios is F6. Ran fine for a week with no issue. No OC just applied XMP profile 1 for the 4000mhz. BSOD overnight and found in the morning. Tried everything I could and it all pointed to board or chip. Place where I bought it all decided it was the board and went to warranty. That one was BSOD out of the box - and they realised the i9 was dead. They have advised me that it was most likely the AVX being set to Auto which has caused the issue. Could this be true? When they gave it back the AVX was once again set to Auto and they said they turned it to 0... I have set it to 0 now just in case. Once getting the system back together I changed the XMP to profile 2 3600mhz in case that was part of the instability/BSOD ( I am a NOOB but know that XMP shouldn't cause a CPU to fail).


----------



## Falkentyne

Mick Becker said:


> Recently put together an i9 9900k with 16gb HyperX 4000mhz on a Master, Bios is F6. Ran fine for a week with no issue. No OC just applied XMP profile 1 for the 4000mhz. BSOD overnight and found in the morning. Tried everything I could and it all pointed to board or chip. Place where I bought it all decided it was the board and went to warranty. That one was BSOD out of the box - and they realised the i9 was dead. They have advised me that it was most likely the AVX being set to Auto which has caused the issue. Could this be true? When they gave it back the AVX was once again set to Auto and they said they turned it to 0... I have set it to 0 now just in case. Once getting the system back together I changed the XMP to profile 2 3600mhz in case that was part of the instability/BSOD ( I am a NOOB but know that XMP shouldn't cause a CPU to fail).


Complete hogwash baloney. AVX=Auto is the same as 0.
And that is not the problem.


----------



## Mick Becker

Thanks for the quick reply mate. Much appreciated. I have no idea what was wrong then. About to set the XMP back to 3600. Games that were playing fine have decided today to crash after 5 seconds. *** lol. All I changed was the XMP and the AVX and these games ran fine in the first build of this system at 4000mhz. I'm just jinxed haha.


----------



## Mick Becker

After a reset it was clearly the usual XMP issue with this board. *whinge start* Why do they think its okay to use these speeds as a selling point when it doesn't work. My sticks are on the QVL, I expect it to work, they are stating that they have tested it... *whinge end*


----------



## EarlZ

@Falkentyne

May I ask what the AI DC loadline 0 or 1 does ?

I am having a tough time getting to stable idle-medium load voltage. Id prefer that it wont shoot past 1.350 and would stay at 1.33x at most, I've tried a few combinations of positive offset and LLC levels of low-med-high and I cant seem to get the right combination. Any input would be appreciated!

Currently I am shooting for 5Ghz and using a +0.080 offset with LLC to medium, setting the LLC to low however caps the voltage to 1.340 however the steady load voltage is around 1.273 ~ 1.279 and I need setting that can maybe raise that closer to 1.300 ~ 1.305 to avoid BSOD

I am also getting a 25W-27W value difference with POUT and Input, what does that exactly mean ?


----------



## Jack051

EarlZ said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> May I ask what the AI DC loadline 0 or 1 does ?


I would also like to know so I can make sure that what I am doing is not only safe but right for my system to be stable. I found that +0.020 on the offset at 4.8ghz is far stable in games since at 0.010 was not. I have both the AC and DC at 1 prior to the comment by Falkentyne. I also have the LLC set to Turbo but again, not sure if this ok to leave at. I appreciate the help 

Edit: Scratch the stable thing. Crashed whilst idling around on chrome. I've given up and gone back to everything default.


----------



## SirCanealot

Hey guys,

Sorry, another memory question. 

Has anyone had their mobo ignore their memory settings? I've realised that the settings that Falkentyne kindly suggested that I thought were improving my memory score were actually being ignored... 

I'm not sure if something is failing and it's setting it back to last known good config? I tried uninstalling Easy Tune (wasn't using it anyway) just to make sure it wasn't that. IS there any way to tell if it's failing and going back to last known good config?

It seems happy with my 3400 16-18-18-36 (or whatever I had) and it's happy with the 2400mhz auto setting, and it's happy with the 3600 19-19-19-39 setting. If I even try to adjust cas down from 19 to 18 it ignores it. 

I've tried maxing voltages to safeish maximums and that has done nothing. Previously my motherboard was crashing a lot on tweaking memory... now it's ignoring me? 0_o 
Almost more happy with the crashing...

Thanks!!


----------



## Haades

Hi!

I'm planning to buy an Aorus Pro alongside a i5-9600k. It will be my first Gigabyte motherboard, and I've not heard only good stuff about them unfortunately. I'm attracted to this motherboard because of the beefy vrm.

What worries me is, how stable are the drivers for windows 10 with this board? Have you, the owners of this board, experienced any weird behaviour or crashes? Crashes when alt-tabbing from games, wonky behaviour with hardware accelerated video, more than usual input lag etc etc? Or worst of all, not anything like this going on: 



 ?

I'm a competitive fps gamer and low latency and high stability are important to me in choosing the mobo.


----------



## iSilver

Falkentyne said:


> Falkentyne


Hello, may I ask what's the difference between POUT and power input? I'm looking for how to measure cpu power consumption since cpu package is based on VID as you said in previous posts.


----------



## Falkentyne

iSilver said:


> Hello, may I ask what's the difference between POUT and power input? I'm looking for how to measure cpu power consumption since cpu package is based on VID as you said in previous posts.


No idea what PInput is, sorry.
Poutput is accurate, as is VR VOUT and Current iOUT.


----------



## EarlZ

Im using low llc with +0.100 offset, It spikes to 1.363v on heavy loads. Is that still a safe voltage?


----------



## Salve1412

I'm trying to run my i9-9900k on a Master board at 5ghz with DVID, LLC high, Uncore ratio 46. Is it bad if I experiment manual IA/AC loadline settings up to 20? Should I just stick to the usual values of 0 and 1 instead? 'Cause I noticed that if I raise the AC loadline (for example to 15) I can lower the dynamic vcore offset and obtain less voltage spikes under load and a lower average VRVOUT.


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> I'm trying to run my i9-9900k on a Master board at 5ghz with DVID, LLC high, Uncore ratio 46. Is it bad if I experiment manual IA/AC loadline settings up to 20? Should I just stick to the usual values of 0 and 1 instead? 'Cause I noticed that if I raise the AC loadline (for example to 15) I can lower the dynamic vcore offset and obtain less voltage spikes under load and a lower average VRVOUT.


0 is equal to 160. Just fyi.


----------



## EarlZ

+0.100 Offset
AI AC loadline 15
AI DC loadline 0
VCCIO 1.100
VCCSA 1.200
LLC at Standard
45X Uncore
50X CPU
Voltage with gaming load ( Anthem ) is 1.313 ~ 1.340 with a peak of 1.373
Still getting WHEA / watchdog error BSOD

Not sure what else to try, any input would be highly appreciated


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> +0.100 Offset
> AI AC loadline 15
> AI DC loadline 0
> VCCIO 1.100
> VCCSA 1.200
> LLC at Standard
> 45X Uncore
> 50X CPU
> Voltage with gaming load ( Anthem ) is 1.313 ~ 1.340 with a peak of 1.373
> Still getting WHEA / watchdog error BSOD
> 
> Not sure what else to try, any input would be highly appreciated


It means you need more voltage. Have you tried 4900 mhz yet?
You need to work your way up 100 mhz at a time so you know the limits.

If RAM is holding you back, you set the RAM to 2133 mhz or 2400 mhz and then re-test.
What sensor are you monitoring for voltage? 1.373v is very high.
And is this your replacement CPU? The new one?


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> It means you need more voltage. Have you tried 4900 mhz yet?
> You need to work your way up 100 mhz at a time so you know the limits.
> 
> If RAM is holding you back, you set the RAM to 2133 mhz or 2400 mhz and then re-test.
> What sensor are you monitoring for voltage? 1.373v is very high.
> And is this your replacement CPU? The new one?


I skipped 4.9 and only tested with 4.7 and 4.8 
Are you able to recommend a specific stress test to run that can give a good indication of stability? I normally just run games and X264 encoding and sometimes it takes hours for instabilities to show.
I am not sure if RAM is holding me back, is there a specific stress test to run for that or just set it at 2133 for now while cpu is at 5Ghz?
I am monitoring from the VR OUT on HWInfo64, What should be the max voltage to aim for, is 1.348 fine?
The replacement is brand new and sealed.


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I skipped 4.9 and only tested with 4.7 and 4.8
> I am not sure if RAM is holding me back, is there a specific stress test to run for that or just set it at 2133 for now while cpu is at 5Ghz?
> I am monitoring from the VR OUT on HWInfo64, What should be the max voltage to aim for, is 1.348 fine?
> The replacement is brand new and sealed.


I can't tell you what's fine or not. I would not go above 1.35v at all, ever.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> I can't tell you what's fine or not. I would not go above 1.35v at all, ever.


Alright I'll aim to cap it at 1.348V, I was surprised to see it shoot up to 1.378 with such a low llc


May I ask for a suggestion on what stress test to use to quickly find instabilities?

I think Ive read a post that stated a specigic prime95 version with some FM3 settings changed and custom ftt sizes


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Alright I'll aim to cap it at 1.348V, May I ask for a suggestion on what stress test to use to quickly find instabilities?
> 
> I think Ive read a post that stated a specigic prime95 version with some FM3 settings changed and custom ftt sizes


https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=23723&page=17

small FFT for pure stress testing AVX/FMA3 enabled--good luck keeping it under 100C past 225W power draw.
avx/fma3 disabled small FFT for real world SSE2 stability
1344K run in place custom fixed FFT AVX/FMA3 for real world AVX/FMA3 stability.

You can disable AVX and FMA3 in the stress test options now.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=23723&page=17
> 
> small FFT for pure stress testing AVX/FMA3 enabled--good luck keeping it under 100C past 225W power draw.
> avx/fma3 disabled small FFT for real world SSE2 stability
> 1344K run in place custom fixed FFT AVX/FMA3 for real world AVX/FMA3 stability.
> 
> You can disable AVX and FMA3 in the stress test options now.


I wont be testing for AVX as this a gaming rig, I'll give the smallFTT with AVX/FM3 disabled a try.

I'll leave the IA AC/DC loadline values to 0 for now and just focus on trying to see if I can get 4.9Ghz stable, I'll also turn off XMP profile to eliminate the RAM as a factor or would it be fine to keep the profile on (3200Mhz C16) and just bump the vccio to 1.20 and vccsa to 1.250 ? What would you suggest?


----------



## bigmike35

Anyway to keep to voltage from spiking higher than you would like? Current Settings: LLC Medium, Internal AC/DC turbo, AC Loadline 1; Adaptive Voltage with an +105mv off-set. I tested Static voltage and ~1.260V was stable with 1.216V-1.222V on Load (VR Out Readings). Right now on adaptive, it really is not spiking to bad, but I see it spike up to ~1.285V (VR Out Readings). It lowered LLC from Turbo to Medium and added about .10mv offset to raise the load voltage to around ~1.215V (VR Out). VID Voltage is right around ~1.2V max.

Edit: So I went ahead and trusted the board actually and it worked out pretty good so far. Temps are down pretty good. I put LLC's on Auto, IA Internal 0; and only set voltage normal and added my offset which is actually a -30mv right now, hovering around 1.20V-1.27V where I needed to be really.

Edit 2: received an error in hwinfo, changed LLC to low and seemed to be fine so far.


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I wont be testing for AVX as this a gaming rig, I'll give the smallFTT with AVX/FM3 disabled a try.
> 
> I'll leave the IA AC/DC loadline values to 0 for now and just focus on trying to see if I can get 4.9Ghz stable, I'll also turn off XMP profile to eliminate the RAM as a factor or would it be fine to keep the profile on (3200Mhz C16) and just bump the vccio to 1.20 and vccsa to 1.250 ? What would you suggest?


I really don't know, sorry.


----------



## EarlZ

No worries, I appreciate the input.


----------



## Mp0wer

What voltage reading on HWinfo do we use when using adaptive voltage, I thought I read someone saying when using adaptive voltage that VR Out shouldn't be used.


----------



## Padinn

So I bought a Poniee PN2000 from Amazon to get a sense of what power usage looks like from the wall socket under different settings. I've only started playing with it, so these are early results - and I can't confirm if any are stable. However, I think are useful because they give you a sense of what **total** system power draw looks like under various scenarios. 

=======================================================
Manual 1.175v/ All LLC Turbo
x264 Blendtest Load - ~232w
VRVout =1.129v 
Prime 95 29.4 build 8 15k custom test - 307w
VrVOUT = 1.111v
Idle with HWInfo - ~93w (low of around 90)
VRVOut = 1.162v idle


Manual 1.185v/Turbo LLC VAXG/CPU IA DC Loadline Auto
x264 Blendtest Load - ~240w (typically 237-245)
VRVout =1.141v load
Prime 95 29.4 build 8 15k custom test - 315w
VrVOUT = 1.12v
Idle with HWInfo - ~93w (low of around 90)
VRVOut = 1.182v idle

Adaptive - normal w/ .025v offset, medium LLC, auto on VAXG/CPU IA DC Loadline
x264 Blendtest Load - 228w (223-233w)
VRVout =1.119v
Prime 95 29.4 build 8 15k custom test - 288w
VrVOUT = 1.088v
Idle with HWInfo - 91w (low of 88w)
VRVOut = 1.184v, dipping to low of .695v
=================================================================

I mainly wanted to see the kind of power savings adaptive mode offered at idle. From what I can tell, its a few watts at idle. Granted I am eyeballing the meter and its updating about once a second, so I might be missing some variances, but I think its interesting. As a heads up, the adaptive setting above spit out a L0 Cache error so it is not stable, but you get a sense of the differences at load as well. In short, I'm not sure there is much point to fighting to get adaptive to work.

*EDIT* Forgot to add this is with all power saving features enabled in BIOS and Balanced Power Plan in Windows.


----------



## Falkentyne

Mp0wer said:


> What voltage reading on HWinfo do we use when using adaptive voltage, I thought I read someone saying when using adaptive voltage that VR Out shouldn't be used.


VR VOUT is still accurate.
It only stops working when the CPU goes into c-state mode.
I'm not talking about adaptive downclocking (aka speed shift + adaptive voltage)
VR VOUT is still good for that.
I'm talking about the CPU cutting the voltage internally via c-states.
Like if your CPU is running at 3600 mhz @ 0.7v, that's from c-states (it will be drawing maybe 0.5W), but the VRM will still be outputting full voltage, not 0.7v.
If it's running 800 mhz @0.7v that's from adaptive downclock+downvolt (you don't need c-states enabled for this, you can do that with Speed Shift and control SS with Throttlestop 8.70).


----------



## EarlZ

Padinn said:


> In short, I'm not sure there is much point to fighting to get adaptive to work.


Thanks for taking the time and effort to do the readings, In my case id like the voltage to drop when its idle to extend the processors life and avoid rapid degradation however I am also not sure if that makes any difference since at idle the current draw is very low and maybe it wont make any difference in the course 3-5yrs.


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Thanks for taking the time and effort to do the readings, In my case id like the voltage to drop when its idle to extend the processors life and avoid rapid degradation however I am also not sure if that makes any difference since at idle the current draw is very low and maybe it wont make any difference in the course 3-5yrs.


High load voltage (voltage at a high current) is far more dangerous than high idle voltage, but even high idle voltage can degrade a chip with literally no current.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> High load voltage (voltage at a high current) is far more dangerous than high idle voltage, but even high idle voltage can degrade a chip with literally no current.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1673657-cpu-overvolt-death-degradation-stories.html


Exactly why I want to use adaptive as I dont want my chip to degrade that fast

EDIT:
I've managed to get stability on 4.9Ghz no crashes since yesterday with a mix of gaming load ( Anthem, Monster Hunter World, Anno 1800 ) and 2hrs of Prime95
+0.070 ( Currently trying at +0.050)
X49 CPU Multi
X43 Uncore
LLC Low
VCCIO 1.160
VCCSA 1.260
PWM Phase control Xtreme Perf
IA AC loadline 1
IA AC/DC loadline Turbo (Not really sure what this does)

EDIT2:

5Ghz seems to be wall that I cant break,
I've tried upto +0.100 but that gives me a peak of 1.36V in gaming. I've also tried standard LLC an + 0.110 and it would still crash


----------



## Padinn

EarlZ said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> In short, I'm not sure there is much point to fighting to get adaptive to work.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for taking the time and effort to do the readings, In my case id like the voltage to drop when its idle to extend the processors life and avoid rapid degradation however I am also not sure if that makes any difference since at idle the current draw is very low and maybe it wont make any difference in the course 3-5yrs.
Click to expand...

I hear ya. I was noticing periodic bsod or L0 cache errors with a .025v offset, which was a bit frustrating. Maybe I'll try again with low llc. Usually happened under medium load, like watching a twitch stream. Really wish we had the adaptive mode that MSI and Asus have.


----------



## milan616

EarlZ said:


> Exactly why I want to use adaptive as I dont want my chip to degrade that fast
> 
> EDIT:
> I've managed to get stability on 4.9Ghz no crashes since yesterday with a mix of gaming load ( Anthem, Monster Hunter World, Anno 1800 ) and 2hrs of Prime95
> +0.070 ( Currently trying at +0.050)
> X49 CPU Multi
> X43 Uncore
> LLC Low
> VCCIO 1.160
> VCCSA 1.260
> PWM Phase control Xtreme Perf
> IA AC loadline 1
> IA AC/DC loadline Turbo (Not really sure what this does)


Thanks for doing all this. I'm also looking to keep down-clocking/volting while getting some extra performance out of my system. I just haven't had the time to try out so many combinations. I hope to use try out your settings soon (probably with a little more +volts to start and work down. Seems like the unpopular opinion compared to high static OCs (which are way easier to stabilize I know), but your testing is much appreciated!


----------



## EarlZ

Padinn said:


> I hear ya. I was noticing periodic bsod or L0 cache errors with a .025v offset, which was a bit frustrating. Maybe I'll try again with low llc. Usually happened under medium load, like watching a twitch stream. Really wish we had the adaptive mode that MSI and Asus have.


Where do you check for L0 Cache errors ?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Where do you check for L0 Cache errors ?


HWinfo64 at the bottom.


----------



## kati

Im still getting idle crash-reboots, pc running 24/7 everything fine and after 2-3 weeks suddenly reboots during idle. Vcore is on normal with + offset, HwInfo shows Vout gets to 0,622V... is there any way to raise the idle Vcore a bit?


----------



## Falkentyne

kati said:


> Im still getting idle crash-reboots, pc running 24/7 everything fine and after 2-3 weeks suddenly reboots during idle. Vcore is on normal with + offset, HwInfo shows Vout gets to 0,622V... is there any way to raise the idle Vcore a bit?


Is IA AC loadline set to 0 or 1?
IA DC loadline?

You can try IA AC loadline=0 and IA DC loadline=1. That will pretty much stop everything.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Is IA AC loadline set to 0 or 1?
> IA DC loadline?
> 
> You can try IA AC loadline=0 and IA DC loadline=1. That will pretty much stop everything.


May I ask what IA DC loadline does?

EDIT:

I tried AC loadline = 0 and DC loadline = 1 
my voltage at -0.080 still overshoots to 1.373 and would still crash at idle


----------



## kati

Falkentyne said:


> Is IA AC loadline set to 0 or 1?
> IA DC loadline?
> 
> You can try IA AC loadline=0 and IA DC loadline=1. That will pretty much stop everything.


Thanks ill try that, had IA DC at 0 and IA AC at 1, quite the opposite.

Added to that i went from F7b after this nights reboot to F8g, sure smooth so far, but yeah i had no probs 3 weeks before tonight either. So its sure hard to tell if im safe or not, time will tell


----------



## EarlZ

kati said:


> Im still getting idle crash-reboots, pc running 24/7 everything fine and after 2-3 weeks suddenly reboots during idle. Vcore is on normal with + offset, HwInfo shows Vout gets to 0,622V... is there any way to raise the idle Vcore a bit?


What LLC and how much offser are you using?


----------



## yerebakan

I shared my options before as below.

9700k
z390 aorus pro
gskill 2*8 3200mhz cl14

ratio 50
vcore 1.295-1.30-1.305
uncore 43 or 47
avx 0
llc turbo
xmp enabled
enhanced multi-core disabled
others auto

Vcore 1.305 seems stable. But I did not test long term. Below 1.305 and turbo llc cause bsod or random restarts on load or idle.

So anyway, today I want to try adaptive settings. 

My new settings:
Ratio: 50
Uncore: 47
TjMax: 90
Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
Vcore: Normal
DVID: +0,075V
AVX: 0
LLC: Low
IA AC LL: 1
IA DC LL: 0
AC/DC LL: Performance
Ring to Core Offset (Down Bin): Disabled
Memory Tweak is set to Enhancement Performance.

Below I took hwinfo's screen short for 3 hours gaming and some benchmark tests. (PUBG, CS:GO, BFV, x264 encode and Prime95)

Is everything seems to be right? 

Generally I track Vcore on load and it often shows 1.308v - 1.332v - 1.344v pike up to max 1.380 as hwinfo. (I saw instantly a time 1.380v) 

Have u got any suggest for me?

*1. attachment on load infos.
*2. attachment on idle infos.
@Falkentyne


----------



## HBizzle

Has anyone been able to get a 32gb 4000 Cl 17-17-17-37 kit working with either the Ultra or Master running with a 9900K? Thanks.


----------



## kati

EarlZ said:


> What LLC and how much offser are you using?


Used medium now low and it looks like its now working out better in idle(at normal Vcore 1,2V with +0,05V offset atm).
But gotta monitor that for some time.
9700k too btw on Master z390.


----------



## Rakanoth

Here are my settings for my 9900k:

https://vgy.me/W8jrl6.jpg
https://vgy.me/8hIYGM.jpg
https://vgy.me/MF2ZDt.jpg
https://vgy.me/8UE6qN.jpg
https://vgy.me/exDZlT.jpg
https://vgy.me/NDjKN5.jpg
https://vgy.me/nm3T48.jpg

It's stable at 5 GHz.

Here is my temperatures:
https://vgy.me/Jf8dsK.png

Ignore 80ish temps because they are the initial values when my x62 isn't running up at its full speed.


----------



## EarlZ

kati said:


> Used medium now low and it looks like its now working out better in idle(at normal Vcore 1,2V with +0,05V offset atm).
> But gotta monitor that for some time.
> 9700k too btw on Master z390.


Whats the peak recorded voltage (VR OUT) from HWinfo ?
I'll do more testing with IA DC loading = 1 instead it looks like it would still use a positive offset which is what I would prefer to use.


----------



## Rakanoth

yerebakan said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I am new here.
> My spec is:
> i7-9700k
> corsair h100i v2 extreme (push/pul)
> gigabyte z390 aorus pro
> gskill tridentz 2*8gb cl14 3200Mhz
> evga 1080ti ftw3 hybrid
> evga supernova 1000 p2
> 
> So I installed this system yesterday. I want to overclock 5.0GHz.
> I read some topics on internet and watched guide on youtube.
> 
> So here is my settings:
> Bios Version: F9b (latest)
> Cpu Ratio: 50
> Uncore Ratio: 43 (Default)
> Vcore: 1.260V
> LLC: Turbo
> AVX: 0
> XMP: Active
> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
> TjMax Temp: 95C
> Core Current Limit: 255
> Package Power Limit 1&2: 4090 (Max)
> 
> -- I connect 8+4 cpu power cable.
> 
> @Falkentyne said prime95 with fixed 1344K test is enough.
> Before I tried settings which is different Vcore:1.250V, I get BSOD(whea_uncorrectable...) while restarting or shutting down pc. I passed all benchmarks like aida64, prime95 26.6 default smallfft, x264 encode... So Vcore is raised up to 1.260. Now I am testing Prime95 NoFma3 and 1344K fixed size. No errors until 35 min. Got Clock Watchdog Timeout BSOD. :Snorkle:
> 
> My temps never pass 70C.
> 
> What will you advise to me for stability? I don't want to see BSOD of course.
> 
> Need to vcore 1.30V and start point here?
> 
> Note:
> HWinfo64 Values:
> Vcore Min: 1.248V
> Vcore Max: 1.308V
> Vcore Current: 1.272V
> VR VOUT Min: 1.207V
> VR VOUT Max: 1.247V
> VR Vout Current: 1.219V


Increase vcore and set pwm phase control to high performance.


----------



## yerebakan

Yeah, I tried up to 1.305v fixed Vcore. 1.305V seems fine but hwinfo reported max value of vcore 1.445v sometimes. 
So I want to try adaptive.


----------



## Rakanoth

yerebakan said:


> Yeah, I tried up to 1.305v fixed Vcore. 1.305V seems fine but hwinfo reported max value of vcore 1.445v sometimes.
> So I want to try adaptive.


Hwinfo is known to report false voltage readings. Use Cpu-Z.


----------



## Jidonsu

yerebakan said:


> Yeah, I tried up to 1.305v fixed Vcore. 1.305V seems fine but hwinfo reported max value of vcore 1.445v sometimes.
> So I want to try adaptive.


I'm guessing you accidentally looked at VID instead? Look for VR VROUT in HWINFO64.


----------



## Rakanoth

Jidonsu said:


> I'm guessing you accidentally looked at VID instead? Look for VR VROUT in HWINFO64.


Oh yeah. There is a nice information about this on hwinfo forums:
https://www.hwinfo.com/forum/Thread-Question-About-VIDs-and-Vcore


----------



## Rakanoth

jlp0209 said:


> No disrespect to anyone here or to you. (If you are fairly new to overclocking) do not copy settings people post and hope they stick. You can kill or degrade your components.


Totally disagree with this. With those high-end components nowadays, it is extremely difficult to kill your CPU or mobo while overclocking. If you kill it, we can blame it on the mobo with a high level of accuracy.


----------



## EarlZ

kati said:


> Used medium now low and it looks like its now working out better in idle(at normal Vcore 1,2V with +0,05V offset atm).
> But gotta monitor that for some time.
> 9700k too btw on Master z390.


+0.050 is like 1.410 on my end, how much voltage do you get on that?


----------



## OutlawII

Rakanoth said:


> Totally disagree with this. With those high-end components nowadays, it is extremely difficult to kill your CPU or mobo while overclocking. If you kill it, we can blame it on the mobo with a high level of accuracy.


You sir are wrong every chip is different so copy pasting just does not work very well. That is bad advice


----------



## HBizzle

Anyone got thoughts on whether the Master is worth it over the Ultra?


----------



## Falkentyne

HBizzle said:


> Anyone got thoughts on whether the Master is worth it over the Ultra?


If you have the money and can afford it, it is. Panel clear cmos and power buttons are useful and dip switches for bios selection and socketed primary bios is even more useful.
Master from Ultra is far more of a real world benefit than Xtreme from Master. A very small group of people would find the Xtreme worth it over the Master, but they are usually professional testers with oscilloscopes, or need the dual LAN for teaming.


----------



## jlp0209

Rakanoth said:


> Totally disagree with this. With those high-end components nowadays, it is extremely difficult to kill your CPU or mobo while overclocking. If you kill it, we can blame it on the mobo with a high level of accuracy.


Nothing wrong with using other users' settings as a starting point, but simply copying and pasting and rolling with those settings, not a good idea. What about someone who just got a new 9900K and has never OC before. Comes here and sees 5.2ghz. Copies settings for manual voltage that for some reason give him/her a Vcore of 1.45 - 1.50. Very high LLC also causing spikes. Because the user doesn't bench and just plays games without crashing he/she thinks it is stable at 5.2ghz and couldn't care less. Running this voltage 24/7 will kill a CPU and the person will never know until it's too late. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, just my thought.


----------



## marik123

Recently I just swapped my Asrock Z370 extreme4 to a Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Pro board and the first thing I noticed is that I now only need 1.28v to run cinebench at 5ghz as opposed to my Asrock board which requires 1.296v. The vdrop issue seems to be less than my Asrock board. I haven't had the chance to fully test stability of the CPU, but I did notice one issue is that my old Asrock board would run my gskill ddr4 3200c14 ram without any issues at 4266mhz 18-18-18-38 2T 1.425v with VCCIO set to 1.15v and VSSA set to 1.2v. However when I try to run it in this Aorus Pro Z390 board, I can only reach 3733mhz stable 16-16-16-36 2T 1.4v. I tried to set my VCCIO/VSSA the same of my Asrock board, but the PC refuse to post as long as the RAM set to beyond 3866mhz. Is there any hidden setting in BIOS I didn't catch?

Thanks


----------



## Sheyster

marik123 said:


> I did notice one issue is that my old Asrock board would run my gskill ddr4 3200c14 ram without any issues at 4266mhz 18-18-18-38 2T 1.425v with VCCIO set to 1.15v and VSSA set to 1.2v. However when I try to run it in this Aorus Pro Z390 board, I can only reach 3733mhz stable 16-16-16-36 2T 1.4v. I tried to set my VCCIO/VSSA the same of my Asrock board, but the PC refuse to post as long as the RAM set to beyond 3866mhz. Is there any hidden setting in BIOS I didn't catch?
> 
> Thanks


Memory support is just plain bad on the Pro board unfortunately. It's my biggest complaint about the board. Well, that and the wonky BIOS.


----------



## marik123

Sheyster said:


> Memory support is just plain bad on the Pro board unfortunately. It's my biggest complaint about the board. Well, that and the wonky BIOS.


I see that you have DDR4 4000 ram. Were you able to run it at that speed? I also heard from a youtube review stating that XMP profile will work no problem, but if you try to overclock it to that speed from let say 3200mhz, then you have a problem because XMP enables hidden features in the BIOS that can't be changed.


At 21:45


----------



## Sheyster

marik123 said:


> I see that you have DDR4 4000 ram. Were you able to run it at that speed? I also heard from a youtube review stating that XMP profile will work no problem, but if you try to overclock it to that speed from let say 3200mhz, then you have a problem because XMP enables hidden features in the BIOS that can't be changed.
> 
> 
> At 21:45
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmtBc_nyJw8&t=1381s



The XMP profile does NOT work for me at 4000 and for many others as well, even at speeds as low as 3200. See Gigabyte's official forums (Z390 section) for more info. I just settled on 3600 15-15-15-35 1T. Real latency at this speed is actually lower than 4000 CL18. Bandwidth is a wash.


----------



## Rakanoth

OutlawII said:


> You sir are wrong every chip is different so copy pasting just does not work very well. That is bad advice





jlp0209 said:


> Nothing wrong with using other users' settings as a starting point, but simply copying and pasting and rolling with those settings, not a good idea. What about someone who just got a new 9900K and has never OC before. Comes here and sees 5.2ghz. Copies settings for manual voltage that for some reason give him/her a Vcore of 1.45 - 1.50. Very high LLC also causing spikes. Because the user doesn't bench and just plays games without crashing he/she thinks it is stable at 5.2ghz and couldn't care less. Running this voltage 24/7 will kill a CPU and the person will never know until it's too late. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, just my thought.


I know every chip is different and copy pasting is not the best thing. What I am disagreeing is the claim that one can kill CPU or mobo by copy pasting settings. 



jlp0209 said:


> Running this voltage 24/7 will kill a CPU and the person will never know until it's too late. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, just my thought.


No, running that kind of voltage won't kill CPU but degrade it.


----------



## EarlZ

Is there a need to max out the values of the following items when manually overclocking or they can be left on auto ?

Package Power Limit1 - TDP (Watts) --- 95
Package Power Limit1 Time --- 10
Package Power Limit2 (Watts) --- 118
Package Power Limit2 Time --- 13
Platform Power Limit1 (Watts) --- 95
Platform Power Limit1 Time --- blank
Platform Power Limit2 (Watts) --- 95
Power Limit3 (Watts) --- 95
Power Limit3 Time --- blank


----------



## Driller au

EarlZ said:


> Is there a need to max out the values of the following items when manually overclocking or they can be left on auto ?
> 
> Package Power Limit1 - TDP (Watts) --- 95
> Package Power Limit1 Time --- 10
> Package Power Limit2 (Watts) --- 118
> Package Power Limit2 Time --- 13
> Platform Power Limit1 (Watts) --- 95
> Platform Power Limit1 Time --- blank
> Platform Power Limit2 (Watts) --- 95
> Power Limit3 (Watts) --- 95
> Power Limit3 Time --- blank


I read a post where Buildzoid said not to worry about the Time ones leave them at auto and max the Watts,he said he puts them at 4000 i have mine at 4090 per KedarWolfs OC on page 177 i also had the time ones maxed but have put them back to auto with no bad effects


----------



## yerebakan

Jidonsu said:


> I'm guessing you accidentally looked at VID instead? Look for VR VROUT in HWINFO64.


No. I did not look VID Values. 
And I know VRVOUT is more accurate and not up to 1.30v.
Vcore report higher than VRVOUT.


----------



## Padinn

So I got a random L0 error at desktop under light load using manual voltage of 1.175 and turbo llc. No crash, but totally unexpected. I do have all power saving on. What could cause that? My VCC SA and IO are at stock.


----------



## EarlZ

Padinn said:


> So I got a random L0 error at desktop under light load using manual voltage of 1.175 and turbo llc. No crash, but totally unexpected. I kdo have all power saving on. What could cause that? My VCC SA and IO are at stock.


Thats the WHEA hardware error at the very bottom of HWinfo right?

Ive never noticed that counter move to any value before a BSOD


----------



## Padinn

EarlZ said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I got a random L0 error at desktop under light load using manual voltage of 1.175 and turbo llc. No crash, but totally unexpected. I kdo have all power saving on. What could cause that? My VCC SA and IO are at stock.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats the WHEA hardware error at the very bottom of HWinfo right?
> 
> Ive never noticed that counter move to any value before a BSOD
Click to expand...

Yup..I setup a custom event in event viewer so I get a dialogue box pop up whenever I get this error. I didnt bsod but I'm surprised it showed up with a manual voltage. I'm wondering if I need to raise my vccio or vccsa since they are at stock and I am running ram at 3200


----------



## Edge0fsanity

Padinn said:


> So I got a random L0 error at desktop under light load using manual voltage of 1.175 and turbo llc. No crash, but totally unexpected. I do have all power saving on. What could cause that? My VCC SA and IO are at stock.


When I was oc'ing my system I would get those without a bsod. It was always vcore related. I found I needed to run p95 no avx/fma3 in place small fft for an hour to clear those wheas. Adding vcore got rid of them. 

I could pass less stressful tests at 5.2ghz 1.35v but I'd randomly get the L0 wheas during normal use. It took 1.365v @ 5.2ghz to get rid of them.


----------



## Vesimas

Here we go again. What i thought was a problem of cold boot (about the monitor not receiving any signal) now happened three times in a row. Just a simple reset to resolve but i would like to resolve it forever


----------



## Uberwolf

Love this board and was just about to buy one when I started seeing posts on youtube reviews regarding the Bios being a bit flakey. Now I know a lot of Mobos suffer this with the inital Bios version. Can anyone speak as to how the Bios has developed thus far.


----------



## Aleeyan

HBizzle said:


> Has anyone been able to get a 32gb 4000 Cl 17-17-17-37 kit working with either the Ultra or Master running with a 9900K? Thanks.


I would have the same question, except I do have a Pro Wifi board. I have the F4-4000C19D-32GTZR DDR 4000 RGB modules from GSKILL. They look super nice but can't enable XMP on auto with that board and my 9900K. Can anyone advise on what exactly can be done to get this kit working.


----------



## kati

EarlZ said:


> Whats the peak recorded voltage (VR OUT) from HWinfo ?
> I'll do more testing with IA DC loading = 1 instead it looks like it would still use a positive offset which is what I would prefer to use.


1,223V(at full load which is about 150w cpu package, jumps around between 1,15V and 1,223V temps are around 70C° max with n-dh15 2x15 fans on silent) but im at stock speed, power enough but if i leave everything at default he peaks at 1,38V and 80°C+ which why i have to figure out a balanced setting(and sure it has to be silent).

VRout goes to 0,695V idle and no crash so far. 
I really pray this keeps being stable, cant stress test this cause under load its sure stable as hell but my reboot crashes were idle ones(Vcore too low most likely).


----------



## avastaja

Hello there.

Could anyone over here help me please.

I have Pro model and problem with usb.
It just freezes time to time. It just usb, not whole pc. It' s hard to use mouse/keyboard.
Problem even with Corsain H100i, with custom fan profile. If usb freezes, fans will raise there rpm. I manually have to apply profile and all ok, till next time.

If I try to move files from memory card, every 3-4 sec. usb will freeze.

Tried to update latest bios, nothing. Different usb setting from bios, nothing.

Anyone?


----------



## OutlawII

Uberwolf said:


> Love this board and was just about to buy one when I started seeing posts on youtube reviews regarding the Bios being a bit flakey. Now I know a lot of Mobos suffer this with the inital Bios version. Can anyone speak as to how the Bios has developed thus far.


The bios is fine ive run Asus boards in the past its definitely not as fancy as that but ive had no problems so far.


----------



## Moparman

Vesimas said:


> Here we go again. What i thought was a problem of cold boot (about the monitor not receiving any signal) now happened three times in a row. Just a simple reset to resolve but i would like to resolve it forever


Yea I have only had it once over the past week. I'm also trying to figure out what it could be 100%.


----------



## marik123

After days of tweaking around, I was finally able to get it maximum RAM speed at 3866mhz. VCCIO = 1.15v, VSSA = 1.21v in BIOS, 3866mhz RAM 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v. Anything higher the system will refuse to post and I have the latest F9b BIOS installed. The same RAM I have can run 4266mhz in my old Asrock Z370 Extreme4 board with the same VCCIO/VSSA voltage. Memory bandwidth I lost about 1gb/sec from 4266 18-18-18-38 2T 1.425v, but right now my CPU can be stable at 1.272v 5Ghz AVX=0 where as my Asrock Z370 Extreme4 board was struggling to hit 5ghz at 1.3v AVX=0. I will try increase the cache speed tonight and see if I can get it to 47x. Overall if gigabyte can fix their low RAM speed oc problems, then it's a very solid board.


----------



## Padinn

Uberwolf said:


> Love this board and was just about to buy one when I started seeing posts on youtube reviews regarding the Bios being a bit flakey. Now I know a lot of Mobos suffer this with the inital Bios version. Can anyone speak as to how the Bios has developed thus far.


The initial f4 bios was pretty bas, substantial improvements on my master since then. Currently on f8e. That said, I think MSI and Asus are probably still better bios wise, especially due to support for things like adaptive+offset mode. but overall the gigabyte one is much improved since launch.


----------



## DestructionJ

Very easy and fast to get all cores to 5 ghz. Still a bit of a dirty overclock but tested to the 4k test in prime. I think this might turn out to be a wonderful relationship :thumb::thumb:

I put fixed voltage to 1.275, CPU clock to 5000mhz, multi core enhancement on, LLC on mild, XMP enabled profile1, played with some fan crap to get a quieter experience, and off to the races :devil:
timings are all reporting correctly with everything on auto.
Z390 AORUS ULTRA / BIOS F7f
I7-9700K @ 5.01 GHz / H110 COOLER
G.SKILL TridentZ RGB F4-4000C17D-16GTZR @4000


SO FAR STABLE CAS Latency 17 / ( 17-17-17-37 ) 



Code:


https://photos.app.goo.gl/xKgnsCJw92mHheEn9


----------



## Timur Born

marik123 said:


> Overall if gigabyte can fix their low RAM speed oc problems, then it's a very solid board.


Have a look at termination voltage. When it's set to 0.7v HWinfo reports only 0.682v. Don't get confused when you use EasyTune, because ET always claims it to be 0.6v regardless of what you set in BIOS and then the corresponding offset applies (0.7v BIOS = 0.6v ET, then change ET to 0.7v and you get 0.8v real).


----------



## yerebakan

Hi all,

My system is stabile on 4.9Ghz Vcore:1,25v LLC:High
On load vcore is between ~1.272v-~1.272v

I want to set DVID.
My settings are;
Ratio: 49
AVX: 0
LLC: Normal
DVID: -0.075 (Tried -0.080 with Standart and Normal LLC)
Uncore: 46
Multi-Core Enh: Disabled
PL1&2 Limit: 4090
Core Amp: 255
TjMax: 90

While some stress testing, Vcore spike up to 1.332v. Idle is ~0.680v
I read previous comments and set IA AC LL to 1. But my system did not boot and bios corrupted.

How to keep my voltage on load below ~1.3v

Thanks in advance.

@Falkentyne
@KedarWolf


----------



## Vesimas

Moparman said:


> Yea I have only had it once over the past week. I'm also trying to figure out what it could be 100%.


Just to know what mobo/gpu do you have?


----------



## Moparman

9600k/Master/ tried SLI 780ti and SLI 980ti both do it.


----------



## yerebakan

Hi,

My Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro backup bios is corrupted. It is not kicked. 

How can I recover my backup bios? 
If I kick in backup bios, only fan and leds working and no post code and etc...



My main bios is working.


----------



## Vesimas

Moparman said:


> 9600k/Master/ tried SLI 780ti and SLI 980ti both do it.


I suppose you don't have a LG 32GK850 as monitor  so the problem should be the Master


----------



## MacG32

yerebakan said:


> Hi,
> 
> My Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro backup bios is corrupted. It is not kicked.
> 
> How can I recover my backup bios?
> If I kick in backup bios, only fan and leds working and no post code and etc...
> 
> 
> 
> My main bios is working.



After checking other forums, it seems there's no manual way to do this. You'd have to make a support ticket with Gigabyte to get an answer. You may end up RMAing your motherboard.


----------



## Moparman

Vesimas said:


> I suppose you don't have a LG 32GK850 as monitor  so the problem should be the Master


No I have 2 different 24in I tried. Also a 3 17in setup. Same issue.


----------



## Falkentyne

MacG32 said:


> Make sure the bios mode is set to single BIOS mode.
> Boot off good BIOS (a)
> Once in the BIOS flip to dead BIOS (b)
> Use Qflash to flash BIOS b.
> 
> *Note the first time BIOS b boots it may cycle 4-5 times or more. I usually give it 2 minutes.
> 
> From Matt from Gigabyte, tenth post down. :thumb:


This is for the Aorus Master and Xtreme *only*.
The boards below that do not have switches.


----------



## MacG32

Falkentyne said:


> This is for the Aorus Master and Xtreme *only*.
> The boards below that do not have switches.



Thank you. I noticed it after I made the post. I wonder if they bareboned the motherboard, would they be able to get it to boot from the backup BIOS? It might be a long shot, but may work. :thinking:


----------



## Falkentyne

MacG32 said:


> Thank you. I noticed it after I made the post. I wonder if they bareboned the motherboard, would they be able to get it to boot from the backup BIOS? It might be a long shot, but may work. :thinking:


In the past, the way to invoke the backup bios was to power on the board with the reset button held down or something or something similar relating to invoking a sudden power off quickly. I don't remember. It was mentioned twice in this thread. Those were during the days when boot loops with dual bios boards were more common.


----------



## Padinn

So I have been dialing in some adaptive voltage settings and running into infrequent L0 Cache errors. I ran a stress test over night (68 loops of the custom x264 blend test) and had no crashes or errors. Today playing Apex I got one L0 Cache error while playing, but game remained running - for a short time at least, then the display driver crashed (it was probably 30 seconds later). I was streaming using CPU encoding at the time so it is fairly intensive on the PC, do you think I should continue increasing offset or try increasing VCC SA/VCC IO above stock? I do run XMP3200 so I'm thinking the memory controller might just need a bit more juice rather than entire core being raised.


----------



## EarlZ

In relation to that post isnt the safe voltage for vccio at 1.2 and vccsa at 1.3 ?


----------



## DavieWeegie

I just bought a 9600k, Gigabyte z390 Gaming X and 16gb Corsair Vengeance Pro 3200mhz, I'd like to try get it to 5ghz if possible but have no clue where to start really, Ive read various things in this thread and tried some and so far ive set...


Clock ratio - 48x
EMCP - Disabled
Turbo Boost - Disabled
Cstates - Disabled
Speedstep - Auto
Ring to Core offset - Disabled


Cpu Vcore - 1.300
BCLK Adaptive voltage - Disabled
Cpu Internal AC/DC loadline - Turbo
Cpu Vcore loadline Calibration - Turbo


IA-AC - 1
DC-LLC - 1


This has passed 5hrs of Intel XTU stress test and various gaming sessions I've done and the highest Temp I've seen is 62 degrees this is with a Corsair H100x cooler, I'm certain it can go more on frequency but I dont want to start just pumping voltage in the way I've done it until someone can validate what I'm doing is right.


----------



## Padinn

EarlZ said:


> In relation to that post isnt the safe voltage for vccio at 1.2 and vccsa at 1.3 ?


Yea I've got quite a bit of room. I wouldn't go above 1.25 on system agent. And too high on these can make it worse


----------



## EarlZ

Padinn said:


> Yea I've got quite a bit of room. I wouldn't go above 1.25 on system agent. And too high on these can make it worse


Gigabyte sets it up for 1.3 on auto with XMP


----------



## yerebakan

MacG32 said:


> yerebakan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> My Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro backup bios is corrupted. It is not kicked.
> 
> How can I recover my backup bios?
> If I kick in backup bios, only fan and leds working and no post code and etc...
> 
> /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
> 
> My main bios is working.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After checking other forums, it seems there's no manual way to do this. You'd have to make a support ticket with Gigabyte to get an answer. You may end up RMAing your motherboard.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I researched all Google and I think so. 😞


----------



## robertr1

marik123 said:


> After days of tweaking around, I was finally able to get it maximum RAM speed at 3866mhz. VCCIO = 1.15v, VSSA = 1.21v in BIOS, 3866mhz RAM 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v. Anything higher the system will refuse to post and I have the latest F9b BIOS installed. The same RAM I have can run 4266mhz in my old Asrock Z370 Extreme4 board with the same VCCIO/VSSA voltage. Memory bandwidth I lost about 1gb/sec from 4266 18-18-18-38 2T 1.425v, but right now my CPU can be stable at 1.272v 5Ghz AVX=0 where as my Asrock Z370 Extreme4 board was struggling to hit 5ghz at 1.3v AVX=0. I will try increase the cache speed tonight and see if I can get it to 47x. Overall if gigabyte can fix their low RAM speed oc problems, then it's a very solid board.


Can you use the asrock timing configurator and post your timings? 

ALso, can you post a screen shot of a AIDA 64 run to see what performance you're getting? 

I'm at 15-15-15-28/3600mhz and wanted to see how it compares.


----------



## Padinn

EarlZ said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yea I've got quite a bit of room. I wouldn't go above 1.25 on system agent. And too high on these can make it worse
> 
> 
> 
> Gigabyte sets it up for 1.3 on auto with XMP
Click to expand...

Yea and that's really too much. I doubt it's harmful but it can impact stability. You'd only need that with very high ram speeds


----------



## HBizzle

Is there a post in here with good bios instructions on OCing a Master? Are the Gigabyte instructions good? I want to run it at a stable 5 OC on a 9900K, and been able to achieve that on an MSI MEG ACE at 1.265 so hoping to achieve something close with this new board.


----------



## DestructionJ

Just got a Z390 ultra - 9700k and am running 5 ghz stable on Intel burn test set to very high with XMP profile 1 @ 4000 ram The kit i got is GSkill Trident Z Rgb (F4-4000C17D-16GTZR)

I got those because they are on the Gskill QVL



 Gskill Trident z RGB (F4-4000C17D-16GTZR) 17-17-17-37 / 1.35 v

Im running prime95 now


----------



## HBizzle

Well I think I have a stable OC with my 9900K/Master running at 1.265 w/LLC at Medium. Did an hour Prime95 26.6 test and threw no BSOD's. 32GB 4000 at 17-17-17-37 running at 1.46. Seems stable am going to see if I can lower the ram voltage now. Cooler temps then my MSI MEG ACE had at the same voltage.


----------



## Driller au

HBizzle said:


> Well I think I have a stable OC with my 9900K/Master running at 1.265 w/LLC at Medium. Did an hour Prime95 26.6 test and threw no BSOD's. 32GB 4000 at 17-17-17-37 running at 1.46. Seems stable am going to see if I can lower the ram voltage now. Cooler temps then my MSI MEG ACE had at the same voltage.


 Do you have to have the VCSSA and VCCIO that high to run the that much memory at high Mhz ?


----------



## Jidonsu

HBizzle said:


> Well I think I have a stable OC with my 9900K/Master running at 1.265 w/LLC at Medium. Did an hour Prime95 26.6 test and threw no BSOD's. 32GB 4000 at 17-17-17-37 running at 1.46. Seems stable am going to see if I can lower the ram voltage now. Cooler temps then my MSI MEG ACE had at the same voltage.


You can probably get the VCCIO and VCCSA down to something like 1.2V/1.25V. Your VCCIO is really high. That's where I have mine at 4000 16-16-16-36 on the 9700k. dram voltage is at 1.45V.


----------



## BradleyW

Driller au said:


> HBizzle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well I think I have a stable OC with my 9900K/Master running at 1.265 w/LLC at Medium. Did an hour Prime95 26.6 test and threw no BSOD's. 32GB 4000 at 17-17-17-37 running at 1.46. Seems stable am going to see if I can lower the ram voltage now. Cooler temps then my MSI MEG ACE had at the same voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have to have the VCSSA and VCCIO that high to run the that much memory at high Mhz ?
Click to expand...

Very high at a guess. My Ultra sets them both to 1.38v @ 4000MHz and even then it isn't stable at that speed. Fails blend.


----------



## BradleyW

Driller au said:


> HBizzle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well I think I have a stable OC with my 9900K/Master running at 1.265 w/LLC at Medium. Did an hour Prime95 26.6 test and threw no BSOD's. 32GB 4000 at 17-17-17-37 running at 1.46. Seems stable am going to see if I can lower the ram voltage now. Cooler temps then my MSI MEG ACE had at the same voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have to have the VCSSA and VCCIO that high to run the that much memory at high Mhz ?
Click to expand...

Very high at a guess. My Ultra sets them both to 1.38v @ 4000MHz and even then it isn't stable at that speed. Fails blend.


----------



## robertr1

It seems that majority of GB auto voltaage settings are ridiculously high. 

I have my VCCIO/SA at 1.050/1.050 with 15-15-15-28 3600mhz but if I left it at auto, it'll go upto 1.4/1.4 That's absurd.

Same with vcore. This has made me more diligent to other what other "auto" voltages there are, their impact and what their working range should be. I don't trust this manufacturer at all.


----------



## Scoty

Since 2 days I also have my first Gigabyte Board, the Designare z390. Great board only the Bios I do not find as good as from Asus.


----------



## ABADY

so, i got my board couple of weeks ago and start ocing. which sensor should i monitor for voltages ? 

https://i.imgur.com/BmlvgUD.png

i've read that the vout is more accurate but 1.380 is too high idk how accurate it is tho. 

i have 9700k 5ghz @1.270 with llc set to extreme (sill testing different llc settings) am i safe with extreme or should i lower it to turbo?


----------



## DavieWeegie

Using Moparmans settings from page 20, I've managed to get windows to boot and run a short stress test with Aida and XTU at 5ghz, I dont know yet if this is fully stable but windows would not boot with any lower than 1.400v vcore


Heres so pictures of my idles temps, load temps and voltages, does it sound right that my VID is under 1.300v yet my vcore needs to be so high at 1.400v?


----------



## Falkentyne

DavieWeegie said:


> Using Moparmans settings from page 20, I've managed to get windows to boot and run a short stress test with Aida and XTU at 5ghz, I dont know yet if this is fully stable but windows would not boot with any lower than 1.400v vcore
> 
> 
> Heres so pictures of my idles temps, load temps and voltages, does it sound right that my VID is under 1.300v yet my vcore needs to be so high at 1.400v?


Why are you using such an old obsolete version of hwinfo? That version doesn't even support your board properly. Update it.


----------



## DavieWeegie

that was the one i got from the site yesterday, ill find a new one


----------



## DavieWeegie

this is the latest the site gives me....


----------



## DavieWeegie

and heres a screenshot of CPUID HWMonitor


----------



## HBizzle

Jidonsu said:


> You can probably get the VCCIO and VCCSA down to something like 1.2V/1.25V. Your VCCIO is really high. That's where I have mine at 4000 16-16-16-36 on the 9700k. dram voltage is at 1.45V.


 Going to try this today and report back. Is this on a 16 or 32 kit?


----------



## HBizzle

Driller au said:


> Do you have to have the VCSSA and VCCIO that high to run the that much memory at high Mhz ?


 Going to tweak later today to find out.


----------



## HBizzle

So I ran into a bug with F8e this afternoon. Went in to adjust the SA and IO to 1.25 and hit save on the profile, then went to save and exit and it only showed IO saving. Restarted and went back into bios and SA was still Auto, and also the vcore was showing 1.3. Saved with SA at 1.25 again and restarted. Started to run Cinebench and the temps were outrageous compared to my stable OC yesterday. Then went to run P95 26.6 at 12k fixed and temps hit 100C out of the blue. Looked at my hwinfo and VOUT was 1.363 max, yet I hadn't adjusted my voltage out of the 1.265. Went back into the bios and set it to 1.25 and saved and vout and vcore came back to normal. Then adjusted back to 1.265 with IO and SA at 1.25 and ran p95 26.6 at 12K and had no issues. Temps were restored. 

Screenshots attached of the weird instance where the voltage wasnt doing what it was assigned to, and I verified it was set at 1.265 before I switched it to try and get it to force the voltage. Also of 1:20 of p95 at the new IO and SA once temps were stable.


----------



## Timur Born

I suspect that internal loadline on "Auto" (default) may sometimes cause havoc with Vcore. I had two instances where something seemed off, so I set mine to "Performance" just to make sure that this remains fixed. I combine this with "Standard" LLC and a small negative offset on (adaptive) Vcore.


----------



## Falkentyne

HBizzle said:


> So I ran into a bug with F8e this afternoon. Went in to adjust the SA and IO to 1.25 and hit save on the profile, then went to save and exit and it only showed IO saving. Restarted and went back into bios and SA was still Auto, and also the vcore was showing 1.3. Saved with SA at 1.25 again and restarted. Started to run Cinebench and the temps were outrageous compared to my stable OC yesterday. Then went to run P95 26.6 at 12k fixed and temps hit 100C out of the blue. Looked at my hwinfo and VOUT was 1.363 max, yet I hadn't adjusted my voltage out of the 1.265. Went back into the bios and set it to 1.25 and saved and vout and vcore came back to normal. Then adjusted back to 1.265 with IO and SA at 1.25 and ran p95 26.6 at 12K and had no issues. Temps were restored.
> 
> Screenshots attached of the weird instance where the voltage wasnt doing what it was assigned to, and I verified it was set at 1.265 before I switched it to try and get it to force the voltage. Also of 1:20 of p95 at the new IO and SA once temps were stable.


Do you have windows fastboot enabled?


----------



## Jidonsu

HBizzle said:


> Going to try this today and report back. Is this on a 16 or 32 kit?


I do have 4x8gb. I'm now down to 1.2v for both VCCIO and VCCSA. Not sure if I want to spend a few more hours running Ram Test and Large FFTs to test lower voltages.


----------



## EarlZ

Jidonsu said:


> I do have 4x8gb. I'm now down to 1.2v for both VCCIO and VCCSA. Not sure if I want to spend a few more hours running Ram Test and Large FFTs to test lower voltages.


On that subject what is the suggested FTT size test for this ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> I do have 4x8gb. I'm now down to 1.2v for both VCCIO and VCCSA. Not sure if I want to spend a few more hours running Ram Test and Large FFTs to test lower voltages.


I went down to 1.00v VCCIO and 1.10v VCCSA. Still don't know how stable it is.


----------



## SONICDK

what is the fastest ram that works with Z390 Aorus master? 
im on the edge of bying these gskill 2x8 4400mhz cl19 "F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK"

and just want to make sure they work


----------



## Jidonsu

EarlZ said:


> On that subject what is the suggested FTT size test for this ?


https://reddit.com/r/overclocking/c...5_investigation_update_whatever_number_it_is/

https://reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/ao7vpz/_/eg0nn9u/?context=1

The large FFTs test on the latest p95 build auto selects a significant percentage of the ram and then runs through the test starting at 2048k and goes up from there. I can’t remember where it begins to loop again. I think it maybe somewhere around near 8M.


----------



## Jidonsu

SONICDK said:


> what is the fastest ram that works with Z390 Aorus master?
> im on the edge of bying these gskill 2x8 4400mhz cl19 "F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK"
> 
> and just want to make sure they work


There are no 2x8gb kits faster than 4000mhz rated by G.Skill for the Aorus Master. I doubt you’ll be able to make those run at reasonable voltages at that clock speed (4400) due to the topology on the Aorus boards. The fastest rated ram for the board is a 4x8gb kit at 4133 CL17. 

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4133c17q-32gtzr


----------



## Jidonsu

Falkentyne said:


> I went down to 1.00v VCCIO and 1.10v VCCSA. Still don't know how stable it is.


What ram speed? I’m at 4000mhz 16-16-16-36 with 4 sticks. I might go for 1.15v each tomorrow, but I may be pushing my luck at this point since most have said that they found it to be less stable below 1.2ish on both io and sa witb similar ram OC.


----------



## ABADY

am testing my oc on 9700k 5ghz @1.260v
llc set to turbo 
IA AC/DC set to 1

VR VOUT reads 1.245 @Idle 
but when running primeV29 small FFT voltage drops to 1.194v making it unstable
when running realbench vout is @1.216 are these vdroops normal for my current settings ?

am passing realbench and 1344k prime. the thing is, is it normal for vr vout sensor to report lower voltage than the one i manually adjusted?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jidonsu said:


> What ram speed? I’m at 4000mhz 16-16-16-36 with 4 sticks. I might go for 1.15v each tomorrow, but I may be pushing my luck at this point since most have said that they found it to be less stable below 1.2ish on both io and sa witb similar ram OC.


2x16GB gskill 3200 mhz cas 14 (b-die).


----------



## SONICDK

Jidonsu said:


> There are no 2x8gb kits faster than 4000mhz rated by G.Skill for the Aorus Master. I doubt you’ll be able to make those run at reasonable voltages at that clock speed (4400) due to the topology on the Aorus boards. The fastest rated ram for the board is a 4x8gb kit at 4133 CL17.
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4133c17q-32gtzr


okay, but why does it say "Support for DDR4 4400(O.C.)" in specs ?
and what are the pro and cons between aorus master, pro and elite? how well does they overclock cpu,
and how fast 16gb ram can they have? 
im going to get a 9900k with it


----------



## KedarWolf

SONICDK said:


> what is the fastest ram that works with Z390 Aorus master?
> im on the edge of bying these gskill 2x8 4400mhz cl19 "F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK"
> 
> and just want to make sure they work


On a 9900k you're lucky if you get 4133MHZ, and with the Master you want to buy a four DIMM kit, not a two stick kit. Master and Xtreme use T-Topology and it works better with four sticks of RAM.

On my Extreme it'll boot and be stable with four sticks and 4133MHZ. With two sticks in the first and third slots with the same RAM speed and timings, PC won't even boot.

The best four stick kit though seems to be the Trident Z 3600 CL16 4x8GB kit. On 8700k's people getting 4400MHZ out of them on a really good IMC and should hit 4133MHZ pretty easy on a decent IMC on a 9900k. 

9900k IMC's aren't as good as 8700k's.


----------



## MacG32

New Prime95 v29.5 Build 10: ftp://ftp.mersenne.org/gimps/p95v295b10.win64.zip


----------



## DavieWeegie

I've settled on my max safe overclock at...


4.8ghz cores
4.4ghz cache
1.280 vcore
ctates off
LLC turbo


with this it will run stress tests allday long and max temp is 62 degrees.


I can take it to...


5ghz cores
4.3ghz cache
1.400 vcore
cstates off
LLC extreme


temps at this are around 70-75 which is still good.


1.400v I dont know how safe that would be for long term use, my PC is on 24/7 although I do let it throttle down at idle.


----------



## Moparman

DavieWeegie said:


> I've settled on my max safe overclock at...
> 
> 
> 4.8ghz cores
> 4.4ghz cache
> 1.280 vcore
> ctates off
> LLC turbo
> 
> 
> with this it will run stress tests allday long and max temp is 62 degrees.
> 
> 
> I can take it to...
> 
> 
> 5ghz cores
> 4.3ghz cache
> 1.400 vcore
> cstates off
> LLC extreme
> 
> 
> temps at this are around 70-75 which is still good.
> 
> 
> 1.400v I dont know how safe that would be for long term use, my PC is on 24/7 although I do let it throttle down at idle.



Have you tried to push the Cache more than 4.4? it's odd to see a chip that can't do 4.6-4.8 cache.


----------



## BradleyW

Moparman said:


> Have you tried to push the Cache more than 4.4? it's odd to see a chip that can't do 4.6-4.8 cache.


I can't do higher than 4.4Ghz cache either unless I put an absolute ton of Vcore into the CPU. Right now I do AVX 5GHz HT @ 1.32 Vcore, x44 Cache.


----------



## DavieWeegie

I havent tried yet but ive stressed this overclock to the max and its solid as a rock, I'll save this profile and give the cache some more testing.


Was a bit gutted not to reach 5ghz safely seeing as my vcore at 4.8ghz is pretty good, its a big jump in volts to get to the 5ghz mark, although it is stable there I just cant bring myself to leave it at that constant.


----------



## DavieWeegie

Moparman said:


> Have you tried to push the Cache more than 4.4? it's odd to see a chip that can't do 4.6-4.8 cache.



Instant BSOD with 4.5ghz cache lol and that was on the lock screen of windows.


I think I lost the silicone lottery big style with this 9600k (or the boards just not upto it) it will do me until I upgrade to a 9900k in a year or two.


----------



## HBizzle

Falkentyne said:


> Do you have windows fastboot enabled?


I don't believe so. Where in the BIOS is it located? Will check when I get home tonight.


----------



## HBizzle

Jidonsu said:


> I do have 4x8gb. I'm now down to 1.2v for both VCCIO and VCCSA. Not sure if I want to spend a few more hours running Ram Test and Large FFTs to test lower voltages.


Cool. Good to know. I am going to try those tighter timings when I go to bed tonight. Will let RamTest run overnight. Have it doing that right now from last night for the current setup.


----------



## Moparman

I must have a very good 9600k then. i'm running 5100 core/50 cache no problem with mem at 3600c14 for may daily on air.


----------



## HBizzle

HBizzle said:


> I don't believe so. Where in the BIOS is it located? Will check when I get home tonight.


 Fast Boot is set to disabled.


----------



## HBizzle

HBizzle said:


> Cool. Good to know. I am going to try those tighter timings when I go to bed tonight. Will let RamTest run overnight. Have it doing that right now from last night for the current setup.


Got to 1,200% on the 4000 17-17-17-37 1.25 SA IO on Memtest. SO I think I am good to go with that. Will see if I can achieve these tighter timings tonight before I go to bed.


----------



## SONICDK

KedarWolf said:


> On a 9900k you're lucky if you get 4133MHZ, and with the Master you want to buy a four DIMM kit, not a two stick kit. Master and Xtreme use T-Topology and it works better with four sticks of RAM.
> 
> On my Extreme it'll boot and be stable with four sticks and 4133MHZ. With two sticks in the first and third slots with the same RAM speed and timings, PC won't even boot.
> 
> The best four stick kit though seems to be the Trident Z 3600 CL16 4x8GB kit. On 8700k's people getting 4400MHZ out of them on a really good IMC and should hit 4133MHZ pretty easy on a decent IMC on a 9900k.
> 
> 9900k IMC's aren't as good as 8700k's.


i did some reseach and found msi MEG Z390 ACE can have 4266, cl19

so my parts will end up being
msi MEG Z390 ACE
g skill tridentz rgb 4266MHz cl19 F4-4266C19D-16GTZR 
noctua nh-d15
i9-9900k

thanks for helping


----------



## HBizzle

SONICDK said:


> i did some reseach and found msi MEG Z390 ACE can have 4266, cl19
> 
> so my parts will end up being
> msi MEG Z390 ACE
> g skill tridentz rgb 4266MHz cl19 F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
> noctua nh-d15
> i9-9900k
> 
> thanks for helping


DO NOT GET THE ACE. It is terrible. Read the end of this thread: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...l-msi-meg-z390-ace-motherboard-thread-18.html 

Multiple members of this forum have now replaced their ACE because of how bad it runs. You will hate it.


----------



## Nizzen

HBizzle said:


> DO NOT GET THE ACE. It is terrible. Read the end of this thread: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...l-msi-meg-z390-ace-motherboard-thread-18.html
> 
> Multiple members of this forum have now replaced their ACE because of how bad it runs. You will hate it.


Same as gigabyte, it sux 

Gigabyte used so much money on vrm's, that there where no money left to make good bios 

The performace effency looks sub par...


----------



## Scoty

Any Gigabyte Z390 Designare User here?


----------



## R3van

Hello guys,

i`m quite new to z390 oc, my last experience is from z77 in 2012 Ivy Bridge.

I´m reading me through the thread for some hints and advice but to get started, do you have me a good starting point from where i can go at it? 
A basic setting with standard Frequencies and deactivated "auto" settings where its possible and useful, maybe the do`s and don`ts...:thumb:

My Hardware:
Gigabyte Aorus Master (F8e BIOS)
9900k
32GB G.Skill 3200MHz RAM
RTX2080
Corsair AX850 PSU

My goal is to find the sweetspot of my cpu with dynamic vcore and a LLC that goes easy on my cpu.


----------



## HBizzle

Nizzen said:


> Same as gigabyte, it sux
> 
> Gigabyte used so much money on vrm's, that there where no money left to make good bios
> 
> The performace effency looks sub par...


Having owned an ACE and a Master now I can tell you that this is absolutely not true and incorrect. Yes the bios of the Gigabyte isn't as user friendly, but my OC is actually cooler at the same voltage and more stable. 

I had the following problems with the ACE that I have not had with the Master:

1. Unable to run ram at correct freq
2. Delays in file transfer among drives
3. Poor sound quality
4. Numerous networking issues and hangups due to the Killer NIC
5. Stuttering and other performance issues while gaming
6. Poor RAM testing. It took longer to reach the same Memtest % with the ACE compared to the Master while at the same OC on the chip. 

The ACE's peripherals on the board are trash. Its management of PCH and PCIE lanes seems to be trash compared to the Master so far. Cannot recommend enough how people should not purchase the ACE.


----------



## Solarity

HBizzle said:


> Having owned an ACE and a Master now I can tell you that this is absolutely not true and incorrect. Yes the bios of the Gigabyte isn't as user friendly, but my OC is actually cooler at the same voltage and more stable.
> 
> I had the following problems with the ACE that I have not had with the Master:
> 
> 1. Unable to run ram at correct freq
> 2. Delays in file transfer among drives
> 3. Poor sound quality
> 4. Numerous networking issues and hangups due to the Killer NIC
> 5. Stuttering and other performance issues while gaming
> 6. Poor RAM testing. It took longer to reach the same Memtest % with the ACE compared to the Master while at the same OC on the chip.
> 
> The ACE's peripherals on the board are trash. Its management of PCH and PCIE lanes seems to be trash compared to the Master so far. Cannot recommend enough how people should not purchase the ACE.


I don't know someone would come into a z390 Aorus thread and say that. Yes Gigabyte might not have the greatest layout, though it is perfectly capable. A UEFI can always be updated, your VRM is not going anywhere.


----------



## HBizzle

Solarity said:


> I don't know someone would come into a z390 Aorus thread and say that. Yes Gigabyte might not have the greatest layout, though it is perfectly capable. A UEFI can always be updated, your VRM is not going anywhere.


I am in this thread because I got rid of my MEG ACE and moved to an Aorus Master, as I stated above. This only came up because some guy in this thread said he wanted to get the MEG ACE and I would HIGHLY RECOMMEND NOT DOING THAT.


----------



## Nizzen

HBizzle said:


> Having owned an ACE and a Master now I can tell you that this is absolutely not true and incorrect. Yes the bios of the Gigabyte isn't as user friendly, but my OC is actually cooler at the same voltage and more stable.
> 
> I had the following problems with the ACE that I have not had with the Master:
> 
> 1. Unable to run ram at correct freq
> 2. Delays in file transfer among drives
> 3. Poor sound quality
> 4. Numerous networking issues and hangups due to the Killer NIC
> 5. Stuttering and other performance issues while gaming
> 6. Poor RAM testing. It took longer to reach the same Memtest % with the ACE compared to the Master while at the same OC on the chip.
> 
> The ACE's peripherals on the board are trash. Its management of PCH and PCIE lanes seems to be trash compared to the Master so far. Cannot recommend enough how people should not purchase the ACE.



So, show us some good results with master then 

4000+ mhz memory?


----------



## R3van

A question about LLC:

When i try with fixedVoltage and LLC at Turbo i get -50mv from idle to load in prime95
When i try dynamic voltage with +0.030 offset and LLC Turbo i get 1.246v on idle and 1.305v on load, both shown by VR Vout.

What is going on here?


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> A question about LLC:
> 
> When i try with fixedVoltage and LLC at Turbo i get -50mv from idle to load in prime95
> When i try dynamic voltage with +0.030 offset and LLC Turbo i get 1.246v on idle and 1.305v on load, both shown by VR Vout.
> 
> What is going on here?


Dynamic (offset mode) uses CPU VID (this VID is based on the CPU cache ratio speed, up to 4700 mhz, not the core speed) and AC loadline to arrive at the actual core voltages, then once the core voltage is calculated, whatever you set for Loadline Calibration (LLC) affects that afterwards. The CPU VID may rise at load compared to idle, and I'm sure what effect the DC loadline value has on the core voltage (DC loadline makes the VID drop by the same factor in mOhms as Loadline calibration being set to low or "Normal" value with respect to cpu vcore; I have NOT been able to test how much DC loadline affects the core voltage but AC loadline (higher values) greatly affects the core voltage; default is 1.60 mOhms or a bios value of 160, do NOT exceed that value!!!!). Because you are applying Loadline calibration=Turbo on top of the IA AC and IA DC loadlines, you are going to get voltage rising at load now.

Fixed mode causes the CPU vcore to completely ignore the CPU VID setting, and only function on how much loadline calibration you have set (higher LLC=less vdroop).

Try your first step and set LLC to normal and see if you are stable. You may need a slightly higher offset however, but see if VR VOUT is lower in the end, than your "Fixed voltage+LLC Turbo" setting.


----------



## R3van

My cpu ccache rationis still at 4300 MHz. Should i rise it to stabilize things?

Regarding to your advice, did that already and in fact it works. Still have to find the right offset though


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> My cpu ccache rationis still at 4300 MHz. Should i rise it to stabilize things?
> 
> Regarding to your advice, did that already and in fact it works. Still have to find the right offset though



CPU cache ratio directly affects the voltage when using Adaptive (Offset) / DVID modes, as CPU VID is based on ring, not core speed.
Using a cache ratio of x43 at 5000 mhz will require a significantly higher +DVID offset than using a cache ratio of x47 at 5000 mhz (although this opens a can of worms, as some people need higher core voltage at x47 cache than at x43 cache, when testing with manual voltages).

Trying a cache ratio of x36 at 5000 mhz with no DVID offset will probably not even POST in offset mode (CPU VID may be far too low, especially if you did the IA AC / IA DC loadline=1 tweak).


----------



## R3van

thanks, i try to increase cpu cache ratio and look how it goes...


----------



## Nammi

Finally reached a point that can be called stable, this is on bios F8g. Maybe 4133 is within reach after all. Is there anyone who's stable at 4133 or higher with just 2 sticks on master?


----------



## milan616

Reading the posts from @Falkentyne is giving me a way better understanding as to why I can't figure out undervolting+minor overclocking on this board and CPU. It makes me miss my Ivy Bridge where all I had to do was figure out a stable undervolt and then overclock with additional turbo voltage.


----------



## Vesimas

Moparman said:


> 9600k/Master/ tried SLI 780ti and SLI 980ti both do it.


Have you tried putting the bios switch to use only the primary bios?


----------



## Falkentyne

milan616 said:


> Reading the posts from @Falkentyne is giving me a way better understanding as to why I can't figure out undervolting+minor overclocking on this board and CPU. It makes me miss my Ivy Bridge where all I had to do was figure out a stable undervolt and then overclock with additional turbo voltage.


I feel you. You also can't go by CPU package power reporting either. You need the VRM output sensors. Did two tests because wingman99 was saying I was lying:

Test 1: IA AC Loadline=1, IA DC Loadline=1, 4.7 ghz core, x44 ring, VID 1.183v, Package power 198W, POUT (VRM) 181W, VR VOUT 1.131W, Amps 161.5W (IOUT).
(Notice that CPU package power is very close to 1.183 * 161.5?)

Test 2: IA AC Loadine=1, IA DC loadline=210, core x47, ring x36, VID 0.895v, CPU Package power 146W POUT (VRM) 178W, VR Vcore 1.133v, IOUT 158.750 amps.
(Notice that CPU package power is VERY VERY close to 158 * 0.895?)

IA DC loadline=210 causes the VID to drop by a factor of (2.1 mOhms at full load * amps of current) (actual drop is 2.1 * amps, e.g. 150 amps * 2.1 =315mv drop, or 100 amps * 2.1=210mv drop)
The final VID is based on this, CPU package power is then based on this final VID * Current.

Raising IA AC Loadline by values of mOhms causes the VID to be much higher at idle and load, with 1.6 mOhms (160) to 2.1 mOhms (210) the default value, but IA AC loadline directly affects the power supply, but causes voltage RISE rather than droop. When using adaptive / normal voltages, this directly influences how much the CPU active VID and Vcore is boosted above the "base" VID, then vcore is latched onto that VID, then IA DC loadline seems to be applied after vcore is set (Loadline calibration is then responsible for affecting CPU vcore droop).


----------



## milan616

Does the VID change as much when the ring speed is 43x and DC loadline is 210 as in test 2? Just trying to reconcile some comments about each ones connection to VID.


----------



## Falkentyne

milan616 said:


> Does the VID change as much when the ring speed is 43x and DC loadline is 210 as in test 2? Just trying to reconcile some comments about each ones connection to VID.


Not as much. I think i did a test with DC loadline=210 at x43 ring ratio once somewhere back. The VID was something like 0.985v to 1.055v. That's all I can remember.
You can download Throttlestop 8.70 and change the CPU global multiplier in it. You can go all the way down to x36 (going lower requires that you use speed shift, enable SST (green in the window) and then set the min and max speedshift value (in the throttlestop TPL window) to the same value, like 35/35 or 34/34 or 33/33,etc), and watch how the VID changes live. Make sure you already have the ring ratio set to be 3 below core (i think RING down Bin=enabled or something).

The reason I did both DC loadline=210 and ring=x36 was to prove that the CPU package power is based purely on amps * VID voltage, which is why you need to use the VR readout (if available on your motherboard) for amps * VR VOUT (Power(POUT)). Even though Asus boards recalibrated their SIO voltage sensor to match VR VOUT, so now all you need is amps * vcore, you still need the VRM wattage output. CPU Package power is still going to be taking the VID into account unless you can look for "Power output (VRM)."


----------



## HBizzle

Odd thing has started to occur on my Master. Shut my rig down and my Corsair K95 keyboard will suddenly have its RGB lights come on. Only thing that stops it is shutting down PSU or unplugging. I haven't installed corsairs icue software yet, so that might fix it, but anyone else experienced this and found a solution? Wondering if I have a grounding issue somewhere?


----------



## Sheyster

HBizzle said:


> Odd thing has started to occur on my Master. Shut my rig down and my Corsair K95 keyboard will suddenly have its RGB lights come on. Only thing that stops it is shutting down PSU or unplugging. I haven't installed corsairs icue software yet, so that might fix it, but anyone else experienced this and found a solution? Wondering if I have a grounding issue somewhere?


I have a K95 Platinum as well. Try to update the firmware and see if the issue persists. I only had the software installed while configuring the keyboard. Since it has built-in memory and profiles, I uninstalled the software once I had the keyboard firmware updated and configured the way I wanted it. It's really a great keyboard and not a bad deal if you buy it on sale.  It's pricey otherwise.


----------



## HBizzle

Sheyster said:


> I have a K95 Platinum as well. Try to update the firmware and see if the issue persists. I only had the software installed while configuring the keyboard. Since it has built-in memory and profiles, I uninstalled the software once I had the keyboard firmware updated and configured the way I wanted it. It's really a great keyboard and not a bad deal if you buy it on sale.  It's pricey otherwise.


Have the same keyboard so will give this a try tonight. Thanks.


----------



## R3van

Does VCCSA and VCCIO have imapct on VCore?

when i lower sa and io to lets say 1.12 i have 1.264v vcore under load.
when i set sa and io to 1.20 i get 1.225v vcore under load

All this with dynamic voltage, offset + 0.060, 5ghz allcore, readout of VR VOUT

Another observation:

A prime run with small ffts starts with 1.225v vcore and rises to 1.293 over around 30 mins, temps are rising too.

I still not understand my board...


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> Does VCCSA and VCCIO have imapct on VCore?
> 
> when i lower sa and io to lets say 1.12 i have 1.264v vcore under load.
> when i set sa and io to 1.20 i get 1.225v vcore under load
> 
> All this with dynamic voltage, offset + 0.060, 5ghz allcore, readout of VR VOUT
> 
> Another observation:
> 
> A prime run with small ffts starts with 1.225v vcore and rises to 1.293 over around 30 mins, temps are rising too.
> 
> I still not understand my board...


Use fixed voltage and do the same test. I pretty much guarantee your VR VOUT will not change this time. Report back please.


----------



## R3van

Thats right, with fixed voltage vcore didn`t changed


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> Thats right, with fixed voltage vcore didn`t changed


Most likely the CPU VID or the IA AC loadline setting is being affected by the VCCSA/VCCIO voltages. Why, I don't know at all. Since fixed vcore completely ignores the CPU VID, that's why load voltages didn't change that way.
Try checking the CPU VID now with the fixed voltage setting, with the old vccsa and vccio (check it at full load and at idle, for completeness), and also the new vccsa and vccio.


----------



## Smokediggity

HBizzle said:


> Odd thing has started to occur on my Master. Shut my rig down and my Corsair K95 keyboard will suddenly have its RGB lights come on. Only thing that stops it is shutting down PSU or unplugging. I haven't installed corsairs icue software yet, so that might fix it, but anyone else experienced this and found a solution? Wondering if I have a grounding issue somewhere?



Some other users reported a similar issue here https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabyte/comments/ale9uy/z390_master_wont_shut_down_connected_usb_devices/. Their solution was to enable the ErP setting in the BIOS. Alternatively, you could try turning off the Fast Startup option in Windows' power settings to see if that makes a difference.


----------



## shaolin95

Smokediggity said:


> Some other users reported a similar issue here https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabyte/comments/ale9uy/z390_master_wont_shut_down_connected_usb_devices/. Their solution was to enable the ErP setting in the BIOS. Alternatively, you could try turning off the Fast Startup option in Windows' power settings to see if that makes a difference.


Good to know as it happened, only really once, with my Rocat Aimo 120


----------



## MacG32

I'm using the F8g beta BIOS and I have a problem. I'm using XMP. When I shut down and power back on, everything's fine. When I restart, I get a memory related BSoD. When I manually enter memory settings and restart, my RAM downclocks to 2800, even though I have it set to 3200. Should I try an older BIOS or wait for a new one? Is anyone else having memory clock problems?


----------



## Falkentyne

MacG32 said:


> I'm using the F8g beta BIOS and I have a problem. I'm using XMP. When I shut down and power back on, everything's fine. When I restart, I get a memory related BSoD. When I manually enter memory settings and restart, my RAM downclocks to 2800, even though I have it set to 3200. Should I try an older BIOS or wait for a new one? Is anyone else having memory clock problems?


I've never seen this happen. Are you using any of the custom memory "presets"?
And what timings? Possible to screenshot or camera capture your primary memory and subtiming sections? What RAM are you using? Base RAM timings/speeds?


----------



## MacG32

Falkentyne said:


> I've never seen this happen. Are you using any of the custom memory "presets"?
> And what timings? Possible to screenshot or camera capture your primary memory and subtiming sections? What RAM are you using? Base RAM timings/speeds?



No presets. When I type them in manually, I use the same values XMP uses. CL 14, RCD 14, RP 14, RAS 34, 3200 MHz, 1.35V, CMD 2T, RC 48, RFC 560, RRDL 8, RRDS 6, and FAW 39. Everything else is on Auto. The RAM is in my signature and is listed on the QVL. They've worked just fine in other motherboards without a problem using XMP ~ ASUS Crosshair VII Hero WiFi, ASRock Taichi Ultimate, & MSI MEG ACE. G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3200C14Q-32GFX SS 14-14-14-34 1.35v 1, 2, & 4. Base timings are CL16 2400MHz. I can add a screenshot to this post if really needed. I can't restart right now.


----------



## Falkentyne

MacG32 said:


> No presets. When I type them in manually, I use the same values XMP uses. CL 14, RCD 14, RP 14, RAS 34, 3200 MHz, 1.35V, CMD 2T, RC 48, RFC 560, RRDL 8, RRDS 6, and FAW 39. Everything else is on Auto. The RAM is in my signature and is listed on the QVL. They've worked just fine in other motherboards without a problem using XMP ~ ASUS Crosshair VII Hero WiFi, ASRock Taichi Ultimate, & MSI MEG ACE. G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3200C14Q-32GFX SS 14-14-14-34 1.35v 1, 2, & 4. Base timings are CL16 2400MHz. I can add a screenshot to this post if really needed. I can't restart right now.


Did you try the memory training mode settings?
I can't really help you because I know absolutely nothing about memory. All I know of is tRFC tRFC tRFC and command rate


----------



## R3van

Did a Prime run yesterday, doesn`t look so bad so far:

@Falkentyne: I will check VID at the weekend


----------



## SoaringStar

Dear Guys,
i´m new in the Gigabyte world with an Aorus Master. I made the following setup:

*Intel 8700K from Batch L83 on Z390 Aorus Master*


The following setup came up with these beautiful voltages:

Idle Voltage: ca. *0,830V*
Max. Non-AVX Voltage: *1,280V*
Max. AVX Voltage: *1,332V* (fits perfectly to my pretested stable fixed vcore)

IA AC Load Line = 1
IA DC Load Line = 1 
CPU Vcore = Normal
Dynamic Vcore = +0.080V
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Turbo

*Do you guys see a problem here? *I´m a little concerned about possible abnormal rising VID voltages due these settings here...Or are these setting OK in the big picture?


The follwing settings are a try to get a good balance between lower idle power consumption and overclocking:

Enhanced Multi-Core Performance = Disabled
CPU Clock Ratio = 50
AVX Offset = 0 
Uncore Ratio = Auto 
*
All* 4 C-State Options from C3 till C10 = Disabled
CPU Enhanced Halt (C1e) = Enabled
Package C-State Limit = Auto

Core Current Limit = 255
Intel Speed Shift Technology = Enabled
CPU EIST Function = Enabled
Energy Efficient Turbo = Disabled
Ring To Core offset (Down bin) = Disabled
Race To halt = Disabled
Voltage optimization = Disabled


----------



## MacG32

Falkentyne said:


> Did you try the memory training mode settings?
> I can't really help you because I know absolutely nothing about memory. All I know of is tRFC tRFC tRFC and command rate



I downgraded to BIOS F7 and all is good now. I can use the XMP Profile and restart without BSoDs. Whatever was changed in the F8 betas messed up the compatibility with my RAM. I was very worried that I got a bad motherboard or worse, that my processor was bad. I'm glad I got it straight with using the latest release quality BIOS. I have no need for "Support 32GB UDIMM" in the latest beta BIOS. I hope Gigabyte gets it all worked out for their next release quality BIOS update. :thumb:


----------



## Falkentyne

MacG32 said:


> I downgraded to BIOS F7 and all is good now. I can use the XMP Profile and restart without BSoDs. Whatever was changed in the F8 betas messed up the compatibility with my RAM. I was very worried that I got a bad motherboard or worse, that my processor was bad. I'm glad I got it straight with using the latest release quality BIOS. I have no need for "Support 32GB UDIMM" in the latest beta BIOS. I hope Gigabyte gets it all worked out for their next release quality BIOS update. :thumb:


The gskill page says:
"Compatible with AMD Threadripper only. AM4 not supported."
And no Intel boards are listed at all. Only AMD.

So if it actually worked on some Intel chipsets or boards, that's just pure luck or good fortune that it did. It's not officially supported.


----------



## MacG32

Falkentyne said:


> The gskill page says:
> "Compatible with AMD Threadripper only. AM4 not supported."
> And no Intel boards are listed at all. Only AMD.
> 
> So if it actually worked on some Intel chipsets or boards, that's just pure luck or good fortune that it did. It's not officially supported.



There are many that are the same with 3200MHz sticks at CL14. FlareX is just a gimmick to sell for AMD boards. My memory is listed on Gigabyte's Official QVL for memory on this motherboard. These are all the same sticks of RAM with different heatsinks. G.Skill's page isn't updated with the latest and greatest information. They've moved on from FlareX. It would make sense to support FlareX as an Intel motherboard manufacturer so if any AMD folks decide to go Intel, they don't need to repurchase RAM again. It just makes sense. Gigabyte obviously knew this already with their support for this RAM.


----------



## SoaringStar

I´m glad you talked about strange behaviour of F8e. I had strange micro stuttering in many games and tried everything. I thought it was a poor oc or something else and never spent a single thought about the current beta bios.....at the end F7 fixed it for me.


----------



## hyder711

porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.


First of all thanks for your guide. Now my problem is when i ran prime95 29.5 small FFT AVX (FMA3 disabled) within 15~16 mins i got an error on one core (FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.4992218018, expected less than 0.4). Also my vcore drops to 1.089 (HWinfo ITE IT8792E). My Temp stays below 80 c. So what can I do now? (i am strictly using the same settings as above and i lost my patience reading after 56 pages so if there is a solution mentioned in later posts kindly point me to it. )

My system is a 8600k on z390 aorus master. I am on bios F7. Trying to get 4.5GHz (100x45)

Thanks again and sorry for my english.


----------



## Falkentyne

MacG32 said:


> There are many that are the same with 3200MHz sticks at CL14. FlareX is just a gimmick to sell for AMD boards. My memory is listed on Gigabyte's Official QVL for memory on this motherboard. These are all the same sticks of RAM with different heatsinks. G.Skill's page isn't updated with the latest and greatest information. They've moved on from FlareX. It would make sense to support FlareX as an Intel motherboard manufacturer so if any AMD folks decide to go Intel, they don't need to repurchase RAM again. It just makes sense. Gigabyte obviously knew this already with their support for this RAM.


Do you have fast startup enabled or disabled in windows?
you said your RAM works perfectly if you cold boot but fails if you reboot? I"m guessing you have the code 66 error?



> "The board, when cold, will retrain the memory on boot. It will go from tightest -> relaxed until something sticks. If the tightest timing works then you should see A0 (boot successful). If it fails even once it will show 66 (atleast one failed boot) . On a soft reboot it already has the timings trained, thus it clears the code and shows A0. The only way to fix this would be to boot successfully on tightest timings. We could fix this by creating a less aggressive profile, however those who are booting with the most aggressive profile would lose performance. That being said I'll check with our BIOS guys but I believe its working as intended."


----------



## MacG32

Falkentyne said:


> Do you have fast startup enabled or disabled in windows?
> you said your RAM works perfectly if you cold boot but fails if you reboot? I"m guessing you have the code 66 error?



Everything's fine now. I'm using BIOS F7. Recently posted F8~ betas were the problem.

I haven't got far enough to even try fast boot and I didn't note the error code. I knew from the blue screens that it was memory related.

With the F8~ betas, my PC would blue screen right when Windows should have loaded.

All is normal now with using XMP and rebooting. No problems anymore using the F7 BIOS.

I'm really looking forward to a release version of the F8 BIOS, once all of the bugs are worked out.

Thank you for trying to offer help. It's much appreciated. :thumb:


----------



## HBizzle

Smokediggity said:


> Some other users reported a similar issue here https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabyte/comments/ale9uy/z390_master_wont_shut_down_connected_usb_devices/. Their solution was to enable the ErP setting in the BIOS. Alternatively, you could try turning off the Fast Startup option in Windows' power settings to see if that makes a difference.


Thank you for linking this.


----------



## R3van

Falkentyne said:


> Most likely the CPU VID or the IA AC loadline setting is being affected by the VCCSA/VCCIO voltages. Why, I don't know at all. Since fixed vcore completely ignores the CPU VID, that's why load voltages didn't change that way.
> Try checking the CPU VID now with the fixed voltage setting, with the old vccsa and vccio (check it at full load and at idle, for completeness), and also the new vccsa and vccio.


Did that test today but i cannot confirm here.

With fixed voltage the VID is mostly the same, regardless which VCCIO or VCCSA i set. Around 0.69 idle and 1.18 - 1.23 load.


----------



## Timur Born

Seems that my active (2nd) BIOS just got corrupted during OC stress testing? Clear CMOS does not help and the Aorus Master again switched to the other BIOS automatically despite being set to manual switching (F5 BIOS as main BIOS, F8 as 2nd). I will try to reflash the corrupt BIOS now. Of course the Gigabyte server for the @BIOS utility still claims F5 to be the most current.


----------



## Timur Born

No chance. Flashing only affects the main bios and Clear CMOS only leads to a never-ending cold-boot loop until I switch off the PSU. Afterwards it ends in POST code 7F, which tells me nothing. So I am down to one working BIOS chip now.


----------



## MacG32

Timur Born said:


> No chance. Flashing only affects the main bios and Clear CMOS only leads to a never-ending cold-boot loop until I switch off the PSU. Afterwards it ends in POST code 7F, which tells me nothing. So I am down to one working BIOS chip now.



Switch the dual boot to single boot. Boot in to the BIOS from the good BIOS. Switch to the corrupt bios. Reflash and reboot in to the new BIOS. Switch back to dual boot and the first BIOS. Reboot and carry on. Problem solved.

Note: Don't use @ BIOS. Flash while in the BIOS.


----------



## Timur Born

MacG32 said:


> Switch the dual boot to single boot. Boot in to the BIOS from the good BIOS. Switch to the corrupt bios. Reflash and reboot in to the new BIOS. Switch back to dual boot and the first BIOS. Reboot and carry on. Problem solved.
> 
> Note: Don't use @ BIOS. Flash while in the BIOS.


I already tried that. It flashed the main BIOS, disregarding the switch position.


----------



## R3van

Your sure that you choose the correct switch? I had to do that too and it worked for me


----------



## Falkentyne

If it's booting on the main bios, then the switch flashing isn't going to work properly if it's an old bios like F5. It was still bugged there.
It was fixed on F8+.


----------



## Timur Born

Like I wrote before, my main BIOS already got upgraded to F8e, albeit unintentionally. Same result, backup fails to POST with code 7F even after trying to reflash the backup BIOS. So still down to only one BIOS chip.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Like I wrote before, my main BIOS already got upgraded to F8e, albeit unintentionally. Same result, backup fails to POST with code 7F even after trying to reflash the backup BIOS. So still down to only one BIOS chip.


Backup can be force flashed with a SPI programmer and Pomona 5250 clip. You will need male to female jumper cables to connect the Pomona clip to the flasher. Skypro is updated most often and is highly recommended.(I believe skypro, II and III all get the same supported updates)


----------



## encrypted11

KedarWolf said:


> On a 9900k you're lucky if you get 4133MHZ, and with the Master you want to buy a four DIMM kit, not a two stick kit. Master and Xtreme use T-Topology and it works better with four sticks of RAM.
> 
> On my Extreme it'll boot and be stable with four sticks and 4133MHZ. With two sticks in the first and third slots with the same RAM speed and timings, PC won't even boot.
> 
> The best four stick kit though seems to be the Trident Z 3600 CL16 4x8GB kit. On 8700k's people getting 4400MHZ out of them on a really good IMC and should hit 4133MHZ pretty easy on a decent IMC on a 9900k.
> 
> 9900k IMC's aren't as good as 8700k's.


Based on MSI's Toppc, the 9th gen IMC is weaker than 8th gen on average. He explained how the 4600++ kits were validated/sorted exclusively at "module houses" with 8700K IMCs (what most board vendors in Taiwan refer to when addresssing the likes of Kingston, Gskill, geil, corsair, teamgroup, adata etc).

Unfortunately, there are no captions in English .







MacG32 said:


> There are many that are the same with 3200MHz sticks at CL14. FlareX is just a gimmick to sell for AMD boards. My memory is listed on Gigabyte's Official QVL for memory on this motherboard. These are all the same sticks of RAM with different heatsinks. G.Skill's page isn't updated with the latest and greatest information. They've moved on from FlareX. It would make sense to support FlareX as an Intel motherboard manufacturer so if any AMD folks decide to go Intel, they don't need to repurchase RAM again. It just makes sense. Gigabyte obviously knew this already with their support for this RAM.


The flareX is priced higher than a standard 3200 C14 XMP bin from G.SKILL. MSI's Toppc mentioned the IC quality required to achieve a stable frequency vary between platforms. (e.g. a 3600 b-die on Intel XMP would be 3466 C14 on Ryzen)

The FlareX 3466 C14 is derived from the 3600 intel xmp bin from G.SKILL, its also reflected in the price point and nothing about scalping.

With the release of each platform, module houses would perform adjustments with the guardband required per MHz bin on an as-needed basis in their current production batches.


----------



## MacG32

encrypted11 said:


> The flareX is priced higher than a standard 3200 C14 XMP bin from G.SKILL. MSI's Toppc mentioned the IC quality required to achieve a stable frequency vary between platforms. (e.g. a 3600 b-die on Intel XMP would be 3466 C14 on Ryzen)
> 
> The FlareX 3466 C14 is derived from the 3600 intel xmp bin from G.SKILL, its also reflected in the price point and nothing about scalping.
> 
> With the release of each platform, module houses would perform adjustments with the guardband required per MHz bin on an as-needed basis in their current production batches.



Thanks for the class, but it was unneeded. I'm not questioning Toppc's knowledge.

Based on the exact performance, clocking, and timings, there is no "scalping" going on. Each of the item's I linked are identical in specifications except for the heat spreaders. Some may or may not "overclock" higher, but the base performance, clocking, and timings are identical.

The main difference between AMD and Intel when it comes to their IMCs is that AMD will hold a command rate of 1T where Intel can only maintain 2T. The Samsung B-Dies linked in my previous post have all been well documented in AMD Motherboard threads to overclocking almost identically and maintaining better performance than in Intel Motherboards due to tighter timings and higher overclocked frequencies.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Backup can be force flashed with a SPI programmer and Pomona 5250 clip. You will need male to female jumper cables to connect the Pomona clip to the flasher. Skypro is updated most often and is highly recommended.(I believe skypro, II and III all get the same supported updates)


Thanks, but no. That's too much hassle for an error that should not happen with a properly working product. Why would the BIOS get corrupted during a Windows based Prime95 stress test?

The whole Dual BIOS experience has not been pleasant compared to what I am used to with the Asus Crosshair VI, especially where OC errors are concerned. This is a case for a RMA, the backup BIOS goes straight to code 7F when the PC is turned on.


----------



## KedarWolf

If anyone has spontaneous reboots on idle enabling Power Loading fixed it for me.


----------



## porksmuggler

hyder711 said:


> First of all thanks for your guide. Now my problem is when i ran prime95 29.5 small FFT AVX (FMA3 disabled) within 15~16 mins i got an error on one core (FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.4992218018, expected less than 0.4). Also my vcore drops to 1.089 (HWinfo ITE IT8792E). My Temp stays below 80 c. So what can I do now? (i am strictly using the same settings as above and i lost my patience reading after 56 pages so if there is a solution mentioned in later posts kindly point me to it. )
> 
> My system is a 8600k on z390 aorus master. I am on bios F7. Trying to get 4.5GHz (100x45)
> 
> Thanks again and sorry for my english.


No worries with your english, all is understood. If errors in prime95, increase the Dynamic Vcore (DVID). -0.110 V is the threshold I achieved 5.0 GHz for a known good quality CPU sample, before having idle freeze.

These settings are still current recommendations, though I do have further solution for idle freezes that I am not posting in this thread due to extensive misinformation provided here, but I'm happy to provide via PM.

Note, your 8600K is down binned obviously from ideal wafer for the series, but you should not have issues achieving 4.5 GHz, in my opinion easily. Note also, I recommend BIOS F6, as there are numerous issues with the updates to the later BIOS revisions, that I do not wish to discuss in this thread either.


----------



## KedarWolf

This is a 9900k with my Z390 Aorus Master.

5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory 17-17-17-40 2T, -.055 Offset IA AC Loadline 0, IA DC Loadline 0, Prime95 and RamTest Stable.

I get about 72C 1344 FFT's in Prime95.


----------



## Timur Born

Is the memory overclock worth the effort? I am using 3500-C14-2T with tight timings, anything higher clocked doesn't really like to be stable. At that "low" 3500 MT I get >54 gb/s read, >53 gb/s write, >50 gb/s copy (close to 51) and <39 ns latency. All that at low VCCIO and VCCSA voltages.

My CPU doesn't like x51 on all cores with my AIO cooling, but 7 cores at x51 seem to work with a -1 AVX offset at sane voltages.

The combination of "Performance" + "Low" loadlines works well, but currently I am trying "Performance" + "Standard" instead so that I can use a lower negative VCore offset for better idle/low load stability in combination with at least C1E (+currently C3 for x51 on 7 cores) and Speedshift.


----------



## GaryLiao

Has anyone tried out the F8g beta for the Aorus Master? I can't find any info online about it besides the fact that it exists and is a build that's about two weeks newer than the currently released F8e.


----------



## Falkentyne

GaryLiao said:


> Has anyone tried out the F8g beta for the Aorus Master? I can't find any info online about it besides the fact that it exists and is a build that's about two weeks newer than the currently released F8e.


Been using it for 2 weeks. No problems to report with it.


----------



## Padinn

Did it fix the offset issue where switching back to normal caused problems?


----------



## Smokediggity

Padinn said:


> Did it fix the offset issue where switching back to normal caused problems?


No. Gigabyte support told me that they were still investigating the issue. That was about 10 days ago.


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> No. Gigabyte support told me that they were still investigating the issue. That was about 10 days ago.


The problem is in the base code from AMI, and I don't know if if the ODM's can simply write new code to avoid it. It's not directly Gigabyte's fault, although I'm sure Asus found a way to avoid this.
If you unlock "Overclocking Performance Menu" (either on desktops or laptops) and gain "Pure" access to static and offset voltage modes, you can see that you can enter an "offset" voltage in both adaptive and override (static) voltage modes, and if you change from adaptive to override, the offset you previously entered is still there. It isn't set to "0" when you change from adaptive to override mode. Except in override mode, the "additional turbo voltage" option vanishes. I assume Asus automatically sets this to 0 in their UEFI (of course you can't exactly access "overclocking performance menu" on desktops unless you do some serious bios hacking).


----------



## Yomny

Has anyone encountered any issues running RAM not listed in the supported list for the specific mobo? I did a while back with a G1 gaming, the PC randomly shutoff. I currently want to swap out my mobo for something a little better as im having issues with power delivery for OCing but I'm afraid to run into the same problems since my current ram inst listed as the supported sticks for the aorus master.

Thanks for your input.


----------



## Jody Hodgson

Memory Choice help Needed:

I am looking at some GSkill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR or some Gskill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR they do not appear in the QVL for this board however the memory maker states compatibility.

Should I be looking at these or something else? Amnyone any experience with them and what sort of results can I expect?

I am pairing with a I9-9900k an want to O'clock CPU and Mem..

All advice appreciated

Cheers


----------



## MacG32

Yomny said:


> Has anyone encountered any issues running RAM not listed in the supported list for the specific mobo? I did a while back with a G1 gaming, the PC randomly shutoff. I currently want to swap out my mobo for something a little better as im having issues with power delivery for OCing but I'm afraid to run into the same problems since my current ram inst listed as the supported sticks for the aorus master.
> 
> Thanks for your input.



G.SKILL 4GB 1Rx8 F4-3000C15Q-16GVR SS 15-15-15-35 1.35v v v v v 2133
G.SKILL 8GB 2Rx8 F4-3000C15Q-32GRK DS 15-15-15-35 1.35v v v v v 2133
G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3000C15Q2-64GVR SS 15-15-15-35 1.35v v v v v 2133
G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3000C16D-16GTZR SS 16-18-18-38 1.35v v v v v 2133
G.SKILL 16GB 2Rx8 F4-3000C14Q2-128GVKD DS 14-14-14-34 1.35v v v v v 2133

All the different CAS Latencies are listed, so I'm sure your RAM will work just fine.



Jody Hodgson said:


> Memory Choice help Needed:
> 
> I am looking at some GSkill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR or some Gskill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR they do not appear in the QVL for this board however the memory maker states compatibility.
> 
> Should I be looking at these or something else? Amnyone any experience with them and what sort of results can I expect?
> 
> I am pairing with a I9-9900k an want to O'clock CPU and Mem..
> 
> All advice appreciated
> 
> Cheers



If the same CAS Latency is listed in the QVL but a different model then you can be sure the RAM will be compatible. I would go with the Gskill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR.


----------



## Jody Hodgson

Thanks Mag32 that's what i was kinda hoping now to try and find some LOL

On a different note how would I control 9 RGB fans (thinking of the Vardar RGB 120mm) I believe these to be none addressable and I assume just link them up? I see there is various options on the board for addressable RGB etc.

I think the Vardars are none addressable and I am unaware of the need for a hub (but I could be wrong) 

My other option is to go with the Thermaltake TRIO RGB and their Hub pro so that I can control the whole shooting match via the Auros software and all synced.

am thinking option A is better as the fans have a much higher static pressure just not sure how it all works.


Really sorry for the mega noob question...


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> This is a 9900k with my Z390 Aorus Master.
> 
> 5.1GHZ CPU, 4.7GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory 17-17-17-40 2T, -.055 Offset IA AC Loadline 0, IA DC Loadline 0, Prime95 and RamTest Stable.
> 
> I get about 72C 1344 FFT's in Prime95.


Thank you for this, I copied your settings (from the images) and my system is now stable at 5.1 Ghz too so far ... I had to give a slight voltage boost, but temps are managable.
(settings apart from memory, as I only have it running at 3600).

Still gonna put it through some more testing to see if all is stable but it is looking good. Way more stable that i was at 5.1 with different settings.


----------



## Yomny

MacG32 said:


> G.SKILL 4GB 1Rx8 F4-3000C15Q-16GVR SS 15-15-15-35 1.35v v v v v 2133
> G.SKILL 8GB 2Rx8 F4-3000C15Q-32GRK DS 15-15-15-35 1.35v v v v v 2133
> G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3000C15Q2-64GVR SS 15-15-15-35 1.35v v v v v 2133
> G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3000C16D-16GTZR SS 16-18-18-38 1.35v v v v v 2133
> G.SKILL 16GB 2Rx8 F4-3000C14Q2-128GVKD DS 14-14-14-34 1.35v v v v v 2133
> 
> All the different CAS Latencies are listed, so I'm sure your RAM will work just fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the same CAS Latency is listed in the QVL but a different model then you can be sure the RAM will be compatible. I would go with the Gskill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR.


Truly appreciate your time. I've got model F4-3000C15D-16GTZ which is 15-15-15-35 CAS latency 15 so should be good, glad to hear.


----------



## DavieWeegie

Does this look fine for a 24/7 overclock, I've enabled speestep and EIST so that it downclocks at idle, I'm wanting the cpu to last me for a couple of years so dont want to be causing any major degredation.


It just wont seem to do 5ghz without a stupid increase in vcore upto and over 1.400v so I'm happy to leave it like this if it seems fine, temps never above 70 degrees in any stress tests for hours.


----------



## HBizzle

Jody Hodgson said:


> Memory Choice help Needed:
> 
> I am looking at some GSkill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR or some Gskill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR they do not appear in the QVL for this board however the memory maker states compatibility.
> 
> Should I be looking at these or something else? Amnyone any experience with them and what sort of results can I expect?
> 
> I am pairing with a I9-9900k an want to O'clock CPU and Mem..
> 
> All advice appreciated
> 
> Cheers


Check GSkill's QVL for the board. My 32gb 4000 17-17-17-37 kit was not listed on the Master's list, but was on GSkill's and is running like a champ.


----------



## Sheyster

Intrud3r said:


> Thank you for this, I copied your settings (from the images) and my system is now stable at 5.1 Ghz too so far ... I had to give a slight voltage boost, but temps are managable.



If you're not benching why not just lower voltage and run at 5 GHz x 8? 100 MHz more is meaningless for performance in games and most applications.


----------



## Sheyster

HBizzle said:


> Check GSkill's QVL for the board. My 32gb 4000 17-17-17-37 kit was not listed on the Master's list, but was on GSkill's and is running like a champ.


What board model do you guys have? The Pro is definitely ultra picky when it comes to memory over 3600 speeds. Only a handful of kits are on the QVL list, unlike the others. As far as I know the Master and Xtreme are quite a bit better in that regard.

EDIT - Looks like Bizzle has the Master, not sure about Jody.


----------



## Intrud3r

Sheyster said:


> If you're not benching why not just lower voltage and run at 5 GHz x 8? 100 MHz more is meaningless for performance in games and most applications.


Very true, for the work I do with my computer I will not notice that last 100Mhz at all ... But it's not about that, it's about wanting to get the most out of it ... if it runs 5.1 why would i run it at 5.0 ? longlevity ? I won't be pushing this CPU to 100% that often so it won't make that much of a difference ...

Most of it's lifetime it'll be doing this -->


----------



## HBizzle

Sheyster said:


> What board model do you guys have? The Pro is definitely ultra picky when it comes to memory over 3600 speeds. Only a handful of kits are on the QVL list, unlike the others. As far as I know the Master and Xtreme are quite a bit better in that regard.
> 
> EDIT - Looks like Bizzle has the Master, not sure about Jody.


 I have a Master.

Edit - And looking at GSkill's list I see what you mean: https://www.gskill.com/en/configurator?manu=54&chip=3471&model=3477


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> Very true, for the work I do with my computer I will not notice that last 100Mhz at all ... But it's not about that, it's about wanting to get the most out of it ... if it runs 5.1 why would i run it at 5.0 ? longlevity ? I won't be pushing this CPU to 100% that often so it won't make that much of a difference ...
> 
> Most of it's lifetime it'll be doing this -->


What interface is that for HWInfo?


----------



## scaramonga

Rainmeter I guess.


----------



## HBizzle

Does power button function change after the pc has been turned off a while when ERP is enabled? Anyone know?


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> What interface is that for HWInfo?


That's is rainmeter showing HWiNFO stuff ... made my own.


----------



## kati

Btw





Overclocking RAM with the Z390 Aorus Master // buildzoid blunders his way to 4533MHz on 32GB of DDR4

Quite interesting, love the explanation to cpu related bios settings


----------



## KedarWolf

kati said:


> Btw
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jsy04IRIwpI
> Overclocking RAM with the Z390 Aorus Master // buildzoid blunders his way to 4533MHz on 32GB of DDR4
> 
> Quite interesting, love the explanation to cpu related bios settings


Watched this video, 4400MHZ will boot but BSOD going into Windows but I'm getting 4266MHZ at 17-17-17-36 2T so far RamTest and HCI MemTest stable. 

Before the tweaks Bullzoid mentions I could only do 4133MHZ 17-17-17-40 2T. :h34r-smi

And MY CPU is still at 5.1GHZ, 4.7GHZ cache! :drool:

No amount of tweaking would get 4266 RamTest and HCI MemTest stable but I have 4133 at 17-16-16-39 2T which is very close to the bandwidth I get in AIDA64 cache and memory test at 4266 17-17-17-44 2T. :cheers:


----------



## bl4ckdot

Hi guys.
So I may get the Aorus Xtreme (if I can find one in France...) and I have a question about memory OC. I currently have these 4 sticks of B-Die : https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzkk

As you can see they have their XMP at 16 16 16 36 with 4 sticks. 

On the Aorus QLV their is only the f4-3600c16D (and not Q) that has been validated. They have the same timing but this is a 2 sticks kit.

Does that mean it should be "fine" (the IMC should be the deciding factor anyway) with 4 of them or it is really not the same ?

Also, is the Aorus Master has the same memory OC capabilities ? I fear not finding the Xtrem.

Thanks !


----------



## encrypted11

Based on Toppc's guideline, a 4 layer PCB (budget motherboard) validated XMP kit has larger guardbands than a 6 or an 8 layer validated XMP kit at the same frequency and timing. 
In other words, when placed on a 6-8 layer board (including 1DPCs like the Apex and ITXs) the signalling margin will be improved and it's very likely you're able to run a higher manual overclock.

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzkk
On a positive note based on G.SKILL's QVL, this kit has been validated on even 4 layer daisy chain and T-topology boards (pretty much the worst case in signalling margin). So in theory you shouldn't have trouble running these on an Aorus Extreme.

The Aorus Xtreme's a 8 layer T-topology board and the ideal memory layout (for larger memory OC margins) will be achieved with all 4 slots filled.


----------



## MacG32

bl4ckdot said:


> Hi guys.
> So I may get the Aorus Xtreme (if I can find one in France...) and I have a question about memory OC. I currently have these 4 sticks of B-Die : https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzkk
> 
> As you can see they have their XMP at 16 16 16 36 with 4 sticks.
> 
> On the Aorus QLV their is only the f4-3600c16D (and not Q) that has been validated. They have the same timing but this is a 2 sticks kit.
> 
> Does that mean it should be "fine" (the IMC should be the deciding factor anyway) with 4 of them or it is really not the same ?
> 
> Also, is the Aorus Master has the same memory OC capabilities ? I fear not finding the Xtrem.
> 
> Thanks !



G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3600C16D-16GVK SS 16-16-16-36 1.35v v v v v 2133 This is listed for the Xtreme and working by occupying all 4 slots, so you're good. On the Master, this is listed G.SKILL 8GB 1Rx8 F4-3600C16D-16GVK SS 16-16-16-36 1.35v v v v v 2133.

From what I've seen, the Xtreme and Master overclock fairly the same. Good luck on getting the board you want.


----------



## danakin

hello everyone.

im running Kedarwolfs setup mentioned in this post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27856662-post2457.html

im running it at 5ghz with a -0.100 offset pretty stable at 12/12 ffts (avx disabled - 87 max on one core after 15 mins) and stable at 1344 ffts with avx enabled (temps are arround 60ish)

but if i run small ftts with all avx settings enabled i got a stop worker load bug. is it just not possible to run 5ghz with that, or do i miss something ?

best regards,

pete

Edit: Vrout is at 1.318 in idle with a peak to 1.354 (in 12/12 small ffts arround stable at 1.270 volts)

Errror in prime:

FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.4997463005, expected less than 0.4
Hardware failure detected, consult stress.txt file.


----------



## KedarWolf

danakin said:


> hello everyone.
> 
> im running Kedarwolfs setup mentioned in this post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27856662-post2457.html
> 
> im running it at 5ghz with a -0.100 offset pretty stable at 12/12 ffts (avx disabled - 87 max on one core after 15 mins) and stable at 1344 ffts with avx enabled (temps are arround 60ish)
> 
> but if i run small ftts with all avx settings enabled i got a stop worker load bug. is it just not possible to run 5ghz with that, or do i miss something ?
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete
> 
> Edit: Vrout is at 1.318 in idle with a peak to 1.354 (in 12/12 small ffts arround stable at 1.270 volts)
> 
> Errror in prime:
> 
> 
> 
> FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.4997463005, expected less than 0.4
> Hardware failure detected, consult stress.txt file.


Probably CPU is getting too hot.


----------



## R3van

Hello,

i have a question regarding windows power plans.

With my Ivy Bridge i could run the highest windows power plan (don`t know how its called in english, sorry) with a minimum cpu of 5% and EIST and C1E worked properly in idle mode.

Now with Coffee Lake i have to set Balanced in Windows power settings to get the cpu to clock down in idle. Vcore is bouncing between 0.78v and 1.3v, according to my offset but the cpu frequency stand fixed at 5GHz.

Which setting in bios do i have to set to get this working?

Edit: When i deactivate C3 State in BIOS EIST works somehow, it clocks at least down to 800MHz and on load it goes up to 5 GHz but there is nothing in between.


----------



## Falkentyne

danakin said:


> hello everyone.
> 
> im running Kedarwolfs setup mentioned in this post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27856662-post2457.html
> 
> im running it at 5ghz with a -0.100 offset pretty stable at 12/12 ffts (avx disabled - 87 max on one core after 15 mins) and stable at 1344 ffts with avx enabled (temps are arround 60ish)
> 
> but if i run small ftts with all avx settings enabled i got a stop worker load bug. is it just not possible to run 5ghz with that, or do i miss something ?
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete
> 
> Edit: Vrout is at 1.318 in idle with a peak to 1.354 (in 12/12 small ffts arround stable at 1.270 volts)
> 
> Errror in prime:
> 
> FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.4997463005, expected less than 0.4
> Hardware failure detected, consult stress.txt file.



What was the VR VOUT with small FFT with AVX enabled (while prime was running before crashing)?
You said with avx disabled it's 1.270v (VR VOUT), right? But what about enabled? I mean, what was the VR VOUT When you crashed (NOT at idle!!)?
Was it higher or lower than the 1.270v?


----------



## Jidonsu

KedarWolf said:


> Watched this video, 4400MHZ will boot but BSOD going into Windows but I'm getting 4266MHZ at 17-17-17-36 2T so far RamTest and HCI MemTest stable.
> 
> Before the tweaks Bullzoid mentions I could only do 4133MHZ 17-17-17-40 2T. :h34r-smi
> 
> And MY CPU is still at 5.1GHZ, 4.7GHZ cache! :drool:
> 
> No amount of tweaking would get 4266 RamTest and HCI MemTest stable but I have 4133 at 17-16-16-39 2T which is very close to the bandwidth I get in AIDA64 cache and memory test at 4266 17-17-17-44 2T. :cheers:


I'm confused. Did 4266 work?

Was it the RTT stuff he mentioned that you tweaked?


----------



## jlp0209

I recall earlier in this thread / elsewhere that some people posted about audio issues with their boards. I'm on a Z390 Master. I always get static or crackling / popping on any source of music that I play, be it FLAC files stored locally or iTunes. I notice it less with online streaming but it does happen. Goes away 100% of the time after reboot. Also another odd issue, logging in with a guest account there is no sound whatsoever. A reboot also fixes this. 

I did a clean Windows 10 install when I installed this board, all drivers are up to date. Running F7 bios. Probably not related to the Code 66 I get every time I power on the PC (also resolved with a reboot, non-issue as people on here have said). 

I have my speakers plugged into the rear headphone / speaker / I/O panel on the board. Not using headphones. Connected using a 3.5 audio cable, my speakers don't have an optical connection option. Did not have this issue with my Z370 build. Anyone else experiencing this?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jidonsu said:


> I'm confused. Did 4266 work?
> 
> Was it the RTT stuff he mentioned that you tweaked?


No, 4266MHZ wasn't HCI Memtest and RamTest stable no matter the tweaks and voltages I used.

This is, however.


----------



## Jidonsu

KedarWolf said:


> No, 4266MHZ wasn't HCI Memtest and RamTest stable no matter the tweaks and voltages I used.
> 
> This is, however.


Thanks. I was pretty tempted to give it another shot, but it doesn't sound like it's worth the work. I'm at 4000mhz 16-16-16-36 with roughly the same memory benchmarks since my secondaries and tertiaries are tighter. Would love to crank out 4400, but it may not be doable with reasonable voltages on 4 sticks.


----------



## BradleyW

What is the best stress test package to test CPU (AVX), memory and cache stability?


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> What is the best stress test package to test CPU (AVX), memory and cache stability?


https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/prime95-download.html

For AVX I use latest beta Prime95 1344 both FFT's, Run In Place and a 15-minute interval. Temps will be low and still a decent AVX stress test.


----------



## danakin

Falkentyne said:


> danakin said:
> 
> 
> 
> hello everyone.
> 
> im running Kedarwolfs setup mentioned in this post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27856662-post2457.html
> 
> im running it at 5ghz with a -0.100 offset pretty stable at 12/12 ffts (avx disabled - 87 max on one core after 15 mins) and stable at 1344 ffts with avx enabled (temps are arround 60ish)
> 
> but if i run small ftts with all avx settings enabled i got a stop worker load bug. is it just not possible to run 5ghz with that, or do i miss something ?
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete
> 
> Edit: Vrout is at 1.318 in idle with a peak to 1.354 (in 12/12 small ffts arround stable at 1.270 volts)
> 
> Errror in prime:
> 
> FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.4997463005, expected less than 0.4
> Hardware failure detected, consult stress.txt file.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What was the VR VOUT with small FFT with AVX enabled (while prime was running before crashing)?
> You said with avx disabled it's 1.270v (VR VOUT), right? But what about enabled? I mean, what was the VR VOUT When you crashed (NOT at idle!!)?
> Was it higher or lower than the 1.270v?
Click to expand...


hello, i dont think its stable.

curently my settings are like kedars with the following changes:

4,9 ghz
4,7 ratio
-0.100 offset

ram (3200 cl 16 gskill trident)
3733 mhz
19 19 19 38 
1.450v
performance mode

no further changes

running a prime 1344 as fft at the moment. gonna let it run during work to see if its stable and gonna report back when i am at home.

already running 30 mins. working good so far.

also tried -120 offset, but that one crashed after 3 minutes bsod...

best regards,

pete

edit: vr out is at 1.32x during test.


----------



## hyder711

porksmuggler said:


> No worries with your english, all is understood. If errors in prime95, increase the Dynamic Vcore (DVID). -0.110 V is the threshold I achieved 5.0 GHz for a known good quality CPU sample, before having idle freeze.
> 
> These settings are still current recommendations, though I do have further solution for idle freezes that I am not posting in this thread due to extensive misinformation provided here, but I'm happy to provide via PM.
> 
> Note, your 8600K is down binned obviously from ideal wafer for the series, but you should not have issues achieving 4.5 GHz, in my opinion easily. Note also, I recommend BIOS F6, as there are numerous issues with the updates to the later BIOS revisions, that I do not wish to discuss in this thread either.


Sorry for late reply and thanks for your response. I made it to 4.5ghz with dvid set to -.015. (no avx offset). But i cannot get anymore above that even with +.015 dvid. Temp goes above 82 instantly and prime95 gives me same error (to be fair i am using a mediocre asetek 120mm aio so looks like i need to upgrade cooler if i want to go above 4.5 as i need much more vcore). Another thing-do I need F6 or keep using F7?

Now if possible can you explain how actually dvid offset and LLC works (also what is idle freeze-too low vcore during idle?) and is it possible to use dvid with manual input voltage (like using dvid with below or above 1.2v)?

I am new to oc so I do not have much understanding about how most oc settings works (I just follow guides and safety precautions).


----------



## Falkentyne

danakin said:


> hello, i dont think its stable.
> 
> curently my settings are like kedars with the following changes:
> 
> 4,9 ghz
> 4,7 ratio
> -0.100 offset
> 
> ram (3200 cl 16 gskill trident)
> 3733 mhz
> 19 19 19 38
> 1.450v
> performance mode
> 
> no further changes
> 
> running a prime 1344 as fft at the moment. gonna let it run during work to see if its stable and gonna report back when i am at home.
> 
> already running 30 mins. working good so far.
> 
> also tried -120 offset, but that one crashed after 3 minutes bsod...
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete
> 
> edit: vr out is at 1.32x during test.


Change cache to 3 lower than core, not 2.
Try x46 not x47.


----------



## danakin

Falkentyne said:


> Change cache to 3 lower than core, not 2.
> Try x46 not x47.


ok thanks. i will try that.

got a BSOD after 1,5 hrs....


----------



## HBizzle

Hey guys,

So I am now curious how much I could push my memory. I have this GSkil Trident Z RGB Kit: F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232675. It is running perfectly on my Master at 17-17-17-37. I am wondering if I could push it to 4133 or 4266? Wondering what timings I could hit? What real world benefits would I see from this though? Now becoming an issue of justifying the time and effort more then anything else.


----------



## Intrud3r

HBizzle said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> So I am now curious how much I could push my memory. I have this GSkil Trident Z RGB Kit: F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232675. It is running perfectly on my Master at 17-17-17-37. I am wondering if I could push it to 4133 or 4266? Wondering what timings I could hit? What real world benefits would I see from this though? Now becoming an issue of justifying the time and effort more then anything else.


Just my 2 cents, from what i've read / learned till now:

Wondering if I could push it to 4133 or 4266 = probably yes, probably even more ... 
Timings = if b-die, probably the same as you're running now ?
Real world benefits = doubt you'll notice anything
Justifying the time and effort spent = as you'll probably don't notice it apart from running benchmarks ... not worth the time.

But ... 

It all depends on if you just wanna play with it or not ... all up to you.

Again, this is just my humble opinion.


----------



## HBizzle

Intrud3r said:


> Just my 2 cents, from what i've read / learned till now:
> 
> Wondering if I could push it to 4133 or 4266 = probably yes, probably even more ...
> Timings = if b-die, probably the same as you're running now ?
> Real world benefits = doubt you'll notice anything
> Justifying the time and effort spent = as you'll probably don't notice it apart from running benchmarks ... not worth the time.
> 
> But ...
> 
> It all depends on if you just wanna play with it or not ... all up to you.
> 
> Again, this is just my humble opinion.


I mean how big a difference is there in real world experience going from 4000 17-17-17-37 to 4266 17-17-17-37? LOL. Doesn't seem worth the effort.


----------



## danakin

solved


----------



## Falkentyne

You can get CPU VID to be within <>5mv of VR VOUT (this also makes CPU Package Power match IOUT perfectly) only under the following conditions:

1) Loadline Calibration must be set to Normal (1.60 mOhms of Loadline)
2) Voltage must be set to Normal (I do not know if Auto is the same as Normal, just without DVID).
3) DVID must be set to 0.00v (don't use any offset).
4) Internal VR: IA AC and IA DC loadlines must be set to 160 and 160 (= 1.6 mOhms).

This will make the CPU VR VOUT and CPU VID match almost exactly (and thus make CPU Package Power match VR Power (POUT)).

It's possible lowering the AC Loadline value will keep VID and VR VOUT lined up (did not test), while reducing the initial voltage.
However, setting DC loadline to 0.01 mOhms (bios value=1) seems to have no effect at all on the VRM loadline setting itself. Unless "Normal" and "Auto" act differently. 
In addition, higher levels of VRM loadline calibration (if all set to match a certain VR VOUT) will cause higher voltage fluctuations and thus more instability with extremely heavy current (e..g FMA3 small FFT Prime95) if you are close to borderline already, with Ultra Extreme LLC being almost unusable at very heavy current, without a voltage increase in the bios to compensate.

Vdroop will be massive however. Attempting to use higher values of Loadline Calibration (VRM loadline) will reduce vdroop but will unlink the VR VOUT from the CPU VID
It may be possible to keep them lined up by reducing the DC loadline value to match what you "think" the VRM loadline is setting in mOhms.


----------



## Nizzen

HBizzle said:


> I mean how big a difference is there in real world experience going from 4000 17-17-17-37 to 4266 17-17-17-37? LOL. Doesn't seem worth the effort.


This is overclock.net, so every mhz is worth 

If you are lurking only on forums and facebook, there is no real world differents 

If you are playing BF V multiplayer with 2080ti oc or 2x 2080ti nvlink, the minimumfps probably will be higher 

Z390 starves from memorybandwidth, when using high gpuload on fast gpu's


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/prime95-download.html
> 
> For AVX I use latest beta Prime95 1344 both FFT's, Run In Place and a 15-minute interval. Temps will be low and still a decent AVX stress test.


I used the previous builds before they changed the initial options menu to disable or enable certain instruction sets.

I could run AVX blend and AVX SmallFFT's all day and night, but on this new build I fail blend within minutes.

5GHz HT 1.33v AVX 0 - RAM 3733MHz Uncore x44, VCCIO 1.25 VCCIA 1.25 (Is now completely unstable on the newer prime's).

Edit: Here's what I've found:

When running SmallFFT and Blend, the first 10 minutes of each test doesn't draw hardly any Vcore, resulting in a worker fail. 

To address this, I raised the Vcore. However, once each test decides to draw the Vcore as expected, the Vcore is significantly way too high because it had to be raised in the BIOS, just to get through the first 10 minutes. Can someone explain to me what this is because I've never seen this with Prime before.


----------



## hyogen

is there a feature in the BIOS to disable HPET? High precision event timer. I did see it in the bios for z370 (gigabyte).


----------



## iSpark

Hi.
Has anyone had any issues with Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro memory and Z390 Aorus Master?

My problem is the RGB keeps flickering or "popping" or blinking with complete color change for a fraction of a second. The memory part seems to be working just fine and it passes all test with Mem86, 4 pass.

The intermittent blinking issue is really distracting.
You know how a regular halogen bulb blows out when you turn them on sometimes?, my RGB lights are doing that. Say I have them set to red, they will intermittently have this pop of light, sometimes it will be green or white, and sometimes it just blinks like you flicked a light switch off and on.

I'm using the latest iCue version software and the latest bios (F8e), and I have updated (forced update actually) the memory firmware.
I've seen where SPD write needs to be enabled on some other problems from around the net, but I can't find it in the bios, if it's even there. 


Any ideas?

I really need to make a quick video showing what it is doing, the "flash" is quite aggravating.


----------



## hyder711

BradleyW said:


> I used the previous builds before they changed the initial options menu to disable or enable certain instruction sets.
> 
> I could run AVX blend and AVX SmallFFT's all day and night, but on this new build I fail blend within minutes.
> 
> 5GHz HT 1.33v AVX 0 - RAM 3733MHz Uncore x44, VCCIO 1.25 VCCIA 1.25 (Is now completely unstable on the newer prime's).
> 
> Edit: Here's what I've found:
> 
> When running SmallFFT and Blend, the first 10 minutes of each test doesn't draw hardly any Vcore, resulting in a worker fail.
> 
> To address this, I raised the Vcore. However, once each test decides to draw the Vcore as expected, the Vcore is significantly way too high because it had to be raised in the BIOS, just to get through the first 10 minutes. Can someone explain to me what this is because I've never seen this with Prime before.


is this issue exists at p95 29.5? because i cannot pass on small fft(avx) above 4.5ghz with any amount of voltage-errors within minutes (8600k on z390 master)


----------



## HBizzle

Nizzen said:


> This is overclock.net, so every mhz is worth
> 
> If you are lurking only on forums and facebook, there is no real world differents
> 
> If you are playing BF V multiplayer with 2080ti oc or 2x 2080ti nvlink, the minimumfps probably will be higher
> 
> Z390 starves from memorybandwidth, when using high gpuload on fast gpu's


Running it with a 2080ti. I might fiddle with it this weekend.


----------



## Vassilis008

KedarWolf said:


> If anyone has spontaneous reboots on idle enabling Power Loading fixed it for me.


This is interesting because I RMA'ed my rig a few weeks ago since I was getting random reboots/crashes on idle or low load at stock settings.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf -- i9 9900K @5.1/4.7 -- 4133Mhz C17-18-18-41-2T -- 1.44v -- SA 1.23v- - VCCIO 1.23v -- HCI 1700%

Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master motherboard -- G.Skill CL14 3200 b-die memory.


----------



## marik123

KedarWolf said:


> KedarWolf -- i9 9900K @5.1/4.7 -- 4133Mhz C17-18-18-41-2T -- 1.44v -- SA 1.23v- - VCCIO 1.23v -- HCI 1700%
> 
> Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master motherboard -- G.Skill CL14 3200 b-die memory.


If you run this with 2 sticks only, were you able to hit 4133mhz? The reason why I ask is because I can't seems to go above 3866mhz on my Aorus Pro board with latest BIOS. I know my RAM can hit 4266mhz 18-18-18-38 2T @ 1.425v VCCIO = 1.16 VSSA = 1.224 since i upgraded from Asrock Z370 Extreme4 to Z390 Aorus Pro because my old board wasn't stable 5ghz at 1.3v where as now I can maintain stability at 1.284v 5ghz.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> KedarWolf -- i9 9900K @5.1/4.7 -- 4133Mhz C17-18-18-41-2T -- 1.44v -- SA 1.23v- - VCCIO 1.23v -- HCI 1700%
> 
> Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master motherboard -- G.Skill CL14 3200 b-die memory.


Why is your VCCPLL and VCCPLL_OC increased past the default?
Did this even do anything to enhance stability? (I found no changes in anything).


----------



## kati

Thx to this thread i know my last idle crash/reboot was 16 days ago *sigh*

Hard to come by such prob if its pretty rare, trying now Kedarwolfs hint that Power load/dummy and just for science i disabled IA AC/DC config.
Time will tell if i ever get an idle crash again.


----------



## BradleyW

hyder711 said:


> is this issue exists at p95 29.5? because i cannot pass on small fft(avx) above 4.5ghz with any amount of voltage-errors within minutes (8600k on z390 master)


I found my issue, I had set the Vcore too low by user error after updating BIOS.


----------



## Vassilis008

kati said:


> Thx to this thread i know my last idle crash/reboot was 16 days ago *sigh*
> 
> Hard to come by such prob if its pretty rare, trying now Kedarwolfs hint that Power load/dummy and just for science i disabled IA AC/DC config.
> Time will tell if i ever get an idle crash again.


Is your PC running 24/7? My idle crashes only happened when the PC was running for more than 48 hours, usually during the night while I was sleeping.


----------



## Intrud3r

Vassilis008 said:


> Is your PC running 24/7? My idle crashes only happened when the PC was running for more than 48 hours, usually during the night while I was sleeping.


My PC is running 24/7 and as soon as I enabled C-states in my current config (kedarwolfs settings mostly) I experienced idle crashes. Disabled them again and I'm running without any issues until now.

Maybe it helps.


----------



## Vassilis008

Intrud3r said:


> My PC is running 24/7 and as soon as I enabled C-states in my current config (kedarwolfs settings mostly) I experienced idle crashes. Disabled them again and I'm running without any issues until now.
> 
> Maybe it helps.


In my case it's crashing regardless of C-States, at idle or low load (e.g. web browsing). Sometimes after a few hours, sometimes after a couple of days. It's been in the store now for 2 months for repairs and they have tested/swapped all devices separately except for the motherboard. At the beginning they thought it was the CPU because it was pulling over 1.35v with stock settings (9900k & z390 Master) so they RMA'ed it for a new one unsuccessfully. If it's the motherboard, Gigabyte's awful support in Belgium means I will have to wait for at least one more month. I should get more news on Monday.

I kinda regretting getting Gigabyte hardware (motherboard, GPU, ram, etc.); it's been over 2 months since I got the new rig and it has been randomly crashing/rebooting since day one regardless of the OS.


----------



## KedarWolf

marik123 said:


> If you run this with 2 sticks only, were you able to hit 4133mhz? The reason why I ask is because I can't seems to go above 3866mhz on my Aorus Pro board with latest BIOS. I know my RAM can hit 4266mhz 18-18-18-38 2T @ 1.425v VCCIO = 1.16 VSSA = 1.224 since i upgraded from Asrock Z370 Extreme4 to Z390 Aorus Pro because my old board wasn't stable 5ghz at 1.3v where as now I can maintain stability at 1.284v 5ghz.


Same BIOS settings on two sticks PC won't even boot.

Gigabyte uses T-Topology so four sticks works much better. It was the same with my Asus T-Topology board. 2x8GB DDR4400 wouldn't even run stable at 4000MHZ but my 4x8GB CL14 3200 would run at 4200 on my 8700k.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Why is your VCCPLL and VCCPLL_OC increased past the default?
> Did this even do anything to enhance stability? (I found no changes in anything).


They ARE the Auto settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> They ARE the Auto settings.


interesting. In the bios it shows them as 1.02, 1.02, 1.25 (VCC PLL OC), etc.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> interesting. In the bios it shows them as 1.02, 1.02, 1.25 (VCC PLL OC), etc.


Yeah, probably better to manually set those.

This is with them set at default by inputting the values instead of Auto.


----------



## DestructionJ

marik123 said:


> If you run this with 2 sticks only, were you able to hit 4133mhz? The reason why I ask is because I can't seems to go above 3866mhz on my Aorus Pro board with latest BIOS. I know my RAM can hit 4266mhz 18-18-18-38 2T @ 1.425v VCCIO = 1.16 VSSA = 1.224 since i upgraded from Asrock Z370 Extreme4 to Z390 Aorus Pro because my old board wasn't stable 5ghz at 1.3v where as now I can maintain stability at 1.284v 5ghz.


 Aorus Pro board dont have a QVL for high speed Gskill ram with low latency last time i checked. The pro board has less layers and it seems that only the ultra model and up (which have six pcb layers) has much better support. I run F4-4000C17D-16GTZR 2x8 kit on the ultra and have no problems at 4000 but didn't try for 4133. I just set xmp and checked timings and i seem to be rock solid on Prime, IBT, 3dmark, cinabench, and Superposition. The master was the same price but as an electronics technician i wanted to use the VRM that looks better on paper then the IR Solution on the master which is very good but i feel to be overrated. 

JMO


----------



## HBizzle

Does ErP enabled change power on functionality? I just spent a minute trying to get my system to power on after it had been off for a few days. Held the button for 10 secs, pressed multiple times. Was strange.


----------



## BradleyW

What is the wattage and amperage draw safe limit when running a load such as AVX? (9900K).

Thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> What is the wattage and amperage draw safe limit when running a load such as AVX? (9900K).
> 
> Thank you.


Absolute max amps is 193 amps on 8 core and 138 amps for 6 core. But it isn't clear what voltage this is meant for, nor at what point eventual signal degradation of the clock (crashing at formerly stable max clocks, OR crashing at formerly tested lower clocks at a self-tested "VMIN" (lowest voltage required for stability) will happen if you approach or exceed 193A.

FMA3 12-16K FFT size prime95 at a VR VOUT of 1.20v and 4.7 ghz already comes VERY close to 193 amps right there. AVX 12-16K FFT's is significantly less.


----------



## StreaMRoLLeR

To people who own Aorus Extreme, I have three questions

1) Can you post a detailed / clear photo of motherside SIDE RGB in your case with some angle photos.

2) Can u control the RGB zones or you have 1 zone to control ( VRM area , Side, top m2 heatsink area )

3) Integrated audio can play Dolby Digital Live signal ?


----------



## Driller au

HBizzle said:


> Does ErP enabled change power on functionality? I just spent a minute trying to get my system to power on after it had been off for a few days. Held the button for 10 secs, pressed multiple times. Was strange.


Never given me any trouble, I have had it enabled all the time to stop my K/B from lighting up when not in use


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the wattage and amperage draw safe limit when running a load such as AVX? (9900K).
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute max amps is 193 amps on 8 core and 138 amps for 6 core. But it isn't clear what voltage this is meant for, nor at what point eventual signal degradation of the clock (crashing at formerly stable max clocks, OR crashing at formerly tested lower clocks at a self-tested "VMIN" (lowest voltage required for stability) will happen if you approach or exceed 193A.
> 
> FMA3 12-16K FFT size prime95 at a VR VOUT of 1.20v and 4.7 ghz already comes VERY close to 193 amps right there. AVX 12-16K FFT's is significantly less.
Click to expand...

What software do you use to read A draw? I use HWiNFO.


----------



## HBizzle

Driller au said:


> Never given me any trouble, I have had it enabled all the time to stop my K/B from lighting up when not in use


This is why I turned mine on. Works for that but have to hold the power button for a while to get it to boot now.


----------



## Driller au

@ HBizzle if you like i can PM you a zip file with all my bios pictures if you want to compare them. I have a Z390 master with a i9 9900k on a F8e bios
I cannot see anything that would cause the problem but you never know


----------



## Jody Hodgson

So whats the latest with Fusion 2.0 on the Auros master I am reading the software does not even work properly and you need to keep it uninstalled?

I am planning on fans, cpu cooler and ram being controlled with Fusion 2 on the MB am I dreaming??

Surely it is not that bad it must work a bit?


----------



## KedarWolf

Jody Hodgson said:


> So whats the latest with Fusion 2.0 on the Auros master I am reading the software does not even work properly and you need to keep it uninstalled?
> 
> I am planning on fans, cpu cooler and ram being controlled with Fusion 2 on the MB am I dreaming??
> 
> Surely it is not that bad it must work a bit?


Older versions had a vulnerability. Newer one should be fine though.


----------



## Vassilis008

Jody Hodgson said:


> So whats the latest with Fusion 2.0 on the Auros master I am reading the software does not even work properly and you need to keep it uninstalled?
> 
> I am planning on fans, cpu cooler and ram being controlled with Fusion 2 on the MB am I dreaming??
> 
> Surely it is not that bad it must work a bit?


It has a bug where a window would popup every hour for one second and disappear (together with an event log warning/error). In some cases, this can cause a game or application to go back to desktop every hour. The only way for many users to solve it is to keep the software uninstalled after it has been setup.


----------



## HBizzle

Driller au said:


> @ HBizzle if you like i can PM you a zip file with all my bios pictures if you want to compare them. I have a Z390 master with a i9 9900k on a F8e bios
> I cannot see anything that would cause the problem but you never know


Could you just host them on an imgur link? Others might have the same prob and be able to learn from it. Same board, chip, and bios version over here.


----------



## HBizzle

Jody Hodgson said:


> So whats the latest with Fusion 2.0 on the Auros master I am reading the software does not even work properly and you need to keep it uninstalled?
> 
> I am planning on fans, cpu cooler and ram being controlled with Fusion 2 on the MB am I dreaming??
> 
> Surely it is not that bad it must work a bit?


Current version works for me, though it has limited options.


----------



## Bravoexo

Hi, just finished building my new PC (i9-9900K, Aorus Z390 Master, 32Gb DDR4 Aorus RGB Ram, 2x Asus ROG Strix 1080 SLI) and I haven't OC'd at all. Everything is Auto as it came out of the box, I've only been changing the Boot drive once in a while and did update the BIOS to f8e.

And to my surprise, I was running BF1 and saw every core was running at 5.2Ghz.










rechecked a bit later in the day (shutdown the PC for several hours) and sure enough, at idle I was at 5.2Ghz without doing anything...










Is this normal? I thought only a few cores would ramp to 5.2ghz on load... but not 5.2ghz on idle with everything on Auto.

Must be a BIOS bug coz I entered the BIOS and existed without saving anything, and now it seems back to 4.7 ghz normal operations...strange


----------



## BradleyW

I've decided to use 4.7GHz HT as my 24/7 clock. It is far cooler and draws significantly less power. At 5GHz, I get no noticeable performance boost in games and desktop. I have all cores at x47, cache x43, vcore (avx) 1.2v, vcore (non-avx) 1.17v. LLC turbo. RAM @ 3733MHz, VCCIO 1.17v, VCCIA 1.2v.


----------



## Falkentyne

Bravoexo said:


> Hi, just finished building my new PC (i9-9900K, Aorus Z390 Master, 32Gb DDR4 Aorus RGB Ram, 2x Asus ROG Strix 1080 SLI) and I haven't OC'd at all. Everything is Auto as it came out of the box, I've only been changing the Boot drive once in a while and did update the BIOS to f8e.
> 
> And to my surprise, I was running BF1 and saw every core was running at 5.2Ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rechecked a bit later in the day (shutdown the PC for several hours) and sure enough, at idle I was at 5.2Ghz without doing anything...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this normal? I thought only a few cores would ramp to 5.2ghz on load... but not 5.2ghz on idle with everything on Auto.
> 
> Must be a BIOS bug coz I entered the BIOS and existed without saving anything, and now it seems back to 4.7 ghz normal operations...strange


Windows fast boot enabled or disabled in windows power options?

What was the Vcore (VR VOUT in HWInfo64) or ITE 8792E voltage when it was at 5200 mhz?
I'm calling shenanigans here. MCE is supposed to lock everything to 5 ghz.
I'd hate to see what voltage (VID is NOT voltage) was running through that thing to not have Battlefield 5 crash at 5.2 ghz on all cores, too....


----------



## Sheyster

BradleyW said:


> I've decided to use 4.7GHz HT as my 24/7 clock. It is far cooler and draws significantly less power. At 5GHz, I get no noticeable performance boost in games and desktop. I have all cores at x47, cache x43, vcore (avx) 1.2v, vcore (non-avx) 1.17v. LLC turbo. RAM @ 3733MHz, VCCIO 1.17v, VCCIA 1.2v.


Why not 44x for cache multi? That's probably what I'd run if shooting for 47x core multi.


----------



## BradleyW

Sheyster said:


> Why not 44x for cache multi? That's probably what I'd run if shooting for 47x core multi.


I didn't see any performance benefit so I left it at the default value of x43.


----------



## Driller au

HBizzle said:


> Could you just host them on an imgur link? Others might have the same prob and be able to learn from it. Same board, chip, and bios version over here.


https://imgur.com/a/fypdQae

Here is the link to my bios pictures

Edit:If some one uses this setup you can run Vcore LLC on high instead of turbo for everyday use


----------



## Bravoexo

Falkentyne said:


> Windows fast boot enabled or disabled in windows power options?
> 
> What was the Vcore (VR VOUT in HWInfo64) or ITE 8792E voltage when it was at 5200 mhz?
> I'm calling shenanigans here. MCE is supposed to lock everything to 5 ghz.
> I'd hate to see what voltage (VID is NOT voltage) was running through that thing to not have Battlefield 5 crash at 5.2 ghz on all cores, too....


Even CPU-Z said it was at 5.2Ghz, strange indeed. Too bad i didn't save the vcore off CPU-Z. Anyway, if it happens again, I'll see to it to grab the voltages. Anyway, fast boot was never enabled.


----------



## Falkentyne

Bravoexo said:


> Even CPU-Z said it was at 5.2Ghz, strange indeed. Too bad i didn't save the vcore off CPU-Z. Anyway, if it happens again, I'll see to it to grab the voltages. Anyway, fast boot was never enabled.


Don't look at the vcore on cpu-z. That's the inaccurate (badly) 8688E sensor.
Use HWinfo for VR VOUT (this requires NO gigabyte system utilities installed) or ITE 8792E (not as accurate).


----------



## Falkentyne

So what's new in Master bios F8H ?


----------



## Bravoexo

Well, I had to go to the BIOS to see if MCE setting was, sure enough it was in Auto. Exited without saving and the same odd i9-9900K before popped up.










Ran Cinebench, just to see what Max temps/vcore it sends to the CPU










90C isn;'t bad...but when in load, I noticed it just goes back to 4.7Ghz. At idle it ramps back up to all cores at 5.2Ghz. Odd indeed.

But when I validate it with CPU-Z, I see the expected numbers... 50 core multiplier max, 4.8Ghz when running validation. High vcore though. 










Am I risking burning the i9-9900K if I keep using AUTO on everything?


----------



## Falkentyne

Bravoexo said:


> Well, I had to go to the BIOS to see if MCE setting was, sure enough it was in Auto. Exited without saving and the same odd i9-9900K before popped up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ran Cinebench, just to see what Max temps/vcore it sends to the CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 90C isn;'t bad...but when in load, I noticed it just goes back to 4.7Ghz. At idle it ramps back up to all cores at 5.2Ghz. Odd indeed.
> 
> But when I validate it with CPU-Z, I see the expected numbers... 50 core multiplier max, 4.8Ghz when running validation. High vcore though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Am I risking burning the i9-9900K if I keep using AUTO on everything?


I don't run auto on anything. I disable MCE and set everything manually. And I definitely don't like that 1.40v VR VOUT at idle.
And 1.344v for VR VOUT load is too high for me. I find anything higher than 1.310v on VR VOUT at load is too much to cool, plus I don't want to risk degradation at all.
Your 8792E (MLCC caps reading) idle vcore is 1.440v, and that is FAR too high. Yes you can get degradation by leaving the CPU idling at a voltage like that (very slowly). It's been tested.


----------



## pm1109

Falkentyne said:


> I don't run auto on anything. I disable MCE and set everything manually. And I definitely don't like that 1.40v VR VOUT at idle.
> And 1.344v for VR VOUT load is too high for me. I find anything higher than 1.310v on VR VOUT at load is too much to cool, plus I don't want to risk degradation at all.
> Your 8792E (MLCC caps reading) idle vcore is 1.440v, and that is FAR too high. Yes you can get degradation by leaving the CPU idling at a voltage like that (very slowly). It's been tested.


Degradation...So your cpu Will last 15 years instead of maybe 20 years.Not many people will keep their cpu for that long ya know.


----------



## Bravoexo

Well I turned off MCE, boot into windows, confirmed its running in 4.7Ghz, Shutdown for lunch, powered on the PC, checked if MCE was still turned off. Booted...desktop icons jumbled up again (Arrgh, why won't it save it?) And sure enough running at 5.2Ghz again on boot. Rebooted, reconfirmed MCE is disabled. (Everytime I restart, this BIOS wants to put an old SSD in the boot priorities for some reason) removed the boot priority 2, saved. Booted in 4.7ghz again. This BIOS is nuts!


----------



## Falkentyne

pm1109 said:


> Degradation...So your cpu Will last 15 years instead of maybe 20 years.Not many people will keep their cpu for that long ya know.


Nope.
At 1.55v idle voltage with no load, 14nm CPU's degraded by 5mv on the "VMIN" (min voltage required for stability) in just 24-36 hours with *NO CURRENT* going through the chips.
And that wasn't 'measured with CPU on-die sense either and LLC level was unknown. So it's better to be safe than sorry.
Why are you insulting people who are worried about degradation anyway? I've already wasted THOUSANDS Of dollars on chips that degraded when people claimed it was a myth. no offense but please do not attack me.


----------



## Driller au

Got bored and gave the new F8h bios a run, i had the F8e bios previously.The menus all seemed the same, at default settings the idle VR Vout seemed to be a little higher seemed to settle at 0.740v and default uncore was 4300. Applied my OC as per my other post no worries there idle VR Vout is back down to 0.715v .
Picked up a few points in cinebench and a quick run in aida64 didn't show up anything unusual. Will report back if anything goes wrong


----------



## kati

Vassilis008 said:


> Is your PC running 24/7? My idle crashes only happened when the PC was running for more than 48 hours, usually during the night while I was sleeping.


Yea well between my last two idle crashes it ran 16 days without reboot or any hiccup, rockstable...and sure thing the idle reboot/crash occured when i was sitting there onlineshopping/reading reviews and scared me.

My last board was an asus paired with 4790k running 3yrs 24/7 with slight overclock, asus min Vcore behaves more adaptive when downclocking.
But aside from this little prob im sure happy with that aorus master having it now for 3 months.

Going to double my ram 2x8 to 4x8 if price drops this summer, maybe snag a 9900k or kfc whats the one without gpu one day, and thats going to last some years.


----------



## HBizzle

Driller au said:


> https://imgur.com/a/fypdQae
> 
> Here is the link to my bios pictures
> 
> Edit:If some one uses this setup you can run Vcore LLC on high instead of turbo for everyday use


Thanks for posting this.


----------



## HBizzle

Bravoexo said:


> Well I turned off MCE, boot into windows, confirmed its running in 4.7Ghz, Shutdown for lunch, powered on the PC, checked if MCE was still turned off. Booted...desktop icons jumbled up again (Arrgh, why won't it save it?) And sure enough running at 5.2Ghz again on boot. Rebooted, reconfirmed MCE is disabled. (Everytime I restart, this BIOS wants to put an old SSD in the boot priorities for some reason) removed the boot priority 2, saved. Booted in 4.7ghz again. This BIOS is nuts!


Are you running in single or dual bios if this is a Master?


----------



## Bravoexo

HBizzle said:


> Are you running in single or dual bios if this is a Master?


Dual, (Main - Updated to F8e, Backup - still at F4) but I've learned not to 'accidentally' trigger the switching to the backup bios by not restarting the board from pressing the power button for 7 secs. (PC-O11 Air case has no reset button unfortunately) I just have to remember to turn off /.on the PSU instead.

Anyway, just overclocked manually to [email protected] just to tame that weird Overvoltage on Auto.


----------



## Falkentyne

Bravoexo said:


> Dual, (Main - Updated to F8e, Backup - still at F4) but I've learned not to 'accidentally' trigger the switching to the backup bios by not restarting the board from pressing the power button for 7 secs. (PC-O11 Air case has no reset button unfortunately) I just have to remember to turn off /.on the PSU instead.
> 
> Anyway, just overclocked manually to [email protected] just to tame that weird Overvoltage on Auto.


Did you verify when you somehow boot at 5.2 ghz that it did not somehow boot to the backup bios?
You can see the bios version in hwinfo64 (extended info) or CPU-Z.

and you should just flash both bioses to f8h now.
To flash the backup bios, set the bios switch to single bios mode and bios 2 after power off and removing the power plug.

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## Bravoexo

No it always stayed in the f8e main bios. I get irritated by sometimes when it insist to put my old OS SSD back on priority #1 even after I keep disabling it. But this overvolting on All Auto when I come from Cold Boot or not is pretty bad. 1.44V yikes.

Now I keep the volt down by actually Overclocking the damn CPU to [email protected]

Addendum: I also hate that the Aorus RGB DDR4 ram will stop lighting up after reset...needs a PSU reboot just to bring them back....arrgh


----------



## Padinn

I wonder if easy tune is setting it to 5.2ghz. It has a setting for that.


----------



## lucasfrance

Padinn said:


> I wonder if easy tune is setting it to 5.2ghz. It has a setting for that.


It does it to 5.2 but with too high voltage and unstable under stress....


----------



## KedarWolf

My BIOS settings in Spoiler, Aorus Master (BIOS screenshots) for 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.6GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory. Temps while running Prime95 1344 FFT's don't go higher than mid 60's. Like me, you'll probably need to do 'IA AC Loadline 1' as with trying to run that low voltages (with a negative offset) you'll BSOD booting into Windows.

Strange thing though with this board, if I disable all C-States and SpeedShift and just have EIST enabled my PC will reboot randomly on idle or while just running Chrome.



Spoiler


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> My BIOS settings in Spoiler, Aorus Master (BIOS screenshots) for 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.6GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory. Temps while running Prime95 1344 FFT's don't go higher than mid 60's. Like me, you'll probably need to do 'IA AC Loadline 1' as with trying to run that low voltages (with a negative offset) you'll BSOD booting into Windows.
> 
> Strange thing though with this board, if I disable all C-States and SpeedShift and just have EIST enabled my PC will reboot randomly on idle or while just running Chrome


What is your idle voltage ? just curious because i started out OCing with your original 5.0 Ghz post and i ended up with a DVID of +0.035 and no reboots my idle VR VOUT is about 0.715


----------



## pm1109

Falkentyne said:


> Nope.
> At 1.55v idle voltage with no load, 14nm CPU's degraded by 5mv on the "VMIN" (min voltage required for stability) in just 24-36 hours with *NO CURRENT* going through the chips.
> And that wasn't 'measured with CPU on-die sense either and LLC level was unknown. So it's better to be safe than sorry.
> Why are you insulting people who are worried about degradation anyway? I've already wasted THOUSANDS Of dollars on chips that degraded when people claimed it was a myth. no offense but please do not attack me.


I was not attacking you just sharing an opinion that’s all.Nothing wrong with that.I have my 9900k on 1.32 Vcore so not really worried about cpu degradation.As long as my temps are acceptable I’m happy.


----------



## Vassilis008

KedarWolf said:


> Strange thing though with this board, if I disable all C-States and SpeedShift and just have EIST enabled my PC will reboot randomly on idle or while just running Chrome.


Enabling power loading did not fix it? I have exactly the same issue with default settings, but the reboots/crashes also take place with C-States enabled sometimes.


----------



## Grisk

Hello all

Will Samsung M378A2K43CB1-CRC – 16GB be compatible with Aorus Pro and how much can it be overclocked? (CPU 9600K will be used in turbobust only).


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> My BIOS settings in Spoiler, Aorus Master (BIOS screenshots) for 5.0GHZ CPU, 4.6GHZ cache, 4133MHZ memory. Temps while running Prime95 1344 FFT's don't go higher than mid 60's. Like me, you'll probably need to do 'IA AC Loadline 1' as with trying to run that low voltages (with a negative offset) you'll BSOD booting into Windows.
> 
> Strange thing though with this board, if I disable all C-States and SpeedShift and just have EIST enabled my PC will reboot randomly on idle or while just running Chrome.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


I had to raise my offset to +.05v to get rid of idle whea errors and chrome bsods.


----------



## Iceman2733

Looking to build a Z390 system and the Gigabyte Master board keeps coming up, wanted to come and ask a few people who own the board there thoughts on it? Any issues? Any regrets? I have never messed with Gigabyte always Asus and Evga but this boards VRM really interest me. 

Does the boards CPU Adaptive voltage work correctly? I have seen some boards that Adaptive does not properly work.


----------



## Vassilis008

Iceman2733 said:


> Looking to build a Z390 system and the Gigabyte Master board keeps coming up, wanted to come and ask a few people who own the board there thoughts on it? Any issues? Any regrets? I have never messed with Gigabyte always Asus and Evga but this boards VRM really interest me.
> 
> Does the boards CPU Adaptive voltage work correctly? I have seen some boards that Adaptive does not properly work.


Three major issues for me:

- very loud coil whine when C-States are enabled
- random reboots/crashes at idle or low load
- rgbfusion has bugs in latest windows 10 build: there is a popup appearing every hour for 1 second on desktop (can cause games or applications switching back to desktop) + error/warnings in windows 10 event log

I ended up with a 6000$ computer that is randomly crashing all the time and coil whining badly - of course the store (or Gigabyte) is refusing to refund or replace so it will end up with a court case.


----------



## HBizzle

Iceman2733 said:


> Looking to build a Z390 system and the Gigabyte Master board keeps coming up, wanted to come and ask a few people who own the board there thoughts on it? Any issues? Any regrets? I have never messed with Gigabyte always Asus and Evga but this boards VRM really interest me.
> 
> Does the boards CPU Adaptive voltage work correctly? I have seen some boards that Adaptive does not properly work.


I haven't had any issues with mine really. There is a known issue where RGB lighting can light up when powered down, but there is an easy fix in the bios for that. That issue is the only one I have had. 

I followed the gigabyte guide to OCing with this board and have a stable and healthy 9900K OC'd at 5.0 @ 1.265v with a cache at 4700, with a 32GB kit at 4000mhz 17-17-17-37. Runs cooler then when I had the chip on an MSI MEG ACE, a direct competitor, and with less issues. Runs better and with less hiccups then I had with that MEG ACE.


----------



## Grisk

KedarWolf said:


> Gigabyte boards are T-Topology for the memory configuration.
> 
> I did a test with my 9900k. Only two sticks the first and third slots in with my current settings at 4133MHZ, no boot.
> 
> All four sticks in, it boots instantly at 4133MHZ.


Is this problem only with high friquencies? If I will have two sticks 16Gb at 3000-3200 will be the same issue?


----------



## Grisk

HBizzle said:


> with a 32GB kit at 4000mhz 17-17-17-37. .


Do you have 2x16Gb or 4x8Gb?


----------



## ilithis

Has anyone had problems with per core overclocking? I have a Aorus Elite with a 9900k. I turn on Per Core Turbo and enter in ratios for each core and boot into Windows 10. I open prime95 to see what frequencies the cores are running at and they're all the same frequency and it corresponds to the lowest ratio I set in BIOS under the per core turbo ratio section. It doesn't matter if core 4 is the lowest or core 8, whatever ratio is the lowest among the 8 cores, it will use that ratio on all cores. I'm not sure if this has been brought up earlier in the thread, I read the first ~30 pages of posts and didn't find anything.

I have tried turning MCE to disabled, enabled, and auto and none of the options seem to help. My goal is to find my good cores and get them running faster than the other cores.


----------



## Falkentyne

ilithis said:


> Has anyone had problems with per core overclocking? I have a Aorus Elite with a 9900k. I turn on Per Core Turbo and enter in ratios for each core and boot into Windows 10. I open prime95 to see what frequencies the cores are running at and they're all the same frequency and it corresponds to the lowest ratio I set in BIOS under the per core turbo ratio section. It doesn't matter if core 4 is the lowest or core 8, whatever ratio is the lowest among the 8 cores, it will use that ratio on all cores. I'm not sure if this has been brought up earlier in the thread, I read the first ~30 pages of posts and didn't find anything.
> 
> I have tried turning MCE to disabled, enabled, and auto and none of the options seem to help. My goal is to find my good cores and get them running faster than the other cores.


You can't do this.
You can't give a multiplier to a SPECIFIC core. The core that will be active will be whatever windows wants it to be, randomly. I believe you could only do this on HEDT platforms (not even 100% sure about this but I do recall someone somewhere mentioning this, as another person asked if this was possible on mainstream and they said no. The same goes for disabling cores; you can't choose which physical core is enabled).

As far as having the ratio go up or down depending on how many cores are loaded (is this what you're also asking?), I remember having this problem on a MSI laptop when I was messing around with the core ratios. From what I remember, it would use the "lowest" core ratio on all cores no matter what, unless I enabled C-states. Then you could freely watch the 'active' cores change in speed randomly, setting something like (for 9900K) 50,49,48,47,46,45,44,43, with 4300 ring ratio. But you still can't choose which physical core/thread will be the x50 one.
I assume you are also referring to the bios option "per-core overclocking" (which I assume doesn't work the way it sounds like it works).

Look in throttlestop 8.70 or HWinfo64, while it's almost impossible to ever see the 1 core ratio (since windows reserves a thread for itself for processes), you can see the 2 core ratio often, and you'll see that 4900 mhz constantly bouncing around between random cores.

Hope that helps.


----------



## unclewebb

ilithis said:


> My goal is to find my good cores and get them running faster than the other cores.


The 9900K only supports Intel Turbo Boost 2.0. 

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...9900k-processor-16m-cache-up-to-5-00-ghz.html

This means that all active cores at any moment in time are all locked to the exact same multiplier. It is physically impossible to run different cores at different multipliers.

The settings you see in the bios only determine what multiplier the CPU uses based on how many cores are active. 

Some monitoring software might have you believing that you can have different multipliers on different cores but it is not true. This is only possible on CPUs that support Turbo Boost 3.0.


----------



## BradleyW

unclewebb said:


> The 9900K only supports Intel Turbo Boost 2.0.
> 
> https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...9900k-processor-16m-cache-up-to-5-00-ghz.html
> 
> This means that all active cores at any moment in time are all locked to the exact same multiplier. It is physically impossible to run different cores at different multipliers.
> 
> The settings you see in the bios only determine what multiplier the CPU uses based on how many cores are active.
> 
> Some monitoring software might have you believing that you can have different multipliers on different cores but it is not true. This is only possible on CPUs that support Turbo Boost 3.0.


I thought the 9900K runs at x50 on a single core and x47 on the rest, unless you lock the multi down for each core, or enable enhanced multi core? Better yet, when gaming, all my cores fluctuate at different speeds (ECO settings ON).


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> I thought the 9900K runs at x50 on a single core and x47 on the rest unless you lock the multi down for each core or enable enhanced multi core?


What UW is saying is that the multiplier gets changed based on how many cores are loaded.
You can't have core 1 running at x50 while the other cores are running at x47. If there is load on other cores, the multiplier will decrease based on how many cores are loaded.
I suggest you just experiment yourself since you do have the computer there to mess with.

I -believe- you must enable c-states for this to work however.

Set your cores to 50,49,48,47,46,45,44,43
(I do not know if per-core overclocking has to be enabled or disabled or auto, try it and find out), and enable c-states. I also do not know if offset or override voltage is needed or not either.
Then run prime95 (note: 29.6 beta 3 has a bug where the stress test wont even start; use beta 2 or older) with AVX disabled and run it on 1, then 2, then 3, then 4 and so on, threads, with HWinfo running (Please set HWinfo to update at 250ms), and watch the clocks and see how the multipliers respond to the thread load. You should also see the thread that is active bounce around between the cores (I'm guessing).


----------



## Vesimas

For the guys having sometime the no video signal problem i found this on the net:



> When computer wakes up after sleep (Windows 10), it freezes with flashing HDD led for 5-10 seconds, no screen wakes up, no mouse/keyboard LED on (mouse flashes briefly when I press a button). Motherboard shows code 66. At which point the only solution is reset or shutdown the pc. A lot of people reported code 66 after wake up, but because for many people computer wakes up just fine (just showing that code), gigabyte refuses acknowledge it as a problem...some people reported disabling fast boot in Windows 10 settings fixes it for them, on my system it works for 5 seconds before it crashes with BSOD. I yet to find any work around this issue that worked for me. [EDIT] This seems to be an issue with having two m.2 drives + Samsung NVMe driver + NVIDIA video card installed. Uninstalling Samsung NVMe driver or removing video card fixes the issue.


When it's happening to me i have code 66 and i have that exact combination of hardware.


----------



## HBizzle

Grisk said:


> Do you have 2x16Gb or 4x8Gb?


4x8


----------



## Driller au

Vesimas said:


> For the guys having sometime the no video signal problem i found this on the net:
> When it's happening to me i have code 66 and i have that exact combination of hardware.


I have the same HW combo but i don't let my computer go to sleep,I get the blank screen on cold boot and the code is AO which is normal.I did try the fix though with deep sleep enabled on the monitor and it didn't wake up so back to deep sleep disabled and all is good.


----------



## Timur Born

My Creative X-Fi isn't enumerated (detected) by the Aorus Master anymore, no idea if the card just broke or not. But more important, I cannot get the onboard sound to output anything. Driver installation goes smooth, headphone and mic are detected properly, Windows thinks that it's outputting sound, but nothing to be heard or recorded from my headphone.

Tried a bluetooth one instead, no problem. So either my headphone/mic is broken, too, or something is amiss with my installation/board. Combined with the broken BIOS chip this seems to qualify for having to sent it in.


----------



## jlp0209

Timur Born said:


> My Creative X-Fi isn't enumerated (detected) by the Aorus Master anymore, no idea if the card just broke or not. But more important, I cannot get the onboard sound to output anything. Driver installation goes smooth, headphone and mic are detected properly, Windows thinks that it's outputting sound, but nothing to be heard or recorded from my headphone.
> 
> Tried a bluetooth one instead, no problem. So either my headphone/mic is broken, too, or something is amiss with my installation/board. Combined with the broken BIOS chip this seems to qualify for having to sent it in.


I've been having onboard sound issues as well where there is no sound output but Windows thinks there is. For me rebooting always solves it. Every time I start up the PC it shows code 66 and then the normal A0 when I reboot. Maybe related, who knows. Yesterday my Intel 9560 card all of a sudden just stopped working and device manager gave me a Code 10 device can't start error. Re-installing the Gigabyte driver resolved it for now. 

The sound issue is annoying, giving it one more bios revision (I'm on F7, not trying any beta bios) and if not resolved will just sell the board and take my losses, and buy another brand.


----------



## milan616

I had a very odd sound issue this past week where my USB DAC(+headphone amp) stopped outputting sound at random, more so while gaming. The quick cure was to disable and re-enable the device in Windows. My other USB DAC (for my speakers) and my USB mic were both fine. I ended up buying a new DAC+amp and it did the same thing. Tried a bunch of things from unplugging one or more devices, different USB ports, not in USB hub but direct to PC, even re-installed Windows. In the middle of re-installing Windows it happened again. So software was ruled out and so I thought it must be an issue with my motherboard. In the end it seems my aging Amazon Basics USB hub was the issue. I don't know what it was doing, but it was locking up the DAC that was plugged directly into my PC. 

I'm sure this story doesn't apply to the onboard sound people, but it's so weird that maybe it does if disabling/re-enabling your audio device in Windows works for you too.

Edit: first DAC was an Aune T1 Mk2, second was a Massdrop SDAC+O2.


----------



## Falkentyne

milan616 said:


> I had a very odd sound issue this past week where my USB DAC(+headphone amp) stopped outputting sound at random, more so while gaming. The quick cure was to disable and re-enable the device in Windows. My other USB DAC (for my speakers) and my USB mic were both fine. I ended up buying a new DAC+amp and it did the same thing. Tried a bunch of things from unplugging one or more devices, different USB ports, not in USB hub but direct to PC, even re-installed Windows. In the middle of re-installing Windows it happened again. So software was ruled out and so I thought it must be an issue with my motherboard. In the end it seems my aging Amazon Basics USB hub was the issue. I don't know what it was doing, but it was locking up the DAC that was plugged directly into my PC.
> 
> I'm sure this story doesn't apply to the onboard sound people, but it's so weird that maybe it does if disabling/re-enabling your audio device in Windows works for you too.
> 
> Edit: first DAC was an Aune T1 Mk2, second was a Massdrop SDAC+O2.


Was your hub a self powered hub, something like this?

https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-Port-USB-Power-Adapter/dp/B00E6GX4BG


----------



## milan616

Yep, except the USB 2.0 version.


----------



## sygnus21

milan616 said:


> I had a very odd sound issue this past week where my USB DAC(+headphone amp) stopped outputting sound at random, more so while gaming. The quick cure was to disable and re-enable the device in Windows. My other USB DAC (for my speakers) and my USB mic were both fine. I ended up buying a new DAC+amp and it did the same thing. Tried a bunch of things from unplugging one or more devices, different USB ports, not in USB hub but direct to PC, even re-installed Windows. In the middle of re-installing Windows it happened again. So software was ruled out and so I thought it must be an issue with my motherboard. In the end it seems my aging Amazon Basics USB hub was the issue. I don't know what it was doing, but it was locking up the DAC that was plugged directly into my PC.
> 
> I'm sure this story doesn't apply to the onboard sound people, but it's so weird that maybe it does if disabling/re-enabling your audio device in Windows works for you too.
> 
> Edit: first DAC was an Aune T1 Mk2, second was a Massdrop SDAC+O2.


Why are you running your DAC off a USB hub??? 

I've a high end DAC + headphone amp (Teac UD-503) myself and it's plugged in a USB port off the back of the PC. It's also plugged into the onboard soundcard via optical cable. I simply choose an input from the DAC. I'm mostly using the onboard soundcard because I get intermittent crashes from the USB ASIO drivers if I don't follow a particular turn on sequence - DAC first, then JRiver Media Center. 

Anyway I have no sound issues with my onboard solution on my Gigabyte 390 Aorus Xtreme. But than again, I'm using the optical output, and my DAC drives my powered speakers and sub. And OS is Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, latest 1809 version.


----------



## milan616

sygnus21 said:


> Why are you running your DAC off a USB hub???


I wasn't, both the old and new were always plugged into a motherboard slot. That's why I went with DAC failure and then software issues before figuring out it was the hub.


----------



## Timur Born

The headphone is not broken, just checked on another device. And of course the Realtek driver detects that the headphone is plugged in, just no sound coming out. I may do a full Windows reset, because this installation saw several iterations of hardware changes.


----------



## sygnus21

milan616 said:


> I wasn't, both the old and new were always plugged into a motherboard slot. That's why I went with DAC failure and then software issues before figuring out it was the hub.


So you mean motherboard hub? If so, that sounds like either a driver issue or a motherboard issue in a failed or dying USB controller.


----------



## sygnus21

Timur Born said:


> My Creative X-Fi isn't enumerated (detected) by the Aorus Master anymore, no idea if the card just broke or not.


Define "anymore"? 



Timur Born said:


> But more important, I cannot get the onboard sound to output anything. Driver installation goes smooth, headphone and mic are detected properly, Windows thinks that it's outputting sound, but nothing to be heard or recorded from my headphone.


Which version of Windows are you using? For Windows 10 (1809) right click the speaker icon and click "Sounds", click the "Playback" tab and make sure the correct device it checked for sound output. Click the Recording tab and do the same. You could also try "Troubleshoot sound problems" and see how that goes. 

Lastly, if you suspect the X-Fi went belly up, remove it and see if your onboard sound issues are resolved. Also, if you're going to be using a dedicated card, disable onboard sound in the BIOS. I ran Creative cards for years, including your X-Fi, and my last being the ZxR and I've always disabled onboard when running a dedicated card. 

Oh, and remembering who Creative is, they're not exactly known for extending driver support to new OS's with their old cards so I wonder what drivers you're using if running Windows 10 with that X-Fi card. BTW, which one is it???


----------



## scaramonga

So how is new BIOS for MASTER F8h guinea pigs?


----------



## Falkentyne

I went back to F8G. F8H was giving me errors in 1344K AVX prime95 at my barely stable VMIN (dropped threads on settings which were previously 2 hours stable and giving WHEA correectable/L0 errors--that was a giveaway something was not right) when I was at the bare min voltage (VMIN) required for stability, while 15K AVX/FMA3 was unaffected. Since only 1344K AVX (did not test this with AVX disabled, far different VMINS) was affected (on F8G, i would either get a random dropped thread on thread #7 or #8, after 1 hour to 1 hour 45 minutes, but with *NO* WHEA correctable or CPU L0 errors at all), I assume that's memory or IMC related and i needed more VCCIO or VCCSA. I went back to F8G and everything was back to as it was before. Can't be bothered trying to find what RAM changes were done in F8H as I know nothing about RAM except command rate, trfc and trefi.

If you are on F8G already, please do me a favor (i'm sure some of you have the time) and write down all of the "secondary" and "tertiary" RAM subtimings that are set to auto, and then when you update to F8H, re-check to see if any of those timings have changed somehow. (both XMP of course).


----------



## milan616

sygnus21 said:


> So you mean motherboard hub? If so, that sounds like either a driver issue or a motherboard issue in a failed or dying USB controller.


I quite understand that the motherboard ports are USB root complexes. Ever since my USB hub has been disconnected I haven't had any problems. You're going way past what I stated what the issue ended up being.


----------



## scaramonga

Falkentyne said:


> I went back to F8G. F8H was giving me errors in 1344K AVX prime95 at my barely stable VMIN (dropped threads on settings which were previously 2 hours stable and giving WHEA correectable/L0 errors--that was a giveaway something was not right) when I was at the bare min voltage (VMIN) required for stability, while 15K AVX/FMA3 was unaffected. Since only 1344K AVX (did not test this with AVX disabled, far different VMINS) was affected (on F8G, i would either get a random dropped thread on thread #7 or #8, after 1 hour to 1 hour 45 minutes, but with *NO* WHEA correctable or CPU L0 errors at all), I assume that's memory or IMC related and i needed more VCCIO or VCCSA. I went back to F8G and everything was back to as it was before. Can't be bothered trying to find what RAM changes were done in F8H as I know nothing about RAM except command rate, trfc and trefi.
> 
> If you are on F8G already, please do me a favor (i'm sure some of you have the time) and write down all of the "secondary" and "tertiary" RAM subtimings that are set to auto, and then when you update to F8H, re-check to see if any of those timings have changed somehow. (both XMP of course).


Sounds good, as I never run Prime95, never will, and certainly don't plan to, after all, why would I? An hour in RealBench is all I need, as that is a more realistic scenario of what one's system is ever gonna get, lol, through 'day to day' use. Of course, Prime95 will kill that, but then again, I'm not running that, so I have no worries 

May just stay on F8b then, as I see no reason to flash, happy @ 5GHz gaming with no hitches, so thx


----------



## GaryLiao

I rolled back to F8g. Previous overclock become unstable, and my temps rose by over 10c, even when compared a stock settings between F8g and F8h.


----------



## sygnus21

milan616 said:


> I quite understand that the motherboard ports are USB root complexes. Ever since my USB hub has been disconnected I haven't had any problems. You're going way past what I stated what the issue ended up being.


Your post was a bit confusing but ok.


----------



## Performer81

WIth Bios F9b voltage offset and vdroop is not working properly on my Z390 Aorus Pro. Back to F8 everything is fine.


----------



## Timur Born

sygnus21 said:


> Define "anymore"?


Turns out that this was a user fault: We recently moved and I inserted an USB plug hanging out of the PC into a USB port to carry the midi-tower. Important thing is: this USB cable carries a PCIe signal, not an USB signal. Seems like this combination specifically broke the enumeration of the X-Fi.



> Which version of Windows are you using? For Windows 10 (1809) right click the speaker icon and click "Sounds", click the "Playback" tab and make sure the correct device it checked for sound output. Click the Recording tab and do the same. You could also try "Troubleshoot sound problems" and see how that goes.


Did all that, everything is set correctly and Windows does play sounds (meter does move), but nothing comes out of the headphones when connected to either the backpanel or frontpanel output. Sometimes a single bleep can be heard, that's it. I did both versions of Windows reset, the one where you keep your files and settings and the one that deletes everything and practically does a fresh Windows installation. Still nothing on my headphones when plugged into the onboard ports.



> Oh, and remembering who Creative is, they're not exactly known for extending driver support to new OS's with their old cards so I wonder what drivers you're using if running Windows 10 with that X-Fi card. BTW, which one is it???


When the card is not enumerated (aka detected) by the hardware then the driver does not matter. It does not even show up in device-manager as unknown device then. That being said, Creative only just released a new X-Fi driver (Titanium) this February. And last time I checked I even could get my old PCI (non e) X-Fi to work with Windows 10. What I miss is the Windows option to increase microphone pre-amplification like you get with the Realtek driver. I mean to remember that this was possible with the X-Fi in the past.


----------



## Padinn

I'm getting a weird error where got will say Sata drive removed, then drive reappears but I can't access files. Reboot fixes it. The drive is and old one, SMART status says it's ok. Any idea what's hapening?


----------



## deniskos

Performer81 said:


> WIth Bios F9b voltage offset and vdroop is not working properly on my Z390 Aorus Pro. Back to F8 everything is fine.


Is it easy to rollback to F8? Can you just flash F8 if you have F9? Thanks.


----------



## hyder711

deniskos said:


> Is it easy to rollback to F8? Can you just flash F8 if you have F9? Thanks.


yes. I went from F4 to F7 then To F6.


----------



## Seadweller23

Hello- I really like the Aorus Master with my 9900K, especially the cool VRM’s. My board came with Bios F4 and I have been reluctant to update the Bios because of the issues I have read about. Is anyone using this set of GSkill RAM with XMP support listed below? If so, what Bios version are you running? This set is not on the Master OVL but GSkill says it is compatible with the Master. Appreciate your feedback.

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c16q-16gtzb


----------



## Falkentyne

Seadweller23 said:


> Hello- I really like the Aorus Master with my 9900K, especially the cool VRM’s. My board came with Bios F4 and I have been reluctant to update the Bios because of the issues I have read about. Is anyone using this set of GSkill RAM with XMP support listed below? If so, what Bios version are you running? This set is not on the Master OVL but GSkill says it is compatible with the Master. Appreciate your feedback.
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c16q-16gtzb


F4 has way too many bugs.
Update to F7 if you want most fixed, and F8G (was available on tweaktown forums but they posted F8H which some had problems with stability) or F8E (on the gigabyte homepage) if you want the IA AC/DC loadline enter button hardlock issue fixed.


----------



## Seadweller23

Thanks Falkentyne.


----------



## Chimera619

https://imgur.com/a/kTs3b71

New OC'er here
9900k Z390 Aorus Master F4 Bios

Vcore 1.3
LLC Turbo
Power management **** disabled
XMP 1
Uncore 43 Ratio
Its been stable at these settings

My questions are related to temps
What temps should I keep my CPU below with SMALL FFT AVX Test ?
What vcore should I strive for
Are these values of VID on hwmonitor correct are they a concern ?

https://imgur.com/a/kTs3b71


----------



## lucasfrance

Check this! 9900K OC 5GHz at 1.2V : https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

ENJOY!!!


----------



## Falkentyne

lucasfrance said:


> Check this! 9900K OC 5GHz at 1.2V : https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> ENJOY!!!


Please don't post old clickbait articles with terrible settings to get your post count up.
I could run mine at 1.20v also with that terrible stress test (not to mention that 1.20v was the SIO sensor which is inaccurate also, I'm betting the true load voltage at such low power draw may have been reading 1.18v)
Aida64 is worthless.

Just for comparison:
5 ghz, HT Off (8C/8T): Vcore 1.285v (LLC Turbo)

1) Prime95 AVX, 15K in place FFT: 144.750 amps (On-die sense load voltage 1.229v), 90C peak
2) Aida64 (his settings) : 106.750 amps, on-die load voltage 1.245v, 70C peak
3) Most stressful AIDA64 proper settings (FPU checked only), 112.750 amps, 75C peak.

I can bet you $100 if that person had run Prime95 AVX, 15K fixed in place FFT's, he would have BSOD'd.
He didn't show which cache ratio he used. That makes things worse-CPU default VID is based on the cache ratio, not the core ratio.
He also didn't even know what the settings he was changing even did.
"Power saving" on internal AC loadlines sets AC loadline to 0.4 mOhms and DC loadline to 1.30 mOhms (DC loadline has no influence on the CPU on-die sense voltage).


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

Looking for some assistance getting my 8086K (silicon lottery re-lid version) up to speed. SL binned it for 5.2Ghz with a -2 AVX offset.

I managed to get it Prime 95 stable on AVX loads at 4.8Ghz with a 1.315 Vcore, no offset. I'm first trying to find my max stable overclock with AVX loads before using the offset to find the max non-AVX clock rate. 4.9Ghz seems to be a bit more trouble. I boosted the Vcore up to 1.35V but can't get AVX to play nice yet. Temps at 4.8GHz were in the mid 70s. 4.9GHz with the stated voltage is pushing it to the 80-85C range. Cooling is a custom loop with a 280mm rad, 900rpm fans in pull at present. I can go to push-pull on the fans easily enough, too. Water temps are 20C idle, 30C max load.

The voltage rise needed to get to 4.9 seems excessive. What other settings can I try to help gain some more stability as I clock higher?


----------



## sygnus21

Voodoo Rufus said:


> What other settings can I try to help gain some more stability as I clock higher?


What's your motherboard??? I'm not versed in this new way of overclocking so I can't help, but I know they need system specs to help answer your questions.

Good luck.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

sygnus21 said:


> What's your motherboard??? I'm not versed in this new way of overclocking so I can't help, but I know they need system specs to help answer your questions.
> 
> Good luck.


Whoops, that would have been more helpful.




Aorus Master, 2x16GB Gskill 3200 CL14, Seasonic Prime 1000W


----------



## Marke064

Pretty happy with my 9900k so far on the Master , its running fine at 5G vcore 1.255V , uncore 46x C states disabled. Havent gone lower yet just running it last few days at that setting to see how it goes but so far no issues .


----------



## KedarWolf

Marke064 said:


> Pretty happy with my 9900k so far on the Master , its running fine at 5G vcore 1.255V , uncore 46x C states disabled. Havent gone lower yet just running it last few days at that setting to see how it goes but so far no issues .


Have you passed Prime95 1344 FFT's with AVX?


----------



## Marke064

KedarWolf said:


> Have you passed Prime95 1344 FFT's with AVX?


Without AVX as well as Aida64 , cinebench , 3dmark and several days using specialised multicore aware imaging software , PSCS and some gaming no issues. 
Cant see the point running prime for hrs if everything I normally do on the PC runs without a hitch.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Have you passed Prime95 1344 FFT's with AVX?


We determined that prime95 1344K is no longer a valid test to run.
When you have multiple threads, AVX loads at higher FFT (outside of CPU cache range) wind up conflicting with each other.
People found this out when testing Linpack on 16 threads and seeing the residuals running slower than on 8 threads at certain sample sizes.

It's also VERY susceptible to voltage undershoot at high LLC due to the loads from the AVX threads (AVX only has 2 memory lanes of access) suddenly spiking up between iterations, causing the "live" voltage to drop below what is stable, if you area borderline, due to current spike (VR VOUT won't even detect this very well, it might drop by 5mv suddenly but it's more like a +20mv microsecond drop, check an Oscillioscope).

The best 'real world' test for AVX stability that doesn't turn into a 200 amp power virus but is still more stressful than realbench (WITHOUT it being 200 amps/115C) is:
(NOTE: you must be smallest FFT AVX disabled prime stable for this to even work):

Prime95 v29.6 build 6

1) 14 threads (6 threads 9700K) smallest FFT, AVX disabled stress test.
2) with prime installed in a different folder: 2 threads (9900K and 9700K) AVX, (click blend then custom): 512K-8192K FFT range, RAM size 5800 (or so). time for each test: 0 minutes.

This should avoid voltage instability problems because the two AVX loads will not cause voltage instability because of fluctuation (you can check it on Current (IOUT) in HWinfo, the amps will barely increase when you run the 2 AVX threads when the 14 non AVX small FFT threads are already running).

You can do 12 non AVX smallest FFT threads + 4 512-8192K AVX threads (time for each FFT:0 minutes) or 14 non AVX threads+2 512K-8192K AVX threads. Isn't really a difference between them (maybe a few amps).
But 9700K you have to do 6 + 2.

The reason why the smallest FFT (4k-20K especially) AVX/FMA3 threads heat up so much is because they don't touch RAM At all so the CPU has full access to all threads. AVX only has access to two "memory channels"
Have you guys noticed that prime95 "1344K" in place FFT with AVX disabled uses *MORE* *watts at 16 threads, than prime95 AVX 1344K fixed FFT's (16 threads?).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> We determined that prime95 1344K is no longer a valid test to run.
> When you have multiple threads, AVX loads at higher FFT (outside of CPU cache range) wind up conflicting with each other.
> People found this out when testing Linpack on 16 threads and seeing the residuals running slower than on 8 threads at certain sample sizes.
> 
> It's also VERY susceptible to voltage undershoot at high LLC due to the loads from the AVX threads (AVX only has 2 memory lanes of access) suddenly spiking up between iterations, causing the "live" voltage to drop below what is stable, if you area borderline, due to current spike (VR VOUT won't even detect this very well, it might drop by 5mv suddenly but it's more like a +20mv microsecond drop, check an Oscillioscope).
> 
> The best 'real world' test for AVX stability that doesn't turn into a 200 amp power virus but is still more stressful than realbench (WITHOUT it being 200 amps/115C) is:
> (NOTE: you must be smallest FFT AVX disabled prime stable for this to even work):
> 
> Prime95 v29.6 build 6
> 
> 1) 14 threads (6 threads 9700K) smallest FFT, AVX disabled stress test.
> 2) with prime installed in a different folder: 2 threads (9900K and 9700K) AVX, (click blend then custom): 512K-8192K FFT range, RAM size 5800 (or so). time for each test: 0 minutes.
> 
> This should avoid voltage instability problems because the two AVX loads will not cause voltage instability because of fluctuation (you can check it on Current (IOUT) in HWinfo, the amps will barely increase when you run the 2 AVX threads when the 14 non AVX small FFT threads are already running).
> 
> You can do 12 non AVX smallest FFT threads + 4 512-8192K AVX threads (time for each FFT:0 minutes) or 14 non AVX threads+2 512K-8192K AVX threads. Isn't really a difference between them (maybe a few amps).
> But 9700K you have to do 6 + 2.
> 
> The reason why the smallest FFT (4k-20K especially) AVX/FMA3 threads heat up so much is because they don't touch RAM At all so the CPU has full access to all threads. AVX only has access to two "memory channels"
> Have you guys noticed that prime95 "1344K" in place FFT with AVX disabled uses *MORE* *watts at 16 threads, than prime95 AVX 1344K fixed FFT's (16 threads?).


Non-AVX both FFT's at 4, Run In Place, 0 Time Interval I immediately hit 90c without the second Prime95 running. I like to stay under 80C at all times.

But then again you are not explaining all the settings. Do I 'Run In Place' the smallest FFT's, what Time Interval, you really are not explaining it well, and if I'm hitting 90C with what you suggest not a chance in hell I'll run that for any length of time.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Non-AVX smallest FFT at 4, Run In Place, 0 Time Interval I immediately hit 90c without the second Prime95 running. I like to stay under 80C at all times.
> 
> But then again you are not explaining all the settings. Do I 'Run In Place' the smallest FFT's, what Time Interval, you really are not explaining it well, and if I'm hitting 90C with what you suggest not a chance in hell I'll run that for any length of time.


No, I explained it perfectly.
These are not my instructions.
These are wantkitteh's instructions.
He's the guy who worked with the prime95 author to update prime95 to not suck so much on modern systems.

here maybe it's just easier if I link you the thread.
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...c_avx_testing_with_prime95/eh7dn8g/?context=3

If this is too stressful for you, then you need to use realbench 2.56.
or you pay to the volcano god that the games which use AVX won't crash.
There is no other way.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> No, I explained it perfectly.
> These are not my instructions.
> These are wantkitteh's instructions.
> He's the guy who worked with the prime95 author to update prime95 to not suck so much on modern systems.
> 
> here maybe it's just easier if I link you the thread.
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...c_avx_testing_with_prime95/eh7dn8g/?context=3
> 
> If this is too stressful for you, then you need to use realbench 2.56.
> or you pay to the volcano god that the games which use AVX won't crash.
> There is no other way.


You never answered my questions.

Do I 'Run In Place' the smallest FFT's, what Time Interval, is it at both FFT's at 4?

Edit: Oh wait, if I change the reddit view i can see the settings.

Still getting around 86-87C without the second Prime95 running. I WON'T run Prime95 at those temps. Not a realistic test for my voltages I need to get 5.1GHZ CPU.

I get 90C In RealBench as well.

I find if I pass 1344 FFT's AVX enabled my PC runs fine with temps while stress testing reasonable and I never crash while gaming or running any program. It works for me.


----------



## Chimera619

Hi guys

For my new build 9900k z390
I am currently in South Africa and it's super hot like 30c outside and I have no AirCon so I am going to keep my 9900k at 4700mhz on 1.2v during Summer at least
Ive had it like that for 2 days
Prime95 non-avx is stable with max temps 92c on one of the cores (vrout 1.1x and vcore is around 1.21v) 
I am using Phanteks TC14PE 
But when I run Prime95 AVX is stays ok for a while with max temps 80-85c then suddenly it goes up to 95c and the test gives errors
Is that normal with these cpus ?
Do I need to set any parameter in motherboard

I am 1.2v and LLC to Turbo
Ram is 3200mhz 1.35v


----------



## HBizzle

Chimera619 said:


> Hi guys
> 
> For my new build 9900k z390
> I am currently in South Africa and it's super hot like 30c outside and I have no AirCon so I am going to keep my 9900k at 4700mhz on 1.2v during Summer at least
> Ive had it like that for 2 days
> Prime95 non-avx is stable with max temps 92c on one of the cores (vrout 1.1x and vcore is around 1.21v)
> I am using Phanteks TC14PE
> But when I run Prime95 AVX is stays ok for a while with max temps 80-85c then suddenly it goes up to 95c and the test gives errors
> Is that normal with these cpus ?
> Do I need to set any parameter in motherboard
> 
> I am 1.2v and LLC to Turbo
> Ram is 3200mhz 1.35v


Have you thought about getting a water AIO for it? With those ambient air temps and no AC I think you are going to have trouble until you do that.


----------



## Falkentyne

Chimera619 said:


> Hi guys
> 
> For my new build 9900k z390
> I am currently in South Africa and it's super hot like 30c outside and I have no AirCon so I am going to keep my 9900k at 4700mhz on 1.2v during Summer at least
> Ive had it like that for 2 days
> Prime95 non-avx is stable with max temps 92c on one of the cores (vrout 1.1x and vcore is around 1.21v)
> I am using Phanteks TC14PE
> But when I run Prime95 AVX is stays ok for a while with max temps 80-85c then suddenly it goes up to 95c and the test gives errors
> Is that normal with these cpus ?
> Do I need to set any parameter in motherboard
> 
> I am 1.2v and LLC to Turbo
> Ram is 3200mhz 1.35v


4.7 ghz core, 4.4 ghz cache @ 1.20v LLC turbo requires a slightly better than average CPU to pass AVX prime.
Try also prime95 29.6 beta 6 (check their forums for it). Easy to disable AVX and FMA3 now and tests make more sense.
For enhanced stability and lower temps (VR VOUT will actually be lower), use Bios voltage 1.240v + LLC High (not turbo). Transient response will be much better, lowering your minimum load VR VOUT slightly.


----------



## Chimera619

Falkentyne said:


> 4.7 ghz core, 4.4 ghz cache @ 1.20v LLC turbo requires a slightly better than average CPU to pass AVX prime.
> Try also prime95 29.6 beta 6 (check their forums for it). Easy to disable AVX and FMA3 now and tests make more sense.
> For enhanced stability and lower temps (VR VOUT will actually be lower), use Bios voltage 1.240v + LLC High (not turbo). Transient response will be much better, lowering your minimum load VR VOUT slightly.


I have the latest prime and non avx small FFT is stable (I tested 40mins with temps not going over 80-82c)
small FFT avx works fine until a certain test then it sky rockets to 95c and gives an error
1344 FFT avx also works fine with temps between 65c and 70c VROUT is 1.166

isnt 1.24 LLC high worse in normal 24/7 as it means higher voltage to the cpu in normal use degradation and everything in mind


----------



## Chimera619

HBizzle said:


> Have you thought about getting a water AIO for it? With those ambient air temps and no AC I think you are going to have trouble until you do that.


I made some research and read that Noctua and Phanteks high end cooler perform the same as an AIO at like 1/3 the price? 
I thought people bought AIOs just for the looks xD


----------



## BradleyW

Chimera619 said:


> I have the latest prime and non avx small FFT is stable (I tested 40mins with temps not going over 80-82c)
> small FFT avx works fine until a certain test then it sky rockets to 95c and gives an error
> 1344 FFT avx also works fine with temps between 65c and 70c VROUT is 1.166
> 
> isnt 1.24 LLC high worse in normal 24/7 as it means higher voltage to the cpu in normal use degradation and everything in mind


Extreme LLC is bad due to voltage spikes.

Higher LLC's allow for less voltage to be dialled in for the Vcore, resulting in less voltage given to the CPU at idle/low load.

On a lower LLC, you may enter 1.25vcore. In windows, on idle/low workloads, that may result in 1.28v, then medium workloads @ 1.26v and high workloads @ 1.2v.

Numbers are for example purposes only and don't reflect the result of an actual test.


----------



## Falkentyne

Chimera619 said:


> I have the latest prime and non avx small FFT is stable (I tested 40mins with temps not going over 80-82c)
> small FFT avx works fine until a certain test then it sky rockets to 95c and gives an error
> 1344 FFT avx also works fine with temps between 65c and 70c VROUT is 1.166
> 
> isnt 1.24 LLC high worse in normal 24/7 as it means higher voltage to the cpu in normal use degradation and everything in mind


There is zero risk to anything with a bios voltage that low. Only once you exceed 1.35v bios idle voltage do things start getting questionable.

Even more questionable is what is the maximum safe "VR VOUT" load voltage on air or water. I have a theory but I'm not saying it now since the haters (the very same people who claimed degradation doesn't exist and who continue to attack me to this day over what I 'estimate' maximum safe voltage to be, will just attack me again, so I'll only give my information to people that deserve it).

One thing to remember is a bios voltage of 1.35v with LLC high is significantly safer than a bios voltage of 1.35v with LLC Turbo. Transient spikes would be reduced by at least 20mv-25mv (guesstimation the amount of the increase of mOhms of resistance (not vdroop, resistance or intensity of the loadline slope) going from LLC turbo to LLC High. The problem is the vdroop with LLC High is almost double the vdroop of LLC Turbo (this basically means that if LLC Turbo=0.4 mOhms of Loadline, LLC High would be close to 0.8 mOhms. I do not know the exact values).


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Extreme LLC is bad due to voltage spikes.
> 
> Higher LLC's allow for less voltage to be dialled in for the Vcore, resulting in less voltage given to the CPU at idle/low load.
> 
> On a lower LLC, you may enter 1.25vcore. In windows, on idle/low workloads, that may result in 1.28v, then medium workloads @ 1.26v and high workloads @ 1.2v.
> 
> Numbers are for example purposes only and don't reflect the result of an actual test.


Higher LLC's cause more voltage instability. It's not just transient spikes. It's transient -drops- too. 
A CPU that is stable with a VR VOUT load (FMA3 prime) of 1.109v at LLC=High would require 1.139v of the same VR VOUT (FMA3 15K Prime95) with LLC Turbo. I've spent **days** testing this.
I know someone is going to attack me again over this, but I've spent more time testing this (and wasting my life) than I have actually playing video games.

This "Delta" decreases with less current. Because less current=less dips AND spikes (So with AVX disabled prime95 you may see a much smaller difference).


----------



## Chimera619

Falkentyne said:


> Higher LLC's cause more voltage instability. It's not just transient spikes. It's transient -drops- too.
> A CPU that is stable with a VR VOUT load (FMA3 prime) of 1.109v at LLC=High would require 1.139v of the same VR VOUT (FMA3 15K Prime95) with LLC Turbo. I've spent **days** testing this.
> I know someone is going to attack me again over this, but I've spent more time testing this (and wasting my life) than I have actually playing video games.
> 
> This "Delta" decreases with less current. Because less current=less dips AND spikes (So with AVX disabled prime95 you may see a much smaller difference).


I meant 1.2 + Turbo is better than 1.24 + High as it means lower idle voltage right ?
I dont need to push my CPU hard during summer as these settings are even lower than stock (voltage+temp)

Can i also get your input on AIO vs my Phanteks Cooler is it worth it or should I just wait for next summer and do a Custom loop

Another question is should I try to get my OC using adaptive voltage or it really wont affect the longevity of the CPU

Last question xD im sry

the pic attached
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257878&thumb=1

Its not my settings I have all these stuff on auto except LLC 
What do they mean and will changing any of them help me


----------



## Falkentyne

Chimera619 said:


> I meant 1.2 + Turbo is better than 1.24 + High as it means lower idle voltage right ?
> I dont need to push my CPU hard during summer as these settings are even lower than stock (voltage+temp)
> 
> Can i also get your input on AIO vs my Phanteks Cooler is it worth it or should I just wait for next summer and do a Custom loop
> 
> Another question is should I try to get my OC using adaptive voltage or it really wont affect the longevity of the CPU
> 
> Last question xD im sry
> 
> the pic attached
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257878&thumb=1
> 
> Its not my settings I have all these stuff on auto except LLC
> What do they mean and will changing any of them help me


Idle voltage is not important under 1.35v
So in your case, 1.23v LLC High is better than 1.20v LLC Turbo--because your load 'VR VOUT' at absolute maximum load (160 amps) will be lower--better temps.


----------



## Chimera619

Falkentyne said:


> Idle voltage is not important under 1.35v
> So in your case, 1.23v LLC High is better than 1.20v LLC Turbo--because your load 'VR VOUT' at absolute maximum load (160 amps) will be lower--better temps.


What about the other settings on the screenshot what do they mean


----------



## Bruticis

Hello all, I'm having some trouble figuring out the A-RGB setup combination of my case and motherboard. I'm using a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra motherboard in a Cooler Master H500M. The case has ARGB connections for both Asus/Asrock and Gigabyte separate. The Gigabyte cable is 3 pins while the Asus is 4 (with one blocked off). My understanding is that Gigabyte switched to the 4 pin on their newer motherboards. If this is correct, does this mean I should use the Asus connection from the case to the motherboard?

I can't seem to work out where exactly on the motherboard I should be plugging the case into. I assume the connections go into C1_LED and C2_LED but the pins don't match the Cooler Master Gigabyte connection from the case. Here are two photos, one of the cables from the CM, the other a close up of the C2_LED on the motherboard.

https://i.imgur.com/xkvFAy9.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/RUFUV1L.jpg


----------



## derelict360

Hi all,

I've just put together a new system with a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master motherboard. I'm unable to get it to boot to BIOS with anything more than 1 stick of RAM and it typically only boots if its in the RAM slot furthest to the right. I am able to boot to windows when using just the 1 RAM stick.

I've done some basic troubleshooting like making sure each stick works in slot 1 and various placements of additional sticks in the RAM slots. It looks like the RAM is not the problem.

I'm down to a few possible causes.

1. Incorrect placement of CPU, CPU pump, CPU backplate, etc.
2. Possibly bad motherboard
3. Incorrect motherboard mounting

My questions are:

1. What is the Likelihood that it is an incorrect motherboard mounting? I used a combination of motherboard mounting screws and radial screws to install the motherboard.
2. If I was able to get the computer to boot into Windows, what are the chances that the CPU is the problem? Will running stress tests eliminate the CPU as the possible cause?
3. Can you think of anything else? If I'm passing CPU stress tests and all the RAM sticks work in slot 1, have I isolated the problem to the motherboard?


----------



## R3van

Is the CPU delided?

Maybe Direct Die with a third party mount?


----------



## derelict360

R3van said:


> Is the CPU delided?
> 
> Maybe Direct Die with a third party mount?


Nope, the CPU heat spreader is still intact. I bought it new from Newegg and have not modified it, overclocked it, etc. It's brand new as is everything else in the rig.

I'm not sure what you mean by a third party mount. The CPU was placed into the CPU slot on the motherboard and I am able to boot to Windows as long as I use only 1 stick of RAM. I am using a Corsair H115i Platinum to cool the chip. When I am able to boot to BIOS the chip idles at 30 degrees C.


----------



## nanotm

derelict360 said:


> Nope, the CPU heat spreader is still intact. I bought it new from Newegg and have not modified it, overclocked it, etc. It's brand new as is everything else in the rig.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by a third party mount. The CPU was placed into the CPU slot on the motherboard and I am able to boot to Windows as long as I use only stick of RAM. I am using a Corsair H115i Platinum to cool the chip. When I am able to boot to BIOS the chip idles at 30 degrees C.


contact the vendor(s) and ask them?

personally I would be inclined to try reseating the cpu cooler (only if you have spare thermal paste at the ready) I would also check the mobo QVL list for the ram and see if there are any bios updates available for the mobo and then see if its all working afterwards or not, 

overtightening the cooler down can cause some issues due to flexing the mobo, you can always use the memtest from the windows menu to test each of the ram sticks if reseating things doesnt work out (and remove the cpu and check the pins on it)


----------



## derelict360

nanotm said:


> contact the vendor(s) and ask them?
> 
> personally I would be inclined to try reseating the cpu cooler (only if you have spare thermal paste at the ready) I would also check the mobo QVL list for the ram and see if there are any bios updates available for the mobo and then see if its all working afterwards or not,
> 
> overtightening the cooler down can cause some issues due to flexing the mobo, you can always use the memtest from the windows menu to test each of the ram sticks if reseating things doesnt work out (and remove the cpu and check the pins on it)



So the dude at Newegg said to try Memtest but Metest appears to be an x86 application. I looked for Metest64 and that one looks like it loads from Windows and not the BIOS. Is there a 64 bit Memtest that tests from the BIOS? Has anyone here used it?

Gonna reseat the CPU and cooler after updating the BIOS. I also have another set of RAM sticks to test.

If none of that works it looks like it's RMA time.


Edit:

Never mind. I just saw this.

https://www.memtest86.com/

MemTest naming
The number 86 following the MemTest part of the name, refers to the original x86 CPU instruction set that all of today's PCs use. This covers both 32bit and 64bit machines. (So there is no need for a future product called MemTest64).


----------



## R3van

derelict360 said:


> Nope, the CPU heat spreader is still intact. I bought it new from Newegg and have not modified it, overclocked it, etc. It's brand new as is everything else in the rig.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by a third party mount. The CPU was placed into the CPU slot on the motherboard and I am able to boot to Windows as long as I use only 1 stick of RAM. I am using a Corsair H115i Platinum to cool the chip. When I am able to boot to BIOS the chip idles at 30 degrees C.


a third party mount like der8auer oc frame for delidded cpus.
but as you said, its not delidded so it hasse to be something else.
still sounds to me like a bad placed cpu or wrong pressure on it.
maybe cooler not evenly distributed?


----------



## nanotm

derelict360 said:


> So the dude at Newegg said to try Memtest but Metest appears to be an x86 application. I looked for Metest64 and that one looks like it loads from Windows and not the BIOS. Is there a 64 bit Memtest that tests from the BIOS? Has anyone here used it?
> 
> Gonna reseat the CPU and cooler after updating the BIOS. I also have another set of RAM sticks to test.
> 
> If none of that works it looks like it's RMA time.
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Never mind. I just saw this.
> 
> https://www.memtest86.com/
> 
> MemTest naming
> The number 86 following the MemTest part of the name, refers to the original x86 CPU instruction set that all of today's PCs use. This covers both 32bit and 64bit machines. (So there is no need for a future product called MemTest64).


 "windows memory diagnostic" which you can enable on restart and then restart the pc or you can boot into recovery console and run it from the advanced options not sure if its as good as memtest (for some reason I thought the built in test was called memtest, but maybe thats just my brain being fuzy)



R3van said:


> a third party mount like der8auer oc frame for delidded cpus.
> but as you said, its not delidded so it hasse to be something else.
> still sounds to me like a bad placed cpu or wrong pressure on it.
> maybe cooler not evenly distributed?


best to get the system running before thinking about delidding the cpu, no point in voiding the warrenty if the cpu is a lemon /


----------



## derelict360

nanotm said:


> overtightening the cooler down can cause some issues due to flexing the mobo, you can always use the memtest from the windows menu to test each of the ram sticks if reseating things doesnt work out (and remove the cpu and check the pins on it)



So a couple of those are bent maybe? on the right....?


----------



## OutlawII

derelict360 said:


> So a couple of those are bent maybe? on the right....?




Yep bent pins, get a magnifying glass and check for sure. Easily fixable


----------



## scaramonga

The thing about the H115i Platinum (as I had one), is that it never tightens up, and is 'supposed' to be designed like that, and after bracket fixing, it moves about, which I did not like. So one will tend to 'over compensate' in tightening the CPU cooler down, which is fair enough, but, as stated, that can cause more problems than it's worth.


----------



## robertr1

Falkentyne said:


> Idle voltage is not important under 1.35v
> So in your case, 1.23v LLC High is better than 1.20v LLC Turbo--because your load 'VR VOUT' at absolute maximum load (160 amps) will be lower--better temps.


So your recommendation is to increase base vcore and lower LLC to control spikes/drops?

In my case Auros Pro Wifi, 9900k 5core/43cache, i'm running static vcore in bios of 1.26v with LLC Turbo. That's rock stable. You're saying that I'd be better off going to 1.3v but with a lower LLC (or whatever is the lowest possible?)


----------



## Falkentyne

robertr1 said:


> So your recommendation is to increase base vcore and lower LLC to control spikes/drops?
> 
> In my case Auros Pro Wifi, 9900k 5core/43cache, i'm running static vcore in bios of 1.26v with LLC Turbo. That's rock stable. You're saying that I'd be better off going to 1.3v but with a lower LLC (or whatever is the lowest possible?)


In general, yes, but the vdroop is double going from LLC turbo to high. So at a certain point, you would need a possibly unsafe idle voltage at higher clocks, as the vdroop would just be too high. Then turbo is probably the best. Also the VMIN stable voltage difference between High and Turbo only starts being noticeable at extremely heavy loads (avx prime95, etc); Realbench doesn't put enough load on so it's maybe a 5mv true load drop.
To be direct however, for general use, turbo is just fine. It's only with FMA3/AVX power viruses that going from turbo to high makes a big difference in transients. There's still vdroop with turbo (ITE 8792E doesn't show any, but VR VOUT does).

At that point, you're better off just using Auto/Normal voltages with DVID and LLC between low to high that way. Then you can also downclock at idle if you want as well, and if you don't want to use power saving, your idle will still be much lower thanks to the negative -DVID.

The one problem I have with Normal - DVID +lower LLC is that you wind up using way too much voltage than you need for lighter loads, while power virus loads may be borderline or even drop too low sometimes (vdroop at high current). So let's say avx disabled prime95 needs 1.293v VR VOUT to be stable. Easy to tune for that with manual+LLC Turbo. (1.350v bios+Turbo should get you there). But with Manual+LLC High, you may need 1.415v in Bios for about 1.405v idle. Now for DVID way, you get a much lower idle, but your load VR VOUT with that same AVX disabled prime may be 1.320v (far higher than needed) while super heavy loads may drop to 1.280v. I was testing intrud3r's settings at 5.1 ghz yesterday and I saw a higher VR VOUT during a realbench test (on average) than mine (1.350v+LLC Turbo), but average load temps were a bit lower. But I did see a drop to 1.273v VR VOUT with his test, which I know is too low.

I'll do more offset testing later. I just really don't like how you can't control your load voltages quite as well (Asus does this better). You wind up with too much voltage for light to medium loads, but it definitely is a valid option.


----------



## GaryLiao

Falkentyne said:


> In general, yes, but the vdroop is double going from LLC turbo to high. So at a certain point, you would need a possibly unsafe idle voltage at higher clocks, as the vdroop would just be too high. Then turbo is probably the best. Also the VMIN stable voltage difference between High and Turbo only starts being noticeable at extremely heavy loads (avx prime95, etc); Realbench doesn't put enough load on so it's maybe a 5mv true load drop.
> To be direct however, for general use, turbo is just fine. It's only with FMA3/AVX power viruses that going from turbo to high makes a big difference in transients. There's still vdroop with turbo (ITE 8792E doesn't show any, but VR VOUT does).
> 
> At that point, you're better off just using Auto/Normal voltages with DVID and LLC between low to high that way. Then you can also downclock at idle if you want as well, and if you don't want to use power saving, your idle will still be much lower thanks to the negative -DVID.
> 
> The one problem I have with Normal - DVID +lower LLC is that you wind up using way too much voltage than you need for lighter loads, while power virus loads may be borderline or even drop too low sometimes (vdroop at high current). So let's say avx disabled prime95 needs 1.293v VR VOUT to be stable. Easy to tune for that with manual+LLC Turbo. (1.350v bios+Turbo should get you there). But with Manual+LLC High, you may need 1.415v in Bios for about 1.405v idle. Now for DVID way, you get a much lower idle, but your load VR VOUT with that same AVX disabled prime may be 1.320v (far higher than needed) while super heavy loads may drop to 1.280v. I was testing intrud3r's settings at 5.1 ghz yesterday and I saw a higher VR VOUT during a realbench test (on average) than mine (1.350v+LLC Turbo), but average load temps were a bit lower. But I did see a drop to 1.273v VR VOUT with his test, which I know is too low.
> 
> I'll do more offset testing later. I just really don't like how you can't control your load voltages quite as well (Asus does this better). You wind up with too much voltage for light to medium loads, but it definitely is a valid option.


I'm also currently at this point in my tweaking - trying to optimize load and idle voltages and preventing overshoots. The approach I took was actually to use the internal VR settings for load line calibration rather than the built in presets. I've currently settled on a 5GHz core with 4.5Ghz Cache with a 9900K and Aorus Master at these settings:

Vcore: Normal
DVID: +0.025

LLC: Normal
IA AC: 50
IA DC: 145 (This just changes the VID to match VR OUT under load)

VRM Performance: Extreme
VRM Switching: 500 (default 400) - from documentation on other motherboards this just simply reduces the amount of time a transient overshoot or undershoot lasts for at the expense of higher VRM heat, but

So far this results in a VR OUT (all voltages mentioned are in references to VR OUT) of 1.19V for P95 26.6 16 thread smallest fft no avx and 1.22V for 14 thread smallest fft no avx + 4 thread AVX enabled 512-8192. I'm happy with these load voltages. The idle spikes can reach up to 1.31v on desktop which I think is ok, with an average idle of around 1.23V.

The method I used to get up to this point was to reciprocally raise or lower the DVID and IA AC values. You can always maintain the same load voltages that way but as Falkentyne mentioned before, higher levels of LLC lead to larger overshoots (negative and positive). 

So the higher the IA AC setting goes, the more overshoot and undershoot you will experience which might lead to instability when dropping to idle from high loads or even just from load variation in real world usage (not constant load like in stress tests). Higher IA AC settings means you can lower your DVID offset, which means you will run at a lower idle voltage. 

Settings like CPU Vcore overcurrent protection also seem to have an effect on how the VRM responds. At Auto I am stable with these settings, but with Turbo I am not stable even on a simple test like x264 - it produces WHEA Cache errors.

Funny enough, the best test I have found for testing CPU stability based on transient voltage changes is 3DMark Time Spy GRAPHICS Test 1 (not CPU Test). Just run it in a loop in the background while monitoring for WHEA cache errors. It's a much more real world dynamic load that picks up instabilities that nothing else has so far for me. In time spy my current settings gets 1.185 minimum and 1.315 as max. 

I don't know how much further I'm going to optimize this.


----------



## Falkentyne

GaryLiao said:


> I'm also currently at this point in my tweaking - trying to optimize load and idle voltages and preventing overshoots. The approach I took was actually to use the internal VR settings for load line calibration rather than the built in presets. I've currently settled on a 5GHz core with 4.5Ghz Cache with a 9900K and Aorus Master at these settings:
> 
> Vcore: Normal
> DVID: +0.025
> 
> LLC: Normal
> IA AC: 50
> IA DC: 145 (This just changes the VID to match VR OUT under load)
> 
> VRM Performance: Extreme
> VRM Switching: 500 (default 400) - from documentation on other motherboards this just simply reduces the amount of time a transient overshoot or undershoot lasts for at the expense of higher VRM heat, but
> 
> So far this results in a VR OUT (all voltages mentioned are in references to VR OUT) of 1.19V for P95 26.6 16 thread smallest fft no avx and 1.22V for 14 thread smallest fft no avx + 4 thread AVX enabled 512-8192. I'm happy with these load voltages. The idle spikes can reach up to 1.31v on desktop which I think is ok, with an average idle of around 1.23V.
> 
> The method I used to get up to this point was to reciprocally raise or lower the DVID and IA AC values. You can always maintain the same load voltages that way but as Falkentyne mentioned before, higher levels of LLC lead to larger overshoots (negative and positive).
> 
> So the higher the IA AC setting goes, the more overshoot and undershoot you will experience which might lead to instability when dropping to idle from high loads or even just from load variation in real world usage (not constant load like in stress tests). Higher IA AC settings means you can lower your DVID offset, which means you will run at a lower idle voltage.
> 
> Settings like CPU Vcore overcurrent protection also seem to have an effect on how the VRM responds. At Auto I am stable with these settings, but with Turbo I am not stable even on a simple test like x264 - it produces WHEA Cache errors.
> 
> Funny enough, the best test I have found for testing CPU stability based on transient voltage changes is 3DMark Time Spy GRAPHICS Test 1 (not CPU Test). Just run it in a loop in the background while monitoring for WHEA cache errors. It's a much more real world dynamic load that picks up instabilities that nothing else has so far for me. In time spy my current settings gets 1.185 minimum and 1.315 as max.
> 
> I don't know how much further I'm going to optimize this.





> Settings like CPU Vcore overcurrent protection also seem to have an effect on how the VRM responds. At Auto I am stable with these settings, but with Turbo I am not stable even on a simple test like x264 - it produces WHEA Cache errors.


What? Are you serious?
That setting actually does something?
I thought this just makes the computer shut off if the current is too high?

(and I have no idea what Vcore / VAXG voltage protection does...it's in mv....I assume that just stops you from setting a too high voltage, but thank god for UNDOCUMENTED settings, huh? We need more undocumented settings, folks!)


----------



## Intrud3r

Sadly my Aorus Ultra misses the option: CPU Vcore overcurrent protection

Otherwise I would have tested it also.


----------



## GaryLiao

Falkentyne said:


> What? Are you serious?
> That setting actually does something?
> I thought this just makes the computer shut off if the current is too high?
> 
> (and I have no idea what Vcore / VAXG voltage protection does...it's in mv....I assume that just stops you from setting a too high voltage, but thank god for UNDOCUMENTED settings, huh? We need more undocumented settings, folks!)


Yeah that's definitely something that Gigabyte needs to work on. This thread has been SUPER helpful though in terms of dialing in an overclock on the 9900K. So much stuff discussed here that's never discussed on any readily available "OC Guides." I remember when I first got the 9900K and Aorus Master and was so frustrated that I couldn't seem to hit 5Ghz with any reasonable voltages.


----------



## Falkentyne

GaryLiao said:


> Yeah that's definitely something that Gigabyte needs to work on. This thread has been SUPER helpful though in terms of dialing in an overclock on the 9900K. So much stuff discussed here that's never discussed on any readily available "OC Guides." I remember when I first got the 9900K and Aorus Master and was so frustrated that I couldn't seem to hit 5Ghz with any reasonable voltages.


Are you sure that setting (specifically CPU VCORE CURRENT PROTECTION) is the -only- thing you changed to stop the WHEA errors?

Something's up somewhere. Almost like that setting is affecting PWM Phase Control somehow? (Oddly enough I never saw any differences when setting PWM phase Control to Lite Pwr, then changing it to Xtreme, several weeks ago).

To be fair, if you read the 9900K thread, I changed this this morning after what you posted, and was able to do a 30 minute realbench 2.56 test at 5.1 ghz, 1.335v vcore (LLC=Turbo) without any errors.
Yesterday I was either getting WHEA/L0 errors logged in 5-10 minutes at that voltage, or even fun stuff like KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED.

So what exactly is this doing?
if you're bored and want to be my new best friend, are you willing to waste a few hours of your life for me and check if you change it back to Turbo (Nothing else done) and see if you get the L0 errors again?
Then try "Extreme" (I never tried that) and see if the L0 errors stop?

I always suspected something was wonky with the Aorus Master. Like settings that worked on the F7B beta bios that MatthewH posted were giving WHEA/L0's on F8G. I just chalked it up to CPU degradation slightly and upped the vcore.

You can even add me on discord (PM me) if you do these tests


----------



## HBizzle

Chimera619 said:


> I made some research and read that Noctua and Phanteks high end cooler perform the same as an AIO at like 1/3 the price?
> I thought people bought AIOs just for the looks xD


I think there are a bunch of people who are air cooler cult members, and repeatedly with this chip you see poorer performance on air coolers, and really anything but a 360 radiator setup. But hey keep trying to get it to work with that air cooler when it isn't working already with it. I am sure something will magically change, right?


----------



## GaryLiao

Falkentyne said:


> Are you sure that setting (specifically CPU VCORE CURRENT PROTECTION) is the -only- thing you changed to stop the WHEA errors?
> 
> Something's up somewhere. Almost like that setting is affecting PWM Phase Control somehow? (Oddly enough I never saw any differences when setting PWM phase Control to Lite Pwr, then changing it to Xtreme, several weeks ago).
> 
> To be fair, if you read the 9900K thread, I changed this this morning after what you posted, and was able to do a 30 minute realbench 2.56 test at 5.1 ghz, 1.335v vcore (LLC=Turbo) without any errors.
> Yesterday I was either getting WHEA/L0 errors logged in 5-10 minutes at that voltage, or even fun stuff like KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED.
> 
> So what exactly is this doing?
> if you're bored and want to be my new best friend, are you willing to waste a few hours of your life for me and check if you change it back to Turbo (Nothing else done) and see if you get the L0 errors again?
> Then try "Extreme" (I never tried that) and see if the L0 errors stop?
> 
> I always suspected something was wonky with the Aorus Master. Like settings that worked on the F7B beta bios that MatthewH posted were giving WHEA/L0's on F8G. I just chalked it up to CPU degradation slightly and upped the vcore.
> 
> You can even add me on discord (PM me) if you do these tests


I forgot to mention that I was using F8g as well since F8h totally messed everything up. I re-did my OC to the settings I mentioned before last night when I read your post on the last page about how 1344K AVX was no longer a valid test. I have an exam coming up next week unfortunately so I'll get back to tweaking after that!


----------



## Falkentyne

GaryLiao said:


> I forgot to mention that I was using F8g as well since F8h totally messed everything up. I re-did my OC to the settings I mentioned before last night when I read your post on the last page about how 1344K AVX was no longer a valid test. I have an exam coming up next week unfortunately so I'll get back to tweaking after that!


I just rebooted to 5.1ghz and got a L0 error in about 12 minutes into Realbench 2.56.
It passed 30 minutes a few hours ago. I give up.
Something's wonky about the transients, I bet.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> I just rebooted to 5.1ghz and got a L0 error in about 12 minutes into Realbench 2.56.
> It passed 30 minutes a few hours ago. I give up.
> Something's wonky about the transients, I bet.


Are you doing that with or without an avx offset of 1 ? I assume none, so 0. My settings would BSOD or throw errors at me with AVX = 0, tested it an hour ago or so.
With my avx offset of 1 I have no problems running at 5.1 (as it seems so far)


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Are you doing that with or without an avx offset of 1 ? I assume none, so 0. My settings would BSOD or throw errors at me with AVX = 0, tested it an hour ago or so.
> With my avx offset of 1 I have no problems running at 5.1 (as it seems so far)


No offsets at all
I just set vcore to 1.340v, Vcore current protection to "Extreme" instead of 'Auto' and am doing a 1 hour Realbench 2.56 test now.
i suspect it will pass.
I really think something's up with the transients though.
One thing that has NOT changed at all in the last 2 months is my absolute lowest VMIN.

Last night, prime95 29.6 build 7, AVX 15K FFT (fixed) passed 3.5 hours at 5 ghz, 1.285v, LLC Turbo (1.229v load VR VOUT) with hyperthreading off, which I established as my VMIN there. 1.280V was never tested, but last January, 1.275v was erratic...on one test it would pass for 1 hour+, in another test, a core (#4 I think) would randomly fail in about 20 minutes to 45 minutes. Sometimes 1.265v would pass 30 minutes, then would fail a thread in 5-15 minutes. So I jacked it up to 1.285v and it's remained steady. 
Another VMIN I established for myself was 4.7 ghz (ring x44), with 1.230v and LLC High (hyperthreading on this time), and 15K FMA3 FFT's. (Load VR VOUT with some huge vdroop to 1.109v-1.107v). That passed 4 hours last night till I ended the test and that has never failed. (1.225v sometimes passed for 2 hours, but one time it failed a thread after an hour and 30 minutes).

An good oscilloscope hooked up to VCC_Sense and VSS_Sense (NOT the MLCC caps) would seriously answer so many questions.... :/


----------



## StreaMRoLLeR

Help me understand the adaptive voltage in advanced way.

My 9900k and Aorus Xtreme is stable with 1.181V 4.9 with MANUEL voltage.

When i change to Adaptive ( due to undervolt at idle saving/power cost) i managed to get 1.248V with -80 offset when i try like -90 i get BSOD or my voltage spike to 1.380V. Whats wrong here. I both tried LL3-7-4


----------



## Intrud3r

Streamroller said:


> Help me understand the adaptive voltage in advanced way.
> 
> My 9900k and Aorus Xtreme is stable with 1.181V 4.9 with MANUEL voltage.
> 
> When i change to Adaptive ( due to undervolt at idle saving/power cost) i managed to get 1.248V with -80 offset when i try like -90 i get BSOD or my voltage spike to 1.380V. Whats wrong here. I both tried LL3-7-4


I've had the same thing, I think it's just how adaptive / normal works on these boards.

Manual voltage @ 1.325V 5.0 / 4.7 stable
Under prime load it dropped to 1.309V with vcore loadline @ turbo
Vcore never exceeded 1.325V as far as I can remember.

Now at adaptive, to get to the same voltage under load I have to set it to normal with a dvid of about -0.070V.
But with these settings I see my VR VOUT go as high as 1.380V, 
With prime running small FFT's without AVX for example the voltage reads 1.309 - 1.314V


----------



## iunlock

Hey fellow Z390 Master owners. I'm running my 8086K + 2080Ti on the board and it has been pretty solid. 

I'm on the latest bios and running at 5.4GHz stable on all 6 cores.

The only thing that I've been noticing are the vcore spikes according to hwinfo64, which are much higher than the static voltage set in the bios. 

I'll carve some time today to search and read through all 260+ pages lol. 

I'm glad this thread is here. 

Cheers to you all.


----------



## derelict360

nanotm said:


> contact the vendor(s) and ask them?
> 
> personally I would be inclined to try reseating the cpu cooler (only if you have spare thermal paste at the ready) I would also check the mobo QVL list for the ram and see if there are any bios updates available for the mobo and then see if its all working afterwards or not,
> 
> overtightening the cooler down can cause some issues due to flexing the mobo, you can always use the memtest from the windows menu to test each of the ram sticks if reseating things doesnt work out (and remove the cpu and check the pins on it)


The board's been RMA'd. 

Normally I would like to punish the manufacturer by buying a different board. I put all options on the table including the MSI Z390 Godlike, ASUS Hero, etc. but the Gigabyte Z390 Master just looks like the best board all around. I had a hard time with features, lack of armor, or lower power phases on every other board.

I hope the 2nd one is not a dud. =/


----------



## marik123

Right now I only have the 8 pin power connector plugged in and was wondering if the extra 4 pin will make a difference in terms of overclocking?


----------



## Falkentyne

marik123 said:


> Right now I only have the 8 pin power connector plugged in and was wondering if the extra 4 pin will make a difference in terms of overclocking?


It won't hurt.
The extra cable will stop the CPU +12v from dipping a bit lower than it does with a single 8 pin, and will thus keep it a tiny bit higher. Whether that makes a difference or not is anyone's guess. But it definitely can not hurt. You should try to measure it with the 8 pin and look in HWinfo64 with a heavy load (at least 140 amps, maybe avx prime95 small FFT at a lower overclock), then power off and plug the 4 pin in with it, and then check the CPU +12v to see if it's any higher. I have no idea how this affects voltage stability as VR VOUT doesn't change; i suspect you would need an oscilloscope to see any differences.


----------



## yerebakan

Hi all again,

Finally I understand how to dual bios mode works?

So, a month later ago my dual bios is bricked because of flashing faulty. I send my mobo to RMA and they flashed both chips in hardware box. Now my main bios is version F8 and backup bios is default version F5. I want to recognize which bios is kicked via colors. 
F5 is red themed and all other versions are orange. 

Today I tested my bios kicked in backup bios. 
How to;
I configured hard settings. For example; 50x ratio with 1.15v vcore and IA/AC LL 1. 

After that I want to kicked in main bios again. 
I have read many threads about kick scenario. Turn psu off combine with press power button shut down and turn on.... bla bla. 

Here is my scenario;
1- Turn off PSU. // While booting (Aorus logo). 
2- Turn on PSU and press power button. // Magic is here. My RGB leds colors are changed. 
3- Turn off PSU again.
4- Clear CMOS.

Vioala main bios turned back. 
I hope this guide is useful for somebody.

*PS. This guide for only non-bios switch's motherboards like Elite, Pro, Pro-Wifi, Ultra... *

Thanks.


----------



## invincible20xx

hello, should i go for the auruos z370 ultra gaming wifi or the asus z370-a given that the auros is only 10 dollars more ?!

does that board over heat on the vrms like the ultra gaming non wifi ?


----------



## Chimera619

Chimera619 said:


> I meant 1.2 + Turbo is better than 1.24 + High as it means lower idle voltage right ?
> I dont need to push my CPU hard during summer as these settings are even lower than stock (voltage+temp)
> 
> Can i also get your input on AIO vs my Phanteks Cooler is it worth it or should I just wait for next summer and do a Custom loop
> 
> Another question is should I try to get my OC using adaptive voltage or it really wont affect the longevity of the CPU
> 
> Last question xD im sry
> 
> the pic attached
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257878&thumb=1
> 
> Its not my settings I have all these stuff on auto except LLC
> What do they mean and will changing any of them help me


 @Falkentyne

What does the internal AC/DC loadline setting do ?
I am trying your suggestion now pumping to 1.23 vcore and lowering LLC to High


----------



## Falkentyne

Chimera619 said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> What does the internal AC/DC loadline setting do ?
> I am trying your suggestion now pumping to 1.23 vcore and lowering LLC to High


AC loadline sets a VID "gain" above the default VID point, which seems to vary depending on load and idle. The default VID changes based on the cache ratio, then CPU Vcore is latched onto this value before VRM loadline calibration handles the voltage droop (in my own tests, DC loadline does not affect the latched vcore).

DC loadline sets how much the VID drops at full load compared to idle, in mOhms of resistance, the same way Loadline Calibration works with respect to the CPU Vcore, except this affects the VID, not the vcore. (this affects CPU Package Power measurements, regardless of vcore). This affects the Q point as well, but that's something I don't understand. Matching DC loadline in mOhms to the VRM Loadline (Loadline calibration) in mOhms will keep the CPU VR VOUT close to equal to the CPU VID, when using normal voltage or Auto, with no offset. (No I do not know the mOhms values for Loadline Calibration except Auto/Standard/Normal is 1.6 mOhms, and Ultra Extreme is 0 mOhms).


----------



## lucasfrance

lucasfrance said:


> Check this! 9900K OC 5GHz at 1.2V : https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> ENJOY!!!


Using these settings with an offset of +0.04V my 9900K Aorus Xtreme is Rock Solid with ANY bench including AVX crazzzzy FFT with very acceptable temps 80C+ at 5.0GHz/4,3GHz Cache. AVX 3

Does anybody have better settings with such a low voltage and lower temps ?


----------



## Vesimas

If someone is interested i have solved the no video signal problem (it's almost five days without it) by updating Samsung NVme driver to the lastest version 3.1


----------



## Falkentyne

lucasfrance said:


> Using these settings with an offset of +0.04V my 9900K Aorus Xtreme is Rock Solid with ANY bench including AVX crazzzzy FFT with very acceptable temps 80C+ at 5.0GHz/4,3GHz Cache.
> 
> Does anybody have better settings with such a low voltage and lower temps ?


These settings are not stable for everyone. I suspect the majority of chips won't be full load stable. That guy isn't even measuring the right sensor. SIO (CPU-Z/Bios) is going to be higher than VR VOUT.
They give a load VR VOUT below 1.2v at 5 ghz. While the transients are splendid, going below the point where your CPU is stable at is going to crash.


----------



## Moparman

Vesimas said:


> If someone is interested i have solved the no video signal problem (it's almost five days without it) by updating Samsung NVme driver to the lastest version 3.1


Great find.


----------



## GaryLiao

This is a fine setting for an AVX offset of -3, if you try to run AVX at 5GHz and you are still stable with those settings then you've got a golden chip right there.


----------



## Falkentyne

GaryLiao said:


> This is a fine setting for an AVX offset of -3, if you try to run AVX at 5GHz and you are still stable with those settings then you've got a golden chip right there.


Gary, did you get my PM?
Also did you ever have a chance to check that current protection thing?
I spent all weekend testing it and in the end I found no difference between Auto and Extreme. (didn't bother testing high and turbo, takes way too long, even though it was on turbo originally. My other tests were in lower ambients since I was borderline anyway). In the end it made no difference.


----------



## GaryLiao

Falkentyne said:


> Gary, did you get my PM?
> Also did you ever have a chance to check that current protection thing?
> I spent all weekend testing it and in the end I found no difference between Auto and Extreme. (didn't bother testing high and turbo, takes way too long, even though it was on turbo originally. My other tests were in lower ambients since I was borderline anyway). In the end it made no difference.


I didn't get a chance to test it yet no, but I will next weekend. I've been using my PC normally and I have had no crashes leaving it on Auto with a light load while studying.


----------



## apexbites

Hello respected members, I just purchased a z390 Aorus master motherboard. I am in love with how beautiful this looks (I came from a very low end build so all this RGB stuff looks very attractive to me) All is well except it has minor coil whine (only noticeable when the room is quiet). Can anyone please suggest me if I should RMA the board because of this minor coil whine because I do not want to risk and end up with a board which has other possible serious issues. 

I am being over conscious about this build because I am not very financially stable and I had to save for 6 years to build this computer. I tend to keep my computers for years my last PC was built in 2010 so please suggest me what to do the only issue I have noticed this far is coil whine when the room is super quiet. It only gets noticeably loud on Apex Legends loading animation when you first fire up the game, only then can I hear it even when the room is not so quiet (My GPU also coil whines a bit but motherboard whine also gets louder when frame rates are super high). Looking forward to your suggestions.


----------



## Falkentyne

apexbites said:


> Hello respected members, I just purchased a z390 Aorus master motherboard. I am in love with how beautiful this looks (I came from a very low end build so all this RGB stuff looks very attractive to me) All is well except it has minor coil whine (only noticeable when the room is quiet). Can anyone please suggest me if I should RMA the board because of this minor coil whine because I do not want to risk and end up with a board which has other possible serious issues.
> 
> I am being over conscious about this build because I am not very financially stable and I had to save for 6 years to build this computer. I tend to keep my computers for years my last PC was built in 2010 so please suggest me what to do the only issue I have noticed this far is coil whine when the room is super quiet. It only gets noticeably loud on Apex Legends loading animation when you first fire up the game, only then can I hear it even when the room is not so quiet (My GPU also coil whines a bit but motherboard whine also gets louder when frame rates are super high). Looking forward to your suggestions.


Coil whine can usually only be dealt with with a RMA.
Sometimes its probably how some component around the VRM's is attached. No one really knows what exact thing -causes- it besides some sort of resonance with something else at certain frequencies.
If you can return the first one for a refund within a window, perhaps you can buy a second board from a local store if you have access to one (Like a microcenter or frys or other shop that would sell them), buy and install it then return the first one as defective, for a refund, to avoid downtime, but disregarding the ethics of that, you still need to have money. People have already played the roulette game with coil whine and RMAs. If it's annoying and loud then the only choice is to RMA.


----------



## apexbites

Falkentyne said:


> Coil whine can usually only be dealt with with a RMA.
> Sometimes its probably how some component around the VRM's is attached. No one really knows what exact thing -causes- it besides some sort of resonance with something else at certain frequencies.
> If you can return the first one for a refund within a window, perhaps you can buy a second board from a local store if you have access to one (Like a microcenter or frys or other shop that would sell them), buy and install it then return the first one as defective, for a refund, to avoid downtime, but disregarding the ethics of that, you still need to have money. People have already played the roulette game with coil whine and RMAs. If it's annoying and loud then the only choice is to RMA.


Thanks for your reply. I am not in US and here these boards are imported on order only. If I RMA the board it will take up to 30 days for new one to arrive and I am not even sure if the store I purchased this from will allow this to be RMA'd because I won't be able to demonstrate the whine in that noisy store. I searched on google, it appears a lot of Z390 Aorus master and Ultra boards have this coil whine I am afraid If I return it the next one (after 30 days) will have the same problem my other option would be to swap it with something from Asus (XI Hero maybe) What do you suggest I do? I noticed in your signature you have the same board, does it have coil whine?


----------



## Knjaz136

Hello, is it possible to disable specific 9900k cores (wanted to disable 3rd and 5th) on Z390 Aorus Ultra BIOS? (currently running F6). I can't seem to find those options.

Also while I'm at it, wanted to ask if there should be any changes to VCore settings during OC if I'm turning off couple cores and HT, or would general VCore values guidelines stay the same? And is it generally safe to more or less often reboot between stock 9900k config (except no TDP limit) and heavily OC'd 6 core/6 thread one?


----------



## yerebakan

Who one tried? 

Today my pc went to sleep mode. 

When pc returned from sleep, VR VOUT values are visible in HWinfo.

Some gigabyte related app is installed. So I did not see values of VR VOUT. 

Discovered new good bug


----------



## Intrud3r

Knjaz136 said:


> Hello, is it possible to disable specific 9900k cores (wanted to disable 3rd and 5th) on Z390 Aorus Ultra BIOS? (currently running F6). I can't seem to find those options.
> 
> Also while I'm at it, wanted to ask if there should be any changes to VCore settings during OC if I'm turning off couple cores and HT, or would general VCore values guidelines stay the same? And is it generally safe to more or less often reboot between stock 9900k config (except no TDP limit) and heavily OC'd 6 core/6 thread one?


As far as I know, there is NO option to disable specific cores on the Aorus Ultra and Aorus Master boards. You can disable a couple of cores, but you can't decide which ones will be disabled.


----------



## BradleyW

Knjaz136 said:


> Hello, *is it possible to disable specific 9900k cores* (wanted to disable 3rd and 5th) on Z390 Aorus Ultra BIOS? (currently running F6). I can't seem to find those options.
> 
> Also while I'm at it, wanted to ask if there should be any changes to VCore settings during OC if I'm turning off couple cores and HT, or would general VCore values guidelines stay the same? And is it generally safe to more or less often reboot between stock 9900k config (except no TDP limit) and heavily OC'd 6 core/6 thread one?


No.


----------



## derelict360

derelict360 said:


> The board's been RMA'd.
> 
> Normally I would like to punish the manufacturer by buying a different board. I put all options on the table including the MSI Z390 Godlike, ASUS Hero, etc. but the Gigabyte Z390 Master just looks like the best board all around. I had a hard time with features, lack of armor, or lower power phases on every other board.
> 
> I hope the 2nd one is not a dud. =/


Yooooooo

Made it happen. Haven't OC'd it yet but that's on the way.


----------



## Moparman

derelict360 said:


> Yooooooo
> 
> Made it happen. Haven't OC'd it yet but that's on the way.



Sweet setup.


----------



## apexbites

derelict360 said:


> Yooooooo
> 
> Made it happen. Haven't OC'd it yet but that's on the way.


congrats, does it have coil whine?


----------



## derelict360

apexbites said:


> congrats, does it have coil whine?


I heard something that might be described as coil whine when I was navigating through the BIOS. The deeper into the BIOS I got the more noise it made and the longer it took to load menu items. 

A bit weird to be sure, but there is no coil whine while Windows is running. Lucky me I guess.


----------



## QQryQ

hello there I'm new owner of Aorus Master with i9 9900k and RAM G.Skill Trident Z RGB, DDR4, 16GB,3200MHz, CL16 (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR)

Would like to share some results I've achived but would like to know is there any chances to improve it more from temp side?

Here my daily usage looks like computer running almost 24/7 and for idle times I manually downclock it to x27 on all cores and set voltage to 1.2V in Easy Tune app.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258856&stc=1&d=1552483817

and here are my settings taken from easy tune

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258858&stc=1&d=1552483873
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258860&stc=1&d=1552483873
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258862&stc=1&d=1552483873
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258864&stc=1&d=1552483873

took a cinebench15 score
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258868&stc=1&d=1552483873

and realbench test for 1;30h
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258866&stc=1&d=1552483873

but when tried to test prime got error after few tests, but computer runs stable for now
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258870&stc=1&d=1552483873


Is there any tips to improve temps with that OC I'm open on suggestions because I believe there is more advenced users than me ;-) - btw. should I OC my RAM? I'm mainly playing games .

I'm really happy from that motherboard didnt notice any strange noices when I put quiet mode for night I cant hear any sounds comming out really love. For daily time I use custom fan curve and most of the gaming time gpu temps are higher than cpu temps.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258876&stc=1&d=1552483873

all completed looks like:


https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=258878&stc=1&d=1552483873


----------



## Nammi

After getting nowhere with just 2 sticks of ram, I went ahead and got another 2 to see how much of an improvement it would be. Well, I guess I won't be returning the extra ram. =D


----------



## Chimera619

I have a 970 EVO Plus 1 TB and hwinfo reports 60c temp 1 and 75c temp 2 on the SSD
is that normal ?
I moved the ssd from M2M to the very bottom one but the temps haven't changed


----------



## flowfaster

Chimera619 said:


> I have a 970 EVO Plus 1 TB and hwinfo reports 60c temp 1 and 75c temp 2 on the SSD
> is that normal ?
> I moved the ssd from M2M to the very bottom one but the temps haven't changed


Seems a tad high to me.

I have a 970 Pro 512gb in the top M.2 slot as my boot drive and idle is around 35-40c. After a heavy gaming session (with SLI so extra heat) it will go up to around 48c.


----------



## Padinn

Anyone tried the RGB Fusion update that came out last Friday? I'm curious if it removed the issue where it would alt tab you out of games.


----------



## Chimera619

Is it a good idea to update bios from F7 to F8 last one ?


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Also did you ever have a chance to check that current protection thing?
> I spent all weekend testing it and in the end I found no difference between Auto and Extreme. (didn't bother testing high and turbo, takes way too long, even though it was on turbo originally. My other tests were in lower ambients since I was borderline anyway). In the end it made no difference.


I had several cold boots with CPU over-current protection on Auto, as opposed to Turbo. So Auto may not always correspond to Turbo. I saw another Auto settings change (forgot which one), so this may or may not be dynamically changing when on Auto.


----------



## derelict360

Can someone help me with a good baseline BIOS configuration to get Prime95 stable at 5GHz?

I tried this: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf

But it didn't work that well. I had to set Vcore at 1.40 just to get Prime95 to even run for a few seconds before freezing the OS. I went back to default configurations after that.

I could also try this guy's settings. He seems to know what he's talking about.


----------



## Falkentyne

derelict360 said:


> Can someone help me with a good baseline BIOS configuration to get Prime95 stable at 5GHz?
> 
> I tried this: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf
> 
> But it didn't work that well. I had to set Vcore at 1.40 just to get Prime95 to even run for a few seconds before freezing the OS. I went back to default configurations after that.
> 
> I could also try this guy's settings. He seems to know what he's talking about.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8rY4TrcDXg


Did you set cpu vcore to 1.35v, and loadline calibration to turbo (NOT CPU Internal Load line)?


----------



## Intrud3r

derelict360 said:


> Can someone help me with a good baseline BIOS configuration to get Prime95 stable at 5GHz?
> 
> I tried this: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Global/multimedia/2/file/525/946.pdf
> 
> But it didn't work that well. I had to set Vcore at 1.40 just to get Prime95 to even run for a few seconds before freezing the OS. I went back to default configurations after that.
> 
> I could also try this guy's settings. He seems to know what he's talking about.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8rY4TrcDXg


Just my 2 cents, take a look at this: 9900k Overclock Results and Questions
You can find good info there too, should be enough to get you started.


----------



## derelict360

Falkentyne said:


> Did you set cpu vcore to 1.35v, and loadline calibration to turbo (NOT CPU Internal Load line)?


Pretty sure I did. I'll give it another whack when I get home.



Intrud3r said:


> Just my 2 cents, take a look at this: 9900k Overclock Results and Questions
> You can find good info there too, should be enough to get you started.


Thanks I'll give it a look.


----------



## BradleyW

Is it better to use LLC high and have a slightly higher idle and low workload voltage, as appose to LLC turbo with less idle and low workload voltage, and of course no vdroop. Less voltage spiking under load? 9900k, z390 ultra, F7f bios.


----------



## kati

Hm so is there any way to raise the Vcore while in idle (which is about 0,7V here) on Aorus Master without touching the Vcore at load?

Cause im still plagued by idle crash/reboot, yesterday again after 2-3 weeks with none.
Kinda funny cause i have those idle crash like on a schedule every 16 days about, everytime im adjusting a bit in bios and wait if its stable but it continues to crash every 16 days.

Actually as long nothings gets damaged i dont care much about a crash reboot every 16 days, still would be way better without.


----------



## Intrud3r

kati said:


> Hm so is there any way to raise the Vcore while in idle (which is about 0,7V here) on Aorus Master without touching the Vcore at load?
> 
> Cause im still plagued by idle crash/reboot, yesterday again after 2-3 weeks with none.
> Kinda funny cause i have those idle crash like on a schedule every 16 days about, everytime im adjusting a bit in bios and wait if its stable but it continues to crash every 16 days.
> 
> Actually as long nothings gets damaged i dont care much about a crash reboot every 16 days, still would be way better without.


I would say lower loadlines with higher DVID.

I've played around with different settings and my system likes the following:

Vcore Loadline Low - DVID -0.030V
Vcore Loadline Med - DVID -0.055V
Vcore Loadline High - DVID -0.080V

All result in about the same load voltage of 1.314-1.324V

Running signature settings atm.
Resulting in:


----------



## Falkentyne

kati said:


> Hm so is there any way to raise the Vcore while in idle (which is about 0,7V here) on Aorus Master without touching the Vcore at load?
> 
> Cause im still plagued by idle crash/reboot, yesterday again after 2-3 weeks with none.
> Kinda funny cause i have those idle crash like on a schedule every 16 days about, everytime im adjusting a bit in bios and wait if its stable but it continues to crash every 16 days.
> 
> Actually as long nothings gets damaged i dont care much about a crash reboot every 16 days, still would be way better without.


Not really possible. If you're using a negative offset, you're asking for this to happen if you also downclock at idle. This won't happen if you are not downclocking.
And negative offsets apply linearly through the entire voltage range.
You can try tweaking the AC loadline value and raising Loadline Calibration a little bit (don't go above medium LLC when using auto or offset voltages).
You can try stuff like lowering the IA AC loadline value and raising the offset higher (lowering the IA AC loadline value will lower the idle voltage and the low load voltages, however a lower AC loadline value has a smaller effect the lower the vcore is. Don't bother with the DC loadline value. I know it changes the 'Q point', but it doesn't seem to affect the VRM very much. The VRM *is* affected but I'm not sure in what way yet (the vcore VR VOUT value remains almost exactly the same; the higher the DC loadline value, the more watts and amps seem to be used, but I only saw a 6W / 4A difference on manual voltages when I tested IA AC/DC 1.6 mOhms and IA AC/DC 0.01 mOhms, but I'm getting off track.

So if you're using default AC/DC loadline (1.6 mOhms/1.6 mOhms) and a negative offset, try changing AC loadline to 0.4 mOhms and raising the offset higher until you get your previous stable voltage. Never go higher than 2.1 mOhms, EVER. (since I know someone is going to mess with these values in the wrong way).

Looks like @Intrud3r beat me to it.


----------



## Intrud3r

But you have a much more technical explanation (and more experience) then me


----------



## kati

Intrud3r said:


> I would say lower loadlines with higher DVID.
> 
> I've played around with different settings and my system likes the following:
> 
> Resulting in:


Im already on the lowest possible...

but i could try @Falkentyne ´s hint with AC values, how would milli Ohms translate into that dezimal settings in IA AC?
Atm i got IA AC at 1 and IA DC at 0.

Thx alot!


----------



## Falkentyne

kati said:


> Im already on the lowest possible...
> 
> but i could try @Falkentyne ´s hint with AC values, how would milli Ohms translate into that dezimal settings in IA AC?
> Atm i got IA AC at 1 and IA DC at 0.
> 
> Thx alot!


No way to answer this question without a degree in EE or advanced calculus.
You have to dial the value and test.

Some random values which probably won't be helpful:
4.7 ghz core, 4.4 ghz cache:
AC/DC loadline= 0.01 mOhms: idle VID 1.135v.
AC/DC loadline=1.60 mOhms: idle VID: 1.320v 
AC loadline=1.60 mohms, DC loadline=0.01 mOhms idle 1.488v

(DC loadline does not affect VRM attached vcore directly, at least it doesn't seem to; maybe a 3 amps/6w difference with MANUAL voltages; I still need to test max power draw on manual voltages, with AC=1.6, and DC 1.6 vs DC 0.01, and then compare if theres a difference with AC 0.01, DC 1.6 vs AC 1.6/DC 1.6):
VRM Vcore seems to be based purely on AC loadline value+CPU's default VID (based on core and cache ratio).


----------



## kati

Falkentyne said:


> You have to dial the value and test.


Ok, thanks for this confusing answer, ill just test, look at my idle Vout, and wait weeks if it crashes again 

Bit of a pity with my prob, its so rare it takes some time to see if idle runs without crash.
And my desktop is running 24/7, so it has alot of idle time and still i get it only every 2-3 weeks.


----------



## Driller au

Whats the conscious on IA AC/DC now ? i am still running mine at IA AC 1 and IA DC 1 with a positive DVID and it seems ok or is there a better way ?

@Intrud3r what are you running them at with that setup?


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> Whats the conscious on IA AC/DC now ? i am still running mine at IA AC 1 and IA DC 1 with a positive DVID and it seems ok or is there a better way ?
> 
> @Intrud3r what are you running them at with that setup?


Whatever works for you is what is best to use.

The way AC loadline and thermal velocity boost and AVX instructions interact with the VID is too complicated to give an answer, unlike VRM loadline+manual voltages (which is based on vdroop in mOhms, and the only thing you have to worry about are transient spikes/transient dips from worse transient response, and voltage oscillation instability at higher LLC levels (less mOhms), which Elmor was investigating.


----------



## derelict360

Falkentyne said:


> Did you set cpu vcore to 1.35v, and loadline calibration to turbo (NOT CPU Internal Load line)?


Found the problem. It was getting too hot right off the bat. I switched up the TJMax to 110C and watched it clip out due to heat in slow motion. I wound up at 1.31 on Vcore after playing around with it a bit. I've never had a chip that could actually handle Prime95 at all lol. The last time I tried was on a Q6600 and I had to settle for using games to stress test.

Right now it's staying around 90C under load with Prime95 but individual workers start to fail after a bit. Time for me to learn about Prime95 error messages. I'll be back to update my progress in the next few days or so.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Whatever works for you is what is best to use.
> 
> The way AC loadline and thermal velocity boost and AVX instructions interact with the VID is too complicated to give an answer, unlike VRM loadline+manual voltages (which is based on vdroop in mOhms, and the only thing you have to worry about are transient spikes/transient dips from worse transient response, and voltage oscillation instability at higher LLC levels (less mOhms), which Elmor was investigating.


Thanks Falkentyne


----------



## Intrud3r

Driller au said:


> Whats the conscious on IA AC/DC now ? i am still running mine at IA AC 1 and IA DC 1 with a positive DVID and it seems ok or is there a better way ?
> 
> @Intrud3r what are you running them at with that setup?


I left them at Auto / untouched in Uefi / bios settings ... Don't recall if it's 0 or 1. Could doublecheck if you wanted me too.


----------



## Driller au

Intrud3r said:


> I left them at Auto / untouched in Uefi / bios settings ... Don't recall if it's 0 or 1. Could doublecheck if you wanted me too.


No its ok was just wondering thanks for answering


----------



## R3van

I`ve changed from IA AC Loadline 1 with positive DVID offset to IA AC Loadline 0 (which is 1.6mOhms as Falkentyne explained earlier) with a negative DVID offset and CPU LLC to normal.

Now i have the same VCore at load but much less vcore at idle (from ~0.7v to 0.588v) with EIST and all C-States enabled.

Its stable so far in idle, but i had to set a dummy voltage in bios for my psu to get stable in idle (Don`t know actually how that setting was named, something on the last or penultimate page).

Before that i got random Bluescreens in idle.


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> I`ve changed from IA AC Loadline 1 with positive DVID offset to IA AC Loadline 0 (which is 1.6mOhms as Falkentyne explained earlier) with a negative DVID offset and CPU LLC to normal.
> 
> Now i have the same VCore at load but much less vcore at idle (from ~0.7v to 0.588v) with EIST and all C-States enabled.
> 
> Its stable so far in idle, but i had to set a dummy voltage in bios for my psu to get stable in idle (Don`t know actually how that setting was named, something on the last or penultimate page).


IA AC/DC loadline is *SUPPOSED* to be 1.6 mOhms, but Gigabyte, in their infinite wisdom, has a setting called "CPU Internal Load Line", which has several presets, which you can find by setting them and opening the CPU tab in HWinfo64.
the PROBLEM IS, the "Auto" setting causes the IA AC/DC loadline to be WRITTEN by whatever Gigabyte wants it to be, depending on your frequency (maybe voltage too i do not know!).
At 5 ghz, the Auto setting sets IA AC/IA DC loadline to 1.3/1.3 mOhms.
At 4.7 ghz, the auto setting sets IA AC to 1.0 mOhms and IA DC to 1.3 mOhms. 
I kid you not.

You know what's even more sad?
the DC loadline value, which directly affects the VID (via 'droop' from the AC VID boost VID), has virtually effect on the VRM Vcore! Only AC loadline does. If you use pure adaptive voltage, a DC loadline of 1.6 mOhms will use about 3-5 more amps and 5-10 more watts of power draw, than a DC loadline value of 0.01 mOhms, but other than that, VR VOUT will be exactly the same.
I tested this with Auto voltage (no offsets) earlier.

AC/DC loadline set to 160 (1.6 mOhms)= VID was within 5mv of VR VOUT at both idle and load and AVX loads.
AC loadline=160, DC loadline=1: VID was 1.488v (!) at idle, VR VOUT was 1.287v, ignoring the change in DC loadline.

So if you want 1.6 mOhms of AC/DC loadline, you either have to use "Turbo" for the CPU Internal Loadline preset, or manually key in 160/160 in CPU VR settings (this overrules the presets).

Extreme 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)
Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
Auto: (whatever Gigabyte wants it to be)


----------



## R3van

Have to check but i think i set CPU Internal Loadline to Turbo. Don`t know for sure...

I read that post from you where you described that. Don`t understand all of these tecnical details but i try to keep up


----------



## KedarWolf

So,

On my Master if I disable C-States and Speed Shift, just leave EIST enabled, and put my minimum CPU at 5% in Windows Power options, my VROut goes down to .295v and i get random reboots, even with Power Loading a dummy load on low voltages enabled in the BIOS. I get random reboots when it goes this low.

With Speed Shift, C-States and EIST enabled my VCore voltage goes just under .800v and no reboots. 

This with both a positive and negative CPU voltage with IA AC Loadline 1 or 0.


Wish I could fix this, I'd rather not use C-States. 

Edit: Never mind, I was looking at the wrong VROut.


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> IA AC/DC loadline is *SUPPOSED* to be 1.6 mOhms, but Gigabyte, in their infinite wisdom, has a setting called "CPU Internal Load Line", which has several presets, which you can find by setting them and opening the CPU tab in HWinfo64.
> the PROBLEM IS, the "Auto" setting causes the IA AC/DC loadline to be WRITTEN by whatever Gigabyte wants it to be, depending on your frequency (maybe voltage too i do not know!).
> At 5 ghz, the Auto setting sets IA AC/IA DC loadline to 1.3/1.3 mOhms.
> At 4.7 ghz, the auto setting sets IA AC to 1.0 mOhms and IA DC to 1.3 mOhms.
> I kid you not.
> 
> You know what's even more sad?
> the DC loadline value, which directly affects the VID (via 'droop' from the AC VID boost VID), has virtually effect on the VRM Vcore! Only AC loadline does. If you use pure adaptive voltage, a DC loadline of 1.6 mOhms will use about 3-5 more amps and 5-10 more watts of power draw, than a DC loadline value of 0.01 mOhms, but other than that, VR VOUT will be exactly the same.
> I tested this with Auto voltage (no offsets) earlier.
> 
> AC/DC loadline set to 160 (1.6 mOhms)= VID was within 5mv of VR VOUT at both idle and load and AVX loads.
> AC loadline=160, DC loadline=1: VID was 1.488v (!) at idle, VR VOUT was 1.287v, ignoring the change in DC loadline.
> 
> So if you want 1.6 mOhms of AC/DC loadline, you either have to use "Turbo" for the CPU Internal Loadline preset, or manually key in 160/160 in CPU VR settings (this overrules the presets).
> 
> Extreme 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)
> Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
> Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
> Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
> Auto: (whatever Gigabyte wants it to be)


Is it better to set DC Loadline to 1 to reduce A and W draw? I currently have AC load-line set to 1, and the Vcore is set via adaptive voltage. LLC is set to HIGH.


----------



## OutlawII

Iam currently running everything at stock,got frustrated and sick of messing with stuff. I can run 5.0 on all cores all day at 1.28 volts run all kinds of stress tests and its fine. Play BF5 and it freezes up no blue screen just freeze so need a break from it for awhile. And yes i upped the voltage to see if it helped and it did for awhile then crashed again.


----------



## Intrud3r

Quick question:

Definition of ohm:
The ohm is defined as an electrical resistance between two points of a conductor

This is just my mind rambling trying to make sense of it ...

So less ohms allow for more voltage and current going through.
Higher ohms will lower the potential ? As higher means less voltage or less amps going through ?

So to get the most overclocking potential you want to choose a setting with the least ohms being used ?

Please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Quick question:
> 
> Definition of ohm:
> The ohm is defined as an electrical resistance between two points of a conductor
> 
> This is just my mind rambling trying to make sense of it ...
> 
> So less ohms allow for more voltage and current going through.
> Higher ohms will lower the potential ? As higher means less voltage or less amps going through ?
> 
> So to get the most overclocking potential you want to choose a setting with the least ohms being used ?
> 
> Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Don't overthink it and don't apply this to overclocking.
milliohms affects vdroop as well as the DC loadline.
I know there's something called the Q point, but the VRM doesn't seem to respond to DC loadline at all, because the bios has its own internal settings for loadline, called "Loadline calibration", and all LLC settings also have fixed values.

mOhms of resistance increase or decrease how much voltage vdroop there is from the target voltage (VRM loadline).
@elmor was looking into this, but it seems that lower amounts of resistance not only reduce vdroop, but also seem to increase voltage signal "instability" (Oscillations), as well as decreasing transient response and increasing transient spikes. But VRM loadline functions like this:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326

mOhms * current=amount of vdroop.
So at the intel reference 1.6 mOhms of loadline for 8 core CFL, 100 amps * 1.6 = 160mv of vdroop at 100 amps, 150 amps * 1.6 = 240 mv of vdroop at 150 amps current, 200 * 1.6=320 mv (!!) of vdroop at 200 amps of current (we're talking 5 ghz @ 1.3v'ish (VR VOUT--cpu on die voltage wrt VCC_Sense / VSS Sense) with smallest FFT AVX prime95 (version 29.6 build 7). So for example if you set a bios voltage of 1.40v with standard loadline calibration, 5 ghz, and tried to run prime95 26.7, smallest FFT FMA3 (more amps than AVX), that 1.40v is going to drop down to close to 1.1v==and hello MACHINE_CHECK_EXCEPTION. (you'd probably crash so hard you wouldn't even see a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT).

https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=24094 <---time for some BSOD's, folks.

So anyway, each vendor has loadline calibration with absolutely no documentation on what each LLC setting does (See Elmor's post), except the highest level of LLC on Gigabyte and Asus boards (except some lower end gigabyte boards) are mOhms, which mean a flat loadline. Unfortunately, voltage stability drops like a rock, so that cpu on-die sense voltage is going to be massively unstable at heavy loads (at low to medium loads it will be fine), and the transient spikes are going to be dangerous, and the transient dips will BSOD you.

@elmor tested LLC8 and saw target voltage stability drop off a cliff faster than Boeing's crash 8 aircraft. I asked Shamino on the ROG forums and he showed me an oscilloscope graph of worst case transient spikes and dips with a flat loadline:

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...about-Transient-Response-(to-Shamino-and-Raja)

It's still unclear what's happening when you have a sustained load and are insta-BSOD'ing or thread crashing at LLC8, at a VR VOUT which is stable at LLC6, for example.

AC loadline= i have no idea how this works, except it 'adds' to the default VID in some way (default VID is based on a preset value depending on CPU core and cache ratio--BOTH can affect the default VID). On Auto/Normal/Adaptive (no offset, without additional turbo voltage), the CPU Vcore (VR VOUT / VCC_SENSE) attaches to the base VID + AC loadline gain value and ignores the DC loadline value. I don't know how AC and DC loadline interact to create the VID shown, but defaults are 1.6 mOhms for 8 core processors --which matches VRM loadline defaults.

DC loadline has to do with power measurements (CPU package power) as CPU package power is equal to amps * VID. DC Loadline seems to work similarly to VRM loadline vdroop, that is, using a 1.6 mOhms DC loadline will keep VID and VCC_Sense matching each other at idle and load quite nicely. But the VRM does not seem to respond to DC loadline properly on auto voltages (although the higher the DC loadline value (more VID droop), oddly enough the amps / watts draw (VRM) increases very slightly. However for what it's worth, some stuff is still pretty strange:

For example: 4.7 ghz core, 4.4 ghz cache, AC/DC loadline both at 1.60 mOhms, default VID will be 1.287v at idle.
Which I posted here:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...lounge-phoenix-5.826848/page-31#post-10876493

At full load things get weird. Keep in mind this is with default 1.6 mOhms of vdroop. So you would THINK that a 150 amp prime95 load would drop this VR VOUT down 240mv to like 1.1v right?
NOPE!

You can see that smallest FFT with AVX disabled, pulls 128 amps, drops VR VOUT to 1.207v, which is only 90mv below VID idle. You would be expecting a 204 mv vdroop here, right?
But AVX, which has a HIGHER amps draw (164 amps!), has a HIGHER VR VOUT! 1.240v !
FMA3 which has 179 amps, has 1.207v VR VOUT.

I tested this also using a DC loadline of 0.01 mOhms (AC loadline was kept at 1.6 mOhms), and the idle VID was now 1.488v (!!), but the VR VOUT did not respond to this (VR VOUT actually dropped by about 5-10mv from the above value used at 1.6 mOhm, from 1.281v to 1.273v or 1.275v, I forgot but it was very close), and all of the load voltages were about 10-15mv lower than the screenshot VR VOUTs above. The VR VOUT did not match the VID at all at full load here (VID changed a lot, VR VOUT changed by like 10mv maximum)

So it looks like the *AC loadline is heavily affecting the base VID (and thus VR VOUT) depending on how much current is being drawn, and thus compensating for vdroop somehow by raising the source voltage signal, and VID up (based on DC loadlne being 1.6 mOhms) in some way and then sending it to the VRM.

Someone would have to test AC loadline=0.01 with auto voltages and see how VR VOUT (or maximus XI boards SIO sensor) responds, because I have no idea how that works.

If VRM loadline is used at a higher than default value, the VRM voltage value gets higher obviously.

But if you set a manual voltage of 1.287v with default loadline calibration (1.6 mOhms) and then did those prime95 smallest FFT tests, depending on how good or bad your CPU is, you might insta-crash as now the vdroop would be massive, since AC loadline wouldn't be there to save you.


----------



## Intrud3r

I knew something was off  Thank you !

and hello MACHINE_CHECK_EXCEPTION --> LOL ... They are my friends, well ... they were ... they came by often testing out different loadline settings with different dvid's.


----------



## R3van

Falkentyne said:


> IA AC/DC loadline is *SUPPOSED* to be 1.6 mOhms, but Gigabyte, in their infinite wisdom, has a setting called "CPU Internal Load Line", which has several presets, which you can find by setting them and opening the CPU tab in HWinfo64.
> the PROBLEM IS, the "Auto" setting causes the IA AC/DC loadline to be WRITTEN by whatever Gigabyte wants it to be, depending on your frequency (maybe voltage too i do not know!).
> At 5 ghz, the Auto setting sets IA AC/IA DC loadline to 1.3/1.3 mOhms.
> At 4.7 ghz, the auto setting sets IA AC to 1.0 mOhms and IA DC to 1.3 mOhms.
> I kid you not.
> 
> You know what's even more sad?
> the DC loadline value, which directly affects the VID (via 'droop' from the AC VID boost VID), has virtually effect on the VRM Vcore! Only AC loadline does. If you use pure adaptive voltage, a DC loadline of 1.6 mOhms will use about 3-5 more amps and 5-10 more watts of power draw, than a DC loadline value of 0.01 mOhms, but other than that, VR VOUT will be exactly the same.
> I tested this with Auto voltage (no offsets) earlier.
> 
> AC/DC loadline set to 160 (1.6 mOhms)= VID was within 5mv of VR VOUT at both idle and load and AVX loads.
> AC loadline=160, DC loadline=1: VID was 1.488v (!) at idle, VR VOUT was 1.287v, ignoring the change in DC loadline.
> 
> So if you want 1.6 mOhms of AC/DC loadline, you either have to use "Turbo" for the CPU Internal Loadline preset, or manually key in 160/160 in CPU VR settings (this overrules the presets).
> 
> Extreme 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)
> Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
> Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
> Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
> Auto: (whatever Gigabyte wants it to be)


Internal Loadline was on Auto.

I did switch to manual values in CPU VR Settings (Both to 160) and went in Windows to Prime (non AVX).

VID sits now around 1.315v more or less while VR VOUT is at 1.258v


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> Internal Loadline was on Auto.
> 
> I did switch to manual values in CPU VR Settings (Both to 160) and went in Windows to Prime (non AVX).
> 
> VID sits now around 1.315v more or less while VR VOUT is at 1.258v


Your VR VOUT should be the exact same as the VID. It is on mine.
Are you using loadline calibration ? (LLC must be left on standard).
Are you using a positive or negative voltage offset?
If you're using an offset, the offset will affect VR VOUT, not VID.


----------



## R3van

LLC was normal. I`m using a negative offset of 0.060v

This fits.


----------



## Driller au

OutlawII said:


> Iam currently running everything at stock,got frustrated and sick of messing with stuff. I can run 5.0 on all cores all day at 1.28 volts run all kinds of stress tests and its fine. Play BF5 and it freezes up no blue screen just freeze so need a break from it for awhile. And yes i upped the voltage to see if it helped and it did for awhile then crashed again.


BFV the most fun stress test there is ....lost count on how many times i have run AIDA64 or realbench of an hour just to crash in minutes with a BF game, just been through it trying to get the uncore up to 4700 gave up and left it at default 4500 the voltage/heat was just getting to high, well for me anyway i want to keep this system for a few years at least and the Australian summer is not the best for stress testing


----------



## Driller au

Interesting reading the last few pages don't 100% understand it all but it all helps in the OCing journey for an old fellow 

By the way what would be the acceptable range for idle VR Vout currently at 0.725V which i am thinking might be a bit high system is not on 24/7


----------



## BradleyW

Is it safe to run AC Loadline 1 to reduce voltage? Or will this have some kind of negative impact?


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Is it safe to run AC Loadline 1 to reduce voltage? Or will this have some kind of negative impact?


Sorry I do not know. Does nothing on manual voltage. Tweak as necessary and pay attention to VR VOUT. DC loadline should probably be at the same value as your VRM loadline but no one knows what mOhms the VRM loadline steps are at (except Standard=1.6mOhms and Ultra Extreme is 0 mOhms).


----------



## Intrud3r

Driller au said:


> BFV the most fun stress test there is ....lost count on how many times i have run AIDA64 or realbench of an hour just to crash in minutes with a BF game, just been through it trying to get the uncore up to 4700 gave up and left it at default 4500 the voltage/heat was just getting to high, well for me anyway i want to keep this system for a few years at least and the Australian summer is not the best for stress testing


Was running some BFV yesterday and you can guess already ... I got a cache error at 5.1 / 4.7. Running prime looked fine.

So I backed down to 5.0 / 4.7 again ... (also because I sorta want to keep my max VR VOUT under 1.350V)
Vcore = normal
Vcore Loadline = Medium
DVID = -0.095V

This let's me run prime small FFT's with avx till it got to 97C (then I stopped it) with a Vcore as low as 1.248V (without avx it drops to 1.275V)
Liquid temp this moming was 27C, so it took a bit to heat up and as such I could run small FFT's with avx longer.

Pic shown is just after running prime small FFT's with avx this morning:

Nope --> cache errors ... upped dvid to -0.075V ... testing testing ...


----------



## Jody Hodgson

Help needed I have just build my system with the Z390 MB on latest Bios. I have OS installed to a 512gb Samsung 970 evo Pro and I have a WD 1 tb black NVME in the second M.2 slot down.

I can see the WD in the Bios and I can see it in device manager however I cannot see it in Disk Management in Win 10


Not sure if this may not actually be supported or work?

Any help welcomed and appreciated everything else seems good just can’t see my second drive to assign it and use it..


----------



## R3van

did you look in the disk Management console? i think the disk has to be activated first


----------



## Padinn

If I'm running AC and DC loadlines at 1, do I risk high transient overshoots? I have a -.05 offset


----------



## robertr1

If you only have 2 DIMM's, should you be using mem slots 2 and 4 on a Z390 Pro board? 

I looked in the manual and doesn't state a preference.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> If I'm running AC and DC loadlines at 1, do I risk high transient overshoots? I have a -.05 offset


If VRM loadline calibration is left at standard/Normal (1.6 mOhms) or Low (I'm going to guess that Gigabyte's Low is 1.3 mOhms and medium is 1.0 mOhms), then I'm guessing no, but I'm talking out of my butthole here.

Transient risks come from VRM loadline being at low mOhms, not AC loadline. But I still don't know precisely how AC loadline works, except the more mOhms on it (default is 1.6 for 8 cores, 2.1 mohms for 4 and 6 core CFL, 1.8 mOhms for Kaby Lake), the higher the VID will be boosted from a base VID, then that VID is sent to the VRM (before DC loadline changes the VID from there). AC loadline does not control "Vcore" vdroop--VRM loadline does.
However, Padinn, this is still a very good question--whether HIGHER values for AC loadline have any risks of spikes compared to lower values (as long as VRM loadline is left at standard)...It would take an oscilloscope to answer this question. And of course, no one here seems to have access to one.

It will just lower the base VID from the defaults. But you would usually need a positive voltage offset to compensate.
Note that I have currently seen NO benefit (yet) of lowering DC loadline to 1, versus leaving it at 160 (1.6 mOhms).
If you do lower AC loadline to 1 (0.01 mOhms, for those with Asus boards), try keeping DC loadline at 1.6 mOhms and see if VID and VR VOUT (Vcore on Maximus XI boards) still lines up if not using any offsets (this won't work at all on manual vcore of course).


----------



## Luck100

Falkentyne said:


> If VRM loadline calibration is left at standard/Normal (1.6 mOhms) or Low (I'm going to guess that Gigabyte's Low is 1.3 mOhms and medium is 1.0 mOhms), then no.
> It will just lower the base VID from the defaults. But you would usually need a positive voltage offset to compensate.
> Note that I have currently seen NO benefit (yet) of lowering DC loadline to 1, versus leaving it at 160 (1.6 mOhms).
> If you do lower AC loadline to 1 (0.01 mOhms, for those with Asus boards), try keeping DC loadline at 1.6 mOhms and see if VID and VR VOUT (Vcore on Maximus XI boards) still lines up if not using any offsets (this won't work at all on manual vcore of course).


On my Asus Maximus Hero XI, AC/DC optimized default values are 1.2 mOhms. But as soon as you change almost anything in the bios (clocks, enable xmp, anything really) the auto AC/DC values change to 0.01 mOhms.


----------



## Intrud3r

Internal AC/DC Load Line = Power Saving
Vcore Loadline Calibration = Medium
HWiNFO's IA Domain Loadline (AC/DC) = 0.400 / 1.300 mOhm
DVID = +0.030V

Been trying to get that VR VOUT lower ... AC/DC Loadline - Power saving seems to be my option to pick.

Runs well till now.


----------



## Jody Hodgson

R3van said:


> did you look in the disk Management console? i think the disk has to be activated first


Yeah that’s the issue I can not see it in there and can. It figure out why it does not appear for me to initiate it?


----------



## Timur Born

Did anyone else notice that their onboard HDMI outputs a signal of questionable quality? I see moving horizontal lines at 2560x1600 px. This does not happen using a dedicated GPU via the same cable and display.


----------



## Intrud3r

Timur Born said:


> Did anyone else notice that their onboard HDMI outputs a signal of questionable quality? I see moving horizontal lines at 2560x1600 px. This does not happen using a dedicated GPU via the same cable and display.


I've got no issues running 1920x1080 through my onboard HDMI output.


----------



## R3van

Jody Hodgson said:


> Yeah that’s the issue I can not see it in there and can. It figure out why it does not appear for me to initiate it?


Can you see the disk when you boot from windows DVD/stick and go to the installer menu?


----------



## Driller au

Jody Hodgson said:


> Help needed I have just build my system with the Z390 MB on latest Bios. I have OS installed to a 512gb Samsung 970 evo Pro and I have a WD 1 tb black NVME in the second M.2 slot down.
> 
> I can see the WD in the Bios and I can see it in device manager however I cannot see it in Disk Management in Win 10
> 
> 
> Not sure if this may not actually be supported or work?
> 
> Any help welcomed and appreciated everything else seems good just can’t see my second drive to assign it and use it..


You could try this


----------



## Pasbags

*Smart fan 5*

Anyone know if they've fixed the smart fan 5 temp offset in the BIOS on the Z390 master yet? still currently operating with a 10-14c offset on the F8e BIOS


----------



## KedarWolf

Pasbags said:


> Anyone know if they've fixed the smart fan 5 temp offset in the BIOS on the Z390 master yet? still currently operating with a 10-14c offset on the F8e BIOS


it doesn't detect temps by CPU Core temperatures, it uses the one called 'CPU' in the ITE IT8688E sensor in HWInfo which is always much lower.


----------



## Abula

Pasbags said:


> Anyone know if they've fixed the smart fan 5 temp offset in the BIOS on the Z390 master yet? still currently operating with a 10-14c offset on the F8e BIOS


 I don't think its going to get fixed, gigabyte is reading another sensor that will never match the cores or package, but thats how they design it. It could be change with an offset, but i dont think gigabyte thinks its not working as intended.


----------



## Intrud3r

This morning I had something weird.

Woke up, started prime small FFT's with avx to check what it would do, as liquid temp was about 26-27C.

The moment I started it, it hit 99C with only about 177W package power and VR VOUT jumped up to 1.340V running prime.

I stopped it, rebooted the PC as the evening before it did not show that behaviour ... 

After the reboot, I checked my liquid temp ... was still at about 29C
So I started prime small FFT's with avx again, cpu package power about 236W and the VR VOUT value kept swinging around 1.300V which seems normal.

WTH ?


----------



## lucasfrance

Intrud3r said:


> Internal AC/DC Load Line = Power Saving
> Vcore Loadline Calibration = Medium
> HWiNFO's IA Domain Loadline (AC/DC) = 0.400 / 1.300 mOhm
> DVID = +0.030V
> 
> Been trying to get that VR VOUT lower ... AC/DC Loadline - Power saving seems to be my option to pick.
> 
> Runs well till now.


Running similar settings here but with 

- AC/DC : Power Saving 
- VCore Loadline = Low 
- VCore Offset = +0.04 

- CPU Core = 50
- AVX = 3
- Uncore = 43

Rock Solid with ALL stress tests. Best setting so far.


----------



## Intrud3r

lucasfrance said:


> Running similar settings here but with
> 
> - AC/DC : Power Saving
> - VCore Loadline = Low
> - VCore Offset = +0.04
> 
> - CPU Core = 50
> - AVX = 3
> - Uncore = 43
> 
> Rock Solid with ALL stress tests. Best setting so far.


I do very much like the power saving setting. Have not played with it a lot yet, but it seems to set my vid to normal values which compare to vr vout and my max vr vout stays WAY lower then with any other setting.
All other settings I've tried let it jump up to 1.380V.
With power saving I'm seeing 1.304V max VR VOUT as of now ... ran prime small fft's without avx for 5 minutes .... no problems at all ... 
I do have to say that I see more voltage differences then with other loadline settings. It swings more up and down then with the others, but it looks like it's stable at just ups the voltage needed when it's needed. Seems to work better then with other loadlines ? At least that's my feeling ... 

Testing DVID = +0.005V atm ... think I can go even lower.

Now this does make me hella curious if I can manage 5.1 / 4.7 with these settings ... of course I would need more dvid, but hell ... why not ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> This morning I had something weird.
> 
> Woke up, started prime small FFT's with avx to check what it would do, as liquid temp was about 26-27C.
> 
> The moment I started it, it hit 99C with only about 177W package power and VR VOUT jumped up to 1.340V running prime.
> 
> I stopped it, rebooted the PC as the evening before it did not show that behaviour ...
> 
> After the reboot, I checked my liquid temp ... was still at about 29C
> So I started prime small FFT's with avx again, cpu package power about 236W and the VR VOUT value kept swinging around 1.300V which seems normal.
> 
> WTH ?


I've seen that sometimes when you switch from manual to auto voltages, it won't set the auto voltage correctly under certain conditions (and uses the last set manual voltage) while other settings get applied (like loadline calibration, etcc), then when you reboot again the voltage gets applied. There's also a thing where if you switch from DVID offset to auto, the dvid offset still gets applied (not sure if rebooting a 2nd time clears it). But about the first thing, some combinations of settings triggers it. I saw that once this morning when I switched from AC/DC loadline 1/1 and 1.20v and turbo LLC, to 160/160 and auto voltages+standard LLC, and on the first reboot to bios to check, the vcore settings showed the new setting but the sensors showed a 1.20v + normal LLC setting (1.176v) reading, then another 'exit without saving' prompt and then it showed 1.296v in the sensors, which I knew was correct.

Now if you changed nothing, I don't know. Was your system powered off?


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> I've seen that sometimes when you switch from manual to auto voltages, it won't set the auto voltage correctly under certain conditions (and uses the last set manual voltage) while other settings get applied (like loadline calibration, etcc), then when you reboot again the voltage gets applied. There's also a thing where if you switch from DVID offset to auto, the dvid offset still gets applied (not sure if rebooting a 2nd time clears it). But about the first thing, some combinations of settings triggers it. I saw that once this morning when I switched from AC/DC loadline 1/1 and 1.20v and turbo LLC, to 160/160 and auto voltages+standard LLC, and on the first reboot to bios to check, the vcore settings showed the new setting but the sensors showed a 1.20v + normal LLC setting (1.176v) reading, then another 'exit without saving' prompt and then it showed 1.296v in the sensors, which I knew was correct.
> 
> Now if you changed nothing, I don't know. Was your system powered off?


System was still on, as it's running 24/7. Only gets reboots when needed.
Can't remember if I rebooted after testing prime small fft's with avx yesterday.
I know when I ran it yesterday without any setting changed it dropped to 1.300V max and 1.284ish while running.
This morning I started it up and it jumped to 1.340V with too little package power to create 99C of heat ... bit weird.

After rebooting tho ... it seems to work normal again ... tested at least 3 runs of prime small fft's without avx and 1 or 2 with avx and voltages are behaving normal again.

You must admit that these voltage values do look way more appealing then the values from my screenshots before:


----------



## Intrud3r

Hmm ... changed the following:
MP = 50 --> 51
AVX offset = Auto --> 1
DVID = +0.005V --> +0.015V --> Nope
DVID = +0.025V --> Nope
DVID = +0.035V

Boots into windows nicely ... testing testing ...

Where I could get sorta stable earlier at 5.1 prime small FFT's without avx at around 1.314V
I would get BSOD's or whea erros if I went lower.


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> System was still on, as it's running 24/7. Only gets reboots when needed.
> Can't remember if I rebooted after testing prime small fft's with avx yesterday.
> I know when I ran it yesterday without any setting changed it dropped to 1.300V max and 1.284ish while running.
> This morning I started it up and it jumped to 1.340V with too little package power to create 99C of heat ... bit weird.
> 
> After rebooting tho ... it seems to work normal again ... tested at least 3 runs of prime small fft's without avx and 1 or 2 with avx and voltages are behaving normal again.
> 
> You must admit that these voltage values do look way more appealing then the values from my screenshots before:


I'm 100% certain your settings were not applied somewhere. CPU Package power is VID * Amps and Power (POUT) is VR VCore * Amps. Something was unlinking VR VOUT to VID, but you were unable to get a hwinfo screenshot in time. A full ss would have given some ideas.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> I'm 100% certain your settings were not applied somewhere. CPU Package power is VID * Amps and Power (POUT) is VR VCore * Amps. Something was unlinking VR VOUT to VID, but you were unable to get a hwinfo screenshot in time. A full ss would have given some ideas.


Thanks for explaining none the less ... I was like ... wth is going on here ... after rebooting and seeing it handled itself fine again, it gave some peace of mind ... but still ...


----------



## lucasfrance

Intrud3r said:


> I do very much like the power saving setting. Have not played with it a lot yet, but it seems to set my vid to normal values which compare to vr vout and my max vr vout stays WAY lower then with any other setting.
> All other settings I've tried let it jump up to 1.380V.
> With power saving I'm seeing 1.304V max VR VOUT as of now ... ran prime small fft's without avx for 5 minutes .... no problems at all ...
> I do have to say that I see more voltage differences then with other loadline settings. It swings more up and down then with the others, but it looks like it's stable at just ups the voltage needed when it's needed. Seems to work better then with other loadlines ? At least that's my feeling ...
> 
> Testing DVID = +0.005V atm ... think I can go even lower.
> 
> Now this does make me hella curious if I can manage 5.1 / 4.7 with these settings ... of course I would need more dvid, but hell ... why not ?


Agreed. Offset +0.04 needed here only for Small FFT with AVX stability.

Edit: Also have :
- VCC PLL 1.16 (default 1.02)
- VCC PLL_OC 1.31 (dedault 1.25)


----------



## Intrud3r

lucasfrance said:


> Agreed. Offset +0.04 needed here only for Small FFT with AVX stability.
> 
> Edit: Also have :
> - VCC PLL 1.16 (default 1.02)
> - VCC PLL_OC 1.31 (dedault 1.25)


Thank you for sharing.

I'm running 5.1 / 4.7 avx offset = 1 DVID = +0.045V
max vr vout value so far = 1.356V
Prime small fft's without avx ran fine for about 5 min (it got hot, as I didn't give it time to cool down ... but ran fine none the less).
1 round of BFV ran fine too.

Was curious if I could get rid of my avx offset ... although my cooling is totally inadequate for 5.1 with avx small fft


----------



## Falkentyne

lucasfrance said:


> Agreed. Offset +0.04 needed here only for Small FFT with AVX stability.
> 
> Edit: Also have :
> - VCC PLL 1.16 (default 1.02)
> - VCC PLL_OC 1.31 (dedault 1.25)


What is the benefit of these two settings?
What happens if you have them at default (1.02 and 1.25?)
Like what exactly happens? Can you verify the difference?


----------



## lucasfrance

Intrud3r said:


> Thank you for sharing.
> 
> I'm running 5.1 / 4.7 avx offset = 1 DVID = +0.045V
> max vr vout value so far = 1.356V
> Prime small fft's without avx ran fine for about 5 min (it got hot, as I didn't give it time to cool down ... but ran fine none the less).
> 1 round of BFV ran fine too.
> 
> Was curious if I could get rid of my avx offset ... although my cooling is totally inadequate for 5.1 with avx small fft


I stay away from 5.1 even if stable with an higher offset as temperature becomes too high for my liking  5.0 all cores,is great already


----------



## lucasfrance

@;


Falkentyne said:


> What is the benefit of these two settings?
> What happens if you have them at default (1.02 and 1.25?)
> Like what exactly happens? Can you verify the difference?


Will give a try and post back.

I took these two settings from the Gigabyte Easytune setting for 5.2 before i completely uninstall it and configured my OC in BIOS.


----------



## Jody Hodgson

Driller au said:


> You could try this
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76pAKsBlaHA


Thanks for that I had already tried this (strange as it seems) but alas that does not change anything either. Still stuck with no second drive


----------



## Intrud3r

Oh my ... I'm liking this Loadline Power Saving setting.

Started Realbench, let it run for about 1 min. Resetted HWiNFO and let it run 3 hash results. Took screenshot while running.
To give an actual picture of the voltage usage during the test.

Realbench 2.56:


----------



## ScomComputers

Intrud3r said:


> Oh my ... I'm liking this Loadline Power Saving setting.
> 
> Started Realbench, let it run for about 1 min. Resetted HWiNFO and let it run 3 hash results. Took screenshot while running.
> To give an actual picture of the voltage usage during the test.
> 
> Realbench 2.56:


Nice...how much your ram clock(3200?)?
The vccio and vccsa not to high?
And All C-States (manually) enabled,or auto?


----------



## Intrud3r

ScomComputers said:


> Nice...how much your ram clock(3200?)?
> The vccio and vccsa not to high?
> And All C-States (manually) enabled,or auto?


Ram runs @ 3600 C16-19-19-43-560-32768

VCCIO couldn't really go lower before, then I would get idle hickups. Have not tried to lower this yet now using Loadline Power Saving.
VCCSA tried running 1.200 set in bios/uefi before switching to loadline Power Saving(results in 1.212 or so), didn't notice any difference.
Only CPU EIST is enabled. C-States settings are all disabled.


----------



## GRat

Quick question about the 2nd pci-e slot on the Z390 Aorus Pro. 

Would I experience any loss in performance if I mounted a single 2070 RTX in the second slot (PCI Express x16 slot, running at x8 (PCIEX8))?


----------



## ScomComputers

Intrud3r said:


> Ram runs @ 3600 C16-19-19-43-560-32768
> 
> VCCIO couldn't really go lower before, then I would get idle hickups. Have not tried to lower this yet now using Loadline Power Saving.
> VCCSA tried running 1.200 set in bios/uefi before switching to loadline Power Saving(results in 1.212 or so), didn't notice any difference.
> Only CPU EIST is enabled. C-States settings are all disabled.


Ok,thank you.
And, what is the real vcore ,now : vcore 1, vcore 2 or vr vout ?


----------



## Intrud3r

ScomComputers said:


> Ok,thank you.
> And, what is the real vcore ,now : vcore 1, vcore 2 or vr vout ?


I'm wishfully looking at VR VOUT ... hoping that it is somewhat accurate.


----------



## shaolin95

Chimera619 said:


> I made some research and read that Noctua and Phanteks high end cooler perform the same as an AIO at like 1/3 the price?
> I thought people bought AIOs just for the looks xD


Not really 
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...-360-tt-premium-cpu-cooler-review/index6.html
That is my favorite even though TT customer service and other sale tactics have them on my black listed companies these days.


----------



## Padinn

GRat said:


> Quick question about the 2nd pci-e slot on the Z390 Aorus Pro.
> 
> Would I experience any loss in performance if I mounted a single 2070 RTX in the second slot (PCI Express x16 slot, running at x8 (PCIEX8))?


Not much, likely less than 2%. If you had a 2080ti it's around 4. Shouldn't be noticeable.


----------



## GRat

Do we know if those pci-e lanes are shared with m.2 or sata slots?


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I'm running AC and DC loadlines at 1, do I risk high transient overshoots? I have a -.05 offset
> 
> 
> 
> If VRM loadline calibration is left at standard/Normal (1.6 mOhms) or Low (I'm going to guess that Gigabyte's Low is 1.3 mOhms and medium is 1.0 mOhms), then I'm guessing no, but I'm talking out of my butthole here.
> 
> Transient risks come from VRM loadline being at low mOhms, not AC loadline. But I still don't know precisely how AC loadline works, except the more mOhms on it (default is 1.6 for 8 cores, 2.1 mohms for 4 and 6 core CFL, 1.8 mOhms for Kaby Lake), the higher the VID will be boosted from a base VID, then that VID is sent to the VRM (before DC loadline changes the VID from there). AC loadline does not control "Vcore" vdroop--VRM loadline does.
> However, Padinn, this is still a very good question--whether HIGHER values for AC loadline have any risks of spikes compared to lower values (as long as VRM loadline is left at standard)...It would take an oscilloscope to answer this question. And of course, no one here seems to have access to one.
> 
> It will just lower the base VID from the defaults. But you would usually need a positive voltage offset to compensate.
> Note that I have currently seen NO benefit (yet) of lowering DC loadline to 1, versus leaving it at 160 (1.6 mOhms).
> If you do lower AC loadline to 1 (0.01 mOhms, for those with Asus boards), try keeping DC loadline at 1.6 mOhms and see if VID and VR VOUT (Vcore on Maximus XI boards) still lines up if not using any offsets (this won't work at all on manual vcore of course).
Click to expand...

Gotcha. These are my current settings.


----------



## Padinn

GRat said:


> Do we know if those pci-e lanes are shared with m.2 or sata slots?


Check manual, its in there wher r it talks about installing m2 drives


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I'm running AC and DC loadlines at 1, do I risk high transient overshoots? I have a -.05 offset
> 
> 
> 
> If VRM loadline calibration is left at standard/Normal (1.6 mOhms) or Low (I'm going to guess that Gigabyte's Low is 1.3 mOhms and medium is 1.0 mOhms), then I'm guessing no, but I'm talking out of my butthole here.
> 
> Transient risks come from VRM loadline being at low mOhms, not AC loadline. But I still don't know precisely how AC loadline works, except the more mOhms on it (default is 1.6 for 8 cores, 2.1 mohms for 4 and 6 core CFL, 1.8 mOhms for Kaby Lake), the higher the VID will be boosted from a base VID, then that VID is sent to the VRM (before DC loadline changes the VID from there). AC loadline does not control "Vcore" vdroop--VRM loadline does.
> However, Padinn, this is still a very good question--whether HIGHER values for AC loadline have any risks of spikes compared to lower values (as long as VRM loadline is left at standard)...It would take an oscilloscope to answer this question. And of course, no one here seems to have access to one.
> 
> It will just lower the base VID from the defaults. But you would usually need a positive voltage offset to compensate.
> Note that I have currently seen NO benefit (yet) of lowering DC loadline to 1, versus leaving it at 160 (1.6 mOhms).
> If you do lower AC loadline to 1 (0.01 mOhms, for those with Asus boards), try keeping DC loadline at 1.6 mOhms and see if VID and VR VOUT (Vcore on Maximus XI boards) still lines up if not using any offsets (this won't work at all on manual vcore of course).
Click to expand...

Also im running a +.05v offset, I know that's a huge difference. Thanks brain 

I am going to try out Power Saving on the Loadline and see if does anything (also set VAXG Loadline to Normal since I'm not using internal graphics). What is the latest recommendations for Prime testing? I remember reading somewhere that what we thought was useful isn't, and I can't remember what the proper settings are now.


----------



## derelict360

Can someone help me better understand the PWM Phase Control option?

My understanding is that it tells the voltage regulator to favor current over temperature. Which tells me that there are certain elements restricting current either due to the present temperature, or anticipated temperature increases.

I would guess that these elements exist outside of whatever TjMax is set to. 

1. If this is the case, when set to auto - what are the conditions that would lead the motherboard to favor lower temperatures over current?
2. What is the danger of setting this option to Extreme Performance?
3. What should I be observing when setting this option to Extreme Performance? For instance my temperatures look good, but what else could go wrong?


----------



## Bravoexo

Is that new f8 bios "new", and what happened to f8e?


----------



## derelict360

Bravoexo said:


> Is that new f8 bios "new", and what happened to f8e?


I believe when you get an e after the BIOS version it means it's like a beta or something. I saw that around here somewhere... not 100% sure it's true.


----------



## Bravoexo

GRat said:


> Do we know if those pci-e lanes are shared with m.2 or sata slots?


the only m.2 slot that affects a pci-e slot is the bottom one, and it disables the lowest most pci-e full size slot, the 2nd m.2 takes 2 sata allotments, while the top m.2 takes one of the first sata slots. IIRC


----------



## Moparman

Bravoexo said:


> the only m.2 slot that affects a pci-e slot is the bottom one, and it disables the lowest most pci-e full size slot, the 2nd m.2 takes 2 sata allotments, while the top m.2 takes one of the first sata slots. IIRC



If you plan to run SLI and use all the sata slots you need to run your NVME in the bottom m.2 slot it is the only one that won't take your sata away.


----------



## Bravoexo

Moparman said:


> If you plan to run SLI and use all the sata slots you need to run your NVME in the bottom m.2 slot it is the only one that won't take your sata away.


which is what I have, two GTX 1080's in SLI and the 970 Evo is on the bottom m.2 slot


----------



## derelict360

Anyone plop 4400Mhz RAM into this thing yet?


----------



## sygnus21

Never mind.


----------



## Intrud3r

Just updated to Bios F7 on my Aorus Ultra and it frecked up my memory overclock ... 

ah well, at least something to do again 

Otherwise it's running fine (for the 10 min. it's running).

--> Let me correct myself ... dumb dumb ... set everything up in bios except ddr voltage .... 

Back at 3733Mhz C17-20-20-43-560


----------



## Padinn

Padinn said:


> Also im running a +.05v offset, I know that's a huge difference. Thanks brain
> 
> I am going to try out Power Saving on the Loadline and see if does anything (also set VAXG Loadline to Normal since I'm not using internal graphics). What is the latest recommendations for Prime testing? I remember reading somewhere that what we thought was useful isn't, and I can't remember what the proper settings are now.


I still seem stable with these settings.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> So,
> 
> On my Master if I disable C-States and Speed Shift, just leave EIST enabled, and put my minimum CPU at 5% in Windows Power options, my VROut goes down to .295v and i get random reboots, even with Power Loading a dummy load on low voltages enabled in the BIOS. I get random reboots when it goes this low.
> 
> With Speed Shift, C-States and EIST enabled my VCore voltage goes just under .800v and no reboots.
> 
> This with both a positive and negative CPU voltage with IA AC Loadline 1 or 0.
> 
> 
> Wish I could fix this, I'd rather not use C-States.
> 
> Edit: Never mind, I was looking at the wrong VROut.


It seems to be a bug with the Master F8g BIOS and Medium LLC. 

I put it on High LLC and lowered my negative offset by -.020v and now no more reboots. :h34r-smi


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> It seems to be a bug with the Master F8g BIOS and Medium LLC.
> 
> I put it on High LLC and lowered my negative offset by -.020v and now no more reboots. :h34r-smi


Not really a bug I would say, just shows that you needed more idle voltage.

If I understand it correctly ... medium loadline gives the yellow line and shows how the voltage drops under heavier load. Left to right, lower load to heavier load, less to more voltage drop.

High has a higher line, even at idle, so should give a tad more voltage at idle so keeps you stable.

Again, this is just my mind trying to make sense of it.

P.S. Idle is not 0, idle is let's say the first vertical line under the "i" or the second vertical line under the "c".


----------



## Moparman

derelict360 said:


> Anyone plop 4400Mhz RAM into this thing yet?



I have had issues getting over 4200 with a few different kits with my 9600k and Master.


----------



## BradleyW

Does anyone know if it is safe to set AI AC Loadline and AI DC loadline to 1 (GIGABYTE) / 0.01 (ASUS).


----------



## davidm71

New F8 bios out for the Master. Anyone try it out yet?


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> New F8 bios out for the Master. Anyone try it out yet?


Tried it out and went back to F8E. Seems like some bugs were probably fixed (I haven't tested the issue I saw with F8G where when you flip on the power supply, the board 'warms up' for 3 seconds then shuts off, also didn't test that F8G issue with F8H either, but F8E did not do that), but I am "slightly" more unstable at my "minimum stable voltage" (same ambients) with F8 compared to F8E (F8H seems to be the same as F8).
Hard to test stuff like this without equipment but: F8E: 5 ghz, 1.265v, LLC Turbo, Realbench 2.56: one WHEA/L0 error after 1 hour 10 minutes. F8: 5 ghz 1.265v, Realbench 2.56: one WHEA/L0 error after 15 minutes (no crashes, just logged in HWinfo64).

Power draw and VR VOUT seemed to be identical; usually stuff like this that goes pear shaped when you are borderline stable can do with RAM subtimings, especially where AVX instructions are concerned, as I didn't notice anything different on 15k small FFT's at all. But I don't have the the time nor patience to spend hours and hours testing stuff like this. Also voltage fluctuations from higher loadline calibration and load changes can cause failures when you are borderline to be very erratic and happen sometimes fast and sometimes it takes forever. Probably more effective to drop the LLC to high or medium (but this requires a much higher bios voltage, but lower LLC=much better transient response than LLC=Turbo) to get the same VR VOUT, then go down 5mv until you start getting errors more predictably. Very torturous stuff and I can't be bothered with that crap now.

When I get my delid kit (ordered one this morning), and I delid and LM the core and relid, hopefully with reduced temps, I can drop the volts then I can see if I can test more precisely. It's really not fun when it takes ages (and heat) to find an error. And I know very little if anything about RAM subtimings or tertiary timings.

YMMV.


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> Tried it out and went back to F8E. Seems like some bugs were probably fixed (I haven't tested the issue I saw with F8G where when you flip on the power supply, the board 'warms up' for 3 seconds then shuts off, also didn't test that F8G issue with F8H either, but F8E did not do that), but I am "slightly" more unstable at my "minimum stable voltage" (same ambients) with F8 compared to F8E (F8H seems to be the same as F8).
> Hard to test stuff like this without equipment but: F8E: 5 ghz, 1.265v, LLC Turbo, Realbench 2.56: one WHEA/L0 error after 1 hour 10 minutes. F8: 5 ghz 1.265v, Realbench 2.56: one WHEA/L0 error after 15 minutes (no crashes, just logged in HWinfo64).
> 
> YMMV.


Are you saying on the F8 Beta's you got double posting behavior? And since F8E did not do that I assume F8 doesn't do that as well??

Hate double posting boards. Hate them.

Thanks.


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Are you saying on the F8 Beta's you got double posting behavior? And since F8E did not do that I assume F8 doesn't do that as well??
> 
> Hate double posting boards. Hate them.
> 
> Thanks.


I don't expose my hardware to testing stuff intentionally like that. 
All I am saying is *F8G* had this and it was NOT double posting behavior. It was the board 'warming up' and shutting down when the AC switch or PSU plug is plugged in from a complete shutoff.
I didn't see this happen in F8E. I did see a 'warmup' when you press the case button manually on f8e (or maybe f8b I honestly forgot) after the AC was shut off completely, but I *never* shut off the entire AC, so I really can't tell you more. I'm also not going to intentionally do this for anyone unless I'm paid to do it. Already had to mess around shutting off the PSU in the middle of windows or on the bios screen to see if I could replicate the "switching to backup bios" thing some people had experienced. And I sure do not appreciate that one bit. Not even a bloody thank you from anyone from my tests. So I'll only test what serves my needs, not others.

Whatever it was, you do NOT want the board immediately warming up and then turning off (as soon as the PSU is turned on) like F8G did. I do NOT know if F8H or F8 does that nor am I about to find out, either. I'd rather have it do it with the case button if anything.


----------



## davidm71

Having a hard time understanding the behavior you are describing. Guess I got to see it happen to understand. Maybe if there was a Youtube video. Not asking you. I'll look for it myself. 

My old X99 MSI Godlike does something like that. After a complete cold shut off when power button pressed it will warm up for a few seconds, different post codes will flash, and then shut off for a second and go back on. They say its memory training but its crap!

Anyhow upgraded to F8 based on promise of improved system stability. Still has trouble finding my Samsung 970 pro. Had to reboot for it to register.

Will see how it goes. Thanks.


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Having a hard time understanding the behavior you are describing. Guess I got to see it happen to understand. Maybe if there was a Youtube video. Not asking you. I'll look for it myself.
> 
> My old X99 MSI Godlike does something like that. After a complete cold shut off when power button pressed it will warm up for a few seconds, different post codes will flash, and then shut off for a second and go back on. They say its memory training but its crap!
> 
> Anyhow upgraded to F8 based on promise of improved system stability. Still has trouble finding my Samsung 970 pro. Had to reboot for it to register.
> 
> Will see how it goes. Thanks.


Ok, in F8b (the last bios where I verified this) and "maybe" sometimes in f8e(??), after a hard AC power off--when all AC power is completely disconnected (not talking about pressing the case button to shut off the computer), when you press the case button, the board will power on briefly, no POST codes or anything, then just power off and then power on again and post normally. It was only like 2 seconds. I also have NO idea if its related to the "Power loading" setting in the bios or not. It does NOT do this when plugging in the AC cable or anything so I can live with this.

In F8G, it would never do this. Instead, as soon as you flick the power supply switch on, or if the switch is already on but the AC plug is unplugged, plugging in the AC cable, the board will instantly "turn on" like it's warming up (no post codes, so its like the one above) and then turn off, and then wait for you to press the case button. This I cant live with.

I do not know if that happened in F8H or F8, couldn't be bothered to see. Maybe I'll try again after my delid kit arrives in a few days and I mess around some more.


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> Ok, in F8b (the last bios where I verified this) and "maybe" sometimes in f8e(??), after a hard AC power off--when all AC power is completely disconnected (not talking about pressing the case button to shut off the computer), when you press the case button, the board will power on briefly, no POST codes or anything, then just power off and then power on again and post normally. It was only like 2 seconds. I also have NO idea if its related to the "Power loading" setting in the bios or not. It does NOT do this when plugging in the AC cable or anything so I can live with this.
> 
> In F8G, it would never do this. Instead, as soon as you flick the power supply switch on, or if the switch is already on but the AC plug is unplugged, plugging in the AC cable, the board will instantly "turn on" like it's warming up (no post codes, so its like the one above) and then turn off, and then wait for you to press the case button. This I cant live with.
> 
> I do not know if that happened in F8H or F8, couldn't be bothered to see. Maybe I'll try again after my delid kit arrives in a few days and I mess around some more.



Well I just tested my system with the F8 bios and powered it down cold and waited for complete discharge and powered on again with out issue or warm up behavior you described.


----------



## Talelorm

*Gigabyte z390 master interference issues*

Does anyone have the non stop interference issues that i am having?
interference 24/7 while pc is on and makes interference noises just moving my mouse across the screen
driver version: Version 6.0.1.8619
bios F8
gigabyte z390 master
corsair 500d se
gtx 1080ti
i7 9700k
seasonic 1000 platinum

things i have checked/done:
moved wires from nearby cables
disabled bluetooth
disabled wifi
unplugged every usb plugged in
turning speakers off works but undesirable
unplugging the green line cable works;undesirable
unplugged the hd audio front panel plug-ins from motherboard

I came from a gigabyte gaming 7 z270 and an i7 7700k from before with 0 interference issues, the only thing that changed was the case, motherboard, processor.


----------



## derelict360

Moparman said:


> I have had issues getting over 4200 with a few different kits with my 9600k and Master.


Is this what the RAM was rated for though or was it overclocked? I'm curious if anyone has tried the RAM that's actually rated for around 4400 MHz.


----------



## jlp0209

Any Z390 Master owners having problems updating the BIOS from F7 to F8? I am trying to run Q flash but it refuses to detect my USB drive. I have USB settings set to detect legacy and also set to "auto" re: using as optical or storage drive, can't remember the wording exactly. The BIOS itself does detect my USB drive when I look at USB settings. But I cannot boot from it nor can the BIOS access it to flash the new BIOS. When I run Q flash it detects an A: drive and says unknown device, with some Microsoft EFI boot files it looks like. The only files on it are from the unzipped F8 BIOS file, but it is not visible in Q flash. I've formatted the drive and everything (it is NTFS), but not sure that even matters. I've never been unable to flash or update BIOS on any prior motherboard dating back to 2011. I'm stumped.



Edit- I previously updated from F4 to F7 just fine.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Any Z390 Master owners having problems updating the BIOS from F7 to F8? I am trying to run Q flash but it refuses to detect my USB drive. I have USB settings set to detect legacy and also set to "auto" re: using as optical or storage drive, can't remember the wording exactly. The BIOS itself does detect my USB drive when I look at USB settings. But I cannot boot from it nor can the BIOS access it to flash the new BIOS. When I run Q flash it detects an A: drive and says unknown device, with some Microsoft EFI boot files it looks like. I've formatted the drive and everything (it is NTFS), but not sure that even matters. I've never been unable to flash or update BIOS on any prior motherboard dating back to 2011. I'm stumped.
> 
> Edit- I previously updated from F4 to F7 just fine.


Use a different port? And it should be FAT32 or FAT, not NTFS. Use Rufus to reformat your drive.
What I like to do is go to the memtest86 website, install memtest86 on the drive, then put the bios on it. That always works. Try it.


----------



## lucasfrance

Falkentyne said:


> What is the benefit of these two settings?
> What happens if you have them at default (1.02 and 1.25?)
> Like what exactly happens? Can you verify the difference?


After a few tests, I cannot confirm these values (1.16 and 1.31) improve the stability of my configuration compared to the AUTO ones. Same stability with AUTO values for "VCC PLL" (1.02)and "VCC PLL_OC" (1.25)

These were the values from EasyTune for 5.2 OC (I'm at 5.0/AVX 3 & uncore 43) so maybe I'm not at the "OC limit" where these values may have an effect on system stability.

I wonder why Gigabytes put these 2 values, there should be a reason...


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Use a different port? And it should be FAT32 or FAT, not NTFS. Use Rufus to reformat your drive.
> What I like to do is go to the memtest86 website, install memtest86 on the drive, then put the bios on it. That always works. Try it.


Rufus did the trick, a handy little utility. Thank you very much. Updated just fine and redid all of my settings rather than just load F7 profile. Running my Prime95 29.5 torture test now, so far so good after 15 mins at my same settings as F7.

I just saw that you ordered a delid kit, you are a brave soul re: delidding a 9900K. I'm sitting this gen out as I'm fine with my CPU OC and voltage. And don't want to break anything when removing the solder. Interested to see your temp differences after you test.

Edit- I got a WHEA error after 20 mins of Prime. Crap. I'm not looking forward to tinkering again / adding voltage after work. My F7 OC was rock solid.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Rufus did the trick, a handy little utility. Thank you very much. Updated just fine and redid all of my settings rather than just load F7 profile. Running my Prime95 29.5 torture test now, so far so good after 15 mins at my same settings as F7.
> 
> I just saw that you ordered a delid kit, you are a brave soul re: delidding a 9900K. I'm sitting this gen out as I'm fine with my CPU OC and voltage. And don't want to break anything when removing the solder. Interested to see your temp differences after you test.
> 
> Edit- I got a WHEA error after 20 mins of Prime. Crap. I'm not looking forward to tinkering again / adding voltage after work. My F7 OC was rock solid.


Go back to F7 right now and test the same settings and tell me if you get a WHEA error. The faster you go back the faster you'll find out.
Make sure all current, current protection and power limits are set to the same thing.
Oh wait you're at work right now?


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Go back to F7 right now and test the same settings and tell me if you get a WHEA error. The faster you go back the faster you'll find out.
> Make sure all current, current protection and power limits are set to the same thing.
> Oh wait you're at work right now?


Yeah I had some time this morning to update BIOS and work at home and now I'm at office. About a month ago I removed MX-4 and replaced with NT-H1 paste. I did my usual Prime small fft avx testing and all was fine. So I believe going back to F7 will be fine. I'll adjust voltage settings a bit tonight and see what happens. If it is out of control and I need a lot more voltage I'll decide on either reverting to F7 or switching boards. I'm not happy about having to sit and re-test for at least a few hours, again.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Yeah I had some time this morning to update BIOS and work at home and now I'm at office. About a month ago I removed MX-4 and replaced with NT-H1 paste. I did my usual Prime small fft avx testing and all was fine. So I believe going back to F7 will be fine. I'll adjust voltage settings a bit tonight and see what happens. If it is out of control and I need a lot more voltage I'll decide on either reverting to F7 or switching boards. I'm not happy about having to sit and re-test for at least a few hours, again.


The most effective way to test is to go back to F7 without increasing voltage on F8, then verify that in fact F7 will run for hours, that way you waste less time testing and can easily get to a conclusion, e.g. whether your chip just happened to require more voltage suddenly than before, or whether it is the F8 causing it. Did you record your maximum temps in F8? If you did then it's even easier; take note of the temps, go back to F7 and test there first. Doing F8 again and increasing volts first also increases temps and makes a control experiment much more inefficient. Make sure you run your prime test in F7 longer than usual to make sure. Then once you're sure, then go back to F8.

If you want to be really sure, I would do this before going back to F7:
1) Go into your bios and write down ALL of the memory subtimings and tertiary timings shown.
2) Go back to F7, then before doing your test, write down all of the memory subtimings again (after you have the previous F7 config all set up).

3) test Prime in F7 fully.
4) If you see any memory differences, let us know (I have no idea if its a memory subtiming causing this or just a change in voltage regulation---although I really find it hard to believe how that could be messed up; I assume PWM switching Frequency is still working correctly).


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> The most effective way to test is to go back to F7 without increasing voltage on F8, then verify that in fact F7 will run for hours, that way you waste less time testing and can easily get to a conclusion, e.g. whether your chip just happened to require more voltage suddenly than before, or whether it is the F8 causing it. Did you record your maximum temps in F8? If you did then it's even easier; take note of the temps, go back to F7 and test there first. Doing F8 again and increasing volts first also increases temps and makes a control experiment much more inefficient. Make sure you run your prime test in F7 longer than usual to make sure. Then once you're sure, then go back to F8.
> 
> If you want to be really sure, I would do this before going back to F7:
> 1) Go into your bios and write down ALL of the memory subtimings and tertiary timings shown.
> 2) Go back to F7, then before doing your test, write down all of the memory subtimings again (after you have the previous F7 config all set up).
> 
> 3) test Prime in F7 fully.
> 4) If you see any memory differences, let us know (I have no idea if its a memory subtiming causing this or just a change in voltage regulation---although I really find it hard to believe how that could be messed up; I assume PWM switching Frequency is still working correctly).


Will post when I get the time and patience to revert; I didn't save the F7 profile on USB so I can't quickly load settings but shouldn't take too long. I never adjust memory settings, always use XMP profile and leave it at that. I did note my max temps in F8.


----------



## iunlock

derelict360 said:


> Is this what the RAM was rated for though or was it overclocked? I'm curious if anyone has tried the RAM that's actually rated for around 4400 MHz.


I'll be RAM tuning today on my board. So far 4266MHz is rock solid on my 32GB G.Skill TridentZ rgb 4266MHz sticks 8GBx4. The goal is to get it to 4522MHz with decent timings. The rgb's should help boost it and keep it stable. Lol I kid...


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Will post when I get the time and patience to revert; I didn't save the F7 profile on USB so I can't quickly load settings but shouldn't take too long. I never adjust memory settings, always use XMP profile and leave it at that. I did note my max temps in F8.


Thank you for your help.
Remember after putting F7 on your USB, before flashing, go into your bios and write down on paper the 2nd and tertiary RAM timings that are shown in F8.
Probably best to write them on paper but if you feel screenshots are better, whatever works (I never used the screenshot feature, maybe i should).
Then after reverting to F7 and setting XMP, save, reboot, and compare the settings. That's why writing them down on paper is easier..you can see what you wrote and compare them easily while saved screenshots would be awkward (I guess unless you used your phone to capture them!). Then its prime test time.

If there is a difference in subtimings between F7 and F8, then it's pretty easy to just change that timing back and see if you regain stability again.
Just to note: It was F8H where I noticed it requiring more voltage. I just never thought about RAM subtimings as I really know little about RAM.
Another user earlier in this thread said F8H was more unstable and 10C hotter than F8G, but 10C is a massive amount, so I really can't believe the accuracy of that.

BTW is your prime test with AVX enabled, FMA3 enabled or with AVX disabled (SSE2/Type1/Core2/Pentiuim4/type 0?)


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you for your help.
> Remember after putting F7 on your USB, before flashing, go into your bios and write down on paper the 2nd and tertiary RAM timings that are shown in F8.
> Probably best to write them on paper but if you feel screenshots are better, whatever works (I never used the screenshot feature, maybe i should).
> Then after reverting to F7 and setting XMP, save, reboot, and compare the settings. That's why writing them down on paper is easier..you can see what you wrote and compare them easily while saved screenshots would be awkward (I guess unless you used your phone to capture them!). Then its prime test time.
> 
> If there is a difference in subtimings between F7 and F8, then it's pretty easy to just change that timing back and see if you regain stability again.
> Just to note: It was F8H where I noticed it requiring more voltage. I just never thought about RAM subtimings as I really know little about RAM.
> Another user earlier in this thread said F8H was more unstable and 10C hotter than F8G, but 10C is a massive amount, so I really can't believe the accuracy of that.
> 
> BTW is your prime test with AVX enabled, FMA3 enabled or with AVX disabled (SSE2/Type1/Core2/Pentiuim4/type 0?)


You should be able to get all timings using this little program ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> You should be able to get all timings using this little program ?


It doesn't show some timings and it's also been shown some timings may be read wrong on Gigabyte boards.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> It doesn't show some timings and it's also been shown some timings may be read wrong on Gigabyte boards.


Ohhh .... oops, didn't know. Excuses moi.


----------



## derelict360

iunlock said:


> I'll be RAM tuning today on my board. So far 4266MHz is rock solid on my 32GB G.Skill TridentZ rgb 4266MHz sticks 8GBx4. The goal is to get it to 4522MHz with decent timings. The rgb's should help boost it and keep it stable. Lol I kid...


I'm interested to see how it turns out.

When are you getting your i9?


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you for your help.
> Remember after putting F7 on your USB, before flashing, go into your bios and write down on paper the 2nd and tertiary RAM timings that are shown in F8.
> Probably best to write them on paper but if you feel screenshots are better, whatever works (I never used the screenshot feature, maybe i should).
> Then after reverting to F7 and setting XMP, save, reboot, and compare the settings. That's why writing them down on paper is easier..you can see what you wrote and compare them easily while saved screenshots would be awkward (I guess unless you used your phone to capture them!). Then its prime test time.
> 
> If there is a difference in subtimings between F7 and F8, then it's pretty easy to just change that timing back and see if you regain stability again.
> Just to note: It was F8H where I noticed it requiring more voltage. I just never thought about RAM subtimings as I really know little about RAM.
> Another user earlier in this thread said F8H was more unstable and 10C hotter than F8G, but 10C is a massive amount, so I really can't believe the accuracy of that.
> 
> BTW is your prime test with AVX enabled, FMA3 enabled or with AVX disabled (SSE2/Type1/Core2/Pentiuim4/type 0?)


I'm using the latest Prime with FMA3 enabled. I will just do these tests using the secondary BIOS which is on F7. I'll flip the switch and compare settings and test. Dual BIOS come in handy after all, haha.


----------



## jlp0209

Re-did my testing using F7 BIOS as secondary and F8 as primary. I compared RAM timings with the XMP profile 1 on both BIOSes and the timings are identical. Ran Prime95 29.5 smallest fft using FMA3 and the F7 test went 30 minutes without any WHEA error. I only used 30 mins because 1) I know this BIOS works from all my past recent testing and 2) I get pretty quick errors using F8. Powered down and set switch to use F8 and rebooted. Re-ran the same test and again I got a WHEA error in 5 minutes. VOUT appeared to be the same but in fairness, I cut off the test after 5 minutes once I saw a WHEA error. I may or may not try further testing at lower voltage and down to 4.9ghz. I'm so tired of tweaking and testing with this board...I'd stay at F7 BIOS but I want to be up to date on security settings and always like running the latest BIOS.

Edit- I am adjusting voltage slowly. I'd been getting away with medium LLC with offset of +.100 for 5.0ghz. I've switched to high LLC and am testing at +.085 offset. Got a Prime error at +.080. I don't like my CPU package power increasing to 225 watts after 15 minutes of my current test; was lower on F7. I recall that when on F7 my CPU package power was at 212 watts or something similar. But that was also using medium LLC. Average VOUT is at 1.234 so far. 8792E average Vcore is up to 1.313v (high LLC, +.085) compared to 1.298v on F7 BIOS (medium LLC, +.100). I recall that on my F7 setup my VOUT was closer to 1.22 on average. So preliminary testing shows I need more voltage on F8 BIOS. On a more positive note I did not see any temperature increase on F8 when I used my F7 settings. Of course it went up as I added voltage.

Will continue to test, I think I'm solid at this setting. Still very annoyed but oh well. In normal use I won't come close to this level of power usage. Thanks Falkentyne for your assistance, always appreciate your posts.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Re-did my testing using F7 BIOS as secondary and F8 as primary. I compared RAM timings with the XMP profile 1 on both BIOSes and the timings are identical. Ran Prime95 29.5 smallest fft using FMA3 and the F7 test went 30 minutes without any WHEA error. I only used 30 mins because 1) I know this BIOS works from all my past recent testing and 2) I get pretty quick errors using F8. Powered down and set switch to use F8 and rebooted. Re-ran the same test and again I got a WHEA error in 5 minutes. VOUT appeared to be the same but in fairness, I cut off the test after 5 minutes once I saw a WHEA error. I may or may not try further testing at lower voltage and down to 4.9ghz. I'm so tired of tweaking and testing with this board...I'd stay at F7 BIOS but I want to be up to date on security settings and always like running the latest BIOS.
> 
> Edit- I am adjusting voltage slowly. I'd been getting away with medium LLC with offset of +.100 for 5.0ghz. I've switched to high LLC and am testing at +.085 offset. Got a Prime error at +.080. I don't like my CPU package power increasing to 225 watts after 15 minutes of my current test; was lower on F7. I recall that when on F7 my CPU package power was at 212 watts or something similar. But that was also using medium LLC. Average VOUT is at 1.234 so far. 8792E average Vcore is up to 1.313v (high LLC, +.085) compared to 1.298v on F7 BIOS (medium LLC, +.100). I recall that on my F7 setup my VOUT was closer to 1.22 on average. So preliminary testing shows I need more voltage on F8 BIOS. On a more positive note I did not see any temperature increase on F8 when I used my F7 settings. Of course it went up as I added voltage.
> 
> Will continue to test, I think I'm solid at this setting. Still very annoyed but oh well. In normal use I won't come close to this level of power usage. Thanks Falkentyne for your assistance, always appreciate your posts.


Thank you jlp. So all RAM timings are identical?......ugh


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you jlp. So all RAM timings are identical?......ugh


Affirmative.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Affirmative.


So Gigabyte messed up with the voltage regulation somehow?
VR VOUT is reading identical on both bioses but yet somehow it's more unstable 
Someone needs to contact Gigabyte and tell them this bug started with F8H (same settings now require more voltage).


----------



## iunlock

Intrud3r said:


> Ohhh .... oops, didn't know. Excuses moi.


For our board it's the tRDWR_ values that read wonky, but that's almost about it iirc and from what I'm seeing so far. 



derelict360 said:


> I'm interested to see how it turns out.
> 
> When are you getting your i9?


Hey there... I've been testing my 9900K for about a week now and I haven't delidded it yet, but it's doing pretty awesome. I have another delidded 9900K that I haven't tested yet. My goal is to see how much I can get out of this stock 9900K first and to gather some more data. 

I've got 5.3GHz rock stable... now tuning 5.4GHz and it's holding up somewhat but needs some work.... I was able to get 2.156sec on the 32M run with wPrime ...

I've posted my CB R20 score the thread. Post #130.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27899298-post130.html

As for the RAM tuning, it's being really stubborn past 4400 right now... trying to figure some things out, which unfortunately is a bunch of trial and error lol so I'll be here all night.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> So Gigabyte messed up with the voltage regulation somehow?
> VR VOUT is reading identical on both bioses but yet somehow it's more unstable
> Someone needs to contact Gigabyte and tell them this bug started with F8H (same settings now require more voltage).


Let me post an apples to apples comparison running the same test, same settings, same OC, etc, comparing both BIOS. And then my adjustments for F8. I didn't make this comparison clear earlier, may ease your concern, my apologies. I got the old CPU package power reading of ~212w from Prime95 29.4 small fft avx. Here I'm using Prime95 29.5 smallest fft fma3 testing. OC is at 5.0ghz. Results are after 11 minutes of testing. 

F7 BIOS (medium LLC, offset +.100)

VOUT avg: 1.217
8688E avg: 1.297
8792E avg: 1.295
CPU package power MAX: 220.6w

F8 BIOS (medium LLC, offset +.100), not stable 

VOUT avg: 1.221
8688E avg: 1.297
8792E avg: 1.294
CPU package power MAX: 219.5w

F8 BIOS (high LLC, offset +.085)

VOUT avg: 1.234
8688E avg: 1.320
8792E avg: 1.313
CPU package power MAX: 225w

For some reason I just need a tad more voltage on F8 (high LLC, higher VOUT 1.234) to maintain the stable 5.0ghz OC, as I noted earlier. These settings never had any issue on F7. 

That said, I would take my basic results with a grain of salt. I have not run the new Prime95 29.5 smallest fft fma3 test for 3 hours on F7 or F8. I don't want to destroy the CPU. This has just been my observation today when doing my routine stability testing.


----------



## KedarWolf

Might have 4200MHZ memory stable on the F8 BIOS. Going to let HCI MemTest run overnight though to be sure. But I'm okay so far at 200%


----------



## GRat

Think I got myself a good chip, 2min in the bios and I got myself a "stable"(did run prime95 small fft for like 20min temps hitting low 70s).

Will try to push higher this weekend!


----------



## Padinn

I am noticing that periodically one of my hard drives will disconnect briefly and reconnect while PC is running. It takes a reboot for files to reappear. Ill get an Intel storage state message saying media was disconnected and then it reconnects. This is an old drive, smart status says it's ok. Anyway to figure out if this is a bad data port, cable, or if drive is dying?


----------



## EarlZ

Is there a setting to disable/enable HPET in the bios of this board ?


----------



## Timur Born

I tried around using the "Power Saver" internal loadline setting, but regardless of LLC and VCore settings I cannot get it as stable as "Performance" at full load, even at higher effective voltages.


----------



## derelict360

iunlock said:


> 4266MHz is rock solid on my 32GB G.Skill TridentZ rgb 4266MHz sticks 8GBx4. The goal is to get it to 4522MHz with decent timings. The rgb's should help boost it and keep it stable. Lol I kid...


Did you have to mess with voltages in order to get this to work? I would imagine that XMP doesn't work for it? Or does it?

I have 128GB of RGB so I'm good on that.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Re-did my testing using F7 BIOS as secondary and F8 as primary. I compared RAM timings with the XMP profile 1 on both BIOSes and the timings are identical. Ran Prime95 29.5 smallest fft using FMA3 and the F7 test went 30 minutes without any WHEA error. I only used 30 mins because 1) I know this BIOS works from all my past recent testing and 2) I get pretty quick errors using F8. Powered down and set switch to use F8 and rebooted. Re-ran the same test and again I got a WHEA error in 5 minutes. VOUT appeared to be the same but in fairness, I cut off the test after 5 minutes once I saw a WHEA error. I may or may not try further testing at lower voltage and down to 4.9ghz. I'm so tired of tweaking and testing with this board...I'd stay at F7 BIOS but I want to be up to date on security settings and always like running the latest BIOS.
> 
> Edit- I am adjusting voltage slowly. I'd been getting away with medium LLC with offset of +.100 for 5.0ghz. I've switched to high LLC and am testing at +.085 offset. Got a Prime error at +.080. I don't like my CPU package power increasing to 225 watts after 15 minutes of my current test; was lower on F7. I recall that when on F7 my CPU package power was at 212 watts or something similar. But that was also using medium LLC. Average VOUT is at 1.234 so far. 8792E average Vcore is up to 1.313v (high LLC, +.085) compared to 1.298v on F7 BIOS (medium LLC, +.100). I recall that on my F7 setup my VOUT was closer to 1.22 on average. So preliminary testing shows I need more voltage on F8 BIOS. On a more positive note I did not see any temperature increase on F8 when I used my F7 settings. Of course it went up as I added voltage.
> 
> Will continue to test, I think I'm solid at this setting. Still very annoyed but oh well. In normal use I won't come close to this level of power usage. Thanks Falkentyne for your assistance, always appreciate your posts.


If you're still here, and you still have F8 installed, can you please boot to F8, and run the Asrock timing configurator and tell me what the four TRDWR values read as?
Then when you boot back to F7, check those values again. (Don't bother checking in the bios).

I just checked in F8E just now (as stable as F7) and it said they were 13/13/13/13, but the Bios has them at 10/10/10/11 to the right of the 'Auto' values.
But when I enter the values manually as 14/14/14/14 (to match the CAS), the Asrock timing configurator said they were 14/14/14/14.
Was messing around at 4.7 ghz when I saw the reply about the timings reading wonky.

I tried 14/14/14/15 but it posted at 2800 mhz (instead of 3200 mhz) after failing to train (what I know 14/14/14/15 worked at 5.1 ghz earlier, whatever).

*edit*
Ok so the Auto values of 10/10/10/11 read as 13/13/13/13 in the asrock tool.
13/13/13/13 doesn't post however...it boots to 2800 mhz.
14/14/14/14 reads as 14/14/14/14
15/15/15/15 reads as 15/15/15/15

However 10/10/10/11 manually reads correctly as 10/10/10/11.
so the Asrock utility is working as expected. the Gigabyte Bios is not.

According to the comprehensive memory guide, those four values affect AVX instructions.
I want to see if F7 and F8 are setting the "Auto" values differently.


----------



## osb40000

Currently running an Aurus Master with a 9900k @ 5ghz, 2080TI. For gaming (specifically BFV which is a pig), what seems to be the best set of fast memory for this mobo? Looking for something that is actually achievable via XMP (with maybe a small voltage bump). I'm not proficient enough to OC RAM and worry about instability.

I'm looking at the compatibility pdf and it seems fairly lacking... maybe it just hasn't been updated. With prior Asus an AsRock mobos there seemed to be much better memory support.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> If you're still here, and you still have F8 installed, can you please boot to F8, and run the Asrock timing configurator and tell me what the four TRDWR values read as?
> Then when you boot back to F7, check those values again. (Don't bother checking in the bios).
> 
> I just checked in F8E just now (as stable as F7) and it said they were 13/13/13/13, but the Bios has them at 10/10/10/11 to the right of the 'Auto' values.
> But when I enter the values manually as 14/14/14/14 (to match the CAS), the Asrock timing configurator said they were 14/14/14/14.
> Was messing around at 4.7 ghz when I saw the reply about the timings reading wonky.
> 
> I tried 14/14/14/15 but it posted at 2800 mhz (instead of 3200 mhz) after failing to train (what I know 14/14/14/15 worked at 5.1 ghz earlier, whatever).
> 
> *edit*
> Ok so the Auto values of 10/10/10/11 read as 13/13/13/13 in the asrock tool.
> 13/13/13/13 doesn't post however...it boots to 2800 mhz.
> 14/14/14/14 reads as 14/14/14/14/
> 15/15/15/15 reads as 15/15/15/15/
> 
> However 10/10/10/11 manually reads correctly as 10/10/10/11.
> so the Asrock utility is working as expected. the Gigabyte Bios is not.
> 
> According to the comprehensive memory guide, those four values affect AVX instructions.
> I want to see if F7 and F8 are setting the "Auto" values differently.


I just checked using the Asrock tool you linked. The four TRDWR values are all 13 in both F7 and F8 for me.


----------



## KedarWolf

derelict360 said:


> Is this what the RAM was rated for though or was it overclocked? I'm curious if anyone has tried the RAM that's actually rated for around 4400 MHz.


If you get your 4x8GB RAM on a 9900k to 4133MHZ you're doing well. If you get it to 4200MHZ you're doing really good. If you get 4266MHZ HCI MemTest stable to say 1000% you have an exceptional IMC and/or highly binned really good RAM.

9900k don't have as good an IMC as say an 8700k so I really for 4x8GB on a four DIMM board I don't think you're going to get 4400MHZ.

Maybe, just maybe, on a 2x8GB high end two DIMM board you might, but 4400MHZ 4x8GB stress tested stable on a 9900k is going to be pretty much unheard of. 

Peeps sometimes can boot at 4400MHZ and even with Buildzoid, higher, but stress test it and it'll get errors immediately.

That being said on my 9900k with Ripjaws 5 4x8 GB CL14 B-die 3200 RAM I have HCI running all day while I'm at work at 4200MHZ 17-17-17-40 2T. Here's hoping. 

And I have Trident Z 4x8GB CL16 3600 NOT RBG (RBG has issues overclocking except the newest released kits) in the mail I'll have in less than a week.


----------



## KedarWolf

osb40000 said:


> Currently running an Aurus Master with a 9900k @ 5ghz, 2080TI. For gaming (specifically BFV which is a pig), what seems to be the best set of fast memory for this mobo? Looking for something that is actually achievable via XMP (with maybe a small voltage bump). I'm not proficient enough to OC RAM and worry about instability.
> 
> I'm looking at the compatibility pdf and it seems fairly lacking... maybe it just hasn't been updated. With prior Asus, an AsRock mobos there seemed to be much better memory support.


Probably what you want, should work with XMP, is a Trident Z 'NOT RGB' 4133MHZ 4x8GB CL19. Except for the newest released kits, RGB kits have issues even running at stock XMP. 

You want a four DIMM kit with a Master, it uses T-Topology and four DIMM kits work much better than two DIMM kits. The same settings with the four DIMM kit won't even boot with two sticks in on my PC 

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4133c19q-32gtzkkf

Gigabyte Master is on the G.Skill QVL list as well, I just checked. 

Edit: You don't want to mix two higher 2x8GB like 4266MHZ or 4400MHZ kits or use a 4x8GB kit that's higher than 4133MHZ, I guarantee it will NOT work with XMP, but that 4133MHZ kit should work fine, just might have to raise voltages to 1.45v which with b-die RAM is perfectly fine to run 24/7. Everything else can just stay at XMP, except System Agent and VCCIO you want to run at say 1.23v for both. :h34r-smi


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> I just checked using the Asrock tool you linked. The four TRDWR values are all 13 in both F7 and F8 for me.


You notice how the bios has them marked as a lower value to the right of Auto, though?
Ok that explains why I'm running at 10/10/10/11 manually now and nothing exploded (yet).
So that proves something is wrong with the VRM regulation in F8H and F8.
I was hoping it was a RAM timing or RAM subtiming or preset, since then that would be an easy fix (?), but I guess I can't have nice things, right?

Thank you very much for checking.


----------



## osb40000

KedarWolf said:


> Probably what you want, should work with XMP, is a Trident Z 'NOT RGB' 4133MHZ 4x8GB CL19. Except for the newest released kits, RGB kits have issues even running at stock XMP.
> 
> You want a four DIMM kit with a Master, it uses T-Topology and four DIMM kits work much better than two DIMM kits. The same settings with the four DIMM kit won't even boot with two sticks in on my PC


Thank you very much for the quick reply! I'll look at that and see what I can work out. RAM is still super expensive on the high end.


----------



## KedarWolf

osb40000 said:


> Thank you very much for the quick reply! I'll look at that and see what I can work out. RAM is still super expensive on the high end.


See my edits to that post, go back to it, vital info added.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> According to the comprehensive memory guide, those four values affect AVX instructions.
> I want to see if F7 and F8 are setting the "Auto" values differently.


These values are affected/changed by the "Memory Enhancement Settings". Here are mine when set to "Performance" in combination with Auto for TRDWR (most other timings were set manually).


----------



## osb40000

KedarWolf said:


> See my edits to that post, go back to it, vital info added.


Very nice! Thank you once again!


----------



## philhalo66

just got my aorus z390 pro today along with a 9900k, loving them so far.


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> If you get your 4x8GB RAM on a 9900k to 4133MHZ you're doing well. If you get it to 4200MHZ you're doing really good. If you get 4266MHZ HCI MemTest stable to say 1000% you have an exceptional IMC and/or highly binned really good RAM.
> 
> 9900k don't have as good an IMC as say an 8700k so I really for 4x8GB on a four DIMM board I don't think you're going to get 4400MHZ.
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, on a 2x8GB high end two DIMM board you might, but 4400MHZ 4x8GB stress tested stable on a 9900k is going to be pretty much unheard of.
> 
> Peeps sometimes can boot at 4400MHZ and even with Buildzoid, higher, but stress test it and it'll get errors immediately.
> 
> That being said on my 9900k with Ripjaws 5 4x8 GB CL14 B-die 3200 RAM I have HCI running all day while I'm at work at 4200MHZ 17-17-17-40 2T. Here's hoping.
> 
> And I have Trident Z 4x8GB CL16 3600 NOT RBG (RBG has issues overclocking except the newest released kits) in the mail I'll have in less than a week.


I spent all day yesterday RAM tuning on my Master board w/ my 8GBx4 G.Skill TridentZ rgb 4266mhz kit, while benching at the same time... 

So far I can run 4266mhz on stock timings just fine with benches and games @ 1.45v dimm.

4133mhz is rock solid as well. 3866mhz it'll do in its sleep.

I was shooting for 4533 and/or 4400, but it was being stubborn and a bit unstable.

I'm just happy that it's running at its rated speeds of 4266mhz. Realistically I wouldn't run over 4400mhz for daily usage anyway.

The sweet slot for my rig is 4133mhz with my 9900K @ 5.4ghz, so I'll just tighten up the timings from there...

I was close to ordering the 4600 kit, but realistically that'll only really benefit in my test bench. However, now those 4800 kits are out... First world problems...


----------



## osb40000

Just tried playing around with my memory since I don't have the money at the moment to go big with four dims and it's acting strange. 9900k @5GHZ, Z390 Master, 16GB (2x8gb) G.Skill 3600mhz 16 16 16 36. I can use XMP to do 3600mhz and it's rock solid. The second I try to do 3700mhz, even with way more juice to the ram and mem controller, it will boot, but the timings are super relaxed at 17 20 20 42. Thoughts? I'm honestly not used to this Gigabyte bios so maybe I'm missing something. Thanks guys!


----------



## KedarWolf

Pretty happy with this, 5.1 GHZ CPU, 4.7 GHZ cache, 4200 MHZ memory.


----------



## BradleyW

From all the research I've done towards AI AC/DC Load-Line, reducing it simply lowers the VID, resulting in less Vcore and is recommended especially on the ASUS forum when using adaptive voltage. So, I assume using the lowest value (1) on GIGABYTE boards for both AI AC/DC is completely safe?


----------



## Timur Born

KedarWolf said:


> Pretty happy with this, 5.1 GHZ CPU, 4.7 GHZ cache, 4200 MHZ memory.


It's worth mentioning that my read speed at 3500-C15 is only 5000 mb/s (10%) lower than yours, while latency is about the same. On the other hand I can keep VCCIO and VCCSA below 1.1v and Vdimm at 1.4v. That is with 2x 8gb single-sided dimms.

So everyone who is not blessed with the best controller/dimm combination, just try to get tight timings at lower clock-rates instead.


----------



## philhalo66

Anyone been able to get the 3D OSD thing working? cant seem to get it working with any games i have tested.


----------



## Timur Born

I cannot use AC/DC internal loadline at 1, because it needs a ridiculous DVID offset of +0.2v to get borderline stable at peak load. As a consequence it shoots idle voltages through the roof.

Using "Power Saver" internal loadline also is more miss than hit. Part of the reason seem to be stronger VID fluctations when running into the peak load thermal throttling wall. I get VID fluctations of 0.1v with "Power Saver" while I only get fluctations of 0.04v with "Performance". And when I lower TJmax and DVID offset accordingly then the fluctuations stop with "Performance".

Main problem with "Performance" and negative DVID offset is idle voltages for me. I do use C3 in order to clock 7 out of 8 cores up to 51x, so too much of a negative offset can cause idle instabilities.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> We determined that prime95 1344K is no longer a valid test to run.
> When you have multiple threads, AVX loads at higher FFT (outside of CPU cache range) wind up conflicting with each other.
> People found this out when testing Linpack on 16 threads and seeing the residuals running slower than on 8 threads at certain sample sizes.
> 
> It's also VERY susceptible to voltage undershoot at high LLC due to the loads from the AVX threads (AVX only has 2 memory lanes of access) suddenly spiking up between iterations, causing the "live" voltage to drop below what is stable, if you area borderline, due to current spike (VR VOUT won't even detect this very well, it might drop by 5mv suddenly but it's more like a +20mv microsecond drop, check an Oscillioscope).
> 
> The best 'real world' test for AVX stability that doesn't turn into a 200 amp power virus but is still more stressful than realbench (WITHOUT it being 200 amps/115C) is:
> (NOTE: you must be smallest FFT AVX disabled prime stable for this to even work):
> 
> Prime95 v29.6 build 6
> 
> 1) 14 threads (6 threads 9700K) smallest FFT, AVX disabled stress test.
> 2) with prime installed in a different folder: 2 threads (9900K and 9700K) AVX, (click blend then custom): 512K-8192K FFT range, RAM size 5800 (or so). time for each test: 0 minutes.
> 
> This should avoid voltage instability problems because the two AVX loads will not cause voltage instability because of fluctuation (you can check it on Current (IOUT) in HWinfo, the amps will barely increase when you run the 2 AVX threads when the 14 non AVX small FFT threads are already running).
> 
> You can do 12 non AVX smallest FFT threads + 4 512-8192K AVX threads (time for each FFT:0 minutes) or 14 non AVX threads+2 512K-8192K AVX threads. Isn't really a difference between them (maybe a few amps).
> But 9700K you have to do 6 + 2.
> 
> The reason why the smallest FFT (4k-20K especially) AVX/FMA3 threads heat up so much is because they don't touch RAM At all so the CPU has full access to all threads. AVX only has access to two "memory channels"
> Have you guys noticed that prime95 "1344K" in place FFT with AVX disabled uses *MORE* *watts at 16 threads, than prime95 AVX 1344K fixed FFT's (16 threads?).


I tried this at 5 Ghz 4.6 GHZ cache on my CPU with much lower voltages than i use for 5.1 GHZ and the AVX threads immediately shot up to 90C. I won't run any stress test that 
doesn't hover around 80C max.

So this isn't really a valid way to stress test for myself.


----------



## osb40000

Well, I burnt a ton of time tonight trying to play with memory timings on my Z390 Master using the F8 bios. I couldn't get a single bump past 16-16-16-36 3600mhz 16gb (2x8gb) (what my kit is rated for) without a boot loop, no matter how much voltage I put to the RAM and memory controller. So I tried to tighten my timings at 3600mhz and it posts, but with super loose timings that aren't anything like what I set and sometimes much lower mhz. 

I followed buildzoid's OC adventure and he never had anything like that happen. Super frustrating. I've gone back to XMP and will sit at that until I learn more.


----------



## Falkentyne

osb40000 said:


> Well, I burnt a ton of time tonight trying to play with memory timings on my Z390 Master using the F8 bios. I couldn't get a single bump past 16-16-16-36 3600mhz 16gb (2x8gb) (what my kit is rated for) without a boot loop, no matter how much voltage I put to the RAM and memory controller. So I tried to tighten my timings at 3600mhz and it posts, but with super loose timings that aren't anything like what I set and sometimes much lower mhz.
> 
> I followed buildzoid's OC adventure and he never had anything like that happen. Super frustrating. I've gone back to XMP and will sit at that until I learn more.


Did you use the memory presets
You can try setting the tertiary timings manually. But set all of the TRDWR timings to the same value as CAS or set them higher. Those four values can play havoc with posting if they're not set right.


----------



## Timur Born

AVX spiking between iterations is exactly the kind of legit test I prefer to run. Because normal systems don't work on constant load, they work on changing load. A system running at stock clocks can survive this, so should an overclocked one. TJmax is a setting that can help some. And like I just mentioned before, some AC/DC loadline settings seem to cause less VID fluctuations to begin with, which surely helps when other fluctuations happen on top of it.


----------



## osb40000

Falkentyne said:


> Did you use the memory presets
> You can try setting the tertiary timings manually. But set all of the TRDWR timings to the same value as CAS or set them higher. Those four values can play havoc with posting if they're not set right.


Z390 Master, i9-9900k, 16GB (2x8gb) 3600mhz 16-16-16-36 ram.

This is a screen shot from Buildzoid's video. But essentially I started by changing "system memory multiplier" to 3700mhz. This is with RAM voltage at 1.4v and VCCIO and System Agent at 1.23v. Since this machine/ram are 100% stable with the xmp settings at 3600mhz with much lower voltages, 3700mhz should be golden but nope, won't post. 

Then I kept system memory multiplier at 3600mhz and tried tightening CAS Latency, tRCD, tRP, tRAS to 15-15-15-35. It posts and I think to myself "great" but then when I go to run Aida it shows slower benchmarks. I look up in CPUZ (can't find the ASROCK timing tool?) and the timings and mem speed are all out of whack at 3200mhz and 17-17-17-39. 

I've literally followed the methodology in the video (using much much much lower speeds/timing) and yet none of my settings will either post or if they do post they're completely different than I set. 

I hope that all makes sense. Maybe I'm missing something completely, I'm still trying to figure out this Gigabyte bios. I've been using AsRock mobos for the past two builds.


----------



## Falkentyne

osb40000 said:


> Z390 Master, i9-9900k, 16GB (2x8gb) 3600mhz 16-16-16-36 ram.
> 
> This is a screen shot from Buildzoid's video. But essentially I started by changing "system memory multiplier" to 3700mhz. This is with RAM voltage at 1.4v and VCCIO and System Agent at 1.23v. Since this machine/ram are 100% stable with the xmp settings at 3600mhz with much lower voltages, 3700mhz should be golden but nope, won't post.
> 
> Then I kept system memory multiplier at 3600mhz and tried tightening CAS Latency, tRCD, tRP, tRAS to 15-15-15-35. It posts and I think to myself "great" but then when I go to run Aida it shows slower benchmarks. I look up in CPUZ (can't find the ASROCK timing tool?) and the timings and mem speed are all out of whack at 3200mhz and 17-17-17-39.
> 
> I've literally followed the methodology in the video (using much much much lower speeds/timing) and yet none of my settings will either post or if they do post they're completely different than I set.
> 
> I hope that all makes sense. Maybe I'm missing something completely, I'm still trying to figure out this Gigabyte bios. I've been using AsRock mobos for the past two builds.


You did not do what I said.
Set the TRDWR values (four of them) to the same value as CAS.

You can also try the "memory enhancement mode" presets also. Tibur Burn knows more about them than I do.


----------



## osb40000

Falkentyne said:


> You did not do what I said.
> Set the TRDWR values (four of them) to the same value as CAS.
> 
> You can also try the "memory enhancement mode" presets also. Tibur Burn knows more about them than I do.


I'm not home to try it, but will later. Just explaining the process I went through. I also don't understand why it would post but with completely different settings than I set. It should just fail to post and reset.


----------



## Falkentyne

osb40000 said:


> I'm not home to try it, but will later. Just explaining the process I went through. I also don't understand why it would post but with completely different settings than I set. It should just fail to post and reset.


I fully understand this.

For example I am at main timings 14-14-14-34, 3200 mhz
The "Auto" setting for memory enhancement mode sets the four TRDWR values to 13,13,13,13, when the defaults for the XMP are supposedly 10/10/10/11 (shown to the right of auto for those values). Checked with Asrock utility.

Setting them MANUALLY to 13/13/13/13 causes a failed train and the system boots at 2800 mhz.
Setting them manually to 14/14/14/14 (equal to cas) works and is stable.
Setting them manually to 14/14/14/15 causes a failed train and it boots at 2800 mhz.

Yet setting them manually to 10/10/10/11 boots fine and is stable

(used asrock timing utility to check).

So yeah. Mess around with those.

If worse comes to worst, mess with the memory enhancement presets directly.


----------



## Timur Born

It's worth mentioning that both manually setting 10/10/10/11 and using the "Performance" preset (also sets 10/10/10/11) works for me. "Auto" seems to be somewhat all over the place, so better use "Standard" if you don't want too tight timings.


----------



## flyinion

Hi guys, potential new Z390 Aorus series owner here. I was pretty set on getting the Ultra, but I'm wondering if the Master is worth paying 10-15 more for while it's on sale now vs 40ish that it normally is. I don't necessarily need the Sabre DAC and other minor upgrades like that vs. the Ultra but I know the VRM is a little better. I'd be running it with a 9700K and DDR3200 rated at 14-14-14-34 with mild-moderate OC on the CPU. Nothing too crazy, but options are always nice.


----------



## osb40000

Falkentyne said:


> I fully understand this.
> 
> For example I am at main timings 14-14-14-34, 3200 mhz
> The "Auto" setting for memory enhancement mode sets the four TRDWR values to 13,13,13,13, when the defaults for the XMP are supposedly 10/10/10/11 (shown to the right of auto for those values). Checked with Asrock utility.
> 
> Setting them MANUALLY to 13/13/13/13 causes a failed train and the system boots at 2800 mhz.
> Setting them manually to 14/14/14/14 (equal to cas) works and is stable.
> Setting them manually to 14/14/14/15 causes a failed train and it boots at 2800 mhz.
> 
> Yet setting them manually to 10/10/10/11 boots fine and is stable
> 
> (used asrock timing utility to check).
> 
> So yeah. Mess around with those.
> 
> If worse comes to worst, mess with the memory enhancement presets directly.


So, I did that, and changed my TRDWR values to 15 15 15 15 to match 3600 15 15 15 35. Sure enough it booted (I had mem timings set to standard) and kept those settings but they didn't score any better than 16 16 16 36. I then tried to do 14 14 14 34 and changed the TRDWR values and it proceeded to bump my speed down to 3200mhz and of course scored horribly. 

I'm super confused with this mobo. Sorry for being so challenged guys, I really do appreciate your help.


----------



## Falkentyne

osb40000 said:


> So, I did that, and changed my TRDWR values to 15 15 15 15 to match 3600 15 15 15 35. Sure enough it booted (I had mem timings set to standard) and kept those settings but they didn't score any better than 16 16 16 36. I then tried to do 14 14 14 34 and changed the TRDWR values and it proceeded to bump my speed down to 3200mhz and of course scored horribly.
> 
> I'm super confused with this mobo. Sorry for being so challenged guys, I really do appreciate your help.


Check the DDR4 stability thread. You may have to tweak other tertiary timings, or even consider using the other presets.
I know nothing about tertiary timings.
Maybe you can PM or tag @Jpmboy because he knows more about RAM than most of us.
You could also consider raising the DDR4 training voltage to 1.45v, bumping the VCCIO and SA, then setting the voltages back after it trains successfully. Memory tweaking can take many days...


----------



## robertr1

osb40000 said:


> So, I did that, and changed my TRDWR values to 15 15 15 15 to match 3600 15 15 15 35. Sure enough it booted (I had mem timings set to standard) and kept those settings but they didn't score any better than 16 16 16 36. I then tried to do 14 14 14 34 and changed the TRDWR values and it proceeded to bump my speed down to 3200mhz and of course scored horribly.
> 
> I'm super confused with this mobo. Sorry for being so challenged guys, I really do appreciate your help.


Yes. Memory tuning on these boards is not a pleasant experience. My pro loves getting stuck in a boot loop instead of failing to train. Then the board won't really go past 3600 (2 stick config) and often it'll train by reducing the bandwidth.


----------



## Padinn

Anandtech posted a review of the Aorus Master. Some of the gaming results were alarming.


----------



## Abula

Padinn said:


> Anandtech posted a review of the Aorus Master. Some of the gaming results were alarming.


 Interesting review, specially the gaming benchmarks, not sure why it performs last over all their tests.


----------



## philhalo66

this may be a giant noob question, but what sort of M.2 drive does the aorus z390 pro support? newegg has like 6 different m.2 types and im not too familiar with m.2 tbh so its like greek to me and google gives me nothing but ads. i was kinda eyeballing this SSD https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167460&ignorebbr=1


----------



## osb40000

Abula said:


> Interesting review, specially the gaming benchmarks, not sure why it performs last over all their tests.


My guess would be poor memory performance since gaming performance was hit. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Master applies very loose sub timings.


----------



## KedarWolf

I was running 1344 FFT's Prime95 and every thread would fail on my previously stable settings. I figured out I hadn't changed the AVX Offset from Auto to 0.

So A fixed AVX Offset is the way to go. Hope this helps some.


----------



## Toxsick

Don't think this is normal for a game that is 16 years old....

guy also runs an aorus master, plus, saw some other threads where people mentioned lag on the auros master with a 9900K.
maybe he has fixed it already, have not heard from the guy yet.


----------



## Falkentyne

Toxsick said:


> Don't think this is normal for a game that is 16 years old....
> 
> guy also runs an aorus master, plus, saw some other threads where people mentioned lag on the auros master with a 9900K.
> maybe he has fixed it already, have not heard from the guy yet.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2Yim7P2GJg


Warcraft 3 uses directX 8.1. This game was designed to run on windows 9x/XP, if I recall. Hardware support for DirectX 7 and 8 were removed or partially removed from video cards for ages (the W buffer for directX 7, other chip features for directx 8) and I believe they only run by emulation of those hardware features now. You really can't put the blame on motherboard manufacturers for being unable to run games properly on hardware that was released 16 years ago. 

I would look towards Nvidia for this issue. And if it's a CPU issue, why are people bashing Gigabyte for this, instead of just disabling hyperthreading or heck, disabling hyperthreading and disabling all but 4 cores? (effectively turning a 9900K or 9700K into a fast 2500K)? Were all these things tried?

I googled for directX problems with warcraft 3 and the blizzard forums are littered with complaints about issues. What do you expect for a game this ancient now?


----------



## Toxsick

Falkentyne said:


> Warcraft 3 uses directX 8.1. This game was designed to run on windows 9x/XP, if I recall. Hardware support for DirectX 7 and 8 were removed or partially removed from video cards for ages (the W buffer for directX 7, other chip features for directx 8) and I believe they only run by emulation of those hardware features now. You really can't put the blame on motherboard manufacturers for being unable to run games properly on hardware that was released 16 years ago.
> 
> I would look towards Nvidia for this issue. And if it's a CPU issue, why are people bashing Gigabyte for this, instead of just disabling hyperthreading or heck, disabling hyperthreading and disabling all but 4 cores? (effectively turning a 9900K or 9700K into a fast 2500K)? Were all these things tried?
> 
> I googled for directX problems with warcraft 3 and the blizzard forums are littered with complaints about issues. What do you expect for a game this ancient now?



Nevermind what I just posted.. I can confirm again that my specific issue has been solved by "poor" outlets in the room..

Had the exact same problem,short pauses, but in CS:GO instead, but I just verified again that this is caused by the outlets in the room.

I also did test Warcraft 3 with the same game-mode, I didn't see the short pauses anymore as in the video on the new outlet.


----------



## orlfman

anyone know how to set turbo settings to follow intel's 95 watt spec? my 9900k in prime95 draws 220 watts and my d15 thermal throttles after 2 seconds..... i don't understand why gigabyte doesn't follow spec. i do have enhanced core disabled in the bios too. using a z390 aorus elite. f7 bios.


----------



## Luck100

orlfman said:


> anyone know how to set turbo settings to follow intel's 95 watt spec? my 9900k in prime95 draws 220 watts and my d15 thermal throttles after 2 seconds..... i don't understand why gigabyte doesn't follow spec. i do have enhanced core disabled in the bios too. using a z390 aorus elite. f7 bios.


You need to set PL1 and PL2 power levels. I don't have a gigabyte board so I'm not sure exactly where you'd find them in the UEFI (or what they may creatively choose to call them).

Intel spec is PL1=95 watts, and PL2 is normally set 25% higher than PL1. You can set them a lot higher depending on your cooling but still prevent thermal throttles.


----------



## Padinn

osb40000 said:


> Abula said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting review, specially the gaming benchmarks, not sure why it performs last over all their tests.
> 
> 
> 
> My guess would be poor memory performance since gaming performance was hit. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Master applies very loose sub timings.
Click to expand...

One test for tomb raider is like 20fps off the leader, I don't think that is from only memory timings


----------



## Phantomas 007

Anyone knows if it's possible to set LED Off of the rear I/O panel ?


----------



## steverebo

Guys is anyone having issues with frame drops and frametime spikes in games with the z390 aorus master, I've swapped every component in my system including swapping my aorus master for a new one yet the frame spikes and drops still persist. My current build is:

8700k
16gb gskill trident z 3600
Msi rtx2080
1tb Samsung evo 970 plus
Corsair rm850x
Aorus master z390


----------



## orlfman

Luck100 said:


> You need to set PL1 and PL2 power levels. I don't have a gigabyte board so I'm not sure exactly where you'd find them in the UEFI (or what they may creatively choose to call them).
> 
> Intel spec is PL1=95 watts, and PL2 is normally set 25% higher than PL1. You can set them a lot higher depending on your cooling but still prevent thermal throttles.


Here's a photo I took of my turbo settings. I'm assuming PL1 & 2 are the package power limits and not platform power limits? Its really annoying how it says to the right of auto, if I am correct that package power is PL1 & 2, it states tdp is 95 watts with a pl2 of 118... yet it doesn't enforce that when auto is set as i'm assuming auto would mean those values. Another question is that should I change / manual set the "limit timings" and to clarify I can set PL1 higher than 95 if I want and pl2 as well? It be ok to set PL1 to 95 watts but set say pl2 to 140? I know my d15 can handle 140 watts just fine... 220 no way lol


----------



## Falkentyne

orlfman said:


> Here's a photo I took of my turbo settings. I'm assuming PL1 & 2 are the package power limits and not platform power limits? Its really annoying how it says to the right of auto, if I am correct that package power is PL1 & 2, it states tdp is 95 watts with a pl2 of 118... yet it doesn't enforce that when auto is set as i'm assuming auto would mean those values. Another question is that should I change / manual set the "limit timings" and to clarify I can set PL1 higher than 95 if I want and pl2 as well? It be ok to set PL1 to 95 watts but set say pl2 to 140? I know my d15 can handle 140 watts just fine... 220 no way lol


This is normal.
Set "MCE" to disabled.
Setting MCE to auto will usually enable MCE, which overrides a bunch of other settings.
Then test.

If still not working when MCE is disabled, set PL1 and PL2 manually.
Ignore the "Platform power limits" settings.
These are supposed to be used with PSYS_PMAX, and you have no access to in this bios (you can see it in AMIBCP 5.02.0031 when you dump the bios capsule and open it, but I would NOT recommend unlocking menus by dumping the APTIO capsule with FPTW64, unlocking those settings and reflashing, if you don't have a manual main/backup bios onboard switch selector).


----------



## orlfman

Falkentyne said:


> This is normal.
> Set "MCE" to disabled.
> Setting MCE to auto will usually enable MCE, which overrides a bunch of other settings.
> Then test.
> 
> If still not working when MCE is disabled, set PL1 and PL2 manually.
> Ignore the "Platform power limits" settings.
> These are supposed to be used with PSYS_PMAX, and you have no access to in this bios (you can see it in AMIBCP 5.02.0031 when you dump the bios capsule and open it, but I would NOT recommend unlocking menus by dumping the APTIO capsule with FPTW64, unlocking those settings and reflashing, if you don't have a manual main/backup bios onboard switch selector).


thank you! yeah I did disabled mce but still doesn't work. I'll manually set pl1 and pl2.

edit:
yup that did it! getting ~3.7ghz in prime95 with a temp of 55c lowest and 60c highest on the cores with hwinfo reporting 95 watts package power. So if I want to tweak this how should I go? set pl1 to something like 120-130? and then times that by 1.25 for pl2? so say p1 - 130 and p2 160? or keep p1 at 95 and increase p2 higher?


----------



## Luck100

orlfman said:


> Here's a photo I took of my turbo settings. I'm assuming PL1 & 2 are the package power limits and not platform power limits? Its really annoying how it says to the right of auto, if I am correct that package power is PL1 & 2, it states tdp is 95 watts with a pl2 of 118... yet it doesn't enforce that when auto is set as i'm assuming auto would mean those values. Another question is that should I change / manual set the "limit timings" and to clarify I can set PL1 higher than 95 if I want and pl2 as well? It be ok to set PL1 to 95 watts but set say pl2 to 140? I know my d15 can handle 140 watts just fine... 220 no way lol


Yes, you want the package power limits, not platform. You can set whatever power levels you want, the point of these settings is to keep you at power levels that your cooling can handle. The PL1/PL2 throttles will limit your clocks more gracefully than hitting the 100C thermal throttle (also, you don't really want to be hitting 100C!). My settings are a bit simpler looking in the Asus bios, for example:

Long Duration Package Power Limit [180]
Package Power Time Window [5]
Short Duration Package Power Limit [225]

With those settings, I have a hard cap at 225W, and lower limit of 180W for a running 5 seconds EMA window. Basically, I can run at 225W for up to 5 seconds and then it will taper down to 180W. The idea is that your cooling can handle a temporary higher load (PL2) but longer term it can only handle PL1.


----------



## orlfman

Luck100 said:


> Yes, you want the package power limits, not platform. You can set whatever power levels you want, the point of these settings is to keep you at power levels that your cooling can handle. The PL1/PL2 throttles will limit your clocks more gracefully than hitting the 100C thermal throttle (also, you don't really want to be hitting 100C!). My settings are a bit simpler looking in the Asus bios, for example:
> 
> Long Duration Package Power Limit [180]
> Package Power Time Window [5]
> Short Duration Package Power Limit [225]
> 
> With those settings, I have a hard cap at 225W, and lower limit of 180W for a running 5 seconds EMA window. Basically, I can run at 225W for up to 5 seconds and then it will taper down to 180W. The idea is that your cooling can handle a temporary higher load (PL2) but longer term it can only handle PL1.


awesome! i settled on 140 - 175 watts. 4.2ghz under avx prime tops off at ~75c after a few minutes. i can push it higher but its more than enough for me for what i do. thanks again for the help!


----------



## steverebo

Guys is anyone having issues with frame drops and frametime spikes in games with the z390 aorus master, I've swapped every component in my system including swapping my aorus master for a new one yet the frame spikes and drops still persist. My current build is:

8700k
16gb gskill trident z 3600
Msi rtx2080
1tb Samsung evo 970 plus
Corsair rm850x
Aorus master z390


----------



## c0ld

Wow I didn't know updating the BIOS made a huge difference in memory stability. 

I can finally run my 32GB (4 x 8GB) Team XCalibur with the XMP profile at 4000Mhz. With the old F6 I was not able to set the XMP profile and I was getting weird discrepancies in speed I had set the BIOS 3900Mhz speed but in the desktop it only showed 3400Mhz.


----------



## Intrud3r

Getting L0 cache errors after enabling Speedshift and C-states when idling for a long time.

Event Viewer:
A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
Processor APIC ID: 0


Already upped DVID by 0.005 ... no solution (I know it's next to nothing, but I don't really wanna go higher)

Disabled anything above C3 (so C1 and C3 states are still enabled)

Let's see how this goes.


----------



## lucasfrance

Intrud3r said:


> Getting L0 cache errors after enabling Speedshift and C-states when idling for a long time.
> 
> Event Viewer:
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor APIC ID: 0
> 
> 
> Already upped DVID by 0.005 ... no solution (I know it's next to nothing, but I don't really wanna go higher)
> 
> Disabled anything above C3 (so C1 and C3 states are still enabled)
> 
> Let's see how this goes.


Maybe :
- Decrease uncore clock a bit 
- Increase VCCSA a bit


----------



## Intrud3r

lucasfrance said:


> Maybe :
> - Decrease uncore clock a bit
> - Increase VCCSA a bit


Decrease uncore clock a bit --> optional, but unwanted.

Increase VCCSA a bit --> isn't VCCIO for cache related stuff ?


----------



## BradleyW

New F7 BIOS for the Z390 ULTRA is brilliant! I can finally run my RAM at 4000MHz.


----------



## KedarWolf

This with the Nvidia Creative Ready drivers.


----------



## lucasfrance

Intrud3r said:


> Decrease uncore clock a bit --> optional, but unwanted.
> 
> Increase VCCSA a bit --> isn't VCCIO for cache related stuff ?


What are the significant perf. increase, if any, unsing uncore 47 instead of 43???


----------



## Timur Born

KedarWolf said:


> This with the Nvidia Creative Ready drivers.


I get around 5100 pts, which is roughly 6% slower. 8 cores of AVX load run at x49 on my CPU and uncore runs at x45, memory runs on tight 2x 3500-C15. So overall this seems to fit well enough.


----------



## c0ld

BradleyW said:


> New F7 BIOS for the Z390 ULTRA is brilliant! I can finally run my RAM at 4000MHz.


Same here F8 on my Master fixed my issues with RAM speed.


----------



## warbucks

c0ld said:


> Same here F8 on my Master fixed my issues with RAM speed.


F8 final or one of the F8* beta versions?


----------



## c0ld

warbucks said:


> F8 final or one of the F8* beta versions?


Final F8. Earlier BIOS'es were so bad lol.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf -- i9 9900k @5.1/4.7 -- 4133Mhz C17-17-17-38-2T 1.46v -- SA 1.26v -- VCCIO 1.23v -- RamTest Over 1 Hour

New RAM kit, Trident Z 4x8GB CL16 3600.


----------



## muffins

Intrud3r said:


> Getting L0 cache errors after enabling Speedshift and C-states when idling for a long time.
> 
> Event Viewer:
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor APIC ID: 0
> 
> 
> Already upped DVID by 0.005 ... no solution (I know it's next to nothing, but I don't really wanna go higher)
> 
> Disabled anything above C3 (so C1 and C3 states are still enabled)
> 
> Let's see how this goes.


i had two of these since i built my new rig with a 9700k in a two and a half time frame. only happens at idle for me as well and i'm running my 9700k at stock. no overclock. i find it concerning, even though they are corrected faults, since at stock settings there shouldn't be ANY cache hierarchy faults. my previous ryzen 1800x started off with correctable ones after owning it for five months and they turned into uncorrectable cache faults and started getting system freezing. ironically they only appeared at first during long idle sessions. i contacted intel about it and they pretty much told me they see nothing wrong after running their stress test (even though i told them multiple times, only at idle) and to check my video card drivers? at least amd accepted my rma request instantly after i told them cache faults in event viewer -_-


----------



## Intrud3r

muffins said:


> i had two of these since i built my new rig with a 9700k in a two and a half time frame. only happens at idle for me as well and i'm running my 9700k at stock. no overclock. i find it concerning, even though they are corrected faults, since at stock settings there shouldn't be ANY cache hierarchy faults. my previous ryzen 1800x started off with correctable ones after owning it for five months and they turned into uncorrectable cache faults and started getting system freezing. ironically they only appeared at first during long idle sessions. i contacted intel about it and they pretty much told me they see nothing wrong after running their stress test (even though i told them multiple times, only at idle) and to check my video card drivers? at least amd accepted my rma request instantly after i told them cache faults in event viewer -_-


It shouldn't happen at stock imho ... but that's just my 2 cents.

It seems to be fixed by disabling anything above C3. Before I had no C-states enabled and did not have issues.
Just thought, why not have more power saving when I can ... 

Even lowered DVID with 0.005 again ... seems to run fine till now.


----------



## muffins

Intrud3r said:


> It shouldn't happen at stock imho ... but that's just my 2 cents.
> 
> It seems to be fixed by disabling anything above C3. Before I had no C-states enabled and did not have issues.
> Just thought, why not have more power saving when I can ...
> 
> Even lowered DVID with 0.005 again ... seems to run fine till now.


I'll try disabling c states above c3 and see if that works on my end too. i wonder if its not enough voltage during idle with those more aggressive states causing it. or a firmware issue on intels end that causes some sort of corruption or something. though if that "fixes" its a sign its probably something wrong with our processors... and i've been battling with intel the last two weeks trying to get them to accept my rma -_-


----------



## Salve1412

Intrud3r said:


> It shouldn't happen at stock imho ... but that's just my 2 cents.
> 
> It seems to be fixed by disabling anything above C3. Before I had no C-states enabled and did not have issues.
> Just thought, why not have more power saving when I can ...
> 
> Even lowered DVID with 0.005 again ... seems to run fine till now.


I'm in a similar situation. Overclocking my 9900k to 5ghz, Uncore Ratio 47 on an Aorus Master, I've experienced a lot of idle freezes followed by DPC_WATCHDOG_VIOLATION BSODs. Keeping only C1 and C3 states enabled seemingly did the trick: haven't been plagued by a single BSOD for about two weeks. Currently running at the above mentioned frequencies with DVID -0.055, LLC Turbo, IA AC Loadline 30, C1, C3, Speed Shift and SpeedStep enabled. If I dare enable C6/C7 states the freezing issues reappear immediately.


----------



## jlp0209

steverebo said:


> Guys is anyone having issues with frame drops and frametime spikes in games with the z390 aorus master, I've swapped every component in my system including swapping my aorus master for a new one yet the frame spikes and drops still persist. My current build is:
> 
> 8700k
> 16gb gskill trident z 3600
> Msi rtx2080
> 1tb Samsung evo 970 plus
> Corsair rm850x
> Aorus master z390


Are you running your GPU with any OC? Sometimes GPU memory OC can cause this in some games. Also if you are using software like Afterburner or EVGA Precision, the real time stat monitoring / HW monitoring can cause this. At least in EVGA's software you can turn this off, I haven't used Afterburner in a long time. Turning that off solved all of my GPU woes on past boards. I'm currently using a GTX 1080 Ti on the Aorus Master and have no issues.


----------



## Intrud3r

Still going strong (it seems). No errors in 22 hours.

Btw ... if anybody is interested in my HWiNFO rainmeter thingy ... just yell ... I'll upload it here ...


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> Still going strong (it seems). No errors in 22 hours.
> 
> Btw ... if anybody is interested in my HWiNFO rainmeter thingy ... just yell ... I'll upload it here ...


Yes please, put it in a .zip file with WinRar, then attach it here.


----------



## Intrud3r

Here you go. You can just edit it, if you click on the HWiNFO icon it opens the HWiNFO Shared Memory Viewer to get the values to add different measures / values.

People --> what I notice is that something is not going well here, the 1 zip file has 2 parts ... you have to download both and rename the second one as stated. I'm only saying this as the part 1 file has 10 views and the part 2 file has 6 views ... that would mean 4 people are not able to open and extract the whole file. :s

2 parts:

part 1


----------



## Intrud3r

part 2

Rename this to .Z01

Location to unpack:
%username%\documents\rainmeter\skins


----------



## Intrud3r

Donnow if you are also interested in these ?


----------



## Intrud3r

I just need something to play with so, C-states it is 

Let's see if it likes C6/C7
(looking at the usage percentage it's sorta sweet for my power usage I assume ... looking at the fact it's running 24/7)


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Still going strong (it seems). No errors in 22 hours.
> 
> Btw ... if anybody is interested in my HWiNFO rainmeter thingy ... just yell ... I'll upload it here ...


Consider yourself yelled !
*edit* i didn't even read the next page.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Consider yourself yelled !
> *edit* i didn't even read the next page.




If you need any help setting anything up ... gimme a hollar.

Was that yelled for the first or the second one ?

Now I'm confused ... 

Reading is hard ... ok, that was for the first.
Case closed.


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> If you need any help setting anything up ... gimme a hollar.
> 
> Was that yelled for the first or the second one ?
> 
> Now I'm confused ...


i mean I asked for the rainmeter without even reading the following posts because they were on the next page.
And something is funky with Apex Legends.
It generates random WHEA correctable "CPU Parity errors" despite power draw being low and temps being nice and low and very low vdroop, unless you either cap the FPS or raise the voltage really high.
Like it will show random correctable errors even at 1.254v VR VOUT at low temps. And it's not just a weak core either--I've seen those parity errors happen on every single core.
Now if I go way too low on the voltage, I get CPU LFB errors also.

Yet guess what?

If you run prime95 small FFT (AVX disabled) dropping VR VOUT to 1.215v, and temps to 86C, and run apex at the same time, there are no parity errors, despite VR VOUT being MUCH lower thanks o vdroop and temps being MUCH higher (wouldn't lower VR VOUT and higher temps mean more instability?).

Apex is doing something really funky to the system to act like that. I wonder if it has something to do with the easy anti-cheat thing. (like the memory can not be "read" errors, that even stock users were getting--some rumor says that disabling all anti-aliasing stops those crashes but whatever).


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> i mean I asked for the rainmeter without even reading the following posts because they were on the next page.
> And something is funky with Apex Legends.
> It generates random WHEA correctable "CPU Parity errors" despite power draw being low and temps being nice and low and very low vdroop, unless you either cap the FPS or raise the voltage really high.
> Like it will show random correctable errors even at 1.254v VR VOUT at low temps. And it's not just a weak core either--I've seen those parity errors happen on every single core.
> Now if I go way too low on the voltage, I get CPU LFB errors also.
> 
> Yet guess what?
> 
> If you run prime95 small FFT (AVX disabled) dropping VR VOUT to 1.215v, and temps to 86C, and run apex at the same time, there are no parity errors, despite VR VOUT being MUCH lower thanks o vdroop and temps being MUCH higher (wouldn't lower VR VOUT and higher temps mean more instability?).
> 
> Apex is doing something really funky to the system to act like that. I wonder if it has something to do with the easy anti-cheat thing. (like the memory can not be "read" errors, that even stock users were getting--some rumor says that disabling all anti-aliasing stops those crashes but whatever).


You wanna get my brain cooking ? Tha F*** ?
(Excuse my language)

Running apex together with prime showing nothing and without acting up. That's just weird.

Sadly I don't play Apex so I can't test it ... did try it out once ... oh my, that's not my game.


----------



## BradleyW

Is it safe to run the VCCIO and VCCIA @ 1.3v for 24/7 use?
I require just under this amount to get my 4000MHz RAM stable on my Z390 Ultra / 9900K.


----------



## Intrud3r

BradleyW said:


> Is it safe to run the VCCIO and VCCIA @ 1.3v for 24/7 use?
> I require just under this amount to get my 4000MHz RAM stable on my Z390 Ultra / 9900K.


From what I've read I would tell you up to 1.350V, but that's just what I've read.


----------



## R3van

I updated from F8e to F8 this evening.

After resetting to optimized deafaults i set back all my settings manually

Core Clock 5GHz
Adaptive voltage with all C-States enabled
CPU Loadline: Turbo
IA AC Loadline: 1
Adaptive Voltage: +0.060v results in 1.281v in Prime 8k w/o AVX

The cpu is stable in 8k even with loadline Medium which results in ~1.25v load in prime95 8k.
When i test bigger FFTs like 768 or 1344k i`m stable too for some minutes with same voltage and then the voltage begins to fluctuate, goes down to 1.22-1.16 and the system freezes.

I tried to disable all the c-states but didn`t helped. 
Did not try fixed voltage yet as i guess that without this voltage fluctuation i don`t have these freezes (like before bios update).
Why are there such voltage drops under constant load?

Anyone else noticed this?


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> I updated from F8e to F8 this evening.
> 
> After resetting to optimized deafaults i set back all my settings manually
> 
> Core Clock 5GHz
> Adaptive voltage with all C-States enabled
> CPU Loadline: Turbo
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> Adaptive Voltage: +0.060v results in 1.281v in Prime 8k w/o AVX
> 
> The cpu is stable in 8k even with loadline Medium which results in ~1.25v load in prime95 8k.
> When i test bigger FFTs like 768 or 1344k i`m stable too for some minutes with same voltage and then the voltage begins to fluctuate, goes down to 1.22-1.16 and the system freezes.
> 
> I tried to disable all the c-states but didn`t helped.
> Did not try fixed voltage yet as i guess that without this voltage fluctuation i don`t have these freezes (like before bios update).
> Why are there such voltage drops under constant load?
> 
> Anyone else noticed this?


What board is this? Aorus Master or something else?
You did NOT have these fluctuations BEFORE updating from f8e to f8 at the same identical settings everywhere (including pwm switch frequency, phase control, etc?)
What voltage are you monitoring here? VR VOUT? ITE 8792E? ITE 8688E? Are you using HWinfo64?

Both me and @jlp0209 felt that F8 requires 'slightly' more voltage than F8E, but I have no idea what fluctuations you are seeing as I only use manual voltage (and no C states either).


----------



## BradleyW

Intrud3r said:


> From what I've read I would tell you up to 1.350V, but that's just what I've read.


Where did you see that information?

Interestingly XMP puts the VCCIO/VCCIA to 1.33v for 4000MHz on the F7 BIOS for the Ultra variant of the Z390 when equipped with my G-Skill Trident Z's. On previous BIOS's, I couldn't go beyond 3733MHz and the XMP set the VCCIO/VCCIA to 1.38v.


----------



## jlp0209

R3van said:


> I updated from F8e to F8 this evening.
> 
> After resetting to optimized deafaults i set back all my settings manually
> 
> Core Clock 5GHz
> Adaptive voltage with all C-States enabled
> CPU Loadline: Turbo
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> Adaptive Voltage: +0.060v results in 1.281v in Prime 8k w/o AVX
> 
> The cpu is stable in 8k even with loadline Medium which results in ~1.25v load in prime95 8k.
> When i test bigger FFTs like 768 or 1344k i`m stable too for some minutes with same voltage and then the voltage begins to fluctuate, goes down to 1.22-1.16 and the system freezes.
> 
> I tried to disable all the c-states but didn`t helped.
> Did not try fixed voltage yet as i guess that without this voltage fluctuation i don`t have these freezes (like before bios update).
> Why are there such voltage drops under constant load?
> 
> Anyone else noticed this?





Falkentyne said:


> What board is this? Aorus Master or something else?
> You did NOT have these fluctuations BEFORE updating from f8e to f8 at the same identical settings everywhere (including pwm switch frequency, phase control, etc?)
> What voltage are you monitoring here? VR VOUT? ITE 8792E? ITE 8688E? Are you using HWinfo64?
> 
> Both me and @jlp0209 felt that F8 requires 'slightly' more voltage than F8E, but I have no idea what fluctuations you are seeing as I only use manual voltage (and no C states either).


F8 BIOS (Aorus Master) has been rock solid for me, despite needing about +.005v - .010v more on the Vcore than F7. On F8 I use medium LLC and a +.105 offset for 5.0ghz, 0 AVX offset. In heaviest Prime95 smallest fft FMA3 testing my VOUT is 1.235v. I'm trying non-AVX fixed 1344k right now and my avg. VOUT is 1.224. It's bouncing between 1.219 and 1.224, same level of fluctuation as @R3van, but I'm not crashing under load or at idle. I haven't touched c-states, speedstep / shift, etc. I've also disabled Gigabyte's version of multi core enhancement. Obviously there are a ton of variables among all of us, but in my experience any crashing at idle or under load means I need more voltage. Every time. Of course at stock that's totally different...could be RAM, bad board, CPU, etc...But with OC it's always voltage in my humble opinion. With F8 I just need a slight bit more juice as @Falkentyne also experienced. 

When I was using adaptive voltage + Turbo LLC I got crashing at idle because the Vcore was just too low. Manual voltage, Turbo LLC was fine. With this board and my CPU medium LLC has been the best setting, and I'm really happy I don't need to use really high LLC here. I've gotten zero WHEA or other CPU related errors in event viewer.


----------



## Intrud3r

BradleyW said:


> Where did you see that information?
> 
> Interestingly XMP puts the VCCIO/VCCIA to 1.33v for 4000MHz on the F7 BIOS for the Ultra variant of the Z390 when equipped with my G-Skill Trident Z's. On previous BIOS's, I couldn't go beyond 3733MHz and the XMP set the VCCIO/VCCIA to 1.38v.


If I remember correctly I read it here somewhere, but please don't ask me to quote it ... as I have no idea when or where ... it just sticks in my mind.


----------



## R3van

Falkentyne said:


> What board is this? Aorus Master or something else?
> You did NOT have these fluctuations BEFORE updating from f8e to f8 at the same identical settings everywhere (including pwm switch frequency, phase control, etc?)
> What voltage are you monitoring here? VR VOUT? ITE 8792E? ITE 8688E? Are you using HWinfo64?
> 
> Both me and @jlp0209 felt that F8 requires 'slightly' more voltage than F8E, but I have no idea what fluctuations you are seeing as I only use manual voltage (and no C states either).


Yes, Aorus Master. I did identical settings everywhere and i`m monitoring VR VOUT with HWInfo64 latest Beta.

I noticed that you mentioned the need for more voltage so i went from LLC Medium to LLC Turbo, just in case. This leads to ~1.281v load instead of 1.254v (which was my stable load voltage with F8e) with llc medium.
The voltage at 8k is bouncing between 1.281v and 1.297v which i assume as 'normal' because i`ve seen that already with F8e and it didn`t cause any error or freeze.

What i now experience are voltage drops from 1.281 to less than 1.2, up to 1.167v after a few minutes of 1344k or 768k (didn`t test any other FFTs) which leads to the crash. In the first place it seems that voltage is stable at 1.281 and suddenly it starts dropping. 

Didn`t seen that ever on any other board that i had.


----------



## KedarWolf

R3van said:


> Yes, Aorus Master. I did identical settings everywhere and i`m monitoring VR VOUT with HWInfo64 latest Beta.
> 
> I noticed that you mentioned the need for more voltage so i went from LLC Medium to LLC Turbo, just in case. This leads to ~1.281v load instead of 1.254v (which was my stable load voltage with F8e) with llc medium.
> The voltage at 8k is bouncing between 1.281v and 1.297v which i assume as 'normal' because i`ve seen that already with F8e and it didn`t cause any error or freeze.
> 
> What i now experience are voltage drops from 1.281 to less than 1.2, up to 1.167v after a few minutes of 1344k or 768k (didn`t test any other FFTs) which leads to the crash. In the first place it seems that voltage is stable at 1.281 and suddenly it starts dropping.
> 
> Didn`t seen that ever on any other board that i had.


If you have the AVX Offset on Auto in the BIOS it'll do that. Putting it at 0 or a fixed offset will fix it.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf i9 9900k -- 5.1GHZ CPU/4.7GHZ cache -- G.Skill 4x8GB Trident Z CL16 3600 @ 4133Mhz 17-17-17-36 2T 1.45v -- 1.25 SA, 1.23 VCCIO -- HCI MemTest 400%

Since lowering tREFI to 33066 I need less voltage for the same timings and speed. But the CPU voltage is only lower as I put the Vcore Loadline Protection from Low to Medium.


----------



## R3van

KedarWolf said:


> If you have the AVX Offset on Auto in the BIOS it'll do that. Putting it at 0 or a fixed offset will fix it.


AVX Offset is already at 0, deactivatet auto right from the start


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> AVX Offset is already at 0, deactivatet auto right from the start


Please file a bug report with Gigabyte. I already tried and they sent me screenshots saying their own tests were identical with f8e and f8 final and the problem with needing slightly more voltage was "marginal CPU voltage".


----------



## R3van

I did that. Let's see what comes out


----------



## jlp0209

R3van said:


> Yes, Aorus Master. I did identical settings everywhere and i`m monitoring VR VOUT with HWInfo64 latest Beta.
> 
> I noticed that you mentioned the need for more voltage so i went from LLC Medium to LLC Turbo, just in case. This leads to ~1.281v load instead of 1.254v (which was my stable load voltage with F8e) with llc medium.
> The voltage at 8k is bouncing between 1.281v and 1.297v which i assume as 'normal' because i`ve seen that already with F8e and it didn`t cause any error or freeze.
> 
> What i now experience are voltage drops from 1.281 to less than 1.2, up to 1.167v after a few minutes of 1344k or 768k (didn`t test any other FFTs) which leads to the crash. In the first place it seems that voltage is stable at 1.281 and suddenly it starts dropping.
> 
> Didn`t seen that ever on any other board that i had.


Just so I understand, as soon as you start a 1344K test your voltage drops from 1.281 to 1.2, correct? Then after several minutes it again drops lower to 1.167? This last part is weird to me. Whenever I do any stress test the vdroop happens right away which is normal, but it doesn't keep drooping lower like you are experiencing. As @Falkentyne said contact GB support, although they may not be all that helpful.

It could be far worse. Briefly tried and returned an Asus XI Hero. Not only did it require more voltage and run far hotter overall than the Aorus Master, it also drooped too much for me even at LLC 7. The positive takeaway I got from the experience is that on the Aorus Master the VOUT reading seems to be the accurate voltage reading. It matches the Asus Vcore readings I got due to the way Asus (properly) tuned the sensor.


----------



## Intrud3r

C6/C7 doesn't seem to be a problem after 21 hours (where about 18 hours are being idle)


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> I just need something to play with so, C-states it is
> 
> Let's see if it likes C6/C7
> (looking at the usage percentage it's sorta sweet for my power usage I assume ... looking at the fact it's running 24/7)


How do you check the C-state usage and what is your usage show with c states disabled?


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> How do you check the C-state usage and what is your usage show with c states disabled?


This is just showing what HWiNFO Sensor window would show.

It just takes the values and shows it on my desktop so I don't have the unneeded stuff and I can place it where ever I want.

You can't ask me what my usage would be with them disabled, because they would show 0 then as they are not active (assuming you mean the values under C6/C7)
My cpu usage I have not compared so I don't know if there is a difference.


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> This is just showing what HWiNFO Sensor window would show.
> 
> It just takes the values and shows it on my desktop so I don't have the unneeded stuff and I can place it where ever I want.
> 
> *You can't ask me what my usage would be with them disabled, because they would show 0 then as they are not active* (assuming you mean the values under C6/C7)
> My cpu usage I have not compared so I don't know if there is a difference.


From what I see with c-states enabled to disabled the usage is the same.


----------



## Intrud3r

Here you go ... I disabled my C6/C7 and as I said ... you see 0 value.

Just my brain thinking here ...

Are you possibly using my rainmeter thingy and you have different hardware then me and you have not changed the sensor measure values in the .ini file so it points to wrong sensors ?


----------



## Intrud3r

I'm just stating this as I just wanna be sure it works for people if they are interested in it.

the zip files for the rainmeter thingy. it's 2 parts. If you wanna extract it you need to download both.

why I'm saying this is because part 1 has 10 views and part 2 has 6 views ... or the site has messed up ... or the ones who didn't download both parts.


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> Here you go ... I disabled my C6/C7 and as I said ... you see 0 value.
> 
> Just my brain thinking here ...
> 
> Are you possibly using my rainmeter thingy and you have different hardware then me and you have not changed the sensor measure values in the .ini file so it points to wrong sensors ?


I was looking at CO residency that did not change with c states enabled to disabled.


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> I'm just stating this as I just wanna be sure it works for people if they are interested in it.
> 
> the zip files for the rainmeter thingy. it's 2 parts. If you wanna extract it you need to download both.
> 
> why I'm saying this is because part 1 has 10 views and part 2 has 6 views ... or the site has messed up ... or the ones who didn't download both parts.


Where are the attachments? Never saw a post with them yet. :/

Edit: Found the downloads, but how do you enable Rainmeter? Unzipped the files to the User/Documents/rainmeter/skins folder nada.


----------



## R3van

jlp0209 said:


> Just so I understand, as soon as you start a 1344K test your voltage drops from 1.281 to 1.2, correct? Then after several minutes it again drops lower to 1.167? This last part is weird to me. Whenever I do any stress test the vdroop happens right away which is normal, but it doesn't keep drooping lower like you are experiencing. As @Falkentyne said contact GB support, although they may not be all that helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> It could be far worse. Briefly tried and returned an Asus XI Hero. Not only did it require more voltage and run far hotter overall than the Aorus Master, it also drooped too much for me even at LLC 7. The positive takeaway I got from the experience is that on the Aorus Master the VOUT reading seems to be the accurate voltage reading. It matches the Asus Vcore readings I got due to the way Asus (properly) tuned the sensor.


no,

my idle voltage is around 0.7v.
I start prime 1344k and it goes up to 1.281v where it should be with the given llc.
Then, a few minutes later, it starts bouncing from 1.281v to less then 1.2 and freezes immediatly.
it cannot hold the load voltage constantly somehow.

Edit: tried Fixed voltage, VRVOUT is stable in 1344k.
with llc medium vcore is pinned at 1.234v, no freezes, no whea, everything is nice and cozy


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> no,
> 
> my idle voltage is around 0.7v.
> I start prime 1344k and it goes up to 1.281v where it should be with the given llc.
> Then, a few minutes later, it starts bouncing from 1.281v to less then 1.2 and freezes immediatly.
> it cannot hold the load voltage constantly somehow.


Can you please send a PM to @GBT-MatthewH ?
Ask him (very politely since he is very busy) to have the Bios engineers look into this issue.
I believe this is the exact same problem that causes F8 to need about 10-15mv more voltage than F8E with "Turbo LLC" on fixed voltage (high LLC only needs about 5mv).

Verify that (you do have the dual bios jumper switch !  you can flash back to F8E and do the exact same test with the exact same bios settings and the bug does NOT occur.
(I understand a video of it happening would be worth its weight in gold to the Bios engineers, but space problems with saving a video where the problem takes some time to happen can be an issue).

Has @Intrud3r tested this as well? He has the same bios. Multiple people who get the same bug makes this confirmed as a fix where the cause is repeatable.


----------



## jlp0209

@Falkentyne - after reading about the new R0 stepping chips coming out I decided to try disabling the integrated GPU within the BIOS. Never thought to try this before, it is an option on the Z390 Master. I fired up a run of Prime95 smallest fft FMA3 and my average VOUT after 6 mins was 1.22v and my core temps were a bit lower as well. With integrated GPU enabled my average VOUT was 1.23 - 1.235. Give it a try if you haven't yet, might bring your voltage down a bit. Could be a fluke run, I'll have to see more runs before I draw a conclusion, but this board continues to impress me. If I can eek out a VOUT of 1.21 for a 5 ghz all core AVX OC, I'll be even happier.

Just tried lowering my offset by .010, no dice re: 1.21v. Regardless I'm fine with saving .010 - .015v with my current settings just by disabling the iGPU.


----------



## R3van

Falkentyne said:


> Can you please send a PM to @GBT-MatthewH ?
> Ask him (very politely since he is very busy) to have the Bios engineers look into this issue.
> I believe this is the exact same problem that causes F8 to need about 10-15mv more voltage than F8E with "Turbo LLC" on fixed voltage (high LLC only needs about 5mv).
> 
> Verify that (you do have the dual bios jumper switch !  you can flash back to F8E and do the exact same test with the exact same bios settings and the bug does NOT occur.
> (I understand a video of it happening would be worth its weight in gold to the Bios engineers, but space problems with saving a video where the problem takes some time to happen can be an issue).
> 
> Has @Intrud3r tested this as well? He has the same bios. Multiple people who get the same bug makes this confirmed as a fix where the cause is repeatable.



Will pm him on tomorrow or saturday, when i find some time to get a politely text in english together :blushsmil

Another thing that come to my mind is:
With fixed voltage 1.330v in BIOS and LLC to High i get 1.234v in 1344k and 1.205v in 8k. This is what i would expect with different FFTs.
With adaptive voltage +0.070 which is what i`m trying now i get the very same voltage in 8k and 1344k -> 1.260v. Now it seems to be stable.

After the first Test with fixed voltage i went back to adaptive to check back if there were different voltages at different FFTs, but there isn`t. And now its working fine, don`t know why but it is. 

Yesterday no way... :buttkick:


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> @Falkentyne - after reading about the new R0 stepping chips coming out I decided to try disabling the integrated GPU within the BIOS. Never thought to try this before, it is an option on the Z390 Master. I fired up a run of Prime95 smallest fft FMA3 and my average VOUT after 6 mins was 1.22v and my core temps were a bit lower as well. With integrated GPU enabled my average VOUT was 1.23 - 1.235. Give it a try if you haven't yet, might bring your voltage down a bit. Could be a fluke run, I'll have to see more runs before I draw a conclusion, but this board continues to impress me. If I can eek out a VOUT of 1.21 for a 5 ghz all core AVX OC, I'll be even happier.
> 
> Just tried lowering my offset by .010, no dice re: 1.21v. Regardless I'm fine with saving .010 - .015v with my current settings just by disabling the iGPU.


How do you ENABLE the iGPU? Isn't that "iGPU=Enabled"? I never have that set to enabled.
Isn't the default option = "Auto"?
Auto should disable the iGPU unless no dGPU video card is present.

Was your setting set to auto? Because my iGPU is not enabled if I set it to auto.


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> How do you ENABLE the iGPU? Isn't that "iGPU=Enabled"? I never have that set to enabled.
> 
> Isn't the default option = "Auto"?
> 
> Auto should disable the iGPU unless no dGPU video card is present.
> 
> 
> 
> Was your setting set to auto? Because my iGPU is not enabled if I set it to auto.


Yeah it's Auto by default. Maybe this is just a fluke test I'll do more over the weekend. 

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Yeah it's Auto by default. Maybe this is just a fluke test I'll do more over the weekend.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk


Yeah it's gotta be a fluke test.
Because when it's auto, the iGPU does not appear in device manager.
Unless this is some new feature of the F8 bios and it DOES appear in device manager when its set to auto?
Can you check that for me?


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Yeah it's gotta be a fluke test.
> Because when it's auto, the iGPU does not appear in device manager.
> Unless this is some new feature of the F8 bios and it DOES appear in device manager when its set to auto?
> Can you check that for me?


On my Ultra Auto gives me no igpu. As I have my 970 GTX installed.
I have to set it to enabled for it to work.

A quick test I did this morning ... a couple of minutes 1344 in place fft's in prime 29.6b7

VR VOUT = 1.312V - 1.326V

Keeps fluctuating between those two values.

I must admit, I had some weird things happen when I was switching between AC/DC loadlines en different dvids ... 
Rebooted once and got the right VR VOUT reading while being idle, as soon as I started a stresstest, my VR VOUT jumped up to 1.344V and stayed there. Rebooted, did not change a thing ... came back into windows, same stresstest ... voltage was behaving nicely and stayed around 1.324V

Never had that happen after that. But as I now don't play with those settings anymore, sounds logical it didn't happen again.
I never shut down my pc / psu. I always just reboot and go into the bios, set stuff up. reboot and go. (unless something really frecks up and then you have to.)


----------



## jlp0209

Falkentyne said:


> Yeah it's gotta be a fluke test.
> 
> Because when it's auto, the iGPU does not appear in device manager.
> 
> Unless this is some new feature of the F8 bios and it DOES appear in device manager when its set to auto?
> 
> Can you check that for me?


Correct, does not appear in device manager on auto. 

Sent from my SM-G970U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> Where are the attachments? Never saw a post with them yet. :/
> 
> Edit: Found the downloads, but how do you enable Rainmeter? Unzipped the files to the User/Documents/rainmeter/skins folder nada.


You need to download rainmeter, install it ... unpack my download and enjoy.
(that's why I said it was a rainmeter thingy  )


----------



## Intrud3r

R3van said:


> Will pm him on tomorrow or saturday, when i find some time to get a politely text in english together :blushsmil
> 
> Another thing that come to my mind is:
> With fixed voltage 1.330v in BIOS and LLC to High i get 1.234v in 1344k and 1.205v in 8k. This is what i would expect with different FFTs.
> With adaptive voltage +0.070 which is what i`m trying now i get the very same voltage in 8k and 1344k -> 1.260v. Now it seems to be stable.
> 
> After the first Test with fixed voltage i went back to adaptive to check back if there were different voltages at different FFTs, but there isn`t. And now its working fine, don`t know why but it is.
> 
> Yesterday no way... :buttkick:


It doesn't have to be polite  Well ... ok, you get my point.

Just be clear in what you want me to test ...


----------



## R3van

Sorry, i actually don`t get your point, what do you mean?
I didn`t ask you to test anything for me, didn`t i?


----------



## Intrud3r

R3van said:


> Sorry, i actually don`t get your point, what do you mean?
> I didn`t ask you to test anything for me, didn`t i?


...

Double post.


----------



## Intrud3r

R3van said:


> Sorry, i actually don`t get your point, what do you mean?
> I didn`t ask you to test anything for me, didn`t i?


You said:
Will pm him on tomorrow or saturday, when i find some time to get a politely text in english together 

Thought you meant me ... I could be wrong.


----------



## R3van

no, i meant the guy falkentyne mentioned in his post, guess hes somehow related to gigabyte


----------



## Intrud3r

R3van said:


> no, i meant the guy falkentyne mentioned in his post, guess hes somehow related to gigabyte


Ah ok, excuses moi.


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> You need to download rainmeter, install it ... unpack my download and enjoy.
> (that's why I said it was a rainmeter thingy  )


Yeah, I figured it out. Just can't figure out how to add sensors to your .ini. I think it's because I'm not doing both the top and bottom sections with the sensor ID's and the bottom placements etc. Just added the ID's part. :/


----------



## KedarWolf

How do you contact Gigabyte to report a bug/request a BIOS feature available from other vendors but not Gigabyte.

There is no way to adjust the IOL Offset which lowers RTL and IOL timings etc. :h34r-smi I know Asus as this option, but Gigabyte doesn't, and if you manually change the RTL's and IOL's it does not work. 

A bug, and needs a fix.


----------



## Nizzen

KedarWolf said:


> How do you contact Gigabyte to report a bug/request a BIOS feature available from other vendors but not Gigabyte.
> 
> There is no way to adjust the IOL Offset which lowers RTL and IOL timings etc. :h34r-smi I know Asus as this option, but Gigabyte doesn't, and if you manually change the RTL's and IOL's it does not work.
> 
> A bug, and needs a fix.


That's why we use Asus Apex and Gene


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, I figured it out. Just can't figure out how to add sensors to your .ini. I think it's because I'm not doing both the top and bottom sections with the sensor ID's and the bottom placements etc. Just added the ID's part. :/


Top part is what sensor the measure is looking at ... use the shared memory viewer to find the values to enter.

Below part (under the text of i9 9900k for example) are the values like text shown - current value - max value - etc etc etc

1 sensor on top
3 or 4 values below

Enjoy


----------



## jlp0209

Nizzen said:


> That's why we use Asus Apex and Gene


Would love to buy the Gene and see how it compares to the Hero (and the Aorus Master). I'm in the U.S. so I can't get the Gene locally. What a crock. If I buy one from outside the U.S. I'll likely have zero warranty.


----------



## Falkentyne

jlp0209 said:


> Would love to buy the Gene and see how it compares to the Hero (and the Aorus Master). I'm in the U.S. so I can't get the Gene locally. What a crock. If I buy one from outside the U.S. I'll likely have zero warranty.


Just buy the Apex in that case. The Gene is good for memory overclocking, yes, but only the Apex would have good enough VRM's without doublers to put up a good fight vs your Master. You already saw how poorly the hero fared.

Even buildzoid said the only two Asus boards worth owning were the gene and the apex (he REALLY liked the apex). He couldn't recommend the IX Extreme purely because of the price, not the quality.

Try this!






Please let me know how the transient response is (especially if you get an Oscilloscope and you do some *GASP* LLC8 FMA3 testing (DO NOT do this above 1.20v set in bios!)


----------



## Intrud3r

C6/C7 was still a no go ...

A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
Processor APIC ID: 2

Boooo .... so C6/C7 is disabled again .... bleh.
(don't really wanna go higher on voltage, so there you have it)

Need more stuff to play with !!!


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> C6/C7 was still a no go ...
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor APIC ID: 2
> 
> Boooo .... so C6/C7 is disabled again .... bleh.
> (don't really wanna go higher on voltage, so there you have it)
> 
> Need more stuff to play with !!!


Did you try the load line calibration on AUTO/Standard?


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> Did you try the load line calibration on AUTO/Standard?


Which loadline ? AC/DC or Vcore ?


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> Which loadline ? AC/DC or Vcore ?


Vcore load line calibration.


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> Vcore load line calibration.


That I actually don't recall ... 

I started out with manual voltage - vcore loadline turbo
switched over to adaptive / auto / normal voltage (chose normal)

jumped over from ac/dc loadline auto --> perfomance with vcore loadines differing from high to medium and low

switched over to ac/dc loadline power saving and only used vcore loadline medium so far.

So a quick guess would say I have not tried that yet ...

And freck me, I did some tests for checking some stuff F. asked me ... prime ... darn it, I needed more voltage. Yes I know I said I don't wanna add more ... Aarrgg ... +0.010V 
Tests went fine after that ...

In other words ... here goes another round of C6/C7 testing again. hehe


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> That I actually don't recall ...
> 
> I started out with manual voltage - vcore loadline turbo
> switched over to adaptive / auto / normal voltage (chose normal)
> 
> jumped over from ac/dc loadline auto --> perfomance with vcore loadines differing from high to medium and low
> 
> switched over to ac/dc loadline power saving and only used vcore loadline medium so far.
> 
> So a quick guess would say I have not tried that yet ...
> 
> And freck me, I did some tests for checking some stuff F. asked me ... prime ... darn it, I needed more voltage. Yes I know I said I don't wanna add more ... Aarrgg ... +0.010V
> Tests went fine after that ...
> 
> In other words ... here goes another round of C6/C7 testing again. hehe


I run all powersaving features at 5.0GHz 1.260v load core voltage. The only thing I changed in BIOS from AUTO default is DVID +0.080 and clock multiplier 50. hehe


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> That I actually don't recall ...
> 
> I started out with manual voltage - vcore loadline turbo
> switched over to adaptive / auto / normal voltage (chose normal)
> 
> jumped over from ac/dc loadline auto --> perfomance with vcore loadines differing from high to medium and low
> 
> switched over to ac/dc loadline power saving and only used vcore loadline medium so far.
> 
> So a quick guess would say I have not tried that yet ...
> 
> And freck me, I did some tests for checking some stuff F. asked me ... prime ... darn it, I needed more voltage. Yes I know I said I don't wanna add more ... Aarrgg ... +0.010V
> Tests went fine after that ...
> 
> In other words ... here goes another round of C6/C7 testing again. hehe


Set CPU Internal AC/DC loadline to "Turbo", *or*, just set the internal VR settings-> IA AC/IA DC loadlines to 160/160 and then test for WHEA errors, please.
(the internal VR settings override the CPU Internal AC/DC as they change the same thing, but the internal VR settings have higher priority).

Report back. (not asking you to keep it here forever. I just want to see if your WHEA's stop happening, because I think I know what's going on).


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> I run all powersaving features at 5.0GHz 1.260v load core voltage. The only thing I changed in BIOS from AUTO default is DVID +0.080 and clock multiplier 50. hehe


Thanks for the info, nice and easy overclock for you there ...


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> Thanks for the info, nice and easy overclock for you there ...


That is the way I always overclock, unless I have a high VID like the i7 9700k then I use IA AC/DC lode line =1.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Set CPU Internal AC/DC loadline to "Turbo", *or*, just set the internal VR settings-> IA AC/IA DC loadlines to 160/160 and then test for WHEA errors, please.
> (the internal VR settings override the CPU Internal AC/DC as they change the same thing, but the internal VR settings have higher priority).
> 
> Report back. (not asking you to keep it here forever. I just want to see if your WHEA's stop happening, because I think I know what's going on).


Willing to test it out, but as I've upped my DVID with +0.010V as a I needed more voltage for those prime tests anyway ... So I wanna see if that fixes my C6/C7 issues before hand.

Funny tho, as I've run multiple prime tests small FFT's and 1344 when I was using Bios F6 and I never had a l0 cache error. Now using Bios F7 I have run some small FFT's. That seems to work, but 1344 needed more voltage.

Could be just me. But that's what I feel happened.


----------



## wingman99

When overclocking the memory and it fails to post I have to clear CMOS with a jumper. Is this normal for gigabyte motherboard?


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> When overclocking the memory and it fails to post I have to clear CMOS with a jumper. Is this normal for gigabyte motherboard?


I've had a couple of times that my board didn't wanna boot, it was cycling about 3 times and shut ifself off and start up by itself. It always jumped back to all defaults or just back to the settings I tried before I saved the bios.

Never until now (knocking on wood) had I had to use the clear CMOS.


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> I've had a couple of times that my board didn't wanna boot, it was cycling about 3 times and shut ifself off and start up by itself. It always jumped back to all defaults or just back to the settings I tried before I saved the bios.
> 
> Never until now (knocking on wood) had I had to use the clear CMOS.


Were you on the latest BIOS?


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> Were you on the latest BIOS?


Nope, was using F6 at that time. Now running F7.


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Willing to test it out, but as I've upped my DVID with +0.010V as a I needed more voltage for those prime tests anyway ... So I wanna see if that fixes my C6/C7 issues before hand.
> 
> Funny tho, as I've run multiple prime tests small FFT's and 1344 when I was using Bios F6 and I never had a l0 cache error. Now using Bios F7 I have run some small FFT's. That seems to work, but 1344 needed more voltage.
> 
> Could be just me. But that's what I feel happened.


Have you tried going back to Bios F6 and doing that same test again to make sure?


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> Nope, was using F6 at that time. Now running F7.


It did not happen for me with the second to latest BIOS just the latest BIOS. If you have a problem with no post needing a clear CMOS with F7 BIOS let me know.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Have you tried going back to Bios F6 and doing that same test again to make sure?


No, and I really don't feel like going back to F6 as F7 is working nicely.
I still have my backup bios on F6 tho ... but as it's working pretty well now, don't really wanna switch over 

(and I've never been able to choose which bios it picks, it just switches over when I mess up with settings so it won't boot. It's been a while since I sorta know where the sweet spot lies now and therefore I am not encountering the not being able to boot situations anymore).


----------



## shaolin95

Has anyone gone from 16GBx2 3200 C14 to 16GBx4 same 3200 and C14 without having to adjust settings or losing OC?

Thanks!


----------



## Falkentyne

Anyone see this?

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1107.html#post511386
http://forum.gigabyte.us/post/29381/thread


----------



## R3van

Great, thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Anyone see this?
> 
> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1107.html#post511386
> http://forum.gigabyte.us/post/29381/thread


Updated to F8i beta BIOS, for the same timings I needed 1.27v SA, 1.23v VCCIO, 1.46v RAM, now I'm at 1.25v SA, 1.25v VCCIO, 1.45v RAM RamTest stable.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Updated to F8i beta BIOS, for the same timings I needed 1.27v SA, 1.23v VCCIO, 1.46v RAM, now I'm at 1.25v SA, 1.25v VCCIO, 1.45v RAM RamTest stable.


That's way within the margin of error.
What bios were you on before?


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> Updated to F8i beta BIOS, for the same timings I needed 1.27v SA, 1.23v VCCIO, 1.46v RAM, now I'm at 1.25v SA, 1.25v VCCIO, 1.45v RAM RamTest stable.


Planning to post your BIOS settings soon? Your settings work great for my system after a couple of tweak so I love it when you post them


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> That's way within the margin of error.
> What bios were you on before?


F8.


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> Planning to post your BIOS settings soon? Your settings work great for my system after a couple of tweak so I love it when you post them


Edit: You likely won't get those timings on RAM though, I have basically the best 4x8GB kit you can buy for overclocking, CL16 Trident Z 3600. :h34r-smi

Here you go, two posts, only so many attachments allowed.


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> Planning to post your BIOS settings soon? Your settings work great for my system after a couple of tweak so I love it when you post them


Hope these help. 

Forgot my RAM timings, added now.


----------



## Driller au

Thanks KedarWolf for posting pics, always interesting


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Set CPU Internal AC/DC loadline to "Turbo", *or*, just set the internal VR settings-> IA AC/IA DC loadlines to 160/160 and then test for WHEA errors, please.
> (the internal VR settings override the CPU Internal AC/DC as they change the same thing, but the internal VR settings have higher priority).
> 
> Report back. (not asking you to keep it here forever. I just want to see if your WHEA's stop happening, because I think I know what's going on).


Ok ... so I thought I would check and see what this does on my system ... 

Steps:
1. Reboot
2. Enter Bios
3. Switch CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline from Power Saving --> Turbo
4. Change DVID from +0.055V --> +0.000V
5. F10 save and reboot
6. Enter Bios and check voltage given to cpu --> 1.500V
7. Eek ... change DVID setting quickly --> DVID from +0.000V --> -0.100V
8. F10 save and reboot
9. Enter Bios and check voltage given to cpu --> 1.400V
10. change DVID -0.100V --> -0.160V
11. F10 save and reboot
12. Enter Bios and check voltage given to cpu --> 1.336V
13. F10 save and reboot
14. This should boot into windows as it's working flawlessly now on power saving around that voltage.
15. Booting into windows --> BSOD WHEA ERROR
16. Reboot --> change settings back while checking voltage --> running nicely on power saving again ... 

I didn't like seeing 1.500V on my bios screen.


----------



## techjesse

Got it working...Win7


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Ok ... so I thought I would check and see what this does on my system ...
> 
> Steps:
> 1. Reboot
> 2. Enter Bios
> 3. Switch CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline from Power Saving --> Turbo
> 4. Change DVID from +0.055V --> +0.000V
> 5. F10 save and reboot
> 6. Enter Bios and check voltage given to cpu --> 1.500V
> 7. Eek ... change DVID setting quickly --> DVID from +0.000V --> -0.100V
> 8. F10 save and reboot
> 9. Enter Bios and check voltage given to cpu --> 1.400V
> 10. change DVID -0.100V --> -0.160V
> 11. F10 save and reboot
> 12. Enter Bios and check voltage given to cpu --> 1.336V
> 13. F10 save and reboot
> 14. This should boot into windows as it's working flawlessly now on power saving around that voltage.
> 15. Booting into windows --> BSOD WHEA ERROR
> 16. Reboot --> change settings back while checking voltage --> running nicely on power saving again ...
> 
> I didn't like seeing 1.500V on my bios screen.


Were you using *Loadline calibration* when you did this?
You should not be using anything except LLC=Standard when using auto voltages without an offset.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Were you using *Loadline calibration* when you did this?
> You should not be using anything except LLC=Standard when using auto voltages without an offset.


I did not touch my vcore loadline which was set at medium through all that.


----------



## Performer81

Warning, if you set an voltage offset and LLC turbo. I set Voltage normal, offset to -0,070V and LLC turbo instead of AUto on my 9700K to test 5GHZ. When i started cinebench the voltage shot to 1,45V under load. What are you doing Gigabyte?
On LLC normal the voltage is under 1,3V.


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> I did not touch my vcore loadline which was set at medium through all that.


That's why your voltage was so high.
You were countering the default vdroop that would have prevented your voltage from reading 1.5v.
AC loadline boosts the voltage up from a defined preset value (based on cache and core ratio) and then the VRM then droops this by 1.6 mOhms. (The DC loadline value will show the result of this droop on the CPU VID, assuming the DC loadline value is set equal to the loadline calibration mOhms value (I assume LLC low=1.3 mOhms and LLC medium=1.0 mOhms).

Also remember you are reading the bios super i/o chip which will always read higher than the real voltage. (CPU VID= CPU VR VOUT if DC loadline=VRM loadline with no offsets are used).

If your LLC were set to standard, your idle voltage would probably be around 1.45v fully idle (this depends on CPU quality and its preset VIDs) and drop down to about 1.3v at full load (FMA3/AVX small FFT would drop this to around 1.25v at 180 amps). This is based on a 5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache setting.


----------



## Falkentyne

Performer81 said:


> Warning, if you set an voltage offset and LLC turbo. I set Voltage normal, offset to -0,070V and LLC turbo instead of AUto on my 9700K to test 5GHZ. When i started cinebench the voltage shot to 1,45V under load. What are you doing Gigabyte?
> On LLC normal the voltage is under 1,3V.


Are you using CPU-Z (ITE 8688E), HWinfo64 (ITE 8792E or 8688E) or VR VOUT to read this voltage? A VR VOUT of 1.45v during cinebench is impossible.
LLC Turbo is 0.4 mOhms. If you were using default AC loadline (1.6 mOhms) you were countering vdroop and the AC loadline voltage power supply boost by applying 0.4 mOhms of loadline on top of that. Never use LLC turbo in combination with a default AC loadline. AC loadline basically handles voltage compensation for you (depending on load) but it's difficult to explain how it works.

Some people set AC loadline to 0.01 mOhms (1 in the bios under internal VR settings) to have more control over the initial voltage. DC loadline should then be set to the same value as VRM loadline if you want the CPU VID and CPU package power to match up with VR VOUT.

I calculated the "Loadline Calibration" mOhm values a few days ago for 8 core processors:

LLC Auto/Standard/Normal=1.6 mOhms
LLC Low=1.3 mOhms
LLC Medium=1.0 mOhms.
LLC High=0.8 mOhms.
LLC Turbo=0.4 mOhms.
LLC Extreme=(not sure, maybe 0.2 mOhms).
LLC Ultra Extreme (don't use this; transient voltage spikes and dips will be massive)= 0 mOhms

In order to use a higher (lower mOhm) loadline calibration, you should reduce the AC loadline value. A value of 40 (0.4 mOhms) on AC loadline would probably work better for you with LLC turbo; you can try that. (the "CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline" preset "power saving" uses an AC loadline of 40 (0.4 mOhms) and DC loadline value of either 1 mOhms or 1.3 mOhms (I forgot). The DC loadline value doesn't affect the VR VOUT however, just the CPU VID and CPU Package Power.


----------



## Intrud3r

CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving


Yeah. I had it saved in a text file but I wrote those replies on my laptop. 
But yes, that 1.3 mOhms of DC loadline is why LLC=Low works so well with it  also 1.3 mOhms
(although using any positive or negative DVID offset will cause VR VOUT to de-link from VID by that offset amount)


----------



## KedarWolf

I found that having the CPU graphics enabled with an HDMI monitor attached or disabled, I needed exactly the same CPU voltage to be stable at 5.1GHZ.

So I keep it enabled to run my second screen on rather than two on my video card. :h34r-smi


----------



## wingman99

Measuring voltage with a fluke meter I have different results compared to ITE 8686E = 1.296v, VRM capacitor = 1.350v, back of the motherboard socket = 1.240v

In this Video he measures at the capacitor and that is not accurate, he needs to measure at the back of the motherboard socket.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> Measuring voltage with a fluke meter I have different results compared to ITE 8686E = 1.296v, VRM capacitor = 1.350v, back of the motherboard socket = 1.240v
> 
> In this Video he measures at the capacitor and that is not accurate, he needs to measure at the back of the motherboard socket.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8na-dENz6Ag


What is your bios voltage?

you're not measuring the "capacitor" at the right spot.
1.350v is impossible. Are you sure that isn't VDDQ you measured?

You need to measure VCC_Sense (power supply) with respect to VSS_Sense (ground).
Buildzoid has a schematic. He measured at the correct location.

Back of the motherboard socket=1.240v (looks right). ITE 8688E (8686E?)=Super I/O chip.


----------



## Falkentyne

Got bored yet again and decided to flash that unreleased F8i Bios.
Is it me or does this bios have an internal build date higher than F8?

Ok first thing I noticed was vAXG iGPU voltage was no longer 0.00v
It actually showed up as 1.20v directly in the health options.
And now I know what that second VR VOUT field is in HWinfo64 that everyone said was reporting an absurd 0.004v voltage (note: the 65.536v VR VOUT bug is caused by Gigabyte Easytune / SIV driver, uninstall that). That's the iGPU voltage. And why that current iout was always 0.250 amps, since the iGPU was disabled anyway.

No idea if this appeared in F8 final (I sure don't remember seeing this in F8H, then again I didn't exactly look. But in F8G and F8E, HWinfo64 had no field for iGPU VAXG voltage, and the bios said the voltage was 0.000v. No idea whether that was just a sensor bios bug or if the voltage was really 0.00v.

Someone may want to test F8E (or F7 or older) bios and set a manual iGPU VAXG voltage (1.20v) and/or temporarily enable the iGPU and see if it still gets reported as 0.00v or not.

@Intrud3r does your F8 show the iGPU VAXG voltage in HWinfo64? @jlp0209


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> What is your bios voltage?
> 
> you're not measuring the "capacitor" at the right spot.
> 1.350v is impossible. Are you sure that isn't VDDQ you measured?
> 
> You need to measure VCC_Sense (power supply) with respect to VSS_Sense (ground).
> Buildzoid has a schematic. He measured at the correct location.
> 
> Back of the motherboard socket=1.240v (looks right). ITE 8688E (8686E?)=Super I/O chip.


BIOS voltage is 1.295v

I measured the VRM capacitor that is right around the left side of CPU socket. What do you get when you measure with a digital multi-meter?


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> BIOS voltage is 1.295v
> 
> I measured the VRM capacitor that is right around the left side of CPU socket. What do you get when you measure with a digital multi-meter?


No DMM yet. Saving up slowly for a good Siglent SDX-1202E. I want to see just how bad these transient spike issues on these current boards actually are, with higher loadline calibrations.
I need to get a DMM eventually.
I'm 95% sure that you were measuring the VDDQ cap. Is your memory voltage 1.35v?
That's pretty easy to verify, set your VDDQ to 1.40v then see if that reading changes.

Can you take a high resolution picture of where you soldered the wires to? Did you connect right next to the IR 35201 controller? What board is it?


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> No DMM yet. Saving up slowly for a good Siglent SDX-1202E. I want to see just how bad these transient spike issues on these current boards actually are, with higher loadline calibrations.
> I need to get a DMM eventually.
> I'm 95% sure that you were measuring the VDDQ cap. Is your memory voltage 1.35v?
> That's pretty easy to verify, set your VDDQ to 1.40v then see if that reading changes.
> 
> Can you take a high resolution picture of where you soldered the wires to? Did you connect right next to the IR 35201 controller? What board is it?


I did not have to solder anything. You are describing the motherboard in the video where the capicters are next to the IR 35201, your ATX motherboard and mine is not that way. 
There is a voltage drop from the processor VRM capacitors to the back of the processor socket when running prime95. That is why the capacitor voltage is higher then ITE 8686E.

In the RED are the capacitor legs that you can measure with a digital multi meter. I would not trust the Video, he is on a ITX motherboard not your ATX. Best to check it your self even if you use low cost digital multi meter.

View attachment 262610


----------



## BradleyW

Is it normal to require a higher CPU Vcore when running your RAM at a higher speed? My CPU is stable at 1.33v @ 5GHz, RAM 3733MHz. When I up the RAM to 4000MHz (rated speed), not only do I need higher VCCIO/IA, but I also need more Vcore. Around 1.35v.

Tested with FMA3 SmallFFT and FMA3 Blend with full RAM allocation.

9900k, Z390 Ultra, F7.

In addition I use LLC High and IA AC 1. Is there anything wrong with this when using adaptive voltage? Thank you very much.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Got bored yet again and decided to flash that unreleased F8i Bios.
> Is it me or does this bios have an internal build date higher than F8?
> 
> Ok first thing I noticed was vAXG iGPU voltage was no longer 0.00v
> It actually showed up as 1.20v directly in the health options.
> And now I know what that second VR VOUT field is in HWinfo64 that everyone said was reporting an absurd 0.004v voltage (note: the 65.536v VR VOUT bug is caused by Gigabyte Easytune / SIV driver, uninstall that). That's the iGPU voltage. And why that current iout was always 0.250 amps, since the iGPU was disabled anyway.
> 
> No idea if this appeared in F8 final (I sure don't remember seeing this in F8H, then again I didn't exactly look. But in F8G and F8E, HWinfo64 had no field for iGPU VAXG voltage, and the bios said the voltage was 0.000v. No idea whether that was just a sensor bios bug or if the voltage was really 0.00v.
> 
> Someone may want to test F8E (or F7 or older) bios and set a manual iGPU VAXG voltage (1.20v) and/or temporarily enable the iGPU and see if it still gets reported as 0.00v or not.
> 
> @Intrud3r does your F8 show the iGPU VAXG voltage in HWinfo64?
> @jlp0209


Sadly my Aorus Ultra does not have a F8 bios. I'm running F7 atm.

And do you mean this value ?
(this value is often not visible on my end, while i'm using my igpu always)


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Is it normal to require a higher CPU Vcore when running your RAM at a higher speed? My CPU is stable at 1.33v @ 5GHz, RAM 3733MHz. When I up the RAM to 4000MHz (rated speed), not only do I need higher VCCIO/IA, but I also need more Vcore. Around 1.35v.
> 
> Tested with FMA3 SmallFFT and FMA3 Blend with full RAM allocation.
> 
> 9900k, Z390 Ultra, F7.
> 
> In addition I use LLC High and IA AC 1. Is there anything wrong with this when using adaptive voltage? Thank you very much.


I wouldn't know. All that matters is if you're stable and if your VR VOUT is where you want it to be.
And with everything integrated on the CPU, I wouldn't be surprised if you needed more voltage, especially with a flatter loadline calibration slope (less vdroop=worse transient response. higher voltages/frequencies/timings=signal strength can get weaker/noise increases)

What's your RAM voltage?



Intrud3r said:


> Sadly my Aorus Ultra does not have a F8 bios. I'm running F7 atm.
> 
> And do you mean this value ?
> (this value is often not visible on my end, while i'm using my igpu always)


I don't have that value at all.
Something appeared in F8i called "iGPU VAXG voltage" that wasn't there before (did not bother to check F8H or F8 final but it was NOT in F8E or F8G). Also in the bios "health" section, iGPU VAXG reads 1.20v or whatever you set it to. In F8G and everything older, it read "0.000v".


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it normal to require a higher CPU Vcore when running your RAM at a higher speed? My CPU is stable at 1.33v @ 5GHz, RAM 3733MHz. When I up the RAM to 4000MHz (rated speed), not only do I need higher VCCIO/IA, but I also need more Vcore. Around 1.35v.
> 
> Tested with FMA3 SmallFFT and FMA3 Blend with full RAM allocation.
> 
> 9900k, Z390 Ultra, F7.
> 
> In addition I use LLC High and IA AC 1. Is there anything wrong with this when using adaptive voltage? Thank you very much.
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't know. All that matters is if you're stable and if your VR VOUT is where you want it to be.
> And with everything integrated on the CPU, I wouldn't be surprised if you needed more voltage, especially with a flatter loadline calibration slope (less vdroop=worse transient response. higher voltages/frequencies/timings=signal strength can get weaker/noise increases)
> 
> What's your RAM voltage?
> 
> 
> 
> Intrud3r said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly my Aorus Ultra does not have a F8 bios. I'm running F7 atm.
> 
> And do you mean this value ?
> (this value is often not visible on my end, while i'm using my igpu always)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't have that value at all.
> Something appeared in F8i called "iGPU VAXG voltage" that wasn't there before (did not bother to check F8H or F8 final but it was NOT in F8E or F8G). Also in the bios "health" section, iGPU VAXG reads 1.20v or whatever you set it to. In F8G and everything older, it read "0.000v".
Click to expand...

My RAM is at 1.35v. The RAM is rated at 4000MHz @ 1.35v.

I didn't think Vcore would be linked to RAM speed. We often advise people to find the highest core clock first, then set the RAM up afterwards, as the two are not considered linked.

Is it OK to use IA AC 1 with an LLC of High? Or would it be safer to increase the IA AC value to something higher? 80 for instance? Should IA DC then be set to 80 to match? 

I've read that people don't need as much Vcore when they use a lower LLC but for me I find that LLC turbo gives me really good results but I've dropped it down due to the frequent mentioning of transient spiking.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I wouldn't know. All that matters is if you're stable and if your VR VOUT is where you want it to be.
> And with everything integrated on the CPU, I wouldn't be surprised if you needed more voltage, especially with a flatter loadline calibration slope (less vdroop=worse transient response. higher voltages/frequencies/timings=signal strength can get weaker/noise increases)
> 
> What's your RAM voltage?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have that value at all.
> Something appeared in F8i called "iGPU VAXG voltage" that wasn't there before (did not bother to check F8H or F8 final but it was NOT in F8E or F8G). Also in the bios "health" section, iGPU VAXG reads 1.20v or whatever you set it to. In F8G and everything older, it read "0.000v".


I'm pretty sure F8i is the last beta BIOS before the full F8, they have the same BIOS date, and it the Beta BIOS forum someone says that.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> Hope these help.
> 
> Forgot my RAM timings, added now.


Thanks a ton, man! 
Well yeah the RAM is one where I dont follow from your settings since my RAM is 16GB x2 of 3200 C14 and I dont OC it pretty much at all...heck, even considering adding two more sticks so I can forget about any RAM ocing LOL
Really appreciate your help as always!


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> My RAM is at 1.35v. The RAM is rated at 4000MHz @ 1.35v.
> 
> I didn't think Vcore would be linked to RAM speed. We often advise people to find the highest core clock first, then set the RAM up afterwards, as the two are not considered linked.
> 
> Is it OK to use IA AC 1 with an LLC of High? Or would it be safer to increase the IA AC value to something higher? 80 for instance? Should IA DC then be set to 80 to match?
> 
> I've read that people don't need as much Vcore when they use a lower LLC but for me I find that LLC turbo gives me really good results but I've dropped it down due to the frequent mentioning of transient spiking.


Bradley you keep asking this question. I told you I don't know. Anything BELOW an AC value of 210 (2.1 mOhms) is "safe" to use, but whether that gives you the voltage you want at idle, light load and load no one here can answer except you. You have to test it, not us. I told you what I told everyone else:

1) dont go above 2.10 mOhms on AC loadline (or 1.60 on 8 core processors).
2) don't use high levels of loadline calibration with default AC loadline (1.60 mOhms)--ever.

That's all I can tell you.
Everything else--you have to experiment and find out yourself.


----------



## Driller au

So when i set a value of 1 for IA AC that is 0.01 mOhms ? if i want to increase this setting to say 15 that equals 0.15 mOhms 
When i did a google search on this i came across a post by you Falkentyne where you said changing IA AC/DC from default means the CPU INTERNAL AC/DC LOADLINE setting in advanced voltage settings on our M/B is ignored is this the correct understanding ?
Thanks for your time


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> So when i set a value of 1 for IA AC that is 0.01 mOhms ? if i want to increase this setting to say 15 that equals 0.15 mOhms
> When i did a google search on this i came across a post by you Falkentyne where you said changing IA AC/DC from default means the CPU INTERNAL AC/DC LOADLINE setting in advanced voltage settings on our M/B is ignored is this the correct understanding ?
> Thanks for your time


Yes, they change the exact same things. But the CPU internal VR settings has higher priority than the Gigabyte UEFI "remapped" settings. 
Also, Gigabyte's presets on CPU Internal Loadline don't make much sense. The AC values make sense, but the DC value being 1.3 mOhms doesn't make sense. The DC value should be linked to whatever VRM loadline calibration you are using, but no one knew what mOhms the VRM loadline calibration (LLC) settings matched up to until I tested them. Elmor wrote a chart of common mOhm values based on a hypothetical bios voltage curve.
But basically if you want your VR VOUT to match the CPU VID at all times, if you use the 1.3 DC Loadline presets (power saving, performance), you need to set Loadline Calibration to low (and not use an offset), as LLC=Low is 1.3 mOhms also (or VERY close to it).

I tested a manual DC loadline value of 3.2 mOhms, 0.01 mOhms and 1.6 mOhms, with AC loadline at 160 and auto voltages (4.7 ghz core, 4.4 cache) and the three DC loadline values had VERY little effect on VR VOUT at full load. Maybe a 15mv difference between 0.01 and 3.2. You are free to test that.

NEVER EVER go higher than 1.6 mOhms for AC loadline (2.1 for 6 cores).


----------



## Kenmar

Hello everyone, I recently bought a Aorus Master and while building my system I discovered a "problem". At least it is one for me 
I want to install a EKWB-Velocity CPU Block but the rubber gasket with the metal backplate lies above of some capacitor pins.
Is it safe to cut those pins a bit down ? Before I'm doing anything I wanted to ask you for advice.
Here is a picture of the rubber gasket and metal backplate:


Spoiler


----------



## BradleyW

@Falkentyne

Thank you.

New issue. RAM is no longer stable at 4000MHz VCCIA 1.28v, VCCIO 1.28v.

It fails MemTest within minutes. Upping IMC/VCCIO voltage hasn't helped.

Before hand I ran FMA3 blend with full RAM usage for a few hours. I'm worried the high draw has damaged the IMC. (5GHz, Vcore 1.33v, peak 1.37v)

9900K, Z390 Ultra, Trident 2x8GB DDR4 XMP rated 4000MHz.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> New issue. RAM is no longer stable at 4000MHz VCCIA 1.28v, VCCIO 1.28v.
> 
> It fails MemTest within minutes. Upping IMC/VCCIO voltage hasn't helped.
> 
> Before hand I ran FMA3 blend with full RAM usage for a few hours. I'm worried the high draw has damaged the IMC. (5GHz, Vcore 1.33v, peak 1.37v)
> 
> 9900K, Z390 Ultra, Trident 2x8GB DDR4 XMP rated 4000MHz.


I can't help with RAM tweaking or problems. I know virtually nothing about it. You need to ask in the DDR4 thread.
Didn't that one guy, thepook or thrasher (one of those two guys) say that they could no longer run at 4200 or 4000 or something mhz or timings because it was causing errors, but they could run it before?
It was in the DDR4 thread a few days ago. You've been in that thread.


----------



## R3van

Falkentyne said:


> Please file a bug report with Gigabyte. I already tried and they sent me screenshots saying their own tests were identical with f8e and f8 final and the problem with needing slightly more voltage was "marginal CPU voltage".


Got the answer from Gigabyte yesterday:



> Hallo Ingo,
> 
> Vielen Dank für Ihre Anfrage.
> 
> Wir freuen uns über Ihr Interesse an Produkten von GIGABYTE.
> 
> 
> Gern möchten wir Ihnen helfen.
> 
> Installieren Sie das Bios noch einmal wie folgt um eine Setup Fehler auszuschließen:
> 
> Laden Sie das Bios Default und verlassen es mit F10.
> 
> Starten Sie das System neu, gehen ins Bios und drücken F8, führen das Bios Update durch.
> 
> Ist das Update durch gelaufen, schalten Sie das System für gut 10-30 Sekunden ab.
> Starten Sie den PC neu und gehen direkt wieder ins Bios.
> 
> Laden Sie nun das Bios wieder Default und verlassen Sie es mit F10.
> 
> Testen Sie jetzt Ihr System erneut.
> 
> Ihr GIGABYTE-Team


Not very helpful as i did that steps anyway.

I PMed the guy Falkentyne mentioned, maybe he has something valuable to share.

I am back on F8e again and now i see these voltage drops with that bios version too. But its completely erratic, sometimes i can run a full custom run without any errors and then again i start prime and after some moments, voltage starts dropping.

I guess i should have sticked with Asus


----------



## Timur Born

Are you sure that you don't get temperature throttled (even if the multiplier does not seem to drop)? That would cause voltage fluctuations, too. Check HWinfo's "Core # Thermal Throttling" sensor.


----------



## R3van

Yes, i`m sure about that.

Temperature was around 70°c-80°c and there were no indication of thermal throtteling in HWInfo.


----------



## marik123

Recently I got extra 2 sticks of GSKILL DDR4 3200C14 ram in my Aorus pro board and now I have 4 sticks of GSKILL DDR4 3200C14 ram. Per the QVL list I was able to run 4 sticks at 4133mhz where as with my previous 2 sticks it doesn't even boot. However when I boot into windows everything seems to be normal, except when I try to play a game I get random game exit, game error within 5-10 minutes of use. When I reboot my system and try to run memtest86 I get 0 memory errors. Right now I have the latest F9 BIOS from Gigabyte.

Original 2x8gb DDR4 3200 C14
I can run as high as 3866mhz 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v no problems at all
VCCIO = 1.2
VCCSA = 1.23v

Anything beyond 3866mhz will no boot, regardless of voltage applied to RAM or VCCIO/VCCSA.

New 4x8gb DDR43200 C14
3866 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v no problems at all
VCCIO = 1.2
VCCSA = 1.23

4000 17-17-17-37 2T 1.425v no boot
VCCIO = 1.2
VCCSA = 1.23


4000 18-18-18-38 2T 1.425v no boot
VCCIO = 1.23
VCCSA = 1.25


4133 18-18-18-38 2T 1.45v boots up fine, memtest86 no error, but keep getting game errors
VCCIO = 1.25
VCCSA = 1.28

Taking the VCCIO/VCCSA to 1.3v on both and RAM to 1.5v still getting game errors.

4266 19-19-19-39 2T 1.5v, boots up fine, but as soon as I run any program system will just blue screen.

Is there anything else I can do to make 4133mhz ram stable. Is there any other settings that I missed?


----------



## KedarWolf

marik123 said:


> Recently I got extra 2 sticks of GSKILL DDR4 3200C14 ram in my Aorus pro board and now I have 4 sticks of GSKILL DDR4 3200C14 ram. Per the QVL list I was able to run 4 sticks at 4133mhz where as with my previous 2 sticks it doesn't even boot. However when I boot into windows everything seems to be normal, except when I try to play a game I get random game exit, game error within 5-10 minutes of use. When I reboot my system and try to run memtest86 I get 0 memory errors. Right now I have the latest F9 BIOS from Gigabyte.
> 
> Original 2x8gb DDR4 3200 C14
> I can run as high as 3866mhz 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v no problems at all
> VCCIO = 1.2
> VCCSA = 1.23v
> 
> Anything beyond 3866mhz will no boot, regardless of voltage applied to RAM or VCCIO/VCCSA.
> 
> New 4x8gb DDR43200 C14
> 3866 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v no problems at all
> VCCIO = 1.2
> VCCSA = 1.23
> 
> 4000 17-17-17-37 2T 1.425v no boot
> VCCIO = 1.2
> VCCSA = 1.23
> 
> 
> 4000 18-18-18-38 2T 1.425v no boot
> VCCIO = 1.23
> VCCSA = 1.25
> 
> 
> 4133 18-18-18-38 2T 1.45v boots up fine, memtest86 no error, but keep getting game errors
> VCCIO = 1.25
> VCCSA = 1.28
> 
> Taking the VCCIO/VCCSA to 1.3v on both and RAM to 1.5v still getting game errors.
> 
> 4266 19-19-19-39 2T 1.5v, boots up fine, but as soon as I run any program system will just blue screen.
> 
> Is there anything else I can do to make 4133mhz ram stable. Is there any other settings that I missed?


Do a custom search with my Username, posted all my BIOS settings for 4133Mhz but I have non-RGB Trident Z CL16 3600 RAM which is basically the best 4x8GB kit for overclocking.


----------



## wingman99

marik123 said:


> Recently I got extra 2 sticks of GSKILL DDR4 3200C14 ram in my Aorus pro board and now I have 4 sticks of GSKILL DDR4 3200C14 ram. Per the QVL list I was able to run 4 sticks at 4133mhz where as with my previous 2 sticks it doesn't even boot. However when I boot into windows everything seems to be normal, except when I try to play a game I get random game exit, game error within 5-10 minutes of use. When I reboot my system and try to run memtest86 I get 0 memory errors. Right now I have the latest F9 BIOS from Gigabyte.
> 
> Original 2x8gb DDR4 3200 C14
> I can run as high as 3866mhz 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v no problems at all
> VCCIO = 1.2
> VCCSA = 1.23v
> 
> Anything beyond 3866mhz will no boot, regardless of voltage applied to RAM or VCCIO/VCCSA.
> 
> New 4x8gb DDR43200 C14
> 3866 16-16-16-36 2T 1.425v no problems at all
> VCCIO = 1.2
> VCCSA = 1.23
> 
> 4000 17-17-17-37 2T 1.425v no boot
> VCCIO = 1.2
> VCCSA = 1.23
> 
> 
> 4000 18-18-18-38 2T 1.425v no boot
> VCCIO = 1.23
> VCCSA = 1.25
> 
> 
> 4133 18-18-18-38 2T 1.45v boots up fine, memtest86 no error, but keep getting game errors
> VCCIO = 1.25
> VCCSA = 1.28
> 
> Taking the VCCIO/VCCSA to 1.3v on both and RAM to 1.5v still getting game errors.
> 
> 4266 19-19-19-39 2T 1.5v, boots up fine, but as soon as I run any program system will just blue screen.
> 
> Is there anything else I can do to make 4133mhz ram stable. Is there any other settings that I missed?


I was just wondering when you have no boot do you need to clear CMOS with a jumper?


----------



## marik123

wingman99 said:


> I was just wondering when you have no boot do you need to clear CMOS with a jumper?


I don't have to clear the CMOS with jumper. All I had to do is to wait for the system to power down automatically and then power back on again, then it will revert back to stock CPU and ram settings. I didn't had to reset the jumper when I install 4 sticks of memory. However when I still had 2 sticks of memory, I had to clear the CMOS with the jumper or else the system will go into endless power on/off without seeing the BIOS ever again. I hope this helps.



KedarWolf said:


> Do a custom search with my Username, posted all my BIOS settings for 4133Mhz but I have non-RGB Trident Z CL16 3600 RAM which is basically the best 4x8GB kit for overclocking.


I found your settings and I will try this tonight when I go home. But most likely I won't be able to make it stable at 4133mhz since you have Aorus Master board and I had the Pro.


----------



## wingman99

marik123 said:


> I don't have to clear the CMOS with jumper. All I had to do is to wait for the system to power down automatically and then power back on again, then it will revert back to stock CPU and ram settings. I didn't had to reset the jumper when I install 4 sticks of memory. However when I still had 2 sticks of memory, I had to clear the CMOS with the jumper or else the system will go into endless power on/off without seeing the BIOS ever again. I hope this helps.


The BIOS before the latest I did not have to clear CMOS with a jumper, it worked the way you described. Now on the latest BIOS I have to clear the CMOS with jumper.


----------



## jarcsp

*Direct Die 9900K with Z390 Aorus Ultra*

Hi Guys, I'm new to the forum so sorry if I'm not posting this in the right place...
I delided my 9900K and I'm doing direct die cooling and temps are awesome, stock bios only with multicore enhancement enabled I get max CPU temps of ~60C in prime 95 with AVX
Yesterday I was playing the Division 2 for around 50 min, Loop coolant temp was 33C max and max CPU temps I saw where around 55C, GPU ~42C.
I left HWMONITOR running on the background and once I finished The TMPIN2 sensor max temp was recorded as 93C.... but the current temp for the same sensor was at 30C, I got really confused about it and tried to play again for like 15 min but the max temp recorded was 42C this time, should I be worried about it? 93C is really high and to be honest never saw those temps before the direct die, well I really never paid that much attention.
Other than that all the temps seem to be really low, I'll try tonight with HWINFO and see what happens. Just worried the direct die is causing that temp to go to the roof somehow...

Any help would be really appreciated.

Cheers.


----------



## Falkentyne

jarcsp said:


> Hi Guys, I'm new to the forum so sorry if I'm not posting this in the right place...
> I delided my 9900K and I'm doing direct die cooling and temps are awesome, stock bios only with multicore enhancement enabled I get max CPU temps of ~60C in prime 95 with AVX
> Yesterday I was playing the Division 2 for around 50 min, Loop coolant temp was 33C max and max CPU temps I saw where around 55C, GPU ~42C.
> I left HWMONITOR running on the background and once I finished The TMPIN2 sensor max temp was recorded as 93C.... but the current temp for the same sensor was at 30C, I got really confused about it and tried to play again for like 15 min but the max temp recorded was 42C this time, should I be worried about it? 93C is really high and to be honest never saw those temps before the direct die, well I really never paid that much attention.
> Other than that all the temps seem to be really low, I'll try tonight with HWINFO and see what happens. Just worried the direct die is causing that temp to go to the roof somehow...
> 
> Any help would be really appreciated.
> 
> Cheers.


Don't use HWmonitor.
Use HWinfo64. HWmonitor is completely useless.


----------



## Jody Hodgson

Hoping for some GURU support here!!

After adjusting a setting in the Bios (main bios Version F8e) the board will not POST (generally hangs or loops around POST debug code 77.... with no VGA at all

After resetting CMOS (back panel IO button)and nothing working I reverted to the backup BIOS which posted (Version F5).

From there i tried to re-flash the main BIOS with F8 in an attempt to recover the BIOS by sliding the main BIOS switch over after a successful POST on the backup BIOS and then used QFLASH

I rebooted into F8 bios however the Main BIOS is still trashed and wont POST however the Backup Bios now posts with the F8 Bios ???????

If there something I am missing I have tried the SW in both positions and tried CMOS resets just going round in circles now :-(

I have read I am not the first to have this issue however I am at a loss as to an actual working solution.

Can someone who has a much firmer understanding of BIOS management and what may be going on please try to explain I will be the first to admit I do not quite understand the interactions at play here and how it is supposed to work verses what is happening so I can fully understand solutions to try and fix it???

All help welcome and appreciated


----------



## Falkentyne

Jody Hodgson said:


> Hoping for some GURU support here!!
> 
> After adjusting a setting in the Bios (main bios Version F8e) the board will not POST (generally hangs or loops around POST debug code 77.... with no VGA at all
> 
> After resetting CMOS (back panel IO button)and nothing working I reverted to the backup BIOS which posted (Version F5).
> 
> From there i tried to re-flash the main BIOS with F8 in an attempt to recover the BIOS by sliding the main BIOS switch over after a successful POST on the backup BIOS and then used QFLASH
> 
> I rebooted into F8 bios however the Main BIOS is still trashed and wont POST however the Backup Bios now posts with the F8 Bios ???????
> 
> If there something I am missing I have tried the SW in both positions and tried CMOS resets just going round in circles now :-(
> 
> I have read I am not the first to have this issue however I am at a loss as to an actual working solution.
> 
> Can someone who has a much firmer understanding of BIOS management and what may be going on please try to explain I will be the first to admit I do not quite understand the interactions at play here and how it is supposed to work verses what is happening so I can fully understand solutions to try and fix it???
> 
> All help welcome and appreciated


What exact setting did you change to cause this to happen?
The only possible setting I think that would cause such a thing is SVID Offset, which I have never seen anyone use or even have any documentation on what it does.
And when I enabled it and had a post code loop, I simply cleared CMOS. It never switched bioses on its own.

What was the exact setting you changed?

I also had no problems switching to the backup bios and booting from there directly. I keep it on "Single bios mode" all the time. I never tried flashing the main bios by switching the bios switch with the power still on however, but I never had the bios ever switch to another one on its own.


----------



## Jody Hodgson

Falkentyne said:


> What exact setting did you change to cause this to happen?
> The only possible setting I think that would cause such a thing is SVID Offset, which I have never seen anyone use or even have any documentation on what it does.
> And when I enabled it and had a post code loop, I simply cleared CMOS. It never switched bioses on its own.
> 
> What was the exact setting you changed?
> 
> I also had no problems switching to the backup bios and booting from there directly. I keep it on "Single bios mode" all the time. I never tried flashing the main bios by switching the bios switch with the power still on however, but I never had the bios ever switch to another one on its own.


The setting I changed was to try and enable secure boot which meant I had to enter "Key Management" option and either set your own keys or use the option which is hidden in there to set the default keys. I set to default and then tried to reboot which is when all hell broke loose

Maybe I stuffed up I am not sure but all I know is that I do not know how to get my main BIOS operational again


----------



## wingman99

Jody Hodgson said:


> Hoping for some GURU support here!!
> 
> After adjusting a setting in the Bios (main bios Version F8e) the board will not POST (generally hangs or loops around POST debug code 77.... with no VGA at all
> 
> After resetting CMOS (back panel IO button)and nothing working I reverted to the backup BIOS which posted (Version F5).
> 
> From there i tried to re-flash the main BIOS with F8 in an attempt to recover the BIOS by sliding the main BIOS switch over after a successful POST on the backup BIOS and then used QFLASH
> 
> I rebooted into F8 bios however the Main BIOS is still trashed and wont POST however the Backup Bios now posts with the F8 Bios ???????
> 
> If there something I am missing I have tried the SW in both positions and tried CMOS resets just going round in circles now :-(
> 
> I have read I am not the first to have this issue however I am at a loss as to an actual working solution.
> 
> Can someone who has a much firmer understanding of BIOS management and what may be going on please try to explain I will be the first to admit I do not quite understand the interactions at play here and how it is supposed to work verses what is happening so I can fully understand solutions to try and fix it???
> 
> All help welcome and appreciated


When you are on main BIOS with it boot looping did you tun off the PSU short the CMOS jumper for 30 seconds?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jody Hodgson said:


> The setting I changed was to try and enable secure boot which meant I had to enter "Key Management" option and either set your own keys or use the option which is hidden in there to set the default keys. I set to default and then tried to reboot which is when all hell broke loose
> 
> Maybe I stuffed up I am not sure but all I know is that I do not know how to get my main BIOS operational again


Isn't that for laptops which have embedded windows product keys?
I never touched that setting. I'm guessing that corrupted something.

So you're saying that if you:

Power off the computer and UNPLUG AC adapter:

1) Set bios to single bios mode.
2) set bios to backup bios
3) plug in and boot into backup bios
4) switch the bios switch to primary (main) bios while in the bios
5) run Qflash and update.

It updates the backup bios (the bios you are currently on) instead of the other bios?

Or if the bioses got "switched":

1) set bios to single bios mode
2) Set bios to bios #2
3) Boot to bios #2
4) switch bios switch to bios #1 while in the bios
5) run Qflash and update,

It updates bios #2 instead of bios #1?


----------



## Jody Hodgson

wingman99 said:


> When you are on main BIOS with it boot looping did you tun off the PSU short the CMOS jumper for 30 seconds?


So it does not boot loop it gets hung or stops at debug 78 ACPHI core initialization I have pressed the Cmos buton on the rear (I have not shorted the CMOS with a Jumper) I feel it is clearing the CMOS as when you restart it does the whole on and off a few times during post but eventually just ends up hanging at 78 with no VGA out. 

I have the GPU in and in the BBios it boots and runs as per normal.just the Main BIOS hangs and I can not Qflash it?


----------



## Jody Hodgson

Falkentyne said:


> Isn't that for laptops which have embedded windows product keys?
> I never touched that setting. I'm guessing that corrupted something.
> 
> So you're saying that if you:
> 
> Power off the computer and UNPLUG AC adapter:
> 
> 1) Set bios to single bios mode.
> 2) set bios to backup bios
> 3) plug in and boot into backup bios
> 4) switch the bios switch to primary (main) bios while in the bios
> 5) run Qflash and update.
> 
> It updates the backup bios (the bios you are currently on) instead of the other bios?
> 
> Or if the bioses got "switched":
> 
> 1) set bios to single bios mode
> 2) Set bios to bios #2
> 3) Boot to bios #2
> 4) switch bios switch to bios #1 while in the bios
> 5) run Qflash and update,
> 
> It updates bios #2 instead of bios #1?


I will try to answer this as below:

Power off the computer and UNPLUG AC adapter:

1) Set bios to single bios mode. YES
2) set bios to backup bios YES
3) plug in and boot into backup bios YES
4) switch the bios switch to primary (main) bios while in the bios YES
5) run Qflash and update. YES

It updates the backup bios (the bios you are currently on) instead of the other bios? YES

So yes the board shows (via orange led) that I am running off the B Bios and that that Bios is now at F8 (was F5 before I tried the above method to Qflash the M Bios)

Or if the bioses got "switched":

1) set bios to single bios mode
2) Set bios to bios #2
3) Boot to bios #2
4) switch bios switch to bios #1 while in the bios
5) run Qflash and update,

It updates bios #2 instead of bios #1?

I don't think it is the above situation. I am definitely only working on the B bios and if I select the M Bios it will not boot. Additionally I removed RAM and forced it from M Bios loop to revert to B Bios and then hoped it would copy B Bios to M Bios automatically but after a bunch of on and offs it does not seem to do that it just hangs at 78 again on the M Bios so again select B bios and then boot from it successfully.


----------



## wingman99

Jody Hodgson said:


> So it does not boot loop it gets hung or stops at debug 78 ACPHI core initialization I have pressed the Cmos buton on the rear (I have not shorted the CMOS with a Jumper) I feel it is clearing the CMOS as when you restart it does the whole on and off a few times during post but eventually just ends up hanging at 78 with no VGA out.
> 
> I have the GPU in and in the BBios it boots and runs as per normal.just the Main BIOS hangs and I can not Qflash it?


Can you boot in to backup BIOS menu, then switch to main BIOS and flash?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jody Hodgson said:


> I will try to answer this as below:
> 
> Power off the computer and UNPLUG AC adapter:
> 
> 1) Set bios to single bios mode. YES
> 2) set bios to backup bios YES
> 3) plug in and boot into backup bios YES
> 4) switch the bios switch to primary (main) bios while in the bios YES
> 5) run Qflash and update. YES
> 
> It updates the backup bios (the bios you are currently on) instead of the other bios? YES
> 
> So yes the board shows (via orange led) that I am running off the B Bios and that that Bios is now at F8 (was F5 before I tried the above method to Qflash the M Bios)
> 
> Or if the bioses got "switched":
> 
> 1) set bios to single bios mode
> 2) Set bios to bios #2
> 3) Boot to bios #2
> 4) switch bios switch to bios #1 while in the bios
> 5) run Qflash and update,
> 
> It updates bios #2 instead of bios #1?
> 
> I don't think it is the above situation. I am definitely only working on the B bios and if I select the M Bios it will not boot. Additionally I removed RAM and forced it from M Bios loop to revert to B Bios and then hoped it would copy B Bios to M Bios automatically but after a bunch of on and offs it does not seem to do that it just hangs at 78 again on the M Bios so again select B bios and then boot from it successfully.


Yeah you did it right but it refused to flash the main bios apparently.
On the Radeon/Vega video cards with a bios switch, flipping the switch after booting, before flashing the bios, will flash the "dead" bios while booting into the good one.


----------



## James1980

Hello, would you mind sending me the Xtreme F5e bios ?


----------



## ola9791

*My Aorus Master Ram overclocking experience*

Got me a 9900K and an Auros master a few months ago.
Board came with F6 bios.
Have the 2x8Gb Gskill Trident Z F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK @1.4volt Ram
Best memory overclock possible initially on F6 was 4000 16-16-16-35 at 1.45volt with 2x8. Anything above 4000 no boot.
With F6 Bios and 4x8 (one kit F4-4400C19D-16GTZKK and one kit F4-4133C19D-16GTZSWC) 4266 17-17-17-37 2T at 1.4 volts (probably possible to go 4266 16-16-1636 2T at 1.45-1.5 volts but not tested). Above 4266 no boot.
Best performance and Command Rate (CR) 1T 3866 16-16-16-35 1T. This setting gave me a latency of 38-39 ns (Aida64 extreme) and good bandwidth.

Last weekend I came across the "Overclocking RAM with the Z390 Aorus Master // buildzoid" YouTube video.
After seeing this and his comment that one of the beta F8 (e?) bios was better for ram overclocking I updated to “stable” F8.
Better, sort of..
With 2x8 now stable at 4266 18-18-18 37 2T 1.4 volt but not the best performance.
Can boot @ 4400 18-18-18 37 2T 1.4 volt but very unstable in windows. Might work if relaxing to 19-19-19 39 or 20-20-20 40 but useless.. Did not test.
Best performance 4133 16-16-16-35 2T 1.47 volts. But 1.47v is a bit high for daily use.
Can now run 3900 16-16-16 35 1T at 1.42 volts.

Funny thing is that now going 4x8 does not improve stability! Can only do about the same as with 2x8. And with 4x8 CR 1T only possible up to 3733 (or was it 3700?).
Not possible to get 4x8 4266 17-17-17-37 2T at 1.4 volts so kind of worse 4 ram sticks performance on F8 than F6.

Now to something a bit weird. Took me many days to figure this out.
Same setting that gave best performance on F6 3866 16-16-16-35 1T would only give a latency of 41-42ns. But using identical memory settings only changing Ram speed to 3733 or 3800 gave me below 40 ns latency. So faster at lower/slower speeds.
Rolling back to F6 and tried old setting but could not get back to 38-39 ns. Got 41-42 ns now also with F6.
Put back F8 again and started testing and finally figured out that the memory training at 3866 end up with some “hidden” sub-settings gets slower (as far as I understand..) at 3866 than 3733-3800.
Figured out a trick to make it 38-39 ns again at 3866.
Did this:
Make all settings and run memory training at 3800. Boot and confirm that I get around 39ns latency.
Then rebooted into bios and only change memory speed to 3866 and then changed “Memory boot mode” from Auto to fast boot. Now when save and reboot it skipped the memory training keeping same settings as last memory training at 3800!
After this I am finally back at 3866 16-16-16-35 1T 1.4volts with 38-39ns 100% stable in windows.

Conclusion:
The Aorus Master is quite good for Ram overclocking but it takes a lot of effort (time) to get good performance with stability.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9900K @ 5.2 GHz 1.4volt | Custom Water | Z390 Aorus Master| 16GB Gskill 4400cl19 | GTX 1070ti | Samsung 970 evo Plus 500GB | Samsung 860 evo 1TB | evga supernova 850 t2 | Fractal Design R6


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

R3van said:


> Yes, Aorus Master. I did identical settings everywhere and i`m monitoring VR VOUT with HWInfo64 latest Beta.
> 
> I noticed that you mentioned the need for more voltage so i went from LLC Medium to LLC Turbo, just in case. This leads to ~1.281v load instead of 1.254v (which was my stable load voltage with F8e) with llc medium.
> The voltage at 8k is bouncing between 1.281v and 1.297v which i assume as 'normal' because i`ve seen that already with F8e and it didn`t cause any error or freeze.
> 
> What i now experience are voltage drops from 1.281 to less than 1.2, up to 1.167v after a few minutes of 1344k or 768k (didn`t test any other FFTs) which leads to the crash. In the first place it seems that voltage is stable at 1.281 and suddenly it starts dropping.
> 
> Didn`t seen that ever on any other board that i had.


Can you save your BIOS to a USB stick then send me a copy (google drive or something). That way we can try and reproduce/test with all the same settings.

- Thanks!


----------



## R3van

i will do so tomorrow or saturday if its ok.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

R3van said:


> i will do so tomorrow or saturday if its ok.


No problem, Taiwan is on holiday until next week anyways


----------



## techjesse

GBT-MatthewH said:


> No problem, Taiwan is on holiday until next week anyways


We need Z390 Win7 Drivers, other motherboards makers are providing them.


----------



## KedarWolf

techjesse said:


> We need Z390 Win7 Drivers, other motherboards makers are providing them.


Important Drivers (AHCI/RAID, NVMe, USB etc.) Section.

https://www.win-raid.com/forum.php


----------



## techjesse

Thanks Wolf, I have Win7 installed and rocking yet not able to use all the resources of this mobo...
Win7 Benches so much better with some benches... https://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5755952
Win7 CPU-Z https://valid.x86.fr/iqcd10


----------



## KedarWolf

techjesse said:


> Thanks Wolf, I have Win7 installed and rocking yet not able to use all the resources of this mobo...
> Win7 Benches so much better with some benches... https://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/5755952
> Win7 CPU-Z https://valid.x86.fr/iqcd10


These are the drivers you want for Windows 7 from WinRaid

Intel MEI Drivers https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html

USB Drivers https://www.win-raid.com/t834f25-USB-Drivers-original-and-modded.html

Chipset Drivers https://www.win-raid.com/t895f42-Intel-Chipset-Device-quot-Drivers-quot-INF-files.html

AHCI/Raid https://www.win-raid.com/t895f42-In...ipset-Device-quot-Drivers-quot-INF-files.html

Ethernet https://downloadcenter.intel.com/do...et-Adapter-Complete-Driver-Pack?product=71305 You can find the Windows 7 .exe ones too. 

I like loading my Windows install ISO install.wim and boot.wim with the .infs in DISM though.

And try Station Drivers for your Realtek Sound Drivers.

Edit: I'm pretty sure the AHCI/Raid and USB on our boards is Intel for sure, plus Asmedia, so do both.


----------



## techjesse

I'll give them a shot  many Thanks.....


----------



## lucasfrance

techjesse said:


> I'll give them a shot  many Thanks.....


As far as I am aware there is no USB win 7 drivers available from intel for the Z390 chipset.

Prove me wrong and I'll be happy


----------



## KedarWolf

lucasfrance said:


> As far as I am aware there is no USB win 7 drivers available from intel for the Z390 chipset.
> 
> Prove me wrong and I'll be happy



https://www.win-raid.com/t834f25-USB-Drivers-original-and-modded.html

See "Intel USB 3.0/3.1 Drivers" and expand the downloads links.


----------



## lucasfrance

Thanks but there is no win 7 Z390 USB drivers there...


----------



## KedarWolf

lucasfrance said:


> Thanks but there is no win 7 Z390 USB drivers there...


The Windows 7 drivers there work with Z390.

Edit: It's not dependent on the platform, but the Device ID of the USB controller.


----------



## lucasfrance

Yes I know, but nothing for DEV_A36D for win 7!!!


----------



## R3van

GBT-MatthewH said:


> Can you save your BIOS to a USB stick then send me a copy (google drive or something). That way we can try and reproduce/test with all the same settings.
> 
> - Thanks!


Hi @GBT-MatthewH,

here are my BIOSes (F8 and F8e):

https://1drv.ms/f/s!ArVD99vgh7BtitR-4eyv5Ns8DwCKrA

Greetings and thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

lucasfrance said:


> Yes I know, but nothing for DEV_A36D for win 7!!!


Yes, you're right. I checked the forum. No working Windows 7 USB 3.1 drivers.


----------



## lucasfrance

Yep. Intel is very bad in not providing win7 USB drivers for Z390 chipset for DEV_A36D... 
Anyway, I do have a dual boot win7/10 ln my Aorus Xtreme 9900K using a PCI/USB card for mouse and keyboard on win7.
I confirm benchmark results are quite better on win7 than on win10!


----------



## HBizzle

Looking for advice on AVX offset suggestions with a 9900k and Master. 

I have run into a bug with the latest Apex Legends patch where many higher core processors keep throwing a game crash, not a BSOD, due to what are apparently AVX instructions they upped with the most recent patch. Numerous other players have run into this issue with consumer cpus over 4 cores, so a lot of 8700ks, 8086ks, and a lot of 9900k owners. Some folks have found adding an offset will fix the issue, with an offset of 3 being suggested by a number of people. 

I attempted a 3 offset tonight and the game ran, but while running I had multiple cores suddenly downclocking from 5.0 to 4.7 intermittently, VROUT was stable as was VCORE. Wondering if I am going to have these downclocks with any offset, or if I go to a lower offset if my 5.0 will stay stable, or do I need to adjust other settings? 

Currently running a stable stress test and gaming wise at [email protected], IO/SA at around 1.25, 32GB ram at 1.45 4000 17-17-17-37. Hours on end of BFV which uses way more AVX then Apex, and never had crashes like this. Any suggestions or advice appreciated.


----------



## Falkentyne

HBizzle said:


> Looking for advice on AVX offset suggestions with a 9900k and Master.
> 
> I have run into a bug with the latest Apex Legends patch where many higher core processors keep throwing a game crash, not a BSOD, due to what are apparently AVX instructions they upped with the most recent patch. Numerous other players have run into this issue with consumer cpus over 4 cores, so a lot of 8700ks, 8086ks, and a lot of 9900k owners. Some folks have found adding an offset will fix the issue, with an offset of 3 being suggested by a number of people.
> 
> I attempted a 3 offset tonight and the game ran, but while running I had multiple cores suddenly downclocking from 5.0 to 4.7 intermittently, VROUT was stable as was VCORE. Wondering if I am going to have these downclocks with any offset, or if I go to a lower offset if my 5.0 will stay stable, or do I need to adjust other settings?
> 
> Currently running a stable stress test and gaming wise at [email protected], IO/SA at around 1.25, 32GB ram at 1.45 4000 17-17-17-37. Hours on end of BFV which uses way more AVX then Apex, and never had crashes like this. Any suggestions or advice appreciated.


The fix for this is to just up the voltage.
It means you are simply not stable. You can use an AVX offset too but of course the clocks will drop.
Apex Legends uses AVX in a different way than Battlefield 5.
Apex will generate internal parity errors or Translocation Lookaside buffer errors (even more unstable).

BTW, if you can pass small FFT prime95 (29.8 build 1 now): https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=24094 with AVX enabled, then there is a 0% chance of Apex Legends crashing.
Of course you don't have to pass small FFT AVX (power draw and heat will be simply too hot), but Apex Legends will require that you simply raise the voltage.

Just having "Just enough voltage" to pass realbench 2.56 for 2 hours or prime with AVX disabled or 2 hours of cinebench R20, or even Battlefield 5, is simply not enough for Apex Legends.
You can also use a higher bios voltage with a steeper loadline calibration (more vdroop), as Apex doesn't put a heavy load on the CPU.


----------



## HBizzle

Falkentyne said:


> The fix for this is to just up the voltage.
> It means you are simply not stable. You can use an AVX offset too but of course the clocks will drop.
> Apex Legends uses AVX in a different way than Battlefield 5.
> Apex will generate internal parity errors or Translocation Lookaside buffer errors (even more unstable).
> 
> BTW, if you can pass small FFT prime95 (29.8 build 1 now): https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=24094 with AVX enabled, then there is a 0% chance of Apex Legends crashing.
> Of course you don't have to pass small FFT AVX (power draw and heat will be simply too hot), but Apex Legends will require that you simply raise the voltage.
> 
> Just having "Just enough voltage" to pass realbench 2.56 for 2 hours or prime with AVX disabled or 2 hours of cinebench R20, or even Battlefield 5, is simply not enough for Apex Legends.
> You can also use a higher bios voltage with a steeper loadline calibration (more vdroop), as Apex doesn't put a heavy load on the CPU.


Currently I am using an LLC of medium, and voltage at 1.26. Guessing I need to go to 1.3 and see if that fixes it? Suggestion on what I should set my LLC at?


----------



## Falkentyne

HBizzle said:


> Currently I am using an LLC of medium, and voltage at 1.26. Guessing I need to go to 1.3 and see if that fixes it? Suggestion on what I should set my LLC at?


Use as much voltage as you need for all errors, whea's and CTDs to stop.


----------



## HBizzle

Falkentyne said:


> Use as much voltage as you need for all errors, whea's and CTDs to stop.


It hasn't been throwing whea's actually. That is the weird thing about this.


----------



## Falkentyne

HBizzle said:


> It hasn't been throwing whea's actually. That is the weird thing about this.


How do you know it hasn't? Have you been checking for them in HWinfo64? I'm not talking about blue screens.
You can use Rivatuner's RTSS (just run it standalone, without running MSI Afterburner) and have it display via OSD with HWinfo64 (along with other sensors) while the game is running.
It won't always display a WHEA error when the game crashes, but it will sometimes display a WHEA, sometimes will CTD with no error, or will crash with an exception error.

Check windows event viewer system logs. I bet you will find some of them there.


----------



## HBizzle

Falkentyne said:


> How do you know it hasn't? Have you been checking for them in HWinfo64? I'm not talking about blue screens.
> You can use Rivatuner's RTSS (just run it standalone, without running MSI Afterburner) and have it display via OSD with HWinfo64 (along with other sensors) while the game is running.
> It won't always display a WHEA error when the game crashes, but it will sometimes display a WHEA, sometimes will CTD with no error, or will crash with an exception error.
> 
> Check windows event viewer system logs. I bet you will find some of them there.


Was running HWinfo64, the newest release edition, while some of the Apex crashes happened. No WHEAs at all.


----------



## Falkentyne

HBizzle said:


> Was running HWinfo64, the newest release edition, while some of the Apex crashes happened. No WHEAs at all.


I've been playing Apex about 8 hours a day. If I ever get random crashes, if I keep relaunching the game, eventually a WHEA will be logged, every time. It might take some time, sometimes hours. One time I had to play for 2 hours before a WHEA got logged. You may be borderline stable, not stable enough to get an internal parity error but still unstable enough to crash the game. How much time are you playing the game? You won't see WHEA's unless you play long enough for them to appear. But I don't crash if I increase vcore enough to never get WHEA's. If I do get a random CTD, if I keep playing, eventually a WHEA will appear.

I don't know about IMC or RAM caused errors.


----------



## Intrud3r

Would love to test and check for errors while playing a game, but grmpf ..... apex is so not my game .... 



If just somebody would want to log in remotely and play the darn game while I was sleeping .... that would be sweet.

Got a 750/750 Mbit fiber connection so that won't be a problem.
Latency however .... meh ... too many hops, although Moonlight streaming does quite a nice job.


----------



## Timur Born

Enabling Platform Power Management in UEFI lowers idle power draw by up to 15 watts (from about 55 to around 40), measured on the wall. Standby power draw seems a bit high at 8 watts, though.


----------



## Timur Born

HBizzle said:


> I attempted a 3 offset tonight and the game ran, but while running I had multiple cores suddenly downclocking from 5.0 to 4.7 intermittently, VROUT was stable as was VCORE. Wondering if I am going to have these downclocks with any offset, or if I go to a lower offset if my 5.0 will stay stable, or do I need to adjust other settings?


When even only a single core uses an AVX instruction then all cores are downclocked according to the AVX offset. The only reason why it seems that some cores stay at 5.0 is measuring complexities.


----------



## HBizzle

Falkentyne said:


> I've been playing Apex about 8 hours a day. If I ever get random crashes, if I keep relaunching the game, eventually a WHEA will be logged, every time. It might take some time, sometimes hours. One time I had to play for 2 hours before a WHEA got logged. You may be borderline stable, not stable enough to get an internal parity error but still unstable enough to crash the game. How much time are you playing the game? You won't see WHEA's unless you play long enough for them to appear. But I don't crash if I increase vcore enough to never get WHEA's. If I do get a random CTD, if I keep playing, eventually a WHEA will appear.
> 
> I don't know about IMC or RAM caused errors.


It crashes rather quickly over and over again. If I run repair under origin it delays it, but comes back frequently. Will try more voltage tonight.


----------



## BradleyW

Not only will Apex (and other titles) crash from a lack of Vcore, but it'll also CTD if either the RAM or cache is unstable. Ensure complete stability with those before pumping the Vcore higher.


----------



## KedarWolf

My Aorus XTreme wouldn't boot, no post code, so I popped out the removable BIOS, put it in USB BIOS programmer, it detects the BIOS is in the programmer but not detecting the model or chip itself and won't let me erase, read or write to it. So I know the BIOS chip itself is borked.

I know the BIOS programmer is working because I can detect, read, erase and write to my Aorus Master chip just fine and after flashing the BIOS with the programmer, the PC boots from it perfectly.

So I contacted Gigabyte tech support for a new BIOS chip with the full details of the testing i did and asking for a replacement chip. *Their response was, "We don't sell replacement parts, you need to RMA the motherboard."*

I'm like, *"Please actually read the email, I just need the BIOS chip, not a new motherboard, it's not an uncommon or unreasonable request."*

They emailed me back asking for my address. I'm pretty sure the person actually read the below and relented.

*"I need a new socketed BIOS chip for my Z390 Aorus XTreme.

Using my USB BIOS Programmer it says the chip is connected but it doesn't detect it and doesn't read, write or erase it.

On my Z390 Aorus Master motherboard, the socketed BIOS also says it's connected but it detects it and reads, erases, writes and verifies properly with the same USB BIOS programmer, and works just fine after doing so.

I'm sure the removable BIOS chip is defective.

Please send me a new one if you will.

Thank you."

and,

"The board does not boot, but it's because of a defective BIOS chip. My Aorus Master had the same issue at one point and I fixed it by reflashing the BIOS chip with a USB BIOS programmer.

As I said, I know it the BIOS chip because it's not detected in the USB BIOS programmer where the Master socketed BIOS is detected and I can flash it with the programmer just fine and board works and boots afterwards. The XTreme BIOS chip is not recognized by the BIOS programmer and won't read, erase or write, so I know the BIOS chip is defective.

Please send me a new BIOS chip. 

I know if the BIOS chip is defective the board will not boot with no post code. I also experienced this on my Master board until I fixed the BIOS chip. 

But the XTreme chip is defective and can't be fixed with a USB BIOS programmer. 

I am a computer technician by trade and my skills are advanced on these issues." *

Hence my request to actually read the emails I sent to support.

Bonus points to you if for any reason you actually read this and got this far in my post!


----------



## HBizzle

BradleyW said:


> Not only will Apex (and other titles) crash from a lack of Vcore, but it'll also CTD if either the RAM or cache is unstable. Ensure complete stability with those before pumping the Vcore higher.


I am Memtested to 1400% on my ram so doubt its that.


----------



## KedarWolf

HBizzle said:


> I am Memtested to 1400% on my ram so doubt its that.


HCI MemTest? One instance for each core of your CPU using 90% of your RAM?

That, GSAT or RamTest pretty much the most reliable memory tests. :h34r-smi

Memtest86 not so much, even the Passmark one. 

BTW, I have an AutoHotKey script for both 32GB or 16GB of RAM that'll run 16 instances of HCI for a 9900k that'll even space each one evenly with the RAM amount preset, for both the free and paid versions of HCI if you want. 

And no need to worry about viruses it being an AutoHotKey script you copy and paste the actual simple code into a blank script, unlike some 'free' GUI versions that won't pass VirusTotal. 

Edit: Here! Script code and how to use it. :bruce:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-795.html#post27802848


----------



## HBizzle

KedarWolf said:


> HCI MemTest? One instance for each core of your CPU using 90% of your RAM?
> 
> That, GSAT or RamTest pretty much the most reliable memory tests. :h34r-smi
> 
> Memtest86 not so much, even the Passmark one.
> 
> BTW, I have an AutoHotKey script for both 32GB or 16GB of RAM that'll run 16 instances of HCI for a 9900k that'll even space each one evenly with the RAM amount preset, for both the free and paid versions of HCI if you want.
> 
> And no need to worry about viruses it being an AutoHotKey script you copy and paste the actual simple code into a blank script, unlike some 'free' GUI versions that won't pass VirusTotal.
> 
> Edit: Here! Script code and how to use it. :bruce:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-795.html#post27802848


Yes HCI. I did the bootable option on it and let it run for like 24 hrs straight.


----------



## BradleyW

HBizzle said:


> I am Memtested to 1400% on my ram so doubt its that.


Fair enough, but I'd try GSAT for 1 hour just to be on the safe side.

If it's OK, boost the Vcore a little more and see how Apex runs. Check for WHEA.


----------



## Wirerat

Im a bit late to the party but I decided to go with 9900k + z390 aorus pro. 

The lack of boot fault led is the only feature I may miss coming from my old hero vi. Its a fair trade off imo. 

The rig is for primarily for gaming w/1080ti and custom loop running win10. 

Anyone had a negative experience oc'ing 9900k on this mobo? 

Thanks!


----------



## HBizzle

BradleyW said:


> Fair enough, but I'd try GSAT for 1 hour just to be on the safe side.
> 
> If it's OK, boost the Vcore a little more and see how Apex runs. Check for WHEA.


What is GSAT? Willing to try it.


----------



## HBizzle

Falkentyne said:


> I've been playing Apex about 8 hours a day. If I ever get random crashes, if I keep relaunching the game, eventually a WHEA will be logged, every time. It might take some time, sometimes hours. One time I had to play for 2 hours before a WHEA got logged. You may be borderline stable, not stable enough to get an internal parity error but still unstable enough to crash the game. How much time are you playing the game? You won't see WHEA's unless you play long enough for them to appear. But I don't crash if I increase vcore enough to never get WHEA's. If I do get a random CTD, if I keep playing, eventually a WHEA will appear.
> 
> I don't know about IMC or RAM caused errors.


So bumped it up to 1.3v last night with no other settings changes and no crashes over about 4 hours of game play. Thanks for the suggestion Falkentyne.


----------



## BradleyW

HBizzle said:


> What is GSAT? Willing to try it.


Google Stress App Test. It is what Google engineers use when testing their server RAM to ensure stability. It required Linux. If your on Windows, just enable Linux Sub-System in the "turn features on or off" in Windows. The go to MS store and download Ubuntu.

Launch it as admin and then run the following commands:

sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get upgrade

sudo apt-get install stressapptest 

Once done, run this command:

stressapptest -W -M 12288 -s 3600 --pause_delay 3700 (For 16GB)

OR

stressapptest -W -M 28672 -s 3600 --pause_delay 3700 (For 32GB)


----------



## Sheyster

HBizzle said:


> Yes HCI. I did the bootable option on it and let it run for like 24 hrs straight.


I've seen BF5 crash to desktop even after 1000% HCI runs. IMHO, the problem is the load profile on the CPU (usually an AVX load which BF5 uses) and how that affects the IMC of the chip. Running 16 instances of Memtest isn't a realistic application/gaming scenario. The memory is stable for THAT scenario if you pass, but change the load profile and things get unstable again. Memtest is useful but not bullet proof IMHO. You'll often need to tweak memory timing, frequency, memory voltage, VCCIO and SA to get memory fully stable at high speeds (3866+) on these boards. It can be very tedious if you're targeting 4000+ speeds and tight timings.


----------



## HBizzle

BradleyW said:


> Google Stress App Test. It is what Google engineers use when testing their server RAM to ensure stability. It required Linux. If your on Windows, just enable Linux Sub-System in the "turn features on or off" in Windows. The go to MS store and download Ubuntu.
> 
> Launch it as admin and then run the following commands:
> 
> sudo apt-get update
> 
> sudo apt-get upgrade
> 
> sudo apt-get install stressapptest
> 
> Once done, run this command:
> 
> stressapptest -W -M 12288 -s 3600 (For 16GB)
> 
> OR
> 
> stressapptest -W -M 28672 -s 3600 (For 32GB)


Is 3600 the MHZ the ram is running at? Wondering if I need to set mine to 4000 since that is what it is at.


----------



## HBizzle

Sheyster said:


> I've seen BF5 crash to desktop even after 1000% HCI runs. IMHO, the problem is the load profile on the CPU (usually an AVX load which BF5 uses) and how that affects the IMC of the chip. Running 16 instances of Memtest isn't a realistic application/gaming scenario. The memory is stable for THAT scenario if you pass, but change the load profile and things get unstable again. Memtest is useful but not bullet proof IMHO. You'll often need to tweak memory timing, frequency, memory voltage, VCCIO and SA to get memory fully stable at high speeds (3866+) on these boards. It can be very tedious if you're targeting 4000+ speeds and tight timings.


In 100+ hours of playing BFV I have only had one or two crashes to desktop, and I think both came during the recent firestorm update. Will see if bumping up to 1.3v vcore prevents any from happening.


----------



## BradleyW

HBizzle said:


> Is 3600 the MHZ the ram is running at? Wondering if I need to set mine to 4000 since that is what it is at.


s 3600 is 3600 seconds.


----------



## Reefersmurf

Guys is there a glitch in f4 bios becouse i can only raise tjmax to 63 at max?


----------



## wingman99

Sheyster said:


> I've seen BF5 crash to desktop even after 1000% HCI runs. IMHO, the problem is the load profile on the CPU (usually an AVX load which BF5 uses) and how that affects the IMC of the chip. Running 16 instances of Memtest isn't a realistic application/gaming scenario. The memory is stable for THAT scenario if you pass, but change the load profile and things get unstable again. Memtest is useful but not bullet proof IMHO. You'll often need to tweak memory timing, frequency, memory voltage, VCCIO and SA to get memory fully stable at high speeds (3866+) on these boards. It can be very tedious if you're targeting 4000+ speeds and tight timings.


I have seen BF5 crash to desktop with stock default BIOS settings.


----------



## Sheyster

wingman99 said:


> I have seen BF5 crash to desktop with stock default BIOS settings.


Indeed, however if you check Windows event viewer for the application log error generated and see "= 0x00000005" as part of the event error, it's typically memory related. I didn't want to get into that level of detail in my reply.


----------



## HBizzle

So went back into the event log and see bursts of internal parity errors from the WHEA logger around times I was playing Apex and crashing.


----------



## sygnus21

Reefersmurf said:


> Guys is there a glitch in f4 bios becouse i can only raise tjmax to 63 at max?


What motherboard? Not all have the same BIOS. I'm running a Z390 Xtreme and the latest BIOS for it is F5. Others here have different boards and thus different BIOS' - F7, F8.


----------



## Alemancio

ola9791 said:


> Got me a 9900K and an Auros master a few months ago.
> Conclusion:
> The Aorus Master is quite good for Ram overclocking but it takes a lot of effort (time) to get good performance with stability.


Hi, what settings did bring you the best stability? I cant get past 3600Mhz with CL17 4000Mhz 2x8GB Kits from GSkill. Post here


----------



## Wirerat

My 9900k settings are 1.31 vcore, 45 uncore, 5ghz core, 0 offsets and llc turbo on aorus pro. 

Vrout shows 1.252v-1.283 under load. 

After some testing it seems this where I will keep it.


----------



## Alemancio

This contribution + Buildzoid's insights is all you need for 4000Mhz+ on the Aorus Master - THANKS!


KedarWolf said:


> Hope these help.
> 
> Forgot my RAM timings, added now.


----------



## Triplefun

I am planning on getting the Aorus Master. Can someone please confirm the maximum number of disks I can configure on the Mobo. I am planning on loading two m.2 cards in the lower two slots M2A and M2P with both configured as PCI-e. According to the manual the only impact this will have on the mobo is the m2p disk sharing bandwidth with pciex4. So presumably I can still get access to 6 sata devices connected to the sata ports? This would give me a total of 8 storage devices.


----------



## Driller au

Has anyone worked out a way to stop the idle re-boots extra DVID doesn't stop it been up to 0.780 and down to 0.740, default VRVOUT seems to be 0.748 on the F8e bios . Didn't have this on my 50/45 OC and this had a 0.715 VRVOUT at idle . Current OC 51/47.


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Has anyone worked out a way to stop the idle re-boots extra DVID doesn't stop it been up to 0.780 and down to 0.740, default VRVOUT seems to be 0.748 on the F8e bios . Didn't have this on my 50/45 OC and this had a 0.715 VRVOUT at idle . Current OC 51/47.


I had to enable all C-States and use the Dummy Load BIOS option.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> Here is the one I wrote for the pro version for my 8086 12 thread processor and 32 GB memory (2300 x 12) to set the affinity for each thread to a logical core. You can easily modify it to 16 threads or more or less memory. I also set a delay (4000 ms ) in an attempt to make sure each thread allocates all of its virtual memory before the next starts:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> sl = 4000
> size=2300
> 
> ;
> ; affmask hyperthread affinity for hexacore processor. Loop over these to populate 12 threads across all logical cores
> ; xpos and ypos are specific to display resolution. They palce the windows uniformly once all 12 windows are launched
> ;
> 
> affmask := ["1","2","4","8","10","20","40","80","100","200","400","800"]
> xpos :=  [150,425,700,975,1250,1525,150,425,700,975,1250,1525]
> ypos :=  [5,5,5,5,5,5,335,335,335,335,335,335]
> 
> SetTitleMatchMode, 2
> 
> loop % affmask.Length()
> {
> aff := affmask[A_Index]
> Run, %comspec% /c start /B  /affinity %aff% memTestPro.exe /t%size% /s2000 /nice, ,Hide ,
> sleep %sl%
> }
> 
> 
> WinGet, id, List, ahk_exe memTestPro.exe
> Loop, %id%
> {
> this_id := id%A_Index%
> WinGet, this_pid, PID, ahk_id %this_id%
> WinMove, ahk_pid %this_pid%,,xpos[A_Index],ypos[A_Index]
> }


*Copied from another thread, this sets each instance of your HCI MemTest to a single separate core on your 9900k using an AutoHotKey script.*



I figured out how to set the Affinity for 16 threads.
And I tweaked your script so the Memtest windows overlap and just show the Coverage, Errors and Error information to save screen space. :drum:
Need the space for MemTweakIt, CPU-Z and Task Manager to post valid results in this thread. The spacing works on my 3840x1080 monitor but will work on a 2560x1080 or 1080p screen as well. :cheers:

Here's for a 16 thread 9900K/7820X CPU and 32GB of RAM with said spacing. For 16GB change the 1705 to 751. I checked the assigned affinities in task manager and they are correct. 

Download and install AutoHotKey from here. https://www.autohotkey.com/

Right click on your Memtest folder and 'New AutoHotKey Script'. Right-click on the script 'Edit Script' add the below, then right-click, 'Run Script'


Code:


sl = 4000
size=1705

;
; affmask hyperthread affinity for hexacore processor. Loop over these to populate 12 threads across all logical cores
; xpos and ypos are specific to display resolution. They place the windows uniformly once all 12 windows are launched
; 

affmask := ["1","2","4","8","10","20","40","80","100","200","400","800","1000","2000","4000","8000"]

xpos :=  [1050,900,750,600,450,300,150,0,1050,900,750,600,450,300,150,0]
ypos :=  [200,200,200,200,200,200,200,200,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5]

SetTitleMatchMode, 2

loop % affmask.Length()
{
        aff := affmask[A_Index]
        Run, %comspec% /c start /B  /affinity %aff% memTestPro.exe /t%size% /s2000 /nice, ,Hide ,
        sleep %sl%
}  


WinGet, id, List, ahk_exe memTestPro.exe
Loop, %id%
{
    this_id := id%A_Index%
    WinGet, this_pid, PID, ahk_id %this_id%
    WinMove, ahk_pid %this_pid%,,xpos[A_Index],ypos[A_Index]
}


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> I had to enable all C-States and use the Dummy Load BIOS option.


I have no problems running with C-states till C3. Dummy load is enabled too.
Anything above C3 will start showing igpu restart events in event viewer.

Tried to up DVID with 0.015V ... that didn't solve it ... lowered DVID again and just disabled anything above C3 so it's running flawlessly.


----------



## Driller au

Thanks guys C states give me WHEA errors but will give it a go .... but i guess this is why you had a high DVID in your last bios pictures Kedarwolf


----------



## Reefersmurf

The aourus master


----------



## Reefersmurf

sygnus21 said:


> What motherboard? Not all have the same BIOS. I'm running a Z390 Xtreme and the latest BIOS for it is F5. Others here have different boards and thus different BIOS' - F7, F8.



The aourus master


----------



## KedarWolf

Unzip these files and put these .exe's in your MemTest Pro folder, run the 32GB for a 9900k for 32GB of RAM, the 16GB one for 16GB of RAM. It actually assigns each of the 16 instances of HCI MemTest Pro to a different logical core of your CPU, so HCI is running once on each core. It uses 90% of your RAM.

Edit: And it spaces them out evenly once they've all loaded just leaving enough room to see the Coverage, Errors count and Error information.


----------



## davidm71

Was playing Shadow of Tomb Raider and after an hour or so of game play it crashed while reloading the game when I died. Think maybe my overclock not as stable as I thought.. Where to fortify? Add more vcore? 

Possibly its the new ram I installed. Got 2x16gb dual rank Gskill Trident Z 3200mhz modules upgraded from 2 x 8gb modules 3200mhz modules. Might need more SA?

Thanks Kedar for sharing the memory tester utility. Also worthy to note that the memtest launcher if left open will close them all down. Thanks.


----------



## davidm71

Also safe to turn down IGpu VAXG voltage down? Not using the igpu so why have it run at 1.2 v or any volts for that matter? Adds heat to cpu?

Thanks again.


----------



## wingman99

davidm71 said:


> Also safe to turn down IGpu VAXG voltage down? Not using the igpu so why have it run at 1.2 v or any volts for that matter? Adds heat to cpu?
> 
> Thanks again.


If your not using using the IGPU then it will not run in the background.


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Also safe to turn down IGpu VAXG voltage down? Not using the igpu so why have it run at 1.2 v or any volts for that matter? Adds heat to cpu?
> 
> Thanks again.


Disable the iGPU, then set iGPU VAXG voltage to "Auto".
Then save, exit, reboot back to bios, then power off the computer.
Then power it back on and the iGPU will be at 0.0v.


----------



## davidm71

*High Temps with OCCT*



Falkentyne said:


> Disable the iGPU, then set iGPU VAXG voltage to "Auto".
> Then save, exit, reboot back to bios, then power off the computer.
> Then power it back on and the iGPU will be at 0.0v.



Ok Thanks will do. 

Anyhow do these voltage and temp readings look normal for OCCT?

Look at the high temps:


----------



## Driller au

Enabling the C-states and the dummy load seems to stop the reboots thanks for the tip guys will test over a longer time. I also noticed this increased the minimum VR VOUT voltage, the "2" sensor vcore is where it is expected to be 

Also is there something in the bios i need to enable to see the DIMM temperature reading ? my HWinfo 64 latest version does not show it, memory is Gskill trident z royal 3200 mhz


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Enabling the C-states and the dummy load seems to stop the reboots thanks for the tip guys will test over a longer time. I also noticed this increased the minimum VR VOUT voltage, the "2" sensor vcore is where it is expected to be
> 
> Also is there something in the bios i need to enable to see the DIMM temperature reading ? my HWinfo 64 latest version does not show it, memory is Gskill trident z royal 3200 mhz


Run HWInfo Sensors Only and here.


----------



## lawlbringer

Hey guys!

Just recently upgraded to a Z390 Aorus Master with a 8086k I managed to get. I've got 2 questions I'm hoping someone could help me with:

1. Whenever a USB device is unplugged from my case's front USB 3.0 ports, my video signal is lost and the system needs to be restarted. This wasn't an issue with the previous ASUS Z270A Prime/7700k combination I had in the same case prior. I've tried upgrading from the F7 to F8 bios but the issue still seems to persist. Not the end of the world, but I'm hoping it's just a setting I can disable in the UEFI/BIOS.

2. What would you guys recommend for stability testing a dynamic(adaptive) vcore overclock on this platform? My 8086k is delidded and was RealBench stress test stable at 5GHz/1.25v manual with LLC set to Turbo but I did notice 2 WHEA errors the last 10 days after switching to dynamic vcore. Using DVID I put a negative offset of -0.080v so the load voltage is around 1.28v...which is more than what I needed for a stability test like RealBench. The weird thing is, I don't BSOD or hard freeze, the game I play(like Overwatch) will just stop responding and spit out a general crash error.


----------



## davidm71

lawlbringer said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> Just recently upgraded to a Z390 Aorus Master with a 8086k I managed to get. I've got 2 questions I'm hoping someone could help me with:
> 
> 1. Whenever a USB device is unplugged from my case's front USB 3.0 ports, my video signal is lost and the system needs to be restarted. This wasn't an issue with the previous ASUS Z270A Prime/7700k combination I had in the same case prior. I've tried upgrading from the F7 to F8 bios but the issue still seems to persist. Not the end of the world, but I'm hoping it's just a setting I can disable in the UEFI/BIOS.
> 
> 2. What would you guys recommend for stability testing a dynamic(adaptive) vcore overclock on this platform? My 8086k is delidded and was RealBench stress test stable at 5GHz/1.25v manual with LLC set to Turbo but I did notice 2 WHEA errors the last 10 days after switching to dynamic vcore. Using DVID I put a negative offset of -0.080v so the load voltage is around 1.28v...which is more than what I needed for a stability test like RealBench. The weird thing is, I don't BSOD or hard freeze, the game I play(like Overwatch) will just stop responding and spit out a general crash error.


1. Sounds like a short in the front panel. Try hooking up the front panel to another port and see if behavior continues or rather test with a standard motherboard usb header backpanel adapter and see if it continues. If so bad motherboard. RMA it.

2. I've been playing around with OCCT with small data sets. It will quack if something is amiss which it just did for me on another system I have. Anyhow try an overly safe but high vcore and see if you still crash playing games. I am sure others on this forum will help you further as I am not really an adaptive overclocker.


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> Run HWInfo Sensors Only and here.


I think it depends on the fact that if your memory modules have temp sensors it will show it as I have no DIMM temps either.

Have checked HWiNFO, can't seem to find an option to enable them, so I figure it depends on the sensor readout / sensor being there.

Or maybe it's even board dependend, as Kedar uses a Master and I'm on an Ultra.


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> I think it depends on the fact that if your memory modules have temp sensors it will show it as I have no DIMM temps either.
> 
> Have checked HWiNFO, can't seem to find an option to enable them, so I figure it depends on the sensor readout / sensor being there.
> 
> Or maybe it's even board dependend, as Kedar uses a Master and I'm on an Ultra.


I'm really sure Royal DIMMs have temp sensors so likely your board, yes.


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> I'm really sure Royal DIMMs have temp sensors so likely your board, yes.


Agreed !


----------



## Intrud3r

Just trying to make sense of the following:

Board = Aorus Ultra
Bios = F7

I was running AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving with a DVID of +0.060V for 5.1/4.8 without any issues.
My cpu core voltage was fluctuating between 1.324 and 1.342V (about those values) when stressed and it ran without problems.

Now 1 user gave me an option to try out AC/DC Loadline = Auto and change DVID accordingly.

I've used AC/DC Loadline = Auto only at the start when I got the hardware and started it up, immediately switched to manual and started overclocking to find the sweetspot, and jump over to adaptive / auto / normal voltage to get bla bla.

Now ... here comes ... 

After I switched over to AC/DC Loadline = Auto and changing DVID accordingly (with a negative value of at least 0.140V) to get around the same voltage my AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving was at.
That worked, tried to boot into windows, gave me a blue screen so I thought, freck this ... let's go back to AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving.

So I switched back to AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving.
Changed DVID accordingly and was running at 5.1/4.8 with a DVID of +0.060V

Switched back to 5.0/4.7 just to play around ... only changed DVID to 0.000V and it ran flawlessly.

Been running 5.0/4.7 for a week or so, decided to jump back to 5.1/4.8
So I upped my MP and Uncore speed with 1 and changed DVID to +0.060V

Booted into windows, started a stresstest and noticed my voltage was around 1.355V running Cinebench R20 for example. Prime showed the same higher voltage then I needed before.

Ran a couple of days ... decided this wasn't normal and started lowering my DVID to get to around the same voltage I was at before ... about 1.324V

Came out at DVID = +0.040V which is definately different then the value of +0.060V which I needed before using the same settings.

AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
DVID = ?!?

How can this value be needing a lower value now if I have not changed anything else ?

Btw ... I doublechecked HWiNFO if anything changed with the AC/DC Loadline values, still shows 0.040/0.130 which it showed before as well.

It's not an issue, as it's working flawlessly ... but I'm just trying to make sense of it.
So any insights are welcome 

P.S. Looking at my voltages after having run 12 hours (about half being idle / me sleeping), they show the same drop as my DVID does.
IT8688E max voltage shows 1.380V where before I remember it showing 1.404V. That's about the same 20mv change as my DVID has changed.
IT8792E max voltage shows 1.353V where before I remember it showing 1.378V. Same statement as above.
VR VOUT ... well ... you can guess what's coming I assume.

Still where I could not finish 10 min of prime 1344 in place fft with avx with +0.055V, and needed +0.060V to get no L0 cache errors.
Now I need +0.040V to finish the same thing without errors.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Run HWInfo Sensors Only and here.





Intrud3r said:


> I think it depends on the fact that if your memory modules have temp sensors it will show it as I have no DIMM temps either.
> 
> Have checked HWiNFO, can't seem to find an option to enable them, so I figure it depends on the sensor readout / sensor being there.
> 
> Or maybe it's even board dependend, as Kedar uses a Master and I'm on an Ultra.


@ Kedarwolf that is what i am doing, when i get back home at Easter i will find where HWinfo stores its user configs and delete everything and start again with no hidden files etc and no DIMM temp is not hidden 

@ Intrud3r I do have the master to and what you say about the sensor was my understanding to but i just thought that royal memory would have the sensor so i asked if there was something in the bios i missed maybe G skill doesn't think 3200 memory needs it, will do a google search a quick one yesterday showed up nothing


Edit: couldn't find anything relevant to my memory


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Just trying to make sense of the following:
> 
> Board = Aorus Ultra
> Bios = F7
> 
> I was running AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving with a DVID of +0.060V for 5.1/4.8 without any issues.
> My cpu core voltage was fluctuating between 1.324 and 1.342V (about those values) when stressed and it ran without problems.
> 
> Now 1 user gave me an option to try out AC/DC Loadline = Auto and change DVID accordingly.
> 
> I've used AC/DC Loadline = Auto only at the start when I got the hardware and started it up, immediately switched to manual and started overclocking to find the sweetspot, and jump over to adaptive / auto / normal voltage to get bla bla.
> 
> Now ... here comes ...
> 
> After I switched over to AC/DC Loadline = Auto and changing DVID accordingly (with a negative value of at least 0.140V) to get around the same voltage my AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving was at.
> That worked, tried to boot into windows, gave me a blue screen so I thought, freck this ... let's go back to AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving.
> 
> So I switched back to AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving.
> Changed DVID accordingly and was running at 5.1/4.8 with a DVID of +0.060V
> 
> Switched back to 5.0/4.7 just to play around ... only changed DVID to 0.000V and it ran flawlessly.
> 
> Been running 5.0/4.7 for a week or so, decided to jump back to 5.1/4.8
> So I upped my MP and Uncore speed with 1 and changed DVID to +0.060V
> 
> Booted into windows, started a stresstest and noticed my voltage was around 1.355V running Cinebench R20 for example. Prime showed the same higher voltage then I needed before.
> 
> Ran a couple of days ... decided this wasn't normal and started lowering my DVID to get to around the same voltage I was at before ... about 1.324V
> 
> Came out at DVID = +0.040V which is definately different then the value of +0.060V which I needed before using the same settings.
> 
> AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
> DVID = ?!?
> 
> How can this value be needing a lower value now if I have not changed anything else ?
> 
> Btw ... I doublechecked HWiNFO if anything changed with the AC/DC Loadline values, still shows 0.040/0.130 which it showed before as well.
> 
> It's not an issue, as it's working flawlessly ... but I'm just trying to make sense of it.
> So any insights are welcome
> 
> P.S. Looking at my voltages after having run 12 hours (about half being idle / me sleeping), they show the same drop as my DVID does.
> IT8688E max voltage shows 1.380V where before I remember it showing 1.404V. That's about the same 20mv change as my DVID has changed.
> IT8792E max voltage shows 1.353V where before I remember it showing 1.378V. Same statement as above.
> VR VOUT ... well ... you can guess what's coming I assume.
> 
> Still where I could not finish 10 min of prime 1344 in place fft with avx with +0.055V, and needed +0.060V to get no L0 cache errors.
> Now I need +0.040V to finish the same thing without errors.



In your screenshot, one of your cores is showing up at 4.8 ghz, not 5.1 ghz.
Might be some downclocking happening somewhere.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> In your screenshot, one of your cores is showing up at 4.8 ghz, not 5.1 ghz.
> Might be some downclocking happening somewhere.


Nah, sorry ... the screenshot was taken when idle. So it downclocks to 800 Mhz when it's doing nothing.

But, thought ... why not go "Load Optimized Defaults" and start again. I know all the settings ...

Loaded Optimized Defaults, set everything up while saving and rebooting numerous times and checking if everything looked ok.

Now I'm at 5.1/4.8

AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
Vcore Loadline = Medium
Vcore = Normal
DVID = +0.050V

Ran 10 min prime 1344 in place fft with avx, almost 10 min of realbench 2.56 and a couple of cinebench R20 runs. Back to where I was ... But again with a different DVID value ... 

Must say that after loading optimized defaults I tried AC/DC Loadline = Auto with Vcore Loadline = Auto but that was a no go, didn't wanna load into windows, kept blue screening on me. Then I had enough and swithed to AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving with Vcore Loadline = Medium (which worked before) ... started with 5.0/4.7 with DVID = 0.000V (as before) to check voltages, looked ok, rebooted into 5.1/4.8 with DVID = +0.040V to check voltage, looked fine. Booted into windows when prime testing --> after having stopped it, about 30-60 seconds ... L0 cache error.

Upped DVID to +0.050V and retested as stated above. No problemo.

Just weird.

Again ... this is not an issue as it's working perfectly ... but I just wanna make sense of it.

P.S. These 10 min tests of prime 1344 in place fft with avx (no avx2) result in about 80C. While running I see temps of 65-75 with peaks of 85.


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> Nah, sorry ... the screenshot was taken when idle. So it downclocks to 800 Mhz when it's doing nothing.
> 
> But, thought ... why not go "Load Optimized Defaults" and start again. I know all the settings ...
> 
> Loaded Optimized Defaults, set everything up while saving and rebooting numerous times and checking if everything looked ok.
> 
> Now I'm at 5.1/4.8
> 
> AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
> Vcore Loadline = Medium
> Vcore = Normal
> DVID = +0.050V
> 
> Ran 10 min prime 1344 in place fft with avx, almost 10 min of realbench 2.56 and a couple of cinebench R20 runs. Back to where I was ... But again with a different DVID value ...
> 
> Must say that after loading optimized defaults I tried AC/DC Loadline = Auto with Vcore Loadline = Auto but that was a no go, didn't wanna load into windows, kept blue screening on me. Then I had enough and swithed to AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving with Vcore Loadline = Medium (which worked before) ... started with 5.0/4.7 with DVID = 0.000V (as before) to check voltages, looked ok, rebooted into 5.1/4.8 with DVID = +0.040V to check voltage, looked fine. Booted into windows when prime testing --> after having stopped it, about 30-60 seconds ... L0 cache error.
> 
> Upped DVID to +0.050V and retested as stated above. No problemo.
> 
> Just weird.
> 
> Again ... this is not an issue as it's working perfectly ... but I just wanna make sense of it.
> 
> P.S. These 10 min tests of prime 1344 in place fft with avx (no avx2) result in about 80C. While running I see temps of 65-75 with peaks of 85.


I checked and AC/DC loadline AUTO core voltage is exactly = to AC/DC loadlilne Turbo core voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> I checked and AC/DC loadline AUTO core voltage is exactly = to AC/DC loadlilne Turbo core voltage.


Depends on the CPU ratio.
At 4.7 ghz core, 4.4 ghz cache, Auto was set to 1.0 mOhms AC/ 1.3 mOhms DC.
At 5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache, Auto was set to 1.3 AC/1.3 DC.

Note that Intel reference value is 1.6 mOhms for both (8 core processors).


----------



## lucasfrance

Could it be linked to the last Win10 update dated last Tuesday??? Just an idea.....


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Depends on the CPU ratio.
> At 4.7 ghz core, 4.4 ghz cache, Auto was set to 1.0 mOhms AC/ 1.3 mOhms DC.
> At 5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache, Auto was set to 1.3 AC/1.3 DC.
> 
> Note that Intel reference value is 1.6 mOhms for both (8 core processors).


Thanks, it does depend on CPU ratio. I checked and came out with the same results just different numbers.

At 4.7 ghz core, Auto was set to 0.800 mOhms AC/ 1.700 mOhms DC.
At 5 ghz core, Auto was set to 1.700 AC/1.700 DC.


----------



## lawlbringer

Instead of using a negative DVID offset with an AC/DC loadline of 1, would it be better to tweak the AC/DC Loadline setting itself to get a more accurate(or lower) SVID/vcore? Is that possible or is that dictated on the CPU itself?

I noticed with this board on defaults if I raised the multiplier my vcore would shoot up pretty high(like 1.5v+), but after setting AC/DC to 1 each it stays at 1.37v regardless if I'm at 5GHz/4.7GHz uncore or 5.2GHz/4.9GHz uncore.

Just wondering what the best approach was stability wise since negative offsets seem to cause idle instability at times from my experience.


----------



## Padinn

Where is this dummy load setting found?


----------



## Driller au

Under the power tab


----------



## RynoW

I just got my build up and running and was hoping to get a stable 5GHz clock going. I followed Gigabyte's 5GHz overclocking guide, but Prime95 just nukes my computer no matter what I do. In Blender, I can benchmark indefinitely at 1.33v and never get above 83C on any core. With LLC on Auto, I BSOD at any vCore. On Turbo, the temps jump very high very quickly on basically any vCore, even as low as 1.29v. On Prime95, I get uncomfortably high temps (over 100C) on two of the cores before I stop it. On lower Vcore, I BSOD after just running Prime95 for just a few minutes bit. At stock clock settings, I even get up to 90c in Prime95, which is ridiculous for a 360mm radiator. Is there anything I can do, or did I just lose the silicon lottery? It doesn't appear to do any thermal throttling, it just does a hard shutdown when it hits TjMAX.

Build:
Intel i9 9900k
Aorus Master Z390
Corsair H150i with stock ML120 1600RPM fans
Nvidia 780Ti
Corsair 750W PSU


----------



## Falkentyne

RynoW said:


> I just got my build up and running and was hoping to get a stable 5GHz clock going. I followed Gigabyte's 5GHz overclocking guide, but Prime95 just nukes my computer no matter what I do. In Blender, I can benchmark indefinitely at 1.33v and never get above 83C on any core. With LLC on Auto, I BSOD at any vCore. On Turbo, the temps jump very high very quickly on basically any vCore, even as low as 1.29v. On Prime95, I get uncomfortably high temps (over 100C) on two of the cores before I stop it. On lower Vcore, I BSOD after just running Prime95 for just a few minutes bit. At stock clock settings, I even get up to 90c in Prime95, which is ridiculous for a 360mm radiator. Is there anything I can do, or did I just lose the silicon lottery? It doesn't appear to do any thermal throttling, it just does a hard shutdown when it hits TjMAX.
> 
> Build:
> Intel i9 9900k
> Aorus Master Z390
> Corsair H150i with stock ML120 1600RPM fans
> Nvidia 780Ti
> Corsair 750W PSU


Are you running prime95 with SSE2 (AVX disabled) or with AVX/FMA3 small FFT's?


----------



## RynoW

With AVX/FMA3 small FFT's. (27.9 Build 1)


----------



## Falkentyne

RynoW said:


> With AVX/FMA3 small FFT's. (27.9 Build 1)


Unrealistic test. Don't bother with that.
You're not going to be able to cool that chip unless you delid it and go 360 rad water.
You can't cool 180 amps of current on your cooling system.

Disable AVX2 and AVX in 29.8 build 1 (current version) and test that.
For AVX testing, you can do:
1344K in place fixed AVX (if hyperthreading is OFF).

Realbench 2.56 (HT on).
Cinebench R20 3600 seconds custom (HT On).

Prime95 two processes in two folders:
1) 14 thread smallest FFT (AVX2 and AVX disabled)
2) 2 thread custom AVX FFT (512K - 8192K FFT range), RAM to use: 5628 MB.

This will test your system without making the load unrealistic.


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> Unrealistic test. Don't bother with that.
> You're not going to be able to cool that chip unless you delid it and go 360 rad water.
> You can't cool 180 amps of current on your cooling system.
> 
> Disable AVX2 and AVX in 29.8 build 1 (current version) and test that.
> For AVX testing, you can do:
> 1344K in place fixed AVX *(if hyperthreading is OFF).*
> 
> Realbench 2.56 (HT on).
> Cinebench R20 3600 seconds custom (HT On).
> 
> Prime95 two processes in two folders:
> 1) 14 thread smallest FFT (AVX2 and AVX disabled)
> 2) 2 thread custom AVX FFT (512K - 8192K FFT range), RAM to use: 5628 MB.
> 
> This will test your system without making the load unrealistic.


And if Hyperthreaded-Technology is on?


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> And if Hyperthreaded-Technology is on?


Hyperthreaded AVX threads with FFT sizes > 112K will compete for memory and wind up jumping all over each other, completely ruining the point of the test. Your amps draw with 16 AVX HT threads at 1344K will be -much- lower than the same test with AVX disabled!

If HT is off, then AVX enabled and disabled 1344K will have close to the same power draw on an 8 core processor. 

Note: AVX can only access as many memory channels as your processor has. 9900K (heck, all of the Skylake non HEDT chips) only have 2 memory channels. That's why if you test FFT sizes < 128K, the power draw goes through the roof, because the AVX threads are no longer competing for memory access. Thus none of this applies to FFT sizes 4k to 112K, since now the threads stay within the L2 and L3 caches, without being bottlenecked by main memory's 2 channels.


----------



## wingman99

Padinn said:


> Where is this dummy load setting found?


Dummy load is for old PSUs that don't support low voltage C6/C7-states.


----------



## RynoW

Falkentyne said:


> Unrealistic test. Don't bother with that.
> You're not going to be able to cool that chip unless you delid it and go 360 rad water.
> You can't cool 180 amps of current on your cooling system.
> 
> Disable AVX2 and AVX in 29.8 build 1 (current version) and test that.
> For AVX testing, you can do:
> 1344K in place fixed AVX (if hyperthreading is OFF).
> 
> Realbench 2.56 (HT on).
> Cinebench R20 3600 seconds custom (HT On).
> 
> Prime95 two processes in two folders:
> 1) 14 thread smallest FFT (AVX2 and AVX disabled)
> 2) 2 thread custom AVX FFT (512K - 8192K FFT range), RAM to use: 5628 MB.
> 
> This will test your system without making the load unrealistic.


Running these tests, my system appears stable at 5GHz 1.27v, and I might be able to go even lower voltage. Temps in non-AVX Prime95 peak around 90c*. Cinebench and Realbench peaked a few degrees lower. My only question now is, why does Gigabyte recommend doing the AVX torture test in their guide?


*Temp is from CoreTemp, for some reason HWiNFO64 reads all the temps significantly lower, peaking at 80c. Anyone else experience a discrepancy like this?


----------



## Falkentyne

RynoW said:


> Running these tests, my system appears stable at 5GHz 1.27v, and I might be able to go even lower voltage. Temps in non-AVX Prime95 peak around 90c*. Cinebench and Realbench peaked a few degrees lower. My only question now is, why does Gigabyte recommend doing the AVX torture test in their guide?
> 
> 
> *Temp is from CoreTemp, for some reason HWiNFO64 reads all the temps significantly lower, peaking at 80c. Anyone else experience a discrepancy like this?


Coretemp is obsolete. Everyone uses HWinfo64 now. Also make sure you are reading the correct sensors.
Also make sure you use the DTS sensors, not the motherboard reported CPU temp. HWinfo will report both CPU package temp and "motherboard" CPU temp, which is usually 10C lower. Both the 80C and 90C temps should be shown in HWinfo64. (the 80C is Tcase measurement, not accurate).


----------



## RynoW

Falkentyne said:


> Coretemp is obsolete. Everyone uses HWinfo64 now. Also make sure you are reading the correct sensors.
> Also make sure you use the DTS sensors, not the motherboard reported CPU temp. HWinfo will report both CPU package temp and "motherboard" CPU temp, which is usually 10C lower. Both the 80C and 90C temps should be shown in HWinfo64. (the 80C is Tcase measurement, not accurate).


lol, if that's the case, my temps have not been an issue at all. Thanks to Gigabyte's guide for the rec to use CoreTemp as well. Thanks for the advice!


----------



## rjeftw

Specs - Z390 Aorus Master - 9900k 5.1ghz - 4x8 G Skill 3600 C16 - EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 Ultra - 960 EVO - EVGA 750 G3 - Custom Water.

Last night I had a strange issue; whole system locked up frozen during PUBG. I attempted to restart to see the all the fans spin and nothing from the motherboard minus buzzing around the cpu socket. No debug codes even coming up at all. Pulled the plug, cleared cmos. Same thing. Changed the ram and tried fewer sticks same thing. No debug codes and just fans on. Even pulled out my 8700K and tossed it in for just checking. No debug codes and fans just spinning. This was all around 3-4am this morning. 

Proceeded to get up and try again; Same thing nothing at all for 20 mins. Then I gave it another shot, 30 seconds later I finally see bios and I got into windows with the 8700k then my 2x8gb kit of spare ram along with now the 9900k and 4x8gb kit.

It's been a very annoying day to say the least... Now I could understand if it was stable and it just crashed and I could go in and adjust some settings and go on my way, but the system wouldn't even post up until about an hour ago... so color me very confused.


----------



## Intrud3r

rjeftw said:


> Specs - 9900k 5.1ghz - 4x8 G Skill 3600 C16 - EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 Ultra - 960 EVO - EVGA 750 G3 - Custom Water.
> 
> Last night I had a strange issue; whole system locked up frozen during PUBG. I attempted to restart to see the all the fans spin and nothing from the motherboard minus buzzing around the cpu socket. No debug codes even coming up at all. Pulled the plug, cleared cmos. Same thing. Changed the ram and tried fewer sticks same thing. No debug codes and just fans on. Even pulled out my 8700K and tossed it in for just checking. No debug codes and fans just spinning. This was all around 3-4am this morning.
> 
> Proceeded to get up and try again; Same thing nothing at all for 20 mins. Then I gave it another shot, 30 seconds later I finally see bios and I got into windows with the 8700k then my 2x8gb kit of spare ram along with now the 9900k and 4x8gb kit.
> 
> It's been a very annoying day to say the least... Now I could understand if it was stable and it just crashed and I could go in and adjust some settings and go on my way, but the system wouldn't even post up until about an hour ago... so color me very confused.


That would definitely get my heart pumping ... nice to see it's up and running again, still ... oh my ... 
Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience. Good to know that if some similar situation occurs, we still have a chance


----------



## rjeftw

Intrud3r said:


> That would definitely get my heart pumping ... nice to see it's up and running again, still ... oh my ...
> Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience. Good to know that if some similar situation occurs, we still have a chance


Yeah, I still have no idea what happened or why... But I did impulse order a board just in case this ****s the bed entirely... don't want to be out of a system you know?


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> That would definitely get my heart pumping ... nice to see it's up and running again, still ... oh my ...
> Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience. Good to know that if some similar situation occurs, we still have a chance


Do folks have to increase power limits to prevent throttling when overclocking with Z390 AORUS?


----------



## Falkentyne

rjeftw said:


> Specs - 9900k 5.1ghz - 4x8 G Skill 3600 C16 - EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 Ultra - 960 EVO - EVGA 750 G3 - Custom Water.
> 
> Last night I had a strange issue; whole system locked up frozen during PUBG. I attempted to restart to see the all the fans spin and nothing from the motherboard minus buzzing around the cpu socket. No debug codes even coming up at all. Pulled the plug, cleared cmos. Same thing. Changed the ram and tried fewer sticks same thing. No debug codes and just fans on. Even pulled out my 8700K and tossed it in for just checking. No debug codes and fans just spinning. This was all around 3-4am this morning.
> 
> Proceeded to get up and try again; Same thing nothing at all for 20 mins. Then I gave it another shot, 30 seconds later I finally see bios and I got into windows with the 8700k then my 2x8gb kit of spare ram along with now the 9900k and 4x8gb kit.
> 
> It's been a very annoying day to say the least... Now I could understand if it was stable and it just crashed and I could go in and adjust some settings and go on my way, but the system wouldn't even post up until about an hour ago... so color me very confused.


What motherboard?
You didn't specify the most important part.

If this were a Master or Xtreme, you could just flip the Bios switch, which would completely narrow down the problem.
By the way, the next time this happens, please -remove- the video card, insert HDMI to the I/O panel and try booting. I've seen dead or dying video cards prevent a board from POSTING in the past.


----------



## rjeftw

Falkentyne said:


> What motherboard?
> You didn't specify the most important part.
> 
> If this were a Master or Xtreme, you could just flip the Bios switch, which would completely narrow down the problem.
> By the way, the next time this happens, please -remove- the video card, insert HDMI to the I/O panel and try booting. I've seen dead or dying video cards prevent a board from POSTING in the past.


Master... sorry forgot to mention it was from both bios. And honestly forgot about the onboard, was pretty pissed off. And if this 2080Ti FTW3 is going bad that will not be the best; this is my third one already.


----------



## Falkentyne

rjeftw said:


> Master... sorry forgot to mention it was from both bios. And honestly forgot about the onboard, was pretty pissed off. And if this 2080Ti FTW3 is going bad that will not be the best; this is my third one already.


If switching the bios didn't help, it was 80% the video card. Since you said the 8700K didn't work and the RAM Didn't work.
If your board wasn't shorted out by something, the only thing you didn't try was removing the videocard.
Just keep that in mind if it happens again.
BTW it never hurts to make sure the card is fully inserted.


----------



## Driller au

Intrud3r said:


> I think it depends on the fact that if your memory modules have temp sensors it will show it as I have no DIMM temps either.
> 
> Have checked HWiNFO, can't seem to find an option to enable them, so I figure it depends on the sensor readout / sensor being there.
> 
> Or maybe it's even board dependend, as Kedar uses a Master and I'm on an Ultra.


My memory G skill 3200 c16 and i would assume yours to is manufactured by SK Hynix and does not have a thermal sensor


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> My memory G skill 3200 c16 and i would assume yours to is manufactured by SK Hynix and does not have a thermal sensor


I'm pretty sure they said they had G.Skill Royals and the DIMM's would have temp sensors so I think it's a board issue.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> I'm pretty sure they said they had G.Skill Royals and the DIMM's would have temp sensors so I think it's a board issue.


 It was me that originally asked the question mate and yes it is royal on a master M/B here is a AIDA64 screenshot


----------



## wingman99

@KedarWolf or anyone else running Gigabyte AORUS, when running prime95 did you have to increase the power limits to prevent throttling at 5.1GHz?


----------



## Reefersmurf

RynoW said:


> I just got my build up and running and was hoping to get a stable 5GHz clock going. I followed Gigabyte's 5GHz overclocking guide, but Prime95 just nukes my computer no matter what I do. In Blender, I can benchmark indefinitely at 1.33v and never get above 83C on any core. With LLC on Auto, I BSOD at any vCore. On Turbo, the temps jump very high very quickly on basically any vCore, even as low as 1.29v. On Prime95, I get uncomfortably high temps (over 100C) on two of the cores before I stop it. On lower Vcore, I BSOD after just running Prime95 for just a few minutes bit. At stock clock settings, I even get up to 90c in Prime95, which is ridiculous for a 360mm radiator. Is there anything I can do, or did I just lose the silicon lottery? It doesn't appear to do any thermal throttling, it just does a hard shutdown when it hits TjMAX.
> 
> Build:
> Intel i9 9900k
> Aorus Master Z390
> Corsair H150i with stock ML120 1600RPM fans
> Nvidia 780Ti
> Corsair 750W PSU





I am running 5.0 fine with the same mobo and cooler and with 1.25 voltage, llc on turbo. Max temp 92 in prime.


----------



## KedarWolf

wingman99 said:


> @KedarWolf or anyone else running Gigabyte AORUS, when running prime95 did you have to increase the power limits to prevent throttling at 5.1GHz?


I max out all the power limits but to be honest don't think I've ever seen throttling on Auto.


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> I max out all the power limits but to be honest don't think I've ever seen throttling on Auto.


I had them maxed out while testing, now I reverted back to all Auto settings.

No throtteling whatsoever ... even running prime small fft's (no avx)


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> I had them maxed out while testing, now I reverted back to all Auto settings.
> 
> No throtteling whatsoever ... even running prime small fft's (no avx)


Was that testing at 5.0GHz?


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> It was me that originally asked the question mate and yes it is royal on a master M/B here is a AIDA64 screenshot


Is the highlighted box checked?


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Is the highlighted box checked?


It wasn't so i checked it, restarted but still the same "no sensor"


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> Was that testing at 5.0GHz?


Roger ... 5.1/4.8 will throttle eventually.


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> Roger ... 5.1/4.8 will throttle eventually.


Thanks. What did it take to throttle at 5.1GHz?


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> It wasn't so i checked it, restarted but still the same "no sensor"


Did the temps show in HWInfo Sensors Only after?

My friend with Samsung Royals doesn't show a Thermal Sensor on his kit either but the temps show in HWInfo starting it Sensors Only.


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> It wasn't so i checked it, restarted but still the same "no sensor"


After you check it, try here.


----------



## pm1109

Do you guys get better memory overcloking with the F8 bios.Im still using F7 bios and debating whether to update to F8 or just stay with F7.Im currently using G.Skill Trident Z (8x2) 16Gb, CL14 3200 on the Gigabyte Z390 Master.
Thanks in advance.


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> Thanks. What did it take to throttle at 5.1GHz?


With the settings I ran ... 

5.1/4.8
AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
Vcore = Normal
DVID = +0.060V

Prime small FFT's NO AVX would start throtteling after about 10 minutes ... quick guess. It would start at about 88C and rise slowly as my liquid temp rises up.

Prime small FFT's with AVX is a no go (even at 5.0/4.7) if I let 16 threads go loose on it ... within a second it jumps to 100C and starts throtteling.
Even at my signature settings ...


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> After you check it, try here.


Just checked again and still nothing 
Ask your friend if he has hynix or samsung memory modules i think that is the difference, i have hynix


----------



## Intrud3r

Driller au said:


> Just checked again and still nothing
> Ask your friend if he has hynix or samsung memory modules i think that is the difference, i have hynix


I've got Hynix 3200 C16-18-18-38 too ... no temp sensors available.


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Just checked again and still nothing
> Ask your friend if he has hynix or samsung memory modules i think that is the difference, i have hynix


He has Samsung.


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> With the settings I ran ...
> 
> 5.1/4.8
> AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
> Vcore = Normal
> DVID = +0.060V
> 
> Prime small FFT's NO AVX would start throtteling after about 10 minutes ... quick guess. It would start at about 88C and rise slowly as my liquid temp rises up.
> 
> Prime small FFT's with AVX is a no go (even at 5.0/4.7) if I let 16 threads go loose on it ... within a second it jumps to 100C and starts throtteling.
> Even at my signature settings ...


At 5.1 GHz was that CPU or power limits AUTO throttling?


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> With the settings I ran ...
> 
> 5.1/4.8
> AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
> Vcore = Normal
> DVID = +0.060V
> 
> Prime small FFT's NO AVX would start throtteling after about 10 minutes ... quick guess. It would start at about 88C and rise slowly as my liquid temp rises up.
> 
> Prime small FFT's with AVX is a no go (even at 5.0/4.7) if I let 16 threads go loose on it ... within a second it jumps to 100C and starts throtteling.
> Even at my signature settings ...


Temperature throttling and throttling from reaching voltage limits are two different things.

You're throttling because of temps, what we are talking about is having the voltage limit settings on Auto and throttling from going over those limits. I don't get that even on Prime95 with voltage limits on Auto. But my temps are well under 80C with Prime95.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> He has Samsung.


Thanks for that i believe the question is answered now 



Intrud3r said:


> I've got Hynix 3200 C16-18-18-38 too ... no temp sensors available.


Interesting OC you have got going there i gave it a go just to see, I can run a 50/46 OC with low LLC at 0.000 DVID. Think i will stay with this, a 50/47 OC only gives me a few points in cinebench and requires a lot more DVID on my system


----------



## TMatzelle60

I have a question how is the gigabyte master z390

Is it a top tier board? 

Is the master right under the extreme

I am looking for a top tier reliable well built motherboard that will make me happy. Also will be using it with the i9 9900k


----------



## Artroxa

So decided to finally switch over my second monitor to the igpu with a HDMI cable, now to my surprise the fps in games TANKED after doing that, is there some basic setting im missing? 
From everything ive read putting your second monitor on your iGPU should NOT decrease performance what so ever but rather fix any pesky gsync issues and variable framerates etc.


----------



## KedarWolf

Artroxa said:


> So decided to finally switch over my second monitor to the igpu with a HDMI cable, now to my surprise the fps in games TANKED after doing that, is there some basic setting im missing?
> From everything ive read putting your second monitor on your iGPU should NOT decrease performance what so ever but rather fix any pesky gsync issues and variable framerates etc.


Slightly better using iGPU. But I only use my iGPU for www.twitch.tv mostly and in BIOS have the memory allocation ect. as low as you can put it.


With iGPU and 1080 screen attached. look at graphics scores, not the full benchmark. The main screen on 1080 Ti display port. 




























iGPU disabled in BIOS and 1080P screen attached to HDMI on 1080 Ti with main screen on 1080 Ti Display Port.


----------



## Artroxa

KedarWolf said:


> Slightly better using iGPU. But I only use my iGPU for www.twitch.tv mostly and in BIOS have the memory allocation ect. as low as you can put it.
> 
> 
> With iGPU and 1080 screen attached. look at graphics scores, not the full benchmark. The main screen on 1080 Ti display port.


Yeah im not sure what my issue is exactly, when i put up youtube or twitch or such on my second screen now that its connected to the iGPU the frames drop lower and are even more varied than when both was running on my 1070, could the videos still be rendered on the 1070 for some reason, like is there some settings you have to change etc? i tried running some benchmarks aswell with both setups and the benchmarks do way better when i don't have my screen connected to the iGPU even if i force it enabled... :thumbsdow


----------



## KedarWolf

Artroxa said:


> Yeah im not sure what my issue is exactly, when i put up youtube or twitch or such on my second screen now that its connected to the iGPU the frames drop lower and are even more varied than when both was running on my 1070, could the videos still be rendered on the 1070 for some reason, like is there some settings you have to change etc? i tried running some benchmarks aswell with both setups and the benchmarks do way better when i don't have my screen connected to the iGPU even if i force it enabled... :thumbsdow


Did you do the tests with the second screen on the video card as well? 

With Twitch open TimeSpy drops 300 points but I do much better with iGPU than the second screen on GPU.

Like 11000 to 10500.


----------



## Moparman

TMatzelle60 said:


> I have a question how is the gigabyte master z390
> 
> Is it a top tier board?
> 
> Is the master right under the extreme
> 
> I am looking for a top tier reliable well built motherboard that will make me happy. Also will be using it with the i9 9900k



Yes it is a top teir board. The newest Bios really helps it's case as one of the best 4 dimm boards.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is the Master F8 BIOS modded with the latest microcode, IRST and Intel Network firmware.

Make a FreeDOS USB with the included Rufus like below. Add the Efiflash.exe and mod_Z390AOMA.F8 to the USB.

Enable CSM in BIOS, boot from the USB NOT UEFI, run this command.


Code:


efiflash mod_z390aoma.f8 /x

My overclock has never been more stable and I get a really great OC and memory timings after the mod. 

Edit: Saved my F8 settings to USB, flashed the modded BIOS, all is well. You can use the saved BIOS settings file from USB from the unmodded F8 too and transfer them to this modded version. :thumb:


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Here is the Master F8 BIOS modded with the latest microcode, IRST and Intel Network firmware.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB with the included Rufus like below. Add the Efiflash.exe and mod_Z390AOMA.F8 to the USB.
> 
> Enable CSM in BIOS, boot from the USB NOT UEFI, run this command.
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_z390aoma.f8 /x
> 
> My overclock has never been more stable and I get a really great OC and memory timings after the mod.
> 
> Edit: Saved my F8 settings to USB, flashed the modded BIOS, all is well. You can use the saved BIOS settings file from USB from the unmodded F8 too and transfer them to this modded version. :thumb:


 @KedarWolf
Can you do this mod for me with bios F8E instead of F8?
I found that F8 requires about 15mv more for the exact same overclock as F8E with the same settings 
So I would rather have F8E modded with your microcode, IRST and intel network firmware than F8, if that's okay.

I attached it.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf
> Can you do this mod for me with bios F8E instead of F8?
> I found that F8 requires about 15mv more for the exact same overclock as F8E with the same settings
> So I would rather have F8E modded with your microcode, IRST and intel network firmware than F8, if that's okay.
> 
> I attached it.


----------



## scaramonga

F8b for Master would be nice also  ^^ Many thx , and this won't flash via BIOS?, just to confirm?


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> F8b for Master would be nice also  ^^ Many thx , and this won't flash via BIOS?, just to confirm?


I need you to zip it and attach the F8b BIOS here, I don't have it. And yes, won't flash through the BIOS as it's been altered.


----------



## Falkentyne

scaramonga said:


> F8b for Master would be nice also  ^^ Many thx , and this won't flash via BIOS?, just to confirm?


F8b is a bad bios.
Still has the lockup where pressing enter on the AC/DC VR settings locks the bios up,
Command Rate 1T doesn't work in that bios version (fails to train and resets back to defaults).


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


>


Thank you very much. I'll flash it later and check it out!
Did you notice any microcode changes with this new "AE" 9900K microcode?


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> F8b for Master would be nice also  ^^ Many thx , and this won't flash via BIOS?, just to confirm?


Found it!!

From Gigabyte servers too.


----------



## Driller au

Kedarwolf thanks for the F8e bios 


Edit: followed your instructions got to the DOS screen ok,put command in and it comes up with "unable to read bios successfully" error
Wait and see how Falkentyne goes probably something i did wrong


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Kedarwolf thanks for the F8e bios
> 
> 
> Edit: followed your instructions got to the DOS screen ok,put command in and it comes up with "unable to read bios successfully" error
> Wait and see how Falkentyne goes probably something i did wrong






Driller au said:


> Kedarwolf thanks for the F8e bios
> 
> 
> Edit: followed your instructions got to the DOS screen ok,put command in and it comes up with "unable to read bios successfully" error
> Wait and see how Falkentyne goes probably something i did wrong


The command for F8e BIOS. Rename it to 1.F8e


Edit: And it DOES work, I flashed it to test it out. 



Code:


efiflash 1.f8e /x


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> The command for F8e BIOS. Rename it to 1.F8e
> 
> 
> Edit: And it DOES work, I flashed it to test it out.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f8e /x


that worked sweet mate, thanks again for modded bios, will test it out later


----------



## Artroxa

KedarWolf said:


> Did you do the tests with the second screen on the video card as well?
> 
> With Twitch open TimeSpy drops 300 points but I do much better with iGPU than the second screen on GPU.
> 
> Like 11000 to 10500.



Yeah i did, just to reiterate: 
With both screens connected to 1070: variable fps drops while playing videos on secondary screen while gaming, game still feels smooth but videos choppy, gpu benchmarks ok but worse than single monitor. 
with secondary monitor connected to igpu: pretty massive fps variable, like 80 to 140 and games feeling choppy as hell, videos are smooth tho. gpu benchmarks are pretty darn bad. 



Like i said, i feel like im missing something really basic here but i have no clue what.


----------



## davidm71

@KedarWolf,

Whats the trick to modding Gigabyte bios's? I assume your using Ubutool? Necessary to mod certain bytes somewhere in the rom to unlock the file for flashing? Or is it all in the command line flash tool?

Thanks


----------



## scaramonga

KedarWolf said:


> Found it!!
> 
> From Gigabyte servers too.


Thx kindly buddy!


----------



## Alemancio

KedarWolf said:


> My overclock has never been more stable and I get a really great OC and memory timings after the mod.


Very interesting!

What exactly were the mods how would/could they affect OC/Memory?

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Alemancio said:


> Very interesting!
> 
> What exactly were the mods how would/could they affect OC/Memory?
> 
> Thanks


Latest microcode is the one that affects stability. Plus latest IRST SATA/RAID firmware and updated Intel Ethernet firmware.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> @KedarWolf,
> 
> Whats the trick to modding Gigabyte bios's? I assume your using Ubutool? Necessary to mod certain bytes somewhere in the rom to unlock the file for flashing? Or is it all in the command line flash tool?
> 
> Thanks


New UBU Tool works out of the box. No need to use a hex editor to change the bytes in the BIOS. 

But you need to get the IRST firmware, doesn't come with it. 

Edit: I update my ME firmware as well, but that's not done with UBU Tool it on the BIOS itself.


----------



## scaramonga

Just noticed, running the tool myself, that I think you have the wrong IRST firmware. The one you replaced with is IRSTe (17.2.5.4046) version, which when placed in correct UBU IRSTe update folder, does not get picked up. If you place these IRSTe variant in the UBU IRST only folder, they do. The latest IRST version is 17.2.0.3790 and gets picked up correctly in the UBU IRST folder, if all that makes sense, lol 

I was under the impression that IRSTe was for enterprise only?

Just being careful 

Tool is nice and simple to use BTW, so thanks for that


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> Just noticed, running the tool myself, that I think you have the wrong IRST firmware. The one you replaced with is IRSTe (17.2.5.4046) version, which when placed in correct UBU IRSTe update folder, does not get picked up. If you place these IRSTe variant in the UBU IRST only folder, they do. The latest IRST version is 17.2.0.3790 and gets picked up correctly in the UBU IRST folder, if all that makes sense, lol
> 
> I was under the impression that IRSTe was for enterprise only?
> 
> Just being careful
> 
> Tool is nice and simple to use BTW, so thanks for that


No, I just checked. It's not the IRSTe firmware. It's the regular IRST firmware I used found here. 

Edit: It's just the EFI firmware, not the IRSTe. 

https://www.win-raid.com/t19f13-Int...uot-and-quot-GopDriver-quot-BIOS-Modules.html

Picture for clarification.


----------



## scaramonga

Using the link above only gives the EFI update, and not the OROM, as seen below with BIOS F8b un-modded...


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> Using the link above only gives the EFI update, and not the OROM, as seen below with BIOS F8b un-modded...


There's two downloads in the forum, one with only the EFI update and one when the EFI AND the OROM. I'm on my phone, can't find the second now. But not hard to find the OROM download.


----------



## scaramonga

KedarWolf said:


> There's two downloads in the forum, one with only the EFI update and one when the EFI AND the OROM. I'm on my phone, can't find the second now. But not hard to find the OROM download.


Yup got it , thx!


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf said:


> New UBU Tool works out of the box. No need to use a hex editor to change the bytes in the BIOS.
> 
> But you need to get the IRST firmware, doesn't come with it.
> 
> Edit: I update my ME firmware as well, but that's not done with UBU Tool it on the BIOS itself.



Thanks for answering that question. Good to know. 

May update the rom to your version in my free time but I'm stable at the moment so may not do it just yet.

Maybe in the future but good to know I can mod my bios on demand when Gigabyte stops releasing updates.

BTW I read that its recommended to flash both sides of the bios side A + B to newer F8 version to prevent the spontaneous bios reversion.

Have a Gigabyte Z87X board that loves to tell me my bios is corrupt and it needs to revert from other bios. About time I give that board away.

Though I never encountered that bios bug myself on the Z390.


Thanks


----------



## BIOSbreaker

Hey all,

I was so lucky to nuke my main BIOS the 2nd day while playing with memory timings, setting tRCD and tRP too low. It refuses to POST freezing on 4F (RESERVED according to manual, yay) even after CMOS reset and the official method of flashing main BIOS via dip switches didn't work. Even when powering and unplugging the system with Single Bios & Backup Bios set it still tries to boot to the corrupt main BIOS. I created a case on Gigabyte's eSupport and the response I got from a rep is to RMA the board. I have seen a few folks having the same problem, so if you found your way here - welcome to the club :-/

I might try to remove the main bios from the DIP socket and reflash it manually and RMA the board when going on vacation  - will update if I get somewhere.

EDIT: Oh yeah, the BIOS chip is 25L12873F M2I 10G (source). You can order them blank or flashed from eBay. If I fail to flash it myself I might try spending some money there too.


----------



## KedarWolf

BIOSbreaker said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I was so lucky to nuke my main BIOS the 2nd day while playing with memory timings, setting tRCD and tRP too low. It refuses to POST freezing on 4F (RESERVED according to manual, yay) even after CMOS reset and the official method of flashing main BIOS via dip switches didn't work. Even when powering and unplugging the system with Single Bios & Backup Bios set it still tries to boot to the corrupt main BIOS. I created a case on Gigabyte's eSupport and the response I got from a rep is to RMA the board. I have seen a few folks having the same problem, so if you found your way here - welcome to the club :-/
> 
> I might try to remove the main bios from the DIP socket and reflash it manually and RMA the board when going on vacation  - will update if I get somewhere.
> 
> EDIT: Oh yeah, the BIOS chip is 25L12873F M2I 10G (source). You can order them blank or flashed from eBay. If I fail to flash it myself I might try spending some money there too.


I flashed my main BIOS with this.

https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Components-Burner-Adapter-Programmer/dp/B07M6P9BVJ

But I had to use the 1.4 Free BIOS Programmer by LostNBios found in the WinRaid forums for it to flash right.

https://www.win-raid.com/t4287f16-G...grammer-Flasher-With-Pictures-4.html#msg76320


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf said:


> I flashed my main BIOS with this.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Components-Burner-Adapter-Programmer/dp/B07M6P9BVJ
> 
> But I had to use the 1.4 Free BIOS Programmer by LostNBios found in the WinRaid forums for it to flash right.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t4287f16-G...grammer-Flasher-With-Pictures-4.html#msg76320



So you bricked your board??! I thought it had dual bios? Not so?


----------



## BIOSbreaker

KedarWolf said:


> I flashed my main BIOS with this.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Components-Burner-Adapter-Programmer/dp/B07M6P9BVJ
> 
> But I had to use the 1.4 Free BIOS Programmer by LostNBios found in the WinRaid forums for it to flash right.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t4287f16-G...grammer-Flasher-With-Pictures-4.html#msg76320


Hey there, thanks for chiming in! I'm going to get this little fella https://www.onetransistor.eu/2017/12/ch341a-usb-spi-programming.html - hopefully your provided utility will be compatible with it.
edit: okay - it seems CH341A is the ultimate tool, didn't notice it's exactly the same thing, it's late here 

Can you please tell me if removing the BIOS chip from the socket is easy and doesn't need any tools or special approaches like a flat-head screwdriver from each side?

@davidm71 The main bios is in a DIP socket so is removable, the backup bios is soldered.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> So you bricked your board??! I thought it had dual bios? Not so?


What I learned is DON'T reset a frozen PC by holding in the power button in until it shuts down. Bricked two BIOS's doing that. Best way is turn the power button off on the power supply. Even Buildzoid does it that way.

And, I could never boot into a working BIOS, flip the DIP switch and flash the nonworking one. When one wasn't working I bricked BOTH BIOS's by resetting holding the power button.


----------



## BIOSbreaker

KedarWolf said:


> What I learned is DON'T reset a frozen PC by holding in the power button in until it shuts down. Bricked two BIOS's doing that. Best way is turn the power button off on the power supply. Even Buildzoid does it that way.
> 
> And, I could never boot into a working BIOS, flip the DIP switch and flash the nonworking one. When one wasn't working I bricked BOTH BIOS's by resetting holding the power button.


That's a nice bit of experience there, I never had any BIOS fail on my by resetting it or holding down the power button (so many times clocking 2600k and now 9900k). All the BIOSes/firmwares I broken so far were by my own ineptitude when I was younger  Were you able to restore the DIP switch functionality after bringing the main bios back to life? I read that there were some issues if both bioses were not on the F8 version.


----------



## KedarWolf

BIOSbreaker said:


> Hey there, thanks for chiming in! I'm going to get this little fella https://www.onetransistor.eu/2017/12/ch341a-usb-spi-programming.html - hopefully your provided utility will be compatible with it.
> edit: okay - it seems CH341A is the ultimate tool, didn't notice it's exactly the same thing, it's late here
> 
> Can you please tell me if removing the BIOS chip from the socket is easy and doesn't need any tools or special approaches like a flat-head screwdriver from each side?
> 
> 
> Really easy on the removable. open the cover on the BIOS, remove with tweezers. After you open the cover it just slides freely in and out of the socket, no clips or catches or anything.


----------



## KedarWolf

BIOSbreaker said:


> That's a nice bit of experience there, I never had any BIOS fail on my by resetting it or holding down the power button (so many times clocking 2600k and now 9900k). All the BIOSes/firmwares I broken so far were by my own ineptitude when I was younger  Were you able to restore the DIP switch functionality after bringing the main bios back to life? I read that there were some issues if both bioses were not on the F8 version.


In order to flash the nonremovable BIOS I need a special clip that'll fit on it, most regular clips are too wide and there is something on the Xtreme motherboard that is really close to the BIOS chip. So until I get a better clip I only have one working BIOS. 

AND, make sure you know which position the BIOS goes back in, if you reverse it you'll fry the BIOS and won't be able to fix it by flashing it even with a BIOS programmer. 

I read something about a hotkey you can use on boot to transfer over working BIOS to nonworking but haven't tried it.


----------



## davidm71

Well I have bricked a few bios's in my time. I own two programmers one being the CH341A and the other a Flashcat though I prefer the CH341A. Also own a SOIC-8 test clip and those come in handy when your bios chip is soldered onto the board. But if you have to remove a bios chip do it very carefully with a chip remover tool because its so easy to break or bend the legs on the chip. I just hope it never comes to that with my Z390 Master. Sorry to hear about your bad luck though. Never had an issue with pressing the power button ever but with that board from now on will just shut off the psu!

Thanks


----------



## Syed talib

I am encountering a problem here, when ever i shutdown my PC (power plugged on) for about an hour or 2, it takes 2 attempts to start, its like first i press the power button it ramp up the fan turn on the leds and stuff then shuts off, after a sec it starts normally
Gigabyte Z390 ELITE
8700k stock clock (-35 offset voltage)
Gskill 16GB 3200MHZ (XMP enabled)
cooler master 750 watts GOLD


----------



## wingman99

Syed talib said:


> I am encountering a problem here, when ever i shutdown my PC (power plugged on) for about an hour or 2, it takes 2 attempts to start, its like first i press the power button it ramp up the fan turn on the leds and stuff then shuts off, after a sec it starts normally
> Gigabyte Z390 ELITE
> 8700k stock clock (-35 offset voltage)
> Gskill 16GB 3200MHZ (XMP enabled)
> cooler master 750 watts GOLD


The PSU could the problem from what your saying. Cold startup with shut down usually is the PSU tripping.


----------



## davidm71

Syed talib said:


> I am encountering a problem here, when ever i shutdown my PC (power plugged on) for about an hour or 2, it takes 2 attempts to start, its like first i press the power button it ramp up the fan turn on the leds and stuff then shuts off, after a sec it starts normally
> Gigabyte Z390 ELITE
> 8700k stock clock (-35 offset voltage)
> Gskill 16GB 3200MHZ (XMP enabled)
> cooler master 750 watts GOLD



I have the same problem with an Asus Z270 board I own in which if a lot of devices on my pci-e bus are turned on the motherboard goes on and off trying to allocate its resources. I would first if I was you reset everything to stock settings even your memory at the 2133 default and see if it still happens. Then turn off every onboard device wether its necessary or not such as raid, or what ever controller there is and see if it happens. Then set it to XMP settings and see if it happens as sometimes memory settings or compatibility issues can cause this. Might also want to turn off memory training.


----------



## Syed talib

wingman99 said:


> The PSU could the problem from what your saying. Cold startup with shut down usually is the PSU tripping.





davidm71 said:


> I have the same problem with an Asus Z270 board I own in which if a lot of devices on my pci-e bus are turned on the motherboard goes on and off trying to allocate its resources. I would first if I was you reset everything to stock settings even your memory at the 2133 default and see if it still happens. Then turn off every onboard device wether its necessary or not such as raid, or what ever controller there is and see if it happens. Then set it to XMP settings and see if it happens as sometimes memory settings or compatibility issues can cause this. Might also want to turn off memory training.


 @wingman, actually i didnt turn off the main power, just proper shutdown my PC, and after 2 hour this happened @DavidM so what actually solved that problem? i have now reseted each and everything to stock in bios


----------



## davidm71

@Syed talib,

Nothing short of a bios update will repair that problem I had. Only way I found to fix it was disable my front panel Asmedia 3.1 port via bios. Hopefully one by one you can diagnosis what is causing your issue.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> In order to flash the nonremovable BIOS I need a special clip that'll fit on it, most regular clips are too wide and there is something on the Xtreme motherboard that is really close to the BIOS chip. So until I get a better clip I only have one working BIOS.
> 
> AND, make sure you know which position the BIOS goes back in, if you reverse it you'll fry the BIOS and won't be able to fix it by flashing it even with a BIOS programmer.
> 
> I read something about a hotkey you can use on boot to transfer over working BIOS to nonworking but haven't tried it.


You need this.
https://www.amazon.com/CPT-063-Test-Clip-SOIC8-Pomona/dp/B00HHH65T4

Pretty sure just by eyeballing it it should work (I saw the cap or whatever that is next to the soldered chip).


----------



## Syed talib

Update: Resetting the bios did it for me lol, was it because of the crappy bios gigabyte uses in their motherboard? I actually updated the bios to f7


----------



## Wirerat

I found what seems to be a bios bug on my aorus pro bios F9 while setting up the favorites tab. 

Memory timing mode saved to favorites will cause the bios to freeze up whenever I switch from Auto to manual. It hangs until reboot. 

It works perfectly from its normal location. I have cleared cmos and tested it from optimized defaults. This is a really strange issue. 

I can toggle the setting repeatedly from its normal location but if jump to fav screen and make the same change the bios freezes.


----------



## MacG32

KedarWolf said:


> New UBU Tool works out of the box. No need to use a hex editor to change the bytes in the BIOS.
> 
> But you need to get the IRST firmware, doesn't come with it.
> 
> Edit: I update my ME firmware as well, but that's not done with UBU Tool it on the BIOS itself.



What did you use to update your ME Firmware with? Would you mind posting it?



KedarWolf said:


> The command for F8e BIOS. Rename it to 1.F8e
> 
> Edit: And it DOES work, I flashed it to test it out.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f8e /x



Thank you very much for the modded F8e BIOS. I've had nothing but problems with F8, but F8e seems to have fixed them. Rebooting to a BSoD was the biggest one. There is a low voltage problem or requiring higher voltages to be stable at stock in F8. I really wish Gigabyte's BIOS Team would fix this.


----------



## Falkentyne

MacG32 said:


> What did you use to update your ME Firmware with? Would you mind posting it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you very much for the modded F8e BIOS. I've had nothing but problems with F8, but F8e seems to have fixed them. Rebooting to a BSoD was the biggest one. There is a low voltage problem or requiring higher voltages to be stable at stock in F8. I really wish Gigabyte's BIOS Team would fix this.


Can you please do me a favor and PM GBT-MatthewH about this?

I complained to Gigabyte about this but they sent back (a rather long reply, to their credit), with screenshots that they tested both bioses at stable and unstable settings.
The problem is, the issue happens "close" to the VMIN (min required stable voltage) on F8E, that F8 fails at completely.

For example, in this test: 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz core/cache, 1.230v, LLC=High (all power saving disabled of course), prime95 29.8 build 1, 15K Fixed FFT FMA3 enabled: 
F8E passes 10 hours. (VR VOUT 1.109v load)

F8 crashes a thread anywhere between 10 minutes to 1 hour. (VR VOUT 1.109v load).

Temps, VR VOUT, power (Current IOUT) are identical on both bioses.
It's like the transient response is worse on F8, almost like there is worse voltage regulation or dips or something.

The issue is, you increase vcore by 15mv, then F8 passes no problem. But again that's 15mv...

I asked long ago if someone had access to an oscilloscope to do reads like this, but no one has ever gotten one. Without a scope, there's no "proof" about what's going on. A scope hooked up to CPU On-die sense (VCC Sense and VSS_Sense ground) would be perfect proof of a comparison.


----------



## Moparman

Why do we all keep going back to using P95? I was going to pull out my scope but I have had such an improvement with F8 on the master that I didn't see any reason to worry about any of it. I was able to get 4000+ mem to work and a 5.2ghz to work no issue with 4900 cache. I haven't had a crash in any benchmark or real world workload and i would never dare put p95 on anything i own nor have I.


----------



## Falkentyne

Moparman said:


> Why do we all keep going back to using P95? I was going to pull out my scope but I have had such an improvement with F8 on the master that I didn't see any reason to worry about any of it. I was able to get 4000+ mem to work and a 5.2ghz to work no issue with 4900 cache. I haven't had a crash in any benchmark or real world workload and i would never dare put p95 on anything i own nor have I.


F8 does improve memory overclocking, and if you're not close to your VMIN, you're going to be fine, but the transients *are* worse.
Booting to a BSOD in F8 at the same settings that work in F8E all the time is a problem. Just because you have no problem with it doesn't mean a problem doesn't exist.


----------



## Moparman

So adjust the settings in the new bios. I wouldn't think settings from one Bios version to another would be the same since things are different.


----------



## Falkentyne

Moparman said:


> So adjust the settings in the new bios. I wouldn't think settings from one Bios version to another would be the same since things are different.


Thats the problem! it's NOT the settings!

Explain this for me, please.
I mean you know how much work I've done with the loadlines, right? I am not stupid.

Settings: 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz core/cache. All power savings disabled, all power limits maxed, current limits maxed.
Vcore Loadline calibration: High (0.8 mOhms), Phase control Ext, Switch Rate 500 khz.
Bios voltage 1.230v

Prime95 29.8 build 1, in place fixed FFT 15K-15K, FMA3:
F8E: pass 10 hours.

F8: thread 6 crash: 10 minutes. (Need +15mv vcore for F8 to pass 10 hours but then higher current, VR VOUT, temps obviously!)

Exact same max temp on core #2 (82c), VR VOUT 1.109v on each bios.

Explain that to me?
(An Oscilloscope would answer this 100%, but I can take my guess: Transient response is WORSE in F8 for some reason at the same settings as F8E (as if loadline calibration is more unstable somehow at the same level-higher levels of LLC worsen transient response on all motherboards (Raja and Shamino explained that on ROG forums, so your VMIN increases at heavy amps load, the higher LLC you use!).


----------



## Moparman

Falkentyne said:


> Thats the problem! it's NOT the settings!
> 
> Explain this for me, please.
> I mean you know how much work I've done with the loadlines, right? I am not stupid.
> 
> Settings: 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz core/cache. All power savings disabled, all power limits maxed, current limits maxed.
> Vcore Loadline calibration: High (0.8 mOhms), Phase control Ext, Switch Rate 500 khz.
> 
> Prime95 29.8 build 1, in place fixed FFT 15K-15K, FMA3:
> F8E: pass 10 hours.
> 
> F8: thread 6 crash: 10 minutes. (Need +15mv vcore for F8 to pass 10 hours but then higher current, VR VOUT, temps obviously!)
> 
> Exact same max temp on core #2 (82c), VR VOUT 1.109v on each bios.
> 
> Explain that to me?
> (An Oscilloscope would answer this 100%, but I can take my guess: Transient response is WORSE in F8 for some reason at the same settings as F8E (as if loadline calibration is more unstable somehow at the same level-higher levels of LLC worsen transient response on all motherboards (Raja and Shamino explained that on ROG forums, so your VMIN increases at heavy amps load, the higher LLC you use!).



Yes i give you major credit for all the testing you have done and it is great to have that. I have a nice scope in storage but just haven't had time to go dig it out and pull my rig apart. But I do bet something they have changed in the bios is what is causing your issue i'm sure.


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> Thats the problem! it's NOT the settings!
> 
> Explain this for me, please.
> I mean you know how much work I've done with the loadlines, right? I am not stupid.
> 
> Settings: 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz core/cache. All power savings disabled, all power limits maxed, current limits maxed.
> Vcore Loadline calibration: High (0.8 mOhms), Phase control Ext, Switch Rate 500 khz.
> Bios voltage 1.230v
> 
> Prime95 29.8 build 1, in place fixed FFT 15K-15K, FMA3:
> F8E: pass 10 hours.
> 
> F8: thread 6 crash: 10 minutes. (Need +15mv vcore for F8 to pass 10 hours but then higher current, VR VOUT, temps obviously!)
> 
> Exact same max temp on core #2 (82c), VR VOUT 1.109v on each bios.
> 
> Explain that to me?
> (An Oscilloscope would answer this 100%, but I can take my guess: Transient response is WORSE in F8 for some reason at the same settings as F8E (as if loadline calibration is more unstable somehow at the same level-higher levels of LLC worsen transient response on all motherboards (Raja and Shamino explained that on ROG forums, so your VMIN increases at heavy amps load, the higher LLC you use!).


Could your problem be the microcode update version in the bios? Have you tried Kedarwolf's mod?


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Could your problem be the microcode update version in the bios? Have you tried Kedarwolf's mod?


Not the microcode.
I tested it with VMware before flashing it.
It's the transient voltage response in the bios. Something is wrong with the signal or regulation.
Plus, F8E and F8 Final (stock) both have the same microcode (A2).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Not the microcode.
> I tested it with VMware before flashing it.
> It's the transient voltage response in the bios. Something is wrong with the signal or regulation.
> Plus, F8E and F8 Final (stock) both have the same microcode (A2).


The modded BIOS's have a newer microcode. Not saying that is the issue, but would be interesting to see the difference.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> The modded BIOS's have a newer microcode. Not saying that is the issue, but would be interesting to see the difference.


Doesn't help. I tested AE microcode with VMware.
It's nothing to do with the microcode.
It's the VRM regulation or something that got something made worse starting with F8H.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted, see new and improved BIOS settings POST.


Old ones wouldn't always pass stressapptest or HCI MemTest, new ones on thread work much better! 


More voltage is NOT always better. :h34r-smi


----------



## Driller au

Nice work Kedarwolf see your back on the F8e bios at those settings what does your DVID max out at ? i assume your idle is 0.864 . 
Since i asked a few pages back about the idle reboots i have had success with only C3 enabled and every other one disabled including C1E and RTH still with dummy load enabled


----------



## Intrud3r

Driller au said:


> Nice work Kedarwolf see your back on the F8e bios at those settings what does your DVID max out at ? i assume your idle is 0.864 .
> Since i asked a few pages back about the idle reboots i have had success with only C3 enabled and every other one disabled including C1E and RTH still with dummy load enabled


Just a heads up, for me it seems VCCSA at 1.250V seems to help with C-states above C3.

Before, I had VCCSA at 1.220V in the bios which results in 1.232V. Anything above C3 enabled gives my igpu driver issues right after logging on and idling on desktop.

Upped VCCSA to 1.250V --> problem solved.
Lowered VCCSA to 1.240V --> immediately after logging in, igpu driver issue when computer idles.
Upped VCCSA to 1.250V and I'm still running without issues it seems.

Didn't know VCCSA had anything to do with C-state stability, but here goes.
As I didn't change any other settings my conclusion is that it helps.


----------



## Driller au

Intrud3r said:


> Just a heads up, for me it seems VCCSA at 1.250V seems to help with C-states above C3.
> 
> Before, I had VCCSA at 1.220V in the bios which results in 1.232V. Anything above C3 enabled gives my igpu driver issues right after logging on and idling on desktop.
> 
> Upped VCCSA to 1.250V --> problem solved.
> Lowered VCCSA to 1.240V --> immediately after logging in, igpu driver issue when computer idles.
> Upped VCCSA to 1.250V and I'm still running without issues it seems.
> 
> Didn't know VCCSA had anything to do with C-state stability, but here goes.
> As I didn't change any other settings my conclusion is that it helps.


Will try this at current DVID and see what happens

Edit:nope BFv just freezes/locks up system


----------



## BIOSbreaker

Hey everybody,

just chiming in that I've succeeded in manually reflashing the BIOS with the help of the CH341A tool, "black edition". It cost me more than if I'd bought a pre-flashed chip off eBay and just swapping it, but where's the fun in that eh? For anyone thinking about doing the same, as previously said - you should get a bundle like this . I had to buy both separately from different e-shops in my country for 4x the price... at least the delivery was within 3 days 

About the procedure - Initially I had a problem of detecting the chip, it was because of some strange contact issue between the SOIC8 clip and the flasher itself (not to mention they delivered the SOIC8 clip to me with bent connection pins - I was really happy to use the bent nose pliers I bought for extracting the chip!) - I had to unplug the flat cable from connector and reseat it again for the software to detect my chip. As previously mentioned, under Windows 10 x64 1903, both AsProgrammer 1.4 and CH341A version 1.4 (what an irony in the version numbers) worked flawlessly, when diffing the BIN file of the BIOS and what was read from chip, they had a 100% match. I would avoid version CH341A version 1.34 however as I had some dodgy results from reading the freshly flashed chip and then comparing it to the source BIOS file.

To my surprise, the physical switches on the motherboard for BIOS selection now work (both BIOSes F8)! I set it to operate in Single Bios mode for well.. forever. When I shut down the system and unplugged the power cable, set the BIOS selector to position 2, it briefly lights up the Main Bios (Going through some short procedure) and then switches to Backup Bios. Just to be safe I ordered a few more chips off eBay in case I play with overclocking till I break it again.

Just a few tips for anyone who will be doing the same in the future:


I used these pliers from Pro's Kit - they made removing the chip, manipulating it and and placing it back a breeze! You can even lightly grab the edges of DIP socket on board and open it with ease.
The Chip is pretty damn little but strudy - I might have reclipped it about 30 times and it fell a few times because of my butter fingers, don't be nervous!
Make a picture of the chip's orientation in the open DIP socket.
If you get sweaty hands the default color marking the pin 1 gets wiped very easily - if so, have some sort of permanent marker handy.
You have to straighten the chip's legs back after squeezing them (repeatedly?) between the clip jaws - you can use a precision flathead screwdriver (product page for reference) to correct the pins slowly one by one. I had vivid memories of destroying many microchip's legs by bending them over and over as a kid, fortunately the history didn't repeat itself now.
If you can't seem to identify the chip and are sure the pins clip nicely to the contacts of the SOIC8 clip - disconnect, check bent pins and reconnect everything that is not soldered on till you get a successful detection.

As a bonus for anyone interested, here's the diff between the corrupt and a clean BIOS file. Crazy!

EDIT: Props to @KedarWolf and @Falkentyne for their inputs! Cheers, guys!


----------



## Falkentyne

BIOSbreaker said:


> Hey everybody,
> 
> just chiming in that I've succeeded in manually reflashing the BIOS with the help of the CH341A tool, "black edition". It cost me more than if I'd bought a pre-flashed chip off eBay and just swapping it, but where's the fun in that eh? For anyone thinking about doing the same, as previously said - you should get a bundle like this . I had to buy both separately from different e-shops in my country for 4x the price... at least the delivery was within 3 days
> 
> About the procedure - Initially I had a problem of detecting the chip, it was because of some strange contact issue between the SOIC8 clip and the flasher itself (not to mention they delivered the SOIC8 clip to me with bent connection pins - I was really happy to use the bent nose pliers I bought for extracting the chip!) - I had to unplug the flat cable from connector and reseat it again for the software to detect my chip. As previously mentioned, under Windows 10 x64 1903, both AsProgrammer 1.4 and CH341A version 1.4 (what an irony in the version numbers) worked flawlessly, when diffing the BIN file of the BIOS and what was read from chip, they had a 100% match. I would avoid version CH341A version 1.34 however as I had some dodgy results from reading the freshly flashed chip and then comparing it to the source BIOS file.
> 
> To my surprise, the physical switches on the motherboard for BIOS selection now work (both BIOSes F8)! I set it to operate in Single Bios mode for well.. forever. When I shut down the system and unplugged the power cable, set the BIOS selector to position 2, it briefly lights up the Main Bios (Going through some short procedure) and then switches to Backup Bios. Just to be safe I ordered a few more chips off eBay in case I play with overclocking till I break it again.
> 
> Just a few tips for anyone who will be doing the same in the future:
> 
> 
> I used these pliers from Pro's Kit - they made removing the chip, manipulating it and and placing it back a breeze! You can even lightly grab the edges of DIP socket on board and open it with ease.
> The Chip is pretty damn little but strudy - I might have reclipped it about 30 times and it fell a few times because of my butter fingers, don't be nervous!
> Make a picture of the chip's orientation in the open DIP socket.
> If you get sweaty hands the default color marking the pin 1 gets wiped very easily - if so, have some sort of permanent marker handy.
> You have to straighten the chip's legs back after squeezing them (repeatedly?) between the clip jaws - you can use a precision flathead screwdriver (product page for reference) to correct the pins slowly one by one. I had vivid memories of destroying many microchip's legs by bending them over and over as a kid, fortunately the history didn't repeat itself now.
> If you can't seem to identify the chip and are sure the pins clip nicely to the contacts of the SOIC8 clip - disconnect, check bent pins and reconnect everything that is not soldered on till you get a successful detection.
> 
> As a bonus for anyone interested, here's the diff between the corrupt and a clean BIOS file. Crazy!
> 
> EDIT: Props to @KedarWolf and @Falkentyne for their inputs! Cheers, guys!


I have a skypro somewhere but I don't know if I have any socket SOIC8 adapters. Might have one that came with my RT809F I wasted money on a few years ago. I know it came with some adapters for sure.


----------



## BIOSbreaker

Just did a quick google search for RT809F and you will almost certainly have them lying around somewhere  You'd just need to have a horizontal USB connection (don't know if there is any clamping mechanism) - I used the one from my keyboard and all went well. I guess any SOP8 DIP8 socket/clip will do when you have just the right amount of pin contact surface and PIN1 is correctly positioned


----------



## nstndg

*AVX offset*

I'm having a problem with AVX offset when I try overclocking my 9900K on my Aorus Pro Wifi. If I use a static voltage and use an AVX offset (no matter what), the system crashes as soon as I start a stress test that is NOT using AVX instructions, tests with AVX instructions work fine. I'm on the latest BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf - i9 9900K 5.1GHz CPU/4.7GHz cache - 4200MHz-C17-17-17-38-2T - 1.44v - VCCIO 1.25 - SA 1.26v - Stressapptest 1 Hour

Updated, voltages changed. Now 100% GSAT stable. Old post I deleted wasn't 100% stable, half the time got errors. MORE voltage is NOT always better, eg. RAM voltages. :drum:

Will run HCI MemTest overnight as the final test. :h34r-smi


----------



## wingman99

nstndg said:


> I'm having a problem with AVX offset when I try overclocking my 9900K on my Aorus Pro Wifi. If I use a static voltage and use an AVX offset (no matter what), the system crashes as soon as I start a stress test that is NOT using AVX instructions, tests with AVX instructions work fine. I'm on the latest BIOS.


I would increase the core voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

nstndg said:


> I'm having a problem with AVX offset when I try overclocking my 9900K on my Aorus Pro Wifi. If I use a static voltage and use an AVX offset (no matter what), the system crashes as soon as I start a stress test that is NOT using AVX instructions, tests with AVX instructions work fine. I'm on the latest BIOS.


Your guardband voltage tolerance is too loose for an AVX offset. Remove the AVX offset and your non AVX stress tests will not crash anymore. Give it a try and see for yourself.
If you still insist on using that offset anyway after you do that test (report your results), then steepen your loadline (use more vdroop) and a higher bios voltage. Lower levels of LLC have a tighter guardband (better transient response).


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf
Can you do your excellent Bios mod for this bios?
https://esupport.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Answer/2019/4/698999/Z390AORUSMASTER.zip

It comes with the A2 microcode and older firmwares.
Doing some stress testing right now and very quick, un-thorough results seem to be better than F8H/F8i/F8 (All of these started acting funky with the voltage regulation when close to your VMIN), but it takes days to do a full battery.

So no way to know for sure but at least there wasn't a 10 minute crashed thread in FMA3 15K prime95 at 1.230v LLC High (4.7/4.4 ghz cache ratios) that I had on F8, where F8E ran 10 hours.

So take that with a grain of salt. Someone else will have to test it to make sure.
(version F9B).


----------



## scaramonga

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf
> Can you do your excellent Bios mod for this bios?
> https://esupport.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/Answer/2019/4/698999/Z390AORUSMASTER.zip
> 
> It comes with the A2 microcode and older firmwares.
> Doing some stress testing right now and very quick, un-thorough results seem to be better than F8H/F8i/F8 (All of these started acting funky with the voltage regulation when close to your VMIN), but it takes days to do a full battery.
> 
> So no way to know for sure but at least there wasn't a 10 minute crashed thread in FMA3 15K prime95 at 1.230v LLC High (4.7/4.4 ghz cache ratios) that I had on F8, where F8E ran 10 hours.
> 
> So take that with a grain of salt. Someone else will have to test it to make sure.
> (version F9B).


Done it for ya, but if you wish to wait for KedarWolf, that is fine


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> Done it for ya, but if you wish to wait for KedarWolf, that is fine


The modded BIOS you did is 100% correct.


----------



## R3van

flashing via dos is still mandatory?


----------



## KedarWolf

R3van said:


> flashing via dos is still mandatory?


Yes, any modified BIOS will not flash with EZFlash.


----------



## R3van

Thanks to both of you @scaramonga and @KedarWolf.

You updated the RST (SATA Controller?) and the network firmware if i get it right? Or are there additional changes?


----------



## KedarWolf

R3van said:


> Thanks to both of you @scaramonga and @KedarWolf.
> 
> You updated the RST (SATA Controller?) and the network firmware if i get it right? Or are there additional changes?


Microcode updated as well. :h34r-smi


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> The modded BIOS you did is 100% correct.


Anyone find out if this bios is as stable as F8E, or does it require +15mv average higher for same minimum stability like F8H and F8 final did?


----------



## R3van

what do you expect?
im about to flash it today and do some tests.
how did it work for you?


----------



## Timur Born

A word of warning: After removing and reinserting the power-plug from my PC the time I booted my AIO pump was not working at all. It is connected to the CPU fan-header and up to now worked properly there. A simple shutdown and restart solved the issue.

My suspicion is that the "Auto" PWM/voltage detection did not work, as the pump is not PWM but voltage controlled. I now manually set the fan-header to voltage.

All other fans worked fine, which were already manually set to PWM.

This is a good example why there ought to be a speaker soldered directly to the mainboard.


----------



## R3van

i flashed the modded f9b.
I can`t see any difference regarding voltage.

1344k AVX DVID +60mv is still stable (1.270v)
1344k AVX DVID +50mv is still throwing WHEAs (1.258v) 

Will try now to activate C-States to see if any of these are fixed for me
Edit -> No difference with anything above C3: WHEA in no time in Heaven. going back to disable C-States again.

Conclusion: I see no difference between F8 and F9b with my system.


----------



## nstndg

I have been trying to get my overclock stable for the last three weeks but nothing seems to be working... 

My setup:
i9 9900K
2x8GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3200 CL16
Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi / Bios: F9
CoolerMaster ML360R

The way I test stability:
15 Minutes AIDA64
Cinebench R15
IntelBurnTest - Standard
IntelBurnTest - Very high
IntelBurnTest - Maximum
~8 hours OCCT Large Data Set
1 hour RealBench

I cannot seem to get my CPU stable at 5Ghz. The last try I did was with X.M.P. profile disabled, voltage at 1.35V, all c-states disabled, LLC=Turbo, cache left at 4.3 Ghz and 0 AVX offset. With these settings I still end up getting L0 cache errors and the temperatures are spiking around 95C... I'm not feeling very comfortable going above 1.35V. Everything stock with X.M.P. profile enabled is stable. Do I just have a very bad chip? Some input would be nice!


----------



## Falkentyne

nstndg said:


> I have been trying to get my overclock stable for the last three weeks but nothing seems to be working...
> 
> My setup:
> i9 9900K
> 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3200 CL16
> Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi / Bios: F9
> CoolerMaster ML360R
> 
> The way I test stability:
> 15 Minutes AIDA64
> Cinebench R15
> IntelBurnTest - Standard
> IntelBurnTest - Very high
> IntelBurnTest - Maximum
> ~8 hours OCCT Large Data Set
> 1 hour RealBench
> 
> I cannot seem to get my CPU stable at 5Ghz. The last try I did was with X.M.P. profile disabled, voltage at 1.35V, all c-states disabled, LLC=Turbo, cache left at 4.3 Ghz and 0 AVX offset. With these settings I still end up getting L0 cache errors and the temperatures are spiking around 95C... I'm not feeling very comfortable going above 1.35V. Everything stock with X.M.P. profile enabled is stable. Do I just have a very bad chip? Some input would be nice!


Save your bios profile,
Then power off

Now,
Clear CMOS first.

Boot,
Set CPU Vcore 1.36v
CPU Vcore Loadline calibration=Turbo
PWM switching frequency:500 khz
PWM phase control: Extreme.
CPU Vcore current protection=Extreme
CPU Vcore/VAXG protection: highest
CPU Current Limit: 255 amps
Ring Down Bin: Disabled or Enabled (try both).
MCE: Disabled (you can also consider testing MCE: enabled if your board does not have all of the PWM or current protection above)

If your bios does not have the PWM options, just try without them.
If still unsuccessful, run 4.9 ghz and accept the loss.


----------



## shaolin95

Guys, can you tell me how to select the Monitor the BIOS will go to? I see an option but no matter what I select it always goes to my left monitor. Annoying. :/


----------



## R3van

change monitor cable


----------



## shaolin95

R3van said:


> change monitor cable


If that was an option, I would have done it....


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> Guys, can you tell me how to select the Monitor the BIOS will go to? I see an option but no matter what I select it always goes to my left monitor. Annoying. :/


Disable CSM in the BIOS.

And under Initial Display Output choose PCI-E.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> Disable CSM in the BIOS.
> 
> And under Initial Display Output choose PCI-E.


You are the man!!!! THanks 
Now to try your latest settings. Looks like you are back to your modded 8E, right?


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> You are the man!!!! THanks
> Now to try your latest settings. Looks like you are back to your modded 8E, right?


I'm on modded F9b.


----------



## warbucks

KedarWolf said:


> I'm on modded F9b.


F9b? Do you mean F8b? I haven't seen a beta bios for F9 yet.


----------



## KedarWolf

warbucks said:


> F9b? Do you mean F8b? I haven't seen a beta bios for F9 yet.




https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1109.html#post511524


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1109.html#post511524


"Fan curves glitching" I have that problem only just worked out a work around in bios if its the same problem I see when saving curves
Everything else is the same as the other modded bios ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> "Fan curves glitching" I have that problem only just worked out a work around in bios if its the same problem I see when saving curves
> Everything else is the same as the other modded bios ?


Yes, all else the same.


----------



## robertr1

nstndg said:


> I have been trying to get my overclock stable for the last three weeks but nothing seems to be working...
> 
> My setup:
> i9 9900K
> 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3200 CL16
> Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi / Bios: F9
> CoolerMaster ML360R
> 
> The way I test stability:
> 15 Minutes AIDA64
> Cinebench R15
> IntelBurnTest - Standard
> IntelBurnTest - Very high
> IntelBurnTest - Maximum
> ~8 hours OCCT Large Data Set
> 1 hour RealBench
> 
> I cannot seem to get my CPU stable at 5Ghz. The last try I did was with X.M.P. profile disabled, voltage at 1.35V, all c-states disabled, LLC=Turbo, cache left at 4.3 Ghz and 0 AVX offset. With these settings I still end up getting L0 cache errors and the temperatures are spiking around 95C... I'm not feeling very comfortable going above 1.35V. Everything stock with X.M.P. profile enabled is stable. Do I just have a very bad chip? Some input would be nice!


I got the same setup as you. You might just have a poor chip, unfortunately.

I run 1.26v in bios (f9) with LLC turbo. MCE disabled and then disable the c-states manually just as a double check. 

The L0 cache errors are a voltage thing most of the time so it looks like your chip just needs a lot of vcore to run 5ghz. 

A quick way to get L0 errors is running the benchmark is Intel XTU for whatever reason. It's faster than sitting through hours of other testing.


----------



## davidm71

Hi guys,

Going to jump in on overclocking my ram and got a question about how to manually set timings in bios because I see that the Z390 Master has two menus for each channel with values to set.

So you have to set your values twice?!

Never had to set values twice before on any board.

Thanks.


----------



## davidm71

Was experimenting with overclocking my RAM from 3200mhz to 3600mhz and that was successful short of my multiplier for my cpu overclock jumping up and down occasionally to X47 when it should be fixed at X50 for 5.0ghz!

On Bios F8 Z390 Master. Could it be because of an AVX 3 offset??

Thanks


----------



## BradleyW

New chipset drivers available for Z390 ULTRA (April).


----------



## Driller au

If nothing else F9b fixes the glitch when saving fan profiles


----------



## Driller au

davidm71 said:


> Was experimenting with overclocking my RAM from 3200mhz to 3600mhz and that was successful short of my multiplier for my cpu overclock jumping up and down occasionally to X47 when it should be fixed at X50 for 5.0ghz!
> 
> On Bios F8 Z390 Master. Could it be because of an AVX 3 offset??
> 
> Thanks


would say so change the offset and see what happens


----------



## davidm71

Driller au said:


> would say so change the offset and see what happens



Changed my power limits to match some of Kedarwolfs profile and got rid of AVX offset and now its locked at 5.0ghz.

At 3600 DDR4 overclock from 3200mhz. Didn't adjust the subtimings at all so the motherboard is leaving them very lax. 

Will need to be tightened later..

Going to try 3733 next as I understand thats the limit for 32gb (2x16gb Sam B-Die) GSkill ram.

Thanks


----------



## davidm71

BradleyW said:


> New chipset drivers available for Z390 ULTRA (April).


Link please??

Thanks


----------



## Rainy4s

anybody help！

using gigabyte z390 elite 

9600K OC to 5hz at 1.29v with Avx offset 2, LLC" turbo"( tested "extreme" will crash less than 10 min) 

actually, it was stable in prime95 (29.8) "blend" for nearly 3 hours, but the temperature range is quite high, maximum at 110°, the lowest at 75°, average at 86° about 2 weeks ago 

however, I constantly experienced BSOD 3 times yesterdays, and I increase that Vcore to 1.32v. I found the Vcore is so choppy, sometimes it even drops to 1.26v. 

right now, It can't run P95 more than 30 min, and it will crash while gaming. I reset the setting to default, and BSOD goes away

Does anyone know how to deal with it?


----------



## nstndg

Falkentyne said:


> Save your bios profile,
> Then power off
> 
> Now,
> Clear CMOS first.
> 
> Boot,
> Set CPU Vcore 1.36v
> CPU Vcore Loadline calibration=Turbo
> PWM switching frequency:500 khz
> PWM phase control: Extreme.
> CPU Vcore current protection=Extreme
> CPU Vcore/VAXG protection: highest
> CPU Current Limit: 255 amps
> Ring Down Bin: Disabled or Enabled (try both).
> MCE: Disabled (you can also consider testing MCE: enabled if your board does not have all of the PWM or current protection above)
> 
> If your bios does not have the PWM options, just try without them.
> If still unsuccessful, run 4.9 ghz and accept the loss.





robertr1 said:


> I got the same setup as you. You might just have a poor chip, unfortunately.
> 
> I run 1.26v in bios (f9) with LLC turbo. MCE disabled and then disable the c-states manually just as a double check.
> 
> The L0 cache errors are a voltage thing most of the time so it looks like your chip just needs a lot of vcore to run 5ghz.
> 
> A quick way to get L0 errors is running the benchmark is Intel XTU for whatever reason. It's faster than sitting through hours of other testing.


Even 1.36V is not stable so I have to accept the loss. I will now try 4.9 GHz. Which voltage would you use as a starting point here? Right now I am trying out 1.3V with X.M.P. enabled and I already saw CPU Cache L0 Errors... This might be the worst chip one could buy... I'm wondering if I should just accept it and not overclock at all but then I wonder why I spent all that money on a 9900K plus a 360 AIO...


----------



## Falkentyne

nstndg said:


> Even 1.36V is not stable so I have to accept the loss. I will now try 4.9 GHz. Which voltage would you use as a starting point here? Right now I am trying out 1.3V with X.M.P. enabled and I already saw CPU Cache L0 Errors... This might be the worst chip one could buy... I'm wondering if I should just accept it and not overclock at all but then I wonder why I spent all that money on a 9900K plus a 360 AIO...


Start with 1.35v, LLC Turbo, and work your way down -10mv at a time.
To be honest, there is indeed something to be said about not playing the silicon lottery and just buying a binned chip from siliconlottery.com itself. You may not get a top binned monster that does 5 ghz @ 1.21v like you may luck out buying a random boxed sample with, but you won't strike out either with something horrible.
Then you know you won't get lemons.
At this point in time though it's probably better to wait for the KF (no iGPU) processors or the R0 steppings to appear, which will clock better (200 or 300 samples of KF chips were tested and all of them were able to do 5 ghz, and one or two did 5.4 on ambient).


----------



## nstndg

I just don't feel like spending another 500-600€ for a CPU that I can overclock a little bit more...
Just before I left for work OCCT had been running (and all previous tests) for almost five hours and no errors so far on [email protected] If there are no errors after work I'll do one more one hour Realbench run and consider it stable and won't go further down as it wasn't stable at 1.325V.


----------



## Driller au

nstndg said:


> I just don't feel like spending another 500-600€ for a CPU that I can overclock a little bit more...
> Just before I left for work OCCT had been running (and all previous tests) for almost five hours and no errors so far on [email protected] If there are no errors after work I'll do one more one hour Realbench run and consider it stable and won't go further down as it wasn't stable at 1.325V.



What are your idle temps? just wondering if your cooler is working 100% if around 30 than it's probably ok


----------



## nstndg

Driller au said:


> What are your idle temps? just wondering if your cooler is working 100% if around 30 than it's probably ok


My idling temperatures are in the mid 30s with 1.34V


----------



## nstndg

While looking at some CableMod cables that fit my color scheme I recognized that there's another ATX_12V_2X2 next to the ATX_12V_2X4 slot. I have only connected my PSU to the 2X4 (8 pin) slot. A quick web search shows that it should not be necessary to connect both but when overclocking it might. Just trying to look at all angles here. Do you have both of them connected or also just the 8pin?


----------



## Driller au

nstndg said:


> While looking at some CableMod cables that fit my color scheme I recognized that there's another ATX_12V_2X2 next to the ATX_12V_2X4 slot. I have only connected my PSU to the 2X4 (8 pin) slot. A quick web search shows that it should not be necessary to connect both but when overclocking it might. Just trying to look at all angles here. Do you have both of them connected or also just the 8pin?


I connected them all and I think most here did 

also it might be helpful if you could post pictures of your bios settings like Kedarwolf does then people a lot smarter than me might see something in them as a last resort


----------



## nstndg

Driller au said:


> I connected them all and I think most here did
> 
> also it might be helpful if you could post pictures of your bios settings like Kedarwolf does then people a lot smarter than me might see something in them as a last resort


I connected the additional 4pin now and these are my current settings (which I have not tested yet as 1.34V was not stable, got L0 cache errors while playing Apex Legends)


----------



## Falkentyne

nstndg said:


> I connected the additional 4pin now and these are my current settings (which I have not tested yet as 1.34V was not stable, got L0 cache errors while playing Apex Legends)


Don't use Apex Legends for any sort of test. It crashes on everyone's overclocked 8700K-9900K without a massive increase in voltage (some sort of Intel low level timing bug; the programmer is going to release a patch to try to avoid this issue). Just use your previous programs (realbench 2.56, 2 hour test, etc).


----------



## Driller au

To start with you could take your VCCIO and SYSTEM AGENT off auto and set them to vccio 1.050 and SA to 1.200 to start with, on auto with xmp the bios set them at 1.300 I run mine at vccio 1.00 and SA 1.150 and that passes P95 1344 with avx NO fma
You can also have intel speed shift enabled and EIST enabled
Falkentyne and Kedarwolf would be able to help you more and of course if you do have a bad chip this won't help. Falkentyne is the fixed voltage man I run with adaptive DVID
sorry if some of this does not make sense it's 2.00am here


----------



## nstndg

Falkentyne said:


> Don't use Apex Legends for any sort of test. It crashes on everyone's overclocked 8700K-9900K without a massive increase in voltage (some sort of Intel low level timing bug; the programmer is going to release a patch to try to avoid this issue). Just use your previous programs (realbench 2.56, 2 hour test, etc).


Well, it actually doesn't crash. I just checked HWInfo after a couple of hours playing it and saw a couple of L0 cache errors. Is that still not something I should care about?


----------



## nstndg

ignore what I said here


----------



## Intrud3r

nstndg said:


> I connected the additional 4pin now and these are my current settings (which I have not tested yet as 1.34V was not stable, got L0 cache errors while playing Apex Legends)
> 
> Some bios pictures


I would start with disabling BCLK adaptive voltage and test again. That setting messes up my overclock when it is enabled.


----------



## nstndg

I can't believe what I'm seeing right now. After I plugged in the additional EPS 4pin next to the EPS 8pin I thought I'd start from the beginning to see if that actually makes a difference. I started running 1.3V and for a short time even tried 4.7GHz cache which INSTANTLY crashed before. Right now I'm starting to go through my test suite with just [email protected], XMP Profile enabled, MCE disabled and ring down bin disabled. I'm just at the start of the stress testing but these settings would not hold for more than ten seconds before. I am also seeing a slightly more "stable" temperature graph as right now AIDA64 is barely going over 80... It looks like that cable is necessary for overclocking? Idle temperatures were also below 30, which they were not before...Always low 30s

EDIT: VRM temperature is also a couple of degrees lower?!


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> I would start with disabling BCLK adaptive voltage and test again. That setting messes up my overclock when it is enabled.


How does that setting mess up your overclock (in what way, exactly) if it's enabled or auto? I mean, your BCLK is 100 mhz regardless right? (right? 
And how would it do anything on manual (fixed) voltage? (yes I am aware you are using auto/DVID). But I am quite curious about this! (how it exactly affects you yourself, because the other poster is on fixed vcore, not auto/dvid). Thank you for enlightening me with your science on this.


----------



## Falkentyne

nstndg said:


> I can't believe what I'm seeing right now. After I plugged in the additional EPS 4pin next to the EPS 8pin I thought I'd start from the beginning to see if that actually makes a difference. I started running 1.3V and for a short time even tried 4.7GHz cache which INSTANTLY crashed before. Right now I'm starting to go through my test suite with just [email protected], XMP Profile enabled, MCE disabled and ring down bin disabled. I'm just at the start of the stress testing but these settings would not hold for more than ten seconds before. I am also seeing a slightly more "stable" temperature graph as right now AIDA64 is barely going over 80... It looks like that cable is necessary for overclocking? Idle temperatures were also below 30, which they were not before...Always low 30s
> 
> EDIT: VRM temperature is also a couple of degrees lower?!


Do a full test suite and report back. I'm guessing you will still need to increase vcore in the end but not as much as before. Plugging in the extra cable helps stabilize the CPU +12v and stop it from sagging. A low CPU +12v can cause stability problems. You can see the +CPU 12v in the Intersil or IR 35201 VR VOUT area somewhere (it will be a different reading than the PSU +12v which is shown higher up).


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> How does that setting mess up your overclock (in what way, exactly) if it's enabled or auto? I mean, your BCLK is 100 mhz regardless right? (right?
> And how would it do anything on manual (fixed) voltage? (yes I am aware you are using auto/DVID). But I am quite curious about this! (how it exactly affects you yourself, because the other poster is on fixed vcore, not auto/dvid). Thank you for enlightening me with your science on this.


The reason why I mentioned it is that maybe it (BCLK setting) messes something up with transient responses.

My base clock is indeed 100Mhz, but the setting speaks of BCLK Adaptive voltage, so the Mhz speed is not in question here ... the voltage adjustment is.

And somehow as soon as I set it to "Auto" my system crashed before when I ran prime for example. Disable it without touching other settings let me run prime small fft's for at least 10 minutes.

So on my system it had a negative impact on my overclock. Just trying to find something to help him ... this is the only thing I could think of looking at his bios pictures.


----------



## nstndg

Falkentyne said:


> Do a full test suite and report back. I'm guessing you will still need to increase vcore in the end but not as much as before. Plugging in the extra cable helps stabilize the CPU +12v and stop it from sagging. A low CPU +12v can cause stability problems. You can see the +CPU 12v in the Intersil or IR 35201 VR VOUT area somewhere (it will be a different reading than the PSU +12v which is shown higher up).


II will definitely report back. I'm sure I'm not suddenly the owner of an amazing chip but I can definitely see an improvement. I guess I'm lucky that I'm not happy with my cable colours, otherwise I would not have checked that stuff again xD. It also seems that not all PSUs come with a second CPU 8pin but my Corsair RM850x does..


----------



## Intrud3r

Btw ... just talking about my own setup. I'm running 5.0 / 4.7 with DVID = +0.020V and VCCIO = 1.000V and VCCSA = 1.150V. Seems to work like a charm.

And ... I don't really see that much of a difference in temps ... ok, my pch temp is a bit lower ... wow


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> The reason why I mentioned it is that maybe it (BCLK setting) messes something up with transient responses.
> 
> My base clock is indeed 100Mhz, but the setting speaks of BCLK Adaptive voltage, so the Mhz speed is not in question here ... the voltage adjustment is.
> 
> And somehow as soon as I set it to "Auto" my system crashed before when I ran prime for example. Disable it without touching other settings let me run prime small fft's for at least 10 minutes.
> 
> So on my system it had a negative impact on my overclock. Just trying to find something to help him ... this is the only thing I could think of looking at his bios pictures.


If you're....ahem......not too bored....uh.......(yeah I'm begging here), can you do a quick test with prime with it disabled and record your VR VOUT while you're running prime?
Then set it to auto, reboot, and run prime again, record your VR VOUT and what kind of crash you get (thread crash or BSOD?) and if the VR VOUT is still exactly the same?
You don't have to do it though but well I am curious. Thank you


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> If you're....ahem......not too bored....uh.......(yeah I'm begging here), can you do a quick test with prime with it disabled and record your VR VOUT while you're running prime?
> Then set it to auto, reboot, and run prime again, record your VR VOUT and what kind of crash you get (thread crash or BSOD?) and if the VR VOUT is still exactly the same?
> You don't have to do it though but well I am curious. Thank you




You'll get your results ... just gimme a day. Got visitors atm ...

Here's my prime test with it disabled (Prime 29.6b7 small fft's no avx):

Vcore lowest I see = 1.246V and highest is 1.268V while running.


----------



## davidm71

LMAO


----------



## Intrud3r

Hush ... I don't wanna let it crash while peeps are here 

And I could run it longer at these settings, but the only difference the picture will show is max core temp = 93C and max package temp = 93C ... rest would be the same ...

Or it's about my video showing, that's just a classic.

Or it's about my monitor setup ... screenshots don't do it justice.

Or ... I donnow ...


----------



## Rider0375

*Wake On Lan - Z390 Aorus Ultra*

Hey everyone!

This will be my first post, only because I've been frustrated with WOL, and its ability to work lol.

I have everything enabled, it even gives me the option on my ASUS router to wake it up, when its powered off, as it sees that it has the ability. When I tell it to wake up, it does nothing. 

If its in sleep mode, or hibernation mode, it WILL wakeup via sending the signal.

What do I need to do differently to make this work from a powered down state? I've never owned a motherboard that wouldnt WOL from a powered off state.

Thanks for the tips!


----------



## Intrud3r

Just saying:

WOL = Wake on LAN


----------



## nstndg

5.0/[email protected] - VCCIO 1.15V - VCCSA 1.15V seems to be stable. Have not run the whole suite yet because I wanted to play some Apex games but in there no errors so far either. Going to post another update tomorrow. If this will prove stable then that's already a win for sure. I'm going to try and increase the cache and see how far I can get it with 1.37V afterwards


----------



## Driller au

nstndg said:


> 5.0/[email protected] - VCCIO 1.15V - VCCSA 1.15V seems to be stable. Have not run the whole suite yet because I wanted to play some Apex games but in there no errors so far either. Going to post another update tomorrow. If this will prove stable then that's already a win for sure. I'm going to try and increase the cache and see how far I can get it with 1.37V afterwards


good to see your making progress


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> If you're....ahem......not too bored....uh.......(yeah I'm begging here), can you do a quick test with prime with it disabled and record your VR VOUT while you're running prime?
> Then set it to auto, reboot, and run prime again, record your VR VOUT and what kind of crash you get (thread crash or BSOD?) and if the VR VOUT is still exactly the same?
> You don't have to do it though but well I am curious. Thank you


So here goes:

Please explain to me why my system is behaving this way 

Ran prime the evening before (posted pic already) and showed a lowest vcore of about 1.246V having bclk adaptive voltage disabled.

Rebooted this morning, set bclk adaptive voltage to "Auto" and started up windows.

Started prime and noticed a lower vcore of 1.237V
Stopped the test as I don't wanna let it crash, but it's borderline at that voltage. Could BSOD on me with machine check errors or what not.

See first picture.

Rebooted and disabled bclk adaptive voltage again, started up windows and started a new prime test.

Vcore would start at around 1.240V dropped a couple of times to 1.237V and stabilizied after about 2 minutes running at around 1.242V or something around that value.

See second picture.

P.S. Don't ask me why HWiNFO doesn't show some values in the second pic. It showed them nicely when I was taking the screenshot ... so something frecked up.

Last time I lowered my DVID value with 0.005V down to DVID = +0.015V and it froze while running prime small FFT's after about 8 minutes. Just froze, maybe it would still BSOD on me if I would have waited longer, but I let it hang in the freeze state for about 20 second before I rebooted the machine using the power button. Rebooted and upped DVID again to +0.020V and it runs prime small FFT's without issues for at least 10 min.


----------



## wingman99

I changed BCLK from AUTO to disabled and there was no core voltage change, even when I went back to AUTO. I checked the core voltage for change in BIOS since it is more stable with DVID readings then software running variations.


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> So here goes:
> 
> Please explain to me why my system is behaving this way
> 
> Ran prime the evening before (posted pic already) and showed a lowest vcore of about 1.246V having bclk adaptive voltage disabled.
> 
> Rebooted this morning, set bclk adaptive voltage to "Auto" and started up windows.
> 
> Started prime and noticed a lower vcore of 1.237V
> Stopped the test as I don't wanna let it crash, but it's borderline at that voltage. Could BSOD on me with machine check errors or what not.
> 
> See first picture.
> 
> Rebooted and disabled bclk adaptive voltage again, started up windows and started a new prime test.
> 
> Vcore would start at around 1.240V dropped a couple of times to 1.237V and stabilizied after about 2 minutes running at around 1.242V or something around that value.
> 
> See second picture.
> 
> P.S. Don't ask me why HWiNFO doesn't show some values in the second pic. It showed them nicely when I was taking the screenshot ... so something frecked up.
> 
> Last time I lowered my DVID value with 0.005V down to DVID = +0.015V and it froze while running prime small FFT's after about 8 minutes. Just froze, maybe it would still BSOD on me if I would have waited longer, but I let it hang in the freeze state for about 20 second before I rebooted the machine using the power button. Rebooted and upped DVID again to +0.020V and it runs prime small FFT's without issues for at least 10 min.


I have no idea what's going on. There's no difference with the BCLK auto/on/off on my system but I don't use adaptive voltage.
I have absolutely no idea. Your current (amps) draw is the same in both the old and new pictures, but your VR VOUT is different. Is it really that setting? or just random? i can't test that...(no change on manual vcore at all)


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> I have no idea what's going on. There's no difference with the BCLK auto/on/off on my system but I don't use adaptive voltage.
> I have absolutely no idea. Your current (amps) draw is the same in both the old and new pictures, but your VR VOUT is different. Is it really that setting? or just random? i can't test that...(no change on manual vcore at all)


I'll let my system run today without rebooting, have to go out in a bit and will be back in a couple of hours.

I'll run another prime test and I'll check the lowest vcore ... I doubt it'll go below 1.240V
It'll prolly keep fluctuating between 1.246-1.258 or something like that like it previously did.

It's just weird.


----------



## Intrud3r

Started another prime test small fft's just to check.

Started at 1.237V jumped almost immediately to 1.246V and kept fluctuating between 1.246 - 1.268V while running prime small FFT's.
This looks like normal except the 1.237 start.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> I'm on modded F9b.


I just flashed it and it shows A0 code after it boots but then changes to code 47. Never seen that one before and the manual does not mention it either.
Any ideas?


----------



## Falkentyne

shaolin95 said:


> I just flashed it and it shows A0 code after it boots but then changes to code 47. Never seen that one before and the manual does not mention it either.
> Any ideas?


Huh?
Do you make it in the bios? Does it boot into windows?
I think A2 is when you're in the bios and A0 is after the OS boot sector loads.


----------



## shaolin95

Falkentyne said:


> Huh?
> Do you make it in the bios? Does it boot into windows?
> I think A2 is when you're in the bios and A0 is after the OS boot sector loads.


Yes I am in Windows just fine. It shows A0 up to the Windows login. After I log in it changes to 47 and stays there


----------



## nstndg

I think I was a little bit too happy too early. 1.37V failed me right at the end of the whole test suit, basically after 7.5 hours of OCCT... This stuff is so time consuming. I think I will just give up on 5GHz still, right now looking at 4.9/[email protected] with VCCSA 1.2V/VCCIO 1.15V. 

If I have found my core speed and voltages and I just want to try and adjust VCCSA and VCCIO is it necessary to run through my whole test suite again or are there other tests that focus more on this area (which should be mostly memory, right?)


----------



## davidm71

Heard BillZoid say Single bios mode is preferred over the dual bios mode on the Master. 

Is this true? For real? 

Why would you?

Thanks


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> KedarWolf - i9 9900K 5.1GHz CPU/4.7GHz cache - 4200MHz-C17-17-17-38-2T - 1.44v - VCCIO 1.25 - SA 1.26v - Stressapptest 1 Hour
> 
> Updated, voltages changed. Now 100% GSAT stable. Old post I deleted wasn't 100% stable, half the time got errors. MORE voltage is NOT always better, eg. RAM voltages. :drum:
> 
> Will run HCI MemTest overnight as the final test. :h34r-smi


Just curious but aree you really using +0.155 now? Cause I remember from your previous settings post that you were always in the negative numbers not even close to even much less positive.
Just double checking 
I copied your last settings post to the F9b modded bios you posted.
Thanks!


----------



## OutlawII

How is the latest bios? Is that what everyone is running?


----------



## KedarWolf

OutlawII said:


> How is the latest bios? Is that what everyone is running?


On the modded F9e I'm Prime95 stable at .140 offset instead of .155 with IA AR Loadline on 1.

But it also might be the improvements with Prime95 29.8 build 3. 

Never mind, had one error. Really annoying I need to open each individual screen on Prime95 to see the error, on my 3140x1080 screen the tests don't scroll and no other way to see the warnings.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> On the modded F9e I'm Prime95 stable at .140 offset instead of .155 with IA AR Loadline on 1.
> 
> But it also might be the improvements with Prime95 29.8 build 3.


No, that means it looks like they fixed the bug in F8 with the voltage regulation, then.
+15mv higher voltage required, that's what me and @Intrud3r found out also.
So it should be as stable as F8E was (this +15mv voltage issue started in F8H)?
*Edit* you said you had one error. Try .145 and check? I still haven't been able to verify conclusively yet due to having delids and putting LM on top of the IHS (not just under it) but a recent test on F8 had a FMA3 thread crash in *one minute* (nothing else running) at 4.7/4.4 when F8E and F9b went 8 hours, so who knows.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> No, that means it looks like they fixed the bug in F8 with the voltage regulation, then.
> +15mv higher voltage required, that's what me and @Intrud3r found out also.
> So it should be as stable as F8E was (this +15mv voltage issue started in F8H)?
> *Edit* you said you had one error. Try .145 and check? I still haven't been able to verify conclusively yet due to having delids and putting LM on top of the IHS (not just under it) but a recent test on F8 had a FMA3 thread crash in *one minute* (nothing else running) at 4.7/4.4 when F8E and F9b went 8 hours, so who knows.


Looks like .145 is stable, I get an error under .150 with F8e.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Looks like .145 is stable, I get an error under .150 with F8e.


Well I think I got my RAM game and prime stable (so far, tests are only for a few hours) at 3600 mhz, 15-15-15-36 2T, at 1.40v RAM and 1.10v VCCIO and 1.15v VCCSA.
1T would *NOT POST* at anything higher than 3333 mhz. It just gave the 5 beeps of death and said "Your computer has failed to POST due to a bad configuration".
tRFC 270 was MADLY unstable at 3600 mhz. Got into windows fine and had great (53850 read, 56500(!) write and 40.3ns latency) but as soon as I ran prime95 112K fixed (AVX disabled), a thread crashed instantly (small FFT did not crash). Then I ran 1024MB RAM, 256K (not in place) and got a thread crash in a few minutes. I loosened tRFC to 320 and 112K failed a thread in about 30 minutes. tRFC 350 seemed to be no problem after over an hour so I went to play games. I could try to raise a voltage but running stress tests all day is madly annoying so I'm not going to bother. I'll just longer test 350 tonight and see what happens.
I tightened some of the secondaries and tertiaries, but whatever. I spent too much time testing vcore in prime and realbench 2.56. Not going to waste another month testing RAM over and over. Maybe I'll grab that compiled Gsat later.

The new prime build is pretty nice. I didn't realize it could test for tRFC stability.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Well I think I got my RAM game and prime stable (so far, tests are only for a few hours) at 3600 mhz, 15-15-15-36 2T, at 1.40v RAM and 1.10v VCCIO and 1.15v VCCSA.
> 1T would *NOT POST* at anything higher than 3333 mhz. It just gave the 5 beeps of death and said "Your computer has failed to POST due to a bad configuration".
> tRFC 270 was MADLY unstable at 3600 mhz. Got into windows fine and had great (53850 read, 56500(!) write and 40.3ns latency) but as soon as I ran prime95 112K fixed (AVX disabled), a thread crashed instantly (small FFT did not crash). Then I ran 1024MB RAM, 256K (not in place) and got a thread crash in a few minutes. I loosened tRFC to 320 and 112K failed a thread in about 30 minutes. tRFC 350 seemed to be no problem after over an hour so I went to play games. I could try to raise a voltage but running stress tests all day is madly annoying so I'm not going to bother. I'll just longer test 350 tonight and see what happens.
> I tightened some of the secondaries and tertiaries, but whatever. I spent too much time testing vcore in prime and realbench 2.56. Not going to waste another month testing RAM over and over. Maybe I'll grab that compiled Gsat later.
> 
> The new prime build is pretty nice. I didn't realize it could test for tRFC stability.


I'm sorta in the same ballpark as you, played with my cpu ... that's all good now ... want to play more, but can't stand the long hours needed for testing the memory ... tried it a while, seemed unstable. Just jumped back for now on my memory ... will see if I get the incentive to do it again.

Honestly I doubt we will notice it using our computers so why even bother, but ok ok ... we are on overclocking.net ... 
We like to push our systems ... but still ...


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> I'm sorta in the same ballpark as you, played with my cpu ... that's all good now ... want to play more, but can't stand the long hours needed for testing the memory ... tried it a while, seemed unstable. Just jumped back for now on my memory ... will see if I get the incentive to do it again.
> 
> Honestly I doubt we will notice it using our computers so why even bother, but ok ok ... we are on overclocking.net ...
> We like to push our systems ... but still ...


Not hard to let HCI MemTest run overnight while you sleep.

It's pretty much the best RAM stress test and tests your cache as well.

I have in another post a program that'll open HCI for 16 times for a 9900k, 12 times for an 8700k or 8086k and 8 times for a few other CPUs that uses 16GB or 32GB of RAM, depending which one you run.

Copy and pasto!

"These are AutoHotKey scripts I compiled and made .exe's for and will run HCI MemTest with 16 instances for a 9900k, 7820X or 5960X or any 16 thread CPU, once for each logical core of your 16 thread CPU. Also included are programs for 12 thread and 8 thread CPU's, both 16GB and 32GB versions.

It will assign each instance of HCI to one separate logical core of the CPU.

This can be checked in Task Manager, right-click on each instance of HCI MemTest, Go To Details, right click on each instance of MemTestPro.exe, Set Affinity, and you'll see each instance is on a separate CPU core.

On a 3840x1080, 2560x1080 or 1080p monitor they will be spaced evenly once all the instances have loaded just leaving enough room to see the Coverage, Errors count and Error information.

Put the .exe files in your MemTest Pro folder and run the correct one."


----------



## KedarWolf

On a side note, I still need .155v on CPU on F9b BIOS, IA AC Loadline 1, to not get L1 cache errors in HWInfo while running Prime95 1344 FFTs.


----------



## Intrud3r

Let's just put it on the table here just for everybody to read (maybe somebody else has the same question in his mind):

Ok, so I'll run this memtest overnight ... but as them memtests don't really stress my cpu, and as I have a AIO cooler. All my fans look at my CPU temp to ramp up. My case airflow would be low while running that overnight.

Would it be better to put the fans on full manually while running the test overnight so that at least some airflow goes over the modules ?
Or doesn't it matter at all and you can just run the stresstest for something like 8 hours with fans running at like 500 rpm ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Intrud3r said:


> Let's just put it on the table here just for everybody to read (maybe somebody else has the same question in his mind):
> 
> Ok, so I'll run this memtest overnight ... but as them memtests don't really stress my cpu, and as I have a AIO cooler. All my fans look at my CPU temp to ramp up. My case airflow would be low while running that overnight.
> 
> Would it be better to put the fans on full manually while running the test overnight so that at least some airflow goes over the modules ?
> Or doesn't it matter at all and you can just run the stresstest for something like 8 hours with fans running at like 500 rpm ?


If your RAM temps are under say 40C in HWInfo you'll be fine. If they go higher then a RAM fan or more air flow is needed.


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> If your RAM temps are under say 40C in HWInfo you'll be fine. If they go higher then a RAM fan or more air flow is needed.


I don't have temp sensors available on my board ... so I donnow.


----------



## KedarWolf

'mb_bios_z390-aorus-master_f8_n.zip' is the file name on the F8 BIOS on Gigabyte site. 

It was until recently 'mb_bios_z390-aorus-master_f8.zip' so I think it's a newer revision of the F8 BIOS.


----------



## Driller au

Intrud3r said:


> I don't have temp sensors available on my board ... so I donnow.


I hear you, just ran a 500% memtest run 1.390V and not knowing the temp is not cool, a least my mem sits right above a 140mm fan on my AIO (inverted M/B in corsair 600c case ) so I think I am ok, passed anyway
Might go upstairs to the 24/7 memory thread when I get back from work in a week there are a few settings I am sure I can do better with


----------



## davidm71

Was just running GSAT and it didn't error but said 'Pausing for voltage spike'..

Is this a voltage regulation issue?

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Was just running GSAT and it didn't error but said 'Pausing for voltage spike'..
> 
> Is this a voltage regulation issue?
> 
> Thanks


This is the command I use for 32GB



Code:


stressapptest -W -M 27511 -s 3600 --pause_delay 3600

Unless you use


Code:


--pause_delay 3600

 in your GSAT command it'll pause for voltage spikes off and on.


----------



## shaolin95

Hey guys, 
Getting back in the OCing "game" after a lot of busy times..just running modded F9b. Wondering if anyone running Master @ 5Ghz with fixed voltage can share the settings so I can get a base to start tweaking. 
I am currently using auto voltages and have not been very successful at getting my fixed settings working and cant find my old settings from previous bioses :/
And yes I know all chips are different but as I said, just need some starting point.
Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

shaolin95 said:


> Hey guys,
> Getting back in the OCing "game" after a lot of busy times..just running modded F9b. Wondering if anyone running Master @ 5Ghz with fixed voltage can share the settings so I can get a base to start tweaking.
> I am currently using auto voltages and have not been very successful at getting my fixed settings working and cant find my old settings from previous bioses :/
> And yes I know all chips are different but as I said, just need some starting point.
> Thanks


I don't help people who beg me for help on discord, spam my OCN PM box begging me for profiles, then cuss at me and rage at me for playing video games. Welcome to my block list. Show a little gratitude next time instead of leeching off other people's hard work.


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> Hey guys,
> Getting back in the OCing "game" after a lot of busy times..just running modded F9b. Wondering if anyone running Master @ 5Ghz with fixed voltage can share the settings so I can get a base to start tweaking.
> I am currently using auto voltages and have not been very successful at getting my fixed settings working and cant find my old settings from previous bioses :/
> And yes I know all chips are different but as I said, just need some starting point.
> Thanks


I don't have much luck with fixed voltages but here's my adaptive without the memory voltages/settings.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> I don't have much luck with fixed voltages but here's my adaptive without the memory voltages/settings.


Thanks man! You are always so helpful!
I am going to try this and report back.
The only thing that confused me is that I thought those IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline were not supposed to be set to 1 for static voltages but maybe I am confused since I was out of the game for a while lol

I will report back on how these work for me.
Thanks!!


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> Thanks man! You are always so helpful!
> I am going to try this and report back.
> The only thing that confused me is that I thought those IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline were not supposed to be set to 1 for static voltages but maybe I am confused since I was out of the game for a while lol
> 
> I will report back on how these work for me.
> Thanks!!


That's not static, is Dynamic VCore (Adaptive).


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> That's not static, is Dynamic VCore (Adaptive).


Oh yes that is what I meant. I thought you only wanted to set those to 1 when using static voltages but I am probably just confusing things after so long lol


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> Oh yes that is what I meant. I thought you only wanted to set those to 1 when using static voltages but I am probably just confusing things after so long lol



IA AC Loadline 1 is for a positive offset.

I find IA DC Loadline 1 keeps temps down a bit and I find I'm more stable.

Edit: I can help in the forums a lot as I have no life!


----------



## nstndg

KedarWolf said:


> I don't have much luck with fixed voltages but here's my adaptive without the memory voltages/settings.


VCCSA and VCCIO are just set so high because you overclocked your RAM, right? What values would you use as a starting point in case one would just run on the RAM on X.M.P.?


----------



## KedarWolf

nstndg said:


> VCCSA and VCCIO are just set so high because you overclocked your RAM, right? What values would you use as a starting point in case one would just run on the RAM on X.M.P.?


Maybe 1.15v.


----------



## OutlawII

Kedar or Falk is the current f8 bios on the gigabyte site any good ? I mean is it stable any issues with it?


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> IA AC Loadline 1 is for a positive offset.
> 
> I find IA DC Loadline 1 keeps temps down a bit and I find I'm more stable.
> 
> Edit: I can help in the forums a lot as I have no life!


hahahah nice 
I will work on the settings today. Yesterday had to finish some work so couldnt play with it. Ended up just stting LCC to Turbo and giving 1.30vcore static for now. I think I was stable before around 1.28 but havent played with it for a while.
Want to see if I can get your settings working so it adjusts voltage/speed automatically.


----------



## Intrud3r

Just playing around with my cpu:

Normally I run 5.0 / 4.7 with HT = on

Decided to see where I ended up with HT = off

AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
Vcore Loadline = Auto
Vcore = Normal
DVID = +0.080V

5.2 / 4.7 with HT = off seems to run nicely. Prime small FFT's 10 min = OK, Realbench 3 hash results seemed fine, temps are in check.

Just messing around, probably will jump back to 5.0 / 4.7 with HT = on soon.

(oops, wrong tab on my browser ... lemme put this on the forum that actually fits the description.)


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Just playing around with my cpu:
> 
> Normally I run 5.0 / 4.7 with HT = on
> 
> Decided to see where I ended up with HT = off
> 
> AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving
> Vcore Loadline = Auto
> Vcore = Normal
> DVID = +0.080V
> 
> 5.2 / 4.7 with HT = off seems to run nicely. Prime small FFT's 10 min = OK, Realbench 3 hash results seemed fine, temps are in check.
> 
> Just messing around, probably will jump back to 5.0 / 4.7 with HT = on soon.
> 
> (oops, wrong tab on my browser ... lemme put this on the forum that actually fits the description.)


So I got bored and I enabled SVID offset, which greys out 'Auto' voltage (AC/DC were 1.6 mOhms)
5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache.

It added a measly 30mv to VID and VR VOUT(compared to SVID offset disabled + Auto voltage, AC DC loadline=1.60 mOhms) to Prime95 12K FFT AVX disabled (about 1.325v in both) and...

wait for it...



90 mv (!!!) to 15K AVX. (VR VOUT was 1.330v (corrected) instead of 1.240v)
CPU reached 105C in 5 seconds!

VID and VR VOUT were 1.330v, Amps was 212 Amps, CPU Package Power was 298W.
I don't think I've ever turned off Prime95 so fast in my life.

(85mv was also added to 1344K AVX in place, but temps were much lower)

(And no, this is not the same as using DVID +100mv. The idle voltages were still identical to Auto).

I don't think you guys need to enable that option.
Interesting that the idle voltage/vid/vr vout didn't change.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> So I got bored and I enabled SVID offset, which greys out 'Auto' voltage (AC/DC were 1.6 mOhms)
> 5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache.
> 
> It added a measly 30mv to VID and VR VOUT(compared to SVID offset disabled + Auto voltage, AC DC loadline=1.60 mOhms) to Prime95 12K FFT AVX disabled (about 1.325v in both) and...
> 
> wait for it...
> 
> 
> 
> 90 mv (!!!) to 15K AVX. (VR VOUT was 1.30v instead of 1.240v)
> CPU reached 105C in 5 seconds!
> 
> VID and VR VOUT were 1.330v, Amps was 212 Amps, CPU Package Power was 298W.
> I don't think I've ever turned off Prime95 so fast in my life.
> 
> (85mv was also added to 1344K AVX in place, but temps were much lower)
> 
> (And no, this is not the same as using DVID +100mv. The idle voltages were still identical to Auto).
> 
> I don't think you guys need to enable that option.
> Interesting that the idle voltage/vid/vr vout didn't change.


I don't like those strange things happening  I always like to have an explanation for something .... need to be able to grasp the general idea ... but these boards .... 

P.S. I so feel you when you said: I don't think I've ever turned off Prime95 so fast in my life. Been there ... done that ...


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> I don't like those strange things happening  I always like to have an explanation for something .... need to be able to grasp the general idea ... but these boards ....
> 
> P.S. I so feel you when you said: I don't think I've ever turned off Prime95 so fast in my life. Been there ... done that ...


I mean I did the Auto voltage (no offset, AC=1.6 mOhms) test before and I knew my CPU would top out at 96C after one full iteration of prime95 15K AVX (about 6 minutes). 
So I just sat back and watched the temps.....and saw red IMMEDIATELY....and wondered why it was at 100C in 3 seconds...then I saw my VR VOUT...yeah...

Of course there's no documentation on what SVID OFFSET even is.
Zero results on google (Except MY OWN POSTS). Like what the hell...And it's NOT a brand new Gigabyte setting. Doesn't seem to be the same as Asus SVID Behavior....(?)

No one cares about undocumented Bios settings?


----------



## Driller au

lols just cannot help ourselves, just got to fiddle, I got 2 good overclocks with a memory oc as well am I happy with that NOOooo push it till it won't boot


----------



## davidm71

Hi guys,

Was wondering what kind of memory are you guys using? Looking for a 4x8gb kit for my master but not sure what Cas latency and frequency is best for hitting 4000mhz? Got a Master Z390. Thanks.


----------



## Sheyster

davidm71 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Was wondering what kind of memory are you guys using? Looking for a 4x8gb kit for my master but not sure what Cas latency and frequency is best for hitting 4000mhz? Got a Master Z390. Thanks.


https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4000c18q-32gtzkw

The Master is on the QVL...


----------



## Intrud3r

davidm71 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Was wondering what kind of memory are you guys using? Looking for a 4x8gb kit for my master but not sure what Cas latency and frequency is best for hitting 4000mhz? Got a Master Z390. Thanks.


I'm using G.Skill 3200Mhz C16-18-18-38-560 4x8GB.
Have a hard time booting anything higher then 3733Mhz.

Mine are Hynix die's


----------



## davidm71

I just ordered these: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232306

G.Skill 3600 15-15-15-35 timings. Maybe I should not have. 

Just wonder if they will reach 4000 at tight timings..

I don't know..


----------



## Sheyster

davidm71 said:


> I just ordered these: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232306
> 
> G.Skill 3600 15-15-15-35 timings. Maybe I should not have.
> 
> Just wonder if they will reach 4000 at tight timings..
> 
> I don't know..


Those are Samsung B-die as far as I know; should OC well. I assume you ordered two of those kits? Why not order a matched 32GB kit?


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Was wondering what kind of memory are you guys using? Looking for a 4x8gb kit for my master but not sure what Cas latency and frequency is best for hitting 4000mhz? Got a Master Z390. Thanks.


Have really great results with this kit 4133MHZ 17-17-17-38 2T, tight second and third timings. 

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232585

Same kit I have but I have the black coloured version which is now out of stock. 

Edit: And DON'T get RGB G.Skill RAM, it doesn't overclock nearly as well.


----------



## davidm71

Sheyster said:


> Those are Samsung B-die as far as I know; should OC well. I assume you ordered two of those kits? Why not order a matched 32GB kit?


Well they don't sell them as cas 15-15-15-35 in a four pack! I'm hoping two separate packs ordered at once will be close to each other enough to get along. Even if I have drop the latency to 16 which I don't think that will be a problem. I hope. 

@KedarWolf I know all about RGB kits not performing or overclocking well. Been doing my research this time round.

I would not have bought these modules now if not for the fact I read Samsung is stoping B-Die production. This forced my hand to purchase now. Had two dual rank 3200 modules at 3600 14-15-15-37 but couldn't get them over 3600mhz. System would fail to post half the time at 3733 at laxed latencies. Maybe I can use the dual ranks in another system. Future build. Want to go dark.

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Well they don't sell them as cas 15-15-15-35 in a four pack! I'm hoping two separate packs ordered at once will be close to each other enough to get along. Even if I have drop the latency to 16 which I don't think that will be a problem. I hope.
> 
> @KedarWolf I know all about RGB kits not performing or overclocking well. Been doing my research this time round.
> 
> I would not have bought these modules now if not for the fact I read Samsung is stoping B-Die production. This forced my hand to purchase now. Had two dual rank 3200 modules at 3600 14-15-15-37 but couldn't get them over 3600mhz. System would fail to post half the time at 3733 at laxed latencies. Maybe I can use the dual ranks in another system. Future build. Want to go dark.
> 
> Thanks


Probably the 2x8GB CL15 kit is the same bin as 4x8GB CL16, you're honestly not going to get better results buying the two CL15 kits over the CL16 kit, and the CL16 kit doesn't have the problems inherent with combining two kits. :h34r-smi


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf said:


> Probably the 2x8GB CL15 kit is the same bin as 4x8GB CL16, you're honestly not going to get better results buying the two CL15 kits over the CL16 kit, and the CL16 kit doesn't have the problems inherent with combining two kits. :h34r-smi


Well your probably right about the binning. Thing is these modules have hot red accents on the edge of the card and look really sharp. The other cas 16 32gb 4x8 kits are either silver/white or black. So I have a few choices. Just keep one kit and run it at 2x8gb and return the other kit, or keep both and if I have problems clock it down to cas 16, or just return them entirely.

Thanks

Edit: Considering I got two dual rank 3200mhz modules running at 3600mhz cas 14-15-15-37 @ 1.45v I think these cas 15 red/black modules should be able to pull their weight?!


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Well your probably right about the binning. Thing is these modules have hot red accents on the edge of the card and look really sharp. The other cas 16 32gb 4x8 kits are either silver/white or black. So I have a few choices. Just keep one kit and run it at 2x8gb and return the other kit, or keep both and if I have problems clock it down to cas 16, or just return them entirely.
> 
> Thanks


Gigabyte Z390 four DIMM use T-Topology and four DIMMs overclock better than two.

I've actually tested this on my 4x8GB kit and a 2x8GB 4400 kit, the 4x8GB was much better! 

I returned the 2x8GB kit.


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf said:


> Gigabyte Z390 four DIMM use T-Topology and four DIMMs overclock better than two.
> 
> I've actually tested this on my 4x8GB kit and a 2x8GB 4400 kit, the 4x8GB was much better!
> 
> I returned the 2x8GB kit.


I know. Well aware. Going to bet the two kits will be close enough to get along. Idk.


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> I know. Well aware. Going to bet the two kits will be close enough to get along. Idk.


Jpmboy who's an overclock.net overclocking god uses 2 CL15 kits just fine for Z390.


----------



## Sheyster

davidm71 said:


> Well they don't sell them as cas 15-15-15-35 in a four pack! I'm hoping two separate packs ordered at once will be close to each other enough to get along. Even if I have drop the latency to 16 which I don't think that will be a problem. I hope.





KedarWolf said:


> Probably the 2x8GB CL15 kit is the same bin as 4x8GB CL16, you're honestly not going to get better results buying the two CL15 kits over the CL16 kit, and the CL16 kit doesn't have the problems inherent with combining two kits. :h34r-smi


I honestly think you should contact Newegg and roll with Kedar's 4-stick kit instead. Assuming your CPU (IMC) cooperates, they'll overclock just as well and they're a matched set for sure.


----------



## davidm71

Sheyster said:


> I honestly think you should contact Newegg and roll with Kedar's 4-stick kit instead. Assuming your CPU (IMC) cooperates, they'll overclock just as well and they're a matched set for sure.



Maybe your right. Idk.

Too bad Newegg is out of stock..


----------



## Sheyster

davidm71 said:


> Maybe your right. Idk.
> 
> Too bad Newegg is out of stock..



Silver version is in stock:

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232585


----------



## davidm71

Sheyster said:


> Silver version is in stock:
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232585


I already have a silver white kit and wanted something more sporty.

I wrote to GSkill today anyhow and they said I should try it as if it doesn't work I can always loosen the timings.

As it turns out they make a 16-16-16-36 kit as well as a 15-15-15-35 2 x 8gb kit so maybe these are a little more highly binned.

Will sleep on wether or not I keep them and see what happens if and when I overclock them.

Thanks.


----------



## Sirhoodie

Can anyone help me with using adaptive Vcore, i want to get 5ghz on 9900k. (btw im new to OC'ing and gigabyte bios)


----------



## KedarWolf

Sirhoodie said:


> Can anyone help me with using adaptive Vcore, i want to get 5ghz on 9900k. (btw im new to OC'ing and gigabyte bios)


Do an Advanced search with my username, KedarWolf, you'll find it minus memory settings. :h34r-smi

For memory, go farther back in the search, it's all there.


----------



## wingman99

Sirhoodie said:


> Can anyone help me with using adaptive Vcore, i want to get 5ghz on 9900k. (btw im new to OC'ing and gigabyte bios)


Leave you core voltage stock default first then clock the CPU to 5.0GHz to see what DVID core voltage you have under stress testing. Then adjust the offset like DVID -0.170 for core voltage of 1.320v under stress testing.


----------



## davidm71

Anyone using the F9b bios on the 390 Master? After updating microcodes to latest on F9b was able to drop vcore 0.10mv less. Maybe more. Your thoughts?


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> Do an Advanced search with my username, KedarWolf, you'll find it minus memory settings. :h34r-smi
> 
> For memory, go farther back in the search, it's all there.


LOL
The settings you gave my for 5Ghz so far are looking great.
Thanks a lot!


----------



## R3van

davidm71 said:


> Anyone using the F9b bios on the 390 Master? After updating microcodes to latest on F9b was able to drop vcore 0.10mv less. Maybe more. Your thoughts?


fir me its just the same as with f8e or f8
still need +0.060 mv dvid


----------



## davidm71

R3van said:


> fir me its just the same as with f8e or f8
> still need +0.060 mv dvid


They still haven't fixed the PCI-E SSD detection bug. I still have to shut down the system cold and turn it on again for it to detect my 970 Pro Angelbird heatsink combo card after a bios change.

Whose the Gigabyte Rep on this thread... ?


Thanks


----------



## Moparman

davidm71 said:


> They still haven't fixed the PCI-E SSD detection bug. I still have to shut down the system cold and turn it on again for it to detect my 970 Pro Angelbird heatsink combo card after a bios change.
> 
> Whose the Gigabyte Rep on this thread... ?
> 
> 
> Thanks



Message Matthew https://www.overclock.net/forum/members/500510-gbt-matthewh.html


----------



## davidm71

Moparman said:


> Message Matthew https://www.overclock.net/forum/members/500510-gbt-matthewh.html



Thanks. I IM'd him just now.


----------



## aussie7

anyone got over 125Mhz BCLK ?


----------



## doom26464

hi guys, its been awhile Since I have been in here.

Having been on F7b for quite some time very stable at 5ghz for the last few months. Now that I moved my PC into the basement and it is much much colder down here would like to try again for 5.1ghz. 


My questions is I see on gigabyte webage that there is a new F8 bios. Is it worth upgrading to it from F7b???


----------



## davidm71

doom26464 said:


> hi guys, its been awhile Since I have been in here.
> 
> Having been on F7b for quite some time very stable at 5ghz for the last few months. Now that I moved my PC into the basement and it is much much colder down here would like to try again for 5.1ghz.
> 
> 
> My questions is I see on gigabyte webage that there is a new F8 bios. Is it worth upgrading to it from F7b???


Word on the street is that the F9b is where its at. Requires less vcore than F8.

Maybe you should try that one.


----------



## doom26464

davidm71 said:


> doom26464 said:
> 
> 
> 
> hi guys, its been awhile Since I have been in here.
> 
> Having been on F7b for quite some time very stable at 5ghz for the last few months. Now that I moved my PC into the basement and it is much much colder down here would like to try again for 5.1ghz.
> 
> 
> My questions is I see on gigabyte webage that there is a new F8 bios. Is it worth upgrading to it from F7b???
> 
> 
> 
> Word on the street is that the F9b is where its at. Requires less vcore than F8.
> 
> Maybe you should try that one.
Click to expand...

I see no such thing on gigabyte page? Where does one get it?


----------



## Falkentyne

doom26464 said:


> I see no such thing on gigabyte page? Where does one get it?


Check the posts around Kedarwolf's posts. A user right in front of him did a f9b mod that had the latest Intel network firmware and CPU microcode in it (several pages back). But you have to flash that with the EFIFLASH /X command line after following kedarwolf's previous instructions (that he posted for the F8 modded bios before this) to format with freedos with Rufus, boot to the non UEFI boot device for the USB flash drive, and then flash the modded F9b, since QFLASH will not work on the modded bios. If you just want f9b without the mod (just flash the modded one), you can get it from tweaktown's forum "Gigabyte Latest Beta Bios" thread on the first page. The modded F9b is several pages back in this thread.


----------



## doom26464

Falkentyne said:


> doom26464 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no such thing on gigabyte page? Where does one get it?
> 
> 
> 
> Check the posts around Kedarwolf's posts. A user right in front of him did a f9b mod that had the latest Intel network firmware and CPU microcode in it (several pages back). But you have to flash that with the EFIFLASH /X command line after following kedarwolf's previous instructions (that he posted for the F8 modded bios before this) to format with freedos with Rufus, boot to the non UEFI boot device for the USB flash drive, and then flash the modded F9b, since QFLASH will not work on the modded bios. If you just want f9b without the mod (just flash the modded one), you can get it from tweaktown's forum "Gigabyte Latest Beta Bios" thread on the first page. The modded F9b is several pages back in this thread.
Click to expand...

Sounds highly complicated and a receipe for disaster outside of the regular qflash.

Maybe ill just try f8 for now

Edit: found all the beta bios here including f9b

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html

Will try flashing to f9b


----------



## KedarWolf

.zip file has F8_n BIOS and F9b with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 11/05/2019, minor updates from the BIOS I posted earlier in the thread.

*Edit: Master BIOS's.*

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *not UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f9b /x

 or


Code:


efiflash 1.f8 /x

Profit!!

ZIP file was too big with both BIOS's in it, upload failed. Now in two ZIP files.


----------



## Falkentyne

doom26464 said:


> Sounds highly complicated and a receipe for disaster outside of the regular qflash.
> 
> Maybe ill just try f8 for now
> 
> Edit: found all the beta bios here including f9b
> 
> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
> 
> Will try flashing to f9b


EFIflash /X is *not* a recipe for disaster. EFIflash is the official Gigabyte command line flasher. It's not a third party tool.
Efiflash is used when Qflash fails to flash bioses. So just do it.
I've run it multiple times. You also have dual bios as well, remember that.
(but I set it on "single bios mode" and just flash the bios manually by powering off, selecting the bios switch to boot to, then powering on and booting.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> .zip file has F8_n BIOS and F9e with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 11/05/2019, minor updates from the BIOS I posted earlier in the thread.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *not UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f9e /x
> 
> or
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f8 /x
> 
> Profit!!


F9E ? Where's that?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> F9E ? Where's that?


You mean F8e?

As far as I know, only F9b is out.


----------



## Driller au

In your DOS commands you have F9e


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> In your DOS commands you have F9e


My bad, fixed. Isn't dyslexia fun?


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> My bad, fixed. Isn't dyslexia fun?


Oh sorry, didn't know you had to deal with that 
I was looking all over for F9e thinking it was a new beta to run 8 hours of prime95 @ 4.7 ghz FMA3 15K's on again...


----------



## KedarWolf

Anyone want to update their motherboard ME firmware follow the instructions here or just use my included .zip and open an Admin command prompt in the folder you unzipped and run this command.

Edit: Takes a bit to reboot after flashing it and I got a BIOS overclock unstable error first boot but soon as I chose "Use Last BIOS Settings' everything was fine or you can load your saved profile and reboot.

https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html



Code:


FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin

*Note: You need to change in the FIT tool to Intel(R) Cannonlake Lake Series Z390 as well as follow the rest of the instructions.*

Notice about CSME 12 FWUpdate Tool: Starting from CSME 12, Intel FWUpdate tool does not work with bare RGN or EXTR CSE firmware as it requires that they are first combined/stitched with the equivalent Power Management Controller (PMC) firmware, which is updated alongside the main CSE firmware. The CSME v12 archives below always include bare RGN or EXTR CSE firmware images so you must always stitch the equivalent PMC firmware first, via Flash Image Tool (FIT), before using Intel FWUpdate tool. To check if a CSE RGN/EXTR firmware region is already FWUpdate compatible, input it at ME Analyzer tool and make sure that "FWUpdate Support" is reported as "Yes". To generate the correct FWUpdate compatible CSME + PMC firmware combination for your system via FIT, you must first know your system's Chipset Platform (H, LP), Chipset Type (Consumer, Corporate, Slim) and Chipset Stepping/Revision (A, B, C etc).

Download the latest Intel CSME System Tools v12 (Section C) as well as ME Analyzer tool.
From Intel CSME System Tools v12, run MEInfo command line tool and under "Intel(R) ME code versions" > "FW Version" you will find your system's Chipset Platform as well as Type (i.e. H Consumer etc). Under "PCH Information" > "PCH Step Data" you will find your system's Chipset Stepping which starts with a letter (Ax, Bx, Cx etc).
Alternatively, only if you cannot use MEInfo, drag & drop your system's SPI/BIOS image at ME Analyzer tool and find "SKU" field which shows your system's Chipset Type and Platform (i.e. Consumer H). Next, find "Chipset Stepping" field which lists one or more supported Chipset Steppings in the form of letters (A, B, C etc).
Based on your system's Chipset Platform, Type and Stepping, choose the correct CSME 12 and PMC CNP firmware (Section B).
Input the chosen CSME 12 firmware into ME Analyzer tool and make sure that "FWUpdate Support" is not reported as "Impossible".
From Intel CSME System Tools v12, run Flash Image Tool (FIT) and adjust the PCH Platform drop-down menu at the top to either "H Series Chipset" or "LP Series Chipset" based on your system's PCH Platform. For the purposes of FWUpdate, there is no need to further adjust the PCH SKU.
Load/drop the chosen CSME 12 firmware image and then input the chosen PMC CNP firmware at "Flash Layout" > "Ifwi: Intel(R) Me and Pmc Region" > "PMC Binary File".
Adjust "Flash Settings" > "Flash Components" > "Number of Flash Components" to "0".
Adjust "Integrated Sensor Hub" > "Integrated Sensor Hub" > "Integrated Sensor Hub Supported" to "No".
Build the image and use "cse_image_FWU_Full.bin" at Intel FWUpdate tool.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Anyone want to update their motherboard ME firmware follow the instructions here or just use my included .zip and open an Admin command prompt in the folder you unzipped and run this command.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t596f39-Intel-Management-Engine-Drivers-Firmware-amp-System-Tools.html
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin
> 
> *Note: You need to change in the FIT tool to intel(R) Cannonlake Lake Series Z390 as well as follow the rest of the instructions.*
> 
> Notice about CSME 12 FWUpdate Tool: Starting from CSME 12, Intel FWUpdate tool does not work with bare RGN or EXTR CSE firmware as it requires that they are first combined/stitched with the equivalent Power Management Controller (PMC) firmware, which is updated alongside the main CSE firmware. The CSME v12 archives below always include bare RGN or EXTR CSE firmware images so you must always stitch the equivalent PMC firmware first, via Flash Image Tool (FIT), before using Intel FWUpdate tool. To check if a CSE RGN/EXTR firmware region is already FWUpdate compatible, input it at ME Analyzer tool and make sure that "FWUpdate Support" is reported as "Yes". To generate the correct FWUpdate compatible CSME + PMC firmware combination for your system via FIT, you must first know your system's Chipset Platform (H, LP), Chipset Type (Consumer, Corporate, Slim) and Chipset Stepping/Revision (A, B, C etc).
> 
> Download the latest Intel CSME System Tools v12 (Section C) as well as ME Analyzer tool.
> From Intel CSME System Tools v12, run MEInfo command line tool and under "Intel(R) ME code versions" > "FW Version" you will find your system's Chipset Platform as well as Type (i.e. H Consumer etc). Under "PCH Information" > "PCH Step Data" you will find your system's Chipset Stepping which starts with a letter (Ax, Bx, Cx etc).
> Alternatively, only if you cannot use MEInfo, drag & drop your system's SPI/BIOS image at ME Analyzer tool and find "SKU" field which shows your system's Chipset Type and Platform (i.e. Consumer H). Next, find "Chipset Stepping" field which lists one or more supported Chipset Steppings in the form of letters (A, B, C etc).
> Based on your system's Chipset Platform, Type and Stepping, choose the correct CSME 12 and PMC CNP firmware (Section B).
> Input the chosen CSME 12 firmware into ME Analyzer tool and make sure that "FWUpdate Support" is not reported as "Impossible".
> From Intel CSME System Tools v12, run Flash Image Tool (FIT) and adjust the PCH Platform drop-down menu at the top to either "H Series Chipset" or "LP Series Chipset" based on your system's PCH Platform. For the purposes of FWUpdate, there is no need to further adjust the PCH SKU.
> Load/drop the chosen CSME 12 firmware image and then input the chosen PMC CNP firmware at "Flash Layout" > "Ifwi: Intel(R) Me and Pmc Region" > "PMC Binary File".
> Adjust "Flash Settings" > "Flash Components" > "Number of Flash Components" to "0".
> Adjust "Integrated Sensor Hub" > "Integrated Sensor Hub" > "Integrated Sensor Hub Supported" to "No".
> Build the image and use "cse_image_FWU_Full.bin" at Intel FWUpdate tool.


Hi Kedarwolf

You don't have a zip in your post.
(you also didn't have one in your f9b bios post you did earlier).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Hi Kedarwolf
> 
> You don't have a zip in your post.
> (you also didn't have one in your f9b bios post you did earlier).


Man, you're quick, I added it about 15 seconds after I made the original post. :h34r-smi

Edit: The ZIP file for the two BIOS's was too big, upload failed the first time. Now two separate ZIP files.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Man, you're quick, I added it about 15 seconds after I made the original post. :h34r-smi
> 
> Edit: The ZIP file for the two BIOS's was too big, upload failed the first time. Now two separate ZIP files.


Thank you very much.
I'm too scared to flash the ME though. Those instructions look extremely complicated.


----------



## davidm71

Nothing gained without risk


----------



## Falkentyne

davidm71 said:


> Nothing gained without risk


intel ME doesn't improve CPU or RAM overclocks.


----------



## davidm71

Falkentyne said:


> davidm71 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing gained without risk
> 
> 
> 
> intel ME doesn't improve CPU or RAM overclocks.
Click to expand...

Your right. It doesn't. Just a little more secure.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you very much.
> I'm too scared to flash the ME though. Those instructions look extremely complicated.


Anyone want to update their motherboard ME firmware just use my included .zip and open an Admin command prompt in the folder you unzipped and run this command.

Edit: Takes a bit to reboot after flashing it and I got a BIOS overclock unstable error first boot but soon as I chose "Use Last BIOS Settings' everything was fine or you can load your saved profile and reboot.



Code:


FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin


----------



## gorillabeard

Do these files work with the Aorus Pro Wifi Bios?


----------



## KedarWolf

gorillabeard said:


> Do these files work with the Aorus Pro Wifi Bios?


The BIOS's, no. The ME firmware, yes.


----------



## gorillabeard

*gorillabeard*



KedarWolf said:


> The BIOS's, no. The ME firmware, yes.


Thank you. What exactly is the ME and is it worth it to flash? Sorry I just built my first PC so learning as I go.


----------



## KedarWolf

gorillabeard said:


> Thank you. What exactly is the ME and is it worth it to flash? Sorry I just built my first PC so learning as I go.


ME firmware mainly includes security fixes.


----------



## KedarWolf

Is the memory timing 1T bugged on Gigabyte boards? I can't even get 1T at 3200MHZ on my 9900k which is really hard to believe.


----------



## Driller au

Don't ask me how it just worked


----------



## Intrud3r

I was able to run my 3200 C16 at T1 also .... should work imho. Assuming your dimms can handle it seeing they are 3600's.


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Don't ask me how it just worked



My board definitely bugged for 1T, this is XMP, everything on Auto but voltages and timing set to 1T, this is Timing Configurator and MemTweakIt.

Notice it says 3192 memory speed and see the question mark under 1T in MemTweakIt.

It does this whether I use XMP or manually set every timing and the memory speed.

In the BIOS it says my memory is at 3600MHZ.

Edit: I loaded optimized default, only changed memory to 1T, same problem. 

Flashed non-modded BIOS, same.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> My board definitely bugged for 1T, this is XMP, everything on Auto but voltages and timing set to 1T, this is Timing Configurator and MemTweakIt.
> 
> Notice it says 3192 memory speed and see the question mark under 1T in MemTweakIt.
> 
> It does this whether I use XMP or manually set every timing and the memory speed.
> 
> In the BIOS it says my memory is at 3600MHZ.
> 
> Edit: I loaded optimized default, only changed memory to 1T, same problem.
> 
> Flashed non-modded BIOS, same.


What does HWinfo say ? timing config doesn't show my speed correctly either like yours , i am at 3600 on my 3200 memory HWinfo shows it correctly as does aidia64


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> My board definitely bugged for 1T, this is XMP, everything on Auto but voltages and timing set to 1T, this is Timing Configurator and MemTweakIt.
> 
> Notice it says 3192 memory speed and see the question mark under 1T in MemTweakIt.
> 
> It does this whether I use XMP or manually set every timing and the memory speed.
> 
> In the BIOS it says my memory is at 3600MHZ.
> 
> Edit: I loaded optimized default, only changed memory to 1T, same problem.
> 
> Flashed non-modded BIOS, same.





Driller au said:


> What does HWinfo say ? timing config doesn't show my speed correctly either like yours , i am at 3600 on my 3200 memory HWinfo shows it correctly as does aidia64


You're not using the current Asrock utility. Use 4.0.4 or newer (if one exists).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> You're not using the current Asrock utility. Use 4.0.4 or newer (if one exists).


Asrock 4.0.4, HWInfo and AIDA64 all say the memory is at 3200MHZ. 


Edit: Only if I change it to 2T is it 3600.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Not the microcode.
> I tested it with VMware before flashing it.
> It's the transient voltage response in the bios. Something is wrong with the signal or regulation.
> Plus, F8E and F8 Final (stock) both have the same microcode (A2).


Try running Prime95 with HWInfo 'Sensors Only' running and see how much voltage you need now to not get Windows Hardware Errors in the bottom of HWInfo.


I found it's pretty much the same voltage for every BIOS I tried from F8e to F8_n and F9b. :h34r-smi


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Try running Prime95 with HWInfo 'Sensors Only' running and see how much voltage you need now to not get Windows Hardware Errors in the bottom of HWInfo.
> 
> 
> I found it's pretty much the same voltage for every BIOS I tried from F8e to F8_n and F9b. :h34r-smi


I did that ages ago.
F8e and F9b will run 8 hours at 1.230v LLC High, at 4.7/4.4 ghz as long as no other background processes are running

F8 randomly crashes, sometimes in less than 10 minutes.

I'm not the only person to post about this. A few other people posted about F8H (where this problem first started) needing more voltage. (persisted through F8i and F8).
F9b no longer has this issue.

BTW you replied to a rather old post.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I did that ages ago.
> F8e and F9b will run 8 hours at 1.230v LLC High, at 4.7/4.4 ghz as long as no other background processes are running
> 
> F8 randomly crashes, sometimes in less than 10 minutes.
> 
> I'm not the only person to post about this. A few other people posted about F8H (where this problem first started) needing more voltage. (persisted through F8i and F8).
> F9b no longer has this issue.
> 
> BTW you replied to a rather old post.



Yes, I know it's an old post. 

But maybe it's because I'm running a higher overclock with higher voltages but on F8e, F8_n and F9b I need exactly the same voltages to not get hardware errors in HWInfo. 5.1CPU/4.7 cache, +.165 Offset with IA AC Loadline of 1. 

This is with latest beta Prime95 using 1344 FFTs.

Edit: I can run lower voltages with F8e and pass Prime95 but not without HWInfo hardware errors.


----------



## KedarWolf

How I set timings from tREFIx9 down to tMOD.

I set my RAM speed really low, like 1733MHZ I think it was and have those timings on Auto.

Reboot, see what they are at, set them, then put RAM speed back up to 4133MHZ.

tCKE I put as low as it'll boot which is 5 for me. 

The rest of the timings I manually set having them figured out what was stable in the past after stress testing.

With doing that and a few other optimizations I've figured out I have my latency down from 39 ms to 38.3 ms.

Also, put tWR as low as it'll boot at, that's 8 for me. Says 7 in MemTweakIt but it's 8 in BIOS.

I included my main memory timings as reference. I find manually setting all my timings increases stress testing stability. :drum:


----------



## ntuason

Has anyone else experienced an occurrence where all your plugged in USB devices stop working and after a few minutes they start back up again?

Experience this twice one my AORUS Master.


----------



## Driller au

DorkSterr said:


> Has anyone else experienced an occurrence where all your plugged in USB devices stop working and after a few minutes they start back up again?
> 
> Experience this twice one my AORUS Master.


Not when my PC is up and running but a few times on start up it takes a minute for my mouse and KB to be detected and start. F9b bios


----------



## Bravoexo

Front usb headers, if I have my HS70 wireless dongle there, and an external ssd on the other... writing out to the SSD, sometimes introduce skips or pauses in the audio currently streaming to my headphones. So I transferred the dongle to the keyboard usb port instead.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> How I set timings from tREFIx9 down to tMOD.
> 
> I set my RAM speed really low, like 1733MHZ I think it was and have those timings on Auto.
> 
> Reboot, see what they are at, set them, then put RAM speed back up to 4133MHZ.
> 
> tCKE I put as low as it'll boot which is 5 for me.
> 
> The rest of the timings I manually set having them figured out what was stable in the past after stress testing.
> 
> With doing that and a few other optimizations I've figured out I have my latency down from 39 ms to 38.3 ms.
> 
> Also, put tWR as low as it'll boot at, that's 8 for me. Says 7 in MemTweakIt but it's 8 in BIOS.
> 
> I included my main memory timings as reference. I find manually setting all my timings increases stress testing stability. :drum:


Everything I said except about tWR is good, that I need at my original setting of 16 to remain GSAT stable, can't run it at 8 or any lower.

Also, lower timings are NOT always faster. If I set tRRD_L tRDRD_sg and tWRWR_sg at 6 instead of 7 and tRDWR_sg tRDWR_dg tRDWR_dr and tRDWR_dd at 13 instead of 14 I lose 400 points in AIDA64 read and write. 

As well, tCWL at 14 instead of 13 I gain about 100 points in read, in write and in copy.


----------



## Driller au

^^^ will give this a go when I have time


----------



## Maident

*Keyboard USB Port?*



Bravoexo said:


> Front usb headers, if I have my HS70 wireless dongle there, and an external ssd on the other... writing out to the SSD, sometimes introduce skips or pauses in the audio currently streaming to my headphones. So I transferred the dongle to the keyboard usb port instead.


Which USB port is designated for keyboard. I need to move my wireless dongle to this port.


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

Just built her this weekend. Amazing how fast the process is when you have the right fittings. Went with mostly barrow, along with a few old bitspower. No difference in quality afaik. Those offset adapters were a godsend. 

Next step is the cosmetics (cables, rgb strips) etc. I might delid too but I’m not sure. I ordered the kit from rockit but Temps seem fine so far. 

I’m liking the white and black look. What color fluid do you guys think? I have a bunch of red sitting around. 










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

Pinnacle Fit said:


> Just built her this weekend. Amazing how fast the process is when you have the right fittings. Went with mostly barrow, along with a few old bitspower. No difference in quality afaik. Those offset adapters were a godsend.
> 
> Next step is the cosmetics (cables, rgb strips) etc. I might delid too but I’m not sure. I ordered the kit from rockit but Temps seem fine so far.
> 
> I’m liking the white and black look. What color fluid do you guys think? I have a bunch of red sitting around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Definitely purple fluid. :thumb:


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

Spoiler






KedarWolf said:


> Definitely purple fluid. :thumb:






That’s a good idea. I didn’t even think about purple. 






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bronson

Hi, Ive recently bought this board and I'm struggling keeping it stable. So I'm going to ask a couple of questions regarding this and other stuff. 

Fisrt My Rig: 

NZXT S340 Elite Matte Black 
Gigabyte Z390 Designare 
Intel i7 8700K 
Cryorig H7 Quad Lumi 
Corsair Vengeance RGB 32 GB 
WDBlack 500GB M2 NVMe 
WDBlack 4 TBx2 
ASUS STRIX 1080 ti_C 
Corsair SF600 
CM MasterKeys PRO M 
Corsair M95 
Samsung U32J590UQL 
Focusrite Scarlett 2i2_Yamaha HS5 
Win 10 Pro 


1. I've seen many users with a F6a Bios, while I've just saw the F6 version in Gigabytes site to download, where does this F6a version come from? where can I downloaded? 

2. According to the Manual, my CPU FAN is the one nearer to the top of the board, but when I plug my fan there it doesn't work, yeat I've plugged it in the CPU_OPT one and it does work...the "odd" stuff is that in BIOS and other software it says that I have my fan connected to the CPU_FAN (instead of the OPT one according to the manual)....might be that the Image in the manual is wrong? I dunno what's going on there. 

3. By default in the BIOS is sellected the first PCIe slot as graphic is there a way to set the BIOS in order to recognize both? just seems like it one or the other...my prior Asrock or Asus ones you could do this simple thing...couldn't find it in this new board.

4. My next WIN10 installation would be the 6 or 7th one and I only have the board for a couple of days, I can't manage to avoid some BSOD after installed it no matter what, usually two types: 

A.
Bug Check String : DRIVER_POWER_STATE_FAILURE 
Bug Check Code : 0x0000009f 
Parameter 1 : 00000000`00000003 
Parameter 2 : ffffd90a`8ad417f0 
Parameter 3 : ffffef88`9d89f7b0 
Parameter 4 : ffffd90a`8da8a010 
Caused By Driver : ntoskrnl.exe 
Caused By Address : ntoskrnl.exe+1bc8a0

or..

B.
Bug Check String : MULTIPLE_IRP_COMPLETE_REQUESTS 
Bug Check Code : 0x00000044 
Parameter 1 : ffff9583`e2ce99a0 
Parameter 2 : 00000000`0000121f 
Parameter 3 : 00000000`00000000 
Parameter 4 : 00000000`00000000 
Caused By Driver : WppRecorder.sys 
Caused By Address : WppRecorder.sys+2053

And also in event viewer I tend to have an: ID EVENT 10016 distributedcom error by the time this BSOD happened.

All of them seem to be drivers related, yet since I experienced a couple of times where it didn't detect my boot drive, I dunno what to think.

Well I know that these are very diverse questions, I know that not many people have this particular board, but if someone can help me with some of this questions I'll be very grateful. I'm really liking all the features this board has, I'm not very fond of the BIOS and I'm worry that it might have some issue due to so varied issues that weren't present with my present hardware bar this new mobo. I still have faith that the BSODs might be some drivers problem due to the many design and all around stuff that I install in my PC.

Thanks in Advance!, don't hesitate to ask anything and BTW sorry for my english isnce it ain't obviuosly my first language


----------



## Driller au

I will just leave this here NOT prime95 stable needs +0.030 for that but realbench, aidia64 (AVX) and hours of BFv stable. I am amazed it even boots no BSOD or freezes modded F9b bios

















































A mix of @Intrud3r and @KedarWolf OCs idles at 0.688V maxes out at 1.305V VR VOUT


----------



## Intrud3r

When I'm seeing this posted above ... I want to get 5.1/4.7 with HT = on to be achievable again 

Right now I'm running (just to try and to play with my hardware):
IA AC/DC Loadline = Turbo
AC Loadline = 1
DC Loadline = 1
Vcore = Normal
DVID = +0.150V
MP = 52
Uncore = 48
HT = off

Runs flawlessly ... although my VR VOUT is higher then I want, but still it runs flawlessly.

Curious if I can get away with 5.1 / 4.7 with HT = on with your settings posted above.
Gonna try 

=========================

Oh my ... that didn't work. Used his exact settings ... just to try ... (yes I know you can't copy bla bla  )

Booted into windows just fine, started prime small fft's (no avx) ... 

It ran for about 40 seconds, it Blue Screened on me AND immediately shut of by itself, rebooted by itself ... 

So I jumped back into the bios ... ONLY TO FIND: No rom detected of whatever the message was.

I was like ... ***. Escape - exit and do not save - reboot - back into bios.

Ok, my bios is back ... tried upping my DVID to +0.010V with the above settings.
Booted into windows = ok
Started prime small fft's = ok for 1 minute ... hit 99C, stopped it
Started Realbench 2.56 = ok for 1 hash result, still a couple of artifacts showed up (that means I need more Vcore / DVID, but my prime small's were already hitting 99 within a minute ... so nahhh.)

Back to 5.0 / 4.7 with HT = on
VR VOUT stays below (idle) 1.350V and I'm rock stable with anything I throw at it.


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf @Intrud3r

Some more settings for you to try out, with even better transient response:

5 ghz/4.7 ghz:
SVID OFFSET: ENABLED.
IA AC Loadline= 90
IA DC Loadline=160
VRM Loadline (CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration) = Standard

CPU Idle VR VOUT (C-states disabled): 1.332v
Small FFT AVX Prime95 (29.8 build 3)= 180 amps'ish. VR VOUT average=1.230v, stable. (FMA3 is not stable, exceeds 195 amps, don't bother)
(VR VOUT started at 1.217v and slowly rose to 1.232v as temps increased, and stayed there).

Note:
Increasing AC Loadline by "5" raises VR VOUT by about 10mv in AVX small FFT Prime95

Compare this to 5 ghz/4.7 ghz:
CPU Vcore: Auto
IA AC Loadline=160
IA DC Loadline=160
VRM Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard.

Idle: 1.404v VR VOUT
Prime95 29.8 build 3 small FFT AVX (15K FFT): 184.250 amps, 1.240v VR VOUT

Enabling SVID OFFSET drops the idle voltage by 70mv and keeps the same load voltage (as SVID=disabled with ACLL=160), *IF* AC LOADLINE IS REDUCED from 1.6 mOhms to 0.9 mOhms (160->90).
If AC were kept at 160, VR VOUT would be 1.330v (!!) with AVX prime95 15K, and 105C temps in 5 seconds. Good game, No Rematch.

SVID offset does not seem to affect idle voltages at all. It seems to boost load voltage based on temps and current.

If you're not stable, raise AC Loadline by "5" until you are stable.
*NOTE* DVID CONTROL IS UNAVAILABLE.


----------



## Intrud3r

So a quick rundown ...

5.0/4.7:
IA AC/DC Loadline = doesn't matter, just pick Auto
AC Loadline = 90
DC Loadline = 160
Vcore loadline = standard
Vcore = Normal
DVID = unavailable
SVID Offset = Enabled

Test for stability --> up AC Loadline by 5 (for +10mv VR VOUT under load) to reach stability.

Correct ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> So a quick rundown ...
> 
> 5.0/4.7:
> IA AC/DC Loadline = doesn't matter, just pick Auto
> AC Loadline = 90
> DC Loadline = 160
> Vcore loadline = standard
> Vcore = Normal
> DVID = unavailable
> SVID Offset = Enabled
> 
> Test for stability --> up AC Loadline by 5 (for +10mv VR VOUT under load) to reach stability.
> 
> Correct ?


Yeah. Depending on your CPU you may need more AC, but yes. that's basically it!
Compared to Vcore=Auto, Offset=0 and SVID Disabled, SVID Offset boosts ONLY load voltage, not idle (the AC loadline doesn't change, just the serial VID is increased somehow), so the idle is the same (if AC Loadline=1.6 mOhms), but SVID Offset boosts load voltage by about 70mv.

So lowering AC Loadline drops both the idle and load voltage when SVID offset is enabled, and ACLL=90 (actually ACLL=95) gives the same VR VOUT as full auto voltage at load, but keeps the idle down (since SVID Offset doesn't affect idle voltage).

I know that's confusing, but think of it like this.
AC Loadline=boosts idle voltage to 1.4v, boosts load voltage to 1.518v (I checked this with DC Loadline=0.01 mOhms and looked at VID, as VR VOUT does not respond to DC Loadline), then load voltage is dropped by VRM Loadline (Loadline Calibration) down to a nice safe level. Intel specifies that Loadline Calibration should be left at their stock settings for the CPU's to perform as expected without degrading. VRM Loadline Calibration is basically a "hack" to avoid this.

SVID Offset boosts voltage based on load and temps, idle voltage is unaffected. I am not sure if SVID offset boosts the VID past 1.52v, but when I tested "Auto" Vcore (SVID Disabled) and I set AC Loadline to 1.6 mOhms and DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms, IDLE VID was 1.404v and load VID was 1.518v in AVX *DISABLED* prime95 *AND* AVX enabled prime95 ! Load VID did not exceed 1.52v (Intel max VID). CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration=standard was then responsible for dropping the vcore down to 1.240v (1.6 mOhms of VRM loadline).

On the old Gigabyte Bioses (well, F7a, possible older bioses or maybe this was a f7a specific bug), SVID Offset would cause a complete POST failure.

The benefit to doing this compared to using Offsets is:
1) Transient response is splendid since LLC is kept at standard, so there are no transient spikes. (this is probably the big one. definitely better transients than LLC=Medium with AC Loadline=0.4).
2) (untested): idle BSOD's may not happen as AC Loadline has a much lower effect on idle voltages than a flat negative offset value. (YMMV).

AC Loadline=0.4 (Power saving preset)+LLC Low is still good if this doesn't work.

What sucks about the Gigabyte "Internal Load Line" presets is that they change DC Loadline, when DC loadline has absolutely no effect on VR VOUT, only on VID and CPU Package Power, as the VRM gets the "AC Loadline" signal before DC Loadline changes the VID afterwards. I don't know if this is intended behavior or a bug. DC Loadline theoretically affects the Q point, but doesn't seem to do so on this motherboard. Lowering DC Loadline on my laptop oddly enough reduces the voltage slightly, while also reducing the "droop on the VID", which doesn't seem to make sense...(higher VID reported at load, but less actual voltage).


----------



## BradleyW

Can someone check these settings for possible improvements? My priority is the health of the CPU (prevent degrading).

9900K 4.7GHz HT ON
Uncore x44
DVID +0.050
Vcore Loadline Calibration Medium
IA AC Loadline 1
IA DC Loadline 1
C States ON

CPU-Z voltage .8v Idle, 1.21v load (FMA3 SmallestFFT).
FMA3 and Apex stable.

Thank you.


----------



## wingman99

BradleyW said:


> Can someone check these settings for possible improvements? My priority is the health of the CPU (prevent degrading).
> 
> 9900K 4.7GHz HT ON
> Uncore x44
> DVID +0.050
> Vcore Loadline Calibration Medium
> IA AC Loadline 1
> IA DC Loadline 1
> C States ON
> 
> CPU-Z voltage .8v Idle, 1.21v load (FMA3 SmallestFFT).
> FMA3 and Apex stable.
> 
> Thank you.


If you just ran at default stock settings the PC would run 4.7GHz on all cores.


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> Can someone check these settings for possible improvements? My priority is the health of the CPU (prevent degrading).
> 
> 9900K 4.7GHz HT ON
> Uncore x44
> DVID +0.050
> Vcore Loadline Calibration Medium
> IA AC Loadline 1
> IA DC Loadline 1
> C States ON
> 
> CPU-Z voltage .8v Idle, 1.21v load (FMA3 SmallestFFT).
> FMA3 and Apex stable.
> 
> Thank you.


With those voltages you should be able to do 4.9GHZ CPU, 4.5GHZ cache easily, maybe even 5.0/4.6, with no more risk of degradation at the current clock speeds.


----------



## BradleyW

wingman99 said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can someone check these settings for possible improvements? My priority is the health of the CPU (prevent degrading).
> 
> 9900K 4.7GHz HT ON
> Uncore x44
> DVID +0.050
> Vcore Loadline Calibration Medium
> IA AC Loadline 1
> IA DC Loadline 1
> C States ON
> 
> CPU-Z voltage .8v Idle, 1.21v load (FMA3 SmallestFFT).
> FMA3 and Apex stable.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> If you just ran at default stock settings the PC would run 4.7GHz on all cores./forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

With stock settings, the voltage is far too high. 



KedarWolf said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can someone check these settings for possible improvements? My priority is the health of the CPU (prevent degrading).
> 
> 9900K 4.7GHz HT ON
> Uncore x44
> DVID +0.050
> Vcore Loadline Calibration Medium
> IA AC Loadline 1
> IA DC Loadline 1
> C States ON
> 
> CPU-Z voltage .8v Idle, 1.21v load (FMA3 SmallestFFT).
> FMA3 and Apex stable.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> With those voltages you should be able to do 4.9GHZ CPU, 4.5GHZ cache easily, maybe even 5.0/4.6, with no more risk of degradation at the current clock speeds. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

I need 1.34v in CPUZ for 5GHz.

I'm just looking to refine my settings to reduce transient spikes and so on.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> With stock settings, the voltage is far too high.
> 
> 
> 
> I need 1.34v in CPUZ for 5GHz.
> 
> I'm just looking to refine my settings to reduce transient spikes and so on.


Bradley, no one can tell you exactly what settings to use as your CPU silicon is different than theirs.
The lower amount of loadline calibration you use, the better the transient response will be.
The drawback is higher vdroop thus needing a higher bios voltage to compensate.
LLC High at 1.35v for example will have better transient response than LLC Turbo at 1.32v, but if you are just doing light to medium current (amps) load on your PC (such as video games!), then transients won't be an issue, so LLC Turbo @ 1.32v might be better.

If you're trying to run FMA3 small FFT prime95 at 180 amps, you want as LITTLE loadline calibration as possible, because transient are going to be all over the place.
tl;dr: You do not need to be worried about transient response or CPU degradation at <1.32v set in BIOS with LLC Turbo, especially if you are not stress testing!

Tell me what VR VOUT you need for 5 ghz, idle and load, please. CPU-Z is garbage. It uses the ITE 8688E (Super I/O) voltage sensor which is extremely inaccurate.


----------



## Driller au

@Intrud3r 
shoot me down in flames here if wrong but the artifacts you get in realbench wouldn't that have more to do with VAXG settings if you have the Igpu enabled when running realbench ?


----------



## Intrud3r

Driller au said:


> @Intrud3r
> shoot me down in flames here if wrong but the artifacts you get in realbench wouldn't that have more to do with VAXG settings if you have the Igpu enabled when running realbench ?


You are probably on point there ... it seems the artifacts come from my igpu and that would be the vaxg setting. I sadly have no loadline for that setting.
Only a voltage setting I can set.

Default is 1.200V
I tried 1.220V but that didn't help at all the time I tried it.


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

BradleyW said:


> Can someone check these settings for possible improvements? My priority is the health of the CPU (prevent degrading).
> 
> 
> 
> 9900K 4.7GHz HT ON
> 
> Uncore x44
> 
> DVID +0.050
> 
> Vcore Loadline Calibration Medium
> 
> IA AC Loadline 1
> 
> IA DC Loadline 1
> 
> C States ON
> 
> 
> 
> CPU-Z voltage .8v Idle, 1.21v load (FMA3 SmallestFFT).
> 
> FMA3 and Apex stable.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.



It might be a good idea to turn c states off until you get a good Overclock before you turn it on. Also CPUz Vcore generally isn’t accurate. You want to get hw info and read the VR Vout because that shows your real time load voltage. At idle you’ll notice it’s close to Vcore but under load it’ll drop severely. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wingman99

BradleyW said:


> With stock settings, the voltage is far too high.


Intel engineers designed the Processor to last a long life with default stock settings. Less than one percent of Intel customers change the core voltage from stock default and CPU's last for decades.


----------



## Smokediggity

Anyone know whats new in the F9c BIOS for the master?


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> So a quick rundown ...
> 
> 5.0/4.7:
> IA AC/DC Loadline = doesn't matter, just pick Auto
> AC Loadline = 90
> DC Loadline = 160
> Vcore loadline = standard
> Vcore = Normal
> DVID = unavailable
> SVID Offset = Enabled
> 
> Test for stability --> up AC Loadline by 5 (for +10mv VR VOUT under load) to reach stability.
> 
> Correct ?


So did you try my settings yet?


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> Anyone know whats new in the F9c BIOS for the master?


If they didn't adjust the PWM switching frequency higher than 500 khz I'm not interested 
Is it still 500 khz maximum in f9c ?


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> So did you try my settings yet?


I will this weekend ... for sure ... 
Curious how it will behave 

I need some time to get my barings straight again. After that prime test --> BSOD --> auto shut off and rebooting into NO BIOS available...

Nah, just kidding ... just need more time to test as fulltime work only gives me so much time.


----------



## EarlZ

When I booted my PC today I was greeted with the F4 bios, I checked on my BIOS LED and it is showing that it is booting from the back up bios (BBIOS_LED). I followed the instructions on the manual to and set it to single bios mode and choose boot to main bios but it still boots to the back up bios, Is there a way to force flash the main bios back maybe it just got corrupted ?

EDIT:

I decided to do a flash on the F9C and before flashing I reverted the bios switches back to default (main, dual) and it flashed F9C on the main bios making it boot and my back up is still F4. I guess that resolves this.


----------



## Driller au

I think Falkentyne had a post here with how to do it, it was a while ago click on his name and search 

here is how from gigabyte site
https://www.gigabyte.com/Support/FAQ/3876


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf @Intrud3r
> 
> Some more settings for you to try out, with even better transient response:
> 
> 5 ghz/4.7 ghz:
> SVID OFFSET: ENABLED.
> IA AC Loadline= 90
> IA DC Loadline=160
> VRM Loadline (CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration) = Standard
> 
> CPU Idle VR VOUT (C-states disabled): 1.332v
> Small FFT AVX Prime95 (29.8 build 3)= 180 amps'ish. VR VOUT average=1.230v, stable. (FMA3 is not stable, exceeds 195 amps, don't bother)
> (VR VOUT started at 1.217v and slowly rose to 1.232v as temps increased, and stayed there).
> 
> Note:
> Increasing AC Loadline by "5" raises VR VOUT by about 10mv in AVX small FFT Prime95
> 
> Compare this to 5 ghz/4.7 ghz:
> CPU Vcore: Auto
> IA AC Loadline=160
> IA DC Loadline=160
> VRM Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard.
> 
> Idle: 1.404v VR VOUT
> Prime95 29.8 build 3 small FFT AVX (15K FFT): 184.250 amps, 1.240v VR VOUT
> 
> Enabling SVID OFFSET drops the idle voltage by 70mv and keeps the same load voltage (as SVID=disabled with ACLL=160), *IF* AC LOADLINE IS REDUCED from 1.6 mOhms to 0.9 mOhms (160->90).
> If AC were kept at 160, VR VOUT would be 1.330v (!!) with AVX prime95 15K, and 105C temps in 5 seconds. Good game, No Rematch.
> 
> SVID offset does not seem to affect idle voltages at all. It seems to boost load voltage based on temps and current.
> 
> If you're not stable, raise AC Loadline by "5" until you are stable.
> *NOTE* DVID CONTROL IS UNAVAILABLE.


I tried this in combination with F9C and it seems to be better than offsets I no longer see huge spikes!


----------



## EarlZ

Driller au said:


> I think Falkentyne had a post here with how to do it, it was a while ago click on his name and search
> 
> here is how from gigabyte site
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Support/FAQ/3876


Thanks for providing the link, I was able to fix it before I saw this link with the same steps as I theorized it would work.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> If they didn't adjust the PWM switching frequency higher than 500 khz I'm not interested
> Is it still 500 khz maximum in f9c ?


Still the same 500khz


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> Still the same 500khz


No point in using it then if you have the modded F9b unless there is a bugfix no one knows about.
I do know the microcode was updated to AE for 9900K (and for 9700K whatever microcode it uses).

So changelog: "Update CPU Microcode"
"unknown undocumented Gigabyte changes" (translation: we may have fixed something and broke something else).


----------



## Intrud3r

Driller au said:


> @Intrud3r
> shoot me down in flames here if wrong but the artifacts you get in realbench wouldn't that have more to do with VAXG settings if you have the Igpu enabled when running realbench ?


Funny thing tho that could maybe help others (except the fact that almost nobody uses there igpu)

What I found during my testing ... is that the Vcore needed to get rid of all the artifacts that my igpu creates while running Realbench 2.56 is the same Vcore needed to be able to enable all C-States.

Maybe it helps somebody.


----------



## Falkentyne

Did a test because I got bored.
Found that with the Gskill 3200 C14 RAM at 3600 mhz, 15-15-15-36, 2T and those tertiary tweaks in the DDR4 thread, VCCIO needs to be 1.15v for stability (and VCCSA).

And i always wondered why when testing Ultra Extreme Loadline Calibration (at low volts) like at 4.7 ghz 1.155v, with Prime95 15K FMA3 (hell worst case torture test), why the system would run about 12 minutes, then 3-4 threads would crash at the exact same time. Figured it was just a huge transient drop from a 0 mOhm loadline, and the last time I tested this was at 3200 mhz cas 14-14-14-34 1T and VCCIO 1.0v

So I got bored and set PS Current Threshold 1, 2 and 3 to "0" (for both Core IA and GT, even though i don't use the iGPU, probably irrelevant) and PS3 and PS4 to disabled.
Since Phase Control was already set to Extreme anyway, and the IA AC and IA DC loadline values if set to a non zero value, completely overrule the "CPU Internal Load Line" presets, but I don't know in what relation PS Current Threshold 1, 2 or 3 (PS current threshold 1 is supposed to be the amps point (default=20) when all phases are enabled, however I have NO idea how this relates to "PWM Phase Control" whatsoever. 
But whatever.

I set 4.7 ghz core, 4.4 cache, and bios voltage=1.155v and Ultra Extreme Loadline Calibration and run FMA3 15K prime95 29.8 build 3.
Expecting half the threads to crash in <12 minutes like they always do.

And...
29 minutes later....all threads were running.

What.
So what was that about. I have no idea.

Because Ultra Extreme Loadline Calibration with FMA3 prime15 15K should be causing WILD Transient spikes and dips of about 100mv each way...
I've tested already that with Loadline Calibration=Standard (1.6 mOhms=meaning maximum transient response), 4.7 ghz 15K FMA3 prime95 needs about 1.090v VR VOUT for full stability. As Loadline Calibration is increased, transient response worsens at higher amps, thus VR VOUT then needs to be higher! (Loadline Calibration="High" (0.8 mOhms) requires VR VOUT to be 1.109v for full stability with nothing else running in the background except 15K FMA3 prime95, and Loadline Calibration=Turbo (0.4 mOhms) requires VR VOUT = 1.137v. See a pattern?

But Ultra Extreme has always been a train wreck at heavy amps.

I can only guess 1 of 2 things here:
1) PWM Phase Control=extreme + PS Current Threshold 1, 2 and 3 all set to "Auto" (0) affects stability (no way to verify without an oscilloscope reading the VR VOUT/VCC_Sense 0 mOhm voltage stability).
2) VCCIO affects L3 cache voltage and the cache is EXTREMELY sensitive to transients, which Shamino mentions:



> If you played with Cache OC, you see that it is very intolerant of any undershoots. Straightaway you would hardlock or BSOD. You can even test it at default. Since it shares the same rail as core, set core ratio to something really low like 40x. Set min and max cache ratio to 43x and set a manual voltage like 1.15v. Run a heavy load like prime 95 non AVX. Dynamically slowly reduce the voltage 5mv at a time. You will find the VMIN this way. Once you find the VMIN under continuous load, stop prime95. If it doesn’t hang, run it again, back and forth between running and stopping. Even try booting straight from bios with that VMIN. You will see that this VMIN requires a guardband for transient load changes, meaning you will need 5mv+++ more. You will observe bigger guardbands needed at higher cache. Obviously the better the transient response, the guardband requirement is smaller.


https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others

However the differences between this and my previous tests like 2 weeks ago (when 4 threads just crashed at about 12 minutes at 1.160v Ultra Extreme) is that I raised VCCIO to 1.15v and those PS Current Threshold changes. 

So either L3 cache is being affected by Ultra Extreme Loadline Calibration, and VCCIO needs to be increased (assuming L1 and L2 cache use the CPU Vcore rail), or PS Current Threshold setting to "0" somehow influences the PWM Phase Control=Extreme in some way instead of overriding it. But I don't even know about that. If I had to take a forced guess, I would say Ultra Extreme LLC affects transients negatively and L3 cache is sensitive to transient drops so VCCIO helped. But I don't know?

With the default values of 80, 20 and 4 (20 amps, 5 amps and 1 amp, after dividers), when I set PWM Phase Control to "Lite Pwr", there seemed to be no difference with a 16 thread SSE2 (AVX disabled) prime95 4.7 ghz test in Amps and Power (POUT) in the IR 35201 sensors. However, when I did a 1 thread (!) and 2 thread test, the amps was shooting all over the place and going back down (as well as the Power POUT), seemed very erratic with 1 or 2 threads. With Extreme Performance, it was much more stable, so PWM Phase Control=Extreme did do something (On light loads) even with the default PS Current Threshold values. Anyway it's one or the other---higher L3 cache voltage (VCCIO) or PS Current Threshold values being set to 0 (Auto).

Ok now that I confused you all, have fun. I just wasted 15 minutes typing this.
And no I'm not going to double check this by running 1.155v 4.7 ghz, LLC=Ultra Extreme + Prime95 15K FMA3 for a second time because you KNOW it's going to crash again. You know it don't you. And I don't like bad, random bad news and I already wasted too many hours doing random stress tests under silly conditions.

Ok now you guys can experiment with changing SVID OFFSET to enabled, Set CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration to Standard, then setting IA AC Loadline to between 80 (golden CPU's) to 110 (crappy CPU's) and see if you're stable, and enjoy a lower idle voltage than if you set "Auto" vcore with 1.6 mOhms (160) for AC loadline. Note that Auto vcore + AC Loadline=90 (0.9 mOhms) is going to be unstable on most systems at 5 ghz if Loadline Calibration is left at Standard. Keep DC Loadline at 1.6 mOhms (160) so VID=VR VOUT.

SVID Offset raises the load input voltage to the VRM without affecting idle voltage. Lowering AC Loadline lowers your idle and load voltages both. Loadline Calibration must be left at Standard if you try this.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf @Intrud3r
> 
> Some more settings for you to try out, with even better transient response:
> 
> 5 ghz/4.7 ghz:
> SVID OFFSET: ENABLED.
> IA AC Loadline= 90
> IA DC Loadline=160
> VRM Loadline (CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration) = Standard
> 
> CPU Idle VR VOUT (C-states disabled): 1.332v
> Small FFT AVX Prime95 (29.8 build 3)= 180 amps'ish. VR VOUT average=1.230v, stable. (FMA3 is not stable, exceeds 195 amps, don't bother)
> (VR VOUT started at 1.217v and slowly rose to 1.232v as temps increased, and stayed there).
> 
> Note:
> Increasing AC Loadline by "5" raises VR VOUT by about 10mv in AVX small FFT Prime95
> 
> Compare this to 5 ghz/4.7 ghz:
> CPU Vcore: Auto
> IA AC Loadline=160
> IA DC Loadline=160
> VRM Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard.
> 
> Idle: 1.404v VR VOUT
> Prime95 29.8 build 3 small FFT AVX (15K FFT): 184.250 amps, 1.240v VR VOUT
> 
> Enabling SVID OFFSET drops the idle voltage by 70mv and keeps the same load voltage (as SVID=disabled with ACLL=160), *IF* AC LOADLINE IS REDUCED from 1.6 mOhms to 0.9 mOhms (160->90).
> If AC were kept at 160, VR VOUT would be 1.330v (!!) with AVX prime95 15K, and 105C temps in 5 seconds. Good game, No Rematch.
> 
> SVID offset does not seem to affect idle voltages at all. It seems to boost load voltage based on temps and current.
> 
> If you're not stable, raise AC Loadline by "5" until you are stable.
> *NOTE* DVID CONTROL IS UNAVAILABLE.


You're confusing the hell out of me, mixing up BIOS names, can you please post BIOS screenshots?


This won't even boot for me on F9c.


----------



## R3van

Is there any changelog for F9c? Edit: Nevermind, found it... :doh:

And since nobody else asked it, will there be a modded version too @KedarWolf?


----------



## KedarWolf

R3van said:


> Is there any changelog for F9c? Edit: Nevermind, found it... :doh:
> 
> And since nobody else asked it, will there be a modded version too @KedarWolf?


Modded F9c BIOS.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Modded F9c BIOS.


Did you just change the ME file? thought F9c had the latest micro code


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Did you just change the ME file? thought F9c had the latest micro code


Yeah, it has the latest microcode, only updated the RST firmware and Ethernet firmware.

ME you can't change in the BIOS, needs to be done on its own in Windows using the method I posted earlier in the thread. It's on WinRaid forums.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, it has the latest microcode, only updated the RST firmware and Ethernet firmware.
> 
> ME you can't change in the BIOS, needs to be done on its own in Windows using the method I posted earlier in the thread. It's on WinRaid forums.


"DOH" said the wrong thing


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> "DOH" said the wrong thing


Wasn't trying to diss you or anything. 

The .zip has the ME firmware you need to flash and the program you flash it with.


Open an Admin command prompt in the folder you unzipped, then run this.



Code:


FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin


----------



## Driller au

Absolutely no offence taken mate  just had the ****s with myself, should of known better


----------



## R3van

KedarWolf said:


> Modded F9c BIOS.


Grazie Mille :specool:


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> You're confusing the hell out of me, mixing up BIOS names, can you please post BIOS screenshots?
> 
> 
> This won't even boot for me on F9c.


What do you mean by doesn't boot?
Can you get into the BIOS?
Does it black screen?
Does it crash loading windows?
And how do I post bios screenshots? I never did that before.
You tried this at 5 ghz, right?

Are you using any power saving? I have all c-states disabled.
And your screenshots are correct.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> What do you mean by doesn't boot?
> Can you get into the BIOS?
> Does it black screen?
> Does it crash loading windows?
> And how do I post bios screenshots? I never did that before.
> You tried this at 5 ghz, right?
> 
> Are you using any power saving? I have all c-states disabled.
> And your screenshots are correct.


To post bios pics put in a USB stick, boot into bios and on the page you want hit F12 or print screen and a box will pop up saying it was successful


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> What do you mean by doesn't boot?
> Can you get into the BIOS?
> Does it black screen?
> Does it crash loading windows?
> And how do I post bios screenshots? I never did that before.
> You tried this at 5 ghz, right?
> 
> Are you using any power saving? I have all c-states disabled.
> And your screenshots are correct.


Black screen, no post, no BIOS, can't remember the Q Code, F7 or something. But I'm at 5.1GHZ which I run at +.160 Offset 1 IA AC Loadlline. Which is why I upped it to IA AC Loadline 120, not 90. 

And no, I can't disable C-States, my board has that bug if they are not all enabled I get random reboots. Other people have reported the same with the Master. 

Edit: I need 1.334v VR Vout when running Prime95 1344 FFTs AVX enabled to remain stable which I get at +.160.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Black screen, no post, no BIOS, can't remember the Q Code, F7 or something. But I'm at 5.1GHZ which I run at +.160 Offset 1 IA AC Loadlline. Which is why I upped it to IA AC Loadline 120, not 90.
> 
> And no, I can't disable C-States, my board has that bug if they are not all enabled I get random reboots. Other people have reported the same with the Master.
> 
> Edit: I need 1.334v VR Vout when running Prime95 1344 FFTs AVX enabled to remain stable which I get at +.160.



That may be why you are getting no post.
There are certain combinations of bios settings which will make a board not POST when changed from other bios settings.

For example, there is a certain settings combination where if you change from 'offset' with a certain Loadline calibration to manual voltage with a different loadline calibration (at least with F8E bios),
by changing bios settings and rebooting, on the first reboot, the LLC you changed isn't applied at all. Then when you go back into the bios (and see a much too high voltage), and go "exit without saving", then reboot again, suddenly your voltages are correct. I first encountered this on F8E when I tried your offset settings.
When I went from your settings, back to 'Auto' voltages, your offset was still applied until I did "exit without saving' and rebooted a 2nd time.
I had a similar bug where I tried going from your offset settings to manual voltage, and it applied 1.45v instead of 1.29v. Exiting without saving and rebooting and voltage was fine.

I didn't encounter this bug if I loaded a saved profile however. But I'm sure you remember the bug reports many pages back where people were complaining that if you went from DVID offset to "Auto" and rebooted, the DVID was still applied (until you rebooted a second time).

I'm still in bed so no screenshots yet, but try this first.

First, try the following.

Go into your bios, from your known settings.

Set IA AC loadline to 160, DC loadline to 160, voltage to manual, voltage to 1.350v, Loadline calibration to "Turbo".
(DO NOT USE THE FAVORITES. Someone else mentioned a bug where the bios locked up if one of the RAM settings was put in favorites so there may be others).

Then save and exit and go back in the bios.

Check voltage readout, then do "exit without saving".
(this will remove any DVID offset bugs from the first change)

Now go in the bios again and set SVID OFFSET to enabled and Loadline Calibration to "Standard" (do not forget this).
Save and exit again.

You should POST now. In fact I am 100% sure you will POST now.

Then change IA AC Loadline to 120.
Save, Exit and go to windows and test.


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf
Is this what you needed?


----------



## BradleyW

Hello,
Just a quick question.
Which scenario would be the better option in terms of stability and transient voltage fluctuation?
CPU Vcore +0.040v, IA AC 1, IA DC 1 = CPU Voltage =1.2v
CPU Vcore +0.010v, IA AC 30, IA DC 30 = CPU Voltage = 1.2v
This is just hypothetical.
Thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

BradleyW said:


> Hello,
> Just a quick question.
> Which scenario would be the better option in terms of stability and transient voltage fluctuation?
> CPU Vcore +0.040v, IA AC 1, IA DC 1 = CPU Voltage =1.2v
> CPU Vcore +0.010v, IA AC 30, IA DC 30 = CPU Voltage = 1.2v
> This is just hypothetical.
> Thank you.


Neither.
Transient response is based on *loadline calibration*.
AC Loadline is not loadline calibration.

AC loadline is the "Bias" of the CPU preprogrammed VID (Core/cache ratio preset, most ratios have a preset going from 800 mhz to 5 ghz), boosted by "resistance' (type of load), then sent to the VRM as input voltage.
DC Loadline is the power measurement (does not actually affect input or output voltages at all, but DOES affect the reported VID you see).

VRM Loadline is the loadline slope of the input voltage, as its being sent to the CPU based on the amps it's pulling--dropping the input voltage down a factor of milliohms (Default is 1.6 mOhms). Loadline Calibration changes (reduces) this resistance to reduce vdroop. *THIS* causes transient response penalties.

Transient response penalties do not happen on the target voltage being supplied to the VRM via switching from 12v to whatever this is (1.518v, 1.404v, etc).
This transient response can only be improved by higher 'VRM switching frequency' (to be fair, this just affects ripple; you need an oscilloscope to check VCC_Sense at different PWM switching frequencies. Once again, no one on this thread seems to have an oscilloscope).

Penalties happen if you change the loadline that affects what the CPU is actually getting based on how much amps it's pulling afterwards. 
Like this: (based on Auto voltage)

CPU +12v supply --> CPU VID read (preset hardwired) --> AC Loadline (bias, mOhms)--> Mosfets (switching 12v to VRM supply voltage) --> VRM target voltage (before VRM loadline vdroop) ---> Loadline (1.6 mOhms)---> CPU VCC_Sense (after VRM loadline vdroop)

Raising DVID or lowering DVID should not affect transient response, as this does not affect loadline. Maybe it does, but without oscilloscope equipment, no one knows. No one here seems to have an oscilloscope.

Increasing CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration (VRM Loadline) to reduce vdroop decreases transient response.

Loadline Calibration=Standard (1.6 mOhms) has the best transient response.


So to answer your question:
AC Loadline=1 and AC Loadline=160 should have insignificant difference in transient response. Just higher "CPU VID-->VRM input voltage" at higher AC loadline.
Naturally, the lower voltage you can run, the better. Lower voltage=longer longevity. (has nothing to do with transient response here).

But Loadline Calibration=Standard --> Loadline Calibration=Extreme--> MUCH much worse transient response.

Or think of it this way
1.6 mOhms of Loadline Calibration. Vdroop is equal to Amps * resistance in milli-volts
(100 amps * 1.6 = 160mv of voltage drop).
If you reduce the mOhms (increasing loadline calibration), you reduce vdroop. But the VRM's are designed to operate *WITH* vdroop. (that's why Intel gave us AC Loadline, to boost the input supply voltage signal to help mitigate the effect of vdroop).
But when you start pulling lots of amps, when 'load' changes (high to low, or load to high), what happens is the vdroop you "removed" (example, 50mv, 100mv, 150mv) actually *COMES BACK* for a few microseconds!
The more vdroop is removed, the more comes back when load changes! Except---it comes back as *BOTH* DROOP (drops--can BSOD you) and SPIKES (can degrade your CPU). Because the more amps you use the more the vdroop will be (vdroop = Amps * resistance, remember?)

Does this make sense now?


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Neither.
> Transient response is based on *loadline calibration*.
> AC Loadline is not loadline calibration.
> 
> AC loadline is the "Bias" of the CPU preprogrammed VID (Core/cache ratio preset, most ratios have a preset going from 800 mhz to 5 ghz), boosted by "resistance' (type of load), then sent to the VRM as input voltage.
> DC Loadline is the power measurement (does not actually affect input or output voltages at all, but DOES affect the reported VID you see).
> 
> VRM Loadline is the loadline slope of the input voltage, as its being sent to the CPU based on the amps it's pulling--dropping the input voltage down a factor of milliohms (Default is 1.6 mOhms). Loadline Calibration changes (reduces) this resistance to reduce vdroop. *THIS* causes transient response penalties.
> 
> Transient response penalties do not happen on the target voltage being supplied to the VRM via switching from 12v to whatever this is (1.518v, 1.404v, etc).
> This transient response can only be improved by higher 'VRM switching frequency' (to be fair, this just affects ripple; you need an oscilloscope to check VCC_Sense at different PWM switching frequencies. Once again, no one on this thread seems to have an oscilloscope).
> 
> Penalties happen if you change the loadline that affects what the CPU is actually getting based on how much amps it's pulling afterwards.
> Like this: (based on Auto voltage)
> 
> CPU +12v supply --> CPU VID read (preset hardwired) --> AC Loadline (bias, mOhms)--> Mosfets (switching 12v to VRM supply voltage) --> VRM target voltage (before VRM loadline vdroop) ---> Loadline (1.6 mOhms)---> CPU VCC_Sense (after VRM loadline vdroop)
> 
> Raising DVID or lowering DVID should not affect transient response, as this does not affect loadline. Maybe it does, but without oscilloscope equipment, no one knows. No one here seems to have an oscilloscope.
> 
> Increasing CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration (VRM Loadline) to reduce vdroop decreases transient response.
> 
> Loadline Calibration=Standard (1.6 mOhms) has the best transient response.
> 
> 
> So to answer your question:
> AC Loadline=1 and AC Loadline=160 should have insignificant difference in transient response. Just higher "CPU VID-->VRM input voltage" at higher AC loadline.
> Naturally, the lower voltage you can run, the better. Lower voltage=longer longevity. (has nothing to do with transient response here).
> 
> But Loadline Calibration=Standard --> Loadline Calibration=Extreme--> MUCH much worse transient response.
> 
> Or think of it this way
> 1.6 mOhms of Loadline Calibration. Vdroop is equal to Amps * resistance in milli-volts
> (100 amps * 1.6 = 160mv of voltage drop).
> If you reduce the mOhms (increasing loadline calibration), you reduce vdroop. But the VRM's are designed to operate *WITH* vdroop. (that's why Intel gave us AC Loadline, to boost the input supply voltage signal to help mitigate the effect of vdroop).
> But when you start pulling lots of amps, when 'load' changes (high to low, or load to high), what happens is the vdroop you "removed" (example, 50mv, 100mv, 150mv) actually *COMES BACK* for a few microseconds!
> The more vdroop is removed, the more comes back when load changes! Except---it comes back as *BOTH* DROOP (drops--can BSOD you) and SPIKES (can degrade your CPU). Because the more amps you use the more the vdroop will be (vdroop = Amps * resistance, remember?)
> 
> Does this make sense now?


I wonder if IA DC loadline effects processor Idle and C-states? I run IA AC/DC 170 and use idle and all C-states.


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf @Intrud3r here


----------



## Intrud3r

Thank you very much


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> That may be why you are getting no post.
> 
> You should POST now. In fact I am 100% sure you will POST now.
> 
> Then change IA AC Loadline to 120.
> Save, Exit and go to windows and test.


Nope, don't post, but if I use the below I get 1.244v VR VOUT idle voltages and 1.334v in Prime95 1344 FFTs which I need to be stable.


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello,
> Just a quick question.
> Which scenario would be the better option in terms of stability and transient voltage fluctuation?
> CPU Vcore +0.040v, IA AC 1, IA DC 1 = CPU Voltage =1.2v
> CPU Vcore +0.010v, IA AC 30, IA DC 30 = CPU Voltage = 1.2v
> This is just hypothetical.
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> Neither.
> Transient response is based on *loadline calibration*.
> AC Loadline is not loadline calibration.
> 
> AC loadline is the "Bias" of the CPU preprogrammed VID (Core/cache ratio preset, most ratios have a preset going from 800 mhz to 5 ghz), boosted by "resistance' (type of load), then sent to the VRM as input voltage.
> DC Loadline is the power measurement (does not actually affect input or output voltages at all, but DOES affect the reported VID you see).
> 
> VRM Loadline is the loadline slope of the input voltage, as its being sent to the CPU based on the amps it's pulling--dropping the input voltage down a factor of milliohms (Default is 1.6 mOhms). Loadline Calibration changes (reduces) this resistance to reduce vdroop. *THIS* causes transient response penalties.
> 
> Transient response penalties do not happen on the target voltage being supplied to the VRM via switching from 12v to whatever this is (1.518v, 1.404v, etc).
> This transient response can only be improved by higher 'VRM switching frequency' (to be fair, this just affects ripple; you need an oscilloscope to check VCC_Sense at different PWM switching frequencies. Once again, no one on this thread seems to have an oscilloscope).
> 
> Penalties happen if you change the loadline that affects what the CPU is actually getting based on how much amps it's pulling afterwards.
> Like this: (based on Auto voltage)
> 
> CPU +12v supply --> CPU VID read (preset hardwired) --> AC Loadline (bias, mOhms)--> Mosfets (switching 12v to VRM supply voltage) --> VRM target voltage (before VRM loadline vdroop) ---> Loadline (1.6 mOhms)---> CPU VCC_Sense (after VRM loadline vdroop)
> 
> Raising DVID or lowering DVID should not affect transient response, as this does not affect loadline. Maybe it does, but without oscilloscope equipment, no one knows. No one here seems to have an oscilloscope.
> 
> Increasing CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration (VRM Loadline) to reduce vdroop decreases transient response.
> 
> Loadline Calibration=Standard (1.6 mOhms) has the best transient response.
> 
> 
> So to answer your question:
> AC Loadline=1 and AC Loadline=160 should have insignificant difference in transient response. Just higher "CPU VID-->VRM input voltage" at higher AC loadline.
> Naturally, the lower voltage you can run, the better. Lower voltage=longer longevity. (has nothing to do with transient response here).
> 
> But Loadline Calibration=Standard --> Loadline Calibration=Extreme--> MUCH much worse transient response.
> 
> Or think of it this way
> 1.6 mOhms of Loadline Calibration. Vdroop is equal to Amps * resistance in milli-volts
> (100 amps * 1.6 = 160mv of voltage drop).
> If you reduce the mOhms (increasing loadline calibration), you reduce vdroop. But the VRM's are designed to operate *WITH* vdroop. (that's why Intel gave us AC Loadline, to boost the input supply voltage signal to help mitigate the effect of vdroop).
> But when you start pulling lots of amps, when 'load' changes (high to low, or load to high), what happens is the vdroop you "removed" (example, 50mv, 100mv, 150mv) actually *COMES BACK* for a few microseconds!
> The more vdroop is removed, the more comes back when load changes! Except---it comes back as *BOTH* DROOP (drops--can BSOD you) and SPIKES (can degrade your CPU). Because the more amps you use the more the vdroop will be (vdroop = Amps * resistance, remember?)
> 
> Does this make sense now?
Click to expand...

Yeah that does help, thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Nope, don't post, but if I use the below I get 1.244v VR VOUT idle voltages and 1.334v in Prime95 1344 FFTs which I need to be stable.


This shouldn't be happening.
Unless your high RAM settings are preventing a POST.

What happens if you :

Disable XMP (RAM runs at 2133 mhz) (Do this first, then save and re-enter bios so it doesn't change too many settings at once):

then:
disable all C-states, disable voltage optimization (ok, disable ALL power saving completely), set Loadline Calibration to Standard,
Set IA AC Loadline to 160, Set IA DC loadline to 160, Enable SVID Offset, 5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache and THEN save and exit?

This posts, now, right?
(Zero reason why this shouldn't).

Then, enable XMP and set your RAM back to your overclocked settings.
Does it POST now?

This should POST as, except for your RAM settings, you would be using identical settings as me.

Then finally, set IA AC Loadline to 120 instead of 160.

Something is causing you to fail to POST.

On Bios F7a, I could not POST with SVID offset enabled and AC/DC Loadline=1 (LLC=Standard). Would just freeze with post code. Had to clear CMOS.

On F8E (mod), I could post with SVID offset enabled with IA/AC DC Loadline=1 but would quickly BSOD trying to load windows (LLC=Standard). Base voltage was too low, because 1.6 mOhms of Vcore Vdroop would drop the voltage down to 1.15v while windows was loading. Nope  Had to set AC/DC back to 160, got to windows, VID and VR VOUT was 1.404v idle (same VID as Auto voltage settings without an offset), ran prime95 AVX small FFT and saw I was pulling 212 amps and VR VOUT was 1.330v, 105C in 5 seconds. Set AC loadline to 90 and kept DC at 160 mOhms and got nice settings. (1.32v VR VOUT/VID=Idle, 1.230v VR VOUT prime95 15K AVX, 1.2 something V SSE2 prime95 AVX disabled).

Keep in mind I did not test SVID Offset with c-states or any power saving options enabled.


----------



## BradleyW

What does voltage optimization actually do? I have it enabled currently along with all other C states.


----------



## Padinn

Since updating to 1903 my pc is rebooting to bios when I choose shutdown. 😞


----------



## Driller au

BradleyW said:


> What does voltage optimization actually do? I have it enabled currently along with all other C states.


Reading the pop up when you click it i take it to be enabled when you have a mobile CPU i.e. laptop and disabled on a desktop and auto the bios decides


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> This shouldn't be happening.
> Unless your high RAM settings are preventing a POST.
> 
> What happens if you :
> 
> Disable XMP (RAM runs at 2133 mhz) (Do this first, then save and re-enter bios so it doesn't change too many settings at once):
> 
> then:
> disable all C-states, disable voltage optimization (ok, disable ALL power saving completely), set Loadline Calibration to Standard,
> Set IA AC Loadline to 160, Set IA DC loadline to 160, Enable SVID Offset, 5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache and THEN save and exit?
> 
> This posts, now, right?
> (Zero reason why this shouldn't).
> 
> Then, enable XMP and set your RAM back to your overclocked settings.
> Does it POST now?
> 
> This should POST as, except for your RAM settings, you would be using identical settings as me.
> 
> Then finally, set IA AC Loadline to 120 instead of 160.
> 
> Something is causing you to fail to POST.
> 
> On Bios F7a, I could not POST with SVID offset enabled and AC/DC Loadline=1 (LLC=Standard). Would just freeze with post code. Had to clear CMOS.
> 
> On F8E (mod), I could post with SVID offset enabled with IA/AC DC Loadline=1 but would quickly BSOD trying to load windows (LLC=Standard). Base voltage was too low, because 1.6 mOhms of Vcore Vdroop would drop the voltage down to 1.15v while windows was loading. Nope  Had to set AC/DC back to 160, got to windows, VID and VR VOUT was 1.404v idle (same VID as Auto voltage settings without an offset), ran prime95 AVX small FFT and saw I was pulling 212 amps and VR VOUT was 1.330v, 105C in 5 seconds. Set AC loadline to 90 and kept DC at 160 mOhms and got nice settings. (1.32v VR VOUT/VID=Idle, 1.230v VR VOUT prime95 15K AVX, 1.2 something V SSE2 prime95 AVX disabled).
> 
> Keep in mind I did not test SVID Offset with c-states or any power saving options enabled.



With the SVID offset IA AC=90 can give me as high as 1.390v on certain gaming loads with 5Ghz Core & 4.7Ghz Cache, wont setting it to 120 make it do like 1.450V or that is totally CPU dependent ?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> With the SVID offset IA AC=90 can give me as high as 1.390v on certain gaming loads with 5Ghz Core & 4.7Ghz Cache, wont setting it to 120 make it do like 1.450V or that is totally CPU dependent ?


It depends on your default VID.
Chips with a higher default VID will have higher idle and load voltages than a chip with a lower default VID.
The exact same thing goes for "Auto" Vcore with SVID disabled, and IA AC/IA DC Loadline=160 (1.6 mOhms).

Also MAKE SURE with SVID offset enabled:

LOADLINE CALIBRATION is set to STANDARD.
IA DC Loadline is set to 1.6 mOhms so VID will equal VR VOUT.

If your VR VOUT is too high, reduce IA AC Loadline by 10 and test again until you get voltages you like to have.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> So did you try my settings yet?


Hi @Falkentyne,

Woke up this morning and thought, let's go testing ... 

Looking sweet so far ...

IA AC/DC Loadline = Auto
Vcore Loadline = Standard
Vcore = Auto
SVID Offset = Enabled
AC Loadline = 90
DC Loadline = 160
MP = 50
Uncore = 47

Started with Prime small fft's no avx for 10 min.

It seems (at least to me when watching hwinfo during the test) that the voltage (VR VOUT) swings less up and down then before, seems more flat.
Lower Idle voltage then I had before, so that's a plus (way lower ... I had it showing values of 1.312V while running idle, now I see 1.241V and occasionaly 1.312V

On to Realbench 2.56

Meh ...

AC Loadline = 90 showed me igpu artifacts on realbench 2.56

So upped AC Loadline to 95
Retested
Still a couple of artifacts, but after about 1 min.
But looking at my VR VOUT ... this is way higher then I need for having no artifacts on my former settings.

Your settings:
I see VR VOUT fluctuate between 1.302V-1.352V with your settings (showing artifacts after about 1 min in Realbench)

My former settings:
VR VOUT fluctuates between 1.293V-1.326V (showing no artifacts in Realbench)

P.S. I know from my own testing that AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving gives you a low idle VR VOUT as your settings did.

Tested AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving again ... to get no artifacts in Realbench 2.56 I had to use DVID = +0.035V on Vcore loadline = medium
Although this showed me a lower idle VR VOUT (about 1.248V - 1.286V), my prime small fft's used 1.284V (no avx) which is too much.

So I switched back to my signature settings.


----------



## Phantomas 007

For the moment I have a Samsung 970 Evo 500GB on M2P connector. I'm planning to install a second M2 ssd on M2A connector. I will loose any of the 6 SATA ports or not ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Hi @Falkentyne,
> 
> Woke up this morning and thought, let's go testing ...
> 
> Looking sweet so far ...
> 
> IA AC/DC Loadline = Auto
> Vcore Loadline = Standard
> Vcore = Auto
> SVID Offset = Enabled
> AC Loadline = 90
> DC Loadline = 160
> MP = 50
> Uncore = 47
> 
> Started with Prime small fft's no avx for 10 min.
> 
> It seems (at least to me when watching hwinfo during the test) that the voltage (VR VOUT) swings less up and down then before, seems more flat.
> Lower Idle voltage then I had before, so that's a plus (way lower ... I had it showing values of 1.312V while running idle, now I see 1.241V and occasionaly 1.312V
> 
> On to Realbench 2.56
> 
> Meh ...
> 
> AC Loadline = 90 showed me igpu artifacts on realbench 2.56
> 
> So upped AC Loadline to 95
> Retested
> Still a couple of artifacts, but after about 1 min.
> But looking at my VR VOUT ... this is way higher then I need for having no artifacts on my former settings.
> 
> Your settings:
> I see VR VOUT fluctuate between 1.302V-1.352V with your settings (showing artifacts after about 1 min in Realbench)
> 
> My former settings:
> VR VOUT fluctuates between 1.293V-1.326V (showing no artifacts in Realbench)
> 
> P.S. I know from my own testing that AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving gives you a low idle VR VOUT as your settings did.
> 
> Tested AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving again ... to get no artifacts in Realbench 2.56 I had to use DVID = +0.035V on Vcore loadline = medium
> Although this showed me a lower idle VR VOUT (about 1.248V - 1.286V), my prime small fft's used 1.284V (no avx) which is too much.
> 
> So I switched back to my signature settings.


I don't understand how or why you're having artifacts. 
Are you using the iGPU to render to a second monitor or something?
Why don't you just increase the iGPU voltage?
Or change the VAXG loadline calibration?

What about the GT AC loadline setting?
I have no idea what "0" Auto sets for GT AC Loadline, but the highest reference value is 3.1 mOhms for GT AC loadline (1.6 mOhms for IA AC Loadline).
The GT AC Loadline does not have a preset so I don't know if its linked to the AC Loadline setting if you use "CPU Internal Load Line".

But with AC Loadline and DC Loadline manually set, when I checked HWinfo64, GT AC and GT DC loadline were both set to 3.1 mOhms.

Try setting GT AC and GT DC Loadline to 360 (3.6 mOhms) VAXG Loadline Calibration to Turbo, and go back to my SVID enabled 90 IA AC loadline and re-test.
If stable, reduce the GT Loadline Calibration setting.
You never specified if you were using VAXG Loadline or not.


----------



## wingman99

Intrud3r said:


> Hi @Falkentyne,
> 
> Woke up this morning and thought, let's go testing ...
> 
> Looking sweet so far ...
> 
> IA AC/DC Loadline = Auto
> Vcore Loadline = Standard
> Vcore = Auto
> SVID Offset = Enabled
> AC Loadline = 90
> DC Loadline = 160
> MP = 50
> Uncore = 47
> 
> Started with Prime small fft's no avx for 10 min.
> 
> It seems (at least to me when watching hwinfo during the test) that the voltage (VR VOUT) swings less up and down then before, seems more flat.
> Lower Idle voltage then I had before, so that's a plus (way lower ... I had it showing values of 1.312V while running idle, now I see 1.241V and occasionaly 1.312V
> 
> On to Realbench 2.56
> 
> Meh ...
> 
> AC Loadline = 90 showed me igpu artifacts on realbench 2.56
> 
> So upped AC Loadline to 95
> Retested
> Still a couple of artifacts, but after about 1 min.
> But looking at my VR VOUT ... this is way higher then I need for having no artifacts on my former settings.
> 
> Your settings:
> I see VR VOUT fluctuate between 1.302V-1.352V with your settings (showing artifacts after about 1 min in Realbench)
> 
> My former settings:
> VR VOUT fluctuates between 1.293V-1.326V (showing no artifacts in Realbench)
> 
> P.S. I know from my own testing that AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving gives you a low idle VR VOUT as your settings did.
> 
> Tested AC/DC Loadline = Power Saving again ... to get no artifacts in Realbench 2.56 I had to use DVID = +0.035V on Vcore loadline = medium
> Although this showed me a lower idle VR VOUT (about 1.248V - 1.286V), my prime small fft's used 1.284V (no avx) which is too much.
> 
> So I switched back to my signature settings.


I wonder if your have IGPU artifacts do to cache overclock? Run Falkentyne settings again and run the cache stock default and see if you still have artifacts. The IGPU is the biggest stain on memory components like cache and system memory. GPU artifacts is usually memory related.


----------



## Driller au

Intrud3r said:


> You are probably on point there ... it seems the artifacts come from my igpu and that would be the vaxg setting. I sadly have no loadline for that setting.
> Only a voltage setting I can set.
> 
> Default is 1.200V
> I tried 1.220V but that didn't help at all the time I tried it.


From Intrud3r a few pages back @Falkentyne


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> From Intrud3r a few pages back @Falkentyne


 @Intrud3r raise the GT AC Loadline setting from "0" to 360 and see if that does anything.
Don't go higher than 400.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> I don't understand how or why you're having artifacts.
> Are you using the iGPU to render to a second monitor or something?
> Why don't you just increase the iGPU voltage?
> Or change the VAXG loadline calibration?
> 
> What about the GT AC loadline setting?
> I have no idea what "0" Auto sets for GT AC Loadline, but the highest reference value is 3.1 mOhms for GT AC loadline (1.6 mOhms for IA AC Loadline).
> The GT AC Loadline does not have a preset so I don't know if its linked to the AC Loadline setting if you use "CPU Internal Load Line".
> 
> But with AC Loadline and DC Loadline manually set, when I checked HWinfo64, GT AC and GT DC loadline were both set to 3.1 mOhms.
> 
> Try setting GT AC and GT DC Loadline to 360 (3.6 mOhms) VAXG Loadline Calibration to Turbo, and go back to my SVID enabled 90 IA AC loadline and re-test.
> If stable, reduce the GT Loadline Calibration setting.
> You never specified if you were using VAXG Loadline or not.


- 4th monitor on igpu
- igpu voltage, I even tested 1.250V (default = 1.200V), still artifacts shown
- GT AC Loadline setting = unavailable on my board (aorus ultra)
- VAXG Loadline calibration = unavailable on my board (aorus ultra)

I know those artifacts (only 4 little green spots after a bit running realbench) can be solved by upping vcore by 0.005 - 0.010V

Will take about 2 months and then I'll have a new graphics card and some new monitors ... then I'll disable my igpu. So I can probably lower voltages by then too


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> - 4th monitor on igpu
> - igpu voltage, I even tested 1.250V (default = 1.200V), still artifacts shown
> - GT AC Loadline setting = unavailable on my board (aorus ultra)
> - VAXG Loadline calibration = unavailable on my board (aorus ultra)
> 
> I know those artifacts (only 4 little green spots after a bit running realbench) can be solved by upping vcore by 0.005 - 0.010V
> 
> Will take about 2 months and then I'll have a new graphics card and some new monitors ... then I'll disable my igpu. So I can probably lower voltages by then too


You can unlock GT AC Loadline.
Dump your bios with FPTW64.exe -D aoultra.bin -bios
Then open it (make a backup first) with AMIBCP 5.02.0031 version (if win-raid released a newer version then use that).
But don't make any changes.
You should be able to find the Internal VR settings menu, which should have IA AC Loadline, IA GT Loadline, IA SA loadline, maybe even IA Ring loadline too or something useless.

Find the settings you want unlocked and then contact Lost Bios over on win-raid, with screenshots of the VR menus you want accessed and what actually appears in your bios, and maybe he can unlock it for you.

Actually I just looked at your bios for you.
The options are there. Even System Agent AC/DC is there.
It's just hidden from you.


----------



## robertr1

My personal experience. There seems to be no drop in vcore needed when turning off HT. I was surprised by this. In bios, it's 1.26v regardless if HT is on or off. 9900k 5ghz and Aorus Pro Wifi.


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf @Intrud3r

I think I found out why you had a NO POST when you enabled SVID Offset

I was testing the modded F9C Bios, and after redoing all my profiles, i then went to my 5 ghz profile (1.270v, LLC Turbo, Ring x47, biosV read 1.284v), and then set IA AC Loadline from 160 to 90, Set Loadline Calibration to Standard, and enabled SVID Offset. Happily smacking my lips to redo my SVID Offset profile

And then rebooted into bios.

To my complete utter horror, the BIOS voltage now read 1.248v when I was expecting it to be 1.332v (from my f9b tests)!

I knew full well since Loadline Calibration was set to standard, if I tried to load windows, I would BSOD because vdroop would be pretty massive.

So I'm like "ok maybe Gigabyte changed something"
So I set AC Loadline back to 160.

So I saved and re-entered bios, expecting results...

And.....
Bios voltage was still 1.248v !

NO CHANGE whatsoever!

AC loadline had no effect??

I then realized, I went directly from a manual voltage, and enabled SVID Offset (as always, disabling loadline calibration).

So this time, I did it the way I did before:
I set CPU Voltage to 'Auto' and AC Loadline to 160.
Saved, rebooted, Bios voltage was 1.404v, as expected.

Then I enabled SVID Offset. Rebooted.
Bios voltage was 1.404v.
Then I set AC Loadline from 160 to 90. Rebooted.

Bios voltage was 1.332v. Ok this is what I was expecting and now identical to what I did on f9b
(apparently when I made this profile on f9b, I enabled auto vcore first, then SVID offset afterwards).

I then saved it as a profile, loaded my 5 ghz bios 1.270v manual profile, rebooted, all good (BiosV=1.284v), then re-loaded the saved SVID Offset profile, rebooted...Bios voltage was 1.332v as expected.

So that means it looks like SVID OFFSET applies an offset to the last set voltage (in some way), AND unless there is a bug somewhere, seems to save the state of the last set voltage.

If the voltage was manual, it applies an offset to the manual voltage, ignoring the AC Loadline value (I have absolutely no idea how this works in combination with loadline calibration and I'm not going to test this now either).

If the voltage were "Auto" (using CPU default VID), then it uses the last known Auto values, and AC Loadline is now applied as Auto uses ACLL.
No idea about offsets (DVID).

This may be of use to someone.

I suggest if someone attempts 'Manual voltage mode' and then directly enables SVID Offset from manual voltage rather than auto voltage, use a low fixed voltage and frequency (like 4.5 ghz, 1.20v) and test Loadline Calibration to see if it applies and check VR VOUT and CPU VID (check both), and then disable SVID Offset and check VR VOUT at the same loadline calibration setting (VID is irrelevant on manual vcore).

@KedarWolf, this may be why your CPU failed to POST when enabling SVID Offset. Probably in combination with C-states; it probably tried to apply an offset to whatever you set.
Try the following this time :

Disable all power saving/c-states.
Set cores to 5 ghz/4.7 cache

Set IA AC/DC Loadline to 160
Set CPU Vcore to Normal (first)
Set DVID to 0.00 (Important).
Set CPU Vcore to Auto (this is to avoid a bug)
Set CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration to Standard

Save and exit.
Check CPU voltage in bios (Super I/O chip)--should be about 1.4v.

Now enable SVID Offset. Save and exit.
Should 100% POST. CPU voltage should read the same as above.

Now reduce AC Loadline as needed until you get a bios voltage that is more sane. (like between AC Loadline=90 to AC Loadline=110) at 5 ghz.
Test your CPU for stability first with Cstates and power saving disabled until you get a windows idle and load VR VOUT that is nice and stable.

Then re-enable your C-states and all that weird stuff you enabled and see if it works.


----------



## BradleyW

Is the in place fft 1344 test redundant these days on new chips like the 9900K?


----------



## Intrud3r

I thought ... this wacky stuff won't happen to me ... So when I went testing your settings I went like:

MP = 50 / uncore = 47 --> 47 / 43 --> F10 Save and Exit
AC/DC Loadline = Turbo --> Auto --> F10
Vcore loadline = Medium --> standard --> F10
DVID +0.110 --> 0.000V --> F10
AC and DC Loadline 0 --> 1 --> F10
etc etc etc

Took me a while, but this worked flawlessly ...


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> I thought ... this wacky stuff won't happen to me ... So when I went testing your settings I went like:
> 
> MP = 50 / uncore = 47 --> 47 / 43 --> F10 Save and Exit
> AC/DC Loadline = Turbo --> Auto --> F10
> Vcore loadline = Medium --> standard --> F10
> DVID +0.110 --> 0.000V --> F10
> AC and DC Loadline 0 --> 1 --> F10
> etc etc etc
> 
> Took me a while, but this worked flawlessly ...


huh what did you do exactly? what settings?


----------



## Intrud3r

Funny thing tho ... for anybody curious about C-states.

I had C-states enabled till C8
So ... enabled in the bios was:

C1E
C3
C6/C7
C8

With these settings I booted into windows and checked event vieuwer. I noticed that my event viewer showed me 3 C-states activated on my CPU.
3 ???

Ah well ... any power saving is better then none (with a 24/7 system) so I didn't bother.
HWiNFO shows C-states values upto C7

Now I thought, why only 3 ... let's just test something ... so I went and enabled C10 in the bios (so all C-states show ENABLED in my bios atm)
Now I booted into windows and checked my event viewer to see what my c-states would show.

Event viewer happily tells me that I have 11 states on my CPU.

11 ???

Well ... it's more then 3, that's good ... but where the hell did they pull those other states from ?


----------



## Driller au

@Intrud3r so when you got everything working what is your idle voltage ? the 1.3xx Falkentyne spoke of in his first post about this seems really high to me


----------



## Intrud3r

Driller au said:


> @Intrud3r so when you got everything working what is your idle voltage ? the 1.3xx Falkentyne spoke of in his first post about this seems really high to me


Atm I'm running my signature settings which result in the following:

When looking at my VR VOUT I see voltages swing between 1.320V (highest while idle) and 0.840V (lowest while idle). <-- this is while looking at the values.

However after enabling (btw, when I say enable I mean bios setting = Enabled instead of Auto, then I'll state "Auto" logically :s ) the C10 state, I noticed I see 2 extra power saving settings in HWiNFO namely:
Package C2 Residency
Package C3 Residency

These 2 values did never showed up before.

After I see those 2 values I noticed my Vcore on the IT8688E sensor shows a lowest value of 0.468V where it never went below 0.700-something while being on Medium loadline and 0.660 on different settings.

Here's a pick of my system running idle for about 11 hours.

P.S. I edited my profile to show my location ... maybe that explains the time it takes for me to respond at times  Timezones ... you gotta love'm.
P.S.2 I read somewhere that only laptops support C10 states, so don't ask me what gives with 11 states with C10 on instead of 3 states with C8 on ...


----------



## wingman99

I had a bad experience with IA AC loadline set to 280 then DC set to 170, after 2 hours I had BSOD with just web surfing.

My 24/7 setup 5.0GHz all settings DVID +0.120, LLC Auto, C-states, EIST, speed shift enabled. Prime95 no AVX= 1.296v core voltage. Idle core voltage = 0.804v.


What I tried for fun and it BSOD in 2 hours of web surfing 5.0GHz all settings IA load line AC 280, IA DC 170, LLC Auto, C-states, EIST, speed shift enabled. Prime95 no AVX= 1.296v core voltage. Idle core voltage = 0.708v.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> I had a bad experience with IA AC loadline set to 280 then DC set to 170, after 2 hours I had BSOD with just web surfing.
> 
> My 24/7 setup 5.0GHz all settings DVID +0.120, LLC Auto, C-states, EIST, speed shift enabled. Prime95 no AVX= 1.296v core voltage. Idle core voltage = 0.804v.
> 
> 
> What I tried for fun and it BSOD in 2 hours of web surfing 5.0GHz all settings IA load line AC 280, IA DC 170, LLC Auto, C-states, EIST, speed shift enabled. Prime95 no AVX= 1.296v core voltage. Idle core voltage = 0.708v.


Why are you raising AC Loadline so high?
it's unsafe.
2.10 mOhms (210) is the maximum value for 6 core processors, 1.60 for 8 core.
If you need more voltage, use SVID offset and reduce the AC loadline below 160 to compensate (see my post above as SVID offset applies to the last "known" voltage set, whether manual or auto). AFAIK, Svid offset raises the load voltage, not the idle voltage.

Ok nice BSOD at 4.7 ghz I got trying to set 1.20v manual +LLC Standard-->enabling SVID Offset.

Avoid setting "SVID Offset" to a manual voltage. If Loadline calibration is set to standard, you will get the full whopping of 1.6 mOhms of vdroop. I think SVID offset is supposed to apply to auto voltages, not manual, since AC Loadline won't save you if you use manual voltage. and manual->SVID Offset->Loadline calibration=Turbo is useless compared to just manual->LLC=Turbo.

so to use SVID offset, set vcore to Auto ->set your IA AC/DC Loadlines to 1.6 mOhms max->enable SVID Offset (you may have to reboot once BEFORE enabling SVID offset)-->check your idle and load voltages in windows. Lower AC Loadline until you get a nice idle and nice load VR VOUT.

AC Loadline=90-100 is a good sweet spot to use.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Why are you raising AC Loadline so high?
> it's unsafe.
> 2.10 mOhms (210) is the maximum value for 6 core processors, 1.60 for 8 core.
> If you need more voltage, use SVID offset and reduce the AC loadline below 160 to compensate (see my post above as SVID offset applies to the last "known" voltage set, whether manual or auto). AFAIK, Svid offset raises the load voltage, not the idle voltage.


Well my VID is low on my 6 core processor, so I was trying to see if I could set IA AC/DC loadline without using DVID offset setting.

I was just wondering where you found IA AC loadline unsafe limits?

Do you have SVID in BIOS and what do you mean by last known voltage set, whether manual or auto?


----------



## Intrud3r

wingman99 said:


> Well my VID is low on my 6 core processor, so I was trying to see if I could set IA AC/DC loadline without using DVID offset setting.
> 
> I was just wondering where you found IA AC loadline unsafe limits?
> 
> Do you have SVID in BIOS and what do you mean by last known voltage set, whether manual or auto?


SVID Offset is an option we have available.

Last known voltage is just what it says ... svid offset is applied to whatever setting the voltage was before you enabled svid offset. (eh ... at least if I understood it correctly  )

P.S. Picture is just an example of the setting, not my current settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> Well my VID is low on my 6 core processor, so I was trying to see if I could set IA AC/DC loadline without using DVID offset setting.
> 
> I was just wondering where you found IA AC loadline unsafe limits?
> 
> Do you have SVID in BIOS and what do you mean by last known voltage set, whether manual or auto?


SVID offset boosts the CPU VID based on the type of load, temps and current (it's basically a load booster that raises VID for you, for poor CPU samples). It seems to be Gigabyte's alternative to Asus "Worst Case SVID behavior".

I mean, if you "enable" SVID offset, it uses the last "target" voltage that was set in the BIOS, as well as the "rules" for it (Example : Auto--> SVID will use the AC/DC Loadlines to boost your VID and thus help "counter" Vdroop without hurting transient response, like loadline calibration would hurt if you used that. Manual->SVID seems to be useless because the AC loadlines are ignored):

If you had a manual 1.20v set in bios, then enabled SVID offset, the VRM would accept 1.20v as the target voltage, instead of using the CPU VID and AC loadlines, and then sending that to the VRM.
Then if you had loadline calibration set to standard (like you're supposed to do normally), you will get the full complete vdroop (1.6 mOhms * CPU Amps), without AC loadline boosting the VR VOUT for you, since VR VOUT does not respond to VID when you use manual voltage). This may be a bug actually (similar to how if you set a "DVID" offset, then switched to "Auto" voltage, the DVID offset would still be active, until you rebooted the system a second time. (another bug: setting a cache ratio, then setting cache back to "Auto" was using the last set cache ratio instead of setting it to 43).

So you need to use "Auto" voltage, then enable SVID offset afterwards.

That way SVID will interact with AC Loadline to give you a higher load voltage than just "Auto" voltage + Standard Loadline Calibration would do, while keeping the idle voltage the same (as if you had SVID offset disabled, + Auto voltage).

Then you can just reduce the AC Loadline value manually, below 1.6 mOhms (1.0 mOhms works well) which will reduce the idle voltage of course, and reduce the load voltage as well.

It's really very similar to using Auto+DVID offsets, except you have a bit more control over your light to heavy load voltages this way without having to use "Low" or "Medium" loadline calibration !

Keeping Loadline Calibration at "Standard" gives you the fewest spikes and transient drops, and thus allows you to be stable at a "lower" Load VR VOUT, when pushing heavy amps.

Here is my test (if you guys are still reading this):

Auto voltage: enabled. SVID: Disabled. no offsets, Vcore Loadline calibration: standard, AC Loadline, DC Loadline=160 (1.6 mOhms):
Bios voltage idle: (Super I/O): 1.404v
IDLE VID: 1.404v
IDLE VR VOUT: 1.391v
15K AVX small FFT Prime95 (29.8 build 3): 1.240v.
184.250 amps.

Auto Voltage: enabled--> SVID Offset: enabled
Vcore Loadline Calibration: Standard
AC Loadline, DCLL: 160 (1.6 mOhms).
Idle Bios voltage: 1.404v
Idle VID: 1.404v
Idle VR VOUT: 1.391v
15K AVX small FFT Prime95: 1.325v
212 Amps, 282 Watts <---good luck.
(Hello 105C in 5 seconds).

-------
Same settings as above, but: AC Loadline= 90 (0.9 mOhms), DC Loadline (160)=1.6 mOhms <---DC loadline=1.6 mOhms to synch up with VRM Loadline=Standard.
Idle bios voltage: 1.332v
Idle VID: 1.330v
Idle VR VOUT: 1.320v
15K AVX small FFT Prime95: starts at 1.213v, rises slowly as temps increase, to 1.232v
Amps: 180 amps.

----------------------
AC Loadline=95:
Idle bios voltage: 1.335v
Idle VR VOUT: (about the same)
Load VR VOUT 15K AVX: rises slowly to 1.240v.
Amps: 184-185 Amps.

= Lower idle voltage than "Auto" + AC Loadline=160
Same load voltage or slightly lower, than Auto +AC Loadline=160.
The lower idle voltage is the reason to use SVID Offset off of "Auto" Vcore as long as you reduce AC Loadline!


----------



## BradleyW

How are you folks determining stability?


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> How are you folks determining stability?


Memory, RamTest and HCI MemTest, GSAT as well. CPU, Prime95 1344 FFT's AVX enabled, cache, AIDA64 Stress Test 'Cache Only'.


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> Memory, RamTest and HCI MemTest, GSAT as well. CPU, Prime95 1344 FFT's AVX enabled, cache, AIDA64 Stress Test 'Cache Only'.


1344's in place?


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> SVID offset boosts the CPU VID based on the type of load, temps and current (it's basically a load booster that raises VID for you, for poor CPU samples). It seems to be Gigabyte's alternative to Asus "Worst Case SVID behavior".
> 
> I mean, if you "enable" SVID offset, it uses the last "target" voltage that was set in the BIOS, as well as the "rules" for it (Example : Auto--> SVID will use the AC/DC Loadlines to boost your VID and thus help "counter" Vdroop without hurting transient response, like loadline calibration would hurt if you used that. Manual->SVID seems to be useless because the AC loadlines are ignored):
> 
> If you had a manual 1.20v set in bios, then enabled SVID offset, the VRM would accept 1.20v as the target voltage, instead of using the CPU VID and AC loadlines, and then sending that to the VRM.
> Then if you had loadline calibration set to standard (like you're supposed to do normally), you will get the full complete vdroop (1.6 mOhms * CPU Amps), without AC loadline boosting the VR VOUT for you, since VR VOUT does not respond to VID when you use manual voltage). This may be a bug actually (similar to how if you set a "DVID" offset, then switched to "Auto" voltage, the DVID offset would still be active, until you rebooted the system a second time. (another bug: setting a cache ratio, then setting cache back to "Auto" was using the last set cache ratio instead of setting it to 43).
> 
> So you need to use "Auto" voltage, then enable SVID offset afterwards.
> 
> That way SVID will interact with AC Loadline to give you a higher load voltage than just "Auto" voltage + Standard Loadline Calibration would do, while keeping the idle voltage the same (as if you had SVID offset disabled, + Auto voltage).
> 
> Then you can just reduce the AC Loadline value manually, below 1.6 mOhms (1.0 mOhms works well) which will reduce the idle voltage of course, and reduce the load voltage as well.
> 
> It's really very similar to using Auto+DVID offsets, except you have a bit more control over your light to heavy load voltages this way without having to use "Low" or "Medium" loadline calibration !
> 
> Keeping Loadline Calibration at "Standard" gives you the fewest spikes and transient drops, and thus allows you to be stable at a "lower" Load VR VOUT, when pushing heavy amps.
> 
> Here is my test (if you guys are still reading this):
> 
> Auto voltage: enabled. SVID: Disabled. no offsets, Vcore Loadline calibration: standard, AC Loadline, DC Loadline=160 (1.6 mOhms):
> Bios voltage idle: (Super I/O): 1.404v
> IDLE VID: 1.404v
> IDLE VR VOUT: 1.391v
> 15K AVX small FFT Prime95 (29.8 build 3): 1.240v.
> 184.250 amps.
> 
> Auto Voltage: enabled--> SVID Offset: enabled
> Vcore Loadline Calibration: Standard
> AC Loadline, DCLL: 160 (1.6 mOhms).
> Idle Bios voltage: 1.404v
> Idle VID: 1.404v
> Idle VR VOUT: 1.391v
> 15K AVX small FFT Prime95: 1.325v
> 212 Amps, 282 Watts <---good luck.
> (Hello 105C in 5 seconds).
> 
> -------
> Same settings as above, but: AC Loadline= 90 (0.9 mOhms), DC Loadline (160)=1.6 mOhms <---DC loadline=1.6 mOhms to synch up with VRM Loadline=Standard.
> Idle bios voltage: 1.332v
> Idle VID: 1.330v
> Idle VR VOUT: 1.320v
> 15K AVX small FFT Prime95: starts at 1.213v, rises slowly as temps increase, to 1.232v
> Amps: 180 amps.
> 
> ----------------------
> AC Loadline=95:
> Idle bios voltage: 1.335v
> Idle VR VOUT: (about the same)
> Load VR VOUT 15K AVX: rises slowly to 1.240v.
> Amps: 184-185 Amps.
> 
> = Lower idle voltage than "Auto" + AC Loadline=160
> Same load voltage or slightly lower, than Auto +AC Loadline=160.
> The lower idle voltage is the reason to use SVID Offset off of "Auto" Vcore as long as you reduce AC Loadline!



Thanks for the information. I was just wondering where you found IA AC loadline unsafe upper limits?


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> [/SPOILER]
> 
> Thanks for the information. I was just wondering where you found IA AC loadline unsafe upper limits?


Intel pdf, the same file you posted before.
Max AC for 4/6 cores=2.10 mOhms
Max AC for 8 cores: 1.6 mOhms.

This is tied to max VID as well (1.52v (without offset voltage; I believe SVID offset is this "offset voltage" but that's a random guess because I'm a gamer)).
You (and anyone else here) can test this *RIGHT NOW* without even changing the voltage to your processor BUT YOU MUST USE MANUAL VOLTAGE, NO offsets and no auto.

Set IA AC Loadline to 1.6 mOhms (2.1 mOhms if you have a 6 core CFL). 1.6 on Asus bios. 160 on Gigabyte (probably on MSI too)
Set IA DC loadline to 0.01 mOhms (0.01 on Asus, 1 on Gigabyte/MSI).
Use the highest 1-core turbo multiplier (4.9 ghz on 9700K, or 5 ghz on 9700K/9900K, whatever is stable). The VID stops scaling at the highest 1-core turbo multplier, with Ring ratio 300 mhz lower.

Boot into windows.
check your VID at idle.

Then run a prime95 test. AVX disabled or enabled. does not matter whatsoever. Small FFT. 29.8 build 3.
Look at the VID.

What does it show?
There's your answer.

For those who are lazy: 1.518v.


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> 1344's in place?


Yes, and a 15 minute time interval.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Intel pdf, the same file you posted before.
> Max AC for 4/6 cores=2.10 mOhms
> Max AC for 8 cores: 1.6 mOhms.
> 
> This is tied to max VID as well (1.52v (without offset voltage; I believe SVID offset is this "offset voltage" but that's a random guess because I'm a gamer)).
> You (and anyone else here) can test this *RIGHT NOW* without even changing the voltage to your processor BUT YOU MUST USE MANUAL VOLTAGE, NO offsets and no auto.
> 
> Set IA AC Loadline to 1.6 mOhms (2.1 mOhms if you have a 6 core CFL). 1.6 on Asus bios. 160 on Gigabyte (probably on MSI too)
> Set IA DC loadline to 0.01 mOhms (0.01 on Asus, 1 on Gigabyte/MSI).
> Use the highest 1-core turbo multiplier (4.9 ghz on 9700K, or 5 ghz on 9700K/9900K, whatever is stable). The VID stops scaling at the highest 1-core turbo multplier, with Ring ratio 300 mhz lower.
> 
> Boot into windows.
> check your VID at idle.
> 
> Then run a prime95 test. AVX disabled or enabled. does not matter whatsoever. Small FFT. 29.8 build 3.
> Look at the VID.
> 
> What does it show?
> There's your answer.
> 
> For those who are lazy: 1.518v.


Thanks for posting the Intel Max AC for 4/6 cores=2.10 mOhms Max AC for 8 cores: 1.6 mOhms I did not see in the Intel PDF. When running for 2 hours at IA AC 280 before BSOD I thought I could smell something burning and my screen was refreshing sometimes, I did not know what was going on.:cryingsmi


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, and a 15 minute time interval.


How long do you leave it running? Same question for AIDA Cache test. Thank you.
+1.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> Thanks for posting the Intel Max AC for 4/6 cores=2.10 mOhms Max AC for 8 cores: 1.6 mOhms I did not see in the Intel PDF. When running for 2 hours at IA AC 280 before BSOD I thought I could smell something burning and my screen was refreshing sometimes, I did not know what was going on.:cryingsmi


Here is the PDF.


----------



## KedarWolf

BradleyW said:


> How long do you leave it running? Same question for AIDA Cache test. Thank you.
> +1.


I make sure while running Prime95 my temps are under 80C or so and let it run overnight. Same with cache test.

GSAT 2 hours, HCI MemTest overnight, RamTest overnight.


----------



## BradleyW

KedarWolf said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> How long do you leave it running? Same question for AIDA Cache test. Thank you.
> +1.
> 
> 
> 
> I make sure while running Prime95 my temps are under 80C or so and let it run overnight. Same with cache test.
> 
> GSAT 2 hours, HCI MemTest overnight, RamTest overnight.
Click to expand...

Brilliant stuff, Thank you for the help!


----------



## Bravoexo

Anyone using Vegas Pro rendering to test stability? I can't render at all with [email protected], which works for everything else (games, benchmarks).


----------



## bandix666

Hi. Anyone know about debug code 47 on aorus master after windows boot?

thank you in advance

PS: bios f9c (oc to 5 ghz with 1.30 llc turbo)


----------



## Smokediggity

For those with the Master, if you enable the CEC 2019 Ready option in the BIOS Power menu, do your rear USB 2.0 ports repeatedly power cycle after booting into Windows? Having your mouse/keyboard stop responding every few seconds makes the computer unusable. Doesn't seem to be a problem with the USB 3 ports.


----------



## WINTENDOX

Help oc stable 5ghz



z390 elite aorus f7 bios
9700k
gzkill trindentz rgb 3600


confused setting


----------



## o0Spoonman0o

Having some issues with Power Limit throttling that I cannot seem to get around. I have had this working and know the CPU should be drawing close to 200W in prime 95, but all of the sudden I cannot get it to push past ~145W, just sits there and power limit throttles which pushes clocks down during prime95 (no errors but I also only left it running for a minute or two), system is stable just won't push past 145W, passes cinebench r20 w/score of ~3800+)

Aorus Z390 Elite (F7 bios)
Seasonic 650W Prime Titanium
I7-9700K @ 5.0GHZ
GSkill 3200Mhz ram

I've tried both ~1.35v @ vcore and "normal" vcore offset of -0.1. The Normal route was the only one I could get it to behave in prime95, this resulted in ~1.35v during loads like prime95 and roughly 200W drawn. Tests perfectly stable in everything I have thrown at it I just can't get past 145W in prime95, I've even tested with loadline pushed up to medium in which HWinfo reports ~1.37v under prime 95 (which is higher than I'd like but I was just trying to get it to push past 145W, loadline will be going back down to auto). Works fine in cinebench and gaming but neither of those actions push the CPU past the magic 145W number.

Presently I'm at:
vcore - normal
offset -0.1
power saving c states etc disabled
pl1/pl2 power limits @ 255

Any advice would be appreciated.

**edit** Nevermind, I had installed Throttlestop to check a few things and it seems doing so enabled a 150W power limit. Back to 5.0 ghz stable @ 1.35 in prime


----------



## shaolin95

Glad to know I am not the only one with this Code after moving to the new modded 9 bios


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

Smokediggity said:


> For those with the Master, if you enable the CEC 2019 Ready option in the BIOS Power menu, do your rear USB 2.0 ports repeatedly power cycle after booting into Windows? Having your mouse/keyboard stop responding every few seconds makes the computer unusable. Doesn't seem to be a problem with the USB 3 ports.




I have the master. What is this option? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> huh what did you do exactly? what settings?


To answer your question ... 

(ok, a little late ... but it was annoying me (the fact that I missed your question and I didn't answer yet)

I just wanted to show how I change from 1 setting to another involving loadlines etc.


----------



## Smokediggity

Pinnacle Fit said:


> I have the master. What is this option?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


According to Gigabyte's manual it "Allows you to select whether to allow the system to adjust power consumption when it is in shutdown, idle, or standby state in order to comply with the CEC (California Energy Commission) 2019 Standards." From what I can tell, it enables all the Platform Power Management options and adds the CPU package states C2 and C3.


This article explains the standard a little more https://www.energy.ca.gov/2016publications/CEC-400-2016-026/CEC-400-2016-026-FS.pdf


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

Smokediggity said:


> According to Gigabyte's manual it "Allows you to select whether to allow the system to adjust power consumption when it is in shutdown, idle, or standby state in order to comply with the CEC (California Energy Commission) 2019 Standards." From what I can tell, it enables all the Platform Power Management options and adds the CPU package states C2 and C3.
> 
> 
> This article explains the standard a little more https://www.energy.ca.gov/2016publications/CEC-400-2016-026/CEC-400-2016-026-FS.pdf




Are you obligated legally to turn this on or something (do you reside in CA)?i only turn on c1e, Intel Speedstep, and EIST. I think EIST is the same as speedstep but it’s a different option. Last time i put on C2 and C3, it was unstable and blued. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Smokediggity

Pinnacle Fit said:


> Are you obligated legally to turn this on or something (do you reside in CA)?i only turn on c1e, Intel Speedstep, and EIST. I think EIST is the same as speedstep but it’s a different option. Last time i put on C2 and C3, it was unstable and blued.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, I'm not a resident of CA. I was just fiddling with options to see what kind of effect it would have.


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

Smokediggity said:


> No, I'm not a resident of CA. I was just fiddling with options to see what kind of effect it would have.




Yea I’m personally not ready to set those options until I get more hours with this overclock. If you’re still finding an OC, I’d leave off all C states until you get it dialed in. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wingman99

o0Spoonman0o said:


> Having some issues with Power Limit throttling that I cannot seem to get around. I have had this working and know the CPU should be drawing close to 200W in prime 95, but all of the sudden I cannot get it to push past ~145W, just sits there and power limit throttles which pushes clocks down during prime95 (no errors but I also only left it running for a minute or two), system is stable just won't push past 145W, passes cinebench r20 w/score of ~3800+)
> 
> Aorus Z390 Elite (F7 bios)
> Seasonic 650W Prime Titanium
> I7-9700K @ 5.0GHZ
> GSkill 3200Mhz ram
> 
> I've tried both ~1.35v @ vcore and "normal" vcore offset of -0.1. The Normal route was the only one I could get it to behave in prime95, this resulted in ~1.35v during loads like prime95 and roughly 200W drawn. Tests perfectly stable in everything I have thrown at it I just can't get past 145W in prime95, I've even tested with loadline pushed up to medium in which HWinfo reports ~1.37v under prime 95 (which is higher than I'd like but I was just trying to get it to push past 145W, loadline will be going back down to auto). Works fine in cinebench and gaming but neither of those actions push the CPU past the magic 145W number.
> 
> Presently I'm at:
> vcore - normal
> offset -0.1
> power saving c states etc disabled
> pl1/pl2 power limits @ 255
> 
> Any advice would be appreciated.
> 
> **edit** Nevermind, I had installed Throttlestop to check a few things and it seems doing so enabled a 150W power limit. Back to 5.0 ghz stable @ 1.35 in prime


What is the power limit set to?


----------



## o0Spoonman0o

wingman99 said:


> What is the power limit set to?


The issue had something to do with TS overriding (lowering) the limits I had set in the BIOS, with it running the CPU wouldn't pull more than 150W.

Package / Platform limits are all set at 4075 (or whatever max for that particular limit is)


----------



## kati

Read few pages backwards, no mention about Master F9c beta, anyone tried it and are changes known?

Last night i had an idle reboot after 2 months 24/7 perfect running; after trying so many changes im tempted to leave it at that. Maybe future bios revision will solve it.


----------



## Wirerat

Hynix cjr ram at 3800 cl 17 on my aorus pro.


----------



## Intrud3r

New Intel drivers for your Aorus Ultra:

Intel Management Engine Interface
(Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[1914.12.0.1256]	82.28 MB	2019/05/29	

Intel INF installation
(Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[10.1.17969.8134]	3.36 MB	2019/05/29	

Intel Serial I/O driver
(Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[30.100.1915.1]	1.55 MB	2019/05/29	

Also a new realtek driver.


----------



## Driller au

Intrud3r said:


> New Intel drivers for your Aorus Ultra:
> 
> Intel Management Engine Interface
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[1914.12.0.1256]	82.28 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel INF installation
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[10.1.17969.8134]	3.36 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel Serial I/O driver
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[30.100.1915.1]	1.55 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Also a new realtek driver.


For the Master too


----------



## warbucks

I updated my bios to the modded F9c Kedarwolf posted as well as the latest MEI firmware and applied the same bios settings. Had a long gaming session all afternoon and night and no issues so far.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf - i9 9900K @5.1/4.7 - 4x8GB G.Skill 3600 CL16 non-RGB @ 4266MHz-C17-18-18-39-2T 1.47v - SA 1.27v - VCCIO 1.25v 

4266MHz memory, 17-17-17-38 2T! 

Now stress tested stable!

New motherboard. Master, same as my old motherboard, and I determined not being able to boot into BIOS settings at all with CSM enabled is a CPU issue.

Still, this one seems to overlock my memory better though. And I don't want to RMA the CPU because 5.1GHZ/4.7Cache, 4266MHz memory isn't half bad if the only issue is not being able to have CSM enabled when I want to boot into the BIOS. :h34r-smi


----------



## techjesse

KedarWolf said:


> KedarWolf - i9 9900K @5.1/4.7 - 4x8GB G.Skill 3600 CL16 non-RGB @ 4266MHz-C17-18-18-39-2T 1.47v - SA 1.27v - VCCIO 1.25v
> 
> 4266MHz memory, 17-17-17-38 2T!
> 
> Now stress tested stable!
> 
> New motherboard. Master, same as my old motherboard, and I determined not being able to boot into BIOS settings at all with CSM enabled is a CPU issue.
> 
> Still, this one seems to overlock my memory better though. And I don't want to RMA the CPU because 5.1GHZ/4.7Cache, 4266MHz memory isn't half bad if the only issue is not being able to have CSM enabled when I want to boot into the BIOS. :h34r-smi


4266MHz memory, 17-17-17-38 2T! Your Rocking!


----------



## shaolin95

bandix666 said:


> Hi. Anyone know about debug code 47 on aorus master after windows boot?
> 
> thank you in advance
> 
> PS: bios f9c (oc to 5 ghz with 1.30 llc turbo)





KedarWolf said:


> KedarWolf - i9 9900K @5.1/4.7 - 4x8GB G.Skill 3600 CL16 non-RGB @ 4266MHz-C17-18-18-39-2T 1.47v - SA 1.27v - VCCIO 1.25v
> 
> 4266MHz memory, 17-17-17-38 2T!
> 
> Now stress tested stable!
> 
> New motherboard. Master, same as my old motherboard, and I determined not being able to boot into BIOS settings at all with CSM enabled is a CPU issue.
> 
> Still, this one seems to overlock my memory better though. And I don't want to RMA the CPU because 5.1GHZ/4.7Cache, 4266MHz memory isn't half bad if the only issue is not being able to have CSM enabled when I want to boot into the BIOS. :h34r-smi


tempted by the 9900ks now? I know I am


----------



## Nephalem89

Falkentyne said:


> This shouldn't be happening.
> Unless your high RAM settings are preventing a POST.
> 
> What happens if you :
> 
> Disable XMP (RAM runs at 2133 mhz) (Do this first, then save and re-enter bios so it doesn't change too many settings at once):
> 
> then:
> disable all C-states, disable voltage optimization (ok, disable ALL power saving completely), set Loadline Calibration to Standard,
> Set IA AC Loadline to 160, Set IA DC loadline to 160, Enable SVID Offset, 5 ghz core, 4.7 ghz cache and THEN save and exit?
> 
> This posts, now, right?
> (Zero reason why this shouldn't).
> 
> Then, enable XMP and set your RAM back to your overclocked settings.
> Does it POST now?
> 
> This should POST as, except for your RAM settings, you would be using identical settings as me.
> 
> Then finally, set IA AC Loadline to 120 instead of 160.
> 
> Something is causing you to fail to POST.
> 
> On Bios F7a, I could not POST with SVID offset enabled and AC/DC Loadline=1 (LLC=Standard). Would just freeze with post code. Had to clear CMOS.
> 
> On F8E (mod), I could post with SVID offset enabled with IA/AC DC Loadline=1 but would quickly BSOD trying to load windows (LLC=Standard). Base voltage was too low, because 1.6 mOhms of Vcore Vdroop would drop the voltage down to 1.15v while windows was loading. Nope  Had to set AC/DC back to 160, got to windows, VID and VR VOUT was 1.404v idle (same VID as Auto voltage settings without an offset), ran prime95 AVX small FFT and saw I was pulling 212 amps and VR VOUT was 1.330v, 105C in 5 seconds. Set AC loadline to 90 and kept DC at 160 mOhms and got nice settings. (1.32v VR VOUT/VID=Idle, 1.230v VR VOUT prime95 15K AVX, 1.2 something V SSE2 prime95 AVX disabled).
> 
> Keep in mind I did not test SVID Offset with c-states or any power saving options enabled.



Hi @Falkentyne Is it advisable to deactivate the c-state with the svid offset? In case of being able to activate which ones would you activate ... The captures of the previous post of your bios are your current and correct parameters?
Is it advisable to deactivate the state with the displacement? In case of being able to activate which ones would you activate ... The captures of the previous post of your bios are your current and correct parameters? Is it possible to put current captures I am setting my bios to 5.2? Thank you very much :thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb:


----------



## BradleyW

Intrud3r said:


> New Intel drivers for your Aorus Ultra:
> 
> Intel Management Engine Interface
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[1914.12.0.1256]	82.28 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel INF installation
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[10.1.17969.8134]	3.36 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel Serial I/O driver
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[30.100.1915.1]	1.55 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Also a new realtek driver.


I noticed these last night. Did a full format, fresh drivers, all is well.


----------



## MacG32

These are the latest drivers from https://www.station-drivers.com/

Intel Chipset Device Software v10.1.18015.8142 WHQL

Intel Management Engine (ME) Firmware v12.0.35.1427 (S&H)(1.5Mo)

Intel Management Engine Interface (MEI) v1916.12.0.1263 WHQL

Intel Network Connections Software v23.5.2 WHQL

Intel Proset-Wireless Bluetooth Software v21.10.1.1

Intel PROSet-Wireless WiFi Software v21.10.1.2 WHQL

Intel Serial IO Driver v30.100.1915.1 WHQL

Realtek High Definition Audio (HDA) R2.8x (8703) WHQL


----------



## KedarWolf

Got my 4x8GB on my Master 1000% HCI MemTest stable at 4266MHz 17-18-18-39 2T.

If anyone wants my BIOS settings I can post them here, but your results will vary depending on your CPU IMC, how good your board overclocks and your RAM kit. G.Skill non-RGB 4x8GB CL16 3600 is one of the best kits for overclocking four DIMMS.

Quite happy with this.


----------



## hodgempls

I was returning a Tiachi x470 open box MB along with a Ryzen 5 CPU and noticed that my local Microcenter had an open box z390 Aorus pro Wifi for $100 along with an open box 9700k for 350. I decided to grab them and the manager also gave me the $30 off for the MB/CPU combo. What is the consensus for RAM on this board? Is it better to run 4x8 or 2x16 for 32 GB?


----------



## KedarWolf

hodgempls said:


> I was returning a Tiachi x470 open box MB along with a Ryzen 5 CPU and noticed that my local Microcenter had an open box z390 Aorus pro Wifi for $100 along with an open box 9700k for 350. I decided to grab them and the manager also gave me the $30 off for the MB/CPU combo. What is the consensus for RAM on this board? Is it better to run 4x8 or 2x16 for 32 GB?


Gigabyte boards are T-Topology so four DIMMs will always run better than two DIMMs and the 16GB DIMMs are Dual Rank so they don't overclock as good. :h34r-smi


----------



## hodgempls

KedarWolf said:


> Gigabyte boards are T-Topology so four DIMMs will always run better than two DIMMs and the 16GB DIMMs are Dual Rank so they don't overclock as good. :h34r-smi


Thanks. So 4 - 8 Gb sticks it is!


----------



## Sheyster

hodgempls said:


> Thanks. So 4 - 8 Gb sticks it is!


That's the way to go with your board. I started with 2 sticks on my Aorus Pro and since moving to 4 sticks things are much better.


----------



## ezveedub

Hey, did Gigabyte remove RGB Fusion from the F8 bios or was it never there? Just getting into this Z390 Master mobo from a Z370 Gaming 7. All my other Z270 & Z370 Gigabyte mobos have it in the bios, just not seeing it in the Master.


----------



## Driller au

ezveedub said:


> Hey, did Gigabyte remove RGB Fusion from the F8 bios or was it never there? Just getting into this Z390 Master mobo from a Z370 Gaming 7. All my other Z270 & Z370 Gigabyte mobos have it in the bios, just not seeing it in the Master.


separate D/L


----------



## ezveedub

Driller au said:


> separate D/L




???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Johaho

Is it possible that SVID offset and TJ Max options are not available in Bios when running 8gen Cpu?


----------



## Driller au

ezveedub said:


> ???
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


go to the gigabyte site and on your motherboard page you will find RGB fusion under the utilities tab


----------



## ezveedub

Driller au said:


> go to the gigabyte site and on your motherboard page you will find RGB fusion under the utilities tab




I know that...I’m taking about the setting inside the bios...like all the other mobos have. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## ntuason

ezveedub said:


> I know that...I’m taking about the setting inside the bios...like all the other mobos have.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


You cant change RGB via BIOS on Aorus Master unfortunately.


----------



## ezveedub

ntuason said:


> You cant change RGB via BIOS on Aorus Master unfortunately.




Ok, thanks for the info. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Firkan

KedarWolf said:


> I don't have much luck with fixed voltages but here's my adaptive without the memory voltages/settings.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/27957088-post3286.html

been running these adaptive settings for a while and the system is really stable which im happy with, the only things i cant figure out are:

1) i put the avx offset to 0 but when running avx games like BF5, Dauntless e.a the cpu clocks down to 4.6 and even 4.5, on non avx games it stays on 5GHZ all the time, thing is temps average 60c, so why is it doing this? any setting i miss?
2) i sometimes see the core voltage go up to 1.4v which is a bit much i feel, is this because LLC turbo on avx loads does this or? how can i turn this down a little without effecting stability?

hope someone can enlighten me


----------



## Bravoexo

Anyone upgraded to 19.03 and are now expriencing Wifi driver problems or Ethernet random disconnections? Event 27 e1dexpress event messages keeps showing up and I keep getting boot off my lan. Started when I upgraded to 19.03 Windows10. Also wifi can't be turned on. (Does it only turn on if I remove the ethernet cable?)


----------



## Intrud3r

Bravoexo said:


> Anyone upgraded to 19.03 and are now expriencing Wifi driver problems or Ethernet random disconnections? Event 27 e1dexpress event messages keeps showing up and I keep getting boot off my lan. Started when I upgraded to 19.03 Windows10. Also wifi can't be turned on. (Does it only turn on if I remove the ethernet cable?)


Aorus Ultra board here ... updated to 19.03 the day it came out. Have not had any issues as of yet.

No problem with enabling Wifi. Mobile hotspot works fine too.


----------



## ezveedub

Bravoexo said:


> Anyone upgraded to 19.03 and are now expriencing Wifi driver problems or Ethernet random disconnections? Event 27 e1dexpress event messages keeps showing up and I keep getting boot off my lan. Started when I upgraded to 19.03 Windows10. Also wifi can't be turned on. (Does it only turn on if I remove the ethernet cable?)




Running two Z390 Master mobos on 1903 since last week and haven’t noticed any issues with LAN or WiFi. I have been using the CD drivers initial install, then the 1903 version after to update them. No additional software, just using Windows only to control connectivity for now .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Bravoexo

There's no 19.03 Wifi drivers on Aorus site, where did you get yours? I checked the Ultra and Extreme board sub pages too, only 1809 are there.


----------



## ezveedub

Bravoexo said:


> There's no 19.03 Wifi drivers on Aorus site, where did you get yours? I checked the Ultra and Extreme board sub pages too, only 1809 are there.




Sorry...have more info than what was applicable. I have been doing Win10 installs all weekend and dealing with drivers, so wasn’t checking all the details. I’ve only been using 1903 drivers when they are available from the Gigabyte website. The LAN/WiFi drivers are not 1903 version, they are what ever WIndows uses right now. I have some issues with loading drivers this weekend and it screwed one install, so I haven’t been keen to use any newer driver over the CD ones at this point so far, only a few of them maybe, but LAN/WiFi was not one of them. 

Also, you can turn off the WiFi in Windows.



















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Bravoexo

Well, I don't even get the device enabled at all...arrgh!


----------



## ezveedub

Bravoexo said:


> Well, I don't even get the device enabled at all...arrgh!




I had issues like this loadIng all AppCenter drivers with the Intel IO drivers...I loaded a bunch of new “1903” drivers with this new Win10 install and had those same “device cannot start” errors. That’s why I wiped the Win10 install and started all over and just let Windows install drivers or use the original CD drivers and let it be. I noticed if you run AppCenter in the beginning, it shows a lot of drivers. Let Windows update instead and go back, and AppCenter won’t show much if any drivers to load 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## KedarWolf

For peeps that can't afford $5 for HCI MemTest Pro or would just prefer not to buy it and use the free version, down free HCI, https://hcidesign.com/memtest/download.html and install AutoHotKey https://www.autohotkey.com/ 

Then right click in your HCI MemTest Free folder, create New, AutoHotkey script. Right click on the script, Edit Script.

Add the below code for 32GB of RAM. For 16GB change 1705 to 751.

It'll allocate each instance of HCI to a separate logical core of your 9900k or two to each core of your 9700k, absolute best way to run HCI MemTest. 



Code:


affmask := ["1","2","4","8","10","20","40","80","100","200","400","800","1000","2000","4000","8000"]

xpos :=  [1050,900,750,600,450,300,150,0,1050,900,750,600,450,300,150,0]
ypos :=  [200,200,200,200,200,200,200,200,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5]

SetTitleMatchMode, 2

loop % affmask.Length()
{
        aff := affmask[A_Index]
        Run, %comspec% /c start /B  /affinity %aff% memtest.exe /t%size% /s2000 /nice, ,Hide ,
        WinWaitActive, Welcome`, New MemTest User
        Send {Enter}
        sleep 100
        WinMove, A, , xpos, ypos
        Send 1705{Tab}{Enter}
        WinWaitActive, Message for first-time users
        Send {Enter}
        sleep %sl%
}  


WinGet, id, List, ahk_exe memtest.exe
Loop, %id%
{
    this_id := id%A_Index%
    WinGet, this_pid, PID, ahk_id %this_id%
    WinMove, ahk_pid %this_pid%,,xpos[A_Index],ypos[A_Index]
}

Oh, and this is for Memtest Pro 5.0 or newer.




Code:


sl = 4000
size=1705

;
; affmask hyperthread affinity for hexacore processor. Loop over these to populate 12 threads across all logical cores
; xpos and ypos are specific to display resolution. They place the windows uniformly once all 12 windows are launched
; 

affmask := ["1","2","4","8","10","20","40","80","100","200","400","800","1000","2000","4000","8000"]

xpos :=  [1050,900,750,600,450,300,150,0,1050,900,750,600,450,300,150,0]
ypos :=  [200,200,200,200,200,200,200,200,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5]

SetTitleMatchMode, 2

loop % affmask.Length()
{
        aff := affmask[A_Index]
        Run, %comspec% /c start /B  /affinity %aff% memTestPro.exe /t%size% /s2000 /nice, ,Hide ,
        sleep %sl%
}  


WinGet, id, List, ahk_exe memTestPro.exe
Loop, %id%
{
    this_id := id%A_Index%
    WinGet, this_pid, PID, ahk_id %this_id%
    WinMove, ahk_pid %this_pid%,,xpos[A_Index],ypos[A_Index]
}


----------



## KedarWolf

Never could get 4266MHz GSAT stable but 4200MHz with better timings is doable. :h34r-smi

I won't run a RAM overclock unless I'm sure I'm GSAT stable.


----------



## Bravoexo

Bravoexo said:


> Well, I don't even get the device enabled at all...arrgh!


Nevermind. Fixed it with shutting down including the PSU. On reboot, latest drivers now stuck.... arrgh. man, so many hours lost.


----------



## Falkentyne

Bravoexo said:


> Nevermind. Fixed it with shutting down including the PSU. On reboot, latest drivers now stuck.... arrgh. man, so many hours lost.


An AC Power off fixed this? Well at least this isn't a BIOS bug, then.
This is scaring me away from build 1903. I guess it was called "Tombstone" for a reason.
But I guess I'll have to set sail eventually when I need that Gsync compatible freesync support someday (when I actually upgrade my monitor to a freesync version).


----------



## Bravoexo

Falkentyne said:


> An AC Power off fixed this? Well at least this isn't a BIOS bug, then.
> This is scaring me away from build 1903. I guess it was called "Tombstone" for a reason.
> But I guess I'll have to set sail eventually when I need that Gsync compatible freesync support someday (when I actually upgrade my monitor to a freesync version).


Yup. Found hints at a laptop forum where the same problems were identified with 19.03. And a true shutdown for them fixed it. (Battery out). I only had to try it once on my rig, (PSU off) and poof! All is well.


----------



## Lurifaks

Hi, is there a way to read memory temperature, without using thermal probes ?


----------



## MacG32

Lurifaks said:


> Hi, is there a way to read memory temperature, without using thermal probes ?



HWiNFO v6.07-3810b: https://www.hwinfo.com/download/ :thumb:


----------



## Lurifaks

MacG32 said:


> HWiNFO v6.07-3810b: https://www.hwinfo.com/download/ :thumb:


Thanks  I already use hwinfo. But I still can't find any memory temperature there. Maybe it's my memory or I'm completely blind


----------



## KedarWolf

Lurifaks said:


> Thanks  I already use hwinfo. But I still can't find any memory temperature there. Maybe it's my memory or I'm completely blind


It depends on the memory DIMMs model themselves, some have temp sensors, some don't.


----------



## Lurifaks

KedarWolf said:


> It depends on the memory DIMMs model themselves, some have temp sensors, some don't.


Ok, thank you  Guess mine don't have then : Patriot Memory Viper Steel PVS416G440C9K


----------



## Nizzen

KedarWolf said:


> KedarWolf - i9 9900K @5.1/4.7 - 4x8GB G.Skill 3600 CL16 non-RGB @ 4266MHz-C17-18-18-39-2T 1.47v - SA 1.27v - VCCIO 1.25v
> 
> 4266MHz memory, 17-17-17-38 2T! /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> Now stress tested stable!
> 
> New motherboard. Master, same as my old motherboard, and I determined not being able to boot into BIOS settings at all with CSM enabled is a CPU issue.
> 
> Still, this one seems to overlock my memory better though. And I don't want to RMA the CPU because 5.1GHZ/4.7Cache, 4266MHz memory isn't half bad if the only issue is not being able to have CSM enabled when I want to boot into the BIOS. /forum/images/smilies/ph34r-smiley.gif


Nice job 😁👍


----------



## maivorbim

I'm trying to OC my RAM, but I cannot go past the 3600 mhz advertised ram speed. I'm sure I'm doing something wrong, but I cannot figure it out.

With the default XMP profile, RAM runs great at advertised 3600 mhz speeds. I have tried manually overclocking, I disabled XMP, ram voltage set to 1.35V, set timings to 18-22-22-42, set ram to 3800 mhz via System memory multipler (DDR4-3800), but all I get is a black screen after saving bios settings. I have to clear cmos to get into bios again. Same results if setting voltage to 1.4V.

I'm using a Z390 Aorus Master motherboard, F9C bios, with an i9-9900k and 2x8GB sticks of Corsair LPX Vengeance 3600 mhz 18-22-22-42, CMK16GX4M2Z3600C18 RAM, v3.31.

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

maivorbim said:


> I'm trying to OC my RAM, but I cannot go past the 3600 mhz advertised ram speed. I'm sure I'm doing something wrong, but I cannot figure it out.
> 
> With the default XMP profile, RAM runs great at advertised 3600 mhz speeds. I have tried manually overclocking, I disabled XMP, ram voltage set to 1.35V, set timings to 18-22-22-42, set ram to 3800 mhz via System memory multipler (DDR4-3800), but all I get is a black screen after saving bios settings. I have to clear cmos to get into bios again. Same results if setting voltage to 1.4V.
> 
> I'm using a Z390 Aorus Master motherboard, F9C bios, with an i9-9900k and 2x8GB sticks of Corsair LPX Vengeance 3600 mhz 18-22-22-42, CMK16GX4M2Z3600C18 RAM, v3.31.
> 
> Thanks


Please CLEAR CMOS after disabling XMP, then try again.


----------



## Falkentyne

SVID Offset allows the AC loadline to boost the VRM Supply voltage / Supply VID (before DC loadline droop bias) ABOVE 1.52v, up to 200mv higher.
With SVID offset disabled, AC Loadline can not boost CPU supply voltage via VID higher than 1.52v.

SVID offset enabled, AC Loadline =1.6 mOhms, DC Loadline=0.01 mOhms (This stops VID from dropping below AC Loadline VID target sent to the VRM)
Hint: If i tried small FFT AVX with this setting, VR VOUT would be 1.32v, Amps would be 212 (!!) amps, Watts would be 260+ and temps would be 105C in two seconds flat.
I calculated that to a target VRM voltage of 1.665v before vdroop!

Welp this explains why SVID offset boosts the load VR VOUT (and VID) on auto voltages much higher, while not affecting idle voltages, and why SVID offset+lowering AC Loadline works quite well in reducing idle while keeping load the same as Auto+SVID disabled. (Vcore Loadline Calibration MUST be left at STANDARD)

Tests with AC Loadline=160 and DC Loadline set to 1 so original target VID is preserved, and SVID Offset enabled.
AVX small FFT loads would not be possible without 115C+ temps and guaranteed CPU degradation at 212 amps (VR VOUT 1.320v). Actually did this AVX small FFT settings test "on accident" to see what SVID offsets would do compared to SVID disabled awhile back when I didn't know what to expect. I lasted 4 seconds before I reached for the full stop button in horror back then.


----------



## sygnus21

Anybody running the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme. What BIOS are you using? I've running the latest official F5 version.


----------



## Firkan

Firkan said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27957088-post3286.html
> 
> been running these adaptive settings for a while and the system is really stable which im happy with, the only things i cant figure out are:
> 
> 1) i put the avx offset to 0 but when running avx games like BF5, Dauntless e.a the cpu clocks down to 4.6 and even 4.5, on non avx games it stays on 5GHZ all the time, thing is temps average 60c, so why is it doing this? any setting i miss?
> 2) i sometimes see the core voltage go up to 1.4v which is a bit much i feel, is this because LLC turbo on avx loads does this or? how can i turn this down a little without effecting stability?
> 
> hope someone can enlighten me



noone? :sadsmiley


----------



## Driller au

Firkan said:


> noone? :sadsmiley


 i am sure i saw Kedarwolf answer this what he said was to change AVX offset from auto to 0 (zero)

Edit: that was some one else in the other thread sorry but try that anyway


----------



## Firkan

I tried that and even on AVX offset set to 0 it still does the same thing, so weird


----------



## Falkentyne

Firkan said:


> I tried that and even on AVX offset set to 0 it still does the same thing, so weird


Power Limits are set to auto in kedarwolf's post so you are going to TDP throttle and downclock past 95 watts. Increase the power limits manually.
I have no idea why @KedarWolf had power limits set to automatic with multicore enhancement disabled (disabling MCE forces settings to follow Intel defaults unless manually overridden by bios settings, this is good for people who want full control).


----------



## o0Spoonman0o

Anyone had issues with the temp sensors in the IT8868E just ceasing to update ? Have to reboot to get them to start working again

It seems to happen when the PC has been idle for awhile (I've disabled as much power management stuff as I can find), I've yet to run into it while actually using the pc. Since the fan curves in SIV use these sensors it results in my fans not reacting (there any other software you can use to control the damn fans?, speed fan can't seem to see them)

edit: Board is Z390 Aorus Elite


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Power Limits are set to auto in kedarwolf's post so you are going to TDP throttle and downclock past 95 watts. Increase the power limits manually.
> I have no idea why @KedarWolf had power limits set to automatic with multicore enhancement disabled (disabling MCE forces settings to follow Intel defaults unless manually overridden by bios settings, this is good for people who want full control).


Just to give you an idea of how it works on my board: Aorus Ultra

I have the same settings as Kedarwolf, apart from that he is running 5.1 and I am at 5.0.
His DVID = +0.175V, mine is +0.070V

MCE = disabled
My power limits are all on AUTO the same as Kedarwolf ... 

Whatever stresstest I throw at it ... It will not throttle down due to 95W TDP power limit. I see no power limit throttle values enabled / on in HWiNFO.

Don't ask me why ... 

If I set them power limits manually to 95 and 200 for example (if I remember correctly, 95 for the first and 200 for the second) it downclocks way too much when running stresstests. Goes down to 4.3 or something (if I remember correctly).


----------



## Intrud3r

o0Spoonman0o said:


> Anyone had issues with the temp sensors in the IT8868E just ceasing to update ? Have to reboot to get them to start working again
> 
> It seems to happen when the PC has been idle for awhile (I've disabled as much power management stuff as I can find), I've yet to run into it while actually using the pc. Since the fan curves in SIV use these sensors it results in my fans not reacting (there any other software you can use to control the damn fans?, speed fan can't seem to see them)
> 
> edit: Board is Z390 Aorus Elite


Uninstall SIV and set your Fans up through the bios ... I would recommend this always.
Maybe you need to uninstall easytune service too. In my case I needed to uninstall both.

P.S. No idea why your temp sensors cease to update. Try a newer version of the software you are using / try a different kind of application / etc


----------



## o0Spoonman0o

Intrud3r said:


> Uninstall SIV and set your Fans up through the bios ... I would recommend this always.
> Maybe you need to uninstall easytune service too. In my case I needed to uninstall both.


Will give this a go, I found previously when I set fans up in the BIOS it didn't hold when windows booted and my fans just ran @ 100%



Intrud3r said:


> P.S. No idea why your temp sensors cease to update. Try a newer version of the software you are using / try a different kind of application / etc


Software I'm using is SIV but the sensors seem to be the problem. You can see them in SIV as well as HWinfo64 and they don't update; you can typically tell with a quick scan that this has occurred because 1 or 2 of the sensors will have some erroneous data like 110C on System1 or single digit temps for CPU.

If I could get another application to see the fans and control them I would. I'll give the uninstall / setup fans in BIOS a go.


----------



## sygnus21

sygnus21 said:


> Anybody running the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme. What BIOS are you using? I've running the latest official F5 version.


Sorry for wasting everyone's time cause I don't have an "overclock my board question", but I ask the above again.


----------



## Moparman

sygnus21 said:


> Sorry for wasting everyone's time cause I don't have an "overclock my board question", but I ask the above again.


I know a few people have posted the Xtreme board in here. But with 3500 posts it's going to be a challenge to find all of them.


----------



## KedarWolf

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html

Gigabyte Z390 F9 BIOS here!!


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
> 
> Gigabyte Z390 F9 BIOS here!!


Thank you, installed, only checked there maybe 6 hours ago


----------



## ntuason

After update bios does it erase all setting including saved presets? That happened to me going from F7 to F8.


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> Thank you, installed, only checked there maybe 6 hours ago


Not even on the main Gigabyte site...hmm...
Is max PWM switching frequency still 500 khz?


----------



## Johaho

Yes 500khz max


----------



## alv-OC

*.*

Hi guys!

I come seekeing Knowlege and help, my Rig is causing me terrible headache:

I Currently own:

Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
I9 9900K Delided + Derbauer Kit for Direct Die Contact
G-Skill 2x8GB 4000MHz CL-17 Kit 
Corsair HX1000
Samsung 512GB 970 Pro 
Custom EK Loop w/ 2x 420mm rads
Gigabyte 1080Ti Extreme
Windows 10 Pro (v1903)
Drivers up to date. 

CPU OC'd and prooven stable over 5 months with this:

BaseClock: 100.05 MHz
Multiplier: 51
Uncore: 47 
All power Limits set to: Max
All Power saving and C-States: Disabled
VT-d: Disabled
Integrated GPU: Disabled.
LLC: High (both CPU and VAXG)
Switch rate: 500KHz (both CPU and VAXG)
Phase Control: High Perf (both CPU and VAXG)
Vcore:1.305v (83ºC max)
VCCIO:1.110v
VCCSA:1.220v

I've been using F8b BIOS along with my previous RAM (Corsair Domintor Plat. 2x8GB 3000MHZ CL15) till last week when I got the G-Skill RAM @4000MHz. New RAM wouldn't pass 3333MHz no mater what voltage or mamory training attempts.... during the OC process I destroyed Windows Boot, no recovery or repair method worked so I had to format and make fresh clean OS installation. 

Then tryed F9a, that was sent to me by Gigabyte Support like 3 months ago or so. Then I manage to set XMP on. Boot passed and OS working, passed all the R15 test I tryed but I had unexpected app shutdows and many... many... random BSODs when using internet browsers. Then I tryed to set XMP values but manually and check stability with MemTest86 (and not screwing windosw boot again...) but 3900MHz was the best I could get with no reported errors. Bu I want all my MHz, 3900 is not right so then tried:

Lowering Uncore step by step to Auto: did't work.
Giving VCore extra power to 1.310v and 1.315v: did't work
Giving RAM extra voltage starting from 1.370 tov 1.450v: didn't work
Giving VCCIO & VCSSA extra power manually to 1.310 and 1.350v: didn't work

3900 still best resoult (on MemTest, didnt get into OS)

To lats i tryed going backwawrds to F8b BOIS and see if I colud replicate the resolust on the latest official and "stable" BIOS but it was even worst deccsision, PC wouldnt boot over 2066MHz...

I don't know what else to do, I've heard about F9b modified BIOS that solved many of the XMP/RAM-Oc/Mem Trainig problems... reached this point I ran out of ideas, last one is setting everythin on fire.

Please assist me.


Many thanks in advance.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Not even on the main Gigabyte site...hmm...
> Is max PWM switching frequency still 500 khz?


Yes



ntuason said:


> After update bios does it erase all setting including saved presets? That happened to me going from F7 to F8.


Yes


----------



## Driller au

@Falkentyne something that might interest you though and i am not 100% certain but the cpu LLC settings seemed to have changed,i have only put in my 51/47 OC that i posted awhile ago and when i tested it, the voltages where higher than i remember approx up 0.020V so now i am on low LLC (high before) and +0.020 DIVD (0.000 before).
On my board one step down in LLC needed at least 0.015V~0.020V to compensate to keep the same VRout. Only thing i haven't done is max out power limits, left them on auto .Will test some more and edit if i find i am wrong or unstable


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> @Falkentyne something that might interest you though and i am not 100% certain but the cpu LLC settings seemed to have changed,i have only put in my 51/47 OC that i posted awhile ago and when i tested it, the voltages where higher than i remember approx up 0.020V so now i am on low LLC (high before) and +0.020 DIVD (0.000 before).
> On my board one step down in LLC needed at least 0.015V~0.020V to compensate to keep the same VRout. Only thing i haven't done is max out power limits, left them on auto .Will test some more and edit if i find i am wrong or unstable


I'll check that later. It would not be logical at all if the loadline steps changed, as Turbo was equal to 25% of loadline vdroop and High was equal to 50% of loadline vdoop, which is based on the maximum allowed AC Loadline value for 8 core CFL being the default VRM loadline for Standard/Normal Loadline Calibration=1.6 mOhms; 1.6 * .25 = 0.4 mOhms (Turbo) and 1.6 * .50 = 0.8 mOhms (High) LLC. I honestly can't see something like those steps being changed, otherwise what would Extreme be if High and Turbo were moved up a step (it's currently 0.2 mOhms)?

I know that the Aorus Ultra board had a bug in the bios where setting a manual vcore would set the target vcore 20mv lower than what you set in the bios, but the Master didn't have this issue at all.

Now if the default Loadline got changed from 1.6 mOhms to 2.1 mOhms (the max Loadline for 6 core CPU's!), then that's purely a bug! Even though the math obviously matches up:
2.1 * .25=0.525 and 2.1 * .5 = 1.05 (compared to 0.4 and 0.8). That would easily cause an average 20mv increase in VR VOUT (less vdroop) based on something like 1.275v manual voltage (e.g. at a 150 amp load, 1275mv - (150 * 0.4)=1215mv, and 1275mv - (0.525 * 150)=1196mv. But the base loadline slope changing like that to 2.1 mOhms is a bug.
This is easy to check on Auto voltages if you use Standard Loadline Calibration, AC Loadline of 1.6 mOhms (160) and record the VR VOUT and compare it to F9C's reading.

I'll flash it later and look. Can't be bothered at the moment.


----------



## Firkan

Intrud3r said:


> Just to give you an idea of how it works on my board: Aorus Ultra
> 
> I have the same settings as Kedarwolf, apart from that he is running 5.1 and I am at 5.0.
> His DVID = +0.175V, mine is +0.070V
> 
> MCE = disabled
> My power limits are all on AUTO the same as Kedarwolf ...
> 
> Whatever stresstest I throw at it ... It will not throttle down due to 95W TDP power limit. I see no power limit throttle values enabled / on in HWiNFO.
> 
> Don't ask me why ...
> 
> If I set them power limits manually to 95 and 200 for example (if I remember correctly, 95 for the first and 200 for the second) it downclocks way too much when running stresstests. Goes down to 4.3 or something (if I remember correctly).



Thanks, i will look at the power limit settings and see what it does after that


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> I'll check that later. It would not be logical at all if the loadline steps changed, as Turbo was equal to 25% of loadline vdroop and High was equal to 50% of loadline vdoop, which is based on the maximum allowed AC Loadline value for 8 core CFL being the default VRM loadline for Standard/Normal Loadline Calibration=1.6 mOhms; 1.6 * .25 = 0.4 mOhms (Turbo) and 1.6 * .50 = 0.8 mOhms (High) LLC. I honestly can't see something like those steps being changed, otherwise what would Extreme be if High and Turbo were moved up a step (it's currently 0.2 mOhms)?
> 
> I know that the Aorus Ultra board had a bug in the bios where setting a manual vcore would set the target vcore 20mv lower than what you set in the bios, but the Master didn't have this issue at all.
> 
> Now if the default Loadline got changed from 1.6 mOhms to 2.1 mOhms (the max Loadline for 6 core CPU's!), then that's purely a bug! Even though the math obviously matches up:
> 2.1 * .25=0.525 and 2.1 * .5 = 1.05 (compared to 0.4 and 0.8). That would easily cause an average 20mv increase in VR VOUT (less vdroop) based on something like 1.275v manual voltage (e.g. at a 150 amp load, 1275mv - (150 * 0.4)=1215mv, and 1275mv - (0.525 * 150)=1196mv. But the base loadline slope changing like that to 2.1 mOhms is a bug.
> This is easy to check on Auto voltages if you use Standard Loadline Calibration, AC Loadline of 1.6 mOhms (160) and record the VR VOUT and compare it to F9C's reading.
> 
> I'll flash it later and look. Can't be bothered at the moment.


I tend to agree with why would they change LLC since it never has in all the other bios versions but something has (bug or intended) earlier in the week i was playing with my 50/46 summer OC and seeing what it took to get normal LLC to run and gave up around 0.050~0.060 as just not worth it. I just set it up with normal LLC and 0.020 DVID and it ran fine a quick 15 min. realbench 2.56 and a few games of BFV . It's not like the voltage i need has changed just the way to get it


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> I tend to agree with why would they change LLC since it never has in all the other bios versions but something has (bug or intended) earlier in the week i was playing with my 50/46 summer OC and seeing what it took to get normal LLC to run and gave up around 0.050~0.060 as just not worth it. I just set it up with normal LLC and 0.020 DVID and it ran fine a quick 15 min. realbench 2.56 and a few games of BFV . It's not like the voltage i need has changed just the way to get it


Ok.
Just flashed it.
Voltages and Loadlines and VR VOUT are identical in all stress tests and amp loads as F9C (and previous).
No differences.

No idea of any changelogs either. All I know is F8h, F8i and F8 all had terrible voltage regulation (vcore or IMC, I don't know) but those were all fixed in F9a (or b, whatever that first leaked one of this level was).

If your voltages/VR VOUT are reading 20mv higher, try clearing CMOS and re-doing all your settings from *scratch*.
Then check again.

I've seen bugs where changing one "group" of settings then going to another group with a completely different speed would sometimes either 1) fail to POST, 2) would keep part of the original settings' profiles until you re-did the settings again (or sometimes entered the bios and rebooted a second time). Some things I can think of directly:

On manual voltage, going from one clock/cache speed in bios and keying in a higher cache/speed and changing voltage from manual to 'Auto' and changing Loadline Calibration from a custom value (Turbo, etc) to Intel Defaults of Standard, would fail to POST completely. Powering off and on then POSTS properly at the new speed you selected and Auto vcore.

SVID offset uses the last set voltage profile and disables all voltage control. SVID Offset allows VID to exceed 1.52v via AC Loadline by up to 200mv (max 1.72v). But if you set a manual voltage and enabled SVID offset, it would disable voltage control but would still use the last voltage you set as the target voltage, instead of using Auto voltage (and of course VR VOUT would ignore the AC Loadline since AC Loadline is VRM ignored on manual voltage). To bypass this, set Auto vcore first, disable Loadline calibration, save and exit, then enable SVID Offset (recommended as per my above post earlier you set ACLL between 0.95 mOhms to 1.20 mOhms).

When changing from a DVID voltage directly to manual voltage, the DVID offset remains in effect. Fix is to switch to 0.00v, save and reboot, then change to manual. Sometimes switching to Auto, saving and rebooting then switching to manual works also. Not sure if this bug has been fixed or not since F8E Bios.

Note: if voltages/configs are saved in bios profiles, they load between them without issues at all (Auto, SVID, manual, etc). The problems all seem to happen when changing certain groups together directly (especially manual to auto+multiplier or offset changes without doing one at a time).

Now if you DO clear CMOS and you find the OFFSETS are completely wrong (like, +0.01 is actually +0.03), then file a bug report. I don't use offsets.


----------



## WINTENDOX

Guide Z390 aorus elite + i79700k?

Problem Establididad Test AVX


----------



## robertr1

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> I come seekeing Knowlege and help, my Rig is causing me terrible headache:
> 
> I Currently own:
> 
> Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
> I9 9900K Delided + Derbauer Kit for Direct Die Contact
> G-Skill 2x8GB 4000MHz CL-17 Kit
> Corsair HX1000
> Samsung 512GB 970 Pro
> Custom EK Loop w/ 2x 420mm rads
> Gigabyte 1080Ti Extreme
> Windows 10 Pro (v1903)
> Drivers up to date.
> 
> CPU OC'd and prooven stable over 5 months with this:
> 
> BaseClock: 100.05 MHz
> Multiplier: 51
> Uncore: 47
> All power Limits set to: Max
> All Power saving and C-States: Disabled
> VT-d: Disabled
> Integrated GPU: Disabled.
> LLC: High (both CPU and VAXG)
> Switch rate: 500KHz (both CPU and VAXG)
> Phase Control: High Perf (both CPU and VAXG)
> Vcore:1.305v (83ºC max)
> VCCIO:1.110v
> VCCSA:1.220v
> 
> I've been using F8b BIOS along with my previous RAM (Corsair Domintor Plat. 2x8GB 3000MHZ CL15) till last week when I got the G-Skill RAM @4000MHz. New RAM wouldn't pass 3333MHz no mater what voltage or mamory training attempts.... during the OC process I destroyed Windows Boot, no recovery or repair method worked so I had to format and make fresh clean OS installation.
> 
> Then tryed F9a, that was sent to me by Gigabyte Support like 3 months ago or so. Then I manage to set XMP on. Boot passed and OS working, passed all the R15 test I tryed but I had unexpected app shutdows and many... many... random BSODs when using internet browsers. Then I tryed to set XMP values but manually and check stability with MemTest86 (and not screwing windosw boot again...) but 3900MHz was the best I could get with no reported errors. Bu I want all my MHz, 3900 is not right so then tried:
> 
> Lowering Uncore step by step to Auto: did't work.
> Giving VCore extra power to 1.310v and 1.315v: did't work
> Giving RAM extra voltage starting from 1.370 tov 1.450v: didn't work
> Giving VCCIO & VCSSA extra power manually to 1.310 and 1.350v: didn't work
> 
> 3900 still best resoult (on MemTest, didnt get into OS)
> 
> To lats i tryed going backwawrds to F8b BOIS and see if I colud replicate the resolust on the latest official and "stable" BIOS but it was even worst deccsision, PC wouldnt boot over 2066MHz...
> 
> I don't know what else to do, I've heard about F9b modified BIOS that solved many of the XMP/RAM-Oc/Mem Trainig problems... reached this point I ran out of ideas, last one is setting everythin on fire.
> 
> Please assist me.
> 
> 
> Many thanks in advance.


2 sticks are going to be tough. This is T-Topology board so if you want high RAM figures, you'll need to run 4 sticks.

I have a C18 4000mhz kit also but have to run it at CL15 3600mhz. Anything beyond that won't work.

Make sure you're using slots B on both channels. The furthest away from the CPU.

Don't expect to run high speeds on these boards using 2 sticks.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Ok.
> Just flashed it.
> Voltages and Loadlines and VR VOUT are identical in all stress tests and amp loads as F9C (and previous).
> No differences.
> 
> No idea of any changelogs either. All I know is F8h, F8i and F8 all had terrible voltage regulation (vcore or IMC, I don't know) but those were all fixed in F9a (or b, whatever that first leaked one of this level was).
> 
> If your voltages/VR VOUT are reading 20mv higher, try clearing CMOS and re-doing all your settings from *scratch*.
> Then check again.
> 
> I've seen bugs where changing one "group" of settings then going to another group with a completely different speed would sometimes either 1) fail to POST, 2) would keep part of the original settings' profiles until you re-did the settings again (or sometimes entered the bios and rebooted a second time). Some things I can think of directly:
> 
> On manual voltage, going from one clock/cache speed in bios and keying in a higher cache/speed and changing voltage from manual to 'Auto' and changing Loadline Calibration from a custom value (Turbo, etc) to Intel Defaults of Standard, would fail to POST completely. Powering off and on then POSTS properly at the new speed you selected and Auto vcore.
> 
> SVID offset uses the last set voltage profile and disables all voltage control. SVID Offset allows VID to exceed 1.52v via AC Loadline by up to 200mv (max 1.72v). But if you set a manual voltage and enabled SVID offset, it would disable voltage control but would still use the last voltage you set as the target voltage, instead of using Auto voltage (and of course VR VOUT would ignore the AC Loadline since AC Loadline is VRM ignored on manual voltage). To bypass this, set Auto vcore first, disable Loadline calibration, save and exit, then enable SVID Offset (recommended as per my above post earlier you set ACLL between 0.95 mOhms to 1.20 mOhms).
> 
> When changing from a DVID voltage directly to manual voltage, the DVID offset remains in effect. Fix is to switch to 0.00v, save and reboot, then change to manual. Sometimes switching to Auto, saving and rebooting then switching to manual works also. Not sure if this bug has been fixed or not since F8E Bios.
> 
> Note: if voltages/configs are saved in bios profiles, they load between them without issues at all (Auto, SVID, manual, etc). The problems all seem to happen when changing certain groups together directly (especially manual to auto+multiplier or offset changes without doing one at a time).
> 
> Now if you DO clear CMOS and you find the OFFSETS are completely wrong (like, +0.01 is actually +0.03), then file a bug report. I don't use offsets.


Deleted all profiles, cleared CMOS seems to have sorted it out. Most strange did everything the same a usual never had this before anyway all good now


----------



## alv-OC

Hello @robertr1 !


yeah I'm aware about the tipology of the wiring on the RAM channels and also I've been told that since the board only has 1 power phase (and with its characteristics) for the 4 slots, max voltage that can be drawn with out causing Jitter and other problems that lead to inestability is about 1.35 1-40v. And regarding the channels that i should use, yes, I'm using Ch1-B and Ch2-B, I learned that lesson the hard way...

But I spent many (and I really mean it, MANY) hours this weekend messing arround with the BIOS and I actually have increased all Cores speed to 5.2GHz at 1.35v (almost with no temp increase, just by enhacing the VRM/Power Management settings) and memory is working at 4000MHz CL17-18-18-38 | 2T | Trfc:450, with RAM Volt: 1.45v | VCCIO: 1.25v | VCCSA: 1.30v (I have also tried RAM Volt: 1.60v | VCCIO: 1.35v | VCCSA: 1.35v but it was even worse, causing it to fail Mem. Training and boot), increasing main timmings wouldn't help either...

I made it work by using subtimmings that I found here on the forum (and in some others), they were talking about extreme DDR4 B-Die ovecloking, taking 3200 ramkits and pushing them to 4200+MHz and about between 1.6v - 2.0v (I would never do that btw). The thing is that with those sub-timmings I improved stability quite a lot, well... I could install games, apps and run many R15 loops, but I have random app close when I do just simple things like using web browsers, and if I try to lunch Adobe Photoshop or a game it crashes badly...

I feel like it needs just the correct subtimmings, but I'm totally lost on that and I could't understand the supposed "logic" that relates primary timmings, subtimmings and Freq/voltage 


Any ideas?


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> Hello @robertr1 !
> 
> 
> yeah I'm aware about the tipology of the wiring on the RAM channels and also I've been told that since the board only has 1 power phase (and with its characteristics) for the 4 slots, max voltage that can be drawn with out causing Jitter and other problems that lead to inestability is about 1.35 1-40v. And regarding the channels that i should use, yes, I'm using Ch1-B and Ch2-B, I learned that lesson the hard way...
> 
> But I spent many (and I really mean it, MANY) hours this weekend messing arround with the BIOS and I actually have increased all Cores speed to 5.2GHz at 1.35v (almost with no temp increase, just by enhacing the VRM/Power Management settings) and memory is working at 4000MHz CL17-18-18-38 | 2T | Trfc:450, with RAM Volt: 1.45v | VCCIO: 1.25v | VCCSA: 1.30v (I have also tried RAM Volt: 1.60v | VCCIO: 1.35v | VCCSA: 1.35v but it was even worse, causing it to fail Mem. Training and boot), increasing main timmings wouldn't help either...
> 
> I made it work by using subtimmings that I found here on the forum (and in some others), they were talking about extreme DDR4 B-Die ovecloking, taking 3200 ramkits and pushing them to 4200+MHz and about between 1.6v - 2.0v (I would never do that btw). The thing is that with those sub-timmings I improved stability quite a lot, well... I could install games, apps and run many R15 loops, but I have random app close when I do just simple things like using web browsers, and if I try to lunch Adobe Photoshop or a game it crashes badly...
> 
> I feel like it needs just the correct subtimmings, but I'm totally lost on that and I could't understand the supposed "logic" that relates primary timmings, subtimmings and Freq/voltage
> 
> 
> Any ideas?


Do a custom search of this thread with the username KedarWolf and you'll see a post with the voltages I needed for 4x8GB GSAT stable and the timings I used. I can post BIOS screenshots as well when I get home from work, as some settings I needed not there like all my timings are manually set, then I used the 4500+ profile, not Performance for timings I couldn't manually set.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Do a custom search of this thread with the username KedarWolf and you'll see a post with the voltages I needed for 4x8GB GSAT stable and the timings I used. I can post BIOS screenshots as well when I get home from work, as some settings I needed not there like all my timings are manually set, then I used the 4500+ profile, not Performance for timings I couldn't manually set.


Do you know anything different in the F9 bios? I can't see anything different compared to F9C.

Does it need the IRST and wifi/ethernet mod thing done?


----------



## robertr1

KedarWolf said:


> Do a custom search of this thread with the username KedarWolf and you'll see a post with the voltages I needed for 4x8GB GSAT stable and the timings I used. I can post BIOS screenshots as well when I get home from work, as some settings I needed not there like all my timings are manually set, then I used the 4500+ profile, not Performance for timings I couldn't manually set.


Yep. I've seen those and you do a great job in sharing info and being open so thank you!

The problem here is 2 fold:
- Both him and I are only have 2 DIMM's which really sucks on T-Topology boards
- We're on Auros pro which is class below the Master and has 2 fewer PCB layers which also doesn't help

Those two issue combined means you're very limited in mem OC.


----------



## robertr1

alv-OC said:


> Hello @robertr1 !
> 
> 
> yeah I'm aware about the tipology of the wiring on the RAM channels and also I've been told that since the board only has 1 power phase (and with its characteristics) for the 4 slots, max voltage that can be drawn with out causing Jitter and other problems that lead to inestability is about 1.35 1-40v. And regarding the channels that i should use, yes, I'm using Ch1-B and Ch2-B, I learned that lesson the hard way...
> 
> But I spent many (and I really mean it, MANY) hours this weekend messing arround with the BIOS and I actually have increased all Cores speed to 5.2GHz at 1.35v (almost with no temp increase, just by enhacing the VRM/Power Management settings) and memory is working at 4000MHz CL17-18-18-38 | 2T | Trfc:450, with RAM Volt: 1.45v | VCCIO: 1.25v | VCCSA: 1.30v (I have also tried RAM Volt: 1.60v | VCCIO: 1.35v | VCCSA: 1.35v but it was even worse, causing it to fail Mem. Training and boot), increasing main timmings wouldn't help either...
> 
> I made it work by using subtimmings that I found here on the forum (and in some others), they were talking about extreme DDR4 B-Die ovecloking, taking 3200 ramkits and pushing them to 4200+MHz and about between 1.6v - 2.0v (I would never do that btw). The thing is that with those sub-timmings I improved stability quite a lot, well... I could install games, apps and run many R15 loops, but I have random app close when I do just simple things like using web browsers, and if I try to lunch Adobe Photoshop or a game it crashes badly...
> 
> I feel like it needs just the correct subtimmings, but I'm totally lost on that and I could't understand the supposed "logic" that relates primary timmings, subtimmings and Freq/voltage
> 
> 
> Any ideas?


I've wasted so many hours like you on this boards trying to get 2 DIMM's to OC. I've actually given up as of last weekend. 

Now I'm just running 16-16-16-39 3600 and rest on auto. My vccio = 0.950 and SA = 1.050 

As an example, I thought I had a CL14 3600 dialed in this past weekend with tight timings. Could pass all sorts of benchmarks. Things were fine until I rebooted for another software update after which I was just crashing and being unstable. This board just sucks trying to OC mem on. It's great for CPU though as you can see!

For those wanting a quick mem test is a real world workload, use Dota 2. It highlights mem issues fast. The game will crash to desktop.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Do you know anything different in the F9 bios? I can't see anything different compared to F9C.
> 
> Does it need the IRST and wifi/ethernet mod thing done?


Only the Ethernet mod, everything else is the newest, even has a newer IRST then what I can mod.

And Ethernet mod really not vital, most being don't even use the BIOS settings where it actually matters.


----------



## kati

Looks like they soon put that F9 onto the support website for the master.

Sadly i had few reboot crash again, 2 in 4 mins(funny cause i get those reboot crashes one in a month normally). My ram is sure ok, thats what memtest said, hope the same for the master plus cpu.
So i ordered a new PSU, i won my old one in a lottery lol its 5 years old until i finally put it into work( got only 1k hours maybe now but i still dont trust it, be quiet straight power 10). A new straight power 11 for €100, now i gotta observe for weeks to months again lol.
Maybe its software/driver related?

That annoying bug made me already thing if i should switch to a yummy zen2 plus x570; but after the psu switch ill wait and see if its still there.


----------



## alv-OC

Yeah, I've notice that Aorus Master is pretty solid for CPU OC, I wasn't expecting to hit 5.2GHz and I'm glad of that, but very high end cooling system is a must obviously. It's kinnda anoying that the Power Managemetn for the CPU is almost the best on Z390 platform and then Gigabite has that "average/mid tier" desing for the RAM power system... they could have spent extra 5$ and give us more stalibility there.

I've emailed G.Skill support team and I've created a post on their forum as well hoping they can give me useful info and perhaps a few tabs with different sub-timings options for me to try. I will be looking for your message @KedarWolf, I feel like I need to fix this regardelss the cost... i'ts becomming something personal. As for the Mem profiles you said taht you used 4500+ profile, right? I messed arround with it a bit but I wasnt sure about how does it work... I only tried 'High Speed' profile and didn't help at all... would you have further info on that? I feel curious.

In a eventual scenario where I'm trying to fight against physics laws and there is no way to achieve full stability at 4000MHz with 18-18-18-38 timings, I'll be trying 1 lower step on speed (3866- 3800MHz??) and maybe 16-16-16-36 but I'm won't accept less whit this memory kit (and it's cost), I would be returning it and buying another kit like 4x8GB 3600MHz...
@robertr1 that VCCIO | SA that you got for 3600 is great! that reminds me my last RAM Kit, 2x8 Corsair Dominator Platinum 3000MHz CL15, that two little [email protected]%&s wont go higer that 3000 no matter what you threw at them and al so liked a bump on VCCIO | SA.

Lets see what G.Skill Supp. team says...


----------



## Firkan

Intrud3r said:


> Just to give you an idea of how it works on my board: Aorus Ultra
> 
> I have the same settings as Kedarwolf, apart from that he is running 5.1 and I am at 5.0.
> His DVID = +0.175V, mine is +0.070V
> 
> MCE = disabled
> My power limits are all on AUTO the same as Kedarwolf ...
> 
> Whatever stresstest I throw at it ... It will not throttle down due to 95W TDP power limit. I see no power limit throttle values enabled / on in HWiNFO.
> 
> Don't ask me why ...
> 
> If I set them power limits manually to 95 and 200 for example (if I remember correctly, 95 for the first and 200 for the second) it downclocks way too much when running stresstests. Goes down to 4.3 or something (if I remember correctly).


kept the same settings but changed ALL the powerlimits to their max value instead of auto, still clocks down to 4.5 - 4.6 while temps are around 60c...


----------



## Driller au

Firkan said:


> kept the same settings but changed ALL the powerlimits to their max value instead of auto, still clocks down to 4.5 - 4.6 while temps are around 60c...


what M/B have you got, if its the master have you got the AUX power hooked up the 2x4 one


----------



## Firkan

Driller au said:


> what M/B have you got, if its the master have you got the AUX power hooked up the 2x4 one


the master yes, 2x4 is connected

ill try a static overclock to see what it does, when i had it at stock it stayed on 4.7 all the time even with avx loads


----------



## Padinn

Fyi, they used an aorus master while testing new overclock utility. I'm gonna give it a whirl


https://pcper.com/2019/06/overclocking-intel-performance-maximizer/


----------



## robertr1

vdroop findings:

Auros Pro wifi
9900k 1.26v in bios with LLC = Turbo
Cinebench R20 = 1.200v under load
Max spike upto 1.248v < only does this when starting up a high CPU process and then drops back down hard
Used VR VOUT in HWINFO to record changes


----------



## Padinn

The performance tuning plan from Intel is out now and very reasonably priced, $20 and they will replace up to a 9900k of you fry it overclocking. I'm trying there auto overclock tool now.


----------



## Padinn

Using Intel performance maximizer it found an all corr overclock of 5.0ghz on my system. I let it run overnight and it looks like reboot failed at one point (it was in bios) but exiting out of that without changing anything gave this result. I will follow up later with voltages it used. I had reset everything in bios to auto, disabled xmp, and left LLC on high with ac/DC at power saving. Voltage was set to auto (showed 1.2v at bios screen)


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Using Intel performance maximizer it found an all corr overclock of 5.0ghz on my system. I let it run overnight and it looks like reboot failed at one point (it was in bios) but exiting out of that without changing anything gave this result. I will follow up later with voltages it used. I had reset everything in bios to auto, disabled xmp, and left LLC on high with ac/DC at power saving. Voltage was set to auto (showed 1.2v at bios screen)


AC Loadline (CPU Internal Load Line) should not be at power saving. If the PM uses auto voltages, AC=0.4 mOhms would greatly affect how much voltage it would be allowed to test on auto. It should be left either on "Auto" or AC/DC should be at 1.6 mOhms (160). Then again I can't run PM because it doesn't work on build 1703. I don't know what it has access to change.
But I personally would set CPU Vcore loadline calibration to Standard, AC/DC to 160 (1.6 mOhms), Speedstep to enabled, Turboboost to auto, and vcore to auto if I were using this tool.


----------



## Lurifaks

Anyone else having broken mem dividers with the latest F9 bios?

3600 give me 3200 and 3200 give 2933 , 4000 is 4000 , so not all have problems. Have cleared cmos etc , but haven`t re-flashed yet


----------



## kati

Got my new PSU, this time it had 2x P8 and i connected both but guess theres no difference to just one on a 9700k i guess?
(Aorus Master Z390)

Also got another set of Corsair Vengeance lpx ddr4-3333 2x8gb
my old set was ver 4.xx and Samsung B-Die
new one is ver 5.xx and Hynix A-Die

But as long im using the xmp Profil it should have no probs, right?

Well i hope and pray...


----------



## ntuason

Anyone know whether I should use Digital Optical or 3.5mm Jack (AUX) for best sound quality on Aorus Master? Does the ESS Sabre even work on the optical output?


----------



## alv-OC

Lurifaks said:


> Anyone else having broken mem dividers with the latest F9 bios?
> 
> 3600 give me 3200 and 3200 give 2933 , 4000 is 4000 , so not all have problems. Have cleared cmos etc , but haven`t re-flashed yet


LoL... i got that issue since ever... F7 (that was my deafult BIOS when i got the Board) then updated to F8, same problem... and F9 also has same problem....

I didn't realted the problem to a broken divider, I thought that it was because of ****ty Gigabyte BIOS (kind of ussual on my personal experience, except for Z87 chipset)

Whatever Freq. i set on BIOS it finally sets the frequency it wants...

Is there any solution??


----------



## Falkentyne

Lurifaks said:


> Anyone else having broken mem dividers with the latest F9 bios?
> 
> 3600 give me 3200 and 3200 give 2933 , 4000 is 4000 , so not all have problems. Have cleared cmos etc , but haven`t re-flashed yet


This isn't broken dividers. This means it didn't train correctly.
If you have higher speed fans where you can hear them easily, after any failed training iteration and reattempt, you will hear the fans rev up and down. If you get several of these during a long time to reach POST, that's when you see a lower RAM speed. A complete failure will either cause 5 long beeps then a power off and on, with a popup, or a prompt popup (without the beeps) saying that the system failed to POST due to overclocking or improper settings. In most cases, if you get zero or only one rev-up, followed by constant speed and a POST <30 seconds later, it worked fine. You can also watch the debug LED sequence. A failed iteration of RAM training will be obvious compared to one that trained correctly.

Were you trying to use 1T Command Rate?


----------



## Lurifaks

Falkentyne said:


> This isn't broken dividers. This means it didn't train correctly.
> If you have higher speed fans where you can hear them easily, after any failed training iteration and reattempt, you will hear the fans rev up and down. If you get several of these during a long time to reach POST, that's when you see a lower RAM speed. A complete failure will either cause 5 long beeps then a power off and on, with a popup, or a prompt popup (without the beeps) saying that the system failed to POST due to overclocking or improper settings. In most cases, if you get zero or only one rev-up, followed by constant speed and a POST <30 seconds later, it worked fine. You can also watch the debug LED sequence. A failed iteration of RAM training will be obvious compared to one that trained correctly.
> 
> Were you trying to use 1T Command Rate?


Thank you for this explanation. I will test more and see. 

Have not tried 1T yet on this F9 bios


----------



## Padinn

Since I'm on auto (manual) voltage I dont think the setting does anything anyway, pretty sure its adaptive only. I'll change later and report back.


----------



## TMatzelle60

Hey All I have a question I am looking into a Top of the line motherboard and always worry about reliability and having a well built motherboard.

I was looking into getting the Z390 Master by gigabyte to pair with the 9900K 

How is this motherboard reliability and build wise?

I heard the bios is not that great should I worry about this if not OC at the moment or maybe at all?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Since I'm on auto (manual) voltage I dont think the setting does anything anyway, pretty sure its adaptive only. I'll change later and report back.


AC loadline affects auto and adaptive voltages. If you mean DVID, (Adaptive is different from DVID; on Asus boards at least, adaptive allows you to set an absolute minimum voltage floor for the processor, but it can't be lower than the CPU's default VID), DVID is simply auto with a fixed offset, nothing more.

Please check my VERY long post in the 9900K thread for how AC Loadline affects auto voltages.
As well as my post I wrote over here: 
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/c29vp8/is_it_safe_to_max_out_the_llc/

I don't know if the Intel maximizer sets loadline calibration manually or uses the defaults, nor do I know what happens if you have a custom LLC set.
I highly doubt it changes the AC loadlines for you (I'd be really surprised if it did though, although you can always check HWinfo64 to see), and I also don't know 
if it sets a fixed manual voltage for you. If it did set a fixed manual voltage, it would have to also set loadline calibration also (1.30v fixed set in bios with default loadline calibration is going to BSOD hard at load; with a 1.6 mOhms VRM loadline that's probably about 150mv of vdroop right there).



TMatzelle60 said:


> Hey All I have a question I am looking into a Top of the line motherboard and always worry about reliability and having a well built motherboard.
> 
> I was looking into getting the Z390 Master by gigabyte to pair with the 9900K
> 
> How is this motherboard reliability and build wise?
> 
> I heard the bios is not that great should I worry about this if not OC at the moment or maybe at all?


It's a well engineered board that is built as well as expected for its price point. The dual bios manual switching works well (and doesn't just revert by itself) on the F9 beta bioses, which was an issue on older bioses.


----------



## lucasfrance

Lurifaks said:


> Anyone else having broken mem dividers with the latest F9 bios?
> 
> 3600 give me 3200 and 3200 give 2933 , 4000 is 4000 , so not all have problems. Have cleared cmos etc , but haven`t re-flashed yet


Had similar issue on the Xtreme beta bios F7a and F7b (3600 was giving 3500) but it has been fixed on the F7 version (not yet officially released by Gigabyte).


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> AC loadline affects auto and adaptive voltages. If you mean DVID, (Adaptive is different from DVID; on Asus boards at least, adaptive allows you to set an absolute minimum voltage floor for the processor, but it can't be lower than the CPU's default VID), DVID is simply auto with a fixed offset, nothing more.
> 
> Please check my VERY long post in the 9900K thread for how AC Loadline affects auto voltages.
> As well as my post I wrote over here:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/c29vp8/is_it_safe_to_max_out_the_llc/
> 
> I don't know if the Intel maximizer sets loadline calibration manually or uses the defaults, nor do I know what happens if you have a custom LLC set.
> I highly doubt it changes the AC loadlines for you (I'd be really surprised if it did though, although you can always check HWinfo64 to see), and I also don't know
> if it sets a fixed manual voltage for you. If it did set a fixed manual voltage, it would have to also set loadline calibration also (1.30v fixed set in bios with default loadline calibration is going to BSOD hard at load; with a 1.6 mOhms VRM loadline that's probably about 150mv of vdroop right there).
> 
> 
> 
> It's a well engineered board that is built as well as expected for its price point. The dual bios manual switching works well (and doesn't just revert by itself) on the F9 beta bioses, which was an issue on older bioses.


So the auto settled around 1.37v with 5.0GHz and an AVX offset of 3. I had placed most of my loadlines back to normal, but left LLC on High. XMP 3200 was enabled for test. So it's interesting and it doesn't seem like it does anything too crazy, but I think with my chip I can probably do a bit better with manual tweaking. Haven't really overclocked this, but now that I have the tuning plan I am going to mess around a bit more since it takes some worry off my shoulders.


----------



## Padinn

Falk, thanks for the info in that link on loadline. I'm still digesting it and appreciate the effort. I've been running on adaptive with my ac/DC loadline set to 1 for a while. Would you recommend for overclocking I leave them at default of 160 and go from there? If I'm understanding properly the 160mohm is designed to help minimize the transient spikes?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Falk, thanks for the info in that link on loadline. I'm still digesting it and appreciate the effort. I've been running on adaptive with my ac/DC loadline set to 1 for a while. Would you recommend for overclocking I leave them at default of 160 and go from there? If I'm understanding properly the 160mohm is designed to help minimize the transient spikes?


No, 160 is not for limiting transients. A lower loadline calibration (higher vdroop) is for limiting transients.
Raising the AC loadline when on auto vcore is for raising the idle voltage (above the original default VID--the VID you see when AC and DC are both set to 1) and for raising the load voltage even more (by signaling the voltage controller via VID (before DC loadline makes the VID drop via VID droop) that that is the target voltage. It is not terribly wrong to think of the AC loadline of being the inverse of VRM loadline in a way, for the sake of understanding it, but that is not really accurate. The only real similarity between VRM Loadline (Loadline calibration reduces vdroop by reducing the resistance (mOhms) of the VRM loadline) and AC loadline is that they both function on resistance. But the AC loadline isn't for vdroop--it's for input voltages sent to the VRM, so transient response isn't affected. 
For example, with DC loadline left at 1 (0.01 mOhms), and using auto voltages, default VID at 5 ghz may be around 1.215v with an AC loadline of 1 (this is very close to the CPUs preprogrammed base VID for 5 ghz core/4.7 ghz cache as AC and DC are not boosting it, although Thermal Velocity Boost boosting the VID based on temps still applies). But with an AC Loadline of 160 (1.6 mOhms), this default VID at full idle changes to around 1.410v (!), and at full load, since current is higher, is boosted to about 1.519v, where it is capped from the VID limit. (it can go higher if SVID offset is enabled, which allows up to 200mv of extra voltage via serial VID).

Then, VRM loadline drops this at load down to a safe level (assuming you kept loadline calibration at standard). But no, Padinn, they are not the inverse of each other, as they don't function on the same power signal! AC Loadline functions on the PWM frequency of the supply voltage (that is modulated from CPU +12v) and then 'added' to the original base VID, depending on current (but the exact formula would probably require advanced electrical engineering knowledge), and sent to the VRM. VRM loadline however, functions on this VRM target voltage, the *exact* same way that DC loadline functions on that VID AFTER it's sent to the VRM (so DC loadline does not affect your operating voltages or VID target, only power measurements as CPU Package Power is VID * Amps. This formula doesn't require anything but basic math to understand, as that's simply (Vdroop / VID Droop = Amps * resistance (mOhms). With the answer in millivolts, since you're using milliOhms as a factor.

Loadline calibration causes transient response penalties because the VRM's were designed for a 2.1 to 1.6 mOhms loadline. And caps have to charge and discharge repeatedly to give the CPU the current it needs. But when you reduce vdroop, when a load state changes, the CPU may be requesting power that isn't available as current yet (this causes a voltage drop) or the CPU may temporarily not need as much current as is being supplied, before the caps can adjust to the new load (this causes a spike). That's why lower loadline calibration is better.

On auto voltages, that's why a standard LLC is best used with a 1.6 mOhms AC. If you reduce the AC loadline, then you can raise Vcore loadline a little bit.


----------



## alv-OC

TMatzelle60 said:


> Hey All I have a question I am looking into a Top of the line motherboard and always worry about reliability and having a well built motherboard.
> 
> I was looking into getting the Z390 Master by gigabyte to pair with the 9900K
> 
> How is this motherboard reliability and build wise?
> 
> I heard the bios is not that great should I worry about this if not OC at the moment or maybe at all?


Regarding the quality, the design and the price, its the best MoBo for Z390 in my oppinion. If you manage to get a good CPU and you get a top cooling system you will be able to push it very high and stable and VRMs wont pass 52ºC... the only problem (in my case, and so far) came when I tried to overclock the RAM memory over 3200MHz which is not neccesary and doesn't give you much over-performance...


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Falk, thanks for the info in that link on loadline. I'm still digesting it and appreciate the effort. I've been running on adaptive with my ac/DC loadline set to 1 for a while. Would you recommend for overclocking I leave them at default of 160 and go from there? If I'm understanding properly the 160mohm is designed to help minimize the transient spikes?
> 
> 
> 
> No, 160 is not for limiting transients. A lower loadline calibration (higher vdroop) is for limiting transients.
> Raising the AC loadline when on auto vcore is for raising the idle voltage (above the original default VID--the VID you see when AC and DC are both set to 1) and for raising the load voltage even more (by signaling the voltage controller via VID (before DC loadline makes the VID drop via VID droop) that that is the target voltage. It is not terribly wrong to think of the AC loadline of being the inverse of VRM loadline in a way, for the sake of understanding it, but that is not really accurate. The only real similarity between VRM Loadline (Loadline calibration reduces vdroop by reducing the resistance (mOhms) of the VRM loadline) and AC loadline is that they both function on resistance. But the AC loadline isn't for vdroop--it's for input voltages sent to the VRM, so transient response isn't affected.
> For example, with DC loadline left at 1 (0.01 mOhms), and using auto voltages, default VID at 5 ghz may be around 1.215v with an AC loadline of 1 (this is very close to the CPUs preprogrammed base VID for 5 ghz core/4.7 ghz cache as AC and DC are not boosting it, although Thermal Velocity Boost boosting the VID based on temps still applies). But with an AC Loadline of 160 (1.6 mOhms), this default VID at full idle changes to around 1.410v (!), and at full load, since current is higher, is boosted to about 1.519v, where it is capped from the VID limit. (it can go higher if SVID offset is enabled, which allows up to 200mv of extra voltage via serial VID).
> 
> Then, VRM loadline drops this at load down to a safe level (assuming you kept loadline calibration at standard). But no, Padinn, they are not the inverse of each other, as they don't function on the same power signal! AC Loadline functions on the PWM frequency of the supply voltage (that is modulated from CPU +12v) and then 'added' to the original base VID, depending on current (but the exact formula would probably require advanced electrical engineering knowledge), and sent to the VRM. VRM loadline however, functions on this VRM target voltage, the *exact* same way that DC loadline functions on that VID AFTER it's sent to the VRM (so DC loadline does not affect your operating voltages or VID target, only power measurements as CPU Package Power is VID * Amps. This formula doesn't require anything but basic math to understand, as that's simply (Vdroop / VID Droop = Amps * resistance (mOhms). With the answer in millivolts, since you're using milliOhms as a factor.
> 
> Loadline calibration causes transient response penalties because the VRM's were designed for a 2.1 to 1.6 mOhms loadline. And caps have to charge and discharge repeatedly to give the CPU the current it needs. But when you reduce vdroop, when a load state changes, the CPU may be requesting power that isn't available as current yet (this causes a voltage drop) or the CPU may temporarily not need as much current as is being supplied, before the caps can adjust to the new load (this causes a spike). That's why lower loadline calibration is better.
> 
> On auto voltages, that's why a standard LLC is best used with a 1.6 mOhms AC. If you reduce the AC loadline, then you can raise Vcore loadline a little bit.
Click to expand...

Thanks again!


----------



## Unkzilla

Hi everyone

Working on a 9900k system with the z390 Aorus pro board - 

I have it stable at 5.2ghz(no HT) with 1.3v in Bios and LLC set to Ultra (eg maximum setting) - realbench runs are passing @ 15 mins

Noticed something interesting with voltage- basically the opposite to 'normal' vdroop

When I boot into windows and the processor isn't up to much, it sits at around 1.284v 

When realbench is running the chip seems to settle at 1.332v 

Can you see any issues with these voltages/behaviour? I am wondering if it is worth playing with the settings under Internal VR control e.g IA AC/DC load line or just leave it as is 

I guess feeding the chip more voltage only when needed sounds ideal unless there are stability issues but perhaps I'm not aware of some other factors

thanks in advance,


----------



## ocococ

*Intel Performance Maximizer with Z390*

Has anyone tried using Intel's Performance Maximizer app? https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/28772/Intel-Performance-Maximizer It's supposedly an automatic overclocker. My i9-9900k has been humming along at 5ghz so I'm not optimistic it'll do much, but I'd like to play around with it. Unfortunately I'm getting an error saying my BIOS is not compatible. I'm running Z390 F8. Has anyone with this combo tried the tool?


----------



## Padinn

Unkzilla said:


> Hi everyone
> 
> Working on a 9900k system with the z390 Aorus pro board -
> 
> I have it stable at 5.2ghz(no HT) with 1.3v in Bios and LLC set to Ultra (eg maximum setting) - realbench runs are passing @ 15 mins
> 
> Noticed something interesting with voltage- basically the opposite to 'normal' vdroop
> 
> When I boot into windows and the processor isn't up to much, it sits at around 1.284v
> 
> When realbench is running the chip seems to settle at 1.332v
> 
> Can you see any issues with these voltages/behaviour? I am wondering if it is worth playing with the settings under Internal VR control e.g IA AC/DC load line or just leave it as is
> 
> I guess feeding the chip more voltage only when needed sounds ideal unless there are stability issues but perhaps I'm not aware of some other factors
> 
> thanks in advance,


I personally think the risk of degradation of the CPU with ultra LLC is not worth the risks unless you are using extremely high end cooling (like, Liquid Nitrogen). You are likely getting some voltage spikes that software won't pick up that could harm the chip.


----------



## Falkentyne

Unkzilla said:


> Hi everyone
> 
> Working on a 9900k system with the z390 Aorus pro board -
> 
> I have it stable at 5.2ghz(no HT) with 1.3v in Bios and LLC set to Ultra (eg maximum setting) - realbench runs are passing @ 15 mins
> 
> Noticed something interesting with voltage- basically the opposite to 'normal' vdroop
> 
> When I boot into windows and the processor isn't up to much, it sits at around 1.284v
> 
> When realbench is running the chip seems to settle at 1.332v
> 
> Can you see any issues with these voltages/behaviour? I am wondering if it is worth playing with the settings under Internal VR control e.g IA AC/DC load line or just leave it as is
> 
> I guess feeding the chip more voltage only when needed sounds ideal unless there are stability issues but perhaps I'm not aware of some other factors
> 
> thanks in advance,


Internal VR Control (IA AC/IA DC Loadines- default 1.6 mOhms for 8 core cpu's (value=160) only apply to AUTO and DVID (DVID is simply dynamic offset or "Auto + an offset") voltages. The AC loadline (CPU power supply voltage bias) is ignored when on manual voltage (VID will still be affected by IA AC and IA DC loadline however, which affects CPU Package Power (= VID * Amps).
"CPU Internal Load Line" are simply presets for the IA AC and DC values. Any non zero value set in Internal VR Settings will overrule any "Internal Load Line" preset selected. That's because 0=Auto.
SVID Offset disables all other voltage control and allows VID to exceed 1.52v by up to 200mv (SVID offset is only even useful if using auto voltages, and its BEST to REDUCE AC Loadline if SVID offset is enabled, unless you want a very high load voltage (I tested this on accident, SVID Offset + 1.60 mOhms AC loadline gives about 1.325v (!!!) on AVX small FFT Prime95 @ 5 ghz, pulling 212+ amps and causing 105C temps in less than 5 seconds--THIS AMOUNT OF AMPS DRAW WILL DEGRADE YOUR CPU---max safe VR VOUT allowed by Intel at 193 amps (max amps supported) is 1.212-1.240v !!!! AC Loadline from 95 to 115 is recommended for SVID Offset=Enabled on Auto voltage (0.95 mOhms to 1.1 mOhms) for a 5 ghz overclock.

And ** IF AC LOADLINE IS SET TO 1.6 mOhms and Voltage control is set to Auto or SVID Offset, CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration *MUST BE SET TO STANDARD OR NORMAL !!!!**.

Also....

First, you are looking at the "Vcore" shown in Bios (Super I/O chip) or CPU-Z or the ITE 8688E sensor.
this sensor is so inaccurate that it isn't even worth using. It's affected VERY heavily by power plane impedance, and the spikes and dips it shows are bizarre and seem to be related to signal changes rather than actual voltage. 
The ITE 8792E sensor is a lot more stable, but this doesn't show vdroop accurately; with Turbo Loadline Calibration, the vcore at idle and load is within +12mv, regardless of the type of load or amps draw. So it's only good for an estimation.
VR VOUT on the IR 35201 or Intersil VRM controller is the voltage you want to use for your measurements.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...load-voltage-main-1-watch-2.html#post27736104
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326

Please do NOT use Ultra Extreme LLC! This setting is *dangerous* at higher voltage and should be completely AVOIDED. At heavy amps draw, not only will this *REDUCE* stability unless the load VR VOUT is increased *significantly* higher than what would be required VR VOUT with a lower Loadline Calibration, you also have to deal with stuff like THIS: (This undershoot (causes crashes) and overshoot (can cause CPU degradation) is what you would get if you tried using Ultra Extreme LLC with a >150 amp current load.

Elmor compared LLC8 (Ultra Extreme's Gigabyte equivalent) vs LLC6 (Turbo) with safe low voltages and saw that the CPU on-die sense voltage (Asus Maximus XI vcore, or Gigabyte VR VOUT) had to be increased compared to using a higher bios voltage with lower loadline calibration (more vdroop). As you can see, Ultra Extreme LLC combined with any heavy amp load should be avoided.



> I fired up the my Maximus XI Gene + 9900K to see if I could replicate your behavior.
> 
> Core = 4.7G
> Cache = 4.4G
> 
> P95 29.1 FMA3 Small FFTs 15K
> 
> LLC=6, Vcore set = 1.130V, Vcore read = 1.066V: 1 thread failed after 6 minutes
> LLC=6, Vcore set = 1.140V, Vcore read = 1.074V: pass 20m+
> 
> LLC=8, Vcore set = 1.075V, Vcore read = 1.074V: 1 thread failed after 2 minutes
> LLC=8, Vcore set = 1.085V, Vcore read = 1.083V: 1 thread failed after 4 minutes
> LLC=8, Vcore set = 1.095V, Vcore read = 1.092V: 1 thread failed after 2 minutes
> LLC=8, Vcore set = 1.105V, Vcore read = 1.101V: 1 thread failed after 9 minutes
> LLC=8, Vcore set = 1.115V, Vcore read = 1.110V: 1 thread failed after 6 minutes
> LLC=8, Vcore set = 1.125V, Vcore read = 1.119V: 1 thread failed after 2 minutes
> LLC=8, Vcore set = 1.135V, Vcore read = 1.137V: pass 1h+
> 
> I repeated it again with LLC=6, Vcore set = 1.140V, Vcore read = 1.074V and 1 thread failed after 14 minutes. Probably 10-20mV extra would pass for 1h+.


Extreme LLC is "ok" to use for gaming as long as bios voltage is 1.30v or lower, but do NOT stress test with it.
Turbo LLC is fine for bios voltages of 1.35v and lower.


----------



## Padinn

ocococ said:


> Has anyone tried using Intel's Performance Maximizer app? https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/28772/Intel-Performance-Maximizer It's supposedly an automatic overclocker. My i9-9900k has been humming along at 5ghz so I'm not optimistic it'll do much, but I'd like to play around with it. Unfortunately I'm getting an error saying my BIOS is not compatible. I'm running Z390 F8. Has anyone with this combo tried the tool?


I ran it on same setup you have, bios F8 as well. You need to turn set almost everything back to automatic for it to work properly. That is probably why it's saying your bios isn't compatible. 

I actually found it kinda impressive, it clocked my chip at 5GHz (there was an AVX offset). However I ended up taking it off so I can manually tweak it.


----------



## Unkzilla

Padinn said:


> I personally think the risk of degradation of the CPU with ultra LLC is not worth the risks unless you are using extremely high end cooling (like, Liquid Nitrogen). You are likely getting some voltage spikes that software won't pick up that could harm the chip.


Yikes-lucky I asked. thanks a lot, i'll try to get the system stable with Turbo LLC


----------



## Unkzilla

Falkentyne said:


> Internal VR Control (IA AC/IA DC Loadines- default 1.6 mOhms for 8 core cpu's (value=160) only apply to AUTO and DVID (DVID is simply dynamic offset or "Auto + an offset") voltages. The AC loadline (CPU power supply voltage bias) is ignored when on manual voltage (VID will still be affected by IA AC and IA DC loadline however, which affects CPU Package Power (= VID * Amps).
> "CPU Internal Load Line" are simply presets for the IA AC and DC values. Any non zero value set in Internal VR Settings will overrule any "Internal Load Line" preset selected. That's because 0=Auto.
> SVID Offset disables all other voltage control and allows VID to exceed 1.52v by up to 200mv (SVID offset is only even useful if using auto voltages, and its BEST to REDUCE AC Loadline if SVID offset is enabled, unless you want a very high load voltage (I tested this on accident, SVID Offset + 1.60 mOhms AC loadline gives about 1.325v (!!!) on AVX small FFT Prime95 @ 5 ghz, pulling 212+ amps and causing 105C temps in less than 5 seconds--THIS AMOUNT OF AMPS DRAW WILL DEGRADE YOUR CPU---max safe VR VOUT allowed by Intel at 193 amps (max amps supported) is 1.212-1.240v !!!! AC Loadline from 95 to 115 is recommended for SVID Offset=Enabled on Auto voltage (0.95 mOhms to 1.1 mOhms) for a 5 ghz overclock.
> 
> And ** IF AC LOADLINE IS SET TO 1.6 mOhms and Voltage control is set to Auto or SVID Offset, CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration *MUST BE SET TO STANDARD OR NORMAL !!!!**.
> 
> Also....
> 
> First, you are looking at the "Vcore" shown in Bios (Super I/O chip) or CPU-Z or the ITE 8688E sensor.
> this sensor is so inaccurate that it isn't even worth using. It's affected VERY heavily by power plane impedance, and the spikes and dips it shows are bizarre and seem to be related to signal changes rather than actual voltage.
> The ITE 8792E sensor is a lot more stable, but this doesn't show vdroop accurately; with Turbo Loadline Calibration, the vcore at idle and load is within +12mv, regardless of the type of load or amps draw. So it's only good for an estimation.
> VR VOUT on the IR 35201 or Intersil VRM controller is the voltage you want to use for your measurements.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...load-voltage-main-1-watch-2.html#post27736104
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326
> 
> Please do NOT use Ultra Extreme LLC! This setting is *dangerous* at higher voltage and should be completely AVOIDED. At heavy amps draw, not only will this *REDUCE* stability unless the load VR VOUT is increased *significantly* higher than what would be required VR VOUT with a lower Loadline Calibration, you also have to deal with stuff like THIS: (This undershoot (causes crashes) and overshoot (can cause CPU degradation) is what you would get if you tried using Ultra Extreme LLC with a >150 amp current load.
> 
> Elmor compared LLC8 (Ultra Extreme's Gigabyte equivalent) vs LLC6 (Turbo) with safe low voltages and saw that the CPU on-die sense voltage (Asus Maximus XI vcore, or Gigabyte VR VOUT) had to be increased compared to using a higher bios voltage with lower loadline calibration (more vdroop). As you can see, Ultra Extreme LLC combined with any heavy amp load should be avoided.
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme LLC is "ok" to use for gaming as long as bios voltage is 1.30v or lower, but do NOT stress test with it.
> Turbo LLC is fine for bios voltages of 1.35v and lower.


Thanks a lot for the detailed response . I will check out those links for more info but I will be switching to Turbo LLC when I get home that's for sure! Will be interesting to see if the system passes benches with the same voltage (e.g 1.3v) with Turbo instead of Extreme

Hopefully haven't done any damage but i've probably done a max of 1hr realbench run's with cpu fan's on max-noctua NH d15. max temps I have seen is 73deg


----------



## alv-OC

Falkentyne said:


> Internal VR Control (IA AC/IA DC Loadines- default 1.6 mOhms for 8 core cpu's (value=160) only apply to AUTO and DVID (DVID is simply dynamic offset or "Auto + an offset") voltages. The AC loadline (CPU power supply voltage bias) is ignored when on manual voltage (VID will still be affected by IA AC and IA DC loadline however, which affects CPU Package Power (= VID * Amps).
> "CPU Internal Load Line" are simply presets for the IA AC and DC values. Any non zero value set in Internal VR Settings will overrule any "Internal Load Line" preset selected. That's because 0=Auto.
> SVID Offset disables all other voltage control and allows VID to exceed 1.52v by up to 200mv (SVID offset is only even useful if using auto voltages, and its BEST to REDUCE AC Loadline if SVID offset is enabled, unless you want a very high load voltage (I tested this on accident, SVID Offset + 1.60 mOhms AC loadline gives about 1.325v (!!!) on AVX small FFT Prime95 @ 5 ghz, pulling 212+ amps and causing 105C temps in less than 5 seconds--THIS AMOUNT OF AMPS DRAW WILL DEGRADE YOUR CPU---max safe VR VOUT allowed by Intel at 193 amps (max amps supported) is 1.212-1.240v !!!! AC Loadline from 95 to 115 is recommended for SVID Offset=Enabled on Auto voltage (0.95 mOhms to 1.1 mOhms) for a 5 ghz overclock.
> 
> And ** IF AC LOADLINE IS SET TO 1.6 mOhms and Voltage control is set to Auto or SVID Offset, CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration *MUST BE SET TO STANDARD OR NORMAL !!!!**.
> 
> Also....
> 
> First, you are looking at the "Vcore" shown in Bios (Super I/O chip) or CPU-Z or the ITE 8688E sensor.
> this sensor is so inaccurate that it isn't even worth using. It's affected VERY heavily by power plane impedance, and the spikes and dips it shows are bizarre and seem to be related to signal changes rather than actual voltage.
> The ITE 8792E sensor is a lot more stable, but this doesn't show vdroop accurately; with Turbo Loadline Calibration, the vcore at idle and load is within +12mv, regardless of the type of load or amps draw. So it's only good for an estimation.
> VR VOUT on the IR 35201 or Intersil VRM controller is the voltage you want to use for your measurements.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...load-voltage-main-1-watch-2.html#post27736104
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326
> 
> Please do NOT use Ultra Extreme LLC! This setting is *dangerous* at higher voltage and should be completely AVOIDED. At heavy amps draw, not only will this *REDUCE* stability unless the load VR VOUT is increased *significantly* higher than what would be required VR VOUT with a lower Loadline Calibration, you also have to deal with stuff like THIS: (This undershoot (causes crashes) and overshoot (can cause CPU degradation) is what you would get if you tried using Ultra Extreme LLC with a >150 amp current load.
> 
> Elmor compared LLC8 (Ultra Extreme's Gigabyte equivalent) vs LLC6 (Turbo) with safe low voltages and saw that the CPU on-die sense voltage (Asus Maximus XI vcore, or Gigabyte VR VOUT) had to be increased compared to using a higher bios voltage with lower loadline calibration (more vdroop). As you can see, Ultra Extreme LLC combined with any heavy amp load should be avoided.
> 
> 
> Extreme LLC is "ok" to use for gaming as long as bios voltage is 1.30v or lower, but do NOT stress test with it.
> Turbo LLC is fine for bios voltages of 1.35v and lower.


Wow, never thought to use Extrme LLC for a 24/ OC. Honestly, 'Turbo LCC' along with, 'Extrme Phase control' & '500KHz PWM switching Rate' is more than enough, in my case for 5.2GHz... Vcore @1.350v. 

Back then at the first days when I was testing the system on 5.1GHz and i tryed to set Vcore as low as possible (2.900v) and compensate it with extra LLC step, (Extreme LLC) and it was both causing inestability and a clear overvolting problem at load spikes. Never used again. As said, Turbo us just more tha enough.


----------



## KedarWolf

There is a new thermal paste, Thermalright TFX which is nonconductive and has an amazing 14.3 W/m.k conductivity. My current Mastermaker Nano has 11 W/m.k conductivity.

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32955394312.html


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> There is a new thermal paste, Thermalright TFX which is nonconductive and has an amazing 14.3 W/m.k conductivity. My current Mastermaker Nano has 11 W/m.k conductivity.
> 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32955394312.html


You know how I feel about w/mk ratings.
Any reviews of this compared to Kryonaut?


----------



## TMatzelle60

Thanks for the help trying to choose my biggest concern is I read the bad reviews online and worry about getting a DOA and other problems and get nervous about my build


----------



## Padinn

ocococ said:


> Has anyone tried using Intel's Performance Maximizer app? https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/28772/Intel-Performance-Maximizer It's supposedly an automatic overclocker. My i9-9900k has been humming along at 5ghz so I'm not optimistic it'll do much, but I'd like to play around with it. Unfortunately I'm getting an error saying my BIOS is not compatible. I'm running Z390 F8. Has anyone with this combo tried the tool?


I ran on the same setup, it came up with a 5.0Ghz OC at around 1.37v load (had to set most of my bios settings to automatic, except I was able to leave XMP on).


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> You know how I feel about w/mk ratings.
> Any reviews of this compared to Kryonaut?


Falk,
What voltages do you get on VRVOut your 9900k at a 5.0 Ghz OC to be stable? (I'm looking to do 5.0 with a 4.3ghz ring ratio). Found an old post of yours on reddit, is this info still accurate?



> So what you need to do is to get the original default VID for the CPU that is not boosted by the IA AC DC loadline value. To do that, go into your Bios, to CPU VR settings, and set IA AC Loadline to "1" and IA DC Loadline to "1". On Asus boards, this may be 0.01, but set it to the lowest non-zero value.
> 
> then set a manual voltage you know is stable. Make sure you set a decent amount of LLC or Loadline Calibration to stop vdroop.
> 
> Then in windows, put a heavy load on the CPU (Cinebench, prime95 without AVX, etc) and check the highest VID shown at full load. This should be the starting vcore your CPU needs at each turbo multiplier up to 5 ghz. this "VID" will decrease every 100 mhz.


If so, following these directions my VID shows 1.27v at 5.0GHz All Core, IA AC/DC set to 1, and under load. So I assume I should aim for that voltage under load, which for me means Turbo LLC and 1.31v in BIOS (gives me a VR VOut reading of 1.26v under load).


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Falk,
> What voltages do you get on VRVOut your 9900k at a 5.0 Ghz OC to be stable? (I'm looking to do 5.0 with a 4.3ghz ring ratio). Found an old post of yours on reddit, is this info still accurate?
> 
> 
> 
> If so, following these directions my VID shows 1.27v at 5.0GHz All Core, IA AC/DC set to 1, and under load. So I assume I should aim for that voltage under load, which for me means Turbo LLC and 1.31v in BIOS (gives me a VR VOut reading of 1.26v under load).


That would actually not be that inaccurate to be honest.
For 5 ghz, I need at least 1.240v load on VR VOUT to be *heavy amps (power virus)* AVX stable (if I use the lowest amount of loadline calibration). For lower loads about 1.20v is fine (e.g. on LLC Turbo).


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> That would actually not be that inaccurate to be honest.
> For 5 ghz, I need at least 1.240v load on VR VOUT to be *heavy amps (power virus)* AVX stable (if I use the lowest amount of loadline calibration). For lower loads about 1.20v is fine (e.g. on LLC Turbo).


So now the tricky part is trying to end up at 1.27v after LLC is applied. I notice periodic L0 Cache errors under x264 stress test when using turbo llc and voltages of 1.32-1.33v. If I drop to high, I can increase voltage to 1.35v or so, which droops to 1.25..but I need to go to 1.37 because I get errors there. 

I seem pretty stable at turbo llc with 1.34v, which leads to a 1.285v VROUT, but temperatures in the upper 98-100c range, which is too toasty for my tastes.

If I can find a way to get it at 5.0ghz stable, with temperatures in the low 90s, I will keep it. Any ideas on how I might be able to do that? I assume that 1.37v with high llc has some costs (I haven't tested it).


----------



## Padinn

Well, a quick update. If I run LLC high with a 1.36v manual voltage, under load it droops to around 1.26v and seems to have eased the cache errors (definitely improved, as I am 7 loops in with none, but hasn't been long enough to confirm stability). Temperatures hovering at 88-90c which I am fine with. 5.0Ghz all core. This seems like a good place, is there a downside to having the 1.36v manual voltage? My plan once I hone this in is to switch to offset voltage and see if I can hone in on this point for stability, obviously no guarantees there.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Well, a quick update. If I run LLC high with a 1.36v manual voltage, under load it droops to around 1.26v and seems to have eased the cache errors (definitely improved, as I am 7 loops in with none, but hasn't been long enough to confirm stability). Temperatures hovering at 88-90c which I am fine with. 5.0Ghz all core. This seems like a good place, is there a downside to having the 1.36v manual voltage? My plan once I hone this in is to switch to offset voltage and see if I can hone in on this point for stability, obviously no guarantees there.


The more vdroop you have, the higher the voltage can go safely. 1.40v is safe with LLC=High (as safe as 1.35v is with LLC Turbo, AND you have less to worry about with transient spikes and dips ruining your day).
What's dangerous is using little to no vdroop and high voltages. For example, 1.30v with Ultra Extreme loadline calibration and then putting a heavy load on the processor (> 150 amps) is a complete no-no unless you're at sub ambient cooling.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> The more vdroop you have, the higher the voltage can go safely. 1.40v is safe with LLC=High (as safe as 1.35v is with LLC Turbo, AND you have less to worry about with transient spikes and dips ruining your day).
> What's dangerous is using little to no vdroop and high voltages. For example, 1.30v with Ultra Extreme loadline calibration and then putting a heavy load on the processor (> 150 amps) is a complete no-no unless you're at sub ambient cooling.


Great, then I think I am in great shape. 5.0 Ghz, finally! Passed 12 runs of the x264 custom blend test, going to play some games and see how system does under a real load. My idle voltage is around 1.34v so I'm well under.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Great, then I think I am in great shape. 5.0 Ghz, finally! Passed 12 runs of the x264 custom blend test, going to play some games and see how system does under a real load. My idle voltage is around 1.34v so I'm well under.


Generally the more vdroop you have, the lower your 'absolute' VR VOUT has to be for heavy load stability (talking about >150 amps here), because with less vdroop, you get bigger transient "dips" (and spikes!) which can cause you to be unstable. Onboard sensors can't show these dips as they happen in microseconds (us) time.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Generally the more vdroop you have, the lower your 'absolute' VR VOUT has to be for heavy load stability (talking about >150 amps here), because with less vdroop, you get bigger transient "dips" (and spikes!) which can cause you to be unstable. Onboard sensors can't show these dips as they happen in microseconds (us) time.


Played BF:V all night while streaming and no issues, which is a good sign (though I was using my RTX Encoder, that game still loads CPU pretty good). Going to see if I can get it to work with offset tomorrow, should be possible.


----------



## Padinn

Went back and used KedarWolfs settings (adjusting for my ram and lower cache ratio) and appear stable with a +.08v offset. Might be able to lower a bit further, IR AC/DC loadlines are set to 1, llc high.


----------



## demonknight9

I have read 291 pages on this thread, (I will continue reading it until the last post) although I have grasped the concept of overclocking and keeping temperatures in check I still haven't found a full proof method that works every time.
Falkentyne helped me a lot in a thread that I created and although I have tried quite a few methods, the temps are still too high for my liking.

I started by just switching three settings. XMP 1, MCE disabled and CPU AC/DC Internal Load Line to Power savings. The result is amazing temps and remarkable stability while running Aida64 stability test and monitoring with HWInfo. Great Benchmark score of 5100 in Cinebench R20.
I thought I hit the jackpot! That was, until I loaded a game. Complete freeze. No blue screen and no reboot, the game just freezes and only the reset button will work.

I then tried a different method, Vcore=normal, DVID Offset +0.070 and IA AC LLC=1 IA DC LLC=1. MCE Disabled and XMP 1. Again, perfect in terms of benchmarks and temps and super stable. Load a game and freezes after a few minutes.
I was about to give up as I tried to raise the DVID Offset to +0.100 but the temps are just too high. Rather leave everything as it was out of the box apart from MCE disabled and XMP 1.

As you are probably aware, this overclocking game is an addiction... I decided to read all posts on this thread and gain more knowledge, it helped.

My settings now are, XMP 1, MCE=disabled, Vcore=normal, No DVID offset, IA AC and IA DC Loadlines are both at 50 each. Temps reach 85c on load which I think it's still too hot. Idle temps are at 38c which is ok for me. Best of all no freezing in games so far.
I will have to test a bit more tonight.

What do I have to do to lower the load temps? Should I lower IA AC to 40 or even 30?

Any tips would be welcome and thanks to everyone that contributed to this thread, its a valuable source of information


----------



## Falkentyne

demonknight9 said:


> I have read 291 pages on this thread, (I will continue reading it until the last post) although I have grasped the concept of overclocking and keeping temperatures in check I still haven't found a full proof method that works every time.
> Falkentyne helped me a lot in a thread that I created and although I have tried quite a few methods, the temps are still too high for my liking.
> 
> I started by just switching three settings. XMP 1, MCE disabled and CPU AC/DC Internal Load Line to Power savings. The result is amazing temps and remarkable stability while running Aida64 stability test and monitoring with HWInfo. Great Benchmark score of 5100 in Cinebench R20.
> I thought I hit the jackpot! That was, until I loaded a game. Complete freeze. No blue screen and no reboot, the game just freezes and only the reset button will work.
> 
> I then tried a different method, Vcore=normal, DVID Offset +0.070 and IA AC LLC=1 IA DC LLC=1. MCE Disabled and XMP 1. Again, perfect in terms of benchmarks and temps and super stable. Load a game and freezes after a few minutes.
> I was about to give up as I tried to raise the DVID Offset to +0.100 but the temps are just too high. Rather leave everything as it was out of the box apart from MCE disabled and XMP 1.
> 
> As you are probably aware, this overclocking game is an addiction... I decided to read all posts on this thread and gain more knowledge, it helped.
> 
> My settings now are, XMP 1, MCE=disabled, Vcore=normal, No DVID offset, IA AC and IA DC Loadlines are both at 50 each. Temps reach 85c on load which I think it's still too hot. Idle temps are at 38c which is ok for me. Best of all no freezing in games so far.
> I will have to test a bit more tonight.
> 
> What do I have to do to lower the load temps? Should I lower IA AC to 40 or even 30?
> 
> Any tips would be welcome and thanks to everyone that contributed to this thread, its a valuable source of information


What's your CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration at?
If you're using auto voltages or dynamic offset, the higher the AC loadline value is, the lower the loadline calibration should be.
160 (1.6 mOhms) for ACLL should set LLC to Standard/Normal, and 130 (1.3 mOhms) works well on LLC Low.


----------



## demonknight9

Falkentyne said:


> What's your CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration at?
> If you're using auto voltages or dynamic offset, the higher the AC loadline value is, the lower the loadline calibration should be.
> 160 (1.6 mOhms) for ACLL should set LLC to Standard/Normal, and 130 (1.3 mOhms) works well on LLC Low.


Vcore LLC only has standard or normal. I have left it on auto. Just played for another 1 hr and temps are holding up. Best of all no freezes! Playing at 1440p60 and recording at 1440p60 at the same time and temps fluctuate between 68 and 78c.

Should I select Vcore LLC to either standard or normal? By what a read it's all the same isn't it? 1.6 m0hms? Auto is 1.6 m0hms as well so I left it on auto.

Just wondered if I should lower the IA AC Loadline to something like 40 or 30 to reduce turbo temps? Or maybe lower both IA AC and IA DC. I have no DVID offset.


----------



## Padinn

Couple quick questions.

1) Can someone explain how SVID Offset works? I was reading a post and it looks like it adds a bit of voltage only while underload. This might help me since I did get one BSOD today on my offset overclock while computer was under mild load (I raised my offset now to .12v). 

2.) How do you check voltage accurately when idle with offset voltage overclocking? I believe VRVOut is only helpful underload, so would I use the 8792E sensor to check idle voltages?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Couple quick questions.
> 
> 1) Can someone explain how SVID Offset works? I was reading a post and it looks like it adds a bit of voltage only while underload. This might help me since I did get one BSOD today on my offset overclock while computer was under mild load (I raised my offset now to .12v).
> 
> 2.) How do you check voltage accurately when idle with offset voltage overclocking? I believe VRVOut is only helpful underload, so would I use the 8792E sensor to check idle voltages?


SVID Offset allows the VID input voltage to exceed 1.52v (before DC Loadline takes effect). Enabling SVID offset 'locks' the last set vcore mode and uses whatever was set, and doesn't allow voltage changes.
Then the AC Loadline can theoretically push the VID target to the VRM higher than 1.52v (DC Loadline must be at 0.01 mOhms to see what AC Loadline is sending to the VRM (before loadline calibration's vdroop sends the VCC_Sense to the CPU as VR VOUT).

I don't think this is the same thing as Asus' Svid behavior=worst case scenario and I don't have an asus board. All I heard is that SVID Behavior=best case scenario sets IA AC and IA DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms when on auto vcore, which forces you to use a higher level of loadline calibration (obviously), like Turbo, etc, or your CPU would not even boot windows or if it did it would insta BSOD if LLC were left at intel defaults of 1.6 mOhms.
I think Asus SVID behavior=worst case sets the IA AC And DC loadlines to 1.6 mOhms (or 2.1).

In my tests with ACLL=160, DCLL=160 and VCore loadline calibration=Standard--1.6 mOhms (this matches the DC Loadline so VR VOUT after vdroop will match VID after vid droop)
SVID Offset disabled= prime95 small FFT 15K AVX = 184.750 amps= 1.238v VR VOUT. Core Temps 95C in 5 minutes with normal ambients.

When I tested SVID Offset enabled and AC/DC 160 and LLC=Standard:
Prime95 small FFT 15K AVX= 212 Amps, 1.330v VR VOUT ((!!)) Core temps 105C in FIVE SECONDS. This type of amps draw would cause guaranteed CPU degradation as max amps supported by Intel is 193 amps (and 1.212v-1.230v VR VOUT at this amps).

With DC Loadline set to 0.01 mOhms, VID was estimated to be about 1.670v (you can calculate this: 1670- ( 1.6 * 212) = 1330mv = 1.330v load).
You can actually test this yourself if you are on MANUAL VOLTAGE. Due to a bug, SVID offset keeps the last set voltage, so if you enabled it on manual, instead of setting it to auto, it would keep your last manual settings, so the AC loadline would do nothing to your cpu voltage. Enable SVID offset and set DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms (AC to 1.6 mOhms or 160), then boot to windows, run a stress test and watch the VID skyrocket at full load. You will see a VID of >1.55v, while VR VOUT would be the same as usual. Then disable it.

A much better realistic use for SVID Offset is to enable SVID offset on auto voltages and then set LLC to Standard and set AC Loadline to 90 to 120 depending on your CPU. Keep DC Loadline at 160. This gives you lower idle voltages (than Auto voltage+SVID disabled+ACLL=160) and keeps load voltages equal to or a bit higher than the Auto+AC 160+SVID disabled.

To use SVID offset, do not make too many changes at once or you may crash the BIOS. For example: one way to instantly crash the bios (it fixes itself after you power cycle though) is to go from 4.7 ghz/4.4 cache on manual voltage and average loadline calibration, to "Auto" vcore and 5 ghz/4.7 ghz and LLC=standard all at once. You will usually fail to POST after this. To avoid problems like this, either change the CPU ratio first and save, or set vcore to auto and LLC to standard, then save.

First, enable auto voltages, set AC/DC to 1.6 mOhms and set Loadline Calibration to Standard or Normal then save and restart (NEVER use auto voltages with anything higher than low LLC, if AC is at 1.6 mOhms!)

Then save that as a profile, then enable SVID offset and reduce AC Loadline down to 90 and watch your idle voltage drop. Then stress test. If you're unstable, raise AC LL by 5 and stress again (keep DCLL at 160).

BTW here's a picture of SVID Offset enabled at 5.0/4.7 ghz, with auto voltages and DC Loadline=0.01 mOhms and ACLL=1.6 mOhms and an AVX disabled stress test (this stops the VID from dropping from the AC Loadline original VID target). Look at that VR VOUT!!.


----------



## Falkentyne

demonknight9 said:


> Vcore LLC only has standard or normal. I have left it on auto. Just played for another 1 hr and temps are holding up. Best of all no freezes! Playing at 1440p60 and recording at 1440p60 at the same time and temps fluctuate between 68 and 78c.
> 
> Should I select Vcore LLC to either standard or normal? By what a read it's all the same isn't it? 1.6 m0hms? Auto is 1.6 m0hms as well so I left it on auto.
> 
> Just wondered if I should lower the IA AC Loadline to something like 40 or 30 to reduce turbo temps? Or maybe lower both IA AC and IA DC. I have no DVID offset.


What motherboard do you have? And what bios?
Gigabyte locked the LLC settings when you are on Dynamic Offset (DVID) + Normal Vcore ?
You should have had all the LLC settings available just like before...
you only have Low, medium, high, turbo, Extreme, UE on manual voltage?


----------



## demonknight9

Falkentyne said:


> What motherboard do you have? And what bios?
> Gigabyte locked the LLC settings when you are on Dynamic Offset (DVID) + Normal Vcore ?
> You should have had all the LLC settings available just like before...
> you only have Low, medium, high, turbo, Extreme, UE on manual voltage?


I never had LLC settings other than those two. I have the z390 ud. I have those settings in CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline. This motherboard is not like yours but still has a 10+2. Some settings are locked and some on that menu dont even appear like the PWM settings.
Is there a risk by leaving LLC on Auto? bios is F7


----------



## ChaosComplete

Despite the bios update indicating 32GB UDIMM modules are supported on the Aorus Xtreme, for a maximum 128GB memory, the QVL was never updated. I reached out to Gigabyte support a few days ago, but haven’t heard back yet. The closest I could find that may work is Samsung M378A4G43MB1-CTD 2666 does anyone know if this or any other module is confirmed to work? More generally, any insight into why the update happened months ago with no mention of an actual product (first or third party) to accommodate this feature?


----------



## EarlZ

I just added another pair of 8GB 3200Mhz on my system and just using XMP. May I ask for the recommended VCCIO and VCCSA ?


----------



## Padinn

Edit, well my tablet destroyed this post lol.

My question was: My goal is to boost idle voltage a little while keeping load the same. What is the best way to do this? I assume a small increase to offset with a decrease in LLC.


----------



## Driller au

EarlZ said:


> I just added another pair of 8GB 3200Mhz on my system and just using XMP. May I ask for the recommended VCCIO and VCCSA ?


on my master i run both +0.050 over default that's 32 gb 3200 overclocked to 3600


----------



## enkur

Hi All,
I recently built a new system with i9-9900K and Aorus Master and just cant seem to get a stable overclock at 5GHz

Here are my settings
CPU voltage: 1.34v (I really dont want to go higher than 1.35v)
Multiplier : 50x.
Uncore : 47x
AVX offset: Auto
All cpu states are disabled including EIST and MCE etc.
Loadline Calibration= Turbo.
VR settings (Internal VR control):
IA AC Loadline->1
IA DC loadline ->1.
VR Current Limit->1023
Vt-d disabled
CPU PWM switch rate : 500KHz
PWM Phase Control: extreme perf

Full custom water cooled with EK Velocity waterblock and Black Ice Nemesis 360GTS Radiator (no GPU in the loop yet)

I can boot in to windows just fine but just cant see to get stable in Prime95 with 1344K.

Any ideas what I can do to make it more stable... I mostly game so that is a priority for me.
I have attached screenshot of my last run before prime95 crashes after about 5 min everytime.

thanks,


----------



## lucasfrance

enkur said:


> Hi All,
> I recently built a new system with i9-9900K and Aorus Master and just cant seem to get a stable overclock at 5GHz
> 
> Here are my settings
> CPU voltage: 1.34v (I really dont want to go higher than 1.35v)
> Multiplier : 50x.
> Uncore : 47x
> AVX offset: Auto
> All cpu states are disabled including EIST and MCE etc.
> Loadline Calibration= Turbo.
> VR settings (Internal VR control):
> IA AC Loadline->1
> IA DC loadline ->1.
> VR Current Limit->1023
> Vt-d disabled
> CPU PWM switch rate : 500KHz
> PWM Phase Control: extreme perf
> 
> Full custom water cooled with EK Velocity waterblock and Black Ice Nemesis 360GTS Radiator (no GPU in the loop yet)
> 
> I can boot in to windows just fine but just cant see to get stable in Prime95 with 1344K.
> 
> Any ideas what I can do to make it more stable... I mostly game so that is a priority for me.
> I have attached screenshot of my last run before prime95 crashes after about 5 min everytime.
> 
> thanks,


Give a try keeping uncore at 43....


----------



## Driller au

enkur said:


> Hi All,
> I recently built a new system with i9-9900K and Aorus Master and just cant seem to get a stable overclock at 5GHz
> 
> Here are my settings
> CPU voltage: 1.34v (I really dont want to go higher than 1.35v)
> Multiplier : 50x.
> Uncore : 47x
> AVX offset: Auto
> All cpu states are disabled including EIST and MCE etc.
> Loadline Calibration= Turbo.
> VR settings (Internal VR control):
> IA AC Loadline->1
> IA DC loadline ->1.
> VR Current Limit->1023
> Vt-d disabled
> CPU PWM switch rate : 500KHz
> PWM Phase Control: extreme perf
> 
> Full custom water cooled with EK Velocity waterblock and Black Ice Nemesis 360GTS Radiator (no GPU in the loop yet)
> 
> I can boot in to windows just fine but just cant see to get stable in Prime95 with 1344K.
> 
> Any ideas what I can do to make it more stable... I mostly game so that is a priority for me.
> I have attached screenshot of my last run before prime95 crashes after about 5 min everytime.
> 
> thanks,


If your mostly gaming try realbench 2.56 for stress test and see how it goes if i pass that i never crash in game


----------



## enkur

lucasfrance said:


> Give a try keeping uncore at 43....


I followed your suggestion and the next one to use Realbench and it seems to have worked.
I dropped the voltage back down to 1.3 and uncore to 43 ran three tests of Realbench at 15 min, 20 min and 1 hour. Totally stable now. The temps were much higher in this bench than in prime95. So whats the deal here why prime95 would fail with lower temps and realbench be more stable with higher.


----------



## Falkentyne

enkur said:


> I followed your suggestion and the next one to use Realbench and it seems to have worked.
> I dropped the voltage back down to 1.3 and uncore to 43 ran three tests of Realbench at 15 min, 20 min and 1 hour. Totally stable now. The temps were much higher in this bench than in prime95. So whats the deal here why prime95 would fail with lower temps and realbench be more stable with higher.


You used 1344K.
This hits main memory and the hyperthreaded threads are limited by memory channels, so power draw drops off sharply once you pass 128K or so.
Try small FFT (don't use obsolete versions of prime, use the newest build which also allows enabling or disabling avx options much simpler--29.8 build 3) then you'll see much heavier load.


----------



## pininfarina575

enkur said:


> Hi All,
> I recently built a new system with i9-9900K and Aorus Master and just cant seem to get a stable overclock at 5GHz
> 
> Here are my settings
> CPU voltage: 1.34v (I really dont want to go higher than 1.35v)
> Multiplier : 50x.
> Uncore : 47x
> AVX offset: Auto
> All cpu states are disabled including EIST and MCE etc.
> Loadline Calibration= Turbo.
> VR settings (Internal VR control):
> IA AC Loadline->1
> IA DC loadline ->1.
> VR Current Limit->1023
> Vt-d disabled
> CPU PWM switch rate : 500KHz
> PWM Phase Control: extreme perf
> 
> Full custom water cooled with EK Velocity waterblock and Black Ice Nemesis 360GTS Radiator (no GPU in the loop yet)
> 
> I can boot in to windows just fine but just cant see to get stable in Prime95 with 1344K.
> 
> Any ideas what I can do to make it more stable... I mostly game so that is a priority for me.
> I have attached screenshot of my last run before prime95 crashes after about 5 min everytime.
> 
> thanks,


I would suggest lowering uncore and trying, as well. 

I'm running my 9900k on Aorus Master at 5.1Ghz, 1.310v with Turbo LLC (actual vcore runs around 1.308~1.320v according to HWInfo), no AVX offset, and it's rock solid with uncore of 46 and haven't crashed once in a couple of months of use or during any stress/stability tests, but not stable at all on uncore 47x. It was the same when I was running 5.0Ghz, 1.290v with High LLC (actual vcore runs around 1.245~1.285v according to HWInfo), no AVX offset, and uncore of 46 was the max stable uncore multiplier. The moment I try 47x, it was unstable.


----------



## lucasfrance

enkur said:


> I followed your suggestion and the next one to use Realbench and it seems to have worked.
> I dropped the voltage back down to 1.3 and uncore to 43 ran three tests of Realbench at 15 min, 20 min and 1 hour. Totally stable now. The temps were much higher in this bench than in prime95. So whats the deal here why prime95 would fail with lower temps and realbench be more stable with higher.


Glad my suggestion for uncore 43 worked. Anyway there is almost no perf improvement increasing it so this is not an issue.


----------



## ntuason

Is there a noticeable difference between uncore 43 vs 47 aside from benchmarks? Running 47 right now and it requires A LOT more voltage then 43, or I’m probably doing something wrong LOL!


----------



## Sheyster

ntuason said:


> Is there a noticeable difference between uncore 43 vs 47 aside from benchmarks? Running 47 right now and it requires A LOT more voltage then 43, or I’m probably doing something wrong LOL!


I would try 45 first if you're at 5 GHz all-core, but not a huge difference overall.


----------



## ntuason

Sheyster said:


> I would try 45 first if you're at 5 GHz all-core, but not a huge difference overall.


Thanks I’ll give that a try. Do you know if uncore voltage is tied to cpu vcore? If I drop uncore to 45 or even 43 I should be able to drop cpu vcore right? 

I’m running uncore 47 and 1.35v on cpu vcore which is kind of height for me. I’m jealous of your 9900k X’D


----------



## Sheyster

ntuason said:


> Thanks I’ll give that a try. Do you know if uncore voltage is tied to cpu vcore? If I drop uncore to 45 or even 43 I should be able to drop cpu vcore right?
> 
> I’m running uncore 47 and 1.35v on cpu vcore which is kind of height for me. I’m jealous of your 9900k X’D


You can probably lower both vcore and VCCSA (aka system agent voltage). Every CPU is different though so you'll have to experiment with it.

I was very glad to get a decent 9900K in the lottery! I was hoping to air cool it at 5 GHz all-core and luckily I was successfully able to do that.


----------



## EarlZ

Driller au said:


> on my master i run both +0.050 over default that's 32 gb 3200 overclocked to 3600


Thanks for this, seems to be stable for the last few days.


----------



## KedarWolf

BIOS settings for 5.1GHz CPU, 4.7GHz cache, 4200MHz memory. You can probably go lower on the Dynamic VCore .175 Offset, but with my second Master board, I get 1.333v VRVout while running 1344FFTs in Prime95 which I need for no errors. My first board, I'd get that at .155 Offset.

This is Prime95 and GSAT for memory stable, plus countless hours of gaming with zero game crashes or blue screens. 



Spoiler


----------



## The Pook

is anyone successfully running 4x8 @ >DDR4-4000 on the Gigabyte Aorus Master? I know @KedarWolf is, but wanna make sure he didn't just win the lottery with a cherry board  

upgraded from 8x2 to 8x4 and my Taichi isn't happy anymore with my RAM, went from being able to run tight timings at 4133 to not being stable above 3600 CL18. thinking about grabbing an Aorus Master and selling my Taichi.


----------



## KedarWolf

The Pook said:


> is anyone successfully running 4x8 @ >DDR4-4000 on the Gigabyte Aorus Master? I know @KedarWolf is, but wanna make sure he didn't just win the lottery with a cherry board
> 
> upgraded from 8x2 to 8x4 and my Taichi isn't happy anymore with my RAM, went from being able to run tight timings at 4133 to not being stable above 3600 CL18. thinking about grabbing an Aorus Master and selling my Taichi.


This is my second Master board. First would do 4133MHz and this second board with a bit more tweaking does 4200MHz. But it depends more on your CPU IMC then your board, but Masters being T-Topology do good with 4x8GB.


----------



## Moparman

The Pook said:


> is anyone successfully running 4x8 @ >DDR4-4000 on the Gigabyte Aorus Master? I know @*KedarWolf* is, but wanna make sure he didn't just win the lottery with a cherry board
> 
> upgraded from 8x2 to 8x4 and my Taichi isn't happy anymore with my RAM, went from being able to run tight timings at 4133 to not being stable above 3600 CL18. thinking about grabbing an Aorus Master and selling my Taichi.



I was running 4x8GB Team Dark pro [email protected] 4000 no problem on my Master and 9600k.


----------



## The Pook

Looks like the Aorus Master is gonna be the board I switch to if I decide to, thanks guys!

Feel silly swapping boards just for a ~500mhz higher RAM OC though  

Got some thinking to do


----------



## Sheyster

The Pook said:


> Looks like the Aorus Master is gonna be the board I switch to if I decide to, thanks guys!
> 
> Feel silly swapping boards just for a ~500mhz higher RAM OC though
> 
> Got some thinking to do


If you're running at 3600 now and primarily gaming I would not bother upgrading the mobo. JMHO.


----------



## Falkentyne

Sheyster said:


> If you're running at 3600 now and primarily gaming I would not bother upgrading the mobo. JMHO.


Depends on how much disposable income he has. Some people here have so much money they can afford to do that.


----------



## asdkj1740

Falkentyne said:


> Depends on how much disposable income he has. Some people here have so much money they can afford to do that.


then he should go for aorus xtreme, for 8 layers pcb to achieve higher frequency.


----------



## asdkj1740

i cant get 4133 c17-18-18-38-2 for 8g*2 b die sticks stable on aorus master.
sa/io 1.35v, ddr4 1.5v already.
can run aida64 but blue screen eventually.
any chance to get it stable on such timings and frequency for 24/7?


----------



## The Pook

asdkj1740 said:


> i cant get 4133 c17-18-18-38-2 for 8g*2 b die sticks stable on aorus master.
> sa/io 1.35v, ddr4 1.5v already.
> can run aida64 but blue screen eventually.
> any chance to get it stable on such timings and frequency for 24/7?



probably would get more help in the DDR4 thread on OCN. 

do you know your kit can even hit CL17 4133? some B-Die is worse than others. are your subs/tertiaries manual or they on auto? 

here's my 24/7 stable 8x2 4133 16-18-18-34 if you wanna try to copy. 1.5v vDIMM, 1.23 VCCIO+SA.


----------



## robertr1

The Pook said:


> probably would get more help in the DDR4 thread on OCN.
> 
> do you know your kit can even hit CL17 4133? some B-Die is worse than others. are your subs/tertiaries manual or they on auto?
> 
> here's my 24/7 stable 8x2 4133 16-18-18-34 if you wanna try to copy. 1.5v vDIMM, 1.23 VCCIO+SA.



That's envious! With my Auros pro wasn't such a POS. 

Btw why such a low uncore ratio?


----------



## The Pook

robertr1 said:


> That's envious! With my Auros pro wasn't such a POS.
> 
> Btw why such a low uncore ratio?



CPU was stock, no sense having the CPU OC'd when dialing in RAM


----------



## asdkj1740

The Pook said:


> probably would get more help in the DDR4 thread on OCN.
> 
> do you know your kit can even hit CL17 4133? some B-Die is worse than others. are your subs/tertiaries manual or they on auto?
> 
> here's my 24/7 stable 8x2 4133 16-18-18-34 if you wanna try to copy. 1.5v vDIMM, 1.23 VCCIO+SA.


thank you.
forgot to mention mine 8g*2 kit is galax hof 3600c17 8g*2 (first gen with no led). 8700k as well.
i set 17-18-18-38-2 manually as it is the rated xmp settings, the rest are all auto.
i shall test this out on weekend, thanks.!


----------



## Transam617

*Double check delid 8700K Aorus Pro overclock*

Hi there,

I recently delidded my 8700K and managed to push it to 5.2/5.0 avx but I have some worry about my voltages.

I am setting 1.48v in bios (fixed) with high LLC and -2 avx offset. The odd thing is in hwinfo64, in windows I am seeing a max of 1.42v idle with IBT or P95 load dropping that down to 1.32v.

I have decent temps (usually under 70) in everything but small FFT p95, but Im a bit worried looking through this thread at people's voltages being so much lower in bios.

Am I crazy - should I settle for a lower OC and get the volts down, or maybe switch to a non-fixed vcore? I am unfamiliar with this MB on how to set adaptive or offset voltages.

Thanks for any help!


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> That's envious! With my Auros pro wasn't such a POS.
> 
> Btw why such a low uncore ratio?


My Aorus Pro is a pain with memory OC as well. I ditched the 2 x 8's I was using and now I'm rolling with 4 x 8 3200/CL14 clocked at 3600 CL15. Good enough for my purposes (mainly gaming).


----------



## Lurifaks

AORUS Master Debug LED Code 47 anyone ?

Can`t find any info


----------



## Driller au

Lurifaks said:


> AORUS Master Debug LED Code 47 anyone ?
> 
> Can`t find any info


do a search of this thread other users have had it , think it was with the f9C BIOS


----------



## Lurifaks

Driller au said:


> do a search of this thread other users have had it , think it was with the f9C BIOS



Thanks for the Thread search tips, was not aware of it 

But did not find anything about debug code 47 , the code is showing when the system is up and running in windows


----------



## Driller au

Lurifaks said:


> Thanks for the Thread search tips, was not aware of it
> 
> But did not find anything about debug code 47 , the code is showing when the system is up and running in windows


post 3457 on page 346 but no answers just another user next page said he had the same code


----------



## asdkj1740

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
is f9 the latest beta bios for aorus master?
i saw some said about f9c, is f9 better than f9c?


----------



## Driller au

asdkj1740 said:


> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
> is f9 the latest beta bios for aorus master?
> i saw some said about f9c, is f9 better than f9c?


F9 is the latest and no change log,with gigabyte bios ones that are named like F9 are the final one of that series the next one will be something like F10b
if that makes sense


----------



## asdkj1740

Driller au said:


> F9 is the latest and no change log,with gigabyte bios ones that are named like F9 are the final one of that series the next one will be something like F10b
> if that makes sense


oic thank you.
so this kind of final bios like f9 should be better than f9i/f9c??
i cant find the links to download f9i/f9c bios.


----------



## robertr1

Sheyster said:


> My Aorus Pro is a pain with memory OC as well. I ditched the 2 x 8's I was using and now I'm rolling with 4 x 8 3200/CL14 clocked at 3600 CL15. Good enough for my purposes (mainly gaming).


Mind sharing your timings and volts? 

btw, our 9900k chips seem identical. Mine does 5ghz all core at 1.26v also. LLC turbo?


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> Mind sharing your timings and volts?
> 
> btw, our 9900k chips seem identical. Mine does 5ghz all core at 1.26v also. LLC turbo?


Yep, LLC Turbo.

Memory is with XMP on, but with overrides for primary timings at 15-15-15-35, 1.38v. I don't feel a need to push it harder given what I'm doing (gaming).


----------



## danakin

hello everyone,

got a 9900k and the aorus master z390 for a couple of month now. tried some overclocking in the beginning but at the end i left it at stock settings 4,7ghz. can you guys let me know some setting i should always turn on/off on stock settings, as well if i could undervolt for lower temps? what settings would you suggest me? 

edit: im on bios version 8

best regards, 

pete


----------



## KedarWolf

danakin said:


> hello everyone,
> 
> got a 9900k and the aorus master z390 for a couple of month now. tried some overclocking in the beginning but at the end i left it at stock settings 4,7ghz. can you guys let me know some setting i should always turn on/off on stock settings, as well if i could undervolt for lower temps? what settings would you suggest me?
> 
> edit: im on bios version 8
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete


Basic BIOS settings for 5.1GHZ but to undervolt at 4.7GHZ you could probably go a negative offset of -.075 or lower. Note: I have IA AC Loadline at 1, not 0. other settings you can still use though. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28018702-post3617.html


----------



## Padinn

Been getting some WHEA errors playing Two Point Hospital, this is a fairly light game and it shows VR out at 1.3v with VID around 1.23v. Temps in low 60s. I have gotten no WHEA errors under heavier loads using my offset voltage, what is best way to approach this? No hard crashes, but a few errors so I'd like to improve it. Should I try low LLC?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Been getting some WHEA errors playing Two Point Hospital, this is a fairly light game and it shows VR out at 1.3v with VID around 1.23v. Temps in low 60s. I have gotten no WHEA errors under heavier loads using my offset voltage, what is best way to approach this? No hard crashes, but a few errors so I'd like to improve it. Should I try low LLC?


What WHEA type is reported under HWinfo64? (you can also look in windows event viewer and copy/paste the error (warning) shown).


----------



## KedarWolf

.zip files have F9 BIOS and F9b with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 30/06/2019.

F9b is older but seems doesn't have that reboot at idle bug some boards have.

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f9b /x

 or


Code:


efiflash 1.f9 /x

Profit!!


----------



## asdkj1740

keep trying different sa/io/ddr4 voltages as well as 4 main timings on f9 bios (aorus master) to get 4133 stable in game. still fail.
eventually the last fail oc broke my windows in a ssd. fortunately the win10 built-in repaire successfully recovers my windows.


----------



## tommy2911

I'm trying to get a stable dynamic overclock for my 9700k with an aorus z390 ultra; static oc is getting a bit to hot with actual summer temperature in idle.
Considering that I'm stable at 5GHz, 1.275v, LLC Turno, no avx offset, Cstates disabled, Vccsa 1.12 and vccio 1.10, uncore ratio 45 with prime95 v29.8 for non avx tests and realbench 2.56. I know to be unstable with heavy AVX workload but I don't use them, so I prefer a lower vcore. If I use an offset I start getting unstable if I test a non avx workload but stable if the workload uses avx.
For the adaptive OC I set the vcore on Normal, set DVID to -0.075 and LLC on normal, uncore ratio 45, Vccsa 1.12 and vccio 1.10 with cstates enabled.
With this setup I can pass without issues 1h of prime, no avx; it crashes if I used a dvid of -0.080.
With -0.075 under load vcore is 1.287v, a bit more than static OC but I have a lot of spikes at 1.298, 1.309, 1.32v and 1.27v which I don't have with static OC at such as values and frequencies.
What do you think about it? There's something I should set differently? should I go for the static or adaptive oc? thanks
https://ibb.co/ynw8Pv0
https://ibb.co/C5hGrJz
https://ibb.co/4mg9XHH
https://ibb.co/2gB9gK3
https://ibb.co/P9gxhhy
https://ibb.co/qFX5qx1
https://ibb.co/ZK7tyHC
https://ibb.co/0Fjw7rR


----------



## Falkentyne

tommy2911 said:


> I'm trying to get a stable dynamic overclock for my 9700k with an aorus z390 ultra; static oc is getting a bit to hot with actual summer temperature in idle.
> Considering that I'm stable at 5GHz, 1.275v, LLC Turno, no avx offset, Cstates disabled, Vccsa 1.12 and vccio 1.10, uncore ratio 45 with prime95 v29.8 for non avx tests and realbench 2.56. I know to be unstable with heavy AVX workload but I don't use them, so I prefer a lower vcore. If I use an offset I start getting unstable if I test a non avx workload but stable if the workload uses avx.
> For the adaptive OC I set the vcore on Normal, set DVID to -0.075 and LLC on normal, uncore ratio 45, Vccsa 1.12 and vccio 1.10 with cstates enabled.
> With this setup I can pass without issues 1h of prime, no avx; it crashes if I used a dvid of -0.080.
> With -0.075 under load vcore is 1.287v, a bit more than static OC but I have a lot of spikes at 1.298, 1.309, 1.32v and 1.27v which I don't have with static OC at such as values and frequencies.
> What do you think about it? There's something I should set differently? should I go for the static or adaptive oc? thanks
> https://ibb.co/ynw8Pv0
> https://ibb.co/C5hGrJz
> https://ibb.co/4mg9XHH
> https://ibb.co/2gB9gK3
> https://ibb.co/P9gxhhy
> https://ibb.co/qFX5qx1
> https://ibb.co/ZK7tyHC
> https://ibb.co/0Fjw7rR


You should look at VR VOUT.


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Been getting some WHEA errors playing Two Point Hospital, this is a fairly light game and it shows VR out at 1.3v with VID around 1.23v. Temps in low 60s. I have gotten no WHEA errors under heavier loads using my offset voltage, what is best way to approach this? No hard crashes, but a few errors so I'd like to improve it. Should I try low LLC?
> 
> 
> 
> What WHEA type is reported under HWinfo64? (you can also look in windows event viewer and copy/paste the error (warning) shown).
Click to expand...

I ended up .05v and it seems okay will test more later this week.


----------



## KedarWolf

@Falkentyne

As requested, F9c Master BIOS with the newest microcode, RST and Intel Ethernet firmware as of July 2nd, 2019.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> As requested, F9c Master BIOS with the newest microcode, RST and Intel Ethernet firmware as of July 2nd, 2019.


I'm trying to play Apex Legends with the "crash bug" Intel path command to see if microcode BE addresses that bug, as if it does, other games which cause "Internal Parity Error" (as opposed to CPU Cache L0 error which means your CPU is just too hot/unstable) may be fixed.

(when i put -force_old_gather_props in at otherwise stable clocks at 5 ghz, 5.1 ghz or 5.2 ghz (HT disabled), I get an Internal Parity error rather quickly (or the game crashes with your "CPU is overclocked too much").
That was the bug that was fixed (I was mentioned in the Apex legends patch notes awhile back). That command line reverts to the old code that is bugged on 7700K-9900K CPU's).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I'm trying to play Apex Legends with the "crash bug" Intel path command to see if microcode BE addresses that bug, as if it does, other games which cause "Internal Parity Error" (as opposed to CPU Cache L0 error which means your CPU is just too hot/unstable) may be fixed.
> 
> (when i put -force_old_gather_props in at otherwise stable clocks at 5 ghz, 5.1 ghz or 5.2 ghz (HT disabled), I get an Internal Parity error rather quickly (or the game crashes with your "CPU is overclocked too much").
> That was the bug that was fixed (I was mentioned in the Apex legends patch notes awhile back). That command line reverts to the old code that is bugged on 7700K-9900K CPU's).


Is that a .exe switch -force_old_gather_props because I can test in on my machine which is running F9b and the latest microcode.

Edit: I put that switch argument in the game settings, ran training, zero issues, but I'm RealBench and GSAT tested stable.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Is that a .exe switch -force_old_gather_props because I can test in on my machine which is running F9b and the latest microcode.
> 
> Edit: I put that switch argument in the game settings, ran training, zero issues, but I'm RealBench and GSAT tested stable.


Gsat/Realbench doesn't matter. The old game path generated errors that crashed Intel processors even if you were Gsat/Realbench/Prime95 small FFT AVX stable. The only way to avoid it was to increase CPU voltage extremely high. The problem was, *SOME* users got these errors on *STOCK* 9900K's and 8700K's. Yes, stock.

Ever since it was addressed by Oriostorm and worked around, all these errors stopped unless you were actually unstable.
(that was mentioned in the months old patch notes with even me being given credit for helping: https://www.reddit.com/r/apexlegends/comments/bpxh1f/next_patch_coming_early_next_week_here_are_the/ )
Oriostorm left the "old" path code intact so Intel could actually investigate the cause of the crashes. But other people also reported "Internal Parity Errors" in Battlefield 5 also (usually you would get CPU Cache L0 error or BSOD, right?) and some other games, so it's possible it was just a plain old microcode or internal bug. How much do you want to bet these bugs were caused by mitigation workarounds (even if your OS version was not mitigation aware?). Remember the old first Haswell spectre fixes which generated Internal Parity errors?

If you're too bored, try to test Microcode AE (use the backup bios or something lol) and then use that commandline switch when overclocked.
You also need to monitor HWINFO for WHEA errors while playing. (if the bug is triggered, you will get "CPU Internal Parity Error", or if you're REALLY unstable "CPU translation lookside buffer Error").

So far I finished 2 hours of testing Apex, one at 5.2 ghz 1.335v (HT disabled/LLC Turbo) and one at 5 ghz 1.270v+HT/LLC
Both settings generated Parity errors with the old code path in AE before, but none with BE microcode yet.

I'll still have to do a lot more testing to confirm.


----------



## asdkj1740

KedarWolf said:


> .zip files have F9 BIOS and F9b with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 30/06/2019.
> 
> F9b is older but seems doesn't have that reboot at idle bug some boards have.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f9b /x
> 
> or
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f9 /x
> 
> Profit!!


is it necessarily to flash this bios from dos?


----------



## Padinn

What are overclock temps while gaming? I stream using CPU encoding and I'm around 88c with a peak of 95 in battlefield v. 5ghz, medium LLC, +.125 offset, ac/dc loadline 1. Sound right?


----------



## Driller au

asdkj1740 said:


> is it necessarily to flash this bios from dos?


Yes because it is a modded bios


----------



## asdkj1740

Driller au said:


> Yes because it is a modded bios


thank you.

this is not a bios released by gigabyte??


----------



## Falkentyne

asdkj1740 said:


> thank you.
> 
> this is not a bios released by gigabyte??


Its a beta bios released with no changelog by Gigabyte, but some of the modules in the UEFI have been modded with updated versions (microcode, ethernet, etc) so it isn't secure flash authenticated anymore so Q-flash won't flash it.


----------



## asdkj1740

Falkentyne said:


> Its a beta bios released with no changelog by Gigabyte, but some of the modules in the UEFI have been modded with updated versions (microcode, ethernet, etc) so it isn't secure flash authenticated anymore so Q-flash won't flash it.


thank you!!


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> What WHEA type is reported under HWinfo64? (you can also look in windows event viewer and copy/paste the error (warning) shown).


The small bump didn't fix it, it's a rare error. Here is the error type:

A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
Processor APIC ID: 2

The details view of this entry contains further information.


----------



## Smokediggity

Anyone else have an issue with memory timings not applying on restart with the F9 series bios on the Master? I either have to shutdown after booting into windows or change the memory frequency when I change the timings before they will apply.


----------



## sirbaili

*controling AVX voltages*



porksmuggler said:


> I've been working on a new offset overclocking guide, so here's a mini version, since you're interested.
> 
> In Windows, disable Hibernation and Sleep. Also make sure Power Options is set to Balanced.
> 
> Reset the CMOS, or in the BIOS, load defaults. Then its just 8 steps to OC.
> 
> M.I.T. tab
> 1 Advanced Frequency Settings - Set X.M.P.
> 2----Advanced CPU Core Settings: AVX Offset - Set -4 (I use -4 for 4.6 GHz so the newest Prime95 Small FFT runs stay under 80 C.)
> 3-----------------------------------Turbo Ratio (x Core Active) - Set all at 50
> --Advanced Voltage Settings
> 4----Advanced Power Settings: CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration - Set Normal
> 5----CPU Core Voltage Control: CPU Vcore - Set Normal
> 6-------------------------------Dynamic Vcore (DVID) - Set -0.110 V (Start with -0.030 V, then stress test in -30 mV intervals. CPUs typically step 100 MHz per 60 mV. Below -0.110 V, I have idle freezes < 0.550 V idle.)
> 
> Chipset tab
> 7 VT-d - Set Disabled
> 8 Internal Graphics - Set Disabled
> 
> That's it, no manual voltages, no messing with LLC levels, etc. The only auto voltage that the Z390 Aorus Master sets high seems to be VCCSA at 1.3 V.




*********************************************************

Hi there

After playing with settings - the only difference when OC-ing to 5ghz: setting for AVX offset
if you enable it at "-2" Minimum - voltages are fine and you can control it with loadline calibration and by setting DINAMIC voltage to negative.
I personally set it at -.060
when under load it shoot a 1.275 max.
But as soon as you disable AVX offset or AUTO or "0" - voltage jumps to 1.360, 1.380 - and only Dynamic oddset controls it - without it it's more like 1.4 - 1.415 under loaD.
Has anyone figure out how to lower AVX voltages ubder 1.3- 1.32
?
I am attaching Bios screenshots


----------



## Falkentyne

sirbaili said:


> *********************************************************
> 
> Hi there
> 
> After playing with settings - the only difference when OC-ing to 5ghz: setting for AVX offset
> if you enable it at "-2" Minimum - voltages are fine and you can control it with loadline calibration and by setting DINAMIC voltage to negative.
> I personally set it at -.060
> when under load it shoot a 1.275 max.
> But as soon as you disable AVX offset or AUTO or "0" - voltage jumps to 1.360, 1.380 - and only Dynamic oddset controls it - without it it's more like 1.4 - 1.415 under loaD.
> Has anyone figure out how to lower AVX voltages ubder 1.3- 1.32
> ?
> I am attaching Bios screenshots


You can't.
AVX loads by themselves aren't anything special at all.
The culprit responsible is the "AC Loadline" value. 
AC Loadline takes whatever the CPU's default VID is (default VID is a hardwired value on each core (in most cases, a CPU that has a lower default VID at their turbo boost ratios will tend to overclock better than those with a higher default VID), and then "Boosts" it up by some formula, depending on the current and load. At 5 ghz, many chips average default VID at full idle will be about 1.215v. The AC Loadline value will boost this based on some formula (unknown to everyone except Intel engineers), that is influenced by the AC Loadline mOhms value, up to the max Intel supported value of 1.6 mOhms for 8 core processors.
At 1.6 mOhms of AC Loadline, this boosted to around 1.38-1.41v at full idle. Then at full load, depending on current (the higher the current, the more the boost), the AC Loadline will boost the CPU's voltage input signal up to the VID max of 1.520v, and then that will get sent to the VRM. AVX loads naturally have a higher load than non AVX, thus the boost is higher. There may also be other formulas at work (like a 30mv vboost in addition to current). DC Loadline will then drop this VID and report it to the operating system, in the exact same formula that VRM Loadline drops the CPU supply voltage (Amps * Resistance=amount of VID Droop)

From there, the VRM loadline (aka loadline calibration value) will then drop that supply voltage gracefully down to the load voltage you see with VR VOUT in HWinfo64, with a much easier to calculate direct formula, that is (amps * VRM loadline resistance). With LLC set to Standard or Normal, this is 1.6 mOhms (oddly enough this matches the maximum supported AC Loadline value mentioned in the Intel spec sheets). A 193 amp load, for example, if the AC loadline boosts the original VID up to 1.520v, would be 1520mv (volts converted to millivolts as resistance is in milliOhms) - ( Current * resistance) or 1520 - (193 * 1.6)= 1.212v.
So with default VRM loadline, that 1520mv VRM target voltage gets dropped nice and low.

AC Loadline boosted VID cannot exceed 1.520v. You can see what the AC Loadline is boosting the CPU VID to (and what the VRM is getting initially) by setting DC Loadline to 1 (0.01 mOhms)--DC Loadline does NOT affect CPU input voltage at all. This is why VRM loadline should be KEPT at standard or normal when using auto voltages!! (Unless AC loadline is lowered).

Enabling SVID Offset allows AC Loadline to exceed 1.52v to the VRM via serial VID--it can go up to 1.72v if this is enabled, so there is no longer a 1.52v cap if you enable this. Since AC Loadline also affects *IDLE* voltage target to the VRM as well, you can do a trick by enabling SVID offset on auto voltages (do NOT enable it on manual voltages) and then reduce the AC Loadline somewhere around 1.0 mOhm (Bios value of 100). This will drop the idle VR VOUT about 80mv lower than normal, while keeping the load VR VOUT equal to if you had SVID offset disabled with a 1.6 mOhms AC Loadline (Bios value=160).

tl;dr: AC Loadline affects CPU operating voltages on auto (and dynamic offset (DVID)) voltages.


----------



## maivorbim

Is there any way to raise only the idle voltages, while keeping the load voltages similar to those you get by using default Normal voltage settings for an i9-9900k on a Gigabyte Z390 Master motherboard?

I am asking because when using Normal voltages and negative DVID offsets to overclock, I sometimes have to raise the DVID offset not because the CPU is not stable during load, but because I get WHEA errors at idle voltages, I'm guessing due to insufficient idle voltages.

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

maivorbim said:


> Is there any way to raise only the idle voltages, while keeping the load voltages similar to those you get by using default Normal voltage settings for an i9-9900k on a Gigabyte Z390 Master motherboard?
> 
> I am asking because when using Normal voltages and negative DVID offsets to overclock, I sometimes have to raise the DVID offset not because the CPU is not stable during load, but because I get WHEA errors at idle voltages, I'm guessing due to insufficient idle voltages.
> 
> Thanks


Thats impossible.
You can't have your cake and eat it too with DVID offsets.

If you want higher idle voltages, and offsets, don't use C-states. (I don't know about speed shift with DVID). Or you can use a fixed voltage combined with speedshift (controlled with Throttlestop 8.70) and have your CPU downclock at idle without changing the voltages.

I don't think you see how idle voltages work.
CPUs have a different default VID depending on their core and cache ratios. They are hardwired and matched with simiilar core capability by binning and then set at certain values starting at 800 mhz, then increasing slowly at most 100 mhz steps, and topping out at the maximum single core CPU ratio. Cache ratio also affects this as well. At 800 mhz, the default VID may be something like 0.650v.

When you apply a negative DVID, you are applying a fixed offset to every voltage step the CPU reaches when downclocking. A -100mv offset is going to have a much larger effect at 0.600v (600mv) than it will at 1.40v (1400mv), because 0.600v is closer to 0 than 1.40v is, so the decrease is obviously a much larger percentage. That's why you get problems.

There's no way to have 'some' downvolting' at idle and 'more' downvolting at load. This would require a dynamically changing "AC Loadline" value rather than DVID offset and no board supports this.

What you can try is NOT using DVID at all, instead reduce the AC Loadline value, use "Auto" voltages instead of DVID, and reduce AC Loadline. Try a value of 100 first and slowly work your way down.
Do not use loadline calibration yet. Keep LLC at *STANDARD*!! Normal is the same as Standard (at least on 8 core processors). Never use higher LLC with a 'defaut' AC Loadline (1.6 mOhms, or 160), EVER.

Work the AC Loadline down without using LLC, until you find a idle/load voltage combination that suits you. If you start failing tests, either stop reducing AC Loadline further, or increase Vcore Loadline Calibration by one level and test again. Do keep in mind that transient response decreases as LLC is increased (this can affect your absolute minimum load VR VOUT required for stability with very heavy stress tests like prime95 AVX).


----------



## bastian

Official F9 Master BIOS is on Gigabyte site now. Only notes are microcode security updates.


----------



## Intrud3r

bastian said:


> Official F9 Master BIOS is on Gigabyte site now. Only notes are microcode security updates.


F8 for the Aorus Ultra board.

Version	Size Date
F8 6.87 MB 2019/06/27	

Update CPU Microcode to address a potential security vulnerability in CPUs, see more: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00233.html


----------



## Falkentyne

bastian said:


> Official F9 Master BIOS is on Gigabyte site now. Only notes are microcode security updates.


This "f9" is identical byte for byte to the leaked f9 that was posted on tweaktown forums by Stasio.
It is using the same AE microcode that F9C leaked came with.
And it's not using the latest microcode either.
BE is the latest 9900K microcode and @KedarWolf modded f9c with it.

Suggest you guys just mod it yourself.

It also appears that BE is more stable vs those "Internal Parity Errors" that the old Apex Legends code path triggered due to a bug in 7600K-9900K processors (still left in the game as an optional command line switch so Intel, if they cared, would look into their microcode bugs)would be prone to doing unless you increased CPU voltage by quite a lot. ( -force_old_gather_props )

With AE microcode and the old code path, those parity errors "seem" to be more common. Still testing because I spent hours and hours testing this stuff before the original fix a few months ago. And sometimes you could go for a few hours without an "Internal parity error", then you do again and the game just crashes...so don't take anything I say for granted anymore.


----------



## Wirerat

F10 bios is up for aorus pro. It mentions microcode update for vulnerability.

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-PRO-rev-10#support-dl-bios


----------



## Sheyster

*Edit* due to re-post...

F10 release Notes:

Update CPU Microcode to address a potential security vulnerability in CPUs, see more:

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00233.html


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf any chance we can get a modded F9 since it's "out" (with old microcode of course, Gigabyte put AE in there, the same one they put into F9C).
I wish you could teach me how to mod it myself (with those three components you do) but I'm afraid I'd do something wrong and brick it. I'm good at messing things up :/


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf any chance we can get a modded F9 since it's "out" (with old microcode of course, Gigabyte put AE in there, the same one they put into F9C).
> I wish you could teach me how to mod it myself (with those three components you do) but I'm afraid I'd do something wrong and brick it. I'm good at messing things up :/


See your PM.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf any chance we can get a modded F9 since it's "out" (with old microcode of course, Gigabyte put AE in there, the same one they put into F9C).
> I wish you could teach me how to mod it myself (with those three components you do) but I'm afraid I'd do something wrong and brick it. I'm good at messing things up :/


Here's F9 from the official Gigabyte website, not the beta forum, with modded everything, microcode, Intel Ethernet, RST already up to date.

And F9b that pushing the BIOS reset button doesn't clear the BIOS password, modded too.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Here's F9 from the official Gigabyte website, not the beta forum, with modded everything, microcode, Intel Ethernet, RST already up to date.
> 
> And F9b that pushing the BIOS reset button doesn't clear the BIOS password, modded too.


Thank you!
Btw the F9 bios Gigabyte posted (way late) on their official website is byte for byte identical to the one that was posted on the beta forum.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you!
> Btw the F9 bios Gigabyte posted (way late) on their official website is byte for byte identical to the one that was posted on the beta forum.


Did you check them with a hash checker?

Yeah, I checked, identical.


----------



## nexxusty

How to we flash it Kedar? I assume since you included Rufus and an EFI executable... Q-Flash will not work?

Let me know if you can brother, thanks!

*Edit*

Ahh, FreeDOS. I get it now, my mistake. Thanks man!


----------



## KedarWolf

nexxusty said:


> How to we flash it Kedar? I assume since you included Rufus and an EFI executable... Q-Flash will not work?
> 
> Let me know if you can brother, thanks!
> 
> *Edit*
> 
> Ahh, FreeDOS. I get it now, my mistake. Thanks man!



Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB NOT UEFI.

When it boots into DOS, type
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9b /x \NoOemID

or
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x

To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x \NoOemID

Profit!!


----------



## nexxusty

KedarWolf said:


> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AORUSMASTERGK.F9b /x
> 
> or
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f9 /x
> 
> Profit!!


Appreciate the advice, it doesn't work though. I get an "!!OEMID Mismatch!!" when I try to flash it.

It's 5am here. I'll try again when I wake up. I don't think I am doing anything incorrectly however, this isn't my first ballgame and I am typing the string out exactly.

Does this work correctly for anyone else? I am flashing from F8 regular non-modded, maybe that is the issue?


----------



## KedarWolf

delete


----------



## KedarWolf

nexxusty said:


> Appreciate the advice, it doesn't work though. I get an "!!OEMID Mismatch!!" when I try to flash it.


You have a Master motherboard and did you type /x after the command?

Edit: Which BIOS did you try?

Second edit: The command for the F9 BIOS is


Code:


efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /x


----------



## nexxusty

KedarWolf said:


> You have a Master motherboard and did you type /x after the command?


Hehe, yes to both my man.

I definitely have an Aorus Master, and I've typed the /x switch three times or so now just to be sure.

*Edit*



KedarWolf said:


> You have a Master motherboard and did you type /x after the command?
> 
> Edit: Which BIOS did you try?


I was flashing your F9B mod from BIOS F8 Regular.

*Edit 2*

I flashed Original F9 and then 1.F9B and it flashed just fine. Not sure why the other UEFI/BIOS file didn't work coming from F8. The one with the BIOS Password mod.

Perhaps that file would work now. I'm not sure as I am fine where I am.

Unlesssssss you want me to guinea pig it for you. Maybe just to see if it's a "Coming from F8 only issue". Hehe, I don't mind trying. I appreciate your work bro.


----------



## Wirerat

I went ahead and loaded win update 1903 and updated bios to f10.

My 5ghz 1.31v 3800mhz cl 17 no offsets profile is still stable. I ran x264 overnight. Max temp 76c seems slighty lower but that could be due to other varibles.


----------



## KedarWolf

nexxusty said:


> Hehe, yes to both my man.
> 
> I definitely have an Aorus Master, and I've typed the /x switch three times or so now just to be sure.
> 
> *Edit*
> 
> I was flashing your F9B mod from BIOS F8 Regular.
> 
> *Edit 2*
> 
> I flashed Original F9 and then 1.F9B and it flashed just fine. Not sure why the other UEFI/BIOS file didn't work coming from F8. The one with the BIOS Password mod.
> 
> Perhaps that file would work now. I'm not sure as I am fine where I am.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlesssssss you want me to guinea pig it for you. Maybe just to see if it's a "Coming from F8 only issue". Hehe, I don't mind trying. I appreciate your work bro.


*Fixed!*

Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB NOT UEFI.

When it boots into DOS, type
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9b /x \NoOemID

or
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x

To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x \NoOemID

Profit!!


----------



## nexxusty

KedarWolf said:


> *Fixed!*
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB NOT UEFI.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AORUSMASTERGK.F9b /c /x \NoOemID
> 
> or
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /x
> 
> To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /c /x \NoOemID
> 
> Profit!!


You sir went above and beyond, you didn't have to track down the non mentioned switches for EFIFLASH.

Thanks brother. I appreciate that, and I mean it.

I keep forgetting you are a Canadian dude. We should hang out sometime and Geek OUT bro. I am going to be delidding and direct die'ing my 9900k soon. You're welcome to use my delid tool if you wanted. 

You're the only other Canadian on here that's as big of a geek as I am, at least to my knowledge.


----------



## KedarWolf

nexxusty said:


> You sir went above and beyond, you didn't have to track down the non mentioned switches for EFIFLASH.
> 
> Thanks brother. I appreciate that, and I mean it.
> 
> I keep forgetting you are a Canadian dude. We should hang out sometime and Geek OUT bro. I am going to be delidding and direct die'ing my 9900k soon. You're welcome to use my delid tool if you wanted.
> 
> You're the only other Canadian on here that's as big of a geek as I am, at least to my knowledge.


I have a delid tool myself but my 9900k temps are decent and I'm kinda hesitant delidding a soldered heatsink and messing with it. 

Edit: Just so you know I saw somewhere there is a decent solvent for safely removing the solder after delidding a 9900k, much easier than sanding, not sure where I saw it exactly though.

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/pages/how-to-remove-the-solder-from-9th-gen-cpus

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/co...ucts/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I have a delid tool myself but my 9900k temps are decent and I'm kinda hesitant delidding a soldered heatsink and messing with it.
> 
> Edit: Just so you know I saw somewhere there is a decent solvent for safely removing the solder after delidding a 9900k, much easier than sanding, not sure where I saw it exactly though.
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/pages/how-to-remove-the-solder-from-9th-gen-cpus
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/co...ucts/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete


I have some of that stuff, but what exactly is it, anyway?
They said "it's not liquid metal for CPU application", but it is SOME sort of liquid metal.
Liquid metal (galinstan) can be used as a CPU solder removal tool also, although it takes awhile.
It's definitely *NOT* quicksilver, as Quicksilver is Mercury (a very toxic compound).
It's also more watery than galinstan.
Anyone have any idea what it is?


----------



## nexxusty

KedarWolf said:


> I have a delid tool myself but my 9900k temps are decent and I'm kinda hesitant delidding a soldered heatsink and messing with it.
> 
> Edit: Just so you know I saw somewhere there is a decent solvent for safely removing the solder after delidding a 9900k, much easier than sanding, not sure where I saw it exactly though.
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/pages/how-to-remove-the-solder-from-9th-gen-cpus
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/co...ucts/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete


You don't have to be hesitant about it brother.

I fully understand when you hear "Soldered IHS" and "Delidding" you think it not worth the hassle.

To put it bluntly, Intel's Indium STIM is garbage. Liquid Metal still performs MUCH better. You're not looking at 20c drops from delidding, more like 5c.... However Delid and Direct Die like I am doing. Easily a 15c difference. In your position.... since you have a delid tool already, it would be a no brainer for me. All you need to get is the Direct Die Mount. Your CPU is close to mine voltage wise, I am quite sure 5.3ghz will be attainable. 5.4ghz for benching.

Think about it man, I fully suggest it. Intel's Indium STIM is not "real" solder. You don't even need to heat your IHS to get it off for one, and you can also scrape it off completely with a plastic razor. It's barely even solder IMO.

I'm putting my 9900k on a Maximus XI Extreme I was given, there are a couple of bent pins and I have been successful in repairing pins on other boards so far every time, IIRC. That's the real reason why I am doing it, I am just thinking best board + this CPU and Direct Die will yield the best result I'm going to see on my 9900k. The Aorus Master will still clock it just as high, if not higher with the better VRM's. I would still do it if I were you.

I remember a solvent too, also not sure what it is. I'll refresh before the delid, I still haven't done it.

*Edit*

I just realized... you said "A delidding tool". You cannot use a delidding tool that would delid an 8700k or older 1151/1150 CPU.

Has to be a 9900k Delidder.

You can verify this yourself, the information is available for everyone to see. I only realized this when I went to buy a tool, who knows... might even be false. However personally, I'd rather be safe.

So, unless you bought a 9900k delidder like I have, and left it lying there.... You shouldn't attempt to delid that CPU.

Anyway, the previous offer is still on the table.



Falkentyne said:


> I have some of that stuff, but what exactly is it, anyway?
> They said "it's not liquid metal for CPU application", but it is SOME sort of liquid metal.
> Liquid metal (galinstan) can be used as a CPU solder removal tool also, although it takes awhile.
> It's definitely *NOT* quicksilver, as Quicksilver is Mercury (a very toxic compound).
> It's also more watery than galinstan.
> Anyone have any idea what it is?


I guess we should start looking.... I will need it very soon. Immediately, even.

Alright boys, fan out, report back?


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> *Fixed!*
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB NOT UEFI.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AORUSMASTERGK.F9b /c /x \NoOemID
> 
> or
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /x
> 
> To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /c /x \NoOemID
> 
> Profit!!


What is the advantage of the modded bios? More recent CPU microcode and ethernet? Is the 1.zip the F9C version?


----------



## KedarWolf

nexxusty said:


> Appreciate the advice, it doesn't work though. I get an "!!OEMID Mismatch!!" when I try to flash it.
> 
> It's 5am here. I'll try again when I wake up. I don't think I am doing anything incorrectly however, this isn't my first ballgame and I am typing the string out exactly.
> 
> Does this work correctly for anyone else? I am flashing from F8 regular non-modded, maybe that is the issue?


The /c switch causes issues, below is correct though.

Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB NOT UEFI.

When it boots into DOS, type
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9b /x \NoOemID

or
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x

To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x \NoOemID

Profit!!


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> What is the advantage of the modded bios? More recent CPU microcode and ethernet? Is the 1.zip the F9C version?


Latest microcode, RST and Intel Ethernet firmware. 

The 1.zip is the latest F9 BIOS from the Gigabyte site. F9c and F9b are older.


----------



## Driller au

@KedarWolf thanks for the modded bios


----------



## kati

KedarWolf said:


> Latest microcode, RST and Intel Ethernet firmware.
> 
> The 1.zip is the latest F9 BIOS from the Gigabyte site. F9c and F9b are older.


So does the F9 from the official support site not include the Intel ethernet firmware update?
Changelog only mentions the microcode fix.


----------



## KedarWolf

kati said:


> So does the F9 from the official support site not include the Intel ethernet firmware update?
> Changelog only mentions the microcode fix.


Not the latest version, no. And it is one microcode revision behind as well, newer microcode seems to be the fix for CPU errors in the game Origins Apex Legends, maybe BattleField 5 as well.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Not the latest version, no. And it is one microcode revision behind as well, newer microcode seems to be the fix for CPU errors in the game Origins Apex Legends, maybe BattleField 5 as well.


The new microcode doesn't seem to fix the Apex issue. I think the 'old code path' isn't working or something. I asked Oriostorm if the commandline still works since season 2 patch but he didn't respond yet. I don't know for sure though. So I could be wrong about everything. It's just too much work to test stuff like this.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> The new microcode doesn't seem to fix the Apex issue. I think the 'old code path' isn't working or something. I asked Oriostorm if the commandline still works since season 2 patch but he didn't respond yet. I don't know for sure though. So I could be wrong about everything. It's just too much work to test stuff like this.


Have you tested your system to be stable? I use RealBench for CPU, HCI MemTest for memory, AIDA64 cache test for the cache. :h34r-smi

I ask because I get zero errors in Apex with HWInfo running, at least in the tutorial. I don't play the game you see.


----------



## KedarWolf

Attached .zip file is the latest ME firmware and update tool for Z390 boards.

Unzip, open an Admin command prompt in the WIN64 folder and use the below command.



Code:


FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin


----------



## Luck100

Falkentyne said:


> The new microcode doesn't seem to fix the Apex issue. I think the 'old code path' isn't working or something. I asked Oriostorm if the commandline still works since season 2 patch but he didn't respond yet. I don't know for sure though. So I could be wrong about everything. It's just too much work to test stuff like this.


I did a test this week and I can confirm the old code path command line switch is still working in Apex. I've probably logged 50+ hours in Apex with no issues in the last month or so. When I used the old code path switch this week, I started getting WHEA errors again within a couple of hours. I had to bump voltage +50mV to stop the errors with the old code.

I don't have the BE microcode installed, just the "current" one from Asus/MS updates.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> nexxusty said:
> 
> 
> 
> Appreciate the advice, it doesn't work though. I get an "!!OEMID Mismatch!!" when I try to flash it.
> 
> It's 5am here. I'll try again when I wake up. I don't think I am doing anything incorrectly however, this isn't my first ballgame and I am typing the string out exactly.
> 
> Does this work correctly for anyone else? I am flashing from F8 regular non-modded, maybe that is the issue?
> 
> 
> 
> The /c switch causes issues, below is correct though.
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB NOT UEFI.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AORUSMASTERGK.F9b /x \NoOemID
> 
> or
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /x
> 
> To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /x \NoOemID
> 
> Profit!!
Click to expand...

*edit*
I should try reading directions  Got it fixed. I'm not seeing the F9 Aorus Master firmware on the Gigabyte Website, did they pull it?


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> *edit*
> I should try reading directions  Got it fixed. I'm not seeing the F9 Aorus Master firmware on the Gigabyte Website, did they pull it?


No its right there.
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios


----------



## Padinn

Falkentyne said:


> No its right there.
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#support-dl-bios


Ah my mistake, I was checking the aorus.com website.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> *Fixed!*
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB NOT UEFI.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AORUSMASTERGK.F9b /x \NoOemID
> 
> or
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /x
> 
> To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash mod_Z390AOMA.F9 /x \NoOemID
> 
> Profit!!


When I try its saying cannot read BIOS file successfully, is that because I am trying to upgrade from F8?


----------



## D13mass

Guys, did someone tries new F10 bios for Aorus z390 pro?
https://www.aorus.com/Z390-AORUS-PRO-rev-10#pd_download 
http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-pro_f10.zip


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> When I try its saying cannot read BIOS file successfully, is that because I am trying to upgrade from F8?


It's because you made a typo in the name, rename the BIOS 1.F9 or other BIOS, 1.F9b and run the command with the new name, make it simpler.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Attached .zip file is the latest ME firmware and update tool for Z390 boards.
> 
> Unzip, open an Admin command prompt in the WIN64 folder and use the below command.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Full.bin



Intel CSME 12.0 Consumer PCH-H B,A Firmware v12.0.40.1433

from Winraid forum properly modded.


----------



## Driller au

It's because you made a typo in the name, rename the BIOS 1.F9 or other BIOS, 1.F9b and run the command with the new name, make it simpler.[/QUOTE]
Could be completely wrong here but could the name be to long I got the same error and just removed the "mod_" and it worked fine


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> It's because you made a typo in the name, rename the BIOS 1.F9 or other BIOS, 1.F9b and run the command with the new name, make it simpler.


Could be completely wrong here but could the name be to long I got the same error and just removed the "mod_" and it worked fine[/QUOTE]

Please don't use the mobile site to post. It's bugged and no one can read what you're writing.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Could be completely wrong here but could the name be to long I got the same error and just removed the "mod_" and it worked fine


Please don't use the mobile site to post. It's bugged and no one can read what you're writing.[/QUOTE]

You can use the OCN website on mobile if you scroll down to the bottom and choose the Desktop version.


----------



## KedarWolf

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete

Just bought a Rockit CPU delidding kit, direct die frame and some Quicksilver to remove the solder. 

For that $59.99 USD including shipping it's incredible and they had a promo, $9.99 shipping by FedEx to Canada!


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete
> 
> Just bought a Rockit CPU delidding kit, direct die frame and some Quicksilver to remove the solder.
> 
> For that $59.99 USD including shipping it's incredible and they had a promo, $9.99 shipping by FedEx to Canada!


Quicksilver is basically just a liquid metal alloy (gallium based) but without the indium content. Indium is what increases heat transfer (W/mk) and also helps with cohesion, so even though it looks like liquid metal and is great for dissolving solder, the thermal transfer properties if it's used as LM, won't be much better than MX-4. That's why it 'dissolves' the indium solder-it simply alloys with it. You can even use normal liquid metal to dissolve the indium but that's a LOT more expensive (indium costs a lot of money compared to tin and gallium).


----------



## arielmoraes

I've been trying to enable the USB TurboCharger for my Aorus Z390 Ultra but the application is missing in the App Center after installing. When I try to open it directly from the Program Files folder (QCharge.exe) it says that my plataform is not supported. Does anyone face the same problem?


----------



## warbucks

KedarWolf said:


> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete
> 
> Just bought a Rockit CPU delidding kit, direct die frame and some Quicksilver to remove the solder.
> 
> For that $59.99 USD including shipping it's incredible and they had a promo, $9.99 shipping by FedEx to Canada!


Let us know your results. I've been itching to do the same. That's a great shipping promo to Canada(I'm in AB).


----------



## KedarWolf

warbucks said:


> Let us know your results. I've been itching to do the same. That's a great shipping promo to Canada(I'm in AB).


Actually, the $9.99 shipping is two day FedEx shipping, ordered Wednesday, will have it Friday.


----------



## diedo

Hello, I have 9900K and Aorus Master Z390 + Evo 212 Turbo what should I do change to undervolt the cpu since it is hitting 100c+ with Small FFTs v26 at stock frequencies 
Till I receive the Thermaltake Water 3.0 360 ARG next sunday [it's a 360mm AIO]?


----------



## Salve1412

Hi guys! I've just received the Thermaltake TFX thermal paste I ordered about two weeks ago from Aliexpress after reading Kedarwolf's post in this thread (I was intrigued by its conductivity and wanted to try to cool my 9900k with it). Before applying it, I'd like to ask you a couple of questions: have someone tried it, and if so how did it go? I've also seen the operating instructions printed on the back of the package: they apparently suggest to squeeze out a line of TFX by the edge of the contact surface on both the cooler bottom and the HSI (IHS I guess), then to distribute it evenly along the surfaces with the included scraper. Is this a well-established method? I usually apply the thermal paste only on the IHS (in the past by dropping a rice sized dot in the middle, lately by covering all of the surface with a spatula). Doesn't applying two layers increase the thickness and hinder the cooling process? Thanks in advance!


----------



## KedarWolf

Salve1412 said:


> Hi guys! I've just received the Thermaltake TFX thermal paste I ordered about two weeks ago from Aliexpress after reading Kedarwolf's post in this thread (I was intrigued by its conductivity and wanted to try to cool my 9900k with it). Before applying it, I'd like to ask you a couple of questions: have someone tried it, and if so how did it go? I've also seen the operating instructions printed on the back of the package: they apparently suggest to squeeze out a line of TFX by the edge of the contact surface on both the cooler bottom and the HSI (IHS I guess), then to distribute it evenly along the surfaces with the included scraper. Is this a well-established method? I usually apply the thermal paste only on the IHS (in the past by dropping a rice sized dot in the middle, lately by covering all of the surface with a spatula). Doesn't applying two layers increase the thickness and hinder the cooling process? Thanks in advance!


Pea method is the way to go, let me know how thick it is, sometimes helps to heat the tube in hot water first if is kinda thick, I don't like thick pastes myself, why I use MasterGel, well, until I delid my 9900k and go direct die, then liquid metal Conductonaut (spelling?). :h34r-smi


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Pea method is the way to go


I agree, but I would describe it as a small pea method or even a rice grain method. There are some large peas out there!


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Pea method is the way to go, let me know how thick it is, sometimes helps to heat the tube in hot water first if is kinda thick, I don't like thick pastes myself, why I use MasterGel, well, until I delid my 9900k and go direct die, then liquid metal Conductonaut (spelling?). :h34r-smi


I prefer the crossing diagonal X method with such large rectangular dies.


----------



## Padinn

You basically cannot worsen temps if you use too much, but can make a mess. If using a conductive paste be careful. I used the kryonaut spreader to put a thin layer over entire die.


----------



## D13mass

Guys, do we have some most optimal bios settings for 24/7? I have 8700K and Z390 Aorus Pro. CPU works well on 5100Mhz and avx offset=1.


----------



## LesPaulLover

KedarWolf said:


> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete
> 
> Just bought a Rockit CPU delidding kit, direct die frame and some Quicksilver to remove the solder.
> 
> For that $59.99 USD including shipping it's incredible and they had a promo, $9.99 shipping by FedEx to Canada!


Oooohhh! I'm actually tempted to try this and then just RMA my CPU w/ the $20 "Intel Tuning Protection Plan" if I manage to ****up and brick the thing.....


----------



## LesPaulLover

z390 Aorus Ultra new F8 BIOS is broken trash (what a surprise, eh?)

BIOS resets on every cold-boot when on the F8 BIOS so back to F7 I go! (and problem was instantly solved it was DEFINITELY the F8 BIOS, despite Gigabyte telling me it was not)

Once again please tell your friends NOT to purchase any Gigabyte products theyre absolute garbo!


----------



## KedarWolf

LesPaulLover said:


> z390 Aorus Ultra new F8 BIOS is broken trash (what a surprise, eh?)
> 
> BIOS resets on every cold-boot when on the F8 BIOS so back to F7 I go! (and problem was instantly solved it was DEFINITELY the F8 BIOS, despite Gigabyte telling me it was not)
> 
> Once again please tell your friends NOT to purchase any Gigabyte products theyre absolute garbo!


After being a long time Asus fanboy I'm totally happy with my Aorus Master, got to be the best motherboard I've ever owned.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> After being a long time Asus fanboy I'm totally happy with my Aorus Master, got to be the best motherboard I've ever owned.


+100000 Same here!


----------



## Wirerat

D13mass said:


> Guys, did someone tries new F10 bios for Aorus z390 pro?
> https://www.aorus.com/Z390-AORUS-PRO-rev-10#pd_download
> http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-pro_f10.zip


Been running f10 on my pro for a few days. My 5ghz 1.31v (no offset) 3800mhz cl17 profile is still stable.


----------



## Intrud3r

LesPaulLover said:


> z390 Aorus Ultra new F8 BIOS is broken trash (what a surprise, eh?)
> 
> BIOS resets on every cold-boot when on the F8 BIOS so back to F7 I go! (and problem was instantly solved it was DEFINITELY the F8 BIOS, despite Gigabyte telling me it was not)
> 
> Once again please tell your friends NOT to purchase any Gigabyte products theyre absolute garbo!


Have not tried F8 yet on my board, as I'm totally happy with F7 on my Aorus Ultra.

As the above people mention, this is my first Gigabyte board. Had lots of ASUS board before in other systems, but I have to admit this board seems solid in how it holds my overclock and I have not run into any problems I could not fix.

Power delivery seems good enough, really happy with it.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> Basic BIOS settings for 5.1GHZ but to undervolt at 4.7GHZ you could probably go a negative offset of -.075 or lower. Note: I have IA AC Loadline at 1, not 0. other settings you can still use though.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28018702-post3617.html


For a 5Ghz overclock running my ram at 3200 (CAS14 using 4x16GB sticks), aside from a lower offset than your 5.1 settings, any other changes you can suggest to lower temps?
Just trying to get my 5Ghz stable with the least possible voltages needed to keep my temps as low as possible since weather is getting hotter 

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

Been testing my memory overclock in benchmarks.

4133MHz with the below timings score better in Cinebench R20, CPU-Z multi-core benchmark and even 3DMark Time Spy.

Then do 4200MHz with the second picture timings. Only way 4200Mhz scores more is in AIDA64 cache and memory test.


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> For a 5Ghz overclock running my ram at 3200 (CAS14 using 4x16GB sticks), aside from a lower offset than your 5.1 settings, any other changes you can suggest to lower temps?
> Just trying to get my 5Ghz stable with the least possible voltages needed to keep my temps as low as possible since weather is getting hotter
> 
> Thanks!


At those speeds and timings you can have RAM voltage, VCCIO and SA lower than what I posted for sure, might help a bit.

Try running RAM voltage at 1.35v or 1.4v if needed, SA and VCCIO at say 1.15v or if that isn't stable, 1.2v.


----------



## spyshagg

Hello guys.

What kit do you recommend for pushing the highest Frequency + lowest timings possible?
I need to increase my minimum framerates for VR. I currently have Dual-Rank 2x16gb 3333mhz CL17 with even worse sub-timings.

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

spyshagg said:


> Hello guys.
> 
> What kit do you recommend for pushing the highest Frequency + lowest timings possible?
> I need to increase my minimum framerates for VR. I currently have Dual-Rank 2x16gb 3333mhz CL17 with even worse sub-timings.
> 
> Thanks!


What motherboard do you have?

I get really good results with 4x8GB Trident Z CL16 3600 NOT RGB. Pretty much the best kit for four DIMMs. 

Edit. And with Gigabyte being T-Topology you do better with four DIMMs.


----------



## spyshagg

Thanks

I have the z390 aorus master.

Wouldn't the board clock higher with 2x8gb?


----------



## KedarWolf

spyshagg said:


> Thanks
> 
> I have the z390 aorus master.
> 
> Wouldn't the board clock higher with 2x8gb?


No, because of T-Topology you always do better with 4x8GB. :h34r-smi


----------



## spyshagg

Read good things about this kit 

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...3200mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-08l-tg.html

Anyone tried it on this board?


----------



## D13mass

Guys, who know where I can find these settings?


----------



## diedo

I have a weird issue with the motherboard tho, since I failed to overclock my 9900K, in my trial and error trying overclocking it, yesterday I upgraded to F9 BIOS from the official website everything went well and the BIOS was upgraded and checked by press F9 it showed the BIOS version F9 and in cpuz showed it was F9, I slept and wake up and still trying why I'm getting Whea errors so I ran Intel CPU diagnostics and everything was passed indicating that my cpu works and there is no issues, then I noticed that Intel Diagnostics reporting my BIOS version is F8. I was shocked like seriously what's the matter here, it's a Aorus Master Z390. Can someone explain this to me?


----------



## danyxp

Hi
I got an i9900k with a z390 aorus master a few days ago, and I am trying to figure out if I keep the or not. I keep it at stock, just xmp enabled (2x8 at 3200) and it gets very hot after an hour of gaming (bf5), 95 Celsius. Voltages are a bit high, with max 1.393 vcore in hwinfo. It is cooled by an Corsair Hydro Series H100x High Performance, i removed and re-applied but no change. The video card ( gtx970 ) does not exceed 70 Celsius while gaming.
In bios, it appears with 1.272v at 4700 (stock) and 1.260 if I apply intel limitations (tdp 95, power boost 118 and duration 8 sec).
In the screen below i run p95 (no avx), hwinfo started after the test.
I enabled in bios the MCE (nothing else just the xmp), saved and at first boot I entered again in bios just to see the voltage, it was 1.46..... Windows started but I was afraid to stress it with that amount in it.
My question is: how can I know if it's ok to keep them (mb +cpu). I do not plan to OC for daily use, but i'm afraid something is wrong here... is it normal to have the vcore at 1.393 (the max value, in load is below that, i guess it spikes when cores go to 5ghz) at stock settings with this mb ? 
I'll take all the help I can get, I tried some setups found in this topic but with no success (no boot or very unstable). 
ps: how can I take screenshots from bios ?
Edit: the cpu is stepping R0, bios F9 (it came with f8, I could not install windows with that version)


----------



## Falkentyne

diedo said:


> I have a weird issue with the motherboard tho, since I failed to overclock my 9900K, in my trial and error trying overclocking it, yesterday I upgraded to F9 BIOS from the official website everything went well and the BIOS was upgraded and checked by press F9 it showed the BIOS version F9 and in cpuz showed it was F9, I slept and wake up and still trying why I'm getting Whea errors so I ran Intel CPU diagnostics and everything was passed indicating that my cpu works and there is no issues, then I noticed that Intel Diagnostics reporting my BIOS version is F8. I was shocked like seriously what's the matter here, it's a Aorus Master Z390. Can someone explain this to me?


Set the bios switches to main bios and single bios mode.
And if you're still getting WHEA's at the settings I told you to use, RMA the CPU.
I replied on reddit.


----------



## Falkentyne

danyxp said:


> Hi
> I got an i9900k with a z390 aorus master a few days ago, and I am trying to figure out if I keep the or not. I keep it at stock, just xmp enabled (2x8 at 3200) and it gets very hot after an hour of gaming (bf5), 95 Celsius. Voltages are a bit high, with max 1.393 vcore in hwinfo. It is cooled by an Corsair Hydro Series H100x High Performance, i removed and re-applied but no change. The video card ( gtx970 ) does not exceed 70 Celsius while gaming.
> In bios, it appears with 1.272v at 4700 (stock) and 1.260 if I apply intel limitations (tdp 95, power boost 118 and duration 8 sec).
> In the screen below i run p95 (no avx), hwinfo started after the test.
> I enabled in bios the MCE (nothing else just the xmp), saved and at first boot I entered again in bios just to see the voltage, it was 1.46..... Windows started but I was afraid to stress it with that amount in it.
> My question is: how can I know if it's ok to keep them (mb +cpu). I do not plan to OC for daily use, but i'm afraid something is wrong here... is it normal to have the vcore at 1.393 (the max value, in load is below that, i guess it spikes when cores go to 5ghz) at stock settings with this mb ?
> I'll take all the help I can get, I tried some setups found in this topic but with no success (no boot or very unstable).
> ps: how can I take screenshots from bios ?
> Edit: the cpu is stepping R0, bios F9 (it came with f8, I could not install windows with that version)


Use VR VOUT for your voltage measurements, not VID nor the other two vcore sensors.


----------



## ntuason

why are there so many vcore sensors in Hwinfo64? Do they represent different things?


----------



## KedarWolf

spyshagg said:


> Read good things about this kit
> 
> https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...3200mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-08l-tg.html
> 
> Anyone tried it on this board?


Gigabyte boards are T-Topology.

You're not going to do near as good 2x8GB as you are 4x8GB.


----------



## diedo

Falkentyne said:


> Set the bios switches to main bios and single bios mode.
> And if you're still getting WHEA's at the settings I told you to use, RMA the CPU.
> I replied on reddit.


Sorry I couldn't replicate the settings you told me about. I couldn't find some of the parameters in the BIOS , but here is a thing I discovered but I'm still not sure of till the time I posted this now, the build had a couple of issue which helped eliminate WHEA BSODs

1- The connectors to the GPU was reversed, I use 1 cable with 2 connectors to connect the gpu, I set the connector that comes directly from the cable to the slot on the right and other one on left (Talking about gpu power connector)

*when I tested with this there was whea bsods 

2- There is a new standard in new motherboards apparently that it has 2 CPU 8Pin connectors, the past days and yesterday I was testing with 1 connector plugged in but when I connected the other one (thankfully my power supply comes with two bundled and I keep them save, Anyway I connected the other connector (CPU 8PIN) and tried to overclock with these settings 
-XPM Profile 1
-Muli x50
-uncore 47
-AVX 0
-MCE disabled
-LLC Turbo
-Vcore 1.330

everything runs smoothly no WHEA BSOD but when I checked in HWiNFO64 there was Cache L0 Error and the PC restarted(all that after the computer ran through 15 minutes of RealBench and it passed it, I couldn't tell if there was a BSOD or not cause I was away from the PC).
I tried again with uncore 46 the PC ran through multiple cinebench tests but Cache L0 error showed up So I flashed BIOS F9 again and it Cache error showed up again.

I'm not sure if the issue with WHEA was fixed due to the dual 8PIN connectors was running on one 8PIN or not, so I'm testing it again tomorrow and see if I can RMA the chip or not.


----------



## danyxp

Falkentyne said:


> Use VR VOUT for your voltage measurements, not VID nor the other two vcore sensors.


Here is an image with sensors during single core cb r15, hwinfo started while cb running.
I was unther the impression that the vcore read by the E2 sensor is good; anyway, is vrout 1.279 something to be expected with default settings on this mb ?
Just xmp enabled and mce disabled.
Thanks for your answers.


----------



## Falkentyne

danyxp said:


> Here is an image with sensors during single core cb r15, hwinfo started while cb running.
> I was unther the impression that the vcore read by the E2 sensor is good; anyway, is vrout 1.279 something to be expected with default settings on this mb ?
> Just xmp enabled and mce disabled.
> Thanks for your answers.


I only used fixed voltage with c-states disabled and MCE disabled. I do not enable MCE.

I can't help you if you are using turbo boost ratios and downclocking at idle.
It looks like that 1.279v on VR VOUT was an idle voltage. But in your screenshot you also seem to be idle with a 1.17v VR VOUT.
And I can't tell from your configuration if that 1.279v VR VOUT was load (at 5 ghz stress test) or idle. 
That's why i can't help if you don't use a fixed vcore and all core turbo multiplier fixed and unchanging at all times.


----------



## danyxp

Hwinfo was started while cb 15 was running and the ss was taken during the test, so the value is at load.
I'm willing to apply whatever necessary setting in bios to test and have peace of mind, I'm just not sure what exactly to do:
mce disabled
50 core multiplier
c-states disabled
what next ?
I repeat, my goal is to determine if there is something wrong with the cpu or mb, because i got the feeling that it uses to much power for stock values.
I haven't close the hwinfo window after the test, in idle vrout is mostly between 1.150 and 1.256, rarely drops to 0.734, with the max being 1.305 now.
edit added ss with hwinfo started after p95 (no avx )was started. (I haven't made any changes in bios yet, still stock + xmp)


----------



## Falkentyne

danyxp said:


> Hwinfo was started while cb 15 was running and the ss was taken during the test, so the value is at load.
> I'm willing to apply whatever necessary setting in bios to test and have peace of mind, I'm just not sure what exactly to do:
> mce disabled
> 50 core multiplier
> c-states disabled
> what next ?
> I repeat, my goal is to determine if there is something wrong with the cpu or mb, because i got the feeling that it uses to much power for stock values.
> I haven't close the hwinfo window after the test, in idle vrout is mostly between 1.150 and 1.256, rarely drops to 0.734, with the max being 1.305 now.


While some people like C-states and turbo boost/downclocking, I always like a fixed multiplier and frequency. I'm not telling you you have to use it, but I can't see what's going on if your voltages and multipliers are all over the map.

Power should be measured by Current IOUT (Amps) and Power POUT (Watts).

CPU Package Power is precisely VID * Amps, and if VID is higher than VR VOUT, then CPU Package Power will be reported too high as well.

"Stock" is based on stock settings of 4.7 ghz core and 4.3 ghz ring and the CPU's default "VID" setting for 4.7 ghz (which can be anywhere between 1.12v to 1.20v).
The problem is, the AC Loadline value influences what is sent to the VRM as a 'target voltage' and is added to the base "VID". The resulting displayed VID (*before DC Loadline drops it down*) and the target VR VOUT (before vdroop drops it down) is what the VRM uses. Please check my other posts here and in the 9900K thread as I explained this with FARRRR too many words and is way too complicated to write all over again. (Vcore Loadline Calibration should be left on standard/normal when using Auto CPU Vcore voltage, if AC Loadline is at 1.6 mOhms). This only applies on "Auto" CPU Vcore; manual voltages directly program the VRM with a target voltage (Ignoring VID), although VID is still affected by AC Loadline.

Gigabyte uses presets for AC And DC Loadline based on the CPU ratio/frequency and the "Auto" setting for "CPU Internal Load Line". Manually putting values in "Internal VR Settings" for AC Loadline and DC Loadline will overrule and supercede the "Internal Load Line" presets.

The maximum values Intel specifies for AC Loadline is 1.6 mOhms, and DC Loadline should normally be set to the same value as VRM loadline (unfortunately, board makers don't tell you the mOhm values for Loadline Calibration, but "Standard" and "Normal" are 1.6 mOhms and "Turbo" is 0.4 mOhms--I experimented and found those myself).


----------



## danyxp

Ok; so it is recomended that I change Vcore Loadline Calibration to standard/normal; do I need to change something to the AC Loadline ? 
Right now max vrout is at 1.229, p95 still running, got 89 celsius.


----------



## Falkentyne

danyxp said:


> Ok; so it is recomended that I change Vcore Loadline Calibration to standard/normal; do I need to change something to the AC Loadline ?
> Right now max vrout is at 1.229, p95 still running, got 89 celsius.


On Auto voltages (no offsets) you can use AC Loadline 130-160 (1.3-1.6 mOhms) and Vcore Loadline Calibration Standard, depending on if your system is stable or not.
5 ghz stability is not guaranteed as the processor was only tested on auto voltages (by Intel) for 1 core stability at 5 ghz and 8 core stability at 4.7 ghz. DC Loadline should be kept at 160 to match VRM (Loadline calibration) loadline.


----------



## danyxp

Thank you; when I get home i'll try to find where in bios I put ac loadline at 160, the vcore loadline i know wher it is 
I read in another thread that most i9's should be stable at fixed voltage 1.275 @48 multiplier; I'll try that to if I can find all the settings needed for that. So far I could not get anything stable other than stock+xmp, I must be doing something wrong or I got a potato chip


----------



## spyshagg

KedarWolf said:


> Gigabyte boards are T-Topology.
> 
> You're not going to do near as good 2x8GB as you are 4x8GB.


I believe you  just not enough funds to buy 4 sticks right now


----------



## KedarWolf

spyshagg said:


> I believe you  just not enough funds to buy 4 sticks right now


here are your best options for B-Dies 2x8GB that you can buy a second same kit later. Cheapest options.

The Royals are really nice and overclock well and are not much more. 

G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4133 (PC4 33000) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZKWC - Newegg.com
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232469

G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4133 (PC4 33000) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZSWC - Newegg.com
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232470

G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZA - Newegg.com
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232471

G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin RGB DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C19D-16GTRG - Newegg.com
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232774

G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZSW - Newegg.com
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/0RN-001W-004N6

G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4133 (PC4 33000) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZC - Newegg.com
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232468


----------



## robertr1

Anyone here custom tune their RTL and IO mem timings? Would you mind sharing?


----------



## spyshagg

KedarWolf said:


> here are your best options for B-Dies 2x8GB that you can buy a second same kit later. Cheapest options.
> 
> The Royals are really nice and overclock well and are not much more.
> 
> G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4133 (PC4 33000) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZKWC - Newegg.com
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232469
> 
> G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4133 (PC4 33000) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZSWC - Newegg.com
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232470
> 
> G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZA - Newegg.com
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232471
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin RGB DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C19D-16GTRG - Newegg.com
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232774
> 
> G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZSW - Newegg.com
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/0RN-001W-004N6
> 
> G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4133 (PC4 33000) Intel Z270 / Z370 / X299 Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4133C19D-16GTZC - Newegg.com
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232468


amazing! Thank you!


----------



## Vesimas

I have a simple question: atm i'm running a RTX 2070, 2 970 Evo NVMe drive and 1 WD Red Sata. What will happen if i add another 970 Evo NMVe (nice deal on Amazon for 1TB) in terms of PCIe line?


----------



## Fuubar

Vesimas, afaik, top to bottom: 1st slot kills 2 sata ports, 2nd slot kills last pciex slot, 3rd slot is free of charge.
Im at BIOS F9 atm, does anyone know where I could find HPET to turn on/off? Im having some sound sync issues in any online videos and mpc-hc. Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

Fuubar said:


> Vesimas, afaik, top to bottom: 1st slot kills 2 sata ports, 2nd slot kills last pciex slot, 3rd slot is free of charge.
> Im at BIOS F9 atm, does anyone know where I could find HPET to turn on/off? Im having some sound sync issues in any online videos and mpc-hc. Thanks!


I think it can only be done by command line, open an admin command prompt and below.



Code:


bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock

https://www.ghacks.net/2013/04/18/try-changing-hpet-settings-to-improve-your-pcs-performance/


----------



## Fuubar

Thanks!


----------



## alv-OC

Hi guys!

After many weeks having problems to get my G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR stable yestrady I decided to send the MoBo back to Caseking for RMA. Before of that I RMA'd the memory kits and G.Skill just gave me brand new sticks (maybe there was something wrong with it?, can't say, they look to do always replacements right away) so the chance of getting 2 'faulty' memory kits of cherry-picked memory is almost impossible.

In the meantine Gigabite's support team answered me saying that they were able to replicate my exact same issue on their lab, and their BIOS team gave me a modified version of the BIOS (wich they called 'F10a') just a few days ago. I tried that BIOS but it didn't make much difference from last official release F9. XMP ON, everything else on Auto and I strugled to pass Mem Training being always stucked at Debug LED code 55, but after a CMOS clean it booted and I could land into windows desktop, however it was very, very, very unestable, I was able to run R15 a couple of times but MemTest64 sowed between 120 and 170 errors the few times it could complete the first loop..., atempting to open any program or even web browsers would cause inmediate BSOD.

F9 was more stable as at least I use internet for a few minutes before crashing, however it was giving me more errors on MemTest64 (it doesn't make much sense for me).

Speaking with another user on G.Skill forums that had exact same hardware than me (even PSU and M.2 device) he got it MoBo replaced from Amazon and looks like he just activated XMP and is runig rock solid.... 

I tryen to relax some timings, but didn't work at all. setting XMO Off and setting frequency manually at 4000MHz and leaving every thing else on Auto o would boot but timings were so crazy high like 20 20 28 62, totally unacceptable.

Does anyone have a clue of what could be the issue or has heard about someone having this issue as well? I don't have previous experience with Caseking's RMA service and I'm not feeling very optimistic...

PS: if someone is interested in having a look to this F10a BIOS just give me a shout by PM and I'll send a WeTransfer with it.


----------



## Falkentyne

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> After many weeks having problems to get my G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR stable yestrady I decided to send the MoBo back to Caseking for RMA. Before of that I RMA'd the memory kits and G.Skill just gave me brand new sticks (maybe there was something wrong with it?, can't say, they look to do always replacements right away) so the chance of getting 2 'faulty' memory kits of cherry-picked memory is almost impossible.
> 
> In the meantine Gigabite's support team answered me saying that they were able to replicate my exact same issue on their lab, and their BIOS team gave me a modified version of the BIOS (wich they called 'F10a') just a few days ago. I tried that BIOS but it didn't make much difference from last official release F9. XMP ON, everything else on Auto and I strugled to pass Mem Training being always stucked at Debug LED code 55, but after a CMOS clean it booted and I could land into windows desktop, however it was very, very, very unestable, I was able to run R15 a couple of times but MemTest64 sowed between 120 and 170 errors the few times it could complete the first loop..., atempting to open any program or even web browsers would cause inmediate BSOD.
> 
> F9 was more stable as at least I use internet for a few minutes before crashing, however it was giving me more errors on MemTest64 (it doesn't make much sense for me).
> 
> Speaking with another user on G.Skill forums that had exact same hardware than me (even PSU and M.2 device) he got it MoBo replaced from Amazon and looks like he just activated XMP and is runig rock solid....
> 
> I tryen to relax some timings, but didn't work at all. setting XMO Off and setting frequency manually at 4000MHz and leaving every thing else on Auto o would boot but timings were so crazy high like 20 20 28 62, totally unacceptable.
> 
> Does anyone have a clue of what could be the issue or has heard about someone having this issue as well? I don't have previous experience with Caseking's RMA service and I'm not feeling very optimistic...
> 
> PS: if someone is interested in having a look to this F10a BIOS just give me a shout by PM and I'll send a WeTransfer with it.


Just post it here as an attachment and then @KedarWolf can do his magic on it!


----------



## Intrud3r

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> After many weeks having problems to get my G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR stable yestrady I decided to send the MoBo back to Caseking for RMA. Before of that I RMA'd the memory kits and G.Skill just gave me brand new sticks (maybe there was something wrong with it?, can't say, they look to do always replacements right away) so the chance of getting 2 'faulty' memory kits of cherry-picked memory is almost impossible.
> 
> In the meantine Gigabite's support team answered me saying that they were able to replicate my exact same issue on their lab, and their BIOS team gave me a modified version of the BIOS (wich they called 'F10a') just a few days ago. I tried that BIOS but it didn't make much difference from last official release F9. XMP ON, everything else on Auto and I strugled to pass Mem Training being always stucked at Debug LED code 55, but after a CMOS clean it booted and I could land into windows desktop, however it was very, very, very unestable, I was able to run R15 a couple of times but MemTest64 sowed between 120 and 170 errors the few times it could complete the first loop..., atempting to open any program or even web browsers would cause inmediate BSOD.
> 
> F9 was more stable as at least I use internet for a few minutes before crashing, however it was giving me more errors on MemTest64 (it doesn't make much sense for me).
> 
> Speaking with another user on G.Skill forums that had exact same hardware than me (even PSU and M.2 device) he got it MoBo replaced from Amazon and looks like he just activated XMP and is runig rock solid....
> 
> I tryen to relax some timings, but didn't work at all. setting XMO Off and setting frequency manually at 4000MHz and leaving every thing else on Auto o would boot but timings were so crazy high like 20 20 28 62, totally unacceptable.
> 
> Does anyone have a clue of what could be the issue or has heard about someone having this issue as well? I don't have previous experience with Caseking's RMA service and I'm not feeling very optimistic...
> 
> PS: if someone is interested in having a look to this F10a BIOS just give me a shout by PM and I'll send a WeTransfer with it.


Don't know if it helps, but I read that you put xmp = off and frequency = 4000 Mhz ... everything else on auto.

On my board I was playing around with my memory, and when I set my XMP = off and left DRAM voltage on AUTO, it only gave something like 1.2V to my dimm's which was logically not enough.

I had to manually enter 1.350V or higher for it to run well when I set xmp = off.

Maybe it helps.


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Don't know if it helps, but I read that you put xmp = off and frequency = 4000 Mhz ... everything else on auto.
> 
> On my board I was playing around with my memory, and when I set my XMP = off and left DRAM voltage on AUTO, it only gave something like 1.2V to my dimm's which was logically not enough.
> 
> I had to manually enter 1.350V or higher for it to run well when I set xmp = off.
> 
> Maybe it helps.


You also have to manually set DDR VTT to 1/2 DDRV if it doesn't adjust it manually.
Seen cases where DDR VTT was set to 0.6v instead of 0.675v.


----------



## diedo

I still can't flash F9B on top of F9 , Cleared CMOS and loaded optimised defaults still can't flash it, it gives me error !! invalid command !! I use



Code:


efiflash.exe 1.F9b /X \NoOemID

Aorus Master here.


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> After many weeks having problems to get my G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR stable yestrady I decided to send the MoBo back to Caseking for RMA. Before of that I RMA'd the memory kits and G.Skill just gave me brand new sticks (maybe there was something wrong with it?, can't say, they look to do always replacements right away) so the chance of getting 2 'faulty' memory kits of cherry-picked memory is almost impossible.
> 
> In the meantine Gigabite's support team answered me saying that they were able to replicate my exact same issue on their lab, and their BIOS team gave me a modified version of the BIOS (wich they called 'F10a') just a few days ago. I tried that BIOS but it didn't make much difference from last official release F9. XMP ON, everything else on Auto and I strugled to pass Mem Training being always stucked at Debug LED code 55, but after a CMOS clean it booted and I could land into windows desktop, however it was very, very, very unestable, I was able to run R15 a couple of times but MemTest64 sowed between 120 and 170 errors the few times it could complete the first loop..., atempting to open any program or even web browsers would cause inmediate BSOD.
> 
> F9 was more stable as at least I use internet for a few minutes before crashing, however it was giving me more errors on MemTest64 (it doesn't make much sense for me).
> 
> Speaking with another user on G.Skill forums that had exact same hardware than me (even PSU and M.2 device) he got it MoBo replaced from Amazon and looks like he just activated XMP and is runig rock solid....
> 
> I tryen to relax some timings, but didn't work at all. setting XMO Off and setting frequency manually at 4000MHz and leaving every thing else on Auto o would boot but timings were so crazy high like 20 20 28 62, totally unacceptable.
> 
> Does anyone have a clue of what could be the issue or has heard about someone having this issue as well? I don't have previous experience with Caseking's RMA service and I'm not feeling very optimistic...
> 
> PS: if someone is interested in having a look to this F10a BIOS just give me a shout by PM and I'll send a WeTransfer with it.


I PM'd you. Can you add it as a .zip file as an attachment either here or in my PM?

Thank you.


----------



## KedarWolf

diedo said:


> I still can't flash F9B on top of F9 , Cleared CMOS and loaded optimised defaults still can't flash it, it gives me error !! invalid command !! I use
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash.exe 1.F9b /X \NoOemID
> 
> Aorus Master here.


I'll make you a regular F9b BIOS without the password reset fix when I get home from work in a few hours. You use the regular command to flash it, not the OemID one.

But I flashed the password fix F9b with that command and it worked just fine. Is the BIOS you are flashing named '1.F9b'?

Edit: And you sure you made the USB properly with Rufus and put the efiflash.exe on the USB drive?


----------



## KedarWolf

diedo said:


> I still can't flash F9B on top of F9 , Cleared CMOS and loaded optimised defaults still can't flash it, it gives me error !! invalid command !! I use
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash.exe 1.F9b /X \NoOemID
> 
> Aorus Master here.


.zip files have F9 BIOS and F9b with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 19/07/2019.

F9b is older but seems doesn't have that reboot at idle bug some boards have. F9b has the password reset fix.

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










When it boots into DOS, type
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9b /x \NoOemID

or
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x

To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x \NoOemID

Profit!!


----------



## diedo

KedarWolf said:


> .zip files have F9 BIOS and F9b with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 19/07/2019.
> 
> F9b is older but seems doesn't have that reboot at idle bug some boards have. F9b has the password reset fix.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F9b /x \NoOemID
> 
> or
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F9 /x
> 
> To flash back from password reset F9b to any other BIOS example F9.
> Code:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F9 /x \NoOemID
> 
> Profit!!


I have F9 flashed successfully tho with efiflash 1.f9 /x but the efiflash 1.f9b /x \noeomid doesn't work at all, Do I have to set the bios to single mode from the switch on the mother board when I try efiflash 1.f9b /x it shows oem mismatch error.


----------



## KedarWolf

diedo said:


> I have F9 flashed successfully tho with efiflash 1.f9 /x but the efiflash 1.f9b /x \noeomid doesn't work at all, Do I have to set the bios to single mode from the switch on the mother board when I try efiflash 1.f9b /x it shows oem mismatch error.


i'm not sure why, but the password modded F9b not flashing for myself any more either.

I can make regular updated F9b though. bbiab.


----------



## KedarWolf

F9b BIOS with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 20/07/2019.

F9b is older but seems doesn't have that reboot at idle bug some boards have. This F9b does NOT have the password reset fix.

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










When it boots into DOS, type

Code:


Code:


efiflash 1.F9b /x

Profit!!


----------



## robertr1

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> After many weeks having problems to get my G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR stable yestrady I decided to send the MoBo back to Caseking for RMA. Before of that I RMA'd the memory kits and G.Skill just gave me brand new sticks (maybe there was something wrong with it?, can't say, they look to do always replacements right away) so the chance of getting 2 'faulty' memory kits of cherry-picked memory is almost impossible.
> 
> In the meantine Gigabite's support team answered me saying that they were able to replicate my exact same issue on their lab, and their BIOS team gave me a modified version of the BIOS (wich they called 'F10a') just a few days ago. I tried that BIOS but it didn't make much difference from last official release F9. XMP ON, everything else on Auto and I strugled to pass Mem Training being always stucked at Debug LED code 55, but after a CMOS clean it booted and I could land into windows desktop, however it was very, very, very unestable, I was able to run R15 a couple of times but MemTest64 sowed between 120 and 170 errors the few times it could complete the first loop..., atempting to open any program or even web browsers would cause inmediate BSOD.
> 
> F9 was more stable as at least I use internet for a few minutes before crashing, however it was giving me more errors on MemTest64 (it doesn't make much sense for me).
> 
> Speaking with another user on G.Skill forums that had exact same hardware than me (even PSU and M.2 device) he got it MoBo replaced from Amazon and looks like he just activated XMP and is runig rock solid....
> 
> I tryen to relax some timings, but didn't work at all. setting XMO Off and setting frequency manually at 4000MHz and leaving every thing else on Auto o would boot but timings were so crazy high like 20 20 28 62, totally unacceptable.
> 
> Does anyone have a clue of what could be the issue or has heard about someone having this issue as well? I don't have previous experience with Caseking's RMA service and I'm not feeling very optimistic...
> 
> PS: if someone is interested in having a look to this F10a BIOS just give me a shout by PM and I'll send a WeTransfer with it.


You're likely not going to get that mem to run at XMP on these boards with 2 sticks. 

These boards are very poor at 2 stick performance.

The chances of you booting with those timings and being stable are somewhere between 0 and .5% I'd love have someone show me a 17-17-17 4000mhz in a 2 stick config on their GB Z390 board running stable. 

RMA the board, get an Asus Apex if you want high mem speeds and want to stick with 2 sticks. Don't touch a GB Z390 board if you goal is 2 stick mem performance. 

If you want to add 2 more sticks, you'll have a much higher chance of running XMP.


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> You're likely not going to get that mem to run at XMP on these boards with 2 sticks.
> I'd love have someone show me a 17-17-17 4000mhz in a 2 stick config on their GB Z390 board running stable.


Yep, that's the reason I switched to 4 sticks of B-die. My friend's ASRock Taichi Z390 fires right up in XMP at 4000 with 2 sticks with a G.skill 4000 CL18 2 stick kit, at 1.35v. I had the same kit and it was a nightmare even getting it to boot at all, at 4000. This was on a Z390 Pro board, the Master might be a little better in this regard.


----------



## Falkentyne

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> After many weeks having problems to get my G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTZR stable yestrady I decided to send the MoBo back to Caseking for RMA. Before of that I RMA'd the memory kits and G.Skill just gave me brand new sticks (maybe there was something wrong with it?, can't say, they look to do always replacements right away) so the chance of getting 2 'faulty' memory kits of cherry-picked memory is almost impossible.
> 
> In the meantine Gigabite's support team answered me saying that they were able to replicate my exact same issue on their lab, and their BIOS team gave me a modified version of the BIOS (wich they called 'F10a') just a few days ago. I tried that BIOS but it didn't make much difference from last official release F9. XMP ON, everything else on Auto and I strugled to pass Mem Training being always stucked at Debug LED code 55, but after a CMOS clean it booted and I could land into windows desktop, however it was very, very, very unestable, I was able to run R15 a couple of times but MemTest64 sowed between 120 and 170 errors the few times it could complete the first loop..., atempting to open any program or even web browsers would cause inmediate BSOD.
> 
> F9 was more stable as at least I use internet for a few minutes before crashing, however it was giving me more errors on MemTest64 (it doesn't make much sense for me).
> 
> Speaking with another user on G.Skill forums that had exact same hardware than me (even PSU and M.2 device) he got it MoBo replaced from Amazon and looks like he just activated XMP and is runig rock solid....
> 
> I tryen to relax some timings, but didn't work at all. setting XMO Off and setting frequency manually at 4000MHz and leaving every thing else on Auto o would boot but timings were so crazy high like 20 20 28 62, totally unacceptable.
> 
> Does anyone have a clue of what could be the issue or has heard about someone having this issue as well? I don't have previous experience with Caseking's RMA service and I'm not feeling very optimistic...
> 
> PS: if someone is interested in having a look to this F10a BIOS just give me a shout by PM and I'll send a WeTransfer with it.


Did you ever get around to posting that BIOS for Kedarwolf?


----------



## KedarWolf

diedo said:


> I still can't flash F9B on top of F9 , Cleared CMOS and loaded optimised defaults still can't flash it, it gives me error !! invalid command !! I use
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash.exe 1.F9b /X \NoOemID
> 
> Aorus Master here.


*The Efiflash.exe included has all checks bypassed. Now it'll flash the password modded F9b included in the F9b.zip.*

*BIOS's for Aorus Master, I might want to mention that. * 

.zip files have F9 BIOS and F9b with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Ethernet firmware as of 20/07/2019.

F9b is older but seems doesn't have that reboot at idle bug some boards have.

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f9b

 or


Code:


efiflash 1.f9


----------



## KedarWolf

Anyone need a microcode, RST and intel Ethernet firmware modded BIOS for any other board than the Aorus Master let me know.

Include in a .zip file here the version you want modded if it's not the latest version from the Gigabyte website. Even the latest BIOS's are outdated in the microcode and firmware.


----------



## diedo

KedarWolf said:


> Anyone need a microcode, RST and intel Ethernet firmware modded BIOS for any other board than the Aorus Master let me know.
> 
> Include in a .zip file here the version you want modded if it's not the latest version from the Gigabyte website. Even the latest BIOS's are outdated in the microcode and firmware.


thanks for the new modded BIOS, but does Microcode help with stability? also are these security patchs microcodes ? are there ones without any security patchs, I don't really think anyone would think to hack my machine and get data from.


----------



## memery.uag

*4 sticks?*



robertr1 said:


> You're likely not going to get that mem to run at XMP on these boards with 2 sticks.
> 
> These boards are very poor at 2 stick performance.
> 
> The chances of you booting with those timings and being stable are somewhere between 0 and .5% I'd love have someone show me a 17-17-17 4000mhz in a 2 stick config on their GB Z390 board running stable.
> 
> RMA the board, get an Asus Apex if you want high mem speeds and want to stick with 2 sticks. Don't touch a GB Z390 board if you goal is 2 stick mem performance.
> 
> If you want to add 2 more sticks, you'll have a much higher chance of running XMP.


I'm running 2 sticks of 16gb Corsair vengeance, you guys are saying it's more stable with all 4 slots filled? I'm gonna have to run out now before the wife gets home!


----------



## KedarWolf

diedo said:


> thanks for the new modded BIOS, but does Microcode help with stability? also are these security patchs microcodes ? are there ones without any security patchs, I don't really think anyone would think to hack my machine and get data from.


I'm pretty sure all the Z390 BIOS's have the Spectre microcode patches etc. They came out after all that. The patches I apply help stability and can help with performance as well, though some microcode patches, like the Spectre ones, actually slowed down PCs. Microcode fixes after that helped fix the Spectre slowdown issues though.


----------



## KedarWolf

I pondered getting an AMD 3900x and an X570 motherboard until I saw about 30 comparison gaming benchmarks between the two and a 9900k was faster pretty much every one.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I pondered getting an AMD 3900x and an X570 motherboard until I saw about 30 comparison gaming benchmarks between the two and a 9900k was faster pretty much every one.


What happened to the guy with the F10 beta Master bios? He seems to have just vanished


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> What happened to the guy with the F10 beta Master bios? He seems to have just vanished


Yes, I PM'd him, nada.


----------



## KedarWolf

F7 BIOS for the Aorus Xtreme

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash Z390AOXT.F7


----------



## GravBar

Wow, that was quick. Thank you KedarWolf


----------



## robertr1

memery.uag said:


> I'm running 2 sticks of 16gb Corsair vengeance, you guys are saying it's more stable with all 4 slots filled? I'm gonna have to run out now before the wife gets home!


The boards use T-Toplogy memory layout meaning they'll always perform better with all 4 slots filled out. Be careful on the pro though. The master has more PCB layers than our Pro's which gives it better mem OC. You should be able to run 3600mhz or so with 2 stick and decent timings on the pro. More than that is gonna be tough.


----------



## alv-OC

Falkentyne said:


> Just post it here as an attachment and then @KedarWolf can do his magic on it!


Yeah he wrote me on PM and I just sent a ZIP file with it.




Intrud3r said:


> Don't know if it helps, but I read that you put xmp = off and frequency = 4000 Mhz ... everything else on auto.
> 
> On my board I was playing around with my memory, and when I set my XMP = off and left DRAM voltage on AUTO, it only gave something like 1.2V to my dimm's which was logically not enough.
> 
> I had to manually enter 1.350V or higher for it to run well when I set xmp = off.
> 
> Maybe it helps.


Actually I tryed that but BIOS would set ridiculous timings like 20 20 28 62 with DDR voltage: 1.4v @4000MHz...




Falkentyne said:


> You also have to manually set DDR VTT to 1/2 DDRV if it doesn't adjust it manually.
> Seen cases where DDR VTT was set to 0.6v instead of 0.675v.


ummm... if I still recall that was my case, VTT was always exactly at 0.600v on Auto (both XMP On and Off)


----------



## memery.uag

robertr1 said:


> The boards use T-Toplogy memory layout meaning they'll always perform better with all 4 slots filled out. Be careful on the pro though. The master has more PCB layers than our Pro's which gives it better mem OC. You should be able to run 3600mhz or so with 2 stick and decent timings on the pro. More than that is gonna be tough.


Yeah I would have gone that route with the Master if I had known that. I did want the wifi and Bluetooth though so I think I'm happy. I went out and grabbed 2 more sticks of ram yesterday though, lol. It was impulsive and not well thought out. I now have two of these https://www.bestbuy.com/site/corsai...th-rgb-lighting-black/6333800.p?skuId=6333800 Latency is 16-18-18-36 and they have been booting into their 3200MHz XMP profile no problem. I just think I really don't need 64GB of RAM! Is there a better set of 4 I could get for the same price, $350+/-?


----------



## robertr1

memery.uag said:


> Yeah I would have gone that route with the Master if I had known that. I did want the wifi and Bluetooth though so I think I'm happy. I went out and grabbed 2 more sticks of ram yesterday though, lol. It was impulsive and not well thought out. I now have two of these https://www.bestbuy.com/site/corsai...th-rgb-lighting-black/6333800.p?skuId=6333800 Latency is 16-18-18-36 and they have been booting into their 3200MHz XMP profile no problem. I just think I really don't need 64GB of RAM! Is there a better set of 4 I could get for the same price, $350+/-?


You'd be hard pressed. 32gb kits are dual rank which puts more stress on the mem controller/imc. 2x8 is generally the fastest setup. Just enjoy the 64gb. Hopefully you run a lot of VM's and/or professional editing and can make use of it. For gaming, 0 point. If you're only gaming, 32gb is more than enough and spend that money towards a GPU upgrade all day.


----------



## KedarWolf

memery.uag said:


> Yeah I would have gone that route with the Master if I had known that. I did want the wifi and Bluetooth though so I think I'm happy. I went out and grabbed 2 more sticks of ram yesterday though, lol. It was impulsive and not well thought out. I now have two of these https://www.bestbuy.com/site/corsai...th-rgb-lighting-black/6333800.p?skuId=6333800 Latency is 16-18-18-36 and they have been booting into their 3200MHz XMP profile no problem. I just think I really don't need 64GB of RAM! Is there a better set of 4 I could get for the same price, $350+/-?


https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232585

Pretty much the best set you can get for 4x8GB. G.Skill CL16 3600 NOT RGB. RGB kits have issues overclocking except the G.Skill Royal kits. 

I run 24/7 at 4133MHz 17-17-17-38 2T with tight second and third timings on my Master with that kit and can run 4200Mhz 17-18-18-39 2T as well but get a bit better benchmarks with 4133Mhz in most benches. Only bench 4200 is better is AIDA64 Extreme.

There is a black kit as well but out of stock at newegg.com. You may be able to find it other places though.

Edit: This is pretty amazing for a 5GHz CPU. 

Second edit: Here the black kit if you want to search the model number for another store.

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232584

I'm pretty happy with this.


----------



## memery.uag

robertr1 said:


> You'd be hard pressed. 32gb kits are dual rank which puts more stress on the mem controller/imc. 2x8 is generally the fastest setup. Just enjoy the 64gb. Hopefully you run a lot of VM's and/or professional editing and can make use of it. For gaming, 0 point. If you're only gaming, 32gb is more than enough and spend that money towards a GPU upgrade all day.


Last night after putting in the second set of (2x16) I booted up and set up my system, (I run a few games but I also do a lot of work with photos and some video work. I also run a secure boot system so I lean towards stability a bit). I opened up as many applications as I could possibly think of, all of Microsoft Office with large files, my photo apps, Hand Brake, monitoring software, put a 4k movie running on VLC about 10 tabs open in Edge and loaded in Steam and started playing a game. All together it only sucked up around 16GB~. So I'm feeling foolish with 64GB. Newegg has the Dominators in a 2x8 kit, what would be better, 3200MHz x 16C or 3600MHz x 18C ? it would actually save me money too

Edit: You saw my GPU huh? lol well I'd have to get a new waterblock too if I got a new GPU and I refuse to buy another xx70 again, if I get a new GPU it's gonna be the 2080ti which is … lots.


----------



## KedarWolf

memery.uag said:


> Last night after putting in the second set of (2x16) I booted up and set up my system, (I run a few games but I also do a lot of work with photos and some video work. I also run a secure boot system so I lean towards stability a bit). I opened up as many applications as I could possibly think of, all of Microsoft Office with large files, my photo apps, Hand Brake, monitoring software, put a 4k movie running on VLC about 10 tabs open in Edge and loaded in Steam and started playing a game. All together it only sucked up around 16GB~. So I'm feeling foolish with 64GB. Newegg has the Dominators in a 2x8 kit, what would be better, 3200MHz x 16C or 3600MHz x 18C ? it would actually save me money too
> 
> Edit: You saw my GPU huh? lol well I'd have to get a new waterblock too if I got a new GPU and I refuse to buy another xx70 again, if I get a new GPU it's gonna be the 2080ti which is … lots.


4x8GB kits are single rank. DIMMs that are 16GB each are Dual Rank.

Check out that kit I linked, way to go for 4x8GB. You can go 4x16GB but won't overclock near as well, and you want to go G.Skill, best RAM by far. And 3200 CL16 are not very good, don't think 3600 CL18 are either.


----------



## KedarWolf

robertr1 said:


> You'd be hard pressed. 32gb kits are dual rank which puts more stress on the mem controller/imc. 2x8 is generally the fastest setup. Just enjoy the 64gb. Hopefully you run a lot of VM's and/or professional editing and can make use of it. For gaming, 0 point. If you're only gaming, 32gb is more than enough and spend that money towards a GPU upgrade all day.


4x8GB kits are single rank and Gigabyte boards are T-Topology, you do much better with four DIMMs then say 2x8GB.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted, that f10a BIOS I was provided will not flash with modded or regular Efiflash.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Deleted, that f10a BIOS I was provided will not flash with modded or regular Efiflash.


I had no problems flashing it with regular EFIflash.
I just ran efiflash f10amod.f10 /x
like usual, after renaming the file


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> I had no problems flashing it with regular EFIflash.
> I just ran efiflash f10amod.f10 /x
> like usual, after renaming the file


Anything interesting in the F10a bios ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> Anything interesting in the F10a bios ?


No.


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Anything interesting in the F10a bios ?


It flashed when I changed the extension to .F10 instead of .F10a.

And I'm GSAT stable at 4200 17-17-17-38 2T whereas before I had to be 17-18-18-39 2T with the F9 BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

F10a BIOS for the Aorus Master with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Intel Ethernet firmware.

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f10 /x


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> F10a BIOS for the Aorus Master with the latest microcode, RST firmware and Intel Ethernet firmware.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f10 /x


You sure that isn't just placebo or you didn't change some other voltages?
I remember the last time you said something was different you had the voltages set wrong 
Did you doublecheck and then do a side by side comparison to be sure? DDR VTT (Termintion?) or anything else?
That's a pretty bizarre difference for tRCD and tRAS to be decreased by 1 on the same voltage.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> You sure that isn't just placebo or you didn't change some other voltages?
> I remember the last time you said something was different you had the voltages set wrong
> Did you doublecheck and then do a side by side comparison to be sure? DDR VTT (Termintion?) or anything else?
> That's a pretty bizarre difference for tRCD and tRAS to be decreased by 1 on the same voltage.


I just booted into the BIOS and checked. Everything exactly the same. Even getting better second and third timings too.

tREFIx9 was at 128, tXSDLL was at 1024, tRFC was at 374, and my 6-4 timings were at 7-4.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I just booted into the BIOS and checked. Everything exactly the same. Even getting better second and third timings too.
> 
> tREFIx9 was at 128, tXSDLL was at 1024, tRFC was at 374, and my 6-4 timings were at 7-4.


Did you check your memory bandwidth scores in AIDA64 to compare them?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Did you check your memory bandwidth scores in AIDA64 to compare them?


Not 100% tested that tREFI is stable on the 4133Mhz though.


----------



## KedarWolf

Both are GSAT stable.


----------



## alv-OC

At least it worked for you @KedarWolf! 

I reported Gigabyte that I was still having the issues and they just answered me saying "bad luack pal, in our system works well" (well, not with same words but same meaning) and I got really upset when I realised that they used the freq. and timings they wanted instead the rated specs of the RAM Kit, this is a screenshot they sent me as "poof":

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=282722&thumb=1

They used 4200MHz 18-19-19-39 instead of 4000 17-17-17-37 as they should have done, seiously I'm very pissed off with Gigabyte right now...

I'll have wait to CaseKing answer.


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> At least it worked for you @KedarWolf!
> 
> I reported Gigabyte that I was still having the issues and they just answered me saying "bad luack pal, in our system works well" (well, not with same words but same meaning) and I got really upset when I realised that they used the freq. and timings they wanted instead the rated specs of the RAM Kit, this is a screenshot they sent me as "poof":
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=282722&thumb=1
> 
> They used 4200MHz 18-19-19-39 instead of 4000 17-17-17-37 as they should have done, seiously I'm very pissed off with Gigabyte right now...
> 
> I'll have wait to CaseKing answer.


Hope you don't mind but I shared it on the beta BIOS forum too. 

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1117.html

XMP is hit and miss. BRB, gonna post BIOS screenshots. I adjusted it for what SHOULD work for 4000MHz 17-17-17-37 2T.


----------



## alv-OC

yeah I don't mind at all, I'm happy to help the comunity 


Have you done changes at IA/GT section of the BIOS?? I always thouth that this section was only useful for "extreme overcloking" and relatedI kinda understand what is each setting but I don't know how they interfere with each other so I didn't touch anything there...

I also see that you seetted 1.45v DDR voltage and 1.46 for DDR training...Should it work with less voltage?? it's "supposed" to work with 1.35v so, 1.40v shouldn't be just enough? I've seen 1.45v for speeds like 4200MHz (with tight timings) and above

I'm going to share your BIOS config with CaseKing so they can try your settings on their lab and see if they can make it work. If it doesn't work I'll be asking for a replacement rigt away.


----------



## therealxx442

*Overall Stability*

Hello everyone!


I recently snagged up a nice deal on a 9900k so I've been researching Z390 motherboards and it seems like Gigabyte have the best ones. For reference, where I am there is a $125 price difference between the two boards I was considering, so I wondered if anyone here could help me. I was considering either the Aorus Pro Wifi or the Aorus Master.


I am eventually planning to overclock, but not heavily. I am only using 2 sticks of RAM (16GB) so I imagine that I will only be able to run at XMP as they're both t-top (RAM is 3200CL16). If I'm only a light overclocker, does it make more sense to get the Pro given the $125 price difference, or are the extra features of the Master worth it?


How do the boards hold up in general? My last motherboard was from Asus and I had no trouble with it, but I've heard worrying things about the Gigabyte BIOS. Also, can you turn off the RGB within the BIOS without needing to download software? Any recommendations for a new Aorus owner?


Thank you!


----------



## alv-OC

therealxx442 said:


> Hello everyone!
> 
> 
> I recently snagged up a nice deal on a 9900k so I've been researching Z390 motherboards and it seems like Gigabyte have the best ones. For reference, where I am there is a $125 price difference between the two boards I was considering, so I wondered if anyone here could help me. I was considering either the Aorus Pro Wifi or the Aorus Master.
> 
> 
> I am eventually planning to overclock, but not heavily. I am only using 2 sticks of RAM (16GB) so I imagine that I will only be able to run at XMP as they're both t-top (RAM is 3200CL16). If I'm only a light overclocker, does it make more sense to get the Pro given the $125 price difference, or are the extra features of the Master worth it?
> 
> 
> How do the boards hold up in general? My last motherboard was from Asus and I had no trouble with it, but I've heard worrying things about the Gigabyte BIOS. Also, can you turn off the RGB within the BIOS without needing to download software? Any recommendations for a new Aorus owner?
> 
> 
> Thank you!


Both will do the job just fine, but the Master will do it cooler, if you go back ont the threat you'll see that the Master has more PCB layers wich means more stability, specially for the RAM. I can't speak much about the Pro Wifi but my master never goes above 58ºC on the VRM with the CPU at 5.2GHz pulling 1.35v. This means that the Master has the best VRM for Z390. As for the RAM you should consider using 4 RAM sticks (because of it's T-tipology layout) for more chances OC'n the RAM or just for being mor stable. However 3200MHz is not such a crazy speed and should be achivable on both boards.

As for the RGB I can't tell, I never tryed to turn off the board LEDs but I'm sure that it can be done with it's software.


----------



## Jonny321321

I'd appreciate a quick answer (since eBay £1 selling fees ends tonight!), is there any point in switching from an itx Z390 Asrock Phantom Gaming board back to a full-size ATX AORUS PRO (that was sent off for repair)? Memory overclocking will only be worse on the Gigabyte due to having 2 sticks & GB's T-topology, and if I remember correctly my AORUS PRO couldn't bclk overclock at all (not relevant for my chip though), the Asrock ITX board has a PS/2 port and a clear CMOS button. However, I was wondering if there any dis-benefits to ITX boards such as in PCIE/graphics performance. Do ITX boards have less chipset bandwidth for things like NVMe & SATA & PCIE? The Asrock ITX board appears to be quite a good board for an itx (VRMs also good) but just wondering how it stacks up overall to a full-size ATX.
Another query was related to whether or not the Gigabyte board has two USB hubs or not (since my 1000hz NKRO USB keyboard appears to be a bit taxing on the USB).

Since there is quite some overlap between the AORUS boards an answer from someone with a AORUS Master/other boards would be welcome

@Falkentyne


----------



## Sheyster

therealxx442 said:


> Hello everyone!
> I am eventually planning to overclock, but not heavily. I am only using 2 sticks of RAM (16GB) so I imagine that I will only be able to run at XMP as they're both t-top (RAM is 3200CL16). If I'm only a light overclocker, does it make more sense to get the Pro given the $125 price difference, or are the extra features of the Master worth it?


If you're using 2 sticks only look at the ASRock Taichi Z390. I would avoid any Gigabyte Z390 board if using 2 sticks.

This said, if you go with Gigabyte, the Master is worth the extra $ IMHO. Avoid the Pro/Pro Wi-Fi. This is coming from a Pro owner.


----------



## shremi

Hey guys I was wondering if you could help me out with something...

I currently have a 8700k on a Z370 gaming 7 and i want to upgrade to a 9900k or kf.... I don't know if the VRMs on my motherboard are capable of running the 8 core CPUs .... I plan to overclock .

I don't want to buy a new z390 board anyone here has this config ???


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> yeah I don't mind at all, I'm happy to help the comunity
> 
> 
> Have you done changes at IA/GT section of the BIOS?? I always thouth that this section was only useful for "extreme overcloking" and relatedI kinda understand what is each setting but I don't know how they interfere with each other so I didn't touch anything there...
> 
> I also see that you setted 1.45v DDR voltage and 1.46 for DDR training...Should it work with less voltage?? it's "supposed" to work with 1.35v so, 1.40v shouldn't be just enough? I've seen 1.45v for speeds like 4200MHz (with tight timings) and above
> 
> I'm going to share your BIOS config with CaseKing so they can try your settings on their lab and see if they can make it work. If it doesn't work I'll be asking for a replacement right away.


1.45v eventual is perfectly safe for b-dies. Try your RAM between 1.42v-1.45v. @Jpmboy who's a memory overclocking god has run his b-dies at that for years as have I with zero degradation in performance. The VCCIO and SA voltages at 1.23v and 1.25v are important as well. Try them between 1.22 and 1.25v.

The only changes I made to the BIOS are microcode updates and updates to the Intel Ethernet firmware. 

My b-die stock are 1.35v as well.

And it's not always about the RAM, it is really the IMC of the CPU, but both matter.


----------



## KedarWolf




----------



## memery.uag

therealxx442 said:


> Hello everyone!
> 
> 
> I recently snagged up a nice deal on a 9900k so I've been researching Z390 motherboards and it seems like Gigabyte have the best ones. For reference, where I am there is a $125 price difference between the two boards I was considering, so I wondered if anyone here could help me. I was considering either the Aorus Pro Wifi or the Aorus Master.
> 
> 
> I am eventually planning to overclock, but not heavily. I am only using 2 sticks of RAM (16GB) so I imagine that I will only be able to run at XMP as they're both t-top (RAM is 3200CL16). If I'm only a light overclocker, does it make more sense to get the Pro given the $125 price difference, or are the extra features of the Master worth it?
> 
> 
> How do the boards hold up in general? My last motherboard was from Asus and I had no trouble with it, but I've heard worrying things about the Gigabyte BIOS. Also, can you turn off the RGB within the BIOS without needing to download software? Any recommendations for a new Aorus owner?
> 
> 
> Thank you!


I have the Aorus Pro Wifi and yes, you can turn the MB LED lights on or off in the BIOS, no need to install software. The software only enables you to manipulate the colors and patterns. BIOS will let you turn it all on or all off.


----------



## memery.uag

What kind of temps do you guys see in your RAM while benchmarking/stressing?


----------



## KedarWolf

memery.uag said:


> What kind of temps do you guys see in your RAM while benchmarking/stressing?


I get around 40C stress testing my RAM with a 3500 RPM RAM fan above it and 80F+ 27C+ ambient temps. Around 36C in winter with 65-70F ambient temps.

On b-die, @Jpmboy, an overclocking god here, says you can get flip errors etc. above 42C or so.


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> 1.45v eventual is perfectly safe for b-dies. Try your RAM between 1.42v-1.45v. @Jpmboy who's a memory overclocking god has run his b-dies at that for years as have I with zero degradation in performance. The VCCIO and SA voltages at 1.23v and 1.25v are important as well. Try them between 1.22 and 1.25v.
> 
> The only changes I made to the BIOS are microcode updates and updates to the Intel Ethernet firmware.
> 
> My b-die stock are 1.35v as well.
> 
> And it's not always about the RAM, it is really the IMC of the CPU, but both matter.


Yeah, im know that 1.4v RAM is perfectly safe for 24/7 OC, I've even seen people using 1.55-1.60v for high density and Freq. overclockings, but in that scenario temperature is another fact to take into account, as you say, as soon as you get into the 40ºC-ish errors start to show up. What I really meant to say is that we should be able to hit that 4000MHz 17-17-17-37 2T (wich is the rated speed and timing for that G.Skill RAM sticks) at it's rated voltage, 1.35v. I can understand that not all boards, even if they are same model, can hit same OC levels and therefore they might need to feed some extra voltage, but it shouldn't be much higher from this 1.35v (lets say...1.38v??) unless you want to exceed that specifications, I'm I wrong?

As for the VCCIO/SA Its well known that XMP+Auto settings will set this two voltages way too high, even if they are within Intel's reccomendations and its not Gigabyte's problem as all borads do it just fo the sake of satability, in my case they were 1.34v for SA and 1.30v for IO (I've met peple that were only 100% stable at 1.37v/1.4v and have been runnig safe for over a year now). I tried both lowering at 1.2v/1.25v and adding more at 1.34v/1.37v but stability dind't go along or scale with the voltage, belive me I tried every possible combination and nothing worked, and I'm not going over this voltages no matter what, it should be just fine at this point.

My first RAM kit was a 2x8GB of Corsair Dominator Platinum 3000MHz CL15, wich is a very nice RAM kit and most users easily ger 3200MHz with ease, well I had the exact same struggles to get I'ts rated specs just like with the G.Skill RAM kit, isn't it pointing to the borad? Igues that it still could be the CPU but its a cherrypicked version so I doubt it...

All the users across other forums that had pretty much the same problem (some of them had exact same hardware, even the PSU!!) got it solved once they had their MoBo replaced, those who had it RMA'd still have it, that makes me think that there was a "bad production batch" or something... **** happens I kow and this time look that I got the "short stick"


----------



## tango bango

Hi all, I finally got my new rig built and running pretty good.I do need some help with an issue. The issue lies with the sound. I have sound, but not through all of my 5.1 speakers.I have downloaded and installed the latest audio driver from gigabyte. Acording to the mb manual, I should have a audio console to adjust speakers and such. But I don't have this. In add/remove proframs I show this as installed and even in the device manager. I think I have the aux canles installed correctly, but not sure because the audio ports are not colored. Any help would be great!

specs-i9-9900k
gigabyte aorys elite
16 gb memmorry
evga 1070ti
seasonic 650 gpu
windows 10 ver 1903

Trying to figure out how to edit ny pv specs in profile.


----------



## ezveedub

Just saw EKWB released a monoblock now for the Aorus Master/Ultra now...is it even really needed though...

https://www.ekwb.com/news/ek-introd...m_medium=post&utm_content=ek-momentum-z390-pr


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## nexxusty

KedarWolf said:


>


Would you be willing to upload this B-Die 4200mhz Aorus Master profile so I can toss it on a USB drive and try it? 🙂

We use close to the same voltages for everything, even CPU.

I got your 4000mhz setting to work seemingly flawlessly. Been playing Apex Legends for hours now with them. Obviously that's not a real test, just saying... No crashes.

Let me know brother? I don't have the time I used to when I was younger, regardless it would be a good 4200mhz starting point.

Thanks man!


----------



## alv-OC

ezveedub said:


> Just saw EKWB released a monoblock now for the Aorus Master/Ultra now...is it even really needed though...
> 
> https://www.ekwb.com/news/ek-introd...m_medium=post&utm_content=ek-momentum-z390-pr
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Aw! thats a pretty good desing! I'd like to see tests showing how does it perform compared to the 'normal' CPU-block and the impact on the VRMs/MOSFETs temps. I've never seen my VRMs over 58ºc and I got my chip @5.2GHz pulling almost 200W (195W~) on full load and is worth to mention that the airflow into my case is not particularly good...


----------



## Grisk

...


----------



## Turgin

So, I've been leak testing, overclocking and installing all of my software on my new build for a while now with it on my work bench using the iGPU. Finally decided it was time to move my video card from my old rig to this new one and switch over to it last night. Didn't plan on any problems and I was wrong. 

After swapping over I get no video output from any of the connectors on the video card or the onboard video. I pulled the video card and the onboard video works fine again. Reset BIOS to defaults and reinstalled new video card making sure it was seated well but still no video. It was late and I was frustrated so I didn't think to look at the POST code but I'm pretty sure Windows booted as I could hear the USB insert/remove sounds from my speakers. Put the video card back in my old rig and it still works fine. I pulled an old Nvidia Quadro FX 4600 from my spare parts bin and it woks fine in my new build. 

I did a bunch of searching and found some hints at a no video condition with Nvidia cards and having two M.2 drives installed. Maybe not ALL Nvidia cards though as the Quadro worked fine once I installed drivers. I work from home on this computer, which is why I spent so much time on the burn in and testing, so haven't tried pulling the storage drive to see, but could it be anything else? I never found any posts with a fix other than pulling the second M.2. Full system specs below:

9900K
Z390 Master F8 BIOS
32GB RAM (Corsair CMK32GX4M2B3200C16)
M2A - 512GB 970 Pro driver 3.1.0.1901
M2M - 2TB 660p
EVGA RTX 2070 Black (08G-P4-1071-KR)
Seasonic Prime 750 Titanium

I'd appreciate any tips or suggestions.


----------



## sygnus21

Hey folks, anyone here have the Aorus Z390 Xtreme? If so, did you recently update to the F7 Bios? I ask because I did and maybe its me, but I’d swear there used to be a setting in the BIOS where you could set the keyboard or mouse to power on the PC. Now when I look, after the F7 update, I see no such feature. Did some things get added or removed? The setting should have been under the "Power" section.

Thanks.


----------



## memery.uag

As far as Gigabytes drivers and utilities go I normally don't use the disk that comes with the board I go directly to the site and download the latest from the MB page onto a zip drive and have it ready to go when I install. This time I saw some utilities that claim to need APP CENTER installed first so I put it in and used it to install Intel XTU. The installation dialogue said there was an unsigned driver in it so I said install anyway, but when I went to run, it said the drivers weren't installed. So I just uninstalled it and got the latest one from Intel's site.

My question is weather or not Gigabytes EasyTune and Intel's XTU would conflict? Does Gigabytes version of XTU account for EasyTune? Just wondering because once you set an OC with XTU and reboot, it keeps going back to the last OC you set. If I load the Default settings it kept giving me a 47x multi on all Turbo ratios. It just wasn't acting sensibly so I don't feel good using it. Some of the advanced settings didn't make any sense either. 

What versions and combinations of these apps is okay to use?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> You sure that isn't just placebo or you didn't change some other voltages?
> I remember the last time you said something was different you had the voltages set wrong
> Did you doublecheck and then do a side by side comparison to be sure? DDR VTT (Termintion?) or anything else?
> That's a pretty bizarre difference for tRCD and tRAS to be decreased by 1 on the same voltage.


Actually, after further testing at 4200 17-17-17-38 2T I sometimes pass GSAT, sometimes don't, and don't pass HCI MemTest where at 17-17-17-38 2T 4133MHz I pass both, got to over 1000% in HCI today. :/


----------



## therealxx442

Hello again everyone! I ended up getting an Aorus Pro WiFi as the price was a steal at a cheaper price than even the Elite. However, I'm having a major problem in regards to using the PC and I believe it may be due to a faulty motherboard. Specs: 

* CPU: Intel Core i9-9900k
* CPU Cooler: BeQuiet Dark Rock 4
* Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi
* Memory: Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16GB (2x8) 3200MHz CL16
* Storage 1: Samsung 970 Evo Plus 500GB
* Storage 2: Crucial MX500 2TB
* GPU: Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super
* Case: Fractal Design Meshify C Black
* Power Supply: Seasonic Focus Plus Platinum 750w
* Operating System: Windows 10 Pro
* Case Fans: Fractal Design Venturi HF-14 (x3) + Meshify C case fans
* Monitor: Dell U2414H + Dell AC511 Soundbar
* Keyboard: Corsair K65 RGB
* Mouse: Mionix Castor Black
* Mousepad: Mionix Alioth M
* Headphones: Sennheiser Game One Black

I did a clean install of Windows when I built the PC, but after about an hour of settings thing up, I got constant BSODs of MACHINE_ERROR_EXCEPTION. I then couldn't even get to the BIOS without a hard reset, and now I can't even get anywhere as when the PC turns on, no picture is shown (VGA LED is hard red).

I've tried reseating RAM, using one stick of RAM, using a different GPU, using a different cable (HDMI / DP), using onboard GPU, using a different monitor, using a different wall plug, reseating power connectors, booting with only video and power...etc. Nothing!

Could it perhaps be down to the RAM not being on the QVL? But then why would that explain a VGA LED error and being completely unable to boot. I'm just confused as it was working when I first built it... but now nothing. 

Is my motherboard broken? Any other troubleshooting steps?


----------



## Shawnb99

When Newegg lists the 
GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS XTREME LGA 1151 (300 Series), there’s only this model and no other series?
It’s the same version no matter what correct?


----------



## memery.uag

therealxx442 said:


> Hello again everyone! I ended up getting an Aorus Pro WiFi as the price was a steal at a cheaper price than even the Elite. However, I'm having a major problem in regards to using the PC and I believe it may be due to a faulty motherboard. Specs:
> 
> * CPU: Intel Core i9-9900k
> * CPU Cooler: BeQuiet Dark Rock 4
> * Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi
> * Memory: Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16GB (2x8) 3200MHz CL16
> * Storage 1: Samsung 970 Evo Plus 500GB
> * Storage 2: Crucial MX500 2TB
> * GPU: Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super
> * Case: Fractal Design Meshify C Black
> * Power Supply: Seasonic Focus Plus Platinum 750w
> * Operating System: Windows 10 Pro
> * Case Fans: Fractal Design Venturi HF-14 (x3) + Meshify C case fans
> * Monitor: Dell U2414H + Dell AC511 Soundbar
> * Keyboard: Corsair K65 RGB
> * Mouse: Mionix Castor Black
> * Mousepad: Mionix Alioth M
> * Headphones: Sennheiser Game One Black
> 
> I did a clean install of Windows when I built the PC, but after about an hour of settings thing up, I got constant BSODs of MACHINE_ERROR_EXCEPTION. I then couldn't even get to the BIOS without a hard reset, and now I can't even get anywhere as when the PC turns on, no picture is shown (VGA LED is hard red).
> 
> I've tried reseating RAM, using one stick of RAM, using a different GPU, using a different cable (HDMI / DP), using onboard GPU, using a different monitor, using a different wall plug, reseating power connectors, booting with only video and power...etc. Nothing!
> 
> Could it perhaps be down to the RAM not being on the QVL? But then why would that explain a VGA LED error and being completely unable to boot. I'm just confused as it was working when I first built it... but now nothing.
> 
> Is my motherboard broken? Any other troubleshooting steps?


#1 You may need a better PSU, The i9-9900k + RTX 2070 together needs more than just 750W PSU I think
#2 When you say 'clean' install, did you use the Win10 settings utility for clean install? Or did you download the creation media from Microsoft?

If your machine worked well enough to turn on and install Win10, it's hopefully okay, just reset your CMOS and try again.

Go to https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10 and follow the instruction to a T. and have your USB drive ready to go. If you can't get a better PSU right now, unplug everything extra, all drives etc. that you don't absolutely need. Unplug your PSU and short out the CMOS jumper for a minute or so. Even try taking out the battery for a bit too. Then put it back together make sure the CMOS jumper is clear and power back on. Make sure your monitor is on (sometimes mine used to not trigger and I had to turn it off then turn it on just as I power on the case). Spam your DEL key and hopefully you'll get into your BIOS. Once there Load Optimized Defaults, Save and Exit. Back to BIOS. Now go through and make sure everything is set the way you want it to be to run. Save and Exit. Back to BIOS. Save Profile As … Stock or Default or whatever. Save and Exit. When you get to the part to select where to install Windows, make sure it's the correct drive, and choose to delete everything on it, even partitions until you see nothing but Unallocated Space. Then just click next or here not format, it will format on it's own, just let Windows own the disk.

I tried a 'clean' install once with the Win10 settings uti. and it just confused old drivers and ****, caused a mess. Then I tried the creation media and didn't delete everything off the disk, I just picked the disk and let it do it's thing, same problem. When I tried again I deleted, formatted and deleted again, everything all partitions etc. off the disk before moving to the next step and it worked beautifully.

Gigabyte boards can sometimes be a little flaky in the BIOS and you have to be anal about Saving and Exiting and never change more than one or two things before Saving, Exiting and entering again to see what else changes. Hopefully your system works, get a Stronger PSU though. I love mine, I have the same board, coming from an old GA-Z68XP-UD4 and my wifes' machine was a Z77 both lasted for 8-9 years through some serious abuse.


----------



## Falkentyne

memery.uag said:


> #1 You may need a better PSU, The i9-9900k + RTX 2070 together needs more than just 750W PSU I think
> #2 When you say 'clean' install, did you use the Win10 settings utility for clean install? Or did you download the creation media from Microsoft?
> 
> If your machine worked well enough to turn on and install Win10, it's hopefully okay, just reset your CMOS and try again.
> 
> Go to https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10 and follow the instruction to a T. and have your USB drive ready to go. If you can't get a better PSU right now, unplug everything extra, all drives etc. that you don't absolutely need. Unplug your PSU and short out the CMOS jumper for a minute or so. Even try taking out the battery for a bit too. Then put it back together make sure the CMOS jumper is clear and power back on. Make sure your monitor is on (sometimes mine used to not trigger and I had to turn it off then turn it on just as I power on the case). Spam your DEL key and hopefully you'll get into your BIOS. Once there Load Optimized Defaults, Save and Exit. Back to BIOS. Now go through and make sure everything is set the way you want it to be to run. Save and Exit. Back to BIOS. Save Profile As … Stock or Default or whatever. Save and Exit. When you get to the part to select where to install Windows, make sure it's the correct drive, and choose to delete everything on it, even partitions until you see nothing but Unallocated Space. Then just click next or here not format, it will format on it's own, just let Windows own the disk.
> 
> I tried a 'clean' install once with the Win10 settings uti. and it just confused old drivers and ****, caused a mess. Then I tried the creation media and didn't delete everything off the disk, I just picked the disk and let it do it's thing, same problem. When I tried again I deleted, formatted and deleted again, everything all partitions etc. off the disk before moving to the next step and it worked beautifully.
> 
> Gigabyte boards can sometimes be a little flaky in the BIOS and you have to be anal about Saving and Exiting and never change more than one or two things before Saving, Exiting and entering again to see what else changes. Hopefully your system works, get a Stronger PSU though. I love mine, I have the same board, coming from an old GA-Z68XP-UD4 and my wifes' machine was a Z77 both lasted for 8-9 years through some serious abuse.


He already has a good enough PSU.
He has a Seasonic 750W. Unless the PSU is defective, that isn't the problem at all here.

Clearing CMOS should be done. Master and Xtreme have CMOS buttons that make it easy. Lower end boards have the jumper. Board MUST be powered off and unplugged before shorting the jumper pins.
He's also not going to get MCE errors just from trying to boot windows. 9900K and a GTX 2070 doesn't draw 750W at idle.

Might be a defective CPU, RAM or motherboard. Each one is going to have to be tested separately to verify where the problem lies. Unless the clear CMOS works, this is going to be a nightmare without a friend, a previous build that some of the new parts work in, or a local shop that can test parts without charging you as much as buying a new item.



therealxx442 said:


> Hello again everyone! I ended up getting an Aorus Pro WiFi as the price was a steal at a cheaper price than even the Elite. However, I'm having a major problem in regards to using the PC and I believe it may be due to a faulty motherboard. Specs:
> 
> * CPU: Intel Core i9-9900k
> * CPU Cooler: BeQuiet Dark Rock 4
> * Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi
> * Memory: Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16GB (2x8) 3200MHz CL16
> * Storage 1: Samsung 970 Evo Plus 500GB
> * Storage 2: Crucial MX500 2TB
> * GPU: Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super
> * Case: Fractal Design Meshify C Black
> * Power Supply: Seasonic Focus Plus Platinum 750w
> * Operating System: Windows 10 Pro
> * Case Fans: Fractal Design Venturi HF-14 (x3) + Meshify C case fans
> * Monitor: Dell U2414H + Dell AC511 Soundbar
> * Keyboard: Corsair K65 RGB
> * Mouse: Mionix Castor Black
> * Mousepad: Mionix Alioth M
> * Headphones: Sennheiser Game One Black
> 
> I did a clean install of Windows when I built the PC, but after about an hour of settings thing up, I got constant BSODs of MACHINE_ERROR_EXCEPTION. I then couldn't even get to the BIOS without a hard reset, and now I can't even get anywhere as when the PC turns on, no picture is shown (VGA LED is hard red).
> 
> I've tried reseating RAM, using one stick of RAM, using a different GPU, using a different cable (HDMI / DP), using onboard GPU, using a different monitor, using a different wall plug, reseating power connectors, booting with only video and power...etc. Nothing!
> 
> Could it perhaps be down to the RAM not being on the QVL? But then why would that explain a VGA LED error and being completely unable to boot. I'm just confused as it was working when I first built it... but now nothing.
> 
> Is my motherboard broken? Any other troubleshooting steps?


Clear the CMOS please and read the above reply.
90% chance of this being defective hardware.
Can you get a second motherboard to test without RMA'ing the first one somehow?
You need to be able to test the CPU, PSU, Video card and RAM independently to verify they are all functional and not defective.
And this is a nightmare if you don't have connections, even more if you are poor or barely getting by (not everyone on these forums has unlimited disposable income to throw at hardware problems).


----------



## therealxx442

I'm pretty sure a 750w Platinum PSU is more than adequate for pretty much anything when booting. This was indeed a clean install using the Microsoft Update Tool and deleting all partitions. Clearing the CMOS doesn't change anything unfortunately.


----------



## therealxx442

Falkentyne said:


> He already has a good enough PSU.
> He has a Seasonic 750W. Unless the PSU is defective, that isn't the problem at all here.
> 
> Clearing CMOS should be done. Master and Xtreme have CMOS buttons that make it easy. Lower end boards have the jumper. Board MUST be powered off and unplugged before shorting the jumper pins.
> He's also not going to get MCE errors just from trying to boot windows. 9900K and a GTX 2070 doesn't draw 750W at idle.
> 
> Might be a defective CPU, RAM or motherboard. Each one is going to have to be tested separately to verify where the problem lies. Unless the clear CMOS works, this is going to be a nightmare without a friend, a previous build that some of the new parts work in, or a local shop that can test parts without charging you as much as buying a new item.
> 
> 
> 
> Clear the CMOS please and read the above reply.
> 90% chance of this being defective hardware.
> Can you get a second motherboard to test without RMA'ing the first one somehow?
> You need to be able to test the CPU, PSU, Video card and RAM independently to verify they are all functional and not defective.
> And this is a nightmare if you don't have connections, even more if you are poor or barely getting by (not everyone on these forums has unlimited disposable income to throw at hardware problems).


The only new components are the CPU, motherboard, and GPU, but I'm sure it's not the GPU as I tried my old GPU and onboard graphics and that didn't change anything. 

It could be that the RAM isn't on the QVL, as I have head that these boards are finicky for RAM, but then it's a VGA error and I tried without XMP.

I just can't believe that everything was working and now it's got to this. I've cleared CMOS multiple times and removed the battery but it doesn't change anything sadly and still leads to a black screen. 

I am hoping to RMA the motherboard tomorrow. I really hope the board is faulty and it's not a CPU issue. Any other things I should try?


----------



## memery.uag

I didn't mean to steer you wrong man, but these other guys on here are the pros for sure. If clearing your CMOS doesn't work for you to get into your BIOS that is bad news. Makes my blood run cold actually. Changing out your RAM would probably be the easiest thing though first. I did check out your specs in some PSU calculators and they are for sure right, you are set in that department. I should have checked that before I said anything. Hopefully this can be fixed with new RAM.


----------



## Peter T.

Hello everybody, new here. Just recently built a pc and I'm having some ram issues.


Specs:


9900k
z390 aorus master
2x8GB 3600 DDR4 hyperx memory
1080ti
850w seasonic prime gold
windows 10 home


My system is not stable using xmp profile 1 which runs the ram at its rated speed of 3600mhz. I get random crashes when gaming and prime 95 fails within five to ten seconds of running. However, the system is stable when using xmp profile 2 which runs the ram at 3000mhz. This is all at stock, nothing is overclocked and clean windows 10 install. Im using bios version F8, I know F9 is the newest one, but according to Gigabytes website the only difference is some security patches. Am i just out of luck and have to stick with 3000 mhz? Is there anything in the bios I could change?


----------



## nexxusty

Bleh.... Kingston...

Can you return that memory?

I suggest you do. 3600mhz is not a fast speed in 2019. It should be EASY to accomplish. Meaning that RAM is trash.
It's likely not your CPU, nor your Motherboard. I'm quite sure the RAM itself is just garbage.

My OTHER suggestion is to get some Samsung B-Die RAM. Google Samsung B-Die to find out which kits have those IC's.

Just return those and get 3600mhz B-Die. You will be fine.


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> Master and Xtreme have CMOS buttons that make it easy.


For clarity, and a reminder, the Aorus 390 Xtreme does NOT have a clear CMOS button on the I/O shield like the Master does. I know this because I have the Xtreme. If you want to use the CLR CMOS button on the Xtreme, you'll need to open up the PC. Why Gigabyte didn't put one on the Xtreme's I/O panel is beyond me.


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> For clarity, and a reminder, the Aorus 390 Xtreme does NOT have a clear CMOS button on the I/O shield like the Master does. I know this because I have the Xtreme. If you want to use the CLR CMOS button on the Xtreme, you'll need to open up the PC. Why Gigabyte didn't put one on the Xtreme's I/O panel is beyond me.


It still has a clear CMOS button onboard instead of needing to short jumpers, so that's still very helpful. The Master got some hate for a clear cmos button on the back because it's easy to press it on accident.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> It still has a clear CMOS button onboard instead of needing to short jumpers, so that's still very helpful. The Master got some hate for a clear cmos button on the back because it's easy to press it on accident.



I've never had one on the back panel but I can see where it might be a problem. I guess the solution is to make sure you always back up your BIOS settings every time you update the BIOS.  A spring-loaded slider switch on the back would probably be better than a button; much less likely to be pressed accidentally.


----------



## kati

Falkentyne said:


> It still has a clear CMOS button onboard instead of needing to short jumpers, so that's still very helpful. The Master got some hate for a clear cmos button on the back because it's easy to press it on accident.


Accident really? Had to use it once after it refused to boot, but the button press is deep enough not to do that accidently... thought those words when i used it. 
But maybe theres people who press buttons on their i/o shield all day.

Btw anyone knows changes for Master z390 F10a?


----------



## Peter T.

nexxusty said:


> Bleh.... Kingston...
> 
> Can you return that memory?
> 
> I suggest you do. 3600mhz is not a fast speed in 2019. It should be EASY to accomplish. Meaning that RAM is trash.
> It's likely not your CPU, nor your Motherboard. I'm quite sure the RAM itself is just garbage.
> 
> My OTHER suggestion is to get some Samsung B-Die RAM. Google Samsung B-Die to find out which kits have those IC's.
> 
> Just return those and get 3600mhz B-Die. You will be fine.





It's not easy for me to return the memory as I already opened it and am using it in my computer. Also, I think my ram is already samsung B-Die. According to this link.


https://benzhaomin.github.io/bdiefinder/


I have the kingston HX436C17PB3K2/16 which shows up in the B-Die finder.


----------



## kati

Peter T. said:


> It's not easy for me to return the memory as I already opened it and am using it in my computer. Also, I think my ram is already samsung B-Die. According to this link.
> 
> 
> https://benzhaomin.github.io/bdiefinder/
> 
> 
> I have the kingston HX436C17PB3K2/16 which shows up in the B-Die finder.


Use the prog "thaiphoon" to read your ram specs
http://softnology.biz/


Mine looks like the attached pic, but beware the new revision of those got hynix.


----------



## therealxx442

memery.uag said:


> I didn't mean to steer you wrong man, but these other guys on here are the pros for sure. If clearing your CMOS doesn't work for you to get into your BIOS that is bad news. Makes my blood run cold actually. Changing out your RAM would probably be the easiest thing though first. I did check out your specs in some PSU calculators and they are for sure right, you are set in that department. I should have checked that before I said anything. Hopefully this can be fixed with new RAM.


I have a new motherboard coming tomorrow. Changing out RAM is also doable but I really hope it's not the CPU. Is anyone else using Micron e-die with the Aorus Z390 boards? This Crucial set is really good and worked on another system.


----------



## Peter T.

kati said:


> Use the prog "thaiphoon" to read your ram specs
> http://softnology.biz/
> 
> 
> Mine looks like the attached pic, but beware the new revision of those got hynix.





Interesting, I downloaded that program and here is my report.


----------



## Peter T.

Ok I think I may have made some progress. Instead of using the xmp profile, I disabled it and manually set my ram speed and timings. I also changed cpu vccio and cpu system agent voltage to 1.2 from auto because I saw a Buildzoid video where he said that's good to do. I ran prime95 blend test for 30 min and got no errors, whereas before I would get errors within the first 5 seconds. I still need to do more testing, but things are looking better. Though there is one thing that worries me, which is the tRC setting. According to cpu-z the xmp profile for my ram is suppose to set this parameter to 85, but my bios only goes up to 64. I just left it on auto. Anybody know what tRC does and if this will screw me in the end.


----------



## Falkentyne

Peter T. said:


> Ok I think I may have made some progress. Instead of using the xmp profile, I disabled it and manually set my ram speed and timings. I also changed cpu vccio and cpu system agent voltage to 1.2 from auto because I saw a Buildzoid video where he said that's good to do. I ran prime95 blend test for 30 min and got no errors, whereas before I would get errors within the first 5 seconds. I still need to do more testing, but things are looking better. Though there is one thing that worries me, which is the tRC setting. According to cpu-z the xmp profile for my ram is suppose to set this parameter to 85, but my bios only goes up to 64. I just left it on auto. Anybody know what tRC does and if this will screw me in the end.


Isn't tRC supposed to be equal to tRAS + tRP?
I can 100% guarantee you 85 is NOT correct, and I don't think there is even a single kit in existence that would even accept or allow such an absurd value.
My 3200 Cas14 kit correctly shows tRC as equal to tRAS+tRP (14-14-14-34, 34+14=48=tRC).


----------



## Peter T.

Falkentyne said:


> Isn't tRC supposed to be equal to tRAS + tRP?
> I can 100% guarantee you 85 is NOT correct, and I don't think there is even a single kit in existence that would even accept or allow such an absurd value.
> My 3200 Cas14 kit correctly shows tRC as equal to tRAS+tRP (14-14-14-34, 34+14=48=tRC).



I don't know, but that's what the xmp profile as reported by cpu-z shows.


----------



## KedarWolf

Peter T. said:


> Ok I think I may have made some progress. Instead of using the xmp profile, I disabled it and manually set my ram speed and timings. I also changed cpu vccio and cpu system agent voltage to 1.2 from auto because I saw a Buildzoid video where he said that's good to do. I ran prime95 blend test for 30 min and got no errors, whereas before I would get errors within the first 5 seconds. I still need to do more testing, but things are looking better. Though there is one thing that worries me, which is the tRC setting. According to cpu-z the xmp profile for my ram is suppose to set this parameter to 85, but my bios only goes up to 64. I just left it on auto. Anybody know what tRC does and if this will screw me in the end.


My tRC goes to 127, you sure you scrolled?

But anyways, tRC is best set at tRC= tRAS+tRP

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-784.html#post27784556

And I think you showed your RAM is b-die. Is it 4x8GB? If it is four DIMMs you should be able to get 4000MHz easy if not 4133MHz.

Try the below BIOS settings for 4000MHz and 4133MHz, should work with your RAM. Minus the AC Loadline 1 and CPU voltages, use SA and VCCIO though.

Edit: Actually, keep your SA and VCCIO between 1.22 and 1.25, I had that for 4200MHz, needed a bit more.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-320.html#post27949818


----------



## Falkentyne

Peter T. said:


> I don't know, but that's what the xmp profile as reported by cpu-z shows.


That SPD is messed up.

Here's mine.


----------



## Peter T.

KedarWolf said:


> My tRC goes to 127, you sure you scrolled?
> 
> But anyways, tRC is best set at tRC= tRAS+tRP
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-784.html#post27784556
> 
> And I think you showed your RAM is b-die. Is it 4x8GB? If it is four DIMMs you should be able to get 4000MHz easy if not 4133MHz.
> 
> Try the below BIOS settings for 4000MHz and 4133MHz, should work with your RAM. Minus the AC Loadline 1 and CPU voltages, use SA and VCCIO though.
> 
> Edit: Actually, keep your SA and VCCIO between 1.22 and 1.25, I had that for 4200MHz, needed a bit more.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-320.html#post27949818



Thanks, my ram is 2 DIMMs, I'll give 4000mhz a try.


----------



## nexxusty

Peter T. said:


> Thanks, my ram is 2 DIMMs, I'll give 4000mhz a try.


Won't work, you're wasting your time.

Tried the other day.... hehe. Grabbing another 2x8GB DIMMS ASAP. I want 4000mhz+. Hehe.


----------



## KedarWolf

Timings not stable though, but stable enough for this benchmarking run.


----------



## TMatzelle60

How bad is GB software

Im looking at getting the Z390 Master and probably a Gigabyte 2080ti Aorus 

I hear like there RGB Fusion has problems and all this other crap. I worry that if I purchase this board stuff will not work and won't be able to change colors. Or RGB fusion won't see my card to change the RGB

Am I overreacting ?


----------



## therealxx442

I really don't know what to do anymore short of doing an RMA with Intel for my CPU... unless anyone here has any other troubleshooting tips.

I upgraded my CPU, motherboard, and GPU recently, although my other components are also relatively new purchases and were definitely working fine in my previous build. 

When I try to turn on the PC, I just get a blank screen and nothing shows up. I see the VGA LED lit on my motherboard and the Q-code LED reads 72 which is "PCH Devices Initialization" according to my motherboard's manual.

This is the case with the new GPU, old GPU, and onboard graphics, using both a HDMI cable and a DP cable- on a different monitor and a TV. So I can rule out the graphics here. 

It's also not my motherboard as I've tried three different boards now (two different Pro WiFi boards and now I'm on an Ultra). No pins are damaged. 

Then it's either my RAM or CPU. I don't think it is the RAM as it was working in my old build and seems to pass training fine. This RAM is not on the QVL but I don't see why it would cause this problem. Either way, I have a completely different set arriving tomorrow just to see if it changes anything (Corsair model which is on the QVL).

This leaves my CPU. Physically, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it that I can see: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/355017613396541443/604396631076372480/IMG_20190726_203406.jpg this is a terrible photo I took. Given that this is the only other new component, should I do an RMA? I've tried reseating it (gold triangle is aligned of course) but even after multiple installations nothing changes. 

Specs:

* CPU: Intel Core i9-9900k
* CPU Cooler: BeQuiet Dark Rock 4
* Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
* Memory: Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16GB (2x8) 3200MHz CL16
* Storage 1: Samsung 970 Evo Plus 500GB
* Storage 2: Crucial MX500 2TB
* GPU: Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super
* Case: Fractal Design Meshify C Black
* Power Supply: Seasonic Focus Plus Platinum 750w
* Operating System: Windows 10 Pro
* Case Fans: Fractal Design Venturi HF-14 (x3) + Meshify C case fans
* Monitor: Dell U2414H + Dell AC511 Soundbar
* Keyboard: Corsair K65 RGB
* Mouse: Mionix Castor Black
* Mousepad: Mionix Alioth M
* Headphones: Sennheiser Game One Black

Troubleshooting:

* Cleared CMOS (multiple times)
* Removed CMOS battery (multiple times) 
* Tried different display cables (HDMI / DP)
* Tried different displays (Dell U2414H / Sony Bravia TV) 
* Tried different inputs on the displays
* Tried using old GPU, new GPU, and onboard graphics
* Tried (three) different motherboards
* Tried booting up outside of the case
* Tried booting up with only the CPU / RAM installed (and motherboard / CPU power) 
* Tried using a different physical wall socket in a different room
* Tried all different combinations of RAM installation (one stick in each slot and tried the same with the other stick, then also different combinations with them both) 
* Reinstalled all components and physically inspected for damage or particles

Any other ideas? If I do have to do an RMA, does anyone have any experience with how Intel's process is (I'm in the UK).

Edit: New RAM didn't help. I have a new CPU coming tomorrow. If that doesn't fix it... I'm done with PCs...


----------



## robertr1

KedarWolf said:


> Timings not stable though, but stable enough for this benchmarking run.


The following might help your RAM stability:

- Keep a gap of 4 between tddr_s and _l with _s being the lower amount (4). Use twrrd_sg/dg to adjust it and leave the secondary tddr_s/_l on auto. The 3rd timings will adjust the 2nd timings. 
- Keep TCWL either at or -1 of tCL (17 in your case)
- reduce your rEFI to 30k for now


try that first, after that, make your trfc 10x or your tras (380). Test with that and above changes. If stable, start dropping your trfc 10 at a time. Once you find a sweetspot, start increasing your trefi by large amounts until you find a balance there.

Also geekbench 4 will show mem scaling effectiveness much better than cinebench, atleast in my experience. My latest: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14082898


----------



## Padinn

So if I wanted to purchase another 16gb of ram using the same sticks it would be a lot of money (around $200). Any harm in using another set with similar specs? I don't plan to overclock ram heavily (I run at 3200 16-16-16-36 timings)


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> So if I wanted to purchase another 16gb of ram using the same sticks it would be a lot of money (around $200). Any harm in using another set with similar specs? I don't plan to overclock ram heavily (I run at 3200 16-16-16-36 timings)


Run this program I attached, post a screenshot of the results here. I'll tell you if it's worth upgrading.

And if not, I'll show you the best 4x8GB kit around $200 USD you can get instead. 

You'll need to get an identical kit likely if you do upgrade your RAM with the same one, or a new 4x8GB kit.

https://benzhaomin.github.io/bdiefinder/ To find a good cheap kit.


----------



## ntuason

Padinn said:


> So if I wanted to purchase another 16gb of ram using the same sticks it would be a lot of money (around $200). Any harm in using another set with similar specs? I don't plan to overclock ram heavily (I run at 3200 16-16-16-36 timings)


Its not recommended but the Auros Master does let you set RAM timings/speed individually. So I dont see the harm, only knowing the my RAM doesn't match XD


----------



## KedarWolf

*Alternative To Using An AVX Offset*

Second Edit.

I need to set the corresponding AVX Offset as the Power Limits etc. I keep temps sane so the below works.

Set Power Limits and Time Limits like below. Use 15 Time Limits for air coolers. Set AVX Offset to 0.

Run Cinebench R20 with HWInfo open. If your temps are under 85C hottest core you're good to go.

If not, lower Power limit to 190w or 180w.

It's better than an AVX Offset because it'll raise and lower CPU clocks dynamically under high AVX loads according to the Power Limits you set, not a fixed AVX Offset.

You'll retain max clocks for gaming (including low AVX loads like Apex) and 24/7 use.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Second Edit.
> 
> I need to corresponding AVX Offset as the Power Limits etc. I keep temps sane so the below works.
> 
> Set Power Limits and Time Limits like below. Use 15 Time Limits for air coolers.
> 
> Run Cinebench R20 with HWInfo open. If your temps are under 85C hottest core you're good to go.
> 
> If not, lower Power limit to 190w or 180w.
> 
> It's better than an AVX Offset because it'll raise and lower CPU clocks dynamically under high AVX loads according to the Power Limits you set, not a fixed AVX Offset.
> 
> You'll retain max clocks for gaming (including low AVX loads like Apex) and 24/7 use.


I will try this in the next few days and see how it goes with BFV


----------



## Luck100

KedarWolf said:


> Second Edit.
> 
> I need to set the corresponding AVX Offset as the Power Limits etc. I keep temps sane so the below works.
> 
> Set Power Limits and Time Limits like below. Use 15 Time Limits for air coolers. Set AVX Offset to 0.
> 
> Run Cinebench R20 with HWInfo open. If your temps are under 85C hottest core you're good to go.
> 
> If not, lower Power limit to 190w or 180w.
> 
> It's better than an AVX Offset because it'll raise and lower CPU clocks dynamically under high AVX loads according to the Power Limits you set, not a fixed AVX Offset.
> 
> You'll retain max clocks for gaming (including low AVX loads like Apex) and 24/7 use.


If you set all the power levels the same, the time settings make no difference. You can have a more aggressive (higher) power level for short term bursts and then a lower power level for indefinite long term loads. The time settings control how long you spend at the higher power level before dropping down to the lower. I've described it here for Asus boards, Gigabyte seems to have more settings so I'm not 100% sure how they map to the Intel PL1/PL2/Tau values:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-351.html#post28063112


----------



## KedarWolf

Luck100 said:


> If you set all the power levels the same, the time settings make no difference. You can have a more aggressive (higher) power level for short term bursts and then a lower power level for indefinite long term loads. The time settings control how long you spend at the higher power level before dropping down to the lower. I've described it here for Asus boards, Gigabyte seems to have more settings so I'm not 100% sure how they map to the Intel PL1/PL2/Tau values:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...official-support-thread-351.html#post28063112


Yeah, makes sense. I dunno how they do that in the Gigabyte BIOS either. Still, my settings work if you watch your temps while testing. 

I tested with Power Limits maxed out and a fixed AVX and this way I described. With the power limits set it dynamically lowers the CPU core speed if the voltage exceeds your max and raises voltage with changes from different AVX loads. So like different core speeds for say Cinebench R20, Prime95 Small FFTs and 1344 FFTs. 

AVX Offset will lower all cores to the AVX Offset regardless of the AVX load. 

I tested it in Origins Apex with uses a low AVX load and my core CPU speed stayed at 5.1GHz, same with non-AVX Diablo 3. :h34r-smi

I also tested it with Cinebench R20, Prime95 Small FFTs and Prime95 1344 FFTs and on each one I got different core speeds and my hottest core was below 85C every time.


----------



## Luck100

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, makes sense. I dunno how they do that in the Gigabyte BIOS either. Still, my settings work if you watch your temps while testing.
> 
> I tested with Power Limits maxed out and a fixed AVX and this way I described. With the power limits set it dynamically lowers the CPU core speed if the voltage exceeds your max and raises voltage with changes from different AVX loads. So like different core speeds for say Cinebench R20, Prime95 Small FFTs and 1344 FFTs.
> 
> AVX Offset will lower all cores to the AVX Offset regardless of the AVX load.
> 
> I tested it in Origins Apex with uses a low AVX load and my core CPU speed stayed at 5.1GHz, same with non-AVX Diablo 3. :h34r-smi
> 
> I also tested it with Cinebench R20, Prime95 Small FFTs and Prime95 1344 FFTs and on each one I got different core speeds and my hottest core was below 85C every time.


Yep, this is exactly why I use and recommend power limits rather than AVX offset. I only wish we could set voltage offset by core ratio so the volts would come down to stock levels when downclocking.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Second Edit.
> 
> I need to set the corresponding AVX Offset as the Power Limits etc. I keep temps sane so the below works.
> 
> Set Power Limits and Time Limits like below. Use 15 Time Limits for air coolers. Set AVX Offset to 0.
> 
> Run Cinebench R20 with HWInfo open. If your temps are under 85C hottest core you're good to go.
> 
> If not, lower Power limit to 190w or 180w.
> 
> It's better than an AVX Offset because it'll raise and lower CPU clocks dynamically under high AVX loads according to the Power Limits you set, not a fixed AVX Offset.
> 
> You'll retain max clocks for gaming (including low AVX loads like Apex) and 24/7 use.


Here is a quick and easy way to check your Power Limits and/or AVS Offset for CPU stability.

Download LinX v0.9.5 for Intel (English). https://hwtips.tistory.com/1611

https://hwtips.tistory.com/attachment/[email protected] Direct Link, their website in Korean and a bit buggy.

Run it Problem Size 35000 and 5 times.

If your Residuals are not all the same as the picture below you can be sure you're not stable with your Power Limits or AVX Offset. if they are the same you can be 99.99% sure your Power Limits or AVX Offset is perfectly stable.

Also, you can have HWInfo open making sure your hottest core is under 85C during the tests.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Here is a quick and easy way to check your Power Limits and/or AVS Offset for CPU stability.
> 
> Download Linpack XTreme. https://www.techpowerup.com/download/linpack-xtreme/
> 
> 
> Run it 2 for 'Stress Test', 5 for '10GB', run it '5' times, 'Y' for 'All available threads', 'N' for 'Disable Sleep mode', 'N' for 'Run CPUID in the background' and let it finish. Takes about 15 minutes.
> 
> If your Residuals are not all the same as the picture below you can be sure you're not stable with your Power Limits or AVX Offset. if they are the same you can be 99.99% sure your Power Limits or AVX Offset is perfectly stable.
> 
> Also, you can have HWInfo open making sure your hottest core in under 85C during the tests.


You can use LinX 0.9 here too. Updated linpack binaries also, so the comments on the Linpack extreme page are no longer accurate.
Even OCCT has updated binaries now.

https://hwtips.tistory.com/1611


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> You can use LinX 0.9 here too. Updated linpack binaries also, so the comments on the Linpack extreme page are no longer accurate.
> Even OCCT has updated binaries now.
> 
> https://hwtips.tistory.com/1611


Updated my post with LinX v0.9.5.


----------



## alv-OC

Hi guys:

I just got reply from the shop about the RMA process, they just handeled the board towards Gigabyte RMA service, great... almost 2 weeks time wasted on nothing but shipping... now they tell me that it's very likely to take another 3 weeks, plus 2 more weeks to come back to me, and replacement is not guaranteed... I can't accept that. I just bought a new Aorus Master from Amazon, this kind of things doesn't happend with them. 

I was tempted by the Asus Apex XI instead, but it was almost 100€ over the Aorus Master, 380€ for a MoBo on mainstream is kinda too much I think. If the Master's does what is advertised to do should be just more than adequate. I'll get new board on Thursday and I will reasemble my system to see the the new MoBo makes any difference, fingers crosed!! i look forward to try some od the settings you have been posting here guys!


----------



## Bronson

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys:
> 
> I just got reply from the shop about the RMA process, they just handeled the board towards Gigabyte RMA service, great... almost 2 weeks time wasted on nothing but shipping... now they tell me that it's very likely to take another 3 weeks, plus 2 more weeks to come back to me, and replacement is not guaranteed... I can't accept that. I just bought a new Aorus Master from Amazon, this kind of things doesn't happend with them.
> 
> I was tempted by the Asus Apex XI instead, but it was almost 100€ over the Aorus Master, 380€ for a MoBo on mainstream is kinda too much I think. If the Master's does what is advertised to do should be just more than adequate. I'll get new board on Thursday and I will reasemble my system to see the the new MoBo makes any difference, fingers crosed!! i look forward to try some od the settings you have been posting here guys!


I know that after that experience Giga might not be an option, but I'm very happy with my Z390 designare...it flies under the radar but is feature rich and not that expensive or more or less in the same price point as the Aorus line


----------



## Eikou

What the difference between standard, auto and normal llc? they all seem the same?


----------



## Falkentyne

Eikou said:


> What the difference between standard, auto and normal llc? they all seem the same?


They are the exact same. It's possible that Auto LLC may set a different loadline based on Multi-core enhancement or may allow changes with Windows utilities. I do not know what auto LLC does with MCE enabled--didn't test it and you can test it yourself (I won't). With MCE disabled, Auto LLC, Standard LLC and Normal LLC are all 1.6 mOhms of loadline resistance (1.6 * Amps=vdroop in millivolts).


----------



## Eikou

Falkentyne said:


> They are the exact same. It's possible that Auto LLC may set a different loadline based on Multi-core enhancement or may allow changes with Windows utilities. I do not know what auto LLC does with MCE enabled--didn't test it and you can test it yourself (I won't). With MCE disabled, Auto LLC, Standard LLC and Normal LLC are all 1.6 mOhms of loadline resistance (1.6 * Amps=vdroop in millivolts).


Thanks. With my 9700k @ 4..8 I've got both these stable

llc auto 1.245v(drops to 1.6 under stress) Shows 1.248 max

or

llc medium 1.200v (Drops to 1.6 under stress) shows 1.205 max

Both rock solid. 

Which should I use>?


----------



## Falkentyne

Eikou said:


> Thanks. With my 9700k @ 4..8 I've got both these stable
> 
> llc auto 1.245v(drops to 1.6 under stress) Shows 1.248 max
> 
> or
> 
> llc medium 1.200v (Drops to 1.6 under stress) shows 1.205 max
> 
> Both rock solid.
> 
> Which should I use>?


Use VR VOUT to monitor voltage. You're probably reading a vcore sensor which doesn't show vdroop properly.
And use whatever one you want. What matters is the load voltage via VR OUT.
Maybe better transients with the higher vcore and more vdroop at LLC Auto.


----------



## Eikou

Falkentyne said:


> Use VR VOUT to monitor voltage. You're probably reading a vcore sensor which doesn't show vdroop properly.
> And use whatever one you want. What matters is the load voltage via VR OUT.
> Maybe better transients with the higher vcore and more vdroop at LLC Auto.


Thanks so much for the great info. I don't really know what I'm looking for but these are the two results.

The first is 1.245v llc auto and the second more blurry image XD is the 1.200v llc med


----------



## Falkentyne

Eikou said:


> Thanks so much for the great info. I don't really know what I'm looking for but these are the two results.
> 
> The first is 1.245v llc auto and the second more blurry image XD is the 1.200v llc med


The VR VOUT's are very different so you can't compare them. Obviously see if the lower one is stable since lower voltage is better.


----------



## Eikou

Falkentyne said:


> The VR VOUT's are very different so you can't compare them. Obviously see if the lower one is stable since lower voltage is better.


Yeah they are both very stable. So the LLC med with lower voltage is the best pick? And always look for lowest voltage on V Out? Thanks btw I've never quite understood how to monitor the effects of llc


----------



## Falkentyne

Eikou said:


> Yeah they are both very stable. So the LLC med with lower voltage is the best pick? And always look for lowest voltage on V Out? Thanks btw I've never quite understood how to monitor the effects of llc


At risk of giving yet another multi-paragraph reply, which I really can't be bothered to do right now, I'll just let you do your own reading.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-412.html#post28022104
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


----------



## Dhwie4543

*[email protected]*



Sheyster said:


> If you're using 2 sticks only look at the ASRock Taichi Z390. I would avoid any Gigabyte Z390 board if using 2 sticks.
> 
> This said, if you go with Gigabyte, the Master is worth the extra $ IMHO. Avoid the Pro/Pro Wi-Fi. This is coming from a Pro owner.


My Master now runs 2 8gb 4000mhz xmp set (same set Alvoc is having issues with) I returned mine to Amazon as 2 sets that previously wouldn't work worked on the new board so it's more YMMV


----------



## Eikou

Falkentyne said:


> At risk of giving yet another multi-paragraph reply, which I really can't be bothered to do right now, I'll just let you do your own reading.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-412.html#post28022104
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html


Awesome! Thank you!

Edit: had a read. Still can't quite get my head round it so I'll just leave it off and go with higher vcore

Thanks for the help any way!


----------



## emil2424

*Crashing at idle after OC*

Hi,
My PC:
Aorus z390 elite + 9900k
My bios setings in attachment

I overclocked the CPU to 5GHz with 1.320 (no AVX) and 1.344 (AVX) voltage.

I pass the following tests:
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R20
blender-benchmark (fast and complete)
RealBench
AIDA64 Extreme
OCCT5.3.1 (avx / no avx / small data sets / large data sets)

But my PC crashes when idle, browsing websites, music etc.
I thought it was a problem with RAM OC and I increased DRAMv / SA / IO but it did not help and I noticed that my Vcore drops to 0.552 - 0.588 in idle.


If I set the DVID to -0.70 it is a little better because Vcore drops only to 0.588 but this results in an increase in stress voltage from 1.320-1.344 to 1.356-1.380.

Is it possible to somehow block the minimum Vcore value on e.g. 0.624 regardless of DVID?

How to set on DVID to achieve:
Min Vcore greater than 0.600
Max Vcore smaller than 1.344

Maybe these crashe in idle have another reason?


----------



## Driller au

emil2424 said:


> Hi,
> My PC:
> Aorus z390 elite + 9900k
> My bios setings in attachment
> 
> I overclocked the CPU to 5GHz with 1.320 (no AVX) and 1.344 (AVX) voltage.
> 
> I pass the following tests:
> Cinebench R15
> Cinebench R20
> blender-benchmark (fast and complete)
> RealBench
> AIDA64 Extreme
> OCCT5.3.1 (avx / no avx / small data sets / large data sets)
> 
> But my PC crashes when idle, browsing websites, music etc.
> I thought it was a problem with RAM OC and I increased DRAMv / SA / IO but it did not help and I noticed that my Vcore drops to 0.552 - 0.588 in idle.
> 
> 
> If I set the DVID to -0.70 it is a little better because Vcore drops only to 0.588 but this results in an increase in stress voltage from 1.320-1.344 to 1.356-1.380.
> 
> Is it possible to somehow block the minimum Vcore value on e.g. 0.624 regardless of DVID?
> 
> How to set on DVID to achieve:
> Min Vcore greater than 0.600
> Max Vcore smaller than 1.344
> 
> Maybe these crashe in idle have another reason?


Try disabling all the C states except C3 and see how it goes


----------



## KedarWolf

emil2424 said:


> Hi,
> My PC:
> Aorus z390 elite + 9900k
> My bios setings in attachment
> 
> I overclocked the CPU to 5GHz with 1.320 (no AVX) and 1.344 (AVX) voltage.
> 
> I pass the following tests:
> Cinebench R15
> Cinebench R20
> blender-benchmark (fast and complete)
> RealBench
> AIDA64 Extreme
> OCCT5.3.1 (avx / no avx / small data sets / large data sets)
> 
> But my PC crashes when idle, browsing websites, music etc.
> I thought it was a problem with RAM OC and I increased DRAMv / SA / IO but it did not help and I noticed that my Vcore drops to 0.552 - 0.588 in idle.
> 
> 
> If I set the DVID to -0.70 it is a little better because Vcore drops only to 0.588 but this results in an increase in stress voltage from 1.320-1.344 to 1.356-1.380.
> 
> Is it possible to somehow block the minimum Vcore value on e.g. 0.624 regardless of DVID?
> 
> How to set on DVID to achieve:
> Min Vcore greater than 0.600
> Max Vcore smaller than 1.344
> 
> Maybe these crashe in idle have another reason?


To stop my crashes at idle I had to enable all C-States and Dummy Load in BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

emil2424 said:


> Hi,
> My PC:
> Aorus z390 elite + 9900k
> My bios setings in attachment
> 
> I overclocked the CPU to 5GHz with 1.320 (no AVX) and 1.344 (AVX) voltage.
> 
> I pass the following tests:
> Cinebench R15
> Cinebench R20
> blender-benchmark (fast and complete)
> RealBench
> AIDA64 Extreme
> OCCT5.3.1 (avx / no avx / small data sets / large data sets)
> 
> But my PC crashes when idle, browsing websites, music etc.
> I thought it was a problem with RAM OC and I increased DRAMv / SA / IO but it did not help and I noticed that my Vcore drops to 0.552 - 0.588 in idle.
> 
> 
> If I set the DVID to -0.70 it is a little better because Vcore drops only to 0.588 but this results in an increase in stress voltage from 1.320-1.344 to 1.356-1.380.
> 
> Is it possible to somehow block the minimum Vcore value on e.g. 0.624 regardless of DVID?
> 
> How to set on DVID to achieve:
> Min Vcore greater than 0.600
> Max Vcore smaller than 1.344
> 
> Maybe these crashe in idle have another reason?


Undervolting that high with the AC loadline reduced (CPU Internal Load Line=Performance reduces the AC Loadline value to I believe 1.3 mOhms, check HWinfo64 for what AC and DC (DC is not important except for CPU package Power/VID reporting) Loadlines are set to) is going to just make you crash at idle and there's nothing you can do about it. AC Loadline regulates the base CPU VID (which is regulated higher at load than at idle as it's based on resistance), then this value is sent to the VRM as an initial target voltage; note that when using fixed voltages, ACLL is completely ignored by the VRM). Either reduce the undervolt, or increase the AC Loadline value. (CPU Internal Load Line=Turbo sets an ACLL value of 1.6 mOhms. You can also manually set the AC/DC values, which will overrule the presets in CPU Internal Load Line, but do not go above 1.6 mOhms).

Either try what Kedarwolf or Driller said, or increase the AC Loadline value or reduce the undervolt (I refuse to use c-states)


----------



## raad11

Hey guys, I'm having this weird thing with my new Z390 Aorus Master board. The ethernet keeps disconnecting and reconnecting. I'm not sure if it's the connection disconnecting or reconnecting or if it's the adapter itself disappearing and reappearing. I've had no issues with my connection until just now with the new motherboard I just got last night.

I updated the BIOS to F10A, but it still happens.

Anyone else heard of a thing like this?


----------



## mngdew

raad11 said:


> Hey guys, I'm having this weird thing with my new Z390 Aorus Master board. The ethernet keeps disconnecting and reconnecting. I'm not sure if it's the connection disconnecting or reconnecting or if it's the adapter itself disappearing and reappearing. I've had no issues with my connection until just now with the new motherboard I just got last night.
> 
> I updated the BIOS to F10A, but it still happens.
> 
> Anyone else heard of a thing like this?


I have to ask you. Did you install the latest driver from Intel?


----------



## Wirerat

Anyone know what VR loop 1 temp reading represents in hwinfo64?

The reading shows up twice.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> Anyone know what VR loop 1 temp reading represents in hwinfo64?
> 
> The reading shows up twice.


It's one of the two rows of VRM's. There are two rows.
The second VR VOUT is for the iGPU.


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone know what VR loop 1 temp reading represents in hwinfo64?
> 
> The reading shows up twice.
> 
> 
> 
> It's one of the two rows of VRM's. There are two rows.
> The second VR VOUT is for the iGPU.
Click to expand...

The second vr loop 1? My igpu is not even being used. It says it peaked at 87c.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> The second vr loop 1? My igpu is not even being used. It says it peaked at 87c.


I said the second VR VOUT, not VR Loop 2.


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second vr loop 1? My igpu is not even being used. It says it peaked at 87c.
> 
> 
> 
> I said the second VR VOUT, not VR Loop 2.
Click to expand...

Which confused me. 

I was asking about the temperature being reported for vr loop 1.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> Which confused me.
> 
> I was asking about the temperature being reported for vr loop 1.
> 
> Thanks for responding.


I answered that also. There are two "Loops." One horizontal and one vertical and I don't know which is which. Sorry.


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> I answered that also. There are two "Loops." One horizontal and one vertical and I don't know which is which. Sorry.


Thanks.

If that reading is accurate my vrm temps are not great. The max of vr loop 1 during 10 loops of x264 was 87c. I may need to take a look under there and make sure the heatsink is getting good contact. 

The vrm mos sensor maxes out at 50c. This is what I been watching for vrm temps.

Thanks for the response.


----------



## shaolin95

Hey guys,
I just for 4x16GB sticks of GSkill Royal PC3200 C14 
It has the same chips as my previous GSkill f4-3200c14d-32gvk.
But I am having a big problem. Unlike my previous RAM this one is NOT getting me the rated 14-14-14-34-48 using the XMP or even if I enter it manually. It ends up with 17-15-15-36.
I am going to try one or 2 sticks at a time to see if one is having issues or what.

Any ideas?


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> Thanks.
> 
> If that reading is accurate my vrm temps are not great. The max of vr loop 1 during 10 loops of x264 was 87c. I may need to take a look under there and make sure the heatsink is getting good contact.
> 
> The vrm mos sensor maxes out at 50c. This is what I been watching for vrm temps.
> 
> Thanks for the response.


Yes, this is normal for the lower end Gigabyte boards. The Master and the Xtreme have much better VRM cooling.
Disassembling and replacing the pads on the Pro/Ultra/Elite etc may work but takes alot of effort. You can try Arctic 0.5mm, 1mm or 1.5mm thermal pads, depending on the thickness of the originals.
It may also be difficult to apply direct cooling on the lower end boards (active fan etc).


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Yes, this is normal for the lower end Gigabyte boards. The Master and the Xtreme have much better VRM cooling.
> Disassembling and replacing the pads on the Pro/Ultra/Elite etc may work but takes alot of effort. You can try Arctic 0.5mm, 1mm or 1.5mm thermal pads, depending on the thickness of the originals.
> It may also be difficult to apply direct cooling on the lower end boards (active fan etc).


 Im running a custom loop. So air over that area limited. I believe the vrm mos temp represents the actual mosfets of the vrm. Which run really cool @ 60c max.

The inductors on the vertical row get hot to touch during stress testing. That could be the area vr loop 1 represents.

I believe these inductors are fine up to 120c. I couldn't find any specific information though. 

I plan to do some testing with a fan blowing right at the inductors. I have had trouble stabilizing 5.1ghz even though 5ghz is stable at 1.31v. Maybe I can at least find out if this is limiting in some way.


----------



## thuNDa

Wirerat said:


> Anyone know what VR loop 1 temp reading represents in hwinfo64?
> 
> The reading shows up twice.


It's already 60°C at idle on my Aorus Elite(~20W POUT), and rises to 75°C at 100W POUT (VRM MOS goes from 40° to 50) - tinkering with the heatsinks because of that reading, would be madness IMO.


----------



## Wirerat

thuNDa said:


> It's already 60Â°C at idle on my Aorus Elite(~20W POUT), and rises to 75Â°C at 100W POUT (VRM MOS goes from 40Â° to 50) - tinkering with the heatsinks because of that reading, would be madness IMO.


Im seeing 87c vr loop1 after a sustained load of 175w. The inductors are very hot to touch. I dont think its the heatsink actually since vrm mos is at 60c.

I am just planning do a test with some direct airflow over that area.

There probably is not really a fix that wouldnt look awful.


----------



## mngdew

shaolin95 said:


> Hey guys,
> I just for 4x16GB sticks of GSkill Royal PC3200 C14
> It has the same chips as my previous GSkill f4-3200c14d-32gvk.
> But I am having a big problem. Unlike my previous RAM this one is NOT getting me the rated 14-14-14-34-48 using the XMP or even if I enter it manually. It ends up with 17-15-15-36.
> I am going to try one or 2 sticks at a time to see if one is having issues or what.
> 
> Any ideas?


I have 2 sets of GSkill Ripjaws V Series F4-3200C14D-16GVR(2x8Gb). XMP works fine as specified, except the command rate has to lower to 2T. 
One thing I also noticed the core temperature difference between running 2 sticks vs 4 sticks. Core temperature increase by up to 10C while running AVX intensive programs such as Prime95 and LinX with 4 sticks.

These memories are for Intel, but they run much better on AMD.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> Im seeing 87c vr loop1 after a sustained load of 175w. The inductors are very hot to touch. I dont think its the heatsink actually since vrm mos is at 60c.
> 
> I am just planning do a test with some direct airflow over that area.
> 
> There probably is not really a fix that wouldnt look awful.


I own the Pro as well. Unless you are running a very high OC (5.2+) I don't think you'll have any problems. Just try to keep some direct airflow in the general area of the inductors and VRM's if possible.


----------



## shaolin95

mngdew said:


> I have 2 sets of GSkill Ripjaws V Series F4-3200C14D-16GVR(2x8Gb). XMP works fine as specified, except the command rate has to lower to 2T.
> One thing I also noticed the core temperature difference between running 2 sticks vs 4 sticks. Core temperature increase by up to 10C while running AVX intensive programs such as Prime95 and LinX with 4 sticks.
> 
> These memories are for Intel, but they run much better on AMD.



So I was finally able to get the RAM to show correctly even using the XMP profile now. The only catch is that even though they seem to be the same Samsung B-Die when I used an app to check all the info about them, now I am getting a latency of around 63 instead of 58 as I was getting before. Maybe not a big deal but I dont like it when I do an upgrade for what is supposed to be better handpicked modules and more expensive then end up with not as good performance. At the very least I was expecting the same not worst.

Anyways need to play with the kit and do a memtest as well to make sure all kits are good...


----------



## shaolin95

double post


----------



## Al_B

Help please....new build...Aorus Master + i99900k + 64gb HyperX Predator 3200Mhz + samsung m2 970 Evo Plus 500Gb + Samsung m2 Evo Plus 1gb.

Install is good and all seems to be working except I cannot install Windows 10 from USB.

Pc can see USB but freezes on boot. If i install from CD, install proceeds but on reboot startup 'cannot find OS'.

Appreciate any guidance....


----------



## emil2424

KedarWolf said:


> To stop my crashes at idle I had to enable all C-States and Dummy Load in BIOS.


I played with the settings yesterday.
Reducing the undervolt raised vcore to 1.380-1.392 in AVX tests so I changed the approach a bit.
CPU Internal Load Line = Auto
CPU Vcore LLC = Normal
DVID = -0.020
I get the following results:
OCCT / No AVX/ small = 1,284 - 1,296
OCCT / No AVX/ big = 1,344 - 1,356
OCCT / AVX/ small = 1,260 (Windows does not crash but the test throws a lot of errors)
OCCT / AVX/ big = 1,356 - 1,368
Cinebench R15 = 1.296
Cinebench R20 = 1,308
RealBench = 1,308
AIDA64 = 1,32-1,33
Blender benchmark 1,3-1,31
Crashing in idle are more rare but still occur.
The idle voltage is at 0.600-0.612 with very rare jumps to 0.588.









Now I would like to test enabling all C-States and Dummy Load in BIOS









Should I leave the CPU Internal Load Line = Auto or set to Turbo?


----------



## raggazam

Hi, I'm having trouble overclocking on memories.

my team is:
Aorus z390 master
i9900k
32 gb dominator Platinum rgb 3200mhz
corsair hx850i
corsair h115i pro

Right now this I use:
5 ghz 1,288 vcore
3200 mhz xmp
vccio 1.20
vccsa 1.30

I tried this but it doesn't work and I have a black screen and it doesn't start

- 3466 = 1733 mhz 14,14,14,34
Vdram 1.40 vvccio 1.20 vccsa 1.35

- 3866 = 1932 mhz 16,18,18,36
Vdram 1.40 vccio 1.20 vccsa 1.35

Big up


----------



## bastian

raggazam said:


> Hi, I'm having trouble overclocking on memories.
> 
> my team is:
> Aorus z390 master
> i9900k
> 32 gb dominator Platinum rgb 3200mhz
> corsair hx850i
> corsair h115i pro
> 
> Right now this I use:
> 5 ghz 1,288 vcore
> 3200 mhz xmp
> vccio 1.20
> vccsa 1.30
> 
> I tried this but it doesn't work and I have a black screen and it doesn't start
> 
> - 3466 = 1733 mhz 14,14,14,34
> Vdram 1.40 vvccio 1.20 vccsa 1.35
> 
> - 3866 = 1932 mhz 16,18,18,36
> Vdram 1.40 vccio 1.20 vccsa 1.35
> 
> Big up


You won't be able to get from 3200 up to anything over 3400 with those tight timings.

My Corsair Dominator RGB 16gb, Samsung B-Die overclocks from 3200->3400 14-14-14-34. That's it.


----------



## raggazam

bastian said:


> You won't be able to get from 3200 up to anything over 3400 with those tight timings.
> 
> My Corsair Dominator RGB 16gb, Samsung B-Die overclocks from 3200->3400 14-14-14-34. That's it.


Ok
Xmp need to disable it?

3400 / 14-14-14-34 
And vcore dram?
Vccio and vccsa?
Big up


----------



## bastian

raggazam said:


> Ok
> Xmp need to disable it?
> 
> 3400 / 14-14-14-34
> And vcore dram?
> Vccio and vccsa?
> Big up


3400 14-14-14-34 for me does not require more voltage. Keep at 1.35.

VCCIO 1.2
VCCSA 1.3

Should be enough. If you can't hit that, you are unlucky and need to increase timings.


----------



## raggazam

bastian said:


> 3400 14-14-14-34 for me does not require more voltage. Keep at 1.35.
> 
> VCCIO 1.2
> VCCSA 1.3
> 
> Should be enough. If you can't hit that, you are unlucky and need to increase timings.


Okay, I'll try tomorrow to see if I'm lucky.
I have to say that I use 4 memory modules


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> I own the Pro as well. Unless you are running a very high OC (5.2+) I don't think you'll have any problems. Just try to keep some direct airflow in the general area of the inductors and VRM's if possible.


I changed my top 360 rad to exhaust and the rear fan to intake. Dropped that VR Loop1 temp more than 10c under the same x264 stressor at 5ghz. 


I was also able to get 5.1 to pass without whea errors at 1.38v. It would never pass x264 before I adjusted the airflow. It did push the vr loop1 temp back up at this voltage but it did give me enough headroom.


----------



## Nammi

bastian said:


> 3400 14-14-14-34 for me does not require more voltage. Keep at 1.35.
> 
> VCCIO 1.2
> VCCSA 1.3
> 
> Should be enough. If you can't hit that, you are unlucky and need to increase timings.





raggazam said:


> Okay, I'll try tomorrow to see if I'm lucky.
> I have to say that I use 4 memory modules



Way too high voltages for those speeds, I'd be surprised if you need more than 1.15V for both VCCSA and VCCIO. Just for reference I run 32GB 4133cl16 with 1.22 VCCIO and 1.24 VCCSA. It's the DRAM voltage that you mainly should be focusing on. As long as you've got adequate airflow to your ram, going up to 1.5V DRAM is considered safe for long term use. Definitely disable XMP and make sure everything other than the primaries are either auto or manually set to very loose values. Once you've got your primaries sorted, I'd recommend taking the plunge for tighter secondaries as there's usually a nice chunk of performance to be gained.


----------



## shaolin95

Nammi said:


> Way too high voltages for those speeds, I'd be surprised if you need more than 1.15V for both VCCSA and VCCIO. Just for reference I run 32GB 4133cl16 with 1.22 VCCIO and 1.24 VCCSA. It's the DRAM voltage that you mainly should be focusing on. As long as you've got adequate airflow to your ram, going up to 1.5V DRAM is considered safe for long term use. Definitely disable XMP and make sure everything other than the primaries are either auto or manually set to very loose values. Once you've got your primaries sorted, I'd recommend taking the plunge for tighter secondaries as there's usually a nice chunk of performance to be gained.


Do you mind of what secondaries to tweak? I am running 4x16GB 3200 C14 RAM (G.Skill Royal) so I dont expect to be able to push my speeds much due to the strain on the Memory Controller so maybe I can just tighten timings a bit more for some extra gains.
Thanks


----------



## Nammi

shaolin95 said:


> Do you mind of what secondaries to tweak? I am running 4x16GB 3200 C14 RAM (G.Skill Royal) so I dont expect to be able to push my speeds much due to the strain on the Memory Controller so maybe I can just tighten timings a bit more for some extra gains.
> Thanks


I'd say head over to the Intel DDR4 thread: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html and see if you can find kits similar to yours to compare with. That'd be one easy way to see if the motherboard didn't train some timings very well. 
Generally tRFC will be set too high and tREFI too low, so I'd start from there. My experience with the aorus master auto memory training wise has been ok, aside from most of the settings marked orange as I was able to improve these settings by quite abit, with the help of added DRAM voltage.

Unfortunately my memory/mobo doesn't like me tinkering with the settings in yellow all that much. Though for more in depth information you're probably better off asking in the memory thread, as I've only grazed the surface of RAM ocing. =p

*Edit*
Since you've got Samsung B-Die you might aswell try and go for 3600/3800(if not more... 9900k has quite a strong IMC), before you start with the secondaries. A few "dirty" tries doesn't take long just to see if it boots VCCIO, VCCSA at 1.25V and DRAM at 1.45V and then gradually lower the voltages untill it doesn't boot. As RAM ocing can be quite grueling, go for the most beneficial settings first.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> I changed my top 360 rad to exhaust and the rear fan to intake. Dropped that VR Loop1 temp more than 10c under the same x264 stressor at 5ghz.
> 
> I was also able to get 5.1 to pass without whea errors at 1.38v. It would never pass x264 before I adjusted the airflow. It did push the vr loop1 temp back up at this voltage but it did give me enough headroom.


Great! I am very satisfied running 8 x 5 GHz (no C states) at a relatively low voltage with no water cooling. I have not tried to push it higher, really no point for gaming which is all I do anymore.  What's your vcore voltage at 5 GHz all-core? The only downside I've found to our Pro boards is the high frequency memory support. The Master is much better in that regard.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Great! I am very satisfied running 8 x 5 GHz (no C states) at a relatively low voltage with no water cooling. I have not tried to push it higher, really no point for gaming which is all I do anymore. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif What's your vcore voltage at 5 GHz all-core? The only downside I've found to our Pro boards is the high frequency memory support. The Master is much better in that regard.


My main rig 9900k + auros pro is at 5ghz 1.31v turbo llc uncore 4.4ghz 3800mhz cl17 hynix cjr ram. Its the old PO stepping. No issues with ram there. I believe these sticks can go higher its just so time consuming to validate ram. 

My alt rig is a little better silicon lottery wise. It's also on aorus pro + 9900kf 5ghz 1.255v llc turbo uncore 4.4ghz 3000mhz cl 15 also on the PO stepping. I just purchased that 9900kf three weeks ago.

I almost swapped the better bin cpu to my main rig but since it only has a single 360mm rad for cpu and gpu Im going to leave it.

I dont use avx offsets. I used x264 50 loops and 4 hours real bench to help find stability on both. We use them both 
Just for gaming.


----------



## raad11

Hey guys, my VCCSA and VCCIO are set at 'Auto' and are at 1.308v and 1.298v respectively in hwinfo. Should I change this?

The other question, is my 2 year old Corsair AX760 PSU enough for this:

Z390 Aorus Master (running off only one EPS12V cable until I get a second on Monday)
i9-9900k (Vcore 1.28v)
2x8GB DDR3600C15 (1.4v running at 3700)
RTX 2080 Super (MSI Ventus OC) (running off only one PCIE cable until I get a second on Monday)
Samsung 860 EVO nvme m.2
2 x WD Gold 4TB
1 x Sound Blaster Z
Various USB devices

CPU is like 155 W and GPU is like 250 W in hwinfo.


----------



## KedarWolf

HCI MemTest Pro and MemTest Free compiled AutoHotkey scripts, for a 9900k or 9700k, 16GB and 32GB versions. It opens 16 instances with the memory amount already set for both Free and Pro.

If you go to Task Manager, click Details on MemTest and check each affinity, each one allocated to one separate thread, absolutely the best way to run Memtest!


----------



## KedarWolf

raad11 said:


> Hey guys, my VCCSA and VCCIO are set at 'Auto' and are at 1.308v and 1.298v respectively in hwinfo. Should I change this?
> 
> The other question, is my 2 year old Corsair AX760 PSU enough for this:
> 
> Z390 Aorus Master (running off only one EPS12V cable until I get a second on Monday)
> i9-9900k (Vcore 1.28v)
> 2x8GB DDR3600C15 (1.4v running at 3700)
> RTX 2080 Super (MSI Ventus OC) (running off only one PCIE cable until I get a second on Monday)
> Samsung 860 EVO nvme m.2
> 2 x WD Gold 4TB
> 1 x Sound Blaster Z
> Various USB devices
> 
> CPU is like 155 W and GPU is like 250 W in hwinfo.


750W is probably the minimum you'd want to go with that setup, but it should be fine. :h34r-smi


----------



## raggazam

I have not managed to overclock on the ram.
I have disabled xmp and 3400 mhz, 14-14-14-34 vccio 1.20 vccsa 1.30. vdram 1.40
I only get black screen loop.
I have tried 3400 mhz with 16-18-18-36 vccio 1.25 vccsa 1.31, vdram 1.42.

My memories are 32 gb 3200 dominator Platinum rgb.

might it have some other bad value in bios?

         

Big up


----------



## Nammi

raad11 said:


> Hey guys, my VCCSA and VCCIO are set at 'Auto' and are at 1.308v and 1.298v respectively in hwinfo. Should I change this?


I would. Just to get the cpu to run abit cooler, as the 9900k is toasty. Unless you're really hammering the IMC for long periods of time, there shouldn't be any concern running those voltages.



raggazam said:


> I have not managed to overclock on the ram.
> I have disabled xmp and 3400 mhz, 14-14-14-34 vccio 1.20 vccsa 1.30. vdram 1.40
> I only get black screen loop.
> I have tried 3400 mhz with 16-18-18-36 vccio 1.25 vccsa 1.31, vdram 1.42.
> 
> My memories are 32 gb 3200 dominator Platinum rgb.
> 
> might it have some other bad value in bios?
> 
> Big up


Didn't notice anything out of whack from a quick glance. How long do you let it sit on the black screen? Memory training sequence can be surprisingly lengthy, check the post code display to see if it's done training.
Not sure which bios version you're on but if I remember correctly F7 and below were not that great memory wise.

Something to note, clearing cmos can have a positive effect if you've been messing around alot with different memory settings. Just remember to save a profile. =p


----------



## raggazam

I use f9 bios


----------



## raad11

Why do you guys recommend disabling XMP?


----------



## Falkentyne

raggazam said:


> I have not managed to overclock on the ram.
> I have disabled xmp and 3400 mhz, 14-14-14-34 vccio 1.20 vccsa 1.30. vdram 1.40
> I only get black screen loop.
> I have tried 3400 mhz with 16-18-18-36 vccio 1.25 vccsa 1.31, vdram 1.42.
> 
> My memories are 32 gb 3200 dominator Platinum rgb.
> 
> might it have some other bad value in bios?
> 
> Big up


DDR Term should be 1/2 DDR voltage.


----------



## raggazam

what do you mean?


----------



## raad11

What should I be using to test memory? MemTest86?


----------



## raad11

raad11 said:


> What should I be using to test memory? MemTest86?


So, to expand on my issue.

Back in 2017 on my old system (Maximus IX Hero + 7700K) I bought G.Skill TridentZ, the one that's DDR4-3600 @ 15-15-15-35 (F4-3600C15D-8GTZ). Except I never got it to work at that speed. I got it stable at 15-16-16-36.

From my e-mail at the time to G.Skill support (who were of no help):



> I've only been able to get the RAM (F4-3600C15D-8GTZ) stable at 15-16-16-36 timings. It gives errors in Memtest86 and HCI Memtest Pro at all possible configurations of 15-15-15-35, so I don't think you should advertise it as compatible with the Maximus IX series of boards. That is at 1.35v and VCCIO 1.92v and VCCSA at 1.216v (a little lower than the 'Auto' settings which raise VCCSA too high at 1.27v).
> 
> I've even had it stable at 3866 MHz at 17-18-18-36 at 1.392v. I didn't try higher but I'm sure it could do 4000 MHz. It just will not do 15-15-15-35. I did not try slower than 3600 MHz.


Their response:



> Have you tried testing each module individually to see if results are consistent?
> 
> If a module performs better than others, feel free to send them in for RMA exchange to see if a new kit works better:


Mine:



> Just tried it. Both sticks gave errors at 15-15-15-35 after a while in HCI Memtest Pro (one on pass 2, the other on pass 3) when used separately/individually.
> 
> I do think it's an incompatibility with the motherboard. If you can verify that you've had it working at 15-15-15-35 in this board (Maximus IX Hero) under the latest BIOS (0906), let me know. I have a few days left to RMA the board.
> 
> I'm using XMP set to 'On' and the 'Maximus Tweak' setting under DRAM timings menu is set to 'Auto'. All timings except primary are set to 'Auto'.
> 
> My CPU is the i7-7700k (no overclock, all default settings aside from 'Sync All Cores' option).


They told me to just RMA the RAM, which I didn't do at that point in time for whatever reason (IIRC, I needed the PC to work because my laptop died at the same time).

So when I turned on XMP on this board, the RAM ran at the 15-15-15-35 fine for a bit except a game crashed once (that's all that happened despite multiple hours of benching and game testing). Then I remembered the RAM situation and lo and behold, MemTest86 was showing errors. So I'm trying first, XMP disabled, 1.5v voltage, DDR4-3600 and 15-15-15-35 manually set. Then if that's a no go, I'll try 15-16-16-36.

I haven't changed the VCCSA and VCCIO yet from their Auto values of 1.3/1.2. I'll do that soon, but if anyone thinks it might help the RAM or other values than 1.2/1.2 will help the RAM, let me know.

*My question is*, which is the "faster" setting for RAM or that will deliver better performance? 3600 @ 15-16-16-36 or 3866 @ 17-18-18-36? Should I try to push it to 4000? The system is mostly used for high framerate/refresh rate gaming (i.e, keeping games at their fps limits and limiting drops in framerate). So is bandwidth better or latency more important and which settings should I aim for? (Lower speed, faster timings, or Higher speeds and slower timings)

Thanks for reading and I appreciate any assistance/help you guys can provide


----------



## Wirerat

raad11 said:


> *My question is*, which is the "faster" setting for RAM or that will deliver better performance? 3600 @ 15-16-16-36 or 3866 @ 17-18-18-36? Should I try to push it to 4000? The system is mostly used for high framerate/refresh rate gaming (i.e, keeping games at their fps limits and limiting drops in framerate). So is bandwidth better or latency more important and which settings should I aim for? (Lower speed, faster timings, or Higher speeds and slower timings)
> 
> Thanks for reading and I appreciate any assistance/help you guys can provide


So for my setup which is 1080p 240hz +9900k 5ghz + 1080ti. The higher frequency/bandwidth ram oc gets higher fps.

I did comparisons running superposition. 3600mhz cl 16 vs 3800mhz cl17. The 3800mhz cl17 scored higher. It is tiny amount more latency at 8.94ns vs 8.88ns but more over all bandwidth. 

In your situation 3600 cl 15 = 8.33ns vs 3866 cl 17 = 8.79ns there is a little more latency delta but I think the extra bandwidth will out weigh the .46ns increase in latency for gaming. 

Maybe you should try a gpu benchmark like valley or superposition and do some comparisons at each ram oc. My 1080ti scales with higher bandwidth in these tests.


----------



## raad11

Wirerat said:


> So for my setup which is 1080p 240hz +9900k 5ghz + 1080ti. The higher frequency/bandwidth ram oc gets higher fps.
> 
> I did comparisons running superposition. 3600mhz cl 16 vs 3800mhz cl17. The 3800mhz cl17 scored higher. It is tiny amount more latency at 8.94ns vs 8.88ns but more over all bandwidth.
> 
> In your situation 3600 cl 15 = 8.33ns vs 3866 cl 17 = 8.79ns there is a little more latency delta but I think the extra bandwidth will out weigh the .46ns increase in latency for gaming.
> 
> Maybe you should try a gpu benchmark like valley or superposition and do some comparisons at each ram oc. My 1080ti scales with higher bandwidth in these tests.


Thanks! Is there a program which will tell you your RAM latency? Also, which gpu benchmark do you think is most affected by CPU/RAM?


----------



## KedarWolf

What I need to be 100% LinX 0.9.5 stable.

I need .130v to be Prime95 1344 FFTs stable. Was .085 old motherboard. 

At .+130 AI VR Loadline 1, I get around 1.274v VRVout.


----------



## Falkentyne

raggazam said:


> what do you mean?


I already told you.
DDR Termination must be half memory voltage.


----------



## Wirerat

raad11 said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> So for my setup which is 1080p 240hz +9900k 5ghz + 1080ti. The higher frequency/bandwidth ram oc gets higher fps.
> 
> I did comparisons running superposition. 3600mhz cl 16 vs 3800mhz cl17. The 3800mhz cl17 scored higher. It is tiny amount more latency at 8.94ns vs 8.88ns but more over all bandwidth.
> 
> In your situation 3600 cl 15 = 8.33ns vs 3866 cl 17 = 8.79ns there is a little more latency delta but I think the extra bandwidth will out weigh the .46ns increase in latency for gaming.
> 
> Maybe you should try a gpu benchmark like valley or superposition and do some comparisons at each ram oc. My 1080ti scales with higher bandwidth in these tests.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! Is there a program which will tell you your RAM latency? Also, which gpu benchmark do you think is most affected by CPU/RAM?
Click to expand...

Aida64 works.. The free version limits a few of options but will show latency iirc. 

Also https://notkyon.moe/ram-latency.htm does the math for you to compare different freq + cas.

I know unigine superposition seems ram sensitive on 1080p medium as long as you're not gpu bottlenecked. It scales with ram on my 1080ti.


----------



## raggazam

Falkentyne said:


> I already told you.
> DDR Termination must be half memory voltage.


I still don't understand friend, can you explain with a photograph or a reference?


----------



## Falkentyne

raggazam said:


> I still don't understand friend, can you explain with a photograph or a reference?


I'm sorry but that's too much work for me.
If you can't understand a very simple setting with simple math, I do not know what to do.
And I'm really not in the mood right now.

You do know what "DDR memory voltage" is, right?
So divide it by half. That should be your DDR Termination voltage.
If it's on "Auto" it might not be getting set right. This has caused problems on some memory kits.


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm sooooooo annoyed.

I loaded a RAID profile but forgot to change it to ACHI before I rebooted, now PC will only boot in RST mode.

I tried loading the ACHI drivers in Windows and rebooting, the same problem.


----------



## raad11

Is the Uncore frequency the speed that the cache uses too?


----------



## Wirerat

raad11 said:


> Is the Uncore frequency the speed that the cache uses too?


Uncore = cache on gigabyte mobos.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I already told you.
> DDR Termination must be half memory voltage.


Testing 4266Mhz with my 4133MHz timings with DRAM Termination at half the RAM voltage.

4266 no go, 4200 maybe.


----------



## raggazam

Falkentyne said:


> I'm sorry but that's too much work for me.
> If you can't understand a very simple setting with simple math, I do not know what to do.
> And I'm really not in the mood right now.
> 
> You do know what "DDR memory voltage" is, right?
> So divide it by half. That should be your DDR Termination voltage.
> If it's on "Auto" it might not be getting set right. This has caused problems on some memory kits.


Now understand man, then when I get home from work I will look for that option and adjust it, to see if I am lucky. Thanks


----------



## GTANY

It seems that the "ultra fast boot" setting does not work on the Z390 Aorus Pro : it is not faster than "fast boot" option : the POST stage requires about 10 s in both cases which is quite long. In the bios, I disabled everything I don't use and disabled CSM and secure boot. I installed Windows 10 in UEFI mode and the EFI system partition is on the Windows disk too.

Is it a bug ? On Asrock motherboards, ultra fast boot is faster than fast boot and enables to have a POST time of less than 5 s.


----------



## raad11

Wirerat said:


> Uncore = cache on gigabyte mobos.


I just set it at 47 and it works (50 overall). Should I tinker with this, raise it some more? Or is 47 about what I should expect?


----------



## Wirerat

raad11 said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uncore = cache on gigabyte mobos.
> 
> 
> 
> I just set it at 47 and it works (50 overall). Should I tinker with this, raise it some more? Or is 47 about what I should expect?
Click to expand...

Well, my uncore/cache is at 4.4ghz on my 9900k. Pushing it higher requires more vcore.

If its stable I would let it be. If you run into any stability issues consider dropping it as opposed to raising vcore.


----------



## raad11

Wirerat said:


> Well, my uncore/cache is at 4.4ghz on my 9900k. Pushing it higher requires more vcore.
> 
> If its stable I would let it be. If you run into any stability issues consider dropping it as opposed to raising vcore.


Ok, cool. What can I use to test stability of Uncore? Or do normal CPU stress tests cover that?


----------



## KedarWolf

raad11 said:


> Ok, cool. What can I use to test stability of Uncore? Or do normal CPU stress tests cover that?


You can use AIDA64 stress test Cache Only.


----------



## Syed talib

heyy all,
new build giga z390 auros elite, 8700k, 16GB gskill ram all stock
problem is when ever i cold boot my system it boots up in backup bios, when i press the power button it delays for like 1 to 2 sen then powers on to backup bios. 
changed the cmos battery, updated bios to f8

thankyou


----------



## Deathtech00

I tried to Direct Die mount my 9900K this weekend, it seems that either there is a spacing issue with my GB Aorus Master z390 + Corsair XC7 Waterblock, or I need some kind of different posts. It seems to not make great contact with the block. It "seems" like it is hitting the caps by the socket, but its hard to tell looking straight down at it. cleaned everything off, tried a bit of Kryonaut to see what kind of pressure I was getting, and despite having the Rockitcool mounting plate, it just "barely" pushed and spread the thermal pastedown. 

Anyone here with a similar setup might be able to chime in, I hope, anything board-specific I am missing? or am I just SOL with the XC7 block and a Z390 master?

I know EK sold an adapter type kit with different sized screws for Ivy (Naked IVY I think?) but I didn't think it would be compatible. Any help at all would be very greatly appreciated.


----------



## Sheyster

Deathtech00 said:


> I tried to Direct Die mount my 9900K this weekend, it seems that either there is a spacing issue with my GB Aorus Master z390 + Corsair XC7 Waterblock, or I need some kind of different posts. It seems to not make great contact with the block. It "seems" like it is hitting the caps by the socket, but its hard to tell looking straight down at it. cleaned everything off, tried a bit of Kryonaut to see what kind of pressure I was getting, and despite having the Rockitcool mounting plate, it just "barely" pushed and spread the thermal pastedown.
> 
> Anyone here with a similar setup might be able to chime in, I hope, anything board-specific I am missing? or am I just SOL with the XC7 block and a Z390 master?
> 
> I know EK sold an adapter type kit with different sized screws for Ivy (Naked IVY I think?) but I didn't think it would be compatible. Any help at all would be very greatly appreciated.


Yep, you'll need a mounting kit for a direct die mount. I know Noctua sells one for their NH-D15 mega heatsink air cooler, not sure who else has one available for their block though.


----------



## thuNDa

Syed talib said:


> heyy all,
> new build giga z390 auros elite, 8700k, 16GB gskill ram all stock
> problem is when ever i cold boot my system it boots up in backup bios, when i press the power button it delays for like 1 to 2 sen then powers on to backup bios.
> changed the cmos battery, updated bios to f8
> 
> thankyou


Here it booted to backup-bios after failed RAM-OC attempt.
CMOS-clear(with shorting the pins) fixed that - only taking out the battery is not the same AFAIK.


----------



## KedarWolf

4200MHz 17-18-18-39 2T seems stable, but 4200MHz 17-17-17-38 2T isnt.


----------



## Syed talib

thuNDa said:


> Here it booted to backup-bios after failed RAM-OC attempt.
> CMOS-clear(with shorting the pins) fixed that - only taking out the battery is not the same AFAIK.


seems like update backup bios to f7 have solved the problem lol, can anybody explain how can a old backup bios version can cause this issue
btw i am on windows 10 1903


----------



## alv-OC

Hey there Guys! 

Finally!! i had to get a new 9900K but now I'm fully stable at 5.1GHz all cores, 47GHz caches at 1.310v, 4000MHz 16-16-16 -36 2t Trfc 370 / VCCIO: 1.180v | VCCSA: 1.200v VDDR 1.45v. and looks like this new chip has rock solid IMC, y could achieve this in 30 minutre yesterday evening: i receiving all the deliding tools tomorrow so I will be pushing 5.2GHz and 4100MHz. 

For the rest of the timings I'm using the this ones: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-381.html#post28054472

Looks like all the isues were caused by the worst IMC ever on my last chip. So happy now...


----------



## EarlZ

I am not 100% sure if this is a motherboard/bios issue/setting but if I have my 2 Seagate 3TB drives connected my boot time is significantly longer but my boot drive is an SSD. Is this normal or there a bios setting that can work around this issue ?


----------



## bastian

alv-OC said:


> Hey there Guys!
> 
> Finally!! i had to get a new 9900K but now I'm fully stable at 5.1GHz all cores, 47GHz caches at 1.310v, 4000MHz 16-16-16 -36 2t Trfc 370 / VCCIO: 1.180v | VCCSA: 1.200v VDDR 1.45v. and looks like this new chip has rock solid IMC, y could achieve this in 30 minutre yesterday evening: i receiving all the deliding tools tomorrow so I will be pushing 5.2GHz and 4100MHz.
> 
> For the rest of the timings I'm using the this ones: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-381.html#post28054472
> 
> Looks like all the isues were caused by the worst IMC ever on my last chip. So happy now...


Try lowering VCCIO/VCCSA. Use MemTest to check stability.


----------



## alv-OC

bastian said:


> Try lowering VCCIO/VCCSA. Use MemTest to check stability.



yeah I know that both VCCSA/IO should be able to be improved up to 1.170v /1.120v respectively but fisrt I'd like to see how far I can go with Freq. and timings. Also I have to keep in mind that mi GF is going to star using my system for 3D modeling and CNC machinign desing so I would be adding another 2x8GB kit and get all 4 slots on use.


----------



## RR991

Hello all together,


I'm new here and have a few questions to you.


Someone got some Screenproblems after updating the BIOS to F10 on Z390 Aorus PRO?


I've got some serious strange behaviour here. I don't know if it's just bad timing and my graphics card or other components are broken.


I get randomly black screens, after re-installing my nvidia driver it works for like 10 mins. Afterwards I completely reinstalled Windows 10 with version 1809 and version 1903. In the beginning it worked for like 10 minutes again. Afterwards I tried some testing. In Furmark I've got some bad screens there, see attachement!



I dont know if its the graphics card, motherboard, psu or anything else.


For your information the system worked 6 months without any problems. There is no OC only the RAM is OC'ed to 3600 MhZ CL16. But that worked for like the whole time. I also tried lowering the RAM's speed to default, didn't change anything.


My system:


CPU: Core i9 9900K
RAM: 16GB Patriot Viper White LED 3600 CL 16 (PVLW416G360C6K)
Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus Z390 PRO BIOS v. F10
Graphics card: Asus Rog-Strix RTX 2070 O8G-Gaming (card is like 8 months old)
PSU Bequiet straight power 650W
Cooling: NZXT Kraken X62 (new version)


Temperature and everything else is fine. 



Hopefully you can tell me some conclusions or help me.


If I did something against the rules I'm very sorry, I'm just desperated.


Kind regards 



RR991


----------



## Falkentyne

RR991 said:


> Hello all together,
> 
> 
> I'm new here and have a few questions to you.
> 
> 
> Someone got some Screenproblems after updating the BIOS to F10 on Z390 Aorus PRO?
> 
> 
> I've got some serious strange behaviour here. I don't know if it's just bad timing and my graphics card or other components are broken.
> 
> 
> I get randomly black screens, after re-installing my nvidia driver it works for like 10 mins. Afterwards I completely reinstalled Windows 10 with version 1809 and version 1903. In the beginning it worked for like 10 minutes again. Afterwards I tried some testing. In Furmark I've got some bad screens there, see attachement!
> 
> 
> 
> I dont know if its the graphics card, motherboard, psu or anything else.
> 
> 
> For your information the system worked 6 months without any problems. There is no OC only the RAM is OC'ed to 3600 MhZ CL16. But that worked for like the whole time. I also tried lowering the RAM's speed to default, didn't change anything.
> 
> 
> My system:
> 
> 
> CPU: Core i9 9900K
> RAM: 16GB Patriot Viper White LED 3600 CL 16 (PVLW416G360C6K)
> Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus Z390 PRO BIOS v. F10
> Graphics card: Asus Rog-Strix RTX 2070 O8G-Gaming (card is like 8 months old)
> PSU Bequiet straight power 650W
> Cooling: NZXT Kraken X62 (new version)
> 
> 
> Temperature and everything else is fine.
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully you can tell me some conclusions or help me.
> 
> 
> If I did something against the rules I'm very sorry, I'm just desperated.
> 
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> 
> 
> RR991


Yikes.
Your 2070 is dead.
That's the space invaders RTX crash.
You ever get this in normal use and the card is busted.


----------



## Smokediggity

F10b BIOS is out for the Master over at tweaktown. Anyone have a changelog?


----------



## slash621

Hey guys, tech support question...

I bought all of these parts in late July so maybe that gives you some idea on steppings/binning etc.

9900k with Aorus Master won’t boot XMP or even accept extra dram voltage without cmos long beep crash.

I can run stock optimized defaults fine, but after running 6-7 days at 1.35v DRAM and 4.9 @ 1.28v I’m now unable to even post at anything other than optimized defaults. I Change any single value and it goes into long beep loops until I clear CMOS. Where should I start? The ram passed memtest for 6 hours at the old settings. The cpu blends for almost 10 hours before and now only gets windows and stable at optimized defaults and 2133.

Kinda frustrated since I thought I bought quality stuff.

9900k Aorus master (F8 and F9 BIOS tried)
32 GB trident z RGB Samsung bdie 3200 cl14 1.35v 
Msi 2080ti gaming trio 
3x ADATA XG8200 pros 
Corsair 1000w platinum AX


Last night I tested flashing to the F8 BIOS, and for about 20 minutes of solid benchmarking I was able to run XMP at stock CPU settings. However, after the first reboot the issues returned again and more flashing doesn't resolve it. Went back to F9 before going to sleep. I can run stock settings all day and test stable at 2133. But any voltage settings to almost anything cause the issue intermittently. However changing anything RAM related gives me codes C0,C2,C3,C4 looping, all of which are "reserved" in the documentation.

I've only got 3 days to decide if it's the following problems...

Mobo : I have a replacement from amazon on the way since I think it's crazy that just updating DRAM voltage would cause this issue.
CPU: Did I just get a 9900K with really bad IMC? Should I initiate a replacement ASAP? I've only got till Aug 11th to do this with my vendor
RAM: How Likely is it that this memory has an issue? Last week before issues started, it passed memtest 86 for 12 hours at XMP @ 1.35v Manual volt setting.


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> F10b BIOS is out for the Master over at tweaktown. Anyone have a changelog?


Yikes. Still same old "AE" 9900K Microcode  @KedarWolf to the rescue?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Falkentyne said:


> Yikes. Still same old "AE" 9900K Microcode
> @KedarWolf to the rescue?



vmanuelgm to the rescue... If u don't mind...

Microcode BE (flash with included efiflash via DOS):

https://mega.nz/#!VmQCjKwK!ZeE1rE5-m3nnIP0h1nY6TGtVWrCfExnlSJWwXh8-pHs


----------



## raad11

While I'm troubleshooting I put VCCSA and IO back on Auto and now they're at 1.33-1.34v. Is this dangerous for the board?


----------



## ntuason

Does anyone have experience with error code "04?". I keep getting this code on my Aorus Master and cant seem to find it in the manual. That cannot be "D4" right?


----------



## raad11

raad11 said:


> While I'm troubleshooting I put VCCSA and IO back on Auto and now they're at 1.33-1.34v. Is this dangerous for the board?


Though ramtest is finally stable at those high voltages...what gives?


----------



## bastian

raad11 said:


> While I'm troubleshooting I put VCCSA and IO back on Auto and now they're at 1.33-1.34v. Is this dangerous for the board?


Auto voltages are always higher. It will depend on the memory. My Samsung b-die only needs 1.1 IO and 1.150 VCCSA at 3400.


----------



## raad11

Also, FWIW, when I plugged in the second CPU EPS12V cable, the VR VIN stabilized to 11.874v average, not dipping below 11.844v. With just one cable, it would go to 11.81 frequently. I don't know if that's good, but it's closer to 12.


----------



## Falkentyne

raad11 said:


> Also, FWIW, when I plugged in the second CPU EPS12V cable, the VR VIN stabilized to 11.874v average, not dipping below 11.844v. With just one cable, it would go to 11.81 frequently. I don't know if that's good, but it's closer to 12.


I've told people that you should plug in both CPU +12v cables if you have them, yet some people keep insisting they aren't important and I even get downvoted on reddit by clueless people. I guess they are too dense to understand that 11.874v is better than 11.81v on the CPU 12v line, if you're trying to get max stability...


----------



## raad11

Falkentyne said:


> I've told people that you should plug in both CPU +12v cables if you have them, yet some people keep insisting they aren't important and I even get downvoted on reddit by clueless people. I guess they are too dense to understand that 11.874v is better than 11.81v on the CPU 12v line, if you're trying to get max stability...


LOL, I know what thread on Reddit you're talking about. That came up in a Google search


----------



## bastian

Falkentyne said:


> I've told people that you should plug in both CPU +12v cables if you have them, yet some people keep insisting they aren't important and I even get downvoted on reddit by clueless people. I guess they are too dense to understand that 11.874v is better than 11.81v on the CPU 12v line, if you're trying to get max stability...


Even Buildzoid says you don't need to plug it in. Usually I agree with him, but on this one I don't.


----------



## Driller au

Lost count of how many problems have been solved in this thread by connecting that lead


----------



## Alex132

Which sensor are you reading the 12v from?

I get different things on different sensors.


----------



## Falkentyne

Alex132 said:


> Which sensor are you reading the 12v from?
> 
> I get different things on different sensors.


VR VIN is the CPU EPS +12v.
+12v is the 24 pin 12v line.


----------



## Alex132

Neat, thanks!


----------



## raad11

Falkentyne said:


> I've told people that you should plug in both CPU +12v cables if you have them, yet some people keep insisting they aren't important and I even get downvoted on reddit by clueless people. I guess they are too dense to understand that 11.874v is better than 11.81v on the CPU 12v line, if you're trying to get max stability...


Lowered my VCCSA/VCCIO to more sane levels and now it's at 11.899 average


----------



## nexxusty

bastian said:


> Even Buildzoid says you don't need to plug it in. Usually, I agree with him, but on this one, I don't.


Buildzoid doesn't elaborate as much as he should. Smart dude, needs to be better at speaking and imparting knowledge to the norms.

Hehe.

Of course, you don't NEED it. However, with two there are only benefits. So you SHOULD use both if possible.


----------



## TheMadMan697

Hi All. I have an unusual problem with my network speed. I recently got Fibre installed. The speed is 1000 / 100 Mb which I am delighted with. What has been bugging me is that my main computer with the Z390 Aorus master LAN is only getting half of the upload speed. Now this may well be a software issue but I don't know what it could be. I decided to reach out to you guys in case that you have come across anything similar with the is board before I go though the hassle of a full reinstall of Windows 10. This device seems to be the only one on my network that cant reach over 50 Mb on the upload tests, even my phone on WiFi is getting the full upload speed. 

I have tried a different router and network cable and also a number of troubleshooting steps on the device itself including Installing the latest LAN drivers from the Gigabyte website, removing any unnecessary programs / network adapters (only LAN and WiFi are present and disabling WiFi does not help). If i test using the on-board WiFi the upload results stay the same at half speed but the and the download does not go over ~200 due to limitations of my WiFi. I also tried uninstalling the network adapter and letting windows reinstall the driver and even booting safe mode and I get the same result. 

Does anyone have any ideas?


----------



## Driller au

A quick google search shows there is a later driver on the intel site 24.0
ref https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra...90_aorus_master_ethernet_speed_is_slow_while/

and on another thread @Falkentyne suggested trying one of @KedarWolf modded bios with latest Ethernet firmware that can be found in this thread

no one answered if it solved their problem so i don't know if it fixes the problem my internet is to slow to test

Edit:also on the peripherals tab in bios there is a intel Ethernet page listed where you can change the link speed from auto i have never played with it but maybe worth trying


----------



## TheMadMan697

Driller au said:


> A quick google search shows there is a later driver on the intel site 24.0
> ref https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra...90_aorus_master_ethernet_speed_is_slow_while/
> 
> and on another thread @Falkentyne suggested trying one of @KedarWolf modded bios with latest Ethernet firmware that can be found in this thread
> 
> no one answered if it solved their problem so i don't know if it fixes the problem my internet is to slow to test
> 
> Edit:also on the peripherals tab in bios there is a intel Ethernet page listed where you can change the link speed from auto i have never played with it but maybe worth trying


Thank you very much for the tips. I tried the newer driver but it didn't help. I checked about the links speed in the BIOS but the fastest manual selection is 100 Mb Full Duplex so I just left it on auto. One key fact that I forgot to state is that the speed on the LAN is fine and can reach gigabit in both directions. Only upload out to the internet is slower. 

I have made an interesting discovery though. I pulled a SATA SSD from my other system and booted it and the upload is fine. It is Windows 10 version 1083 instead of 1809. I have a second NVME drive so I am going to try a fresh install of 1809 now on that to see if it is fixed as well. I wanted to avoid a reinstall but It looks like I may not have a choice.


----------



## Driller au

TheMadMan697 said:


> Thank you very much for the tips. I tried the newer driver but it didn't help. I checked about the links speed in the BIOS but the fastest manual selection is 100 Mb Full Duplex so I just left it on auto. One key fact that I forgot to state is that the speed on the LAN is fine and can reach gigabit in both directions. Only upload out to the internet is slower.
> 
> I have made an interesting discovery though. I pulled a SATA SSD from my other system and booted it and the upload is fine. It is Windows 10 version 1083 instead of 1809. I have a second NVME drive so I am going to try a fresh install of 1809 now on that to see if it is fixed as well. I wanted to avoid a reinstall but It looks like I may not have a choice.


sounds like you are onto it here is a write up about slow speeds with 1809

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us...9/022c16ef-3c69-4472-b7e9-d0b7466916fc?page=1


----------



## Falkentyne

vmanuelgm said:


> vmanuelgm to the rescue... If u don't mind...
> 
> Microcode BE (flash with included efiflash via DOS):
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!VmQCjKwK!ZeE1rE5-m3nnIP0h1nY6TGtVWrCfExnlSJWwXh8-pHs


Thank you Can you mod this with the newest Ethernet firmware like @KedarWolf 's versions?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you Can you mod this with the newest Ethernet firmware like @KedarWolf 's versions?



My mod already has the latest Intel Ethernet modules, 0.0.23 and 0.1.14, latest Microcode BE and latest Raid (17.5.0.4136 which came with the original f10b so didn't need to renew it).

I checked latest Kedarwolf mod for f10a and his mod has Ethernet versions 0.0.19 and 0.1.13, so my mod is pretty updated, 




EDIT:

A new mod with latest Efi Gop 1092:


https://mega.nz/#!NrYyFSqR!5BxHHpW7ph-aAgDilZZSKpw3HsJ_jIJUEYr6Cv2Lfs4


----------



## TheMadMan697

Driller au said:


> sounds like you are onto it here is a write up about slow speeds with 1809
> 
> https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us...9/022c16ef-3c69-4472-b7e9-d0b7466916fc?page=1


I actually found this thread earlier and tried all the steps. None seem to have worked for me so i reverted them all.

This is really strange. I have done some fresh installs on my second NVME drive and Windows 10 1803 gets full upload speed for me. Then I tried a Fresh install of 1809 and the newest 1903 and I only get half speed again on both of these. I also tried updating from F9 to F10b bios that @vmanuelgm just posted but it doesn't seem to have helped the upload speed. I think download may have gotten a bit better after i flashed f10b but that might be just because less traffic on the network when i tested.


----------



## Driller au

TheMadMan697 said:


> I actually found this thread earlier and tried all the steps. None seem to have worked for me so i reverted them all.
> 
> This is really strange. I have done some fresh installs on my second NVME drive and Windows 10 1803 gets full upload speed for me. Then I tried a Fresh install of 1809 and the newest 1903 and I only get half speed again on both of these. I also tried updating from F9 to F10b bios that @vmanuelgm just posted but it doesn't seem to have helped the upload speed. I think download may have gotten a bit better after i flashed f10b but that might be just because less traffic on the network when i tested.


Time to start stalking the OS section of some forums


----------



## KedarWolf

TheMadMan697 said:


> Hi All. I have an unusual problem with my network speed. I recently got Fibre installed. The speed is 1000 / 100 Mb which I am delighted with. What has been bugging me is that my main computer with the Z390 Aorus master LAN is only getting half of the upload speed. Now this may well be a software issue but I don't know what it could be. I decided to reach out to you guys in case that you have come across anything similar with the is board before I go though the hassle of a full reinstall of Windows 10. This device seems to be the only one on my network that cant reach over 50 Mb on the upload tests, even my phone on WiFi is getting the full upload speed.
> 
> I have tried a different router and network cable and also a number of troubleshooting steps on the device itself including Installing the latest LAN drivers from the Gigabyte website, removing any unnecessary programs / network adapters (only LAN and WiFi are present and disabling WiFi does not help). If i test using the on-board WiFi the upload results stay the same at half speed but the and the download does not go over ~200 due to limitations of my WiFi. I also tried uninstalling the network adapter and letting windows reinstall the driver and even booting safe mode and I get the same result.
> 
> Does anyone have any ideas?


Never have had issues with Windows 1903 and my Master.


----------



## Scunner

Hello everyone.

I'm having a problem updating to vmanuelgm'sF10b bios. I have tried multiple downloads, and 2 different thumb drives but whatever I do I can't get it to work. For some reason, after an initial success it always reports "bios failed to load". I've run out of ideas as to why it isn't working when seemingly no one else has had a problem. I must be doing something wrong, but what?

If anyone can shed any light on this problem, I would be eternally grateful. I have just finished building my rig and it has only got the F6 bios!

Thanks very much for reading.


----------



## KedarWolf

Scunner said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> I'm having a problem updating to vmanuelgm'sF10b bios. I have tried multiple downloads, and 2 different thumb drives but whatever I do I can't get it to work. For some reason, after an initial success it always reports "bios failed to load". I've run out of ideas as to why it isn't working when seemingly no one else has had a problem. I must be doing something wrong, but what?
> 
> If anyone can shed any light on this problem, I would be eternally grateful. I have just finished building my rig and it has only got the F6 bios!
> 
> Thanks very much for reading.


I change the .F10b extension to just .f10 and the command you need to use is.



Code:


efiflash z390aorusmaster.f10 /x

Or to keep it simple I change the bios name to 1.f10 and use.


Code:


efiflash 1.f10 /x


----------



## Scunner

KedarWolf said:


> I change the .F10b extension to just .f10 and the command you need to use is.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash z390aorusmaster.f10 /x
> 
> Or to keep it simple I change the bios name to 1.f10 and use.
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f10 /x



Will try that. Thanks ever so much for replying.


----------



## Scunner

@KedarWolf Ahh that's the ticket. Brilliant. Thanks a lot.


----------



## Scunner

Also @*vmanuelgm*. Thanks for making the bios.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Thanks @KedarWolf and @Scunner


New link with f10b, latest modules including GOP 1092 and instructions text:


https://mega.nz/#!NrYyFSqR!5BxHHpW7ph-aAgDilZZSKpw3HsJ_jIJUEYr6Cv2Lfs4


----------



## Padinn

I've noticed in Madden 20 frequent L0 errors . Other games seem fine and it's less cpu bound. I may go back to a static voltage since some middle step in cstates seems to be causing issues


----------



## Wirerat

Padinn said:


> I've noticed in Madden 20 frequent L0 errors . Other games seem fine and it's less cpu bound. I may go back to a static voltage since some middle step in cstates seems to be causing issues


Why not just increase the offset voltage 
.010 or .020v?


----------



## Scunner

vmanuelgm said:


> Thanks @*KedarWolf* and @*Scunner*
> 
> 
> New link with f10b, latest modules including GOP 1092 and instructions text:
> 
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!NrYyFSqR!5BxHHpW7ph-aAgDilZZSKpw3HsJ_jIJUEYr6Cv2Lfs4



Thanks for this. Also, a large thank you to everyone on this forum for their advice and help throughout the pages. I've read all of it, forgotten most of it, but still, like many people, am immensely grateful.


----------



## Wirerat

I switched to adaptive mode and was able to get 5.1,ghz stable +.110. With low Llc/ power save ac loadline. 

For those that played around with adaptive mode. What happens with intel speed step disabled?

I assume it simply doesn't drop vcore at idle. 

Also I see that when the vcore does drop the vrout rarely follows the vcore all the way down. I was thinking its because it is rare that all 8 cores idle all the way down.


----------



## Smokediggity

F10b for the Master has been officially released on Gigabyte's website, although the download links appear to be broken at the moment.


Changelog:


Support AORUS Memory Boost
Support JEDEC DDR4 native 3200MHz memory
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10/support#support-dl-bios


----------



## raad11

Wirerat said:


> I switched to adaptive mode and was able to get 5.1,ghz stable +.110. With low Llc/ power save ac loadline.
> 
> For those that played around with adaptive mode. What happens with intel speed step disabled?
> 
> I assume it simply doesn't drop vcore at idle.
> 
> Also I see that when the vcore does drop the vrout rarely follows the vcore all the way down. I was thinking its because it is rare that all 8 cores idle all the way down.


How do you do adaptive mode in this BIOS?

I noticed my system is more stable at 5.1 when I turned LLC down to 'High' from 'Turbo', and put up VCore a little.


----------



## Falkentyne

raad11 said:


> How do you do adaptive mode in this BIOS?
> 
> I noticed my system is more stable at 5.1 when I turned LLC down to 'High' from 'Turbo', and put up VCore a little.


Adaptive= DVID.
AMI Bios (if you do a raw read and check "Overclocking performance menu") calls offset mode "Adaptive".

Asus' adaptive mode is completely different.


----------



## raad11

Falkentyne said:


> Adaptive= DVID.
> AMI Bios (if you do a raw read and check "Overclocking performance menu") calls offset mode "Adaptive".
> 
> Asus' adaptive mode is completely different.


Ah, thanks. Yeah this is my first non-Asus board to overclock with in a long time.


----------



## Jeredien

Quick question. Does the official release for F10b include all the updates in the modded bios?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jeredien said:


> Quick question. Does the official release for F10b include all the updates in the modded bios?


No. F10b is the same as the one posted on tweaktown and has AE microcode for 9900k, not anything newer. Not sure what other processors are there. I'm assuming just 9900k, 9700k, 9600k and 9900kf. So you want the modded one.


----------



## KedarWolf

vmanuelgm said:


> Thanks @KedarWolf and @Scunner
> 
> 
> New link with f10b, latest modules including GOP 1092 and instructions text:
> 
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!NrYyFSqR!5BxHHpW7ph-aAgDilZZSKpw3HsJ_jIJUEYr6Cv2Lfs4


I PM'd you, having trouble updating the GOP module, can you explain in PM how you did it?

Never mind, figured it out.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted for updates


----------



## KedarWolf

vmanuelgm said:


> Thanks @KedarWolf and @Scunner
> 
> 
> New link with f10b, latest modules including GOP 1092 and instructions text:
> 
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!NrYyFSqR!5BxHHpW7ph-aAgDilZZSKpw3HsJ_jIJUEYr6Cv2Lfs4


One 906 microcode missing. I get them all from https://github.com/platomav/CPUMicrocodes/tree/master/Intel


----------



## GravBar

Works like a charm, thank you KedarWolf


----------



## Jeredien

Just updated to F10b, thank you. Now time to see how much higher I can push this memory.


----------



## nexxusty

Having a ROUGH time on this T-Topolgy board with 2x8GB DIMMS.

I will get another 2 DIMMS when I can, however, the price for these (ADATA D80) is not going down.

In the meantime, I would like to clock them higher than I have. I have them at stock 3600mhz 16-17-17-38-1T with TRFC at 300 and TREFI at max. That's it. I cannot go lower on TRFC so there is no more bandwidth to be had.

Does anyone have any profiles for B-Die in my situation that I could test out? Meaning 2X8GB Single Rank DIMMS.

I'd love 4000mhz. I can boot it, Karu fails at 7% every time. I've tried tweaking the necessary voltages.... no difference. Sometimes I can get it past 7%, however, it will eventually fail at 1700% or something. Any profiles or advice would be helpful, I feel like a n00b asking.... I've just been overclocking less and less and want to change that. Haha.

Thanks, guys!


----------



## robertr1

nexxusty said:


> Having a ROUGH time on this T-Topolgy board with 2x8GB DIMMS.
> 
> I will get another 2 DIMMS when I can, however, the price for these (ADATA D80) is not going down.
> 
> In the meantime, I would like to clock them higher than I have. I have them at stock 3600mhz 16-17-17-38-1T with TRFC at 300 and TREFI at max. That's it. I cannot go lower on TRFC so there is no more bandwidth to be had.
> 
> Does anyone have any profiles for B-Die in my situation that I could test out? Meaning 2X8GB Single Rank DIMMS.
> 
> I'd love 4000mhz. I can boot it, Karu fails at 7% every time. I've tried tweaking the necessary voltages.... no difference. Sometimes I can get it past 7%, however, it will eventually fail at 1700% or something. Any profiles or advice would be helpful, I feel like a n00b asking.... I've just been overclocking less and less and want to change that. Haha.
> 
> Thanks, guys!


This is what I run 24x7. 1.2v vccio 1.23v sa 1.5v dram I have airflow over the ram.


----------



## KedarWolf

*F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master and F8a BIOS for the Extreme with the latest microcode, RST firmware, and Intel Ethernet firmware.*

*This version has updated 17.5.2.4317 RST firmware. There is also a new GOP available but it hasn't been thoroughly tested on Z390 and was removed from the forum I use for these firmwares.*

Microcodes:
906E9 1151v2\cpu906E9_plat2A_ver000000B4_2019-04-01_PRD_DACDA920.bin
906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000B4_2019-04-01_PRD_B2B10713.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000B4_2019-04-01_PRD_C9AD2768.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.1092

EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.2.4317
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.2.4317

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.

*Rename the BIOS you're flashing to 1.F10*










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f10 /x


----------



## Scunner

KedarWolf said:


> *F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master and F8a BIOS for the Extreme with the latest microcode, RST firmware, and Intel Ethernet firmware.*
> 
> *This version has updated 17.5.2.4317 RST firmware. There is also a new GOP available but it hasn't been thoroughly tested on Z390 and was removed from the forum I use for these firmwares.*
> 
> Microcodes:
> 906E9 1151v2\cpu906E9_plat2A_ver000000B4_2019-04-01_PRD_DACDA920.bin
> 906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000B4_2019-04-01_PRD_B2B10713.bin
> 906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000B4_2019-04-01_PRD_C9AD2768.bin
> 906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
> 906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin
> 
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.1092
> 
> EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.2.4317
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.2.4317
> 
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> *Rename the BIOS you're flashing to 1.F10*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f10 /x




Thanks @KedarWolf


----------



## Crezzlin

*Dead Memory*

Anyone had RAM problems with the Master, I have the Gigabyte 3200 set in from day one 2x8gig and 2xdummy RGB, one stick failed so I sent it back and had been using some corsair memory from a friend until I got it back. 

Got the memory back and put it in with the corsair memory so I had 32gb all the same stock voltage etc, 2 weeks later 3 sticks are dead and only one of gigabyte sticks is working :S I can't even get it to post with the corsair sticks. it just loops and if I have both the gigabyte sticks in one shows as 8gb and the other some random amount. I updated the bios and changed from DIMM to DIMM but still, only the one stick worked. soo strange, either the mater is blowing them or the gigabyte sticks been faulty somehow did it.. confused lol


----------



## shaolin95

I have only 2 kits of Gskill ram (both using b-die and both 4x16GB PC3200 C14) and not a single issue with mine.


----------



## Sheyster

nexxusty said:


> Having a ROUGH time on this T-Topolgy board with 2x8GB DIMMS.
> 
> I will get another 2 DIMMS when I can, however, the price for these (ADATA D80) is not going down.
> 
> In the meantime, I would like to clock them higher than I have. I have them at stock 3600mhz 16-17-17-38-1T with TRFC at 300 and TREFI at max. That's it. I cannot go lower on TRFC so there is no more bandwidth to be had.
> 
> Does anyone have any profiles for B-Die in my situation that I could test out? Meaning 2X8GB Single Rank DIMMS.
> 
> I'd love 4000mhz. I can boot it, Karu fails at 7% every time. I've tried tweaking the necessary voltages.... no difference. Sometimes I can get it past 7%, however, it will eventually fail at 1700% or something. Any profiles or advice would be helpful, I feel like a n00b asking.... I've just been overclocking less and less and want to change that. Haha.
> 
> Thanks, guys!


If you have the Pro or Pro WiFi version, just give up trying to get 4000 stable with 2 sticks. I speak from experience on this. If you like banging your head up against a wall for extended periods of time then feel free to experiment.


----------



## raad11

Sheyster said:


> If you have the Pro or Pro WiFi version, just give up trying to get 4000 stable with 2 sticks. I speak from experience on this. If you like banging your head up against a wall for extended periods of time then feel free to experiment.


Why?


----------



## Wirerat

raad11 said:


> Sheyster said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you have the Pro or Pro WiFi version, just give up trying to get 4000 stable with 2 sticks. I speak from experience on this. If you like banging your head up against a wall for extended periods of time then feel free to experiment. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Why?
Click to expand...

Its the layout of the board (t-topolgy) combined with 4 layer pcb. Im quoting buildzoid.

Im on aorus pro. I do have my hynix cjr ram at 3800mhz cl 17 running good. I know it can run tighter timings with increased voltage. Its currently at 1.4v. I just havent been able spend the time on it yet.

You may want to dial in the ram around 3800mhz on this mobo.


----------



## robertr1

RAM tuning the pro board is a bit of a nightmare from usability standpoint also:

- Get stuck in a boot loop and can't recover quite often
- No clear cmos button so get the screwdriver out each time and short the jumper
- Will switch to backup bios randomly and lose all your profiles
- No guarantee that stable settings will train again the same way once reapplied after a cmos reset
- Recovery to main bios needs reboot cycles and weird procedures not well documented


I'd play around with ram tuning much more on this board if it wasn't for the above issue. They might not seem like a big deal when starting out but when you're close to the limit, you're talking about cmos resets all t he time due to it's lack of recovery. The frustration adds up quickly.


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> RAM tuning the pro board is a bit of a nightmare from usability standpoint also:
> 
> - Get stuck in a boot loop and can't recover quite often
> - No clear cmos button so get the screwdriver out each time and short the jumper
> - Will switch to backup bios randomly and lose all your profiles
> - No guarantee that stable settings will train again the same way once reapplied after a cmos reset
> - Recovery to main bios needs reboot cycles and weird procedures not well documented
> 
> 
> I'd play around with ram tuning much more on this board if it wasn't for the above issue. They might not seem like a big deal when starting out but when you're close to the limit, you're talking about cmos resets all t he time due to it's lack of recovery. The frustration adds up quickly.


 It wont be breaking any records but 3800mhz is easy to get to with the right kit.

Not being able to force a bios swap is probably the biggest downfall of the pro. The benifits of a dual bios seem out weighed by the drawbacks.


----------



## ZafirZ

robertr1 said:


> RAM tuning the pro board is a bit of a nightmare from usability standpoint also:
> 
> - Get stuck in a boot loop and can't recover quite often
> - No clear cmos button so get the screwdriver out each time and short the jumper
> - Will switch to backup bios randomly and lose all your profiles
> - No guarantee that stable settings will train again the same way once reapplied after a cmos reset
> - Recovery to main bios needs reboot cycles and weird procedures not well documented
> 
> 
> I'd play around with ram tuning much more on this board if it wasn't for the above issue. They might not seem like a big deal when starting out but when you're close to the limit, you're talking about cmos resets all t he time due to it's lack of recovery. The frustration adds up quickly.


Yeah I wish I knew a easy method of swapping between the different bios. The only reason I got out of the backup bios when I messed up was because I'd taken the displayport cable out and hadn't plugged it in all the way when I put it back so the boot sequence got stuck and I had to force shut it down.

Edit: Just realised I'm in the wrong thread, but its the same with the x570 version of the board.


----------



## Matlad

Thank you very much @KedarWolf!

I noticed a slight problem with this latest version. My display does not turn on before reaching Windows when I disable CSM. I can enter the BIOS and reboot from it as I know which keys to press by heart, but I get no display. Everything works when I enable CSM.

I think it might come from EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.1092, as the first version provided by @vmanuelgm (thanks!) which did not have the GOP update did not cause any problem.

EDIT: forgot an important bit, if someone ever comes across this - I'm using the 9900K's IGPU on a Master.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> Its the layout of the board (t-topolgy) combined with 4 layer pcb. Im quoting buildzoid.
> 
> Im on aorus pro. I do have my hynix cjr ram at 3800mhz cl 17 running good. I know it can run tighter timings with increased voltage. Its currently at 1.4v. I just havent been able spend the time on it yet.
> 
> You may want to dial in the ram around 3800mhz on this mobo.


I was able to run 3866 stable when I had 2 sticks only.


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> RAM tuning the pro board is a bit of a nightmare from usability standpoint also:
> 
> - Get stuck in a boot loop and can't recover quite often
> - No clear cmos button so get the screwdriver out each time and short the jumper
> - Will switch to backup bios randomly and lose all your profiles
> - No guarantee that stable settings will train again the same way once reapplied after a cmos reset
> - Recovery to main bios needs reboot cycles and weird procedures not well documented
> 
> 
> I'd play around with ram tuning much more on this board if it wasn't for the above issue. They might not seem like a big deal when starting out but when you're close to the limit, you're talking about cmos resets all t he time due to it's lack of recovery. The frustration adds up quickly.


Agreed with all of the above. If RAM OC is important to you, just roll with the Master Z390 or another brand of motherboard.


----------



## robertr1

ZafirZ said:


> Yeah I wish I knew a easy method of swapping between the different bios. The only reason I got out of the backup bios when I messed up was because I'd taken the displayport cable out and hadn't plugged it in all the way when I put it back so the boot sequence got stuck and I had to force shut it down.
> 
> Edit: Just realised I'm in the wrong thread, but its the same with the x570 version of the board.


To get the bios to switch:

- restart matching and go into bios
- hit the shutdown button to power off the pc
- cut the power from the back of the psu
- turn on the back of the psu but don't turn on the pc
- short the jumper by holding a screwdriver on both for 5 seconds
- turn on the pc. you'll hear a few clicks

You'll have switched bios.


----------



## Deathtech00

Any other Z390 Aorus Master users here have the Intermittent random C4 Code thrown when rebooting? for some reason When trying to OC my 9900k, it will boot fine, run great for hours, stability test passes without issue, but if I reboot it hangs with this C4 Code. It is not listed in their codes (or rather listed as "reserved"). 

Replaced the Board, but the issue persists. Someone mentioned a new F10b bios so I am going to try that. The intermittency of it just has me for a loop. I can leave it off for a while, come back, boot up and it will once again be perfectly fine. Reboot for windows updates with no BIOS changes? bam, C4 code over and over. 

Also, someone mentioned a Power supply could be at fault? Sometimes the lights on my motherboard will just stay on even after shutting completely down, and it will take me actually having to hit the kill switch on the PSU for it to actually drain power and go off. Would this be an indication of a PSU issue? it did this on BOTH Aorus master boards.


----------



## Jeredien

Deathtech00 said:


> Any other Z390 Aorus Master users here have the Intermittent random C4 Code thrown when rebooting? for some reason When trying to OC my 9900k, it will boot fine, run great for hours, stability test passes without issue, but if I reboot it hangs with this C4 Code. It is not listed in their codes (or rather listed as "reserved").
> 
> Replaced the Board, but the issue persists. Someone mentioned a new F10b bios so I am going to try that. The intermittency of it just has me for a loop. I can leave it off for a while, come back, boot up and it will once again be perfectly fine. Reboot for windows updates with no BIOS changes? bam, C4 code over and over.
> 
> Also, someone mentioned a Power supply could be at fault? Sometimes the lights on my motherboard will just stay on even after shutting completely down, and it will take me actually having to hit the kill switch on the PSU for it to actually drain power and go off. Would this be an indication of a PSU issue? it did this on BOTH Aorus master boards.


I believe I have ran into this issue in my journey with this setup and was traced back to the memory being unstable. Whether it is system agent, timings, or DDR voltage, you will have to figure out which one.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deathtech00 said:


> Any other Z390 Aorus Master users here have the Intermittent random C4 Code thrown when rebooting? for some reason When trying to OC my 9900k, it will boot fine, run great for hours, stability test passes without issue, but if I reboot it hangs with this C4 Code. It is not listed in their codes (or rather listed as "reserved").
> 
> Replaced the Board, but the issue persists. Someone mentioned a new F10b bios so I am going to try that. The intermittency of it just has me for a loop. I can leave it off for a while, come back, boot up and it will once again be perfectly fine. Reboot for windows updates with no BIOS changes? bam, C4 code over and over.
> 
> Also, someone mentioned a Power supply could be at fault? Sometimes the lights on my motherboard will just stay on even after shutting completely down, and it will take me actually having to hit the kill switch on the PSU for it to actually drain power and go off. Would this be an indication of a PSU issue? it did this on BOTH Aorus master boards.


From my research, C4 is usually a memory related error.


----------



## Falkentyne

Deathtech00 said:


> Any other Z390 Aorus Master users here have the Intermittent random C4 Code thrown when rebooting? for some reason When trying to OC my 9900k, it will boot fine, run great for hours, stability test passes without issue, but if I reboot it hangs with this C4 Code. It is not listed in their codes (or rather listed as "reserved").
> 
> Replaced the Board, but the issue persists. Someone mentioned a new F10b bios so I am going to try that. The intermittency of it just has me for a loop. I can leave it off for a while, come back, boot up and it will once again be perfectly fine. Reboot for windows updates with no BIOS changes? bam, C4 code over and over.
> 
> Also, someone mentioned a Power supply could be at fault? Sometimes the lights on my motherboard will just stay on even after shutting completely down, and it will take me actually having to hit the kill switch on the PSU for it to actually drain power and go off. Would this be an indication of a PSU issue? it did this on BOTH Aorus master boards.


Enable power loading on your bios settings and enable eRP mode and see if that does anything.
Are you overclocking your RAM?
Did you check the DDR VTT value ? This can be read from the bios in the health section. If it's not 1/2 DDRV, there's a problem.


----------



## Deathtech00

Falkentyne said:


> Enable power loading on your bios settings and enable eRP mode and see if that does anything.
> Are you overclocking your RAM?
> Did you check the DDR VTT value ? This can be read from the bios in the health section. If it's not 1/2 DDRV, there's a problem.


Hey Falkentyne, I appreciate all of your info on here and Reddit. I am not sure about "Power Loading" or "eRP" Haven't seen anyone mention these in all the guides I have looked at so that may be a start. I haven't played with those settings before. Some other helpful people above here (Thank you for your replies!) also mentioned other ram settings to try. I will check all of this in a couple of hours. People keep mentioning VCCIO and VCSA settings, but I can't seem to find a definitive "Start here" voltage. Everyone keeps mentioning either "1" or ".01" for some kind of memory quirk on these boards? Oddly using XMP works sometimes, and other times it will just fail with this C4 code. I have a friend bringing me some RAM tomorrow to try and see if it is related to the kit I have.

Super frustrating. Single dad, haven't built my own system in quite a few years, and I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall. The intermittency of it all makes me wonder if there is an issue with the Powersupply. Brand new EVGA P1200. 

If it makes a difference I am using TeamGroup Nighthawk DDR CL16 @ 3200 MHz (1.35v). I will reply back as soon as I can test these things. I also have a backup bios (F7 Was the bios it shipped with) and the latest F10b (non modded) and am going to try the modded one from here as well.


----------



## Falkentyne

Deathtech00 said:


> Hey Falkentyne, I appreciate all of your info on here and Reddit. I am not sure about "Power Loading" or "eRP" Haven't seen anyone mention these in all the guides I have looked at so that may be a start. I haven't played with those settings before. Some other helpful people above here (Thank you for your replies!) also mentioned other ram settings to try. I will check all of this in a couple of hours. People keep mentioning VCCIO and VCSA settings, but I can't seem to find a definitive "Start here" voltage. Everyone keeps mentioning either "1" or ".01" for some kind of memory quirk on these boards? Oddly using XMP works sometimes, and other times it will just fail with this C4 code. I have a friend bringing me some RAM tomorrow to try and see if it is related to the kit I have.
> 
> Super frustrating. Single dad, haven't built my own system in quite a few years, and I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall. The intermittency of it all makes me wonder if there is an issue with the Powersupply. Brand new EVGA P1200.
> 
> If it makes a difference I am using TeamGroup Nighthawk DDR CL16 @ 3200 MHz (1.35v). I will reply back as soon as I can test these things. I also have a backup bios (F7 Was the bios it shipped with) and the latest F10b (non modded) and am going to try the modded one from here as well.


The very first setting you should check is the DDR VTT (termination). And that's easily shown in "Health." An incorrect DDR VTT will cause problems like this. I've already seen some RAM kits try to set 1.35v DDR voltage with DDR VTT (DDR Termination voltage) at 0.6v. 0.6v is the value for 1.2v DDR, because DDR VTT is supposed to be 1/2 DDR memory voltage.


----------



## Deathtech00

Ok, so I just got home, enabled XMP, rebooted to check voltages.

While dram a/b voltage is 1.368, the DDRVtt is sitting at 0.660.

This could absolutely be my headache, and when trying to apply manual settings I never changed the DDRVTT setting. So if XMP is disabled, and I manually calculate DDRVTT, it should be half of what the profile is giving? What about training voltage or ddrvpp?


----------



## Deathtech00

Falkentyne said:


> The very first setting you should check is the DDR VTT (termination). And that's easily shown in "Health." An incorrect DDR VTT will cause problems like this. I've already seen some RAM kits try to set 1.35v DDR voltage with DDR VTT (DDR Termination voltage) at 0.6v. 0.6v is the value for 1.2v DDR, because DDR VTT is supposed to be 1/2 DDR memory voltage.


So, that seemed to work, since it was defaulting to 1.368 I did 1.37v and 0.685 VTT. Booted fine with all 4 sticks with manual voltage and xmp settings. Tried my overclock settings (basically the Gigabyte OC guide) and bam, C1 Error this time. Reset BIOS and had to remove, allow it to boot with default values, and oddly readd the ramsticks for it to boot past cycling C codes and F7. I am going to try the F10b modded bios from the nice gentleman above and see if that makes a difference.


----------



## Falkentyne

Deathtech00 said:


> Ok, so I just got home, enabled XMP, rebooted to check voltages.
> 
> While dram a/b voltage is 1.368, the DDRVtt is sitting at 0.660.
> 
> This could absolutely be my headache, and when trying to apply manual settings I never changed the DDRVTT setting. So if XMP is disabled, and I manually calculate DDRVTT, it should be half of what the profile is giving? What about training voltage or ddrvpp?


Training voltage is for RAM training help only. If RAM needs more voltage to train than it needs to run, it may be useful. I can't help with this, sorry. 
I have no idea whatsoever with DDRVPP is.

Keep in mind I am not a RAM person. I only know the bare basics. You're best off asking in the DDR memory thread about that.


----------



## Driller au

Deathtech00 said:


> Ok, so I just got home, enabled XMP, rebooted to check voltages.
> 
> While dram a/b voltage is 1.368, the DDRVtt is sitting at 0.660.
> 
> This could absolutely be my headache, and when trying to apply manual settings I never changed the DDRVTT setting. So if XMP is disabled, and I manually calculate DDRVTT, it should be half of what the profile is giving? What about training voltage or ddrvpp?


Interesting thing with this is on my system i run 1.380V on the ram and have the VTT set for 0.690V and i have never seen it get to this voltage it sits at 0.660V and spikes to 0.671 for a second or so no matter what i set it to. Actually just thinking while i am typing this i will try manually setting it and not by the menu will report back shortly

Edit: ok had a play with it the only way i could get it close to 0.690V was to set it at 0.741V in the bios menu which gave me 0.693V in the "PC health " menu and also in HWinfo64 will leave it there and see if any adverse effects

Edit Edit: After a few hours my PC hard locked so back to just setting 0.690V bios and reading 0.660v everywhere


----------



## robertr1

Anyone with a Pro board running adaptive voltage? I know our boards don't have many options as the Master thus wondering if there are some key settings missing that make it difficult to run.


----------



## Deathtech00

Driller au said:


> Interesting thing with this is on my system I run 1.380V on the ram and have the VTT set for 0.690V and I have never seen it get to this voltage it sits at 0.660V and spikes to 0.671 for a second or so no matter what I set it to. Actually just thinking while I am typing this I will try manually setting it and not by the menu will report back shortly
> 
> Edit: ok had a play with it the only way I could get it close to 0.690V was to set it at 0.741V in the bios menu which gave me 0.693V in the "PC health " menu and also in HWinfo64 will leave it there and see if any adverse effects
> 
> Edit Edit: After a few hours my PC hard locked so back to just setting 0.690V bios and reading 0.660v everywhere


Interesting. The odd part in all of this is it seems to react as well if I leave ram alone, but try to apply a 5.0 GHz OC. not sure if it should act that way, but it has me questioning the IMC or PSU maybe? I literally just replaced the motherboard, so I don't think it would be that.


----------



## Padinn

Would getting four sticks of ram help me with stability? Im not fully understanding what t topology does


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> Anyone with a Pro board running adaptive voltage? I know our boards don't have many options as the Master thus wondering if there are some key settings missing that make it difficult to run.


I have adaptive working on my pro

I set 

Core 51

Uncore 44

Vcore normal 

Dynamic vcore +. 110

Acx offset 0

Ac loadline power save

Llc low

Intel speed shift enabled 

Its at 5.1ghz w/max vcore of 1.38 (1.29v vrout).


----------



## metalspider

robertr1 said:


> Anyone with a Pro board running adaptive voltage? I know our boards don't have many options as the Master thus wondering if there are some key settings missing that make it difficult to run.





Padinn said:


> Would getting four sticks of ram help me with stability? Im not fully understanding what t topology does





i gave up on running dvid on my aorus pro since even if load was ok id get crash/freeze on idle.the power usage in watts with a fixed voltage doesnt seem too much higher according to hwinfo.maybe 5 watts when idling.i left all the c-states on etc.


T topology means in theory 4 sticks can run faster then just 2 in a 4 dimm slot board but there also seem to be pcb quality issues which limit you.im having a really hard time going over ddr 3866mhz on my aorus pro.
i can boot a winpe at 4133 and get ram errors and sometimes even 4266 but for some reason 4000 doesnt even post.
i have 4 dimms of gskill ram with 4266mhz xmp. currently at 3866mhz and ive been tuning timings for the past week.


----------



## Wirerat

metalspider said:


> robertr1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone with a Pro board running adaptive voltage? I know our boards don't have many options as the Master thus wondering if there are some key settings missing that make it difficult to run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would getting four sticks of ram help me with stability? Im not fully understanding what t topology does
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i gave up on running dvid on my aorus pro since even if load was ok id get crash/freeze on idle.the power usage in watts with a fixed voltage doesnt seem too much higher according to hwinfo.maybe 5 watts when idling.i left all the c-states on etc.
Click to expand...

What were your uncore frequency set to? 

Im not have any issues at all with adaptive. It actually helped stabilize 5.1ghz with 4.4ghz uncore.


----------



## metalspider

Wirerat said:


> What were your uncore frequency set to?
> 
> Im not have any issues at all with adaptive. It actually helped stabilize 5.1ghz with 4.4ghz uncore.



i have it at 4.7ghz but it also downclocks on idle.


----------



## robertr1

Wirerat said:


> I have adaptive working on my pro
> 
> I set
> 
> Core 51
> 
> Uncore 44
> 
> Vcore normal
> 
> Dynamic vcore +. 110
> 
> Acx offset 0
> 
> Ac loadline power save
> 
> Llc low
> 
> Intel speed shift enabled
> 
> Its at 5.1ghz w/max vcore of 1.38 (1.29v vrout).


I'm current at 5.2 with ht off at 1.3 VR Vout at idle and 1.26 under high load.

So I should try a similar offset as yours at this stage?


----------



## Intrud3r

robertr1 said:


> I'm current at 5.2 with ht off at 1.3 VR Vout at idle and 1.26 under high load.
> 
> So I should try a similar offset as yours at this stage?


As Kedarwolf and me both need about DVID = +150 to get 5.1 / 4.7 stable I would assume that +110 would be little too less.

Edited:
Cause we use HT = On ...
And i've read posts that state that with or without HT Vcore would be almost identical ... I have however noticed I can go a bit lower on DVID tho when I disable HT ... haven't tested it till the end of time, but it seemed stable.

If I remember correctly ... my profile for 5.2 / 4.7 with HT = off goes to DVID = +140


----------



## Wirerat

metalspider said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> What were your uncore frequency set to?
> 
> Im not have any issues at all with adaptive. It actually helped stabilize 5.1ghz with 4.4ghz uncore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i have it at 4.7ghz but it also downclocks on idle.
Click to expand...

 Thats possibly why it freezes up at idle. Lower uncore would have stabilized it.


----------



## metalspider

Wirerat said:


> Thats possibly why it freezes up at idle. Lower uncore would have stabilized it.


maybe ill try later,been busy trying to get my ram up to full speed but stuck at 3866mhz.i can sometimes get 4133mhz to work a little but with errors.its 2 kits of gskill f4-4266c19d-16gtza so 4x8gb in total.


----------



## Sheyster

metalspider said:


> maybe ill try later,been busy trying to get my ram up to full speed but stuck at 3866mhz.i can sometimes get 4133mhz to work a little but with errors.its 2 kits of gskill f4-4266c19d-16gtza so 4x8gb in total.


It's very unlikely you'll stabilize a Pro board at 4000 let alone 4133. I rolled with 3600 CL15 and called it a day. I've been able to run 3866 as well, but I bench slightly higher with 3600 CL15. I've tried with two different G-skill kits, one rated at 4000 CL18, and the current 3200 CL14 B-Die kit I have now.


----------



## robertr1

Intrud3r said:


> As Kedarwolf and me both need about DVID = +150 to get 5.1 / 4.7 stable I would assume that +110 would be little too less.
> 
> Edited:
> Cause we use HT = On ...
> And i've read posts that state that with or without HT Vcore would be almost identical ... I have however noticed I can go a bit lower on DVID tho when I disable HT ... haven't tested it till the end of time, but it seemed stable.
> 
> If I remember correctly ... my profile for 5.2 / 4.7 with HT = off goes to DVID = +140


I have IA disabled. Do i need to enable that first or is that irrelevant?


----------



## metalspider

Sheyster said:


> It's very unlikely you'll stabilize a Pro board at 4000 let alone 4133. I rolled with 3600 CL15 and called it a day. I've been able to run 3866 as well, but I bench slightly higher with 3600 CL15. I've tried with two different G-skill kits, one rated at 4000 CL18, and the current 3200 CL14 B-Die kit I have now.



been able to boot a winpe with 4133mhz and get very little errors so it feels like its taunting me.4266mhz was less stable and 4000mhz wont even post.
100mhz ratios also dont seem to work,like 3900 4100..... 
for now im at 3866mhz with tuned timings,tunning sub timings also got me a lot of performance and its seems stable passing 400% hci.
lots of issues ive had in the past were due to bad sub timings tuning and i was surprised to learn those are set pretty much the same no matter the frequency.


even at 3866 i saw a massive difference in read/write and latency just from tuning some of my sub timings.

ive been burned in the past by the whole ram performance setting in gigabyte boards so i set to enhanced performance and even then it seems you can do so much better manually.


----------



## Intrud3r

robertr1 said:


> I have IA disabled. Do i need to enable that first or is that irrelevant?


We both (Kedarwolf and me) are running IA AC Loadline = 1 and IA DC Loadline = 1


----------



## raad11

Weird thing just happened now. I came to the computer in the morning and it had rebooted into BIOS overnight with the error code 'A6'. I restarted again and it loaded no problem.

Overclock symptom perhaps? Or a power outage? I gamed for like 5 hours last night on heavy load with zero issues...

EDIT: I'm also debating where to go with the voltages. BIOS at 1.325v Vcore with LLC on High has been working (except mystery crashes when I'm not around like this morning), but the VR VOUT shows 1.23-1.24v Vcore under load (Dipped to 1.213v!) which is way lower than what I had with LLC on Turbo. I read here that LLC High can mean more stability under lower voltage, but should I increase it a bit? Or should I try the Adaptive/DVID route? I'm at 5.1/4.7 overclock.

EDIT 2: I'm also keeping C-States and all that power saving stuff on, and I'm wondering if that's messing with anything too...


----------



## Syed talib

heyy guys please help me out in this issue
so the issue is my motherboard automatically switches to backup bios, it was stable for like 3 months (it was a new built) but then it started doing this thing, it was doing it on every cold bootup, i tried reinstalling the windows clearing the cmos (by shorting 2 pins), changing cmos battery, but didnt help. it didnt changed any settings in primary bios, bios settings are on factory default
then i updated my backup bios (from f4 to f7) and my primary bios ( from f5 to f9a), behavior was changed, now it will do it once in a while like 1 time a week

BEFORE UPDATING BIOS: every cold bootup was on backup bios, i have to shut it down several times to force it to boot in primary bios, it will post and goes into the windows normally, can play games and render videos for hours and hours, completely stable after booting into windows, to duplicate this issue, press the power button(cold bootup) it takes a pause for about 2 sec then starts to boot, stop, powers on again then boots in windows on the backup bios normally. then i have to shut it down restart several times to make it boot into primary bios. solutions i have tried: reinstalling windows, clearing cmos, changing cmos battery 

AFTER UPDATING BIOS: now it wont switch bios on every cold boot, but every now and the it does, like once in a week, behavior have been changed, like before updating bios it will boot into windows from backup bios normally now all it does is shut down it self repower and i am on my primary bios, to duplicate it: press the power button it will take a pause for about 2sec then starts to boot, stop, powers on again into the windows from primary bios. 

System specs
8700k all stock
Gigabyte z390 auros elite (All bios settings)
16GB 3200MHZ Gskill ripjaws (didnt turn on the xmp)
GTX1080 no overclockes at all

Sory for my English guys
Thankyou


----------



## KedarWolf

Syed talib said:


> heyy guys please help me out in this issue
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> so the issue is my motherboard automatically switches to backup bios, it was stable for like 3 months (it was a new built) but then it started doing this thing, it was doing it on every cold bootup, i tried reinstalling the windows clearing the cmos (by shorting 2 pins), changing cmos battery, but didnt help. it didnt changed any settings in primary bios, bios settings are on factory default
> then i updated my backup bios (from f4 to f7) and my primary bios ( from f5 to f9a), behavior was changed, now it will do it once in a while like 1 time a week
> 
> BEFORE UPDATING BIOS: every cold bootup was on backup bios, i have to shut it down several times to force it to boot in primary bios, it will post and goes into the windows normally, can play games and render videos for hours and hours, completely stable after booting into windows, to duplicate this issue, press the power button(cold bootup) it takes a pause for about 2 sec then starts to boot, stop, powers on again then boots in windows on the backup bios normally. then i have to shut it down restart several times to make it boot into primary bios. solutions i have tried: reinstalling windows, clearing cmos, changing cmos battery
> 
> AFTER UPDATING BIOS: now it wont switch bios on every cold boot, but every now and the it does, like once in a week, behavior have been changed, like before updating bios it will boot into windows from backup bios normally now all it does is shut down it self repower and i am on my primary bios, to duplicate it: press the power button it will take a pause for about 2sec then starts to boot, stop, powers on again into the windows from primary bios.
> 
> System specs
> 8700k all stock
> Gigabyte z390 auros elite (All bios settings)
> 16GB 3200MHZ Gskill ripjaws (didnt turn on the xmp)
> GTX1080 no overclockes at all
> 
> Sory for my English guys
> Thankyou



NEVER press and hold the power button to shutdown on a running system or even on a boot failure. It can corrupt one or both BIOS's, it happened to me. 

Always on a boot failure, turn off the power button on the power supply, or if it doesn't have a power button, unplug the power cord, wait thirty seconds, plug it back in and power it back on. This way you will not corrupt your BIOS's.


----------



## metalspider

also save your bios profiles to a usb,that way if it decides to switch and you cant get back to the right bios you still have the profiles.
but of course you can only apply a profile to the bios version it was made in unfortunately so if you upgrade bios version the profile from an older version wont load.


----------



## Syed talib

KedarWolf said:


> [/SPOILER]
> 
> NEVER press and hold the power button to shutdown on a running system or even on a boot failure. It can corrupt one or both BIOS's, it happened to me.
> 
> Always on a boot failure, turn off the power button on the power supply, or if it doesn't have a power button, unplug the power cord, wait thirty seconds, plug it back in and power it back on. This way you will not corrupt your BIOS's.


thanks for you reply bro,
i havent done this (press and holding power button to force turn off/on my PC), what i was trying to say is when pressing my power button, system takes a pause for a 1 to 2 sec to start the boot


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## Nammi

metalspider said:


> been able to boot a winpe with 4133mhz and get very little errors so it feels like its taunting me.4266mhz was less stable and 4000mhz wont even post.
> 100mhz ratios also dont seem to work,like 3900 4100.....
> for now im at 3866mhz with tuned timings,tunning sub timings also got me a lot of performance and its seems stable passing 400% hci.
> lots of issues ive had in the past were due to bad sub timings tuning and i was surprised to learn those are set pretty much the same no matter the frequency.
> 
> 
> even at 3866 i saw a massive difference in read/write and latency just from tuning some of my sub timings.
> 
> ive been burned in the past by the whole ram performance setting in gigabyte boards so i set to enhanced performance and even then it seems you can do so much better manually.


If it's just on the brink of stability it might be the temperature. 52C DIMM is on the high side for B-Die.


----------



## metalspider

Nammi said:


> If it's just on the brink of stability it might be the temperature. 52C DIMM is on the high side for B-Die.



yeah,ive tried rearranging some fans today so the dimms wont have the cpu coolers fan sitting on top of them.got a little braver with vdimm too going up to 1.55v just to test and results are the same as far as stability at 4133.
even at 3866 my dimms passed 52c i think when gaming since the gpu heats up the case but that didnt cause any issues.

ive only had these sticks for a week so i guess ill try more just because its so appealing.but im thinking maybe it really is a matter of not high end enough motherboard and the fact its 2 seperate 2x8gb kits and not a single kit of 4x8gb matched dimms.also theres only 1 model listed on gigabytes qvl for ram at 4133 and the gskill site only goes up as far as 4000mhz for the aorus pro.


----------



## Wirerat

I recently got a kit of Ballistix Sport LT 16GB 3200mhz cl 16-18-18-36 for $70 at newegg.

Im not much of ram overclocker but I got this kit at 3600mhz cl 16-20-20-36 1.4v on auros pro 9900kf with very little effort. I will try and validate 3800mhz (it booted at same timings) when I get the time. 

Micron E die is a such a good value right now. With this easy/lazy oc to 3600mhz it literally performs like kits that cost near double.


----------



## Padinn

Wirerat said:


> What were your uncore frequency set to?
> 
> Im not have any issues at all with adaptive. It actually helped stabilize 5.1ghz with 4.4ghz uncore.


I run 5.0Ghz w/ 4.3 Ghz Uncore.


----------



## Tantawi

KedarWolf said:


> F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master, F10 BIOS for the Aorus Pro Wi-Fi and F8a BIOS for the XTreme with the latest microcode, RST firmware, and Intel Ethernet firmware.


Thanks! <3


----------



## Tantawi

Wirerat said:


> I recently got a kit of Ballistix Sport LT 16GB 3200mhz cl 16-18-18-36 for $70 at newegg.
> 
> Im not much of ram overclocker but I got this kit at 3600mhz cl 16-20-20-36 1.4v on auros pro 9900kf with very little effort. I will try and validate 3800mhz (it booted at same timings) when I get the time.
> 
> Micron E die is a such a good value right now. With this easy/lazy oc to 3600mhz it literally performs like kits that cost near double.


I have the same kit but the 32GB one (2x16). Currently runnig at stock timings @ 3400Mhz. 1.36v. I want to try to push it like yours but I donät feel comfortable at 1.4v. Did you have stability problems below that voltage?


----------



## Wirerat

Tantawi said:


> I have the same kit but the 32GB one (2x16). Currently runnig at stock timings @ 3400Mhz. 1.36v. I want to try to push it like yours but I donÃ¤t feel comfortable at 1.4v. Did you have stability problems below that voltage?


 I didn't even try below that voltage lol. I wanted to validate it before my son got home since he uses that rig.

It can probably be brought down some at same settings. 1.4v is definitely not going to hurt anything though. 

I plan to try 3800mhz later. 

You wont know until you try. 

I used below link as a general guide. 

https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md


----------



## AndrejB

Hi everyone,

I'm trying to learn and achieve at least to an extent stable settings.

(Answered, thanks @Falkentyne = Main & Single bios) Physical:
Should the bios switches be set to dual bios + main bios? Single bios seems to be a bit more straight forward.

Bios version:
Should I be using the latest official or the modded one from Kedarwolf or an older one?

Bios settings: @KedarWolf, thank you for sharing yours but you're using powersavings and I think given that I use Max performance in Windows that it just conflicts.
Also isn't iA ac dc loadline = turbo (1.6 mOhms)
being overwritten when you set ia ac & dc to 1(0.1 mOhms)?

Apologies if these questions are out of place, I'm asking them as I read that the optimized ones tend to overvolt.
Like my vccsa being 1.308v

So more or less I'm just asking what to use day to day (I know that stability is a scale not a state), but coming from an Asus gene + 4770k where I just turned off the power saving options and set the multipler to 44 (stable for 5 years now) I'm a bit lost.

Also I keep getting an error (1 error, never more nor less) in OCCT, whenever I try anything else except optimized?
(Only after 15min never before, I used to get it on optimized as well but now that I boot the backup bios, then went back to the main one, no errors...)?


----------



## KedarWolf

BIOS settings for LinX 0.9.5 stable.

I find if your Residuals are all exactly the same in LinX you can be sure your overclock is 100% stable.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> I'm trying to learn and achieve at least to an extent stable settings.
> 
> (Answered, thanks @Falkentyne = Main & Single bios) Physical:
> Should the bios switches be set to dual bios + main bios? Single bios seems to be a bit more straight forward.
> 
> Bios version:
> Should I be using the latest official or the modded one from Kedarwolf or an older one?
> 
> Bios settings: @KedarWolf, thank you for sharing yours but you're using powersavings and I think given that I use Max performance in Windows that it just conflicts.
> Also isn't iA ac dc loadline = turbo (1.6 mOhms)
> being overwritten when you set ia ac & dc to 1(0.1 mOhms)?
> 
> Apologies if these questions are out of place, I'm asking them as I read that the optimized ones tend to overvolt.
> Like my vccsa being 1.308v
> 
> So more or less I'm just asking what to use day to day (I know that stability is a scale not a state), but coming from an Asus gene + 4770k where I just turned off the power saving options and set the multipler to 44 (stable for 5 years now) I'm a bit lost.
> 
> Also I keep getting an error (1 error, never more nor less) in OCCT, whenever I try anything else except optimized?
> (Only after 15min never before, I used to get it on optimized as well but now that I boot the backup bios, then went back to the main one, no errors...)?


Yes, IA AC and IA DC loadline values will have higher priority than "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" and will overwrite them.
So @KedarWolf's value for AC/DC=Turbo (which is preset to 1.6 mOhms, which is the same loadline value as Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard/Normal) is being ignored.
This should also apply for VR Current Limit and VR Voltage Limit and any other settings there which have 'duplicate' entries in the main bios menus (like CPU Current Limit (Amps).


----------



## Hackslash

do you guys have a solution for this behaviour of my aorus master:

when the power is completely disconnected (coldboot) and i switch the power on for the first time my pc starts and shuts down after a few seconds.

i have this bug since f8 (the only bios where it is not is f7) (f10b modded has this problem aswell)

ive tries already the AC resume options in bios.

any ideas?


----------



## Wirerat

KedarWolf said:


> BIOS settings for LinX 0.9.5 stable.
> 
> I find if your Residuals are all exactly the same in LinX you can be sure your overclock is 100% stable.


Im curious what your max vrout is with those settings?

My llc is set to low with +.v110 and it hits 1.38v max. I tested medium llc and was peaking above 1.4v. This behavior may be different since im on aorus pro.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Yes, IA AC and IA DC loadline values will have higher priority than "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" and will overwrite them.
> So @KedarWolf's value for AC/DC=Turbo (which is preset to 1.6 mOhms, which is the same loadline value as Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard/Normal) is being ignored.
> This should also apply for VR Current Limit and VR Voltage Limit and any other settings there which have 'duplicate' entries in the main bios menus (like CPU Current Limit (Amps).


Would you mind sharing with us your settings?


----------



## KedarWolf

Wirerat said:


> Im curious what your max vrout is with those settings?
> 
> My llc is set to low with +.v110 and it hits 1.38v max. I tested medium llc and was peaking above 1.4v. This behavior may be different since im on aorus pro.


At idle I don't go by VR VOUT, it doesn't factor in C-States being used. I can see the voltages being lowered under the ITE IT8792E VCore, so I know my idle voltages are good.

I'm installing BF5 to see my VR VOUT while playing a game but even at +.165 IA AC 1 it stays under 1.4v, lower under AVX loads. This motherboard needs .10 more voltage for the same VR VOUT as my last Master.


----------



## raad11

How long would you run aida64 cache stress test to be sure your uncore ratio is stable?


----------



## KedarWolf

raad11 said:


> How long would you run aida64 cache stress test to be sure your uncore ratio is stable?


I'd run it at least 3 hours, I've had errors an hour in.


----------



## KedarWolf

Wirerat said:


> Im curious what your max vrout is with those settings?
> 
> My llc is set to low with +.v110 and it hits 1.38v max. I tested medium llc and was peaking above 1.4v. This behavior may be different since im on aorus pro.


This is in BF5 at +.135.


----------



## raad11

KedarWolf said:


> This is in BF5 at +.135.


Are those 12v/5v/VR VIN voltages okay or a little low?


----------



## KedarWolf

raad11 said:


> Are those 12v/5v/VR VIN voltages okay or a little low?


It's probably just a sensor issue. I have a Corsair AX1500i, one of the best PSUs ever made, and this motherboard needs +.10-+.15 DVID over my last board for the same stability and VR VOUT.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> It's probably just a sensor issue. I have a Corsair AX1500i, one of the best PSUs ever made, and this motherboard needs +.10-+.15 DVID over my last board for the same stability and VR VOUT.


It's definitely not a sensor issue.
You 12v and CPU +12v are reading low. These are important voltages.
If your motherboard needs higher DVID than the last one, it could be a trace problem or connection problem causing the voltages to drop somewhere. But I would bet $100 easily that those voltages are the cause of the problem. I'm not knowledgeable enough to blame the PSU or motherboard here, however I have seen worn PSU cables cause voltage drop. My PCIE cables slowly wore out, causing my Radeon 290x +12v to go as low as 11.25v under load, and eventually it would just black screen (oddly enough usually at idle). When I replaced the cables, the 12v read a flat 11.75v, and no more crashes. Problem solved--it wasn't the PSU. It was the cables. (and probably happened because I used a 1 to 2 split for the GPU +12v as they were built in that way, instead of two separate PCIE cables but I'm getting off topic).

I always look at people's voltages and I dont remember your old motherboard reporting values that low.


----------



## Wirerat

My 12v, 5v and 3.3v dont seem to ever drop below 12v, 5v and 3.3v. My VRIN is 11.5v min. 

Im using a seasonic G-series 750w gold psu. Its about 4 years old. 

I had played ow for a few hours before taking this screenie.

Edit: I also checked my other rig that has a brand new seasonic focus gold 650w aorus pro 9900kf. The VRin shows 11.5-11.85v.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> It's definitely not a sensor issue.
> You 12v and CPU +12v are reading low. These are important voltages.
> If your motherboard needs higher DVID than the last one, it could be a trace problem or connection problem causing the voltages to drop somewhere. But I would bet $100 easily that those voltages are the cause of the problem. I'm not knowledgeable enough to blame the PSU or motherboard here, however I have seen worn PSU cables cause voltage drop. My PCIE cables slowly wore out, causing my Radeon 290x +12v to go as low as 11.25v under load, and eventually it would just black screen (oddly enough usually at idle). When I replaced the cables, the 12v read a flat 11.75v, and no more crashes. Problem solved--it wasn't the PSU. It was the cables. (and probably happened because I used a 1 to 2 split for the GPU +12v as they were built in that way, instead of two separate PCIE cables but I'm getting off topic).
> 
> I always look at people's voltages and I dont remember your old motherboard reporting values that low.


I replugged the 8 pin CPU cords into the power supply, now got this.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I replugged the 8 pin CPU cords into the power supply, now got this.


Good work.
Can you see if you can reduce the DVID by 10mv now?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Good work.
> Can you see if you can reduce the DVID by 10mv now?


No, need the same DVID to be LinX stable, but the good news is my RAM is stress testing stable at 4200MHz again rather than just 4133.


----------



## Driller au

@KedarWolf thanks  you just showed me the answer to the DDR VVT that i was talking about a few pages back


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> @KedarWolf thanks  you just showed me the answer to the DDR VVT that i was talking about a few pages back


For 4200MHz I run my RAM voltage at 1.45v in BIOS and my DDR VVT at .725v in BIOS.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> For 4200MHz I run my RAM voltage at 1.45v in BIOS and my DDR VVT at .725v in BIOS.


Yes in the bios pics on the other page you have it set to normal, i was setting it to 0.690 from the drop down list, which is what i need for 1.380 but it wouldn't get that and stay at 0.660 but using the normal setting i get the correct 0.690 + or - but very close


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Yes in the bios pics on the other page you have it set to normal, i was setting it to 0.690 from the drop down list, which is what i need for 1.380 but it wouldn't get that and stay at 0.660 but using the normal setting i get the correct 0.690 + or - but very close


Yes, normal seems to set it at half of RAM voltage. To be honest though, that was a mistake, I meant for it to be Auto. brb, I want to test DR VPP on normal.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, normal seems to set it at half of RAM voltage. To be honest though, that was a mistake, I meant for it to be Auto. brb, I want to test DR VPP on normal.


lols serendipity discovery right there


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> lols serendipity discovery right there


Yeah, DDR VTT on Normal sets it at half the RAM voltage, I have the exact same voltage in HWInfo on normal as I do manually setting it to .725v. 

DDR VPP stays at 2.5v though.


----------



## KedarWolf

In this thread someone noticed my +3.3v, +12v and +5v were a bit low. I replugged in my power cables to the motherboard and PSU, problem fixed, now I'm stable at better timings.

KedarWolf - i9 9900K @5.0/4.7 - 4.xGB G.Skill Trident Z CL16 3600 @ 4200MHz C17-17-17-38-2T 1.45v - VCCIO 1.23v - SA 1.25v - DDR VTT .725v - Stressapptest 1 Hour


----------



## robertr1

Plugging in the 2nd cpu power did wonders for my stability and my vrvin now doesn't drop and the system can oc better. 

Daily stable now at 5.3ghz 1.385v in bios with llc high. Obviously a lot of it's down to silicon lottery but my observations so far so stability:
- LLC high is more stable than LLC turbo
- My current chip scales as such (bios fixed vcore with high llc): 5.1v = 1.285v 5.2v = 1.325v 5.3 = 1.385v 
- HT hurts my gaming workloads so it's off. Also gives a nice drop in temps
- Once I get a 360 and can drop temps over my dark rock 4, I'll push for 5.4ghz daily
- Uncore has been at 4.7 I haven't messed around with it


----------



## KedarWolf

raad11 said:


> How long would you run aida64 cache stress test to be sure your uncore ratio is stable?


HCI MemTest tests memory AND cache quite well!!


HCI MemTest Pro and MemTest Free compiled AutoHotkey scripts, for a 9900k or 9700k, 16GB and 32GB versions. It opens 16 instances with the memory amount already set for both Free and Pro.

If you go to Task Manager, click Details on MemTest and check each affinity, each one allocated to one separate thread, absolutely the best way to run Memtest!

Edit: You need to let it run overnight while you sleep though. If you get to 1000% you're good to go! :h34r-smi


----------



## Driller au

robertr1 said:


> Plugging in the 2nd cpu power did wonders for my stability and my vrvin now doesn't drop and the system can oc better.
> 
> Daily stable now at 5.3ghz 1.385v in bios with llc high. Obviously a lot of it's down to silicon lottery but my observations so far so stability:
> - LLC high is more stable than LLC turbo
> - My current chip scales as such (bios fixed vcore with high llc): 5.1v = 1.285v 5.2v = 1.325v 5.3 = 1.385v
> - HT hurts my gaming workloads so it's off. Also gives a nice drop in temps
> - Once I get a 360 and can drop temps over my dark rock 4, I'll push for 5.4ghz daily
> - Uncore has been at 4.7 I haven't messed around with it


Just this week i installed a EK MLC Phoenix 280 i to was after a 360 but after watching this youtube 



 i decided to go with the 280 only one they have now,not the prettiest but a really thick rad which dropped my temps about 10 deg C over my corsair H115i 280. At just under $A300 with 2 extra fans delivered to AUS it was good valve, worth a look IMO


----------



## Padinn

What is aorus memory boost that f10b added to aorus master?


----------



## robertr1

Driller au said:


> Just this week i installed a EK MLC Phoenix 280 i to was after a 360 but after watching this youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkndwkW-xEc i decided to go with the 280 only one they have now,not the prettiest but a really thick rad which dropped my temps about 10 deg C over my corsair H115i 280. At just under $A300 with 2 extra fans delivered to AUS it was good valve, worth a look IMO


Looks like it's been made end of life 

10c is a nice drop over your H115i. It does seem that the more stress you put on the system, the better high end units perform and pull ahead. You'd reasonably expect that but the reviewer community does poor job of testing these system under proper stress.


----------



## Syed talib

Syed talib said:


> heyy guys please help me out in this issue
> so the issue is my motherboard automatically switches to backup bios, it was stable for like 3 months (it was a new built) but then it started doing this thing, it was doing it on every cold bootup, i tried reinstalling the windows clearing the cmos (by shorting 2 pins), changing cmos battery, but didnt help. it didnt changed any settings in primary bios, bios settings are on factory default
> then i updated my backup bios (from f4 to f7) and my primary bios ( from f5 to f9a), behavior was changed, now it will do it once in a while like 1 time a week
> 
> BEFORE UPDATING BIOS: every cold bootup was on backup bios, i have to shut it down several times to force it to boot in primary bios, it will post and goes into the windows normally, can play games and render videos for hours and hours, completely stable after booting into windows, to duplicate this issue, press the power button(cold bootup) it takes a pause for about 2 sec then starts to boot, stop, powers on again then boots in windows on the backup bios normally. then i have to shut it down restart several times to make it boot into primary bios. solutions i have tried: reinstalling windows, clearing cmos, changing cmos battery
> 
> AFTER UPDATING BIOS: now it wont switch bios on every cold boot, but every now and the it does, like once in a week, behavior have been changed, like before updating bios it will boot into windows from backup bios normally now all it does is shut down it self repower and i am on my primary bios, to duplicate it: press the power button it will take a pause for about 2sec then starts to boot, stop, powers on again into the windows from primary bios.
> 
> System specs
> 8700k all stock
> Gigabyte z390 auros elite (All bios settings)
> 16GB 3200MHZ Gskill ripjaws (didnt turn on the xmp)
> GTX1080 no overclockes at all
> 
> Sory for my English guys
> Thankyou



guys please need some help here


----------



## metalspider

Syed talib said:


> guys please need some help here


 if you didnt turn on xmp is the ram running at 2133mhz or 3200mhz?
did you set any setting in the bios manually?vccsa,vccio?

for ram some say even running at xmp means you have to turn the profile on since it changes some ram settings you dont have access to in the bios.


----------



## thuNDa

Syed talib said:


> guys please need some help here


I would also say it might be a problem with the RAM - only time i saw the backup-bios of my elite was after a failed attempt of RAM OC.
Maybe set the RAM to 3000MHz and see if the problem goes away, if yes you can get into troubleshooting the RAM later.


----------



## Syed talib

metalspider said:


> if you didnt turn on xmp is the ram running at 2133mhz or 3200mhz?
> did you set any setting in the bios manually?vccsa,vccio?
> 
> for ram some say even running at xmp means you have to turn the profile on since it changes some ram settings you dont have access to in the bios.





thuNDa said:


> I would also say it might be a problem with the RAM - only time i saw the backup-bios of my elite was after a failed attempt of RAM OC.
> Maybe set the RAM to 3000MHz and see if the problem goes away, if yes you can get into troubleshooting the RAM later.


thanks for your reply, Bios settings are all on stock since day one and in the bios it show 2133mhz for ram speed, after updating my primary and backup bios to f7 and f9a, it just power it self off (on a cold bootup, all rgb leds remains on) and turns back on (on primary bios) and into the windows normaly.


----------



## metalspider

Syed talib said:


> thanks for your reply, Bios settings are all on stock since day one and in the bios it show 2133mhz for ram speed, after updating my primary and backup bios to f7 and f9a, it just power it self off (on a cold bootup, all rgb leds remains on) and turns back on (on primary bios) and into the windows normaly.


well if all settings are stock then it shouldnt matter which bios its using.in any case update to latest stable bios version.f9a sounds like its a beta bios?
as for stability on boot up what is you power supply?model?watts? did it have enough 12v cpu connectors to the motherboard?even though there are sometimes more then is needed in theory hooking them all up can help stability.

edit:latest stable bios version i see on gigabytes site for the z390 aorus elite is F8


----------



## Syed talib

metalspider said:


> well if all settings are stock then it shouldnt matter which bios its using.in any case update to latest stable bios version.f9a sounds like its a beta bios?
> as for stability on boot up what is you power supply?model?watts? did it have enough 12v cpu connectors to the motherboard?even though there are sometimes more then is needed in theory hooking them all up can help stability.
> 
> edit:latest stable bios version i see on gigabytes site for the z390 aorus elite is F8


yes sir its a beta bios, for power supply i am using a cooler master 750 GOLD, plus i have just recheck all the connectors on the motherboard, but (1 x 4-pin ATX 12V power connector) is not hooked.


----------



## KedarWolf

metalspider said:


> well if all settings are stock then it shouldnt matter which bios its using.in any case update to latest stable bios version.f9a sounds like its a beta bios?
> as for stability on boot up what is you power supply?model?watts? did it have enough 12v cpu connectors to the motherboard?even though there are sometimes more then is needed in theory hooking them all up can help stability.
> 
> edit:latest stable bios version i see on gigabytes site for the z390 aorus elite is F8


https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html

F9a available here. I'm pretty sure it's not a beta BIOS, just Gigabyte hasn't updated the site yet as they did with Master F10b etc.


----------



## Syed talib

can it be abios bug? or should i RMA the motherboard?


----------



## metalspider

KedarWolf said:


> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html
> 
> F9a available here. I'm pretty sure it's not a beta BIOS, just Gigabyte hasn't updated the site yet as they did with Master F10b etc.


that is the beta bios thread,so yes it is a beta bios.
latest stable bios are what is on the gigabyte support site.


----------



## metalspider

Syed talib said:


> yes sir its a beta bios, for power supply i am using a cooler master 750 GOLD, plus i have just recheck all the connectors on the motherboard, but (1 x 4-pin ATX 12V power connector) is not hooked.


well that power supply doesnt have any more cpu 12v available from what i can find.
are the voltages measuring ok in hwinfo? 12v 5v 3.3v?


----------



## KedarWolf

metalspider said:


> that is the beta bios thread,so yes it is a beta bios.
> latest stable bios are what is on the gigabyte support site.


They post the latest stable BIOS on the beta BIOS thread, not just beta BIOS's. F10b Master was posted a few weeks on the thread before it was on the Gigabyte website.


----------



## metalspider

KedarWolf said:


> They post the latest stable BIOS on the beta BIOS thread. F10b Master was posted a few weeks on the thread before it was on the Gigabyte website.


and the thread itself states all bioses are considered in beta until they pass testing and are then posted on the gigabyte support site as well.


----------



## Syed talib

metalspider said:


> well that power supply doesnt have any more cpu 12v available from what i can find.
> are the voltages measuring ok in hwinfo? 12v 5v 3.3v?


i have attached the screenshot.


----------



## KedarWolf

metalspider said:


> and the thread itself states all bioses are considered in beta until they pass testing and are then posted on the gigabyte support site as well.


Yes, of course, just like they had F8 before it was on the Gigabyte website.


----------



## metalspider

Syed talib said:


> i have attached the screenshot.





KedarWolf said:


> Yes, of course, just like they had F8 before it was on the Gigabyte website.


i dont see the 12v 5v or 3.3v in that picture.


obviously they had the f8 bios first,was beta and in testing,after validation it exited the beta stage and got posted on the official site.


----------



## KedarWolf

metalspider said:


> i dont see the 12v 5v or 3.3v in that picture.
> 
> 
> obviously they had the f8 bios first,was beta and in testing,after validation it exited the beta stage and got posted on the official site.


F8 was a non-beta BIOS, a major release, and I actually checked the SHA-1 of the BIOS released by the Beta website and the BIOS from Gigabyte website, they were identical, no modifications were made. So even though the website says they are beta until released, they have early access to full releases.


----------



## Falkentyne

Syed talib said:


> i have attached the screenshot.


Please use HWinfo64 and not hwmonitor. HWmonitor is garbage and most of those voltages don't mean anything. You can also expand the fields in HWinfo64 also.


----------



## metalspider

KedarWolf said:


> F8 was a non-beta BIOS, a major release, and I actually checked the SHA-1 of the BIOS released by the Beta website and the BIOS from Gigabyte website, they were identical, no modifications were made. So even though the website says they are beta until released, they have early access to full releases.


 perhaps you dont understand what a beta is because of how the term has been misused in recent times by various AAA games?
a beta is a work in progress that has not been fully tested for stability.once testing is complete it is decided if fixes need to be made or if the code is now considered stable and therefor no longer in beta.
the fact that in the case you mentioned sha-1 was the same in the end only means that version passed testing and was released later on as a stable version.


----------



## Syed talib

metalspider said:


> i dont see the 12v 5v or 3.3v in that picture.
> 
> 
> obviously they had the f8 bios first,was beta and in testing,after validation it exited the beta stage and got posted on the official site.


i dont know why but the newer update of HWMonitor dose not have 12v 5v 3.3v, or do i have to enable it from somewhere? 
anyways i am attaching a screenshot of version 1.23 see if it helps


----------



## Syed talib

metalspider said:


> i dont see the 12v 5v or 3.3v in that picture.
> 
> 
> obviously they had the f8 bios first,was beta and in testing,after validation it exited the beta stage and got posted on the official site.





Falkentyne said:


> Please use HWinfo64 and not hwmonitor. HWmonitor is garbage and most of those voltages don't mean anything. You can also expand the fields in HWinfo64 also.


thanks sir, here is the screenshot


----------



## metalspider

Syed talib said:


> i dont know why but the newer update of HWMonitor dose not have 12v 5v 3.3v, or do i have to enable it from somewhere?
> anyways i am attaching a screenshot of version 1.23 see if it helps





doesnt seem accurate,use hwinfo.


if those 5v and 3.3v are even remotely accurate id be shocked your pc turns on and is stable.
12v is missing there's a -12v but thats way off too.


----------



## Syed talib

Falkentyne said:


> Please use HWinfo64 and not hwmonitor. HWmonitor is garbage and most of those voltages don't mean anything. You can also expand the fields in HWinfo64 also.





metalspider said:


> doesnt seem accurate,use hwinfo.
> 
> 
> if those 5v and 3.3v are even remotely accurate id be shocked your pc turns on and is stable.
> 12v is missing there's a -12v but thats way off too.


i have attached a Hwinfo screenshot, thanks


----------



## metalspider

Syed talib said:


> i have attached a Hwinfo screenshot, thanks


voltages look fine and from vccsa and ddr i see xmp is probably now on.
where is vccio?


----------



## KedarWolf

metalspider said:


> perhaps you dont understand what a beta is because of how the term has been misused in recent times by various AAA games?
> a beta is a work in progress that has not been fully tested for stability.once testing is complete it is decided if fixes need to be made or if the code is now considered stable and therefor no longer in beta.
> the fact that in the case you mentioned sha-1 was the same in the end only means that version passed testing and was released later on as a stable version.


I don't think there has ever been a case of the SHA-1 of a release BIOS from the Gigabyte Beta BIOS thread ever being different than the actual Gigabyte website release.

Edit: Anyways, I'm totally done with this p___ing contest with you and am not commenting on it any more.


----------



## Syed talib

metalspider said:


> voltages look fine and from vccsa and ddr i see xmp is probably now on.
> where is vccio?


yes i turned it on after one of the post said that i should test my ram on Xmp enable and 3000mhz\
sorry i cant find the vccio on hwinfo, please guide me where to look for vccio voltage readings thanks.


----------



## metalspider

KedarWolf said:


> I don't think there has ever been a case of the SHA-1 of a release BIOS from the Gigabyte Beta BIOS thread ever being different than the actual Gigabyte website release.
> 
> Edit: Anyways, I'm totally done with this p___ing contest with you and am not commenting on it any more.





Syed talib said:


> yes i turned it on after one of the post said that i should test my ram on Xmp enable and 3000mhz\
> sorry i cant find the vccio on hwinfo, please guide me where to look for vccio voltage readings thanks.



i wasnt saying the bioses posted are fake.or not from gigabyte.


vccio should also be in one of the motherboard sensors.but im doubting it will be off if all other readings seem ok so far.
can you try another PSU that has enough cpu 12v connectors to connect to all the 12v pcu on the motherboard?
can you test the voltage from the wall socket to see if it is high enough and stable?sometimes this could be an issue with the electricity in the room or house.


----------



## vmanuelgm

KedarWolf said:


> F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master, F10 BIOS for the Aorus Pro Wi-Fi and F8a BIOS for the XTreme with the latest microcode, RST firmware, and Intel Ethernet firmware.
> 
> Updated Microcodes and RST firmware from the earlier version posted.
> 
> Microcodes:
> 906E9 1151v2\cpu906E9_plat2A_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_19E2FDAE.bin
> 906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin
> 906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
> 906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
> 906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin
> 
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.1092
> 
> EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
> 
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f10 /x



The 906E9 microcode is for 1151 socket, not 1151v2... U should make some hardware modding to use one of these cpu's under 1151v2...


----------



## KedarWolf

vmanuelgm said:


> The 906E9 microcode is for 1151 socket, not 1151v2... U should make some hardware modding to use one of these cpu's under 1151v2...


Yes, you're right. My bad for assuming a 906 microcode was i9 9**** series.


----------



## KedarWolf

F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master, F10 BIOS for the Aorus Pro Wi-Fi and F8a BIOS for the XTreme with the latest microcode, RST firmware, and Intel Ethernet firmware.

Updated Microcodes and RST firmware.

Microcodes:

906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.1092

EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f10 /x


----------



## vmanuelgm

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, you're right. My bad for assuming a 906 microcode was i9 9**** series.



Thanks @KedarWolf


----------



## robertr1

How do I convert the following fixed voltage to adaptive?

Current fixed:
- Bios Vcore = 1.385v
- LLC = High
- Under heavy load (cinebench, realbench, etc) = 1.29v vrvout
- Idle vcore in OS = 1.360v vrvout

What is the best recommended method to convert this to adaptive voltage?


----------



## Falkentyne

robertr1 said:


> How do I convert the following fixed voltage to adaptive?
> 
> Current fixed:
> - Bios Vcore = 1.385v
> - LLC = High
> - Under heavy load (cinebench, realbench, etc) = 1.29v vrvout
> - Idle vcore in OS = 1.360v vrvout
> 
> What is the best recommended method to convert this to adaptive voltage?


No one can answer this.
You have to do your own testing to find out.
Every CPU has a different default VID and DVID (Offset voltage) is based on your default VID, AC Loadline boost, and finally, a fixed offset applied to whatever VID+AC Loadline bias is (AC Loadline is based on resistance, it is NOT a fixed offset! ACLL boosts the default VID higher at load than at idle).

You can start by saving the following settings to a profile.
AC Loadline=160, DC Loadline=160

(Alternatively, set CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline to Turbo, which sets the same values for you. NOTE: Manually setting AC and DC Loadline in Internal VR Settings overrules what is set in CPU Internal AC/DC)

CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard (Or normal). It is IMPORTANT NOT to use any higher levels of vcore loadline calibration when AC Loadline is at 160 or 130. = 1.6 mOhms or 1.3 mOhms.
Note that Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard/Normal sets the VRM loadline (vdroop loadline) also to 1.6 mOhms.

DVID Offset= 0.00v.

Then save and enter the BIOS.
Note: due to some bios bugs, you may need to enter the bios TWICE for this to work properly, ESPECIALLY when changing from a fixed voltage to DVID.

Your bios voltage should be between 1.380v to 1.420v now. This is NORMAL and expected and within Intel specifications (because you didn't mess it up by using Loadline Calibration).
Boot to windows, and check your VR VOUT at idle and load. Most likely your load VR VOUT will be okay but your idle will be pretty high.

Now you can go from here. Try using a negative DVID offset in small values and boot and check.
If you wind up with a too low VR VOUT and get unstable, but you still don't like your idle VR VOUT, you can then try reducing the AC Loadline value manually. Try manual values like 130 (1.3 mOhms), 100 (1.0 mOhms), 80 (0.8 mOhms) and 40 (0.4 mOhms). SET DVID OFFSET BACK TO 0.00V before you do this or you may wind up crashing trying to load windows.

If you find reducing the AC Loadline manually gives you a nice idle VR VOUT, but you are crashing at load, try raising CPU Vcore loadline calibration up ONE level. (DO NOT exceed medium, EVER, if AC Loadline is higher than 1.0 mOhms, period). Try "Low" first. then try lowering your DVID offset or raising it.

Trying to get a good DVID offset takes a LOT more work than just dialing in a fixed voltage and setting Vcore loadline calibration to Turbo (or a slightly higher fixed voltage with Loadline calibration set to High).
Not as much as DDR overclock testing ("yuck--overclocking memory and stress testing over and over is only for people who hate themselves" - Buildzoid), but it's still annoying for some people.

If you're still too bored and want a quick fix (i'm warning you--quick fixes for lazy people never lead anywhere):
You can try something like:

AC Loadline=1, Vcore Loadline Calibration=Turbo.
AC Loadline=40, Vcore Loadline Calibration=Medium
AC Loadline=80, Vcore Loadline Calibration=Low.
ACLL=130/160, Vcore loadline Calibration=Standard/Normal

(see the pattern? AC Loadline's mOhms should NEVER be the same as VRM Loadline's mOhms. But DC Loadline's mOhms are BEST put the same as VRM Loadline's mOhms).

Note:
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration:
Standard/Normal/Auto (auto may allow changing via GB windows utilities or MCE enabled maybe? Idk): 1.6 mOhms.
Low: 1.3 mOhms
Medium: 1.0 mOhms
High: 0.8 mOhms
Turbo: 0.4 mOhms
Extreme: 0.2 or 0.25 mOhms
Ultra Extreme: 0 mOhms (Don't use this unless you hate your CPU and VRM's).


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> How do I convert the following fixed voltage to adaptive?
> 
> Current fixed:
> - Bios Vcore = 1.385v
> - LLC = High
> - Under heavy load (cinebench, realbench, etc) = 1.29v vrvout
> - Idle vcore in OS = 1.360v vrvout
> 
> What is the best recommended method to convert this to adaptive voltage?


 I worked it the same way I oc fixed.

My method was like this:

Vcore normal 
Ac loadline power save 
Llc low
Intel speed shift enabled 
Core 51
Uncore 46

Offset +.000

With above settings it crashed on boot. So I changed the following:

Offset +.050v 

Crashed on boot. 

Offset +.080v 

Booted but failed x264 stressor with whea errors . Vrout was dipping too low 1.24v. So I changed.

Offset +.110v

Booted. Passed 10 loops x264. No whea errors. Vrout min 1.28v. Ran the rest of my stress tests.

My +.110 translated to approx 1.38v max vcore and 1.27-1.3v vrout. However this varies from one cpu to another.


----------



## Syed talib

metalspider said:


> i wasnt saying the bioses posted are fake.or not from gigabyte.
> 
> 
> vccio should also be in one of the motherboard sensors.but im doubting it will be off if all other readings seem ok so far.
> can you try another PSU that has enough cpu 12v connectors to connect to all the 12v pcu on the motherboard?
> can you test the voltage from the wall socket to see if it is high enough and stable?sometimes this could be an issue with the electricity in the room or house.


I have a friend's corsair psu laying around somewhere, will try it and report back the results to you


----------



## Falkentyne

Syed talib said:


> I have a friend's corsair psu laying around somewhere, will try it and report back the results to you


If VCCIO is missing try resetting ALL of the fields and panels/layouts in HWInfo64 settings to default. Sometimes entries get "hidden" and put into the "Hidden" (blocked) fields for some reason.


----------



## robertr1

@Falkentyne and @Wirerat Appreciate the detailed help! I went through the pain of RAM oc, so I can handle this  

Did a clean setup (load optimized defaults) as my current one kept getting stuck in boot loops if i tried to set it to adaptive. From a clean setup, this is what I changed. Everything else is auto/default etc. 

Vcore normal 
Ac loadline power save 
Llc low
Intel speed shift enabled 
Core 52
Uncore 47
Offset +.080

I need to get my RAM back to normal but I want to get this dialed in first. Can you please see if anything looks off? should there be more bios settings I should be fine tuning? Ignore the heat. It's a meh dark rock 4 (non pro). 360 Alphacool coming tomorrow for proper cooling.


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> @Falkentyne and @Wirerat Appreciate the detailed help! I went through the pain of RAM oc, so I can handle this /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Did a clean setup (load optimized defaults) as my current one kept getting stuck in boot loops if i tried to set it to adaptive. From a clean setup, this is what I changed. Everything else is auto/default etc.
> 
> Vcore normal
> Ac loadline power save
> Llc low
> Intel speed shift enabled
> Core 52
> Uncore 47
> Offset +.080
> 
> I need to get my RAM back to normal but I want to get this dialed in first. Can you please see if anything looks off? should there be more bios settings I should be fine tuning? Ignore the heat. It's a meh dark rock 4 (non pro). 360 Alphacool coming tomorrow for proper cooling.


Bios settings look good. It is kinda simple. Not a lot to change in bios. 

You are hitting 90c in cinebench. That was only at 150w pout. You already mentioned a cooler upgrade is coming so that will improve hopefully. 

What else did you test stability with? I like to run x264 stressor. 

https://mega.nz/#!ywAFDQQQ!hEQCeRXDKpHoeRYEaspux3ZA9Smx6tp8h0leb7ZHdJo

I use these settings. 

Name 5.2ghz (any name you want) 

Threads 32 (2x the available) 

Loops 10 (pass this, then do an overnight run at 50-100 loops) 

Priorty low

Keep in mind the above uses avx and pushes a 5.2ghz 9900k above 200w pout. Not as hot as p95 small fft w/avx but its still a serious load. 

You may need to run this after you get the new cooler setup.


----------



## Lolek74

*Z390 Aorus Master 9700k*

I used Asus boards for about 11 years. Z390 Aorus Master is my first GB board. The bios setup is confusing at least. I'm still trying to wrap my head around all these options. All I want to do is run CPU at 5GHz with adaptive voltage. I can get it stable at 1.25V but I'm having trouble getting it to boot with negative offset on adaptive voltage....
I'll try *Falkentyne* suggestion and see how it goes.


----------



## Wirerat

Lolek74 said:


> I used Asus boards for about 11 years. Z390 Aorus Master is my first GB board. The bios setup is confusing at least. I'm still trying to wrap my head around all these options. All I want to do is run CPU at 5GHz with adaptive voltage. I can get it stable at 1.25V but I'm having trouble getting it to boot with negative offset on adaptive voltage....
> I'll try *Falkentyne* suggestion and see how it goes.


How do you know it needs negative offset? Mine requires a +offset. That's more than likely the issue.

There is not many bios settings to change. 

Vcore normal 
Ac loadline power save
Llc low
Intel speed shift enabled 
Core 50
Uncore 44 
Offset +.080

Something like above will probably boot. If it doesnt raise offset. If it does.. You can stress test and make sure there are no whea errors. Then try to work the offset down as much as possible.


----------



## robertr1

Wirerat said:


> Bios settings look good. It is kinda simple. Not a lot to change in bios.
> 
> You are hitting 90c in cinebench. That was only at 150w pout. You already mentioned a cooler upgrade is coming so that will improve hopefully.
> 
> What else did you test stability with? I like to run x264 stressor.
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!ywAFDQQQ!hEQCeRXDKpHoeRYEaspux3ZA9Smx6tp8h0leb7ZHdJo
> 
> I use these settings.
> 
> Name 5.2ghz (any name you want)
> 
> Threads 32 (2x the available)
> 
> Loops 10 (pass this, then do an overnight run at 50-100 loops)
> 
> Priorty low
> 
> Keep in mind the above uses avx and pushes a 5.2ghz 9900k above 200w pout. Not as hot as p95 small fft w/avx but its still a serious load.
> 
> You may need to run this after you get the new cooler setup.


Cool. Wasn't sure if there's various combos of different llc's to try and such. 

The 90c was from extended realbench but i'm gonna hold off until the AIO at this stage. 

I have all cstates, power limits and such on auto in bios. Should I leave those alone?

update: couldn't get bf5 to stop crashing and even going up in offset was just causing heat issues to the point I was running much hotter with adaptive than fixed. Went back to static and all is well. Experiment over for now.


----------



## Deathtech00

Wirerat said:


> How do you know it needs negative offset? Mine requires a +offset. That's more than likely the issue.
> 
> There is not many bios settings to change.
> 
> Vcore normal
> Ac loadline power save
> Llc low
> Intel speed shift enabled
> Core 50
> Uncore 44
> Offset +.080
> 
> Something like above will probably boot. If it doesn't raise offset. If it does.. You can stress test and make sure there are no whea errors. Then try to work the offset down as much as possible.


I can likely peruse the forum a bit for more, but I am in a similar boat in that I just didn't really push my processor until I got better cooling. Now cooling is fine, but it seems that I am getting lower scores in 3dMark for CPU (Although I am still waiting on better ram) and just threw a watchdog error. I believe this is lack of Voltage, and was running a basic GB manual overclock (from their guide) but 1.3v may be too little.

I am also in the camp of wanting the best performance I can get at around a 5.0 GHz all core clock. Temperature seems to be eliminated as an issue. I rarely break 70-75 degrees on long stress tests. Would these settings be a good place to start working in and dialing at the "Adaptive" style tunings? So far I am following KedarWolf & Falkentyne's posts on here pretty closely. I had to drop from 4 3200 MHZ 8GB Chips (32GB) to a single 3000 8gb until my new kit gets here. I know that will cause some performance loss, as well as lower 3dmark scores, but I went from upper 10's and low 11's to a low 8.


----------



## Falkentyne

Deathtech00 said:


> I can likely peruse the forum a bit for more, but I am in a similar boat in that I just didn't really push my processor until I got better cooling. Now cooling is fine, but it seems that I am getting lower scores in 3dMark for CPU (Although I am still waiting on better ram) and just threw a watchdog error. I believe this is lack of Voltage, and was running a basic GB manual overclock (from their guide) but 1.3v may be too little.
> 
> I am also in the camp of wanting the best performance I can get at around a 5.0 GHz all core clock. Temperature seems to be eliminated as an issue. I rarely break 70-75 degrees on long stress tests. Would these settings be a good place to start working in and dialing at the "Adaptive" style tunings? So far I am following KedarWolf & Falkentyne's posts on here pretty closely. I had to drop from 4 3200 MHZ 8GB Chips (32GB) to a single 3000 8gb until my new kit gets here. I know that will cause some performance loss, as well as lower 3dmark scores, but I went from upper 10's and low 11's to a low 8.


Find out what MANUAL fixed VR VOUT you need (with turbo LLC--or even better, "high" LLC+a higher bios voltage) you need for stability. Do not bother trying to get LinX 0.9.5 stable unless you hate yourself. I tried doing Kedarwolf's test and at 5 ghz @ 1.275v and LLC Turbo, my CPU reached 95C as soon as the test "ramped up" past the beginning warmup point, INSTANTLY, and it didn't even BSOD--it just hard locked hard. At 5 ghz and on all Auto vcore and Loadline Calibration=Standard, it didn't hard lock, but it reached 100C extremely fast and was pulling 195 Amps--no thanks. Please stick to the reasonable tests of Realbench 2.56, Cinebench R20+3600 second loop, Prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled (29.8 build 6). Find me a program that pulls 195 amps and puts your CPU to 110C in less than 2 minutes then maybe I'll care about LinX / OCCT Linpack small, etc.

If you find what load VR VOUT you need for full stability at 5 ghz and a certain fixed bios voltage+LLC High, record that (you want the lowest VR VOUT you need, doing this with fixed vcore+LLC High is better than LLC Turbo), then aim for that exact same VR VOUT with Normal Vcore+AC Loadline=40 (= Power saving AC/DC) + LLC "Low" and whatever DVID offset you need. That's what I would do.


----------



## Wirerat

Deathtech00 said:


> I can likely peruse the forum a bit for more, but I am in a similar boat in that I just didn't really push my processor until I got better cooling. Now cooling is fine, but it seems that I am getting lower scores in 3dMark for CPU (Although I am still waiting on better ram) and just threw a watchdog error. I believe this is lack of Voltage, and was running a basic GB manual overclock (from their guide) but 1.3v may be too little.
> 
> I am also in the camp of wanting the best performance I can get at around a 5.0 GHz all core clock. Temperature seems to be eliminated as an issue. I rarely break 70-75 degrees on long stress tests. Would these settings be a good place to start working in and dialing at the "Adaptive" style tunings? So far I am following KedarWolf & Falkentyne's posts on here pretty closely. I had to drop from 4 3200 MHZ 8GB Chips (32GB) to a single 3000 8gb until my new kit gets here. I know that will cause some performance loss, as well as lower 3dmark scores, but I went from upper 10's and low 11's to a low 8.


The gigabyte guides shows how to setup a fixed vcore. My only issue with it is it suggested 4.7-4.8ghz uncore. I think its better to start this lower like 4.4ghz and raise it later. Uncore can increase the required vcore.

The adaptive method thats being talked about a lot seems the better method imo. It allows a much lower LLC to be used. I had to use turbo on fixed vcore and Im getting away with Low using adaptive. 

There are several benefits to the lower llc. @Falkentyne is much better at explaining it though. He went into length about it in the above post and a few posts up the page.


----------



## lincolnunit

*Over 2 volts on VID?!*

Hey guys, so I am a little green to this overclocking thing, I'm use to easy one click overclocking on old mobos but now it seems I would have to do manual input on this new Gigabyte Aorus Master motherboard. I did not de-lid my cpu nor lapped it, although now i am considering getting this thing de-lidded or return to microcenter because it is so friggin hot. I did the spin test on a glass surface and it does not spin.



Settings used after having default load optimization :


https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...ster.18837783/


I had to set Dynamic Vcore (DVID) to +0.050 to be stable at 5 ghz. +0.035 for 4.9 ghz.


Pretty much used settings in the link as well as using XMP profile (Corsair Dominator Platinum 32 gb @ 3200 Mhz) - though in bios says its using 1.38 when ram should be at 1.35 from factory but oh well.


Same profile used on all test (5 ghz):


*First CPU Cooler used:*


H100i Pro + coollaboratory pro (LIQUID METAL) on surface of IHS and Cooler. under Cinebench I would hit 100C on 1 core with all other cores in mid 90's


I then heard that putting Liquid metal on IHS = bad so decided to switch


*Second CPU Cooler used:*

Noctua Nh-D15


Super quiet in my case however under Cinebench I was hitting 100C on 3 cores! I used Thermal Grizzley kryonaut All other cores max temps in high 90's


*Third CPU Cooler*


This is my current cooler:


Kraken x72 with push/pull config with radiator mounted on top. Thermal Grizzley kryonaut once again.
Under Cinebench: 1 core would reach 100C with all other cores maxing out around mid to high 90's...with exception of one being 88 degrees (What the?).


One thing of note: under HWmonitor/info i noticed about all of my cores under VID is sitting at over 2 volts....(Confused).


Was this a bad OC guide?


Gaming temps will hit 80 after maybe after an hour (Assassin's Creed Odyssey) , otherwise itll be mid 70's at most times on first boot. Beyond the hour maybe going into 2.5-3.5 hours, I'll start seeing spikes of temps to 90's at the corner of my screen and then I'll stop playing. 

Liquid temp seems to get around low 40's to mid 40's after gaming.


Using 4.9 ghz i can game a little longer maybe 4-5 hours before even seeing it go pass 90 degrees.


----------



## Falkentyne

lincolnunit said:


> Hey guys, so I am a little green to this overclocking thing, I'm use to easy one click overclocking on old mobos but now it seems I would have to do manual input on this new Gigabyte Aorus Master motherboard. I did not de-lid my cpu nor lapped it, although now i am considering getting this thing de-lidded or return to microcenter because it is so friggin hot. I did the spin test on a glass surface and it does not spin.
> 
> 
> 
> Settings used after having default load optimization :
> 
> 
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...ster.18837783/
> 
> 
> I had to set Dynamic Vcore (DVID) to +0.050 to be stable at 5 ghz. +0.035 for 4.9 ghz.
> 
> 
> Pretty much used settings in the link as well as using XMP profile (Corsair Dominator Platinum 32 gb @ 3200 Mhz) - though in bios says its using 1.38 when ram should be at 1.35 from factory but oh well.
> 
> 
> Same profile used on all test (5 ghz):
> 
> 
> *First CPU Cooler used:*
> 
> 
> H100i Pro + coollaboratory pro (LIQUID METAL) on surface of IHS and Cooler. under Cinebench I would hit 100C on 1 core with all other cores in mid 90's
> 
> 
> I then heard that putting Liquid metal on IHS = bad so decided to switch
> 
> 
> *Second CPU Cooler used:*
> 
> Noctua Nh-D15
> 
> 
> Super quiet in my case however under Cinebench I was hitting 100C on 3 cores! I used Thermal Grizzley kryonaut All other cores max temps in high 90's
> 
> 
> *Third CPU Cooler*
> 
> 
> This is my current cooler:
> 
> 
> Kraken x72 with push/pull config with radiator mounted on top. Thermal Grizzley kryonaut once again.
> Under Cinebench: 1 core would reach 100C with all other cores maxing out around mid to high 90's...with exception of one being 88 degrees (What the?).
> 
> 
> One thing of note: under HWmonitor/info i noticed about all of my cores under VID is sitting at over 2 volts....(Confused).
> 
> 
> Was this a bad OC guide?
> 
> 
> Gaming temps will hit 80 after maybe after an hour (Assassin's Creed Odyssey) , otherwise itll be mid 70's at most times on first boot. Beyond the hour maybe going into 2.5-3.5 hours, I'll start seeing spikes of temps to 90's at the corner of my screen and then I'll stop playing.
> 
> Liquid temp seems to get around low 40's to mid 40's after gaming.
> 
> 
> Using 4.9 ghz i can game a little longer maybe 4-5 hours before even seeing it go pass 90 degrees.


As said many times before, DON'T USE HWMONITOR. It's garbage.
use HWinfo64.


----------



## lincolnunit

Thanks, so ignore the VID readings on that thing got it. Any suggestions bios config settings to get those temps down though? Using other softwares to monitor them (msi after burner / cam)


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> Cool. Wasn't sure if there's various combos of different llc's to try and such.
> 
> The 90c was from extended realbench but i'm gonna hold off until the AIO at this stage.
> 
> I have all cstates, power limits and such on auto in bios. Should I leave those alone?
> 
> update: couldn't get bf5 to stop crashing and even going up in offset was just causing heat issues to the point I was running much hotter with adaptive than fixed. Went back to static and all is well. Experiment over for now.


 @robertr1 Interesting, I had the opposite experience. My temps were too high with fixed to stabilize 5.1ghz 1.375v turbo llc. 

Adaptive with low llc brought my cpu and vrloop1 temps down enough to stabilize.

When your 360mm rad comes and you get setup. Post some temp comparisons custom loop vs dark rock pro. Im interested to see the results.



lincolnunit said:


> Thanks, so ignore the VID readings on that thing got it. Any suggestions bios config settings to get those temps down though? Using other softwares to monitor them (msi after burner / cam)


Check the llc. When using offset/adaptive you should use llc low. Medium at max.

Thats possibly the temp issue.


----------



## Wirerat

Accidental double post.


----------



## lincolnunit

@Wirerat thank you for response. Yes the cpu VCore LLC is set to low, just like the guide. Unless you are referring to VAXG LLC? Guide has it on normal


----------



## Intrud3r

lincolnunit said:


> Hey guys, so I am a little green to this overclocking thing, I'm use to easy one click overclocking on old mobos but now it seems I would have to do manual input on this new Gigabyte Aorus Master motherboard. I did not de-lid my cpu nor lapped it, although now i am considering getting this thing de-lidded or return to microcenter because it is so friggin hot. I did the spin test on a glass surface and it does not spin.
> 
> 
> 
> Settings used after having default load optimization :
> 
> 
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...ster.18837783/
> 
> 
> I had to set Dynamic Vcore (DVID) to +0.050 to be stable at 5 ghz. +0.035 for 4.9 ghz.
> 
> 
> Pretty much used settings in the link as well as using XMP profile (Corsair Dominator Platinum 32 gb @ 3200 Mhz) - though in bios says its using 1.38 when ram should be at 1.35 from factory but oh well.
> 
> 
> Same profile used on all test (5 ghz):
> 
> 
> *First CPU Cooler used:*
> 
> 
> H100i Pro + coollaboratory pro (LIQUID METAL) on surface of IHS and Cooler. under Cinebench I would hit 100C on 1 core with all other cores in mid 90's
> 
> 
> I then heard that putting Liquid metal on IHS = bad so decided to switch
> 
> 
> *Second CPU Cooler used:*
> 
> Noctua Nh-D15
> 
> 
> Super quiet in my case however under Cinebench I was hitting 100C on 3 cores! I used Thermal Grizzley kryonaut All other cores max temps in high 90's
> 
> 
> *Third CPU Cooler*
> 
> 
> This is my current cooler:
> 
> 
> Kraken x72 with push/pull config with radiator mounted on top. Thermal Grizzley kryonaut once again.
> Under Cinebench: 1 core would reach 100C with all other cores maxing out around mid to high 90's...with exception of one being 88 degrees (What the?).
> 
> 
> One thing of note: under HWmonitor/info i noticed about all of my cores under VID is sitting at over 2 volts....(Confused).
> 
> 
> Was this a bad OC guide?
> 
> 
> Gaming temps will hit 80 after maybe after an hour (Assassin's Creed Odyssey) , otherwise itll be mid 70's at most times on first boot. Beyond the hour maybe going into 2.5-3.5 hours, I'll start seeing spikes of temps to 90's at the corner of my screen and then I'll stop playing.
> 
> Liquid temp seems to get around low 40's to mid 40's after gaming.
> 
> 
> Using 4.9 ghz i can game a little longer maybe 4-5 hours before even seeing it go pass 90 degrees.


I'm using a X72 Kraken myself ... running a 9900k @ 5.1 / 4.7 and my temps while gaming do not exceed 70C
Battlefield 5 runs at max settings for hours and temps stay below 70C. Have not tried Assasins Creed tho ... 

Liquid temp stays below 40C, mostly around 35-37C after about 2 hours of gaming.

Ambient temp is about 22-23C atm.

Just to give you a comparison.


----------



## Wirerat

lincolnunit said:


> @Wirerat thank you for response. Yes the cpu VCore LLC is set to low, just like the guide. Unless you are referring to VAXG LLC? Guide has it on normal


You have the settings correct. Consider remounting/repasting the cpu block.

Whats the ambient temp?


----------



## shocker94

Hello, i have the z390 aorus master, with a 9900k 5.0 ghz 1.30v fixed. I use Turbo as LLC, current protection and pwm phase to the maximum value. Are these a good value? Or have i to change something to achieve better overclock/stability or temperature?
The bios version is the F10b. Thanks.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## shocker94

shocker94 said:


> Hello, i have the z390 aorus master, with a 9900k 5.0 ghz 1.30v fixed. I use Turbo as LLC, current protection and pwm phase to the maximum value. Are these a good value? Or i have to change something to achieve better overclock/stability or temperature?
> The bios version is the F10b. Thanks.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk




Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Wirerat

shocker94 said:


> Hello, i have the z390 aorus master, with a 9900k 5.0 ghz 1.30v fixed. I use Turbo as LLC, current protection and pwm phase to the maximum value. Are these a good value? Or have i to change something to achieve better overclock/stability or temperature?
> The bios version is the F10b. Thanks.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


Those settings look good. How are your temps?


----------



## shocker94

Wirerat said:


> Those settings look good. How are your temps?


Peak of 75 degrees with 2x360mm cpu+gpu, under prime95 29.4.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

Hey guys, I know this is probably a dumb question but wanted to check which of the below is the safest combination:

(P95 stable)
Ac/dc 80
Llc low
Dvid -0.020

(P95 stable)
Ac/dc 80
Llc normal
Dvid +0.000

Edited: more logical question


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> Hey guys, I know this is probably a dumb question but wanted to check which of the below is the safest combination:
> 
> (P95 stable)
> Ac/dc 80
> Llc low
> Dvid -0.020
> 
> (P95 stable)
> Ac/dc 80
> Llc normal
> Dvid +0.000
> 
> Edited: more logical question


For me, p95 is useless, because is stable with every voltage.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

shocker94 said:


> For me, p95 is useless, because is stable with every voltage.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


I found that getting errors in blend is pretty indicative of instability.

In any case, just wondering if I should push llc a level higher for less voltage or keep it lower with higher vrout?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> I found that getting errors in blend is pretty indicative of instability.
> 
> In any case, just wondering if I should push llc a level higher for less voltage or keep it lower with higher vrout?


Both are irrelevant for comparison here at such low levels of loadline. Safety is not a factor here.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Both are irrelevant for comparison here at such low levels of loadline. Safety is not a factor here.


Thank you, as I was hoping because with llc low, getting more favorable results.


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Both are irrelevant for comparison here at such low levels of loadline. Safety is not a factor here.


Is it better to have less LLC? I mean, lower than turbo? My vrout is 1.24v more or less on stress test.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> The gigabyte guides shows how to setup a fixed vcore. My only issue with it is it suggested 4.7-4.8ghz uncore. I think its better to start this lower like 4.4ghz and raise it later. Uncore can increase the required vcore.


I believe the reason they recommend 47x for uncore is because intel recommends keeping it within 3x of the core multiplier (50x in the guide). They're just following intel's guidelines. Practically, there is very little performance hit lowering it below 47x, within reason. I would probably never run a 40x uncore with a 50x core multiplier.


----------



## robertr1

shocker94 said:


> Is it better to have less LLC? I mean, lower than turbo? My vrout is 1.24v more or less on stress test.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


I found my chip more stable at llc high instead of turbo.


----------



## shocker94

robertr1 said:


> I found my chip more stable at llc high instead of turbo.


Have you increased the vcore?

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## robertr1

shocker94 said:


> Have you increased the vcore?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


It's been a while and I've done a lot of changes. You can try without adding vcore. Worst case it'll crash. You can't do damage that way.


----------



## shocker94

robertr1 said:


> It's been a while and I've done a lot of changes. You can try without adding vcore. Worst case it'll crash. You can't do damage that way.


Ok, thank you, i will try.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> I believe the reason they recommend 47x for uncore is because intel recommends keeping it within 3x of the core multiplier (50x in the guide). They're just following intel's guidelines. Practically, there is very little performance hit lowering it below 47x, within reason. I would probably never run a 40x uncore with a 50x core multiplier.


That makes sense. My experience was my 5ghz 1.31v profile was not stable with uncore above 4.4ghz.

My 5.1ghz 1.38v profile works with 4.7ghz uncore. I run this with an offset +.110v and adaptive vcore though.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Find out what MANUAL fixed VR VOUT you need (with turbo LLC--or even better, "high" LLC+a higher bios voltage) you need for stability. Do not bother trying to get LinX 0.9.5 stable unless you hate yourself. I tried doing Kedarwolf's test and at 5 ghz @ 1.275v and LLC Turbo, my CPU reached 95C as soon as the test "ramped up" past the beginning warmup point, INSTANTLY, and it didn't even BSOD--it just hard locked hard. At 5 ghz and on all Auto vcore and Loadline Calibration=Standard, it didn't hard lock, but it reached 100C extremely fast and was pulling 195 Amps--no thanks. Please stick to the reasonable tests of Realbench 2.56, Cinebench R20+3600 second loop, Prime95 small FFT with AVX disabled (29.8 build 6). Find me a program that pulls 195 amps and puts your CPU to 110C in less than 2 minutes then maybe I'll care about LinX / OCCT Linpack small, etc.
> 
> If you find what load VR VOUT you need for full stability at 5 ghz and a certain fixed bios voltage+LLC High, record that (you want the lowest VR VOUT you need, doing this with fixed vcore+LLC High is better than LLC Turbo), then aim for that exact same VR VOUT with Normal Vcore+AC Loadline=40 (= Power saving AC/DC) + LLC "Low" and whatever DVID offset you need. That's what I would do.


You need to set the power limits at 200W or lower for LinX or temps way too high. My screenshots had that, 190 it was I think. Or an AVX Offset. Then the core speed ramps down if voltages get too high. At all power limits at 190 under water I'm under 85C all cores with LinX.


----------



## lincolnunit

Stupid question...the NZXT fans for the kraken x72...purple sticker side is air flow moving away from it yes? If not then I think I’m the first idiot in the world to do a pull-pull configuration and could explain why my temps are insane after an hour or so of gaming


----------



## shocker94

lincolnunit said:


> Stupid question...the NZXT fans for the kraken x72...purple sticker side is air flow moving away from it yes? If not then I think I’m the first idiot in the world to do a pull-pull configuration and could explain why my temps are insane after an hour or so of gaming


There are 2 arrows, meanings the direction of the airflow and spinning.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## shocker94

I want to try to swap from static to adaptative voltage. To fix vid, i have to put ia ac and dc to 1. LLC low, from what i'm reading, is the best value to achieve more stable oc with less voltage. Am i right?

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

shocker94 said:


> I want to try to swap from static to adaptative voltage. To fix vid, i have to put ia ac and dc to 1. LLC low, from what i'm reading, is the best value to achieve more stable oc with less voltage. Am i right?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


You'll need a lot of voltage to be stable on ac/dc 1 and llc low.
Read Falks comment from 2 days ago.
I got prime 95 2h blend stable at:
Ac/dc 80
Llc low
Dvid -0.020


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> You'll need a lot of voltage to be stable on ac/dc 1 and llc low.
> Read Falks comment from 2 days ago.
> I got prime 95 2h blend stable at:
> Ac/dc 80
> Llc low
> Dvid -0.020


Ibt says i'm no stable with this settings. With llc medium, is the same.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## shocker94

I hate this motherboard, with the z370 gsming k6 asrock, i was stable at 1.30v 5ghz. With the master, ibt says i'm not stable at the same voltage and frequency...
Up: i've found the problem... Lastes bios update, broke my ram overclock.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

shocker94 said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> You'll need a lot of voltage to be stable on ac/dc 1 and llc low.
> Read Falks comment from 2 days ago.
> I got prime 95 2h blend stable at:
> Ac/dc 80
> Llc low
> Dvid -0.020
> 
> 
> 
> Ibt says i'm no stable with this settings. With llc medium, is the same.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What's lbt?


----------



## Intrud3r

AndrejB said:


> What's lbt?


I think he means "Intel Burn Test"

https://www.google.com/search?ei=qN...hUKEwi8ubz3hZfkAhVQUlAKHf6UDMwQ4dUDCAo&uact=5


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> What's lbt?


Intel burn test. An old stress test with linpack. With standard 15 run, it tells you quickly if the oc is stable without AVX. For avx, i will use prime95.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Intrud3r

shocker94 said:


> Intel burn test. An old stress test with linpack. With standard 15 run, it tells you quickly if the oc is stable without AVX. For avx, i will use prime95.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


It's old indeed ... have no idea if it has gotten any update, but I've used it back in the day of my q9450.

Nowadays I only use --> too lazy to type, see picture.


----------



## shocker94

Intrud3r said:


> It's old indeed ... have no idea if it has gotten any update, but I've used it back in the day of my q9450.
> 
> 
> 
> Nowadays I only use --> too lazy to type, see picture.


I only use ibt and prim95, because i don't like to spend an entire day to test 

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Wirerat

AndrejB said:


> shocker94 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want to try to swap from static to adaptative voltage. To fix vid, i have to put ia ac and dc to 1. LLC low, from what i'm reading, is the best value to achieve more stable oc with less voltage. Am i right?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> You'll need a lot of voltage to be stable on ac/dc 1 and llc low.
> Read Falks comment from 2 days ago.
> I got prime 95 2h blend stable at:
> Ac/dc 80
> Llc low
> Dvid -0.020
Click to expand...

Adaptive allowed me to drop from Turbo llc to Low llc. My vrout is actually less under load.


----------



## shocker94

Wirerat said:


> Adaptive allowed me to drop from Turbo llc to Low llc. My vrout is actually less under load.


Less vrout, mean less cpu temperature?

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> It's old indeed ... have no idea if it has gotten any update, but I've used it back in the day of my q9450.
> 
> Nowadays I only use --> too lazy to type, see picture.


Better is this these days. LinX 0.9.5.

https://hwtips.tistory.com/1611


----------



## AndrejB

What temps should I expect from cinebench @ 47/43 @ max vrout 1.2?

I have a h150i pro and I think it's not applying enough pressure. When I put the backplate mount + mounting screws it was loose and I could move it up and down. Once I attached the pump it's sturdy but the pump screws got to the end, so not sure if it's good enough.


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Better is this these days. LinX 0.9.5.
> 
> 
> 
> https://hwtips.tistory.com/1611


I'll try. Prime95 and ibt, are always stable, but, when i open the browser i get bsod.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## lincolnunit

Wirerat said:


> You have the settings correct. Consider remounting/repasting the cpu block.
> 
> Whats the ambient temp?


 @Wirerat

Yep....accidentally set my fans as Pull / Pull configuration LMAO...
I'm such a dummy. Temps at 4.9 are a whole lot better now, max 90 during Cinebench.
I then did 5.0ghz settings with offset of +.05 and now seeing max temp of 98, though there was thermal throttling but thats because I'm too scared to set my TJMAX temps to 110 degrees like some other people (would like to keep this for 5 years at least)- kept it at auto for now.

But most the time during the cinebench load at 5.0 ghz its in high 80's and low 90's. Still hot, but at least I'm not seeing all the cores hitting 100 anymore. 

Gaming now seeing high 50's and mid 60's---atleast a 10 degree drop in temps (though haven't done an extensive 2-3 hour session yet). 

I also made some edits from the guide I mentioned which boosted slightly better temps as well. I will share later when I get home, but basically enabled and disabled additional settings in the advance frequency section as well as manually changing the turbo frequency so that i won't be using 5.0ghz all the time. At first I hated this gigabyte board, but now I'm starting to understand all these settings in bios and loving it. 

But to summarize...pull/pull configuration is REALLY REALLY REALLY BAD guys...don't do it lol.


----------



## Phantomas 007

The onboard soundcard of the Z390 Aorous Master how close is to a soundcard like Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5 ?


----------



## shockdocker99

Phantomas 007 said:


> The onboard soundcard of the Z390 Aorous Master how close is to a soundcard like Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5 ?


The AE-5 is miles ahead, using it currently. I had the Z270 Gaming 7 and the soundchip was crackling and making all sorts of wird noises as soon as the GPU was pulling power. Read some reports that it's the same on the Z390 boards; Haven't used onboard on my Z390 Master yet tho.

Still, get yourself a dedicated soundcard if you want good audio 

Irecommend the official driver from a year ago works fine for me. The new beta driver on reddit limits the equalizer to +12 and -12 db. I'm using a 14db bass boost and I'm NOT a bass head. It just makes the sound so much richer...

Hope I could help

(Just created a random account trying to give some advice... Following this thread for a few days and pretty happy with all the stuff you guys are doing, thank you. Whether it's setting recommendations or modded BIOSs  )

9700K R0 here: running 5.2ghz AVX2 but not prime 95 stable @1.43 Vcore @80°C under stress load, NZXT kraken X62 v2 with conductonaut and noiseblocker fans, 4.7uncore cuz 4.8 crashes after a few hours, 1.2v SA+IO, 1.5v DIMM for 3775 CL15 memtest stable with tight sub timings

glhf


----------



## shocker94

I can't find stability with adaptative voltage. It pass linx and prime95, but crash when i open a folder. With Turbo LLC and 1.30v, it's stable. I left ac/dc at 80, is it safe?(the max vrout is 1.299v now).

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Salve1412

Hi guys! I've noticed an issue with my Z390 Aorus Master and my 9900k: if I manually set in the BIOS the "Package C State Limit" at C3 or above, my speakers emit a crackling noise when reproducing any audio stream: it intensifies if the CPU is in idle state or under light load, whereas it disappears if it is at full load. I know for sure that manually setting the Package C State limit is different form leaving it at Auto, because under HWInfo two more strings appear that say: "Package C2 Residency" and "Package C3 Residency" (incidentally, setting any Package state limit above C3 in the BIOS doesn't apparently do anything). Can somebody with an identical CPU and motherboard combo try to do the same and see if he experiences a similar issue? In my case the problem occurs both at stock settings and in an overclocked scenario. Thanks!


----------



## shocker94

Salve1412 said:


> Hi guys! I've noticed an issue with my Z390 Aorus Master and my 9900k: if I manually set in the BIOS the "Package C State Limit" at C3 or above, my speakers emit a crackling noise when reproducing any audio stream: it intensifies if the CPU is in idle state or under light load, whereas it disappears if it is at full load. I know for sure that manually setting the Package C State limit is different form leaving it at Auto, because under HWInfo two more strings appear that say: "Package C2 Residency" and "Package C3 Residency" (incidentally, setting any Package state limit above C3 in the BIOS doesn't apparently do anything). Can somebody with an identical CPU and motherboard combo try to do the same and see if he experiences a similar issue? In my case the problem occurs both at stock settings and in an overclocked scenario. Thanks!


I've a noise in idle state, but is coil whine and disappear under load.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Salve1412

shocker94 said:


> I've a noise in idle state, but is coil whine and disappear under load.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


I think this is something different: in my case I can hear coil whine when i run a CPU benchmark via XTU, but the noise comes from the motherboard itself, whilst this one derives from the speakers and is more like a popping sound.


----------



## Smokediggity

Here is something to play with for the weekend. F10c for the Master. Fixes an issue where memory training wouldn't occur on reboot if Memory Integrity was enabled in Windows Defender. The modded bios has the latest RST, LAN, GPU, and CPU firmware.


----------



## Padinn

Anyone with aorus master have trouble with using digital wave rgb setting to sync fans with io cover. When I set io cover rgbs to two lowest speed settings they do not change at all


----------



## shocker94

Smokediggity said:


> Here is something to play with for the weekend. F10c for the Master. Fixes an issue where memory training wouldn't occur on reboot if Memory Integrity was enabled in Windows Defender. The modded bios has the latest RST, LAN, GPU, and CPU firmware.


Where did you find it? On the gigabyte site, the last bios is F10B. "B" stands for beta, "C" for what?

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Driller au

shocker94 said:


> Where did you find it? On the gigabyte site, the last bios is F10B. "B" stands for beta, "C" for what?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


All gigabyte master bios with a letter after it are beta the ones like F9 are the only full release ones


----------



## shocker94

Driller au said:


> All gigabyte master bios with a letter after it are beta the ones like F9 are the only full release ones


Oh ok. I'll wait the final release of F10. F10B have bad ram oc than F9.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## ezveedub

Driller au said:


> All gigabyte master bios with a letter after it are beta the ones like F9 are the only full release ones




Not true....they release betas on website. The @BIOS app is what won’t show beta bios. Been seeing this going back to X58 mobos. 











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Driller au

ezveedub said:


> Not true....they release betas on website. The @BIOS app is what won’t show beta bios. Been seeing this going back to X58 mobos.
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I never said anything about whats on the website.Let me explain better for you 
Master bios with a letter after them e.g. F9b,F9c,F9e are beta bios for the F9 series
Master bios without a letter after them e.g. F7,F8,F9 are final release for that series
and yes they do have them on the website


----------



## ezveedub

Driller au said:


> I never said anything about whats on the website.Let me explain better for you
> 
> Master bios with a letter after them e.g. F9b,F9c,F9e are beta bios for the F9 series
> 
> Master bios without a letter after them e.g. F7,F8,F9 are final release for that series
> 
> and yes they do have them on the website




Been up late and I misread your original post...lol. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## KedarWolf

Support AORUS Memory Boost

Does anyone know what exactly this is?


----------



## ezveedub

KedarWolf said:


> Support AORUS Memory Boost
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone know what exactly this is?




I’m wondering the same.....was just looking through on here if anyone had an idea...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## AndrejB

KedarWolf said:


> Support AORUS Memory Boost
> 
> Does anyone know what exactly this is?


Someone mentioned support for the memory modules that are 3200 base from gigabyte


----------



## Smokediggity

shocker94 said:


> Where did you find it? On the gigabyte site, the last bios is F10B. "B" stands for beta, "C" for what?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk



I got it from Gigabyte support.


----------



## shocker94

Smokediggity said:


> I got it from Gigabyte support.


If i flash the 10c, can i use backup settings of the 10b version?

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Smokediggity

shocker94 said:


> If i flash the 10c, can i use backup settings of the 10b version?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


No, you should not use a saved profile from another bios version.


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> If i flash the 10c, can i use backup settings of the 10b version?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


Redo your settings. It takes less than 5 minutes once you know what to change.
And you should add commonly used settings to your favorites on your very first profile. Your favorites are saved along with the profile.
The only annoying thing is changing memory timings where you have different subs and tets with various memory overclocks. It goes a lot faster if you just go old school and write them down on a piece of paper. Sure you could use your cellphone but that's for lazy people.


----------



## scaramonga

KedarWolf said:


> Support AORUS Memory Boost
> 
> Does anyone know what exactly this is?


Supports the new memory modules from Gigabyte, thus 'boosting' their cash inflow, if your stupid enough to buy them


----------



## danyxp

lincolnunit said:


> @Wirerat
> 
> Yep....accidentally set my fans as Pull / Pull configuration LMAO...
> I'm such a dummy. Temps at 4.9 are a whole lot better now, max 90 during Cinebench.
> I then did 5.0ghz settings with offset of +.05 and now seeing max temp of 98, though there was thermal throttling but thats because I'm too scared to set my TJMAX temps to 110 degrees like some other people (would like to keep this for 5 years at least)- kept it at auto for now.
> 
> But most the time during the cinebench load at 5.0 ghz its in high 80's and low 90's. Still hot, but at least I'm not seeing all the cores hitting 100 anymore.
> 
> Gaming now seeing high 50's and mid 60's---atleast a 10 degree drop in temps (though haven't done an extensive 2-3 hour session yet).
> 
> I also made some edits from the guide I mentioned which boosted slightly better temps as well. I will share later when I get home, but basically enabled and disabled additional settings in the advance frequency section as well as manually changing the turbo frequency so that i won't be using 5.0ghz all the time. At first I hated this gigabyte board, but now I'm starting to understand all these settings in bios and loving it.
> 
> But to summarize...pull/pull configuration is REALLY REALLY REALLY BAD guys...don't do it lol.


I also had my fans all set up to exhaust for a while  I mounted the intake fans correctly but I was holding the mounting plate wrong lol. After realizing and fixing the mistake got a massive temp drop, 13-15 celsius


----------



## redot

Hey guys, I just purchased new Aorus Z390 Ulta MB and I have few questions:
1: how can I connect 6 fans
2: which one of the plugs is for EKWB D5 Vario pump?
Somehow I got my parts, just done water-cooling and now I'm lost of where I have to connect my fans ... but with fans I have issues: a) only 4 Noctua PWM fans; b) 2 are Thermaltake fans from AIO so I will be using them trough TT hub. but where do i need to plug my 4 fans and a pump ? as my case is in win 303 ill be using it as open, no side panel ( the way I like ) and I won't be using an exhaust fan.
Thanks in advance.


----------



## Wirerat

redot said:


> Hey guys, I just purchased new Aorus Z390 Ulta MB and I have few questions:
> 1: how can I connect 6 fans
> 2: which one of the plugs is for EKWB D5 Vario pump?
> Somehow I got my parts, just done water-cooling and now I'm lost of where I have to connect my fans ... but with fans I have issues: a) only 4 Noctua PWM fans; b) 2 are Thermaltake fans from AIO so I will be using them trough TT hub. but where do i need to plug my 4 fans and a pump ? as my case is in win 303 ill be using it as open, no side panel ( the way I like ) and I won't be using an exhaust fan.
> Thanks in advance.


 There are 7 fan headers on the mobo. The D5 can plug into any one of those. If its the Vario (little red dial on the pump) it will just be reporting rpm speed of the pump and not pulling power as it has separate molex for power. 

If its a pwm d5 it will be controlable through the mobo but still gets power from a separate psu connection.

I am using auros pro z390 with a custom loop. I have a total of 9 fans + a pwm ddc pump. I used the pump header at the bottom of the board for the pump. 

The rest of the fans are spread around the other headers and I have a couple of two way pwm splitters.

Just do not mix 4 pin and 3 pin fans on the same header if you do run any splitters. 
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01DV1Z0Z4/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_1RWyDbB9RESAR


----------



## AndrejB

I noticed that at cold boot LinX residuals aren't equal, then after a reboot they are.
Also noticed slightly different idle voltages between the two.
Im running:
Ia ac/dc 80
Llc low
Dvid -0.020

Seems like gigabyte didn't solve all their cold boot issues, or did I do something wrong?


----------



## KedarWolf

AndrejB said:


> I noticed that at cold boot LinX residuals aren't equal, then after a reboot they are.
> Also noticed slightly different idle voltages between the two.
> Im running:
> Ia ac/dc 80
> Llc low
> Dvid -0.020
> 
> Seems like gigabyte didn't solve all their cold boot issues, or did I do something wrong?


I just tested that. Same problem. Residuals wrong cold boot, fine on a reboot. 

And next, my exhaustive hours of testing on cache, timings etc.


----------



## KedarWolf

So, I just spent all day stress testing various cache settings, timings etc.

Here all the results.

If I have CPU at 5.0 GHz and lower cache from 47 to 45, I can run 4200 Mhz on RAM at 17-17-17-38 2T with a low tRFC of 345 stress-tested stable.

If I have the cache at 47 I can only run 4133 MHz at 17-17-17-38 2T with a tRFC of 374 for the same CPU voltage.

If I raise the CPU voltage by .040 I can run the tRFC at 339, not worth it.

4200 Mhz at those timings with the cache at 45 does better in read, write and copy in AIDA64 cache and memory test than the 4133 MHz at a 47 cache.

Lastly, I put the RAM voltage at 1.46v for those timings. I set the DRAM Termination voltage at Auto which is .600v. If I set it to .730v or half of the RAM voltage as some have suggested, it fails the stress test.

In my BIOS screenshots, I included I disabled the drives not connected and the Serial port disabled as it's good practice to disable anything in the BIOS you're not actually using. 

*And IMPORTANT NOTE! If you're going to stress test with LinX 0.9.5 have the power limits set as 200 or lower in the BIOS or an AVX Offset of 5 or higher you're going to have temps way too high and freeze up your PC as someone did using my settings WITHOUT setting the power limits.

You can test your temps by having HWInfo open, start LinX, wait the 15 seconds until it REALLY kicks in, see temps. I suggest if the hottest core is over 85C lower power limits or set a higher AVX Offset.*


----------



## shocker94

KedarWolf said:


> So, I just spent all day stress testing various cache settings, timings etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Here all the results.
> 
> 
> 
> If I have CPU at 5.0 GHz and lower cache from 47 to 45, I can run 4200 Mhz on RAM at 17-17-17-38 2T with a low tRFC of 345 stress-tested stable.
> 
> 
> 
> If I have the cache at 47 I can only run 4133 MHz at 17-17-17-38 2T with a tRFC of 374 for the same CPU voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> If I raise the CPU voltage by .040 I can run the tRFC at 339, not worth it.
> 
> 
> 
> 4200 Mhz at those timings with the cache at 45 does better in read, write and copy in AIDA64 cache and memory test than the 4133 MHz at a 47 cache.
> 
> 
> 
> Lastly, I put the RAM voltage at 1.46v for those timings. I set the DRAM Termination voltage at Auto which is .600v. If I set it to .730v or half of the RAM voltage as some have suggested, it fails the stress test.
> 
> 
> 
> In my BIOS screenshots, I included I disabled the drives not connected and the Serial port disabled as it's good practice to disable anything in the BIOS you're not actually using.
> 
> 
> 
> *And IMPORTANT NOTE! If you're going to stress test with LinX 0.9.5 have the power limits set as 200 or lower in the BIOS or an AVX Offset of 5 or higher you're going to have temps way too high and freeze up your PC as someone did using my settings WITHOUT setting the power limits.
> 
> 
> 
> You can test your temps by having HWInfo open, start LinX, wait the 15 seconds until it REALLY kicks in, see temps. I suggest if the hottest core is over 85C lower power limits or set a higher AVX Offset.*


Enhaced performance for timing, is Better than auto? I didn't test it. I left it on auto, since i have this motherboard.

Up: With enhanced performance, there are no difference with timings...
All stress test are useless. I tried prime95, xtu, ibt, linx and occt. I can pass all of them, but it crash when i play battlefront 2...

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

shocker94 said:


> Enhaced performance for timing, is Better than auto? I didn't test it. I left it on auto, since i have this motherboard.
> 
> Up: With enhanced performance, there are no difference with timings...
> All stress test are useless. I tried prime95, xtu, ibt, linx and occt. I can pass all of them, but it crash when i play battlefront 2...
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


You mean Star Wars Battlefront 2, right?

It works fine on my PC.


----------



## shocker94

KedarWolf said:


> You mean Star Wars Battlefront 2, right?
> 
> 
> 
> It works fine on my PC.


Yes, it works fine on my pc too, but not at 1.26v, which all stress test are stable.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## bastian

Master F10c beta bios is available now.



shocker94 said:


> Yes, it works fine on my pc too, but not at 1.26v, which all stress test are stable.


DICE game engines use a decent amount of AVX. You need more voltage.


----------



## Cuthalu

Will Aorus Pro boot with 9900KF if it has launch bios? And what are the chances that Aorus Pro bought today doesn't have at least F8 bios?


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


> So, I just spent all day stress testing various cache settings, timings etc.
> 
> Here all the results.
> 
> If I have CPU at 5.0 GHz and lower cache from 47 to 45, I can run 4200 Mhz on RAM at 17-17-17-38 2T with a low tRFC of 345 stress-tested stable.
> 
> If I have the cache at 47 I can only run 4133 MHz at 17-17-17-38 2T with a tRFC of 374 for the same CPU voltage.
> 
> If I raise the CPU voltage by .040 I can run the tRFC at 339, not worth it.
> 
> 4200 Mhz at those timings with the cache at 45 does better in read, write and copy in AIDA64 cache and memory test than the 4133 MHz at a 47 cache.
> 
> Lastly, I put the RAM voltage at 1.46v for those timings. I set the DRAM Termination voltage at Auto which is .600v. If I set it to .730v or half of the RAM voltage as some have suggested, it fails the stress test.
> 
> In my BIOS screenshots, I included I disabled the drives not connected and the Serial port disabled as it's good practice to disable anything in the BIOS you're not actually using.
> 
> *And IMPORTANT NOTE! If you're going to stress test with LinX 0.9.5 have the power limits set as 200 or lower in the BIOS or an AVX Offset of 5 or higher you're going to have temps way too high and freeze up your PC as someone did using my settings WITHOUT setting the power limits.
> 
> You can test your temps by having HWInfo open, start LinX, wait the 15 seconds until it REALLY kicks in, see temps. I suggest if the hottest core is over 85C lower power limits or set a higher AVX Offset.*


I was playing around with Lynx 0.9.5

I was running 5.1/4.7 --> no problems whatsoever ... 
Listened to Kedarwolf and started retesting Lynx 0.9.5 to check if my residuals were the same.

At DVID = +0.150V they were not the same.

Upped DVID to 0.160V and retested.

At DVID = +0.160V only the last one was off, but still ... it was off.

Restested my stable 5.0 / 4.7 setting for the same residuals at a DVID = +0.110V (all benches and stresstests passed this)
Residuals were NOT the same.

Upped DVID to +0.120V and now my residuals were the same for 5.0 / 4.7
Retested after a reboot, and they were still the same.

(keep in mind, I almost never cold boot my system, it's running 24/7)

So my final setting is in my signature ... power limits in bios are capped at 200 atm, instead of kedarwolf's 190. Maybe I should lower them to 190, as my temps hit 90C, but even at 190 they will hit 90C with my kraken x72 so ... that won't matter much.

(funny timezones ... last edited 9.38 AM. It's 19.38 overhere ... so 7.38 PM ....)


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> So, I just spent all day stress testing various cache settings, timings etc.
> 
> Here all the results.
> 
> If I have CPU at 5.0 GHz and lower cache from 47 to 45, I can run 4200 Mhz on RAM at 17-17-17-38 2T with a low tRFC of 345 stress-tested stable.
> 
> If I have the cache at 47 I can only run 4133 MHz at 17-17-17-38 2T with a tRFC of 374 for the same CPU voltage.
> 
> If I raise the CPU voltage by .040 I can run the tRFC at 339, not worth it.
> 
> 4200 Mhz at those timings with the cache at 45 does better in read, write and copy in AIDA64 cache and memory test than the 4133 MHz at a 47 cache.
> 
> Lastly, I put the RAM voltage at 1.46v for those timings. I set the DRAM Termination voltage at Auto which is .600v. If I set it to .730v or half of the RAM voltage as some have suggested, it fails the stress test.
> 
> In my BIOS screenshots, I included I disabled the drives not connected and the Serial port disabled as it's good practice to disable anything in the BIOS you're not actually using. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> *And IMPORTANT NOTE! If you're going to stress test with LinX 0.9.5 have the power limits set as 200 or lower in the BIOS or an AVX Offset of 5 or higher you're going to have temps way too high and freeze up your PC as someone did using my settings WITHOUT setting the power limits.
> 
> You can test your temps by having HWInfo open, start LinX, wait the 15 seconds until it REALLY kicks in, see temps. I suggest if the hottest core is over 85C lower power limits or set a higher AVX Offset.*


Got a good resource where I can read up on these various memory timings? Saw some are very different from what bios says are default


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> I was playing around with Lynx 0.9.5
> 
> I was running 5.1/4.7 --> no problems whatsoever ...
> Listened to Kedarwolf and started retesting Lynx 0.9.5 to check if my residuals were the same.
> 
> At DVID = +0.150V they were not the same.
> 
> Upped DVID to 0.160V and retested.
> 
> At DVID = +0.160V only the last one was off, but still ... it was off.
> 
> Restested my stable 5.0 / 4.7 setting for the same residuals at a DVID = +0.110V (all benches and stresstests passed this)
> Residuals were NOT the same.
> 
> Upped DVID to +0.120V and now my residuals were the same for 5.0 / 4.7
> Retested after a reboot, and they were still the same.
> 
> (keep in mind, I almost never cold boot my system, it's running 24/7)
> 
> So my final setting is in my signature ... power limits in bios are capped at 200 atm, instead of kedarwolf's 190. Maybe I should lower them to 190, as my temps hit 90C, but even at 190 they will hit 90C with my kraken x72 so ... that won't matter much.
> 
> (funny timezones ... last edited 9.38 AM. It's 19.38 overhere ... so 7.38 PM ....)


Power limits at 300W.
Your settings, 5.0/4.7 ...

195 amps, 99C in 5 seconds after ramp-up.
I'll pass.

What's the point of trying to pass LinX anyway?

Why don't you try my settings since I'm always trying someone else's strange settings.

5.1/4.7
CPU Vcore: AUTO
Loadline Calibration: STANDARD/Normal
AC Loadline 130, DC Loadline 160
PL1/PL2: 300W
(WARNING: IF YOU HAD A DVID OFFSET PREVIOUSLY YOU MUST REBOOT TO BIOS TWICE TO CLEAR THE DVID OFFSET UNLESS YOU SET IT TO 0.00 THEN REBOOT)
(BUG: changing from DVID Offset to Auto or Fixed Vcore KEEPS the DVID offset unless the system is power cycled or rebooted twice).

(Reboot to BIOS after these)
SVID OFFSET: ENABLED

Try to LinX that.

Then:
5.0 / 4.7
Vcore: Auto
LLC: standard/Normal
AC Loadline: 96, DC Loadline: 160
PL1/PL2: 300W
SVID OFFSET: ENABLED

Can you LinX that?
The second one should absolutely pass.


----------



## Padinn

Man my 150i is saturated with like 170w. But could be I need to do some more voltage tweaks.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Power limits at 300W.
> Your settings, 5.0/4.7 ...
> 
> 195 amps, 99C in 5 seconds after ramp-up.
> I'll pass.
> 
> What's the point of trying to pass LinX anyway?
> 
> Why don't you try my settings since I'm always trying someone else's strange settings.
> 
> 5.1/4.7
> CPU Vcore: AUTO
> Loadline Calibration: STANDARD/Normal
> AC Loadline 130, DC Loadline 160
> PL1/PL2: 300W
> (WARNING: IF YOU HAD A DVID OFFSET PREVIOUSLY YOU MUST REBOOT TO BIOS TWICE TO CLEAR THE DVID OFFSET UNLESS YOU SET IT TO 0.00 THEN REBOOT)
> (BUG: changing from DVID Offset to Auto or Fixed Vcore KEEPS the DVID offset unless the system is power cycled or rebooted twice).
> 
> (Reboot to BIOS after these)
> SVID OFFSET: ENABLED
> 
> Try to LinX that.
> 
> Then:
> 5.0 / 4.7
> Vcore: Auto
> LLC: standard/Normal
> AC Loadline: 96, DC Loadline: 160
> PL1/PL2: 300W
> SVID OFFSET: ENABLED
> 
> Can you LinX that?
> The second one should absolutely pass.


Falk .... I didn't know you were running adaptive voltages ? All I knew is you were stuck on fixed voltage with turbo llc. I need to pay more attention it seems ... 

You are making me eager to try ...


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Falk .... I didn't know you were running adaptive voltages ? All I knew is you were stuck on fixed voltage with turbo llc. I need to pay more attention it seems ...
> 
> You are making me eager to try ...


I'm not using adaptive voltages. 
I just have it saved in a profile because I'm bored and do silly things.
Since small FFT AVX prime95 or LinX is a no-go at 5 ghz on any fixed voltage and LLC Turbo (just crashes) without raising vcore to uncoolable levels and reaching 100C, I tried messing around with using no loadline calibration and using the ACLL to boost the vcore on auto vcore to increase stability.
Then I can use 15K AVX as long as the core temps stay below 95C. (4.9 ghz is brainless compared to 5 ghz). Then I messed around with SVID offset. Since VID target is increased up to 1.72v with SVID offset enabled, VR VOUT will slowly increase (1.5mv every 1C), so AC Loadline must be lowered considerably. (SVID Offset+ AC LL 96 lowers the idle vcore by about 60mv and keeps the load vcore the same as if SVID is disabled with ACLL 160).


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> I'm not using adaptive voltages.
> I just have it saved in a profile because I'm bored and do silly things.
> Since small FFT AVX prime95 or LinX is a no-go at 5 ghz on any fixed voltage and LLC Turbo (just crashes) without raising vcore to uncoolable levels and reaching 100C, I tried messing around with using no loadline calibration and using the ACLL to boost the vcore on auto vcore to increase stability.
> Then I can use 15K AVX as long as the core temps stay below 95C. (4.9 ghz is brainless compared to 5 ghz). Then I messed around with SVID offset. Since VID target is increased up to 1.72v with SVID offset enabled, VR VOUT will slowly increase (1.5mv every 1C), so AC Loadline must be lowered considerably. (SVID Offset+ AC LL 96 lowers the idle vcore by about 60mv and keeps the load vcore the same as if SVID is disabled with ACLL 160).


Darn .... you have been playing around ... will try your settings ... this weekend, maybe earlier ... I would love my 5.1 back again ... it def helps my framerates in bf5.

(btw ... it's good that you mentioned it, but I always do it more then thoroughly ... When touching voltages, I touch one thing, and reboot, then the next ... when changing dvid --> fixed, I always first go to 0 --> save --> reboot --> change the rest ... even if that takes a couple more reboots cause of frequency changes)


----------



## Intrud3r

Totally off-topic, but I just have to say it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Btw ... I'll probably get flamed for this ... spare me ... pls ... 

Listen ... When I post something and state that my settings are in my signature ... and I get a reply that we can't read your signature because we are on mobile reading the forum. Please let me reply:

We are on a overclocking forum for cpu's / gpu's playing with different kinds of motherboards and memory kits ... we are not overclocking your frecking phone ... go sit behind a pc and read the forum.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sorry, I just had to ...


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> I'm not using adaptive voltages.
> 
> I just have it saved in a profile because I'm bored and do silly things.
> 
> Since small FFT AVX prime95 or LinX is a no-go at 5 ghz on any fixed voltage and LLC Turbo (just crashes) without raising vcore to uncoolable levels and reaching 100C, I tried messing around with using no loadline calibration and using the ACLL to boost the vcore on auto vcore to increase stability.
> 
> Then I can use 15K AVX as long as the core temps stay below 95C. (4.9 ghz is brainless compared to 5 ghz). Then I messed around with SVID offset. Since VID target is increased up to 1.72v with SVID offset enabled, VR VOUT will slowly increase (1.5mv every 1C), so AC Loadline must be lowered considerably. (SVID Offset+ AC LL 96 lowers the idle vcore by about 60mv and keeps the load vcore the same as if SVID is disabled with ACLL 160).


Here am I, with a cpu stable no matter what vcore. I'using turbo LLC 1.26v 5ghz and i can pass linx and prime95 AVX. But for gaming, i have to raise the voltage to 1.30v. No one seems to have a answer for that... Problably, i have a z390 aorus magic[emoji1787]

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Sheyster

shocker94 said:


> Here am I, with a cpu stable no matter what vcore. I'using turbo LLC 1.26v 5ghz and i can pass linx and prime95 AVX. But for gaming, i have to raise the voltage to 1.30v. No one seems to have a answer for that... Problably, i have a z390 aorus magic[emoji1787]


What's your cache (uncore) multiplier when running 5 GHz?
Do you pass memory benchmarks like HCI Memtest?
What games do you play?


----------



## Driller au

shocker94 said:


> Here am I, with a cpu stable no matter what vcore. I'using turbo LLC 1.26v 5ghz and i can pass linx and prime95 AVX. But for gaming, i have to raise the voltage to 1.30v. No one seems to have a answer for that... Problably, i have a z390 aorus magic[emoji1787]
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


Like i have said earlier in this thread BF games/frostbite engine the most fun stress test there is, lost count of how many stress tests i have passed only to crash in BF1/BF5.
Happened again only last night passed linX playing with Kedarwolf settings 15 minutes of BF5 got WHEA errors


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Like i have said earlier in this thread BF games/frostbite engine the most fun stress test there is, lost count of how many stress tests i have passed only to crash in BF1/BF5.
> Happened again only last night passed linX playing with Kedarwolf settings 15 minutes of BF5 got WHEA errors


I've tested my settings in BF5, spectating, an hour at a time, no issues. Your results with vary. And spectating is no different than actually playing, you can stress test with it.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> I've tested my settings in BF5, spectating, an hour at a time, no issues. Your results with vary. And spectating is no different than actually playing, you can stress test with it.


i was playing with the voltages and LLC, just a bit bored being silly


----------



## shocker94

Sheyster said:


> What's your cache (uncore) multiplier when running 5 GHz?
> 
> Do you pass memory benchmarks like HCI Memtest?
> 
> What games do you play?


4.7ghz.
yes, 1300% coverage.
Battlefront 2, hard reset redux, youngblood.

Up: If i lower the cache to 4.3 with 1.26v, probably it will be stable in game. I've to try.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## vmanuelgm

KedarWolf said:


> I've tested my settings in BF5, spectating, an hour at a time, no issues. Your results with vary. And spectating is no different than actually playing, you can stress test with it.



BF5 Spectator crashes because of the game itself. Sometimes it has to do with gpu memory limit option in game, sometimes with future frame rendering and/or forced settings in Nvidia or AMD control panel...


----------



## shocker94

With ia ac dc at 1, my VROUT is higher then before(ia ac dc 80). If i left 1 on ia ac dc, i can turn down the LLC to high. [emoji848]
This motherboard is very difficult[emoji1787]

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> With ia ac dc at 1, my VROUT is higher then before(ia ac dc 80). If i left 1 on ia ac dc, i can turn down the LLC to high. [emoji848]
> This motherboard is very difficult[emoji1787]
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


This is impossible.
What exact voltage settings are you using?


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> This is impossible.
> 
> What exact voltage settings are you using?


Fixed vcore 1.30v, max vrout 1.299v, min 1.264v with ac dc at 1, 1.254v with ac dc 80. Both are stable with LLC turbo.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> Fixed vcore 1.30v, max vrout 1.299v, min 1.264v with ac dc at 1, 1.254v with ac dc 80. Both are stable with LLC turbo.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


Again this makes no sense.
Maybe its a language problem.

What is your IDLE VR VOUT with AC/DC 1 and AC/DC 80?

What is your LOAD VR VOUT with AC/DC 1 and AC/DC 80?

I just tested this and zero difference. Only VID changed. Not VR VOUT.

Using AC/DC 1 does not allow you to go from LLC:Turbo to LLC:High on fixed vcore (meaning: if system is unstable on high, the other AC/DC will not make it stable!)
What is the problem?

What happens if you use LLC:HIGH on AC/DC 80? is there a problem with your system?

what happens if you use LLC:Turbo on AC/DC 80?

Please take some time to write a complete reply. Writing small posts leaves people confused.


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Again this makes no sense.
> 
> Maybe its a language problem.
> 
> 
> 
> What is your IDLE VR VOUT with AC/DC 1 and AC/DC 80?
> 
> 
> 
> What is your LOAD VR VOUT with AC/DC 1 and AC/DC 80?
> 
> 
> 
> I just tested this and zero difference. Only VID changed. Not VR VOUT.
> 
> 
> 
> Using AC/DC 1 does not allow you to go from LLC:Turbo to LLC:High on fixed vcore (meaning: if system is unstable on high, the other AC/DC will not make it stable!)
> 
> What is the problem?
> 
> 
> 
> What happens if you use LLC:HIGH on AC/DC 80? is there a problem with your system?
> 
> 
> 
> what happens if you use LLC:Turbo on AC/DC 80?
> 
> 
> 
> Please take some time to write a complete reply. Writing small posts leaves people confused.


Sorry, i will explain better. 
With ac dc at 1, i have a idle vrout at 1.293, max 1.299, min 1.264. The difference from ac dc at 80, is only the minimum VROUT(1.254v) but, probably, during stress test it doesn't change anything(1.27v if i'm not wrong, i have to retest).
I will try high LLC, to see if there are difference on VR OUT, during load, with 1 ac dc and 80.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> Sorry, i will explain better.
> With ac dc at 1, i have a idle vrout at 1.293, max 1.299, min 1.264. The difference from ac dc at 80, is only the minimum VROUT(1.254v) but, probably, during stress test it doesn't change anything(1.27v if i'm not wrong, i have to retest).
> I will try high LLC, to see if there are difference on VR OUT, during load, with 1 ac dc and 80.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


Margin of error. AC isn't affecting this. Probably some program using extra 10 amps randomly.

Minimum VR VOUT is caused by amps draw.
Vdroop is equal to VRM loadline milliOhms * Amps 

Example: (VRM Loadline=loadline calibration ok?)

If your loadline is 0.4 mOhms (VRM Loadline)---this is the value for loadline calibration=Turbo,
And you are pulling 100 amps power draw:

Vdroop will be 0.4 * 100 =40 millivolts or 0.04v.

Then you subtract this from bios voltage set:
1300mv - 40mv =1260mv or 1.260v = VR VOUT at 100 amps.


That is the vdroop.
So: you subtract "BIOS SET VCORE - Vdroop" and that is your load VR VOUT.


----------



## Snowblind

Stupid question.

The box doesn't ship with an m.2 SSD drive, right?


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Margin of error. AC isn't affecting this. Probably some program using extra 10 amps randomly.
> 
> 
> 
> Minimum VR VOUT is caused by amps draw.
> 
> Vdroop is equal to VRM loadline milliOhms * Amps
> 
> 
> 
> Example: (VRM Loadline=loadline calibration ok?)
> 
> 
> 
> If your loadline is 0.4 mOhms (VRM Loadline)---this is the value for loadline calibration=Turbo,
> 
> And you are pulling 100 amps power draw:
> 
> 
> 
> Vdroop will be 0.4 * 100 =40 millivolts or 0.04v.
> 
> 
> 
> Then you subtract this from bios voltage set:
> 
> 1300mv - 40mv =1260mv or 1.260v = VR VOUT at 100 amps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the vdroop.
> 
> So: you subtract "BIOS SET VCORE - Vdroop" and that is your load VR VOUT.


Thanks for the explanation.
With high LLC, during cinebench r20, the load vrout is 1.209v, averange in gaming 1.278v(control game), max 1.287v.
Cinebech r20 use AVX... How can i pass the bench with such a low vrout?

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## ezveedub

Snowblind said:


> Stupid question.
> 
> The box doesn't ship with an m.2 SSD drive, right?


This mobo? No


----------



## HuntrPad

Anyone have any DPC latency issues related to ACPI.sys on the Aorus Pro? I've had it for almost a year now, and as of lately been having random freezing/ audio glitching. Ran LatencyMon and it came out to that causing it..

This happens on a FRESH clean install of windows as well.

Another thing to note thats new when booting even with a fresh install where it shows the logo (not bios) of windows loading right before it shows the login screen theres a weird graphical glitch. Does it with both the 1070ti and IGPU. 

Thanks


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

reachthesky said:


> Sup fam. Help request here. Anyone here using the 32GB(4x8) G.Skill Trident Z RGB CL17-17-17-37 4000MHz ki(F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR) with the Aorus z390 Master +9900k? I'm having some trouble overclocking these sticks past the xmp profile. I tried changing the frequency to 4400/4266, throwing 1.5v dram/training voltage, .750 vtt at it with up to 1.3v sa/io, auto mobo timings, 1.1v pch/autoV pch, 1.35v vcore and mobo won't train either frequency at either auto mobo timings or adjusted xmp timings. [email protected] works just fine @1.15io/1.2sa. Motherboard keeps trying to train but it never goes past 31, tries to retrain and then I end up with a C1 code followed up with a bios reset. Anyone have any ideas? I've trained a cl18-19-19-39 4000mhz kit to 4400mhz on this board no problem. What am I missing here?


My experience with b-dies is you're not going to get over 4133-4200 stress-tested stable on 4x8GB on a Master or even an XTreme, with reasonable voltages anyways. Rule of thumb is RAM 1.45V or under, SA and VCCIO 1.25 or under.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> It's not a question of can they be stabilized, It's more of, Why aren't these sticks even training past 4000? They are a better BIN than the 18-19-19-19-39 set that doesn't have any issues going up to 4400. Something isn't adding up as to why they won't even train. Was there a setting that I forgot to adjust? I do appreciate you responding so quickly but your general message of "give up you can't get them stable" doesn't really address the issue i'm facing at this time.


It's well known these boards are not memory OC rockstars, especially the Pro model. You'll have to look elsewhere for that. If you need to blame something then blame the Gigabyte BIOS and what appears to be questionable high-frequency memory support. Otherwise, plan to spend LOTS of time experimenting with sub-timings and voltages and you just might get lucky.


----------



## robertr1

Shadow of the Tomb Raider is a good stress on the CPU. More demanding than BFV. I needed another .010v above BF5/realbench/p95 to not get CPU errors showing in hwinfo. Oh and the game is fun.


----------



## EarlZ

Is there a bios setting that totally cuts off power to the USB ports if I've initiated a windows shut down ?


----------



## vmanuelgm

robertr1 said:


> Shadow of the Tomb Raider is a good stress on the CPU. More demanding than BFV. I needed another .010v above BF5/realbench/p95 to not get CPU errors showing in hwinfo. Oh and the game is fun.



U kidding???

xDDD


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok I think you may be mistaken or didn't completely read my original post. In case you misinterpreted what I said, *on this very same aorus z390 master motherboard + very same 9900k*, I was able to boot my g.skill trident z non-rgb cl 18-19-19-19-39 4000 kit all the way up to 4400mhz. It's not a question of whether or not the mobo/cpu are capable of booting 4400, they've already done it 3 days ago. However, with the trident z rgb cl 17-17-17-37 4000 kit, It won't boot post 4133mhz. It's not a question of the board or chip. It's a question of what am I doing wrong(hence why I posted all my settings in my first post here) because the trident z rgb sticks should have no issue booting up to 4400mhz with this mobo+chip since a worse binned set did it no issue(both being samsung b-die). If the issue was the mobo, I'd have never been able to boot up 4400 and play games on the other set of worse binned sticks to begin with.


Need to ask Gigabyte about that.
RAM compatibility. I doubt anyone in this thread can fix your problem.
Maybe ask in the DDR4 thread instead.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

just fyi for those having issues with adaptive voltage (like me) and still want to reduce your idle draw, just enable speedshift in the bios with fixed voltage and turn your windows power plan to balanced. Your idle will drop in line with clocks dropping.


----------



## Cuthalu

What kind of DPC latency does Z390 Aorus boards with up to date bios and drivers show with latency monitor? On Anandtech's tests Pro and Master were at bottom of the barrel.


----------



## metalspider

ran a quick test and seems fine to me.
auros pro,9900k,ddr4 3866mhz 16-17-17-35,1080ti.....
f10 bios


----------



## KedarWolf

Cuthalu said:


> What kind of DPC latency does Z390 Aorus boards with up to date bios and drivers show with latency monitor? On Anandtech's tests Pro and Master were at bottom of the barrel.


I've heard peeps say there are issues with playing videos in a browser and latency.

This is with a Twitch stream open and seems fine.


----------



## Nammi

Idle with the old F8 bios on master, win10 1903.


----------



## Intrud3r

Running youtube music videos, F7 bios on a Ultra board running signature settings.


----------



## Thomas73

My rig
Aorus Z390 Master F10b
CPU 9900K 5ghz on all cores
RAM Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 4x16gb
GPU Zotac RTX 2080 Ti Amp xtreme core
PSU Seasonic Prime Ultra 1000 Platinum
Cooling:ID Cooling Auraflow 360 RGB AIO
Case:TT Core P5


----------



## KedarWolf

Thomas73 said:


> My rig
> Aorus Z390 Master F10b
> CPU 9900K 5ghz on all cores
> RAM Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 4x16gb
> GPU Zotac RTX 2080 Ti Amp xtreme core
> PSU Seasonic Prime Ultra 1000 Platinum
> Cooling:ID Cooling Auraflow 360 RGB AIO
> Case:TT Core P5


Use Rigbuilder at the top. Create MyRig, add it to your signature, plus you can add that stuff directly in your sig as well in User CP in overclock.net profile.


----------



## The_Fog_Man

Z390 master F8 i7-8700k 4.8ghz 1.2v Win7 Ultimate Modded








For fix the latency you need to set up the bios and tweak the OS for get best performance


----------



## Cuthalu

The_Fog_Man said:


> Z390 master F8 i7-8700k 4.8ghz 1.2v Win7 Ultimate Modded
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For fix the latency you need to set up the bios and tweak the OS for get best performance


That's a nice result. How long did you monitor that and what optimizations you're using? Have you tried what kind of results you get in Win10?


----------



## Arni90

This motherboard really likes all RAM slots filled, it's incredible how much of a difference it makes in terms of overclocking RAM and for stability.

I achieved this result after filling all RAM slots with B-die, first set is a G.Skill FlareX 3200 CL14, second set is Ripjaws V 3600 CL16
1.46V DRAM, 0.722V termination


----------



## shocker94

Arni90 said:


> This motherboard really likes all RAM slots filled, it's incredible how much of a difference it makes in terms of overclocking RAM and for stability.
> 
> 
> 
> I achieved this result after filling all RAM slots with B-die, first set is a G.Skill FlareX 3200 CL14, second set is Ripjaws V 3600 CL16
> 
> 1.46V DRAM, 0.722V termination


I'm using two stick of kfa2 hof extreme oc. Ram 1.45v termination 0.725, 4000mhz cl 16 18 18 38 tras 56 trfc 350. With fast boot ram disabled, the stability, increase a lot. At the end, this motherboard, is not too bad on ram oc.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## The_Fog_Man

https://discord.gg/44TkbuR
Guide by FR33THY
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nrcQ2EU5512TpuspPF4u5PgZ43p7hoV1cYBMi2C3XSQ/edit



https://discordapp.com/invite/44TkbuR


----------



## philhalo66

hold the phone, does that mean someone got Windows 7 working with Z390? i keep hearing about USB not working. id LOVE to get rid of windows 10 its buggy.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> So, I just spent all day stress testing various cache settings, timings etc.
> 
> Here all the results.
> 
> If I have CPU at 5.0 GHz and lower cache from 47 to 45, I can run 4200 Mhz on RAM at 17-17-17-38 2T with a low tRFC of 345 stress-tested stable.
> 
> If I have the cache at 47 I can only run 4133 MHz at 17-17-17-38 2T with a tRFC of 374 for the same CPU voltage.
> 
> If I raise the CPU voltage by .040 I can run the tRFC at 339, not worth it.
> 
> 4200 Mhz at those timings with the cache at 45 does better in read, write and copy in AIDA64 cache and memory test than the 4133 MHz at a 47 cache.
> 
> Lastly, I put the RAM voltage at 1.46v for those timings. I set the DRAM Termination voltage at Auto which is .600v. If I set it to .730v or half of the RAM voltage as some have suggested, it fails the stress test.
> 
> In my BIOS screenshots, I included I disabled the drives not connected and the Serial port disabled as it's good practice to disable anything in the BIOS you're not actually using.
> 
> *And IMPORTANT NOTE! If you're going to stress test with LinX 0.9.5 have the power limits set as 200 or lower in the BIOS or an AVX Offset of 5 or higher you're going to have temps way too high and freeze up your PC as someone did using my settings WITHOUT setting the power limits.
> 
> You can test your temps by having HWInfo open, start LinX, wait the 15 seconds until it REALLY kicks in, see temps. I suggest if the hottest core is over 85C lower power limits or set a higher AVX Offset.*


I take back saying your DRAM Termination voltage shouldn't be set at half of your RAM voltage. 

With my DRAM Termination voltage on Normal, it sets it at half your RAM voltage, I'm stable at 4200MHz 17-17-17-38 2T 4x8GB. 

If I set it at Auto my Residuals are not all the same in LinX.


----------



## The_Fog_Man

philhalo66 said:


> hold the phone, does that mean someone got Windows 7 working with Z390? i keep hearing about USB not working. id LOVE to get rid of windows 10 its buggy.


Some chinese team made driver for usb for win7 on z390 


Spoiler


----------



## Haudi

KedarWolf said:


> How do you manually tune the RTL's and IOL's on a Master, Xtreme?
> 
> No IOL Offset in BIOS like Asus has and if I manually set them in the BIOS Timing Configurator says they are much higher and not at what I set.


Same question here...
someone an idea?


----------



## shocker94

Haudi said:


> Same question here...
> 
> someone an idea?


They are on the timing page in the bios, but, if you change it, doesn't do anything.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Alunais

Has anyone installed that motherboard inside Define R6 pc case? I bought that case and using it with default fan setup. These are 3-pin fans, and are connected to the case fan hub, and the fan hub is connected to SYS_FAN1 on the motherboard. In BIOS I set SYS_FAN1 to be controlled by voltage (was Auto), yet the fans are still spinning at 100% even when there is no need for them. Have I missed something? The hub is also connected to SATA power cable, so I can unplug it from SYS_FAN1 and the fans will run at something like 20% but that's not the point, because there are times I need them to run at 100%. My previous Define R4 had nice switch in the fron panel but R6 don't have it.


----------



## CaptnJones

Create a custom fan curve


----------



## Alunais

I tried to change fan curve via windows software (SIV) but it doesn't seem to affect that fans. Only CPU fan can be controlled, I still cannot do anything to case fans.


----------



## Driller au

Alunais said:


> Has anyone installed that motherboard inside Define R6 pc case? I bought that case and using it with default fan setup. These are 3-pin fans, and are connected to the case fan hub, and the fan hub is connected to SYS_FAN1 on the motherboard. In BIOS I set SYS_FAN1 to be controlled by voltage (was Auto), yet the fans are still spinning at 100% even when there is no need for them. Have I missed something? The hub is also connected to SATA power cable, so I can unplug it from SYS_FAN1 and the fans will run at something like 20% but that's not the point, because there are times I need them to run at 100%. My previous Define R4 had nice switch in the fron panel but R6 don't have it.


Try changing it to manual control and cpu temp


----------



## KedarWolf

Alunais said:


> I tried to change fan curve via windows software (SIV) but it doesn't seem to affect that fans. Only CPU fan can be controlled, I still cannot do anything to case fans.


In the BIOS put your fan curves on Manual, then adjust them.


----------



## Alunais

Same effect, oh well, guess I have to invest in 3 PWM fans then.


----------



## ntuason

Does anyone know what setting correlates to 'Package/Ring Power Limit Exceeded' in bios? I keep triggering it in Windows and automatically limits my 5GHz OC to 4.9GHz when under heavy load like benchmarking, everything else it will stay at 5GHz.

Thanks


----------



## Cuthalu

Aorus Pro is one scary motherboard. Under completely normal routine system restart it decided to do a failed restart for unknown reason and to top that off it switched to the backup bios. Good times. Clearing cmos made it to boot with main bios once again, and it even remembered previously saved profile. Is there easier way to switch between the bioses than clearing cmos?

As a side bonus this couldn't get 4*8GB 3200C15 b-dies to work with xmp auto settings, but manual voltages seemed to do the trick.


----------



## Driller au

ntuason said:


> Does anyone know what setting correlates to 'Package/Ring Power Limit Exceeded' in bios? I keep triggering it in Windows and automatically limits my 5GHz OC to 4.9GHz when under heavy load like benchmarking, everything else it will stay at 5GHz.
> 
> Thanks


 Isn't that the power limits on the advanced frequency tab in bios


----------



## Sheyster

The_Fog_Man said:


> Some chinese team made driver for usb for win7 on z390


Installing an uncertified *driver* from "some Chinese team" on Win7 sounds like a great idea to me, NOT...


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> Installing an uncertified *driver* from "some Chinese team" on Win7 sounds like a great idea to me, NOT...


You can always upload the driver files to virustotal.com, then you'll know if they're safe.


----------



## Sheyster

Cuthalu said:


> Aorus Pro is one scary motherboard. Under completely normal routine system restart it decided to do a failed restart for unknown reason and to top that off it switched to the backup bios. Good times. Clearing cmos made it to boot with main bios once again, and it even remembered previously saved profile. Is there easier way to switch between the bioses than clearing cmos?
> 
> As a side bonus this couldn't get 4*8GB 3200C15 b-dies to work with xmp auto settings, but manual voltages seemed to do the trick.


On the Pro board there is no easy way to switch BIOS without cutting power to the board. The Pro board in particular is a little sketchy with memory support (as are the other models to a certain degree). I almost got rid of mine at one point, but I got a different memory kit (4 sticks now) and got it dialed in to my liking. My previous board was an ASRock and I regret not rolling with a Z390 Taichi. My next board will not be a Gigabyte board.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> On the Pro board there is no easy way to switch BIOS without cutting power to the board. The Pro board in particular is a little sketchy with memory support (as are the other models to a certain degree). I almost got rid of mine at one point, but I got a different memory kit (4 sticks now) and got it dialed in to my liking. My previous board was an ASRock and I regret not rolling with a Z390 Taichi. My next board will not be a Gigabyte board.


Next-gen CPU I'll probably go back to Asus, they learned from their dodgy Z390 VRM setups and their Rysen 3000 series have the best quality boards and VRM setups in the business. :h34r-smi

They'll probably do the same with new generations of CPUs like Comet Lake. 

https://wccftech.com/asus-msi-gigabyte-x570-motherboard-wars/


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> You can always upload the driver files to virustotal.com, then you'll know if they're safe.


You really have no idea how sophisticated hackers are now do you?  It means nothing if they pass 50+ virus checks. Just don't download and use uncertified drivers, especially from China and Russia.


----------



## AndrejB

Found that lowering VCCSA and VCCIO gave LinX equal residuals on cold boot.


On Intel's specified 1.05 and 0.95 got a freeze, but only the second time, first run passed (on cold boot).
On 1.1 and 1.0 passed both times.


Let me know if the below looks ok, if anyone has time (the +12v seems high, maybe)?

Oh and if anyone has suggestions on ram oc, please share. Should I even bother, for gaming?
I tried 3733 @ 1.4v 18-18-18-38 (subs auto), passed hci (100%) but failed linx (1.25/1.23 vccsa/vccio)


----------



## philhalo66

Sheyster said:


> You really have no idea how sophisticated hackers are now do you?  It means nothing if they pass 50+ virus checks. Just don't download and use uncertified drivers, especially from China and Russia.


my thoughts exactly, plus hes charging money, sounds like a hackers wet dream to me, stolen credit card plus access to someones computer. ill stick to windows 8.1 till a proper driver is made.


----------



## The_Fog_Man

They just ask 3 dollars for support them by paypal..... not credit card. but yeah no one can be sure at 100% if this can be a virus or not, but when they offer me to use win7 on z390 i really dont care about it.
Win 10 is a garbage os spyware **** and only slow down all your pc and is impossible to enjoy in gaming. win 8 is just a failure beta testing OS but much better that win10. Win 7 still remain best OS after many years best performance best latency.


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> Found that lowering VCCSA and VCCIO gave LinX equal residuals on cold boot.
> 
> 
> On Intel's specified 1.05 and 0.95 got a freeze, but only the second time, first run passed (on cold boot).
> On 1.1 and 1.0 passed both times.
> 
> 
> Let me know if the below looks ok, if anyone has time (the +12v seems high, maybe)?
> 
> Oh and if anyone has suggestions on ram oc, please share. Should I even bother, for gaming?
> I tried 3733 @ 1.4v 18-18-18-38 (subs auto), passed hci (100%) but failed linx (1.25/1.23 vccsa/vccio)


Switch "memory boot mode" to "disable fast boot" and retry.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

AndrejB said:


> Found that lowering VCCSA and VCCIO gave LinX equal residuals on cold boot.
> 
> 
> On Intel's specified 1.05 and 0.95 got a freeze, but only the second time, first run passed (on cold boot).
> On 1.1 and 1.0 passed both times.
> 
> 
> Let me know if the below looks ok, if anyone has time (the +12v seems high, maybe)?
> 
> Oh, and if anyone has suggestions on ram oc, please share. Should I even bother, for gaming?
> I tried 3733 @ 1.4v 18-18-18-38 (subs auto), passed hci (100%) but failed linx (1.25/1.23 vccsa/vccio)


You GFlops seem low, but I never clicked on your pictures to see them. BTW, you can use this website, convert your BIOS screenshots to .jpg, then they'll preview right and we can see them, choose 100% when you convert them. https://bulkresizephotos.com/en

This is my LinX run.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is the Latest ME firmware for Z390 boards. It has stability and often security fixes.

Unzip the file, open Admin command prompt in the unzipped folder, run:



Code:


FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Base.bin


----------



## AndrejB

KedarWolf said:


> You GFlops seem low, but I never clicked on your pictures to see them. BTW, you can use this website, convert your BIOS screenshots to .jpg, then they'll preview right and we can see them, choose 100% when you convert them. https://bulkresizephotos.com/en
> 
> This is my LinX run.



Thanks, converted.


Yea the GFLOPs are lower as I'm running 47/43 and 3200 cl14


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Here is the Latest ME firmware for Z390 boards. It has stability and often security fixes.
> 
> Unzip the file, open Admin command prompt in the unzipped folder, run:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Base.bin


Where is it?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Where is it?


Forgot the .zip file, added now.


----------



## KedarWolf

I applied Conductonaut liquid metal thermal paste and I'm wth haven't I done it a long time ago. :h34r-smi

My highest core temp while running Prime95 1344 FFTs is 10C less then my Mastergel Maker Nano was. :drum:


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Here is the Latest ME firmware for Z390 boards. It has stability and often security fixes.
> 
> Unzip the file, open Admin command prompt in the unzipped folder, run:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Base.bin


Thanks Kedarwolf


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Alemancio

@KedarWolf

If you were to buy another Ram set (4x8gb) for the Aorus Master, which kit would you buy now?

Would it be this one?

Thanks!


----------



## robertr1

What's the risk level of using conductonaut on top of the IHS? 

Spread it out event on the IHS and don't let the cooler squeeze it out the sides?


----------



## The_Fog_Man

robertr1 said:


> What's the risk level of using conductonaut on top of the IHS?
> 
> Spread it out event on the IHS and don't let the cooler squeeze it out the sides?


Metal liquid is corrosive for copper and aluminum only nickel dont get corroded.


----------



## Wirerat

The_Fog_Man said:


> robertr1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's the risk level of using conductonaut on top of the IHS?
> 
> Spread it out event on the IHS and don't let the cooler squeeze it out the sides?
> 
> 
> 
> Metal liquid is corrosive for copper and aluminum only nickel dont get corroded.
Click to expand...

 Its very bad for aluminum. Copper just needs a lapping and re application after a few weeks. 

I have used lm on raw copper before. It was the underside of a custom copper rockit cool ihs. It simply absorbed some of the lm and created a very thin build up. It required lapping smooth again. 

After this process took place it left a silver stained area on the ihs. This area no longer had any reaction with the lm. I checked on the area periodically. 

I would not recommend using lm between the cooler and cpu for other reasons though. Its all the extra risk of a conductive paste for whats essentially less than 2c better than kryonaught.


----------



## Falkentyne

robertr1 said:


> What's the risk level of using conductonaut on top of the IHS?
> 
> Spread it out event on the IHS and don't let the cooler squeeze it out the sides?


You do NOT want the cooler 'squeezing' out conductonaut. If you applied that much so that happens, you're going to destroy the socket. You want to apply a very thin layer (even thinner than normal thermal paste) and then an equal layer on the heatsink (this is for proper adhesion and helps get lowest temps, as LM tends to stick to itself). You should also protect the socket and motherboard by doing extra work and applying either kneaded eraser around the edges of the socket and IHS gap area so a barrier is made, or apply super 33+ tape to cover up that gap, by attaching intersecting strips to the top of the retention bracket. This will catch any spare LM and protect the socket nicely. You can go even further (only with the tape method--not necessary with kneaded eraser) by cutting out a polyurethane 15-20 ppi foam dam (air conditioner filter foam works great here--make sure the foam is very compressible!), which creates an extra barrier and helps reduce oxidation by blocking out air. That's what I use myself.

Just don't try LM without any protection (its fine under a delid on the die of course).


----------



## KedarWolf

Alemancio said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> If you were to buy another Ram set (4x8gb) for the Aorus Master, which kit would you buy now?
> 
> Would it be this one?
> 
> Thanks!


Yes, that's the best 4x8GB kit you can buy right now, maybe other than the Royals.

I have the all-black version though.

http://www.gskill.com/product/165/1...-ZDDR4-3600MHz-CL16-16-16-36-1.35V32GB-(4x8GB)

Edit: If money isn't an issue get these, they are higher binned.

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232828


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> You do NOT want the cooler 'squeezing' out conductonaut. If you applied that much so that happens, you're going to destroy the socket. You want to apply a very thin layer (even thinner than normal thermal paste) and then an equal layer on the heatsink (this is for proper adhesion and helps get lowest temps, as LM tends to stick to itself). You should also protect the socket and motherboard by doing extra work and applying either kneaded eraser around the edges of the socket and IHS gap area so a barrier is made, or apply super 33+ tape to cover up that gap, by attaching intersecting strips to the top of the retention bracket. This will catch any spare LM and protect the socket nicely. You can go even further (only with the tape method--not necessary with kneaded eraser) by cutting out a polyurethane 15-20 ppi foam dam (air conditioner filter foam works great here--make sure the foam is very compressible!), which creates an extra barrier and helps reduce oxidation by blocking out air. That's what I use myself.
> 
> Just don't try LM without any protection (its fine under a delid on the die of course).


It helps my motherboard sits horizontally in my case, not vertically. Less chance of the LM to get into the socket.


----------



## KedarWolf

F10 BIOS for the Aorus Pro Wifi, F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master, F7 BIOS for the XTreme.

*Updated GOP firmware.*

Updated Microcodes and RST firmware.

Microcodes:

906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin

*EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001*

EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

For Aorus Wifi Pro

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F10 /x

For Master

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.10b /x

For XTreme

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F7 /x


----------



## robertr1

@KedarWolf How are these bios modified vs what's available on site? I've been on Pro Wifi F9 since it same out and pretty stable. Just wondering what's different between yours and official?

Also thanks on the LM advice. I'll stick to Kryo for now when I get the AIO. Currently ran out of Aeronaut which I bought my mistake but it's fine.


----------



## KedarWolf

robertr1 said:


> @KedarWolf How are these bios modified vs what's available on site? I've been on Pro Wifi F9 since it same out and pretty stable. Just wondering what's different between yours and official?
> 
> Also thanks on the LM advice. I'll stick to Kryo for now when I get the AIO. Currently ran out of Aeronaut which I bought my mistake but it's fine.


All these microcodes and firmwares are newer versions than stock BIOS.

Updated GOP firmware.

Updated Microcodes and RST firmware.

Microcodes:

906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001

EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm very happy with this, since going liquid metal, my highest core temp is 83C while LinX is running, with 240 power limits in the BIOS.

The best result over 500 GFLOPS.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Master f10b mod with the latest EfiRaid 17.5.4.4296

https://mega.nz/#!FyQh3CqS!QZ2MCpNDLC65zAeLBmSiuswAavKUu7I9h-n7BIH-Ab4


906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001

OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14


----------



## KedarWolf

vmanuelgm said:


> Master f10b mod with the latest EfiRaid 17.5.4.4296
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!FyQh3CqS!QZ2MCpNDLC65zAeLBmSiuswAavKUu7I9h-n7BIH-Ab4
> 
> 
> 906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin
> 906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
> 906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
> 906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin
> 
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001
> 
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
> 
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14


I never flash mismatching SATA and IRST firmware, I always wait until the matching versions are available.


----------



## vmanuelgm

KedarWolf said:


> I never flash mismatching SATA and IRST firmware, I always wait until the matching versions are available.



No problems at all...


----------



## R3van

Why you`re not using latest f10c bios for the master?


----------



## vmanuelgm

R3van said:


> Why you`re not using latest f10c bios for the master?



Here it is, F10c mod:

https://mega.nz/#!p2xRXQTT!wbW8IRSYdg3BUCL-bjI3ufdGqOiFYSzA_2QhyKhJU5I


906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001

OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
EfiRaid 17.5.4.4296

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14


----------



## R3van

I do not use modded bios, was just curious why it wasn`t the most recent version


----------



## vmanuelgm

R3van said:


> I do not use modded bios, was just curious why it wasn`t the most recent version



I used f10b after seeing Kedar was using it, and since he is trying every bios in the Master, I supposed he was happier with F10b, that's it...

U can use mods without any problems, u only have to use efiflash under DOS instead of inbios flash.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> I'm very happy with this, since going liquid metal, my highest core temp is 83C while LinX is running, with 240 power limits in the BIOS.
> 
> The best result over 500 GFLOPS. /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif


What's your cooling? Did you remove the ihs solder? Great work getting those temps!!


----------



## shocker94

KedarWolf said:


> I'm very happy with this, since going liquid metal, my highest core temp is 83C while LinX is running, with 240 power limits in the BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> The best result over 500 GFLOPS.


Frequency and vcore?
My 9900k at 5ghz do 293GFLOPS.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Cuthalu

Life with Aorus Pro is one fascinating journey full of happy accidents when tuning ram.  

I have 4x4GB 3200C15 b-die with manual primary and secondary timings, volts 1.38, 1.21 io, 1.23 sa. Weird stuff keeps happening: 3500 MHz -> sometimes boot failures, sometimes boots. 3600 MHz -> no problems, instead of 3600 I'll give you 3700 MHz without asking and boot happily. 3700 MHz -> actually gives 3700 MHz. 3733 MHz -> gives 3733 MHz, still no problems with booting or stability. 3800 -> boot fail, probably not enough juice. At times I've gotten 2500 or 2700 MHz, though usually it defaults to 2133 if there's a boot failure.

What gives? Why does it constantly refuse to go 3600 MHz?

Settings in attachment result in 3700 MHz.


----------



## shocker94

Cuthalu said:


> Life with Aorus Pro is one fascinating journey full of happy accidents when tuning ram.
> 
> 
> 
> I have 4x4GB 3200C15 b-die with manual primary and secondary timings, volts 1.38, 1.21 io, 1.23 sa. Weird stuff keeps happening: 3500 MHz -> sometimes boot failures, sometimes boots. 3600 MHz -> no problems, instead of 3600 I'll give you 3700 MHz without asking and boot happily. 3700 MHz -> actually gives 3700 MHz. 3733 MHz -> gives 3733 MHz, still no problems with booting or stability. 3800 -> boot fail, probably not enough juice. At times I've gotten 2500 or 2700 MHz, though usually it defaults to 2133 if there's a boot failure.
> 
> 
> 
> What gives? Why does it constantly refuse to go 3600 MHz?
> 
> 
> 
> Settings in attachment result in 3700 MHz.


Set memory boot mode to disable fastboot

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

shocker94 said:


> Frequency and vcore?
> My 9900k at 5ghz do 293GFLOPS.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


Wow that's low. I get 415 gflops on 47/43 locked to 80c tjmax (so it throttles instantly to 4.3 ghz) and memory @ 3200 cl14.
When I tried 3733 cl18 memory, I got 440 gflops


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> Wow that's low. I get 415 gflops on 47/43 locked to 80c tjmax (so it throttles instantly to 4.3 ghz) and memory @ 3200 cl14.
> When I tried 3733 cl18 memory, I got 440 gflops


Probably, i have a low vcore under load(1.254v) and high cache(4.7). I'll try lowering cache first.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> I'm very happy with this, since going liquid metal, my highest core temp is 83C while LinX is running, with 240 power limits in the BIOS.
> 
> The best result over 500 GFLOPS.


Can't run this test.
At 5 ghz, Amps reaches 194 amps (!!) beyond Intel max spec, temps reach 102C and it fails on the first residual (VR VOUT 1.219v at full load, vcore=Auto, Loadline Calibration=Standard)
CPU Package Power reports 280 watts (VR reports 225 watts) if DC Loadline is set to 1.

Kedarwolf
What is your POWER POUT (*NOT CPU PACKAGE POWER*) and VR VOUT on this test?


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Can't run this test.
> 
> At 5 ghz, Amps reaches 194 amps (!!) beyond Intel max spec, temps reach 102C and it fails on the first residual (VR VOUT 1.219v at full load, vcore=Auto, Loadline Calibration=Standard)
> 
> CPU Package Power reports 280 watts (VR reports 225 watts) if DC Loadline is set to 1.


Are you sure? My 9900k reach 180w max, with 4095w powerlimit and a vrout of 1.254v.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Cuthalu

shocker94 said:


> Set memory boot mode to disable fastboot
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


It has no effect.


----------



## thuNDa

I just got four sticks of 3000MHz CL15 Micron E-Dies for my Aorus Elite.
Couldn't boot 4000 as of now, so i settled with 3900 @1.42V(no boot with 1.4V) - but not too shabby for the price of 16GB B-Dies


----------



## shocker94

Cuthalu said:


> It has no effect.


In my case, the ram stability, has increased a lot.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Scunner

Thanks for the bios @KedarWolf


----------



## robertr1

Cuthalu said:


> Life with Aorus Pro is one fascinating journey full of happy accidents when tuning ram.
> 
> I have 4x4GB 3200C15 b-die with manual primary and secondary timings, volts 1.38, 1.21 io, 1.23 sa. Weird stuff keeps happening: 3500 MHz -> sometimes boot failures, sometimes boots. 3600 MHz -> no problems, instead of 3600 I'll give you 3700 MHz without asking and boot happily. 3700 MHz -> actually gives 3700 MHz. 3733 MHz -> gives 3733 MHz, still no problems with booting or stability. 3800 -> boot fail, probably not enough juice. At times I've gotten 2500 or 2700 MHz, though usually it defaults to 2133 if there's a boot failure.
> 
> What gives? Why does it constantly refuse to go 3600 MHz?
> 
> Settings in attachment result in 3700 MHz.


It took me a while but I finally got my kit at CL15 1T 3600mhz on the pro wifi. This board is a pain in the ass. 

A few things I learned. 
- Set all your timings manually; primary, secondary and tertiary in that order. Even if auto defaults to the right timings, still manually put them in where you can
- leave command rate at 2. This is the last thing you should change

mem related voltage will trigger a re-learn which can throw off timings as you're getting so set some relaxed volts set manually and then work on timings.


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> It took me a while but I finally got my kit at CL15 1T 3600mhz on the pro wifi. This board is a pain in the ass.
> 
> A few things I learned.
> - Set all your timings manually; primary, secondary and tertiary in that order. Even if auto defaults to the right timings, still manually put them in where you can
> - leave command rate at 2. This is the last thing you should change
> 
> mem related voltage will trigger a re-learn which can throw off timings as you're getting so set some relaxed volts set manually and then work on timings.


Indeed, the Pro board is a pain with memory support as stated. Mine is tuned now at 3600/CL15 as well. I don't have ALL the timings set manually but many of them are. I decided not to push 1T at 3600/CL15 since it would have virtually no impact with games. It does boot with 1T CR though.


----------



## brzozux

Guys,


I bought kit of F4-3000C14D-64GTZDC (2x32) but I can't make it work on my z390 aorus master. Is there any way to make them run on this mobo? Changelog of the F8 BIOS says that 32GB UDIMM are supported. I tried all of the Bioses from F8 to F10b but nothig helped. Any help will be appreciated.


Cheers!


----------



## shocker94

brzozux said:


> Guys,
> 
> 
> I bought kit of F4-3000C14D-64GTZDC (2x32) but I can't make it work on my z390 aorus master. Is there any way to make them run on this mobo? Changelog of the F8 BIOS says that 32GB UDIMM are supported. I tried all of the Bioses from F8 to F10b but nothig helped. Any help will be appreciated.
> 
> 
> Cheers!


Are you using A2 and B2 slots?

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## ali_ca

Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO WiFi (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2)
CPU: Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz TurboIntel Core i9-9900K
RAM: G.SKILL 32GB (2 x 16GB) Ripjaws V Series DDR4 PC4-25600 3200MHz
GPU: MSI Gaming GeForce RTX 2080 8GB GDRR6
HD: Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB SSD
PSU: Corsair HXi Series Hx1000i 1000 W
Cooler: Noctua NH-D15

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue: The computer posts and boots up perfectly fine. Did a fresh Windows install, after starting up Windows 10, within 1 minute, the screen flickers/flashes white, and that's where the computer basically goes to crap.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Windows 10 64 bit install goes smoothly and quickly, and windows seems to work ok during the first time after booting for a while.

- Ran memory test, ram seems good. The computer isn't overheating at all, temps are very good. Everything is stock, have not overclocked anything.

- After fresh windows install, I start windows update and start installing drivers, and usually the issue starts few minutes. Once the computer has frozen/crashed for the first time, it gets worst. Meaning you can restart it, it will freeze up again within 1 minute.

- I have removed the GPU, and did a fresh windows install without any nVidia drivers, and went with onboard. Same issue, the computer crashes.

- I have tried swapping and using single ram, same issue.

- I have the latest bios, F10 from the Gigabyte's website. Motherboard/PSU everything is wired and connected properly.



I am going to try using a SATA hard drive next, and try a different hard drive next. Could it be a bad motherboard? CPU? ram or maybe PSU? I still have time to return all the parts for full refund, please advice on what to try next.


----------



## DBaer

I am building my first new totally rig in six years (I did update it a few times however)
I decided to go with AMD for the first time and after reading loads of reviews Etc I have bought a 3900X and an Aorus Master WiFi Mobo.
For memory I bought 32 Gb (4X4 8 Gb) Dominator Platinum RGB 3200. I was told that even though the Aorus Motherboard is dual channel, using 4 X 8 memory would be fine. I have not started the build as yet as I am waiting for a new case but I am now reading that I should stick with no more than 2 Ram sticks if using a board that is dual rather than quad channel.


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> Are you sure? My 9900k reach 180w max, with 4095w powerlimit and a vrout of 1.254v.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


What are you measuring the power usage from? 180W is impossible.

CPU Package Power is inaccurate, because it is VID * Amps.
VID is influenced by default VID + DC Loadline droop.

You need to use "Power (POUT)" in the same location as VR VOUT.
I'm guessing that's going to be about 235W.


----------



## Deathtech00

*Wrong Thread*



DBaer said:


> I am building my first new totally rig in six years (I did update it a few times however)
> I decided to go with AMD for the first time and after reading loads of reviews Etc I have bought a 3900X and an Aorus Master WiFi Mobo.
> For memory I bought 32 Gb (4X4 8 Gb) Dominator Platinum RGB 3200. I was told that even though the Aorus Motherboard is dual channel, using 4 X 8 memory would be fine. I have not started the build as yet as I am waiting for a new case but I am now reading that I should stick with no more than 2 Ram sticks if using a board that is dual rather than quad channel.



This is for the Intel Z390 Aorus master forum, I think you need the AMD X570 Aorus Master forum.


----------



## Deathtech00

@KedarWolf - A few posts back you were helping someone with memory issues, and you posted screenshots of your Bios settings. I am curious, are these your daily driver settings? I won't be able to test them until I get back home in a week, but you and @Falkentyne have a plethora of info that might make a great "guide" or at the least point some in the right direction for overclocking this board properly. If it is OK with you, I was considering making an *updated* Z390 / 9900K guide, as much has changed since release. A lot of what I find (most) doesn't have adaptive voltage settings / or instructions and I know that, at least for me, that is what I wanted over a straight voltage style OC. Especially with some of the nuance of this board, like the weird bug that forces you to save options twice in order for them to function, etc.


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> What are you measuring the power usage from? 180W is impossible.
> 
> 
> 
> CPU Package Power is inaccurate, because it is VID * Amps.
> 
> VID is influenced by default VID + DC Loadline droop.
> 
> 
> 
> You need to use "Power (POUT)" in the same location as VR VOUT.
> 
> I'm guessing that's going to be about 235W.





Spoiler















Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


Your system is throttling somewhere. There is NO way in hell you would only be drawing 140 amps of current. That Kedarwolf (35000 size) test should be pulling well over 180 amps (over 210 Power POUT).


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Your system is throttling somewhere. There is NO way in hell you would only be drawing 140 amps of current. That Kedarwolf (35000 size) test should be pulling well over 180 amps (over 210 Power POUT).


This will explain the reason why i have a low score. 293 GFLOPS.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

shocker94 said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your system is throttling somewhere. There is NO way in hell you would only be drawing 140 amps of current. That Kedarwolf (35000 size) test should be pulling well over 180 amps (over 210 Power POUT).
> 
> 
> 
> This will explain the reason why i have a low score. 293 GFLOPS.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Or you have ht disabled


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> Or you have ht disabled


HT is enabled.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

shocker94 said:


> HT is enabled.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk



You got some serious throttling somewhere or something else is wrong (maybe memory).



This is on tjmax of 80c on a 360 aio (26c ambient), even when it was hotter and it would throttle to 4.2 ghz I never saw less than 415 gflops


----------



## Sevens

ali_ca said:


> - After fresh windows install, I start windows update and start installing drivers, and usually the issue starts few minutes. Once the computer has frozen/crashed for the first time, it gets worst. Meaning you can restart it, it will freeze up again within 1 minute.


Hello,
If you have overclocked your uncore to something like x47, that could be the problem.
You could also check what it says on your Windows Event Log.
Are you using adaptive voltage ?
Edit: my bad i didn't see when you said everything is at stock, sorry.
I wanted to answer because i get the same thing when my uncore is at 47 until i up the vcore.

What are you using to test ram stability and how long ?
Do you have Muli-Core Enhancement enabled ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Padinn said:


> What's your cooling? Did you remove the ihs solder? Great work getting those temps!!


Conductonaut liquid metal thermal paste not delidded yet, have the delidding kit, solder remover, just lacking the motivation to tear apart my PC, install the direct die frame and rebuild my PC with new watercooling gear etc. 

One 360 RAD on CPU with EK Velocity full nickel block.


5 GHZ CPU, 4.6 GHZ cache, 4133 MHz memory, power limits at 240 in the BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Can't run this test.
> At 5 ghz, Amps reaches 194 amps (!!) beyond Intel max spec, temps reach 102C and it fails on the first residual (VR VOUT 1.219v at full load, vcore=Auto, Loadline Calibration=Standard)
> CPU Package Power reports 280 watts (VR reports 225 watts) if DC Loadline is set to 1.
> 
> Kedarwolf
> What is your POWER POUT (*NOT CPU PACKAGE POWER*) and VR VOUT on this test?


You need to set your power limits in BIOS at 200 or lower, run LinX, check temps with HWInfo, adjust accordingly.

Edit: With power limits at 240 in BIOS. VRVOUT is lower because of power limiting.

Second edit: With liquid metal cooling.


----------



## brzozux

shocker94 said:


> Are you using A2 and B2 slots?
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk



Thanks for the input. Sure, I tried all of the combinations but nothing worked.


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> You got some serious throttling somewhere or something else is wrong (maybe memory).
> 
> 
> 
> This is on tjmax of 80c on a 360 aio (26c ambient), even when it was hotter and it would throttle to 4.2 ghz I never saw less than 415 gflops


With 4090 powerlimit is the same. Maximum temp is 75 degree. I don't know where is the problem. Tj max 90 degree. Ram are ok After 2000% coverage of hci memtest.
Up: i raised the vcore, but nothing has changed. In gaming i don't have fps problem or stuttering. I'm not sure my cpu have a problem.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## thuNDa

Has anyone successfully tweaked the memory RTL and IO-L on an Aorus Z390?
I have XMP disabled but still it doesn't apply the changes i make in this section.


----------



## shocker94

thuNDa said:


> Has anyone successfully tweaked the memory RTL and IO-L on an Aorus Z390?
> 
> I have XMP disabled but still it doesn't apply the changes i make in this section.


Same here.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## AndrejB

shocker94 said:


> With 4090 powerlimit is the same. Maximum temp is 75 degree. I don't know where is the problem. Tj max 90 degree. Ram are ok After 2000% coverage of hci memtest.
> Up: i raised the vcore, but nothing has changed. In gaming i don't have fps problem or stuttering. I'm not sure my cpu have a problem.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


It's maybe something in your os. I would reset to optimized and enable xmp, also set tjmax to 80-85 and see then.


----------



## shocker94

AndrejB said:


> It's maybe something in your os. I would reset to optimized and enable xmp, also set tjmax to 80-85 and see then.


My cinebech r20 score is normal. The issue is Linx. Probably something related to ram? But aida64 benchmark result are fine.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

If you're having trouble getting your RAM stable, DON'T keep DRAM Termination on Auto.

Auto for me gives me .720v in HWInfo and I get LinX unstable residuals.

If I manually set it at .600v which is the default setting, my residuals are perfect.


----------



## shocker94

KedarWolf said:


> If you're having trouble getting your RAM stable, DON'T keep DRAM Termination on Auto.
> 
> 
> 
> Auto for me gives me .720v in HWInfo and I get LinX unstable residuals.
> 
> 
> 
> If I manually set it at .600v which is the default setting, my residuals are perfect.


Ram are stable after 2000% coverage of hci memtest. But, i will try to change DRAM termination to 0.6v, now is 0.750v.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Alunais

Long story short:

Bought new Gigabyte Z390 Pro Wifi, Noctua NH-D15S, i9 9900K. In BIOS everything set to AUTO, launched prime95's torture test, the temps on all core went up to 100'C (212'F) after couple of minutes. I found out that BIOS settings are too aggressive on AUTO so I switched LLC from Auto to Normal, and it helped a lot, same prime95 test and temps 65'C (149'F) max. Then decided to switch to Gigabyte Z390 Master because of annoying coil whine, on the new motherboard the coil whine was even worse, but that's different story, what concern me the most is that same Auto settings (except for LLC to Normal) like on previous motherboard gives me temp up to 100'C. Can anyone tell what is going on ? It's same cooler, nearly same BIOS, just more expensive mobo and that temps are out of handle. I'm using Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, I think I applied it properly.


----------



## buellersdayoff

Alunais said:


> Same effect, oh well, guess I have to invest in 3 PWM fans then.


If your fan hub is 4pin to motherboard set it to pwm, even if the fans connected are 3pin voltage controlled. I have a phanteks hub that works this way no problem albeit limited range


----------



## Alunais

buellersdayoff said:


> If your fan hub is 4pin to motherboard set it to pwm, even if the fans connected are 3pin voltage controlled. I have a phanteks hub that works this way no problem albeit limited range


Yup, that fixed this problem, now I have new one  Which is described in my previous post. 

ps. I dealt with coil whine by disabling C-states in BIOS, dirty method but work.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## rdr09

reachthesky said:


> Weeeeeeeee This memory kit/motherboard are silly. Finally booted 4400mhz by putting all voltage on auto. It would not boot when I set the dram voltage but when I leave it on auto, it boots into windows showing only 1.38vdimm lol. Weird behavior but i guess i'll take it. auto timings ended up being 19-20-20-42. I manually set the IO/SA after training the first time. Looks like 4dimms @4400mhz is a bit hungry on the voltage, 1.32IO/1.35SA. Do i bother trying to tune this for daily use? Currently using cl16 4000, What would be ideal CL for 4400 so that i'm equally as fast or faster than my 4000 settings?



If you do tune it, save a profile in BIOS first. Run Aida64 Memory Latency test, so you'd know where your ram stands. I'd guess that has a latency lower than 30 ns.


----------



## shocker94

I'have compared Linx score, with a friend using an ASROCK TAICHI. Same result, low LINX score of 315GFLOPS and 180w max POUT. I don't know where the problem could be. I've tried everything. But nothing worked. Seems like my CPU is locked inside.[emoji848]

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

Alunais said:


> Long story short:
> 
> Bought new Gigabyte Z390 Pro Wifi, Noctua NH-D15S, i9 9900K. In BIOS everything set to AUTO, launched prime95's torture test, the temps on all core went up to 100'C (212'F) after couple of minutes. I found out that BIOS settings are too aggressive on AUTO so I switched LLC from Auto to Normal, and it helped a lot, same prime95 test and temps 65'C (149'F) max. Then decided to switch to Gigabyte Z390 Master because of annoying coil whine, on the new motherboard the coil whine was even worse, but that's different story, what concern me the most is that same Auto settings (except for LLC to Normal) like on previous motherboard gives me temp up to 100'C. Can anyone tell what is going on ? It's same cooler, nearly same BIOS, just more expensive mobo and that temps are out of handle. I'm using Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, I think I applied it properly.


This means absolutely nothing.
You should have posted the full HWinfo64 sensor window, paying very close attention to CPU speed, VR VOUT (true cpu voltage), Current IOUT (Amps), Power Pout (cpu power draw from the VRM) and VID (base VID is very important on auto voltages). Posted from both boards while at load. And of course the prime95 version and test options (everyone should be using 29.8 build 6 now, not old obsolete versions like 26.6 or 28.4).

Your Pro Wifi board was probably throttling you hard. No one scores 65C max on prime95 unless they are direct die cooled, and definitely not with small FFT AVX (or FMA3).


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> This means absolutely nothing.
> 
> You should have posted the full HWinfo64 sensor window, paying very close attention to CPU speed, VR VOUT (true voltage), Current IOUT (Amps), Power Pout (cpu power draw from the VRM) and VID (base VID is very important on auto voltages). And of course the prime95 version and test options (everyone should be using 29.8 build 6 now, not old obsolete versions like 26.6 or 28.4).
> 
> 
> 
> Your Pro Wifi board was probably throttling you hard. No one scores 65C max on prime95 unless they are direct die cooled, and definitely not with small FFT AVX (or FMA3).


Mine do 55 degree on smalftt 29.4. But i have a custom loop with 2x360mm radiators. I think there's some problem with AVX on my 9900k, at this point.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Sheyster

Alunais said:


> Long story short:
> I'm using Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, I think I applied it properly.


In addition to what Falk mentioned, HOW did you actually apply it?

You're telling us your story, but you're not providing the needed detail for us to help you.


----------



## Alunais

Falkentyne said:


> This means absolutely nothing.
> You should have posted the full HWinfo64 sensor window, paying very close attention to CPU speed, VR VOUT (true cpu voltage), Current IOUT (Amps), Power Pout (cpu power draw from the VRM) and VID (base VID is very important on auto voltages). Posted from both boards while at load. And of course the prime95 version and test options (everyone should be using 29.8 build 6 now, not old obsolete versions like 26.6 or 28.4).
> 
> Your Pro Wifi board was probably throttling you hard. No one scores 65C max on prime95 unless they are direct die cooled, and definitely not with small FFT AVX (or FMA3).


I'm unbale to test it on Pro Wifi because I returned it over to the seller. Too bad I didn't screenshot the results back then but it didn't feel like a throttling to me. 

So here are results from the torture test Smallest FFTs on 16 cores, using latest prime95 29.8 build 6, I stopped it after around 2mins because of temps.



Any suggestions what can I set in BIOS to prevent this? When I checked out typical temperatures for Noctua D15s + i9900k under load (without OC) should be around 66'C, unless someone was lying there.

Full specs of my rig is: i9 9900k, 32GB (4x8) HyperX DDR4 3200, Seasonic Focus Plus 850W 80+Gold, 970 Evo Plus 1TB M2, MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X, Fractal Design Define R6.


----------



## Falkentyne

Alunais said:


> I'm unbale to test it on Pro Wifi because I returned it over to the seller. Too bad I didn't screenshot the results back then but it didn't feel like a throttling to me.
> 
> So here are results from the torture test Smallest FFTs on 16 cores, using latest prime95 29.8 build 6, I stopped it after around 2mins because of temps.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any suggestions what can I set in BIOS to prevent this? When I checked out typical temperatures for Noctua D15s + i9900k under load (without OC) should be around 66'C, unless someone was lying there.
> 
> Full specs of my rig is: i9 9900k, 32GB (4x8) HyperX DDR4 3200, Seasonic Focus Plus 850W 80+Gold, 970 Evo Plus 1TB M2, MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X, Fractal Design Define R6.


Thank you for your picture. This helps alot. But next time please post it as a full-size attachment directly here and for the love of God, don't post it as a spoiler in tiny size. It's almost too small to read. Or you can post it on IMGUR.com as a 'direct link' and link it here too.
Your Master is performing exactly as it should . Mine does the exact same thing (But lower temps than yours because I removed the solder). Anyway there is nothing wrong.
I do not know why your Pro ran much lower temps with LLC=Auto then ran the same as the Master with LLC=Normal, but obviously the "Auto" setting was triggering some sort of throttling somewhere or possibly was doing something with the AC loadlines. I really dont know. Again I can't help without Hwinfo screenshots from the Pro board. 

You can reduce your load voltage by lowering your AC Loadline value. Default (or rather, should I say, maximum for 8 core systems) is 160. You can try something between 80 to 100.
The CPU Internal AC/DC Loadlines are presets, going from 210, 160, 100 and 40 for the levels, and Auto setting whatever it wants to set (varies with the CPU speed but I saw 5 ghz setting 1.3 mOhms (130) and 4.7 ghz setting 1.0 mOhms (100). The VR Settings "AC Loadline" will override this setting.


----------



## shocker94

I think i found why i've low score on LINX. Probably, 16gb of ram, is not enough.

Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk

Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> I think i found why i've low score on LINX. Probably, 16gb of ram, is not enough.
> 
> Inviato dal mio Redmi Note 7 utilizzando Tapatalk
> 
> Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


Lower the sample size. 35000 is for 32 GB systems.


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Lower the sample size. 35000 is for 32 GB systems.


Residual are different.









Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## vmanuelgm

Gigabyte z390 Aorus Master F10c mod with the latest Microcodes C6:


https://mega.nz/#!87xghYCK!v0kcWuYRGpupMIytCQfdB8ukf7wRsV1t4-Un4YkrDFM


906EA C6
906EB C6
906EC C6
906ED C6

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001

OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
EfiRaid 17.5.4.4296

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14


----------



## KedarWolf

New microcodes just released, we'll have modded BIOS's when I get home from work.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> New microcodes just released, we'll have modded BIOS's when I get home from work.


Can you mod f10a with it (if possible?). I had some issue with f10c.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Can you mod f10a with it (if possible?). I had some issue with f10c.


F10b you mean? I don't have F10a.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Giga z390 Aorus Master F10a with Microcodes C6 and the very latest modules:

https://mega.nz/#!xmx0Da6T!N8ecw1mUdHqXCVwm4ky8fDqACefhu5yKgI2xreWM6SY



Giga z390 Aorus Master F10b with Microcodes C6 and the very latest modules:

https://mega.nz/#!xzgEHYpa!V8EPPSLcWljlTXu4QI-meXUoNDTg9W06y0K7ysxkRhA


----------



## KedarWolf

F10 BIOS for the Aorus Pro Wifi, F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master, F7 BIOS for the XTreme.

_I only update the below to firmwares that are matching. If one or the other is newer, I wait until matching versions on the new ones are released for compatibility reasons.

EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203_

*Updated Microcodes.

Microcodes:

906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000C6_2019-08-14_PRD_FB15B2A4.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000C6_2019-08-14_PRD_177C8996.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000C6_2019-08-14_PRD_7C30A4E1.bin
906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000C6_2019-08-14_PRD_C34D9A63.bin*

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001

EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

For Aorus Wifi Pro

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F10 /x

For Master

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.10b /x

For XTreme

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F7 /x


----------



## Smokediggity

@KedarWolf I think you forgot to attach the files to your post.


Also, do you know how difficult it is to merge the latest CSME into the bios image as opposed to flashing it separately?


----------



## KedarWolf

Smokediggity said:


> @KedarWolf I think you forgot to attach the files to your post.
> 
> 
> Also, do you know how difficult it is to merge the latest CSME into the bios image as opposed to flashing it separately?


It might be able to be done, check with Lost_N_BIOS on the WinRaid forums.

BTW, files added now.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> F10b you mean? I don't have F10a.


Here was a previously modded f10a with the previous "BE" microcode. You can just put the new microcode in it?
(edit) someone may have beat me to it above.


----------



## shocker94

I've tried to turn down the cpu to 4.9ghz, cache to 4.3 and ram to 3866. Residuals on linx, remain different. I think i'll delete linx

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## vmanuelgm

Falkentyne said:


> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> F10b you mean? I don't have F10a.
> 
> 
> 
> Here was a previously modded f10a with the previous "BE" microcode. You can just put the new microcode in it?
> (edit) someone may have beat me to it above.
Click to expand...


Hello someone, u got f10a in my previous post, updated with the latest microcodes c6 and all the newest gop, raid and lan modules. It has been hex tweaked to be flashed even without the x parameter of efiflash (in fact in my previous Gigabyte x299's I could use an original non modded efiflash without the x parameter).



Giga z390 Aorus Master F10a with Microcodes C6 and the very latest modules:

https://mega.nz/#!xmx0Da6T!N8ecw1mUdHqXCVwm4ky8fDqACefhu5yKgI2xreWM6SY

906EA C6
906EB C6
906EC C6
906ED C6

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - 9.0.2001

OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.5.3.4203
EfiRaid 17.5.4.4296

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14

Hex modded to allow easier flash via non modded efiflash



PS: my bios's are almost identical (I say almost since Kedar opted for putting the same raid and efi modules version, while I opted for the latest efi. I also checked Kedar didn't mod via hex to allow easier flashing) to kedar's ones, just in case someones think mine are worse... Funny mates!!!


----------



## shocker94

Linx residual are different even at stock stock. I think the mobo is broken.

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## KedarWolf

shocker94 said:


> Linx residual are different even at stock stock. I think the mobo is broken.
> 
> Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


Do you have anything running in the background? Like you can't have HWInfo open. Do CTRL ALT DEL. open Task Manager, disable everything in Start-up, reboot, try again.

Edit: I hit F7 in BIOS, loaded default, F10, saved settings and rebooted. My residuals, nothing running or open.


----------



## shocker94

KedarWolf said:


> Do you have anything running in the background? Like you can't have HWInfo open. Do CTRL ALT DEL. open Task Manager, disable everything in Start-up, reboot, try again.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: I hit F7 in BIOS, loaded default, F10, saved settings and rebooted. My residuals, nothing running or open.


Same different residual without program on background. There's a problem somewhere.

Up: turned off hwinfo64 and now rediduals are ok...
I turned up all programs, and now residual are different again, without hwinfo.

Nothing, no way to fix this residuals.

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## Falkentyne

shocker94 said:


> Same different residual without program on background. There's a problem somewhere.
> 
> Up: turned off hwinfo64 and now rediduals are ok...
> I turned up all programs, and now residual are different again, without hwinfo.
> 
> Nothing, no way to fix this residuals.
> 
> Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


Test your RAM. A CPU will not cause different residals without the program crashing. This points to a RAM problem (or IMC, I do not know).
Can you pass prime95 29.8 build 6 blend test (AVX disabled option)?


----------



## KedarWolf

New findings.

RAM voltage, VCCIO and SA are all heavily tied into base CPU voltage.

If I raise my CPU voltage by .010v I can run Ram voltage at 1.44v, VCCIO and SA at 1.21.

Edit: I'm LinX and GSAT stable at those lower voltages.

If I run the lower CPU voltage my SA needs 1.46, my VCCIO needs 1.45 and my RAM voltage needs 1.46v.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Test your RAM. A CPU will not cause different residals without the program crashing. This points to a RAM problem (or IMC, I do not know).
> Can you pass prime95 29.8 build 6 blend test (AVX disabled option)?


You can get different residuals in LinX and it'll finish saying no errors. But you really want all the residuals the same.


----------



## shocker94

Falkentyne said:


> Test your RAM. A CPU will not cause different residals without the program crashing. This points to a RAM problem (or IMC, I do not know).
> 
> Can you pass prime95 29.8 build 6 blend test (AVX disabled option)?


I can pass prime95 blend, smallftt and hci memtest 2000% coverage without errors. Even at stock ram settings, residuals are different.

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## KedarWolf

This is LinX and GSAT stable.


----------



## shocker94

KedarWolf said:


> This is LinX and GSAT stable.


No way to keep residual stable. Probably, the motherboard, don't like my HoF ram. This is the first and the last aorus motherboard for me.

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## KedarWolf

shocker94 said:


> No way to keep residual stable. Probably, the motherboard, don't like my HoF ram. This is the first and the last aorus motherboard for me.
> 
> Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


I know your PC is themed, but peeps pretty much should stick to G.Skilll RAM these days.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> You can get different residuals in LinX and it'll finish saying no errors. But you really want all the residuals the same.


Ok.
So um...I decided to do it at 4.9 ghz and Auto Vcore, Vcore Loadline calibration at Intel defaults for VRM Loadline (1.6 mOhms (Standard/Normal/Auto)), and AC Loadline at Intel Maximum (1.6 mOhms). DC Loadline also set to VRM loadline (1.6 mOhms).

It passed fine, but my CPU probably hates me for it. Probably degraded it a bit more. Look at those amps and temps. (not sure if the amps reading is 10 amps below real level or not; 195 amps should have a minimum VR VOUT of 1.208v (1520 mv - ( 195 * 1.6) = 1208mv), but you can look at the screenshot.

5 ghz just crashes LinX. Because "VR VOUT" won't go any higher on auto vcore, because VRM target voltage is limited by the 1.520v cap (AC Loadline influence from default VID). Only way to get a higher VR VOUT is to enable SVID Offset (AC Loadline will have to be reduced if that happens or 115C + 220 amps will happen) or enable DVID with a positive offset. But I'm limited by temps and max amps specification so there's no point.
What's the point of passing this test if nothing else (except small FFT FMA3 or AVX) crashes anyway? Do you guys really enjoy silly stress tests?

I dare any of you guys to try the same settings (Vcore Auto, AC Loadline 160, Power limits MAXED (no cutting corners this time), current limits maxed. If 4.9 ghz passes try 5 ghz.

4.7 ghz passes with Auto vcore, LLC=Standard, and AC Loadline at 105. I forgot the VR VOUT. Probably around 1.125v. (funny enough, AC Loadline = 100 passes ten tests, IF hwinfo isn't running. If it is it will randomly fail a residual).


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Ok.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> So um...I decided to do it at 4.9 ghz and Auto Vcore, Vcore Loadline calibration at Intel defaults for VRM Loadline (1.6 mOhms (Standard/Normal/Auto)), and AC Loadline at Intel Maximum (1.6 mOhms). DC Loadline also set to VRM loadline (1.6 mOhms).
> 
> It passed fine, but my CPU probably hates me for it. Probably degraded it a bit more. Look at those amps and temps. (not sure if the amps reading is 10 amps below real level or not; 195 amps should have a minimum VR VOUT of 1.208v (1520 mv - ( 195 * 1.6) = 1208mv), but you can look at the screenshot.
> 
> 5 ghz just crashes LinX. Because "VR VOUT" won't go any higher on auto vcore, because VRM target voltage is limited by the 1.520v cap (AC Loadline influence from default VID). Only way to get a higher VR VOUT is to enable SVID Offset (AC Loadline will have to be reduced if that happens or 115C + 220 amps will happen) or enable DVID with a positive offset. But I'm limited by temps and max amps specification so there's no point.
> What's the point of passing this test if nothing else (except small FFT FMA3 or AVX) crashes anyway? Do you guys really enjoy silly stress tests?
> 
> I dare any of you guys to try the same settings (Vcore Auto, AC Loadline 160, Power limits MAXED (no cutting corners this time), current limits maxed. If 4.9 ghz passes try 5 ghz.
> 
> 
> 4.7 ghz passes with Auto vcore, LLC=Standard, and AC Loadline at 105. I forgot the VR VOUT. Probably around 1.125v. (funny enough, AC Loadline = 100 passes ten tests, IF hwinfo isn't running. If it is it will randomly fail a residual).


Nope, no chance I'm doing crazy tests like this. :h34r-smi


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Nope, no chance I'm doing crazy tests like this. :h34r-smi


I guess my desktop is more interesting than the tests, then :h34r-smi


----------



## shocker94

Residual are different with a fresh install of windows. It's an hardware problem. Probably from my galax ram, because they aren't in QVL list.
I think i'll get an asrock taichi. The asrock have some galax ram in QVL.









Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## Padinn

What does this residual discussion mean performance wise? I'm not familiar with it.


----------



## Sevens

Hello,

Is there any way to unlock vrm frequency setting on the aorus pro by modding the bios ?


----------



## w3ggy

I have the following items:
1. PATRIOT Viper Steel PVS416G400C9K DDR4 with XMP profile 4000
2. GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI

Also, I have updated my BIOS to F10.
Problem:
I can't reach 4000 MHz memory frequency. With XMP profile it runs with 3600 frequency automatically. With manual settings, it freezes on the startup. The maximum frequency that I reached was 3866.
So, motherboard spec contains memory support until 4133.
How can I fix this? Or it is impossible with my memory?


----------



## Sheyster

Padinn said:


> What does this residual discussion mean performance wise? I'm not familiar with it.


Nothing performance-wise. Mismatched residuals in the test indicate stability issues. More info here:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/758434-linx-residual.html


----------



## Sheyster

w3ggy said:


> I have the following items:
> 1. PATRIOT Viper Steel PVS416G400C9K DDR4 with XMP profile 4000
> 2. GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI
> 
> Also, I have updated my BIOS to F10.
> Problem:
> I can't reach 4000 MHz memory frequency. With XMP profile it runs with 3600 frequency automatically. With manual settings, it freezes on the startup. The maximum frequency that I reached was 3866.
> So, motherboard spec contains memory support until 4133.
> How can I fix this? Or it is impossible with my memory?


I suggest you run at 3600 15-15-15-35. You might be able to use a 1T command rate as well. That's about as good as it gets with the Pro board. You could also just stay at 3866 and try to tighten up the timings a bit with some higher voltage. I run 1.38v DRAM voltage.


----------



## thuNDa

w3ggy said:


> I have the following items:
> 1. PATRIOT Viper Steel PVS416G400C9K DDR4 with XMP profile 4000
> 2. GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI
> 
> Also, I have updated my BIOS to F10.
> Problem:
> I can't reach 4000 MHz memory frequency. With XMP profile it runs with 3600 frequency automatically. With manual settings, it freezes on the startup. The maximum frequency that I reached was 3866.
> So, motherboard spec contains memory support until 4133.
> How can I fix this? Or it is impossible with my memory?


The max memory specs of the motherboard refer to all DIMM-slots populated.
If you look in the QVL, you will see that the highest rated memory kit is an 4x 8GB one.
In other words, your only chance for higher frequency is to buy an additional kit of your RAM.



Sheyster said:


> I suggest you run at 3600 15-15-15-35. You might be able to use a 1T command rate as well. That's about as good as it gets with the Pro board. You could also just stay at 3866 and try to tighten up the timings a bit with some higher voltage. I run 1.38v DRAM voltage.


Since you have 32GB, can't you go higher with the frequency, or are you using an 2x 16GB kit?


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf (and anyone else)

C6 microcode is TERRIBLE!
Cinebench R15 score dropped from 2270 at 5.1 ghz to 2205 (tested across several reboots)
That's slightly lower than my 5 ghz score (2208-2220).

BE (even AE and A2) gave 2270.
Note I don't even have mitigations enabled since it isn't migitation aware (1703).

Suggest you guys roll back your microcodes if you care about your FPS !


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf (and anyone else)
> 
> C6 microcode is TERRIBLE!
> Cinebench R15 score dropped from 2270 at 5.1 ghz to 2205 (tested across several reboots)
> That's slightly lower than my 5 ghz score (2208-2220).
> 
> BE (even AE and A2) gave 2270.
> Note I don't even have mitigations enabled since it isn't migitation aware (1703).
> 
> Suggest you guys roll back your microcodes if you care about your FPS !


Can confirm, new microcode, Cinebench R20, 5258, previous microcode, 5321.


----------



## Alunais

Has anyone encountered this noise (coil whine) durring prime95 small fft with avx2 stress test?





 (you need to volume up)

It's there only when I use graph from HWInfo64 and move mouse pointer over them.

It's on Aorus Master btw.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Does F9 bios have the c6 microcode?


No. Gigabyte is months old putting in microcodes (they barely got to AE) and C6 just got released last week.


----------



## Sheyster

thuNDa said:


> Since you have 32GB, can't you go higher with the frequency, or are you using an 2x 16GB kit?


I'm running a 4x8GB kit. I can loosen timings a bit and run 3866.

4000 seems very elusive if not impossible with the Pro boards. Master boards are a bit better.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> So I added 3 more fans to my setup. Went from having the 360mm aio as front intake with 3 fans in push config on the radiator to 3 fans push/3 fans pull config on the radiator. Can do cinebench r20 runs @ 5ghz core/4.7cache without going above 80c now, down from 86c(with whatever thermal compound that nzxt uses on the x72, still need to try kryonaut to see if I can bring temps down even more). Anyone with an AIO may want to consider putting fans on both sides of the radiator if you haven't already.


I'm quite curious what your temps will be after moving to kryonaut, as I bought some kryonaut already and am just deciding when to if it actually helps 
I got a NZXT X72 also with 3 corsair SP120 fans as intake ... was thinking about adding the 3 fans from the NZXT cooler on the back of the rad to improve the situation.


----------



## vmanuelgm

@someones


Cinebench is not everything in the world, latest microcodes address other issues and implement corrections in order to enhance security and general cpu behaviour under different circumstances...


----------



## Falkentyne

vmanuelgm said:


> @someones
> 
> 
> Cinebench is not everything in the world, latest microcodes address other issues and implement corrections in order to enhance security and general cpu behaviour under different circumstances...


You mean like lowering my Gflops in LinX and my FPS also?
Do you really think I care about "security fixes"? 
My OS can't even use the fixes anyway. Newer is NOT always better.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> You mean like lowering my Gflops in LinX and my FPS also?
> Do you really think I care about "security fixes"?
> My OS can't even use the fixes anyway. Newer is NOT always better.


Indeed... I'm probably going to stay on the F9 BIOS for a while. I am running Win10 1903 though.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Falkentyne said:


> You mean like lowering my Gflops in LinX and my FPS also?
> Do you really think I care about "security fixes"?
> My OS can't even use the fixes anyway. Newer is NOT always better.



I mean new microcodes try to improve things. Maybe u can get a higher score in cinebench with an older one, but have worse oc general stability or crash in another program or game. The new microcodes also try to adapt the cpu behaviour to the new OS updates, and Windows 10 is evolving constantly right now.

Microcode 64 for 50645 cpus also has decreased performance in Cinebench, yet I am not disappointed. Taking a look at the recent microcodes releases, seems like there is a kind of tick tock, one with a better performance, next one with a little worse.


----------



## Deathtech00

KedarWolf said:


> Can confirm, new microcode, Cinebench R20, 5258, previous microcode, 5321.


 @KedarWolf - I noticed you posted F10c on tweaktown, is this the firmware that includes the new microcode? I know you have posted a few modded bios versions, is there one in particular you can recommend?


----------



## Falkentyne

vmanuelgm said:


> I mean new microcodes try to improve things. Maybe u can get a higher score in cinebench with an older one, but have worse oc general stability or crash in another program or game. The new microcodes also try to adapt the cpu behaviour to the new OS updates, and Windows 10 is evolving constantly right now.
> 
> Microcode 64 for 50645 cpus also has decreased performance in Cinebench, yet I am not disappointed. Taking a look at the recent microcodes releases, seems like there is a kind of tick tock, one with a better performance, next one with a little worse.


Wait, I don't mean to be rude, but did you actually think before you made that post?
Of COURSE the system is *Slightly* more stable! The CPU IS SLOWER! Literally 100 mhz slower in raw calculations.
Why would I want to GIMP my system? Might as well just bought an AMD Ryzen 3, then!
And I could care less about "windows 10 updates." I don't update winblows.


----------



## Falkentyne

Deathtech00 said:


> @KedarWolf - I noticed you posted F10c on tweaktown, is this the firmware that includes the new microcode? I know you have posted a few modded bios versions, is there one in particular you can recommend?


Microcodes were posted on win-raid. They were just released last week.
Original modded F10C by Kedarwolf had BE microcode (Gigabyte's version I think had AE).
You can get new microcodes there. 
https://www.win-raid.com/t3355f47-I...le-CPU-Microcode-Repositories-Discussion.html
They will usually be in BIN files, which can't be used by the vmware program, so they need to be converted.

You can test new microcodes to see if they trash your FPS by using the VMWare CPUCodeupdate program.
Throw the new microcodes from win-raid.com (matching the CPUID's from your product SKU) in a work folder and extract this CPUcodeupdate that was released over on notebookreview.com, into a different folder, and delete "microcode.dat" as it's very old. (do NOT run the batch file yet).

Then run the microcode converter file and point it to where you downloaded the microcodes from win-raid. If you get an error, 
Then build a new microcode.dat by installing the converter that will convert the new microcodes to dat files, then run "install.bat" after the conversion and copying the "new" Microcode.dat file over, as administrator.

The only problem is you can't go to an older microcode than what is already installed in the Bios.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Falkentyne said:


> Wait, I don't mean to be rude, but did you actually think before you made that post?
> Of COURSE the system is *Slightly* more stable! The CPU IS SLOWER! Literally 100 mhz slower in raw calculations.
> Why would I want to GIMP my system? Might as well just bought an AMD Ryzen 3, then!
> And I could care less about "windows 10 updates." I don't update winblows.



If the system is more stable, then Intel is doing fine, ironic mode on. I remember a long time ago when after installing a certain antivirus my Internet was cut off, I got very angry, but hey, no Internet=no virus/troyans, nice job... xDDD

And yeah, I did think before posting, and to my head came the standard user who is on Win10 and updates his OS regularly, not your case as u have written, yet I guess u understand I am not omniscient.

So if u don't want to lose performance, and u are so disappointed with this new MC, u have a pretty easy fix, just remain with whichever microcode works better for u. I still think newer is better (at least hypothetically).

Someone "dixit"


----------



## KedarWolf

Deathtech00 said:


> @KedarWolf - I noticed you posted F10c on tweaktown, is this the firmware that includes the new microcode? I know you have posted a few modded bios versions, is there one in particular you can recommend?


I get the best results with the F10b modded with the microcode before the latest one.


----------



## KedarWolf

With ambients temps much lower than the 30C+ I had this summer, I raised the power limits to 255, now my Residuals are all above 500, max core temp 85C with liquid metal on the CPU, not delidded, yet.


----------



## KedarWolf

Someone requested my BIOS settings, but before using those power limits make sure you have really good cooling, and have HWInfo open and make sure your hottest core in under 85C when LinX really kicks in 15 seconds later.

Also, I use .145v CPU voltage so I can keep RAM voltage at 1.45v and VCCIO and SA at 1.23v instead of 1.35v CPU voltage with 1.46v RAM and 1.25v - 1.27v VCCIO and SA.



Spoiler


----------



## Medvediy

KedarWolf said:


> With ambients temps much lower than the 30C+ I had this summer, I raised the power limits to 255, now my Residuals are all above 500, max core temp 85C with liquid metal on the CPU, not delidded, yet.


Thx for pics!
And if it is possible, please add AIDA memory test results.
Just trying to figure out some things about my results.
And do you know smth about RTL and IOL training on z390 Aorus master? And fixing them by hand as on other MoBos? Will Gigabyte make this thing work?


----------



## The_Fog_Man

Someone have a bios with no spectre patch for master?


----------



## KedarWolf

Medvediy said:


> Thx for pics!
> And if it is possible, please add AIDA memory test results.
> Just trying to figure out some things about my results.
> And do you know smth about RTL and IOL training on z390 Aorus master? And fixing them by hand as on other MoBos? Will Gigabyte make this thing work?


----------



## Intrud3r

KedarWolf said:


>


I know it's nothing special ... but I do like what I managed to get from my RAM.


----------



## Deathtech00

KedarWolf said:


> Someone requested my BIOS settings, but before using those power limits make sure you have really good cooling, and have HWInfo open and make sure your hottest core in under 85C when LinX really kicks in 15 seconds later.
> 
> Also, I use .145v CPU voltage so I can keep RAM voltage at 1.45v and VCCIO and SA at 1.23v instead of 1.35v CPU voltage with 1.46v RAM and 1.25v - 1.27v VCCIO and SA.


 @KedarWolf
Thanks for the reply, as well as sharing all of your work on this board here. 

I am going to try and dial in a bit tonight. Finally got my replacement PSU. What if I want to start out a bit less aggressive on the RAM at first? Using a GSkill 3466 CL16 Trident kit, Samsung B-Die, and I want to get my CPU stable before I start the DDR4 OC Process. Would you relax any of these values / voltages if instead of 1.46v on the ram, you were running 1.35v-1.38v? I am basically starting all over as far as what the system can do now that the PSU has been replaced, and definitely want to use a Moderate OC of 5.0Ghz all core, using the adaptive techniques advised here. 

I am curious what you specifically would start these settings at before you start tweaking everything in.


----------



## t1mch3

Hey guys, I'm new to this thread and I don't want to catch up 440 pages 

So what is the general consensus on LLC and VCore? I've heard that voltage spikes in general are bad for the CPU lifespan or are only spikes above 1.4V - 1.45V actually harmful?

I'm reading the VCore with VR VOUT in HWiNFO and I'm currently running a 9700K at 5GHz with VCore 1.350 and LLC High on an Aorus Pro WiFi with F10 BIOS. Temps are around 90°C at Prime95 Small FFTs Non-AVX.

VR VOUT shows min. 1.236V, max. 1.312V, avg. 1.245V.

Should LLC be disabled? What would be the setting to disable it because the is no disable setting for LLC.

Thanks.


----------



## robertr1

t1mch3 said:


> Hey guys, I'm new to this thread and I don't want to catch up 440 pages
> 
> So what is the general consensus on LLC and VCore? I've heard that voltage spikes in general are bad for the CPU lifespan or are only spikes above 1.4V - 1.45V actually harmful?
> 
> I'm reading the VCore with VR VOUT in HWiNFO and I'm currently running a 9700K at 5GHz with VCore 1.350 and LLC High on an Aorus Pro WiFi with F10 BIOS. Temps are around 90°C at Prime95 Small FFTs Non-AVX.
> 
> VR VOUT shows min. 1.236V, max. 1.312V, avg. 1.245V.
> 
> Should LLC be disabled? What would be the setting to disable it because the is no disable setting for LLC.
> 
> Thanks.


LLC high had a lot vdroop built in. You're more than fine. Even turbo is fine. 

Going lower than high on LLC will be tough. 

Sustained load in the danger zone + heat = degradation. You're miles away from that and will have cooling issue before getting in that range.


----------



## t1mch3

Thanks for the quick reply.

Will play around with High and Turbo for stable VDroop. Had Turbo previously, but with Uncore ratio 47 as suggested by the official Gigabyte OC guide. Turned it down to 43 as recommended starting point by der8auer and High was running stable.

Is there better OC guide floating around in this thread rather than the one by Gigabyte? I've seen people messing around with power limits, CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line and other stuff. I'm fairly new to this Gen OC. Previous CPU was 3570K.


----------



## Deathtech00

Also, odd question. I cant seem to find a definitive answer for. 

I currently have 3 M.2 SSD's installed, as well as two SATA drives (on port 3+4 I believe) and an RTX 2080. I keep seeing people saying that when using all 3 you run out of PCI-E lanes?


----------



## Padinn

Deathtech00 said:


> Also, odd question. I cant seem to find a definitive answer for.
> 
> I currently have 3 M.2 SSD's installed, as well as two SATA drives (on port 3+4 I believe) and an RTX 2080. I keep seeing people saying that when using all 3 you run out of PCI-E lanes?


It depends on the specific motherboard you have make sure to check.motherboard manual as the Sata and m2 ports do share lanes. It also can vary on if they are m2 sata drivers or m2.pcie drives


----------



## Padinn

Im curious if anyone running a 9900k can share temperatures with me when overclocked to 5ghz using a corsair h150i. I find to be stable on x264 blender requires a +.14v offset with medium or low LLC. Temps can hit mid to upper 90s. I'm on kryptonaut and running pump/fans at extreme. 

I'm scared to try linx


----------



## Deathtech00

Padinn said:


> It depends on the specific motherboard you have make sure to check.motherboard manual as the Sata and m2 ports do share lanes. It also can vary on if they are m2 sata drivers or m2.pcie drives


Sorry. I am using a GB Z390 Aorus Master, Rev1.


----------



## Padinn

Deathtech00 said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> It depends on the specific motherboard you have make sure to check.motherboard manual as the Sata and m2 ports do share lanes. It also can vary on if they are m2 sata drivers or m2.pcie drives
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry. I am using a GB Z390 Aorus Master, Rev1.
Click to expand...

I have same one. Here is guidance from manual. If bottom m2 slot is used then bottom pcie slot operates at x2 max. If other slots are used various sata ports are disabled, which you can determine using attached chart. Make sure you look at both attachments as I capture from phone, so there is some overlap


----------



## Padinn

Deathtech00 said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> It depends on the specific motherboard you have make sure to check.motherboard manual as the Sata and m2 ports do share lanes. It also can vary on if they are m2 sata drivers or m2.pcie drives
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry. I am using a GB Z390 Aorus Master, Rev1.
Click to expand...

In short. You can use SATA port 0, port 2, and port 3 if you are using all m.2 slots. Your bottom pcie slot is limited to x2. Your rtx 2080 should operate at x16. This is an advantage of the aorus master and not all motherboard use their lanes the same way, somemlimit graphics card to x8, ect. Make sure you check before changing motherboard in future. 

It's due to limited pci lanes available on intel CPU and chipset, which changes from generation for chipset and motherboard

*edit* if you use an m.2 pci e drive (Not m.2 sata type) in middle m.2 slot you also can use sata port 1. See attachments in my post for chart. 

In addition, the bottom m.2 slot does not support any m.2 sata type drives. They must be m.2 pci e.


----------



## Falkentyne

Padinn said:


> Im curious if anyone running a 9900k can share temperatures with me when overclocked to 5ghz using a corsair h150i. I find to be stable on x264 blender requires a +.14v offset with medium or low LLC. Temps can hit mid to upper 90s. I'm on kryptonaut and running pump/fans at extreme.
> 
> I'm scared to try linx


Don't bother trying LinX at 5 ghz+
I tried Kedarwolf's settings, even his power limits, and I reached 85C instantly and throttled, VR VOUT dropped as low as 1.164v and max current amps was 195 (!) but was throttling anyway, and was -crashing- in LinX it was so unstable. Those were with his settings.

Yet he said he kept it under 80C with it NOT delidded. Not all of us have double or more 360 rads...I'm on air.

I can barely pass small FFT AVX with auto voltages and NO loadline calibration (best stability and transients). LinX is NO GO.
I can pass LinX at 4.9 ghz, auto voltages, No loadline calibration and AC Loadline at 160, though.


----------



## Madness11

Guys please help me ... Have aorus z390 master and to day I buy new memory ( g skill trident z royal 32gb , 2x16 , 4000mhz cl 19 19 19 39) and I can't run ... com no work , manual also .. please help please please


----------



## Sheyster

Madness11 said:


> Guys please help me ... Have aorus z390 master and to day I buy new memory ( g skill trident z royal 32gb , 2x16 , 4000mhz cl 19 19 19 39) and I can't run ... com no work , manual also .. please help please please


That's not on G.skill's QVL list for any Gigabyte board:

https://www.gskill.com/qvl/165/299/1552460131/F4-4000C19D-32GTRS-Qvl

Try running it at 3600 MHz. Do not use XMP.


----------



## Madness11

Its work 3600.. its mean I buy wrong memory ??? Or its bios problem ?


----------



## thuNDa

Madness11 said:


> Its work 3600.. its mean I buy wrong memory ??? Or its bios problem ?


4x 8GB would have most likely worked at 4000MHz on your mainboard, 2x 16GB is a different story.
If you can send the RAM back, i would do it and buy a 4x 8GB kit.


----------



## Sheyster

thuNDa said:


> 4x 8GB would have most likely worked at 4000MHz on your mainboard, 2x 16GB is a different story.
> If you can send the RAM back, i would do it and buy a 4x 8GB kit.


I agree, these boards like 4 sticks due to their T-Topology design.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Don't bother trying LinX at 5 ghz+
> I tried Kedarwolf's settings, even his power limits, and I reached 85C instantly and throttled, VR VOUT dropped as low as 1.164v and max current amps was 195 (!) but was throttling anyway, and was -crashing- in LinX it was so unstable. Those were with his settings.
> 
> Yet he said he kept it under 80C with it NOT delidded. Not all of us have double or more 360 rads...I'm on air.
> 
> I can barely pass small FFT AVX with auto voltages and NO loadline calibration (best stability and transients). LinX is NO GO.
> I can pass LinX at 4.9 ghz, auto voltages, No loadline calibration and AC Loadline at 160, though.


I told you two times already, with a screenshot of the BIOS settings, you need the power limits at 200 or under depending on the cooling.

Don't know how you could miss that.

Oh sorry, never saw you say you tried the power limits. On air, lower is the key.


----------



## AndrejB

I get 195w on tjmax 80c and a h150i.

Something nice I found is that setting the memory manually is still better than xmp.
Now getting 430 gflops


----------



## Madness11

Guys I find this kit ( g skill trident z rgb , f4-4266, C19d 16gtrz, in qvl have same memory but C17q , so its work with me ? Or no , please help )


----------



## Sheyster

Why are y'all running LinX anyway? I thought as a community we were generally past that.


----------



## w3ggy

REMOVED


----------



## Madness11

Guys , this one is good memory ??


----------



## Sheyster

Madness11 said:


> Guys , this one is good memory ??


If it's not on the QVL I would avoid it if I were you. These Gigabyte boards already seem pretty picky regarding memory support at higher speeds.


----------



## KedarWolf

Madness11 said:


> Guys , this one is good memory ??


For memory you never want to go two sticks on Gigabyte boards, always 4x8Gb, people not even able too do XMP
with two sticks. T-Topology is why, four sticks the way to go, and not 4x16GB, they are dual rank, not single rank.

And my advice is stick with G.Skill b dies.. Check out the b die finder, I'm on my phone, Google it.


----------



## Smokediggity

It seems that I have bricked the main bios on my Master. I've tried the whole boot with backup bios, flip the switch to the broken bios, then flash using q-flash, but it isn't working. It just keeps flashing the backup bios. Anyone have any suggestions on how I could reflash the main bios chip? Of course, it may be time to invest in a chip programmer, for which I am open to recommendations.


----------



## hickelpickle

Madness11 said:


> Guys , this one is good memory ??




That's what I'm running, idk if the rgb version is qvl, but the non rgb one is I'm pretty sure and I've had no issues with the rgb kit on my build. I also have no issues with getting a great overclock running 2 dimms, though I'm sure it would be better with 4 as I still have frequency and timing headroom I cant seem to stabilize for the life of me, even if cranking up my sa/io and dram voltage, which leads me to believe the issue getting past that is the t-topology and running 2 dimms. 

Here's the timings for my cl16/4100mhz overclock on those sticks. 1.23io/1.24sa 1.48v dram

https://imgur.com/a/MWNEi9C


Also they advertise those dimms as cl 17, but they are cl19, they dont have a cl17 bin at that speed. They are xmp cl19/4000 with xmp2 being cl17/3600


----------



## hickelpickle

KedarWolf said:


> For memory you never want to go two sticks on Gigabyte boards, always 4x8Gb, people not even able too do XMP
> with two sticks. T-Topology is why, four sticks the way to go, and not 4x16GB, they are dual rank, not single rank.
> 
> And my advice is stick with G.Skill b dies.. Check out the b die finder, I'm on my phone, Google it.



Pretty sure anyone who had those issues, had it on the original bios which was just **** in general with memory. I found my board to be really finicky on the exact sa/io to stabilize, but in my post above you can see I got a very reasonable oc with 2 dimms. Any b die shouldn't have an issue running either, this is Intel and memory compatibility isn't that complicated these days(though it likely was at release on these boards)


----------



## KedarWolf

Smokediggity said:


> It seems that I have bricked the main bios on my Master. I've tried the whole boot with backup bios, flip the switch to the broken bios, then flash using q-flash, but it isn't working. It just keeps flashing the backup bios. Anyone have any suggestions on how I could reflash the main bios chip? Of course, it may be time to invest in a chip programmer, for which I am open to recommendations.


Yeah, BIOS flash DON'T work, I had to use a BIOS programmer, but take a pic of the BIOS before you pull it out, put it back the wrong way and you'll fry it, I know, or buy a preprogrammed BIOS from ebay, they are cheap.


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> It seems that I have bricked the main bios on my Master. I've tried the whole boot with backup bios, flip the switch to the broken bios, then flash using q-flash, but it isn't working. It just keeps flashing the backup bios. Anyone have any suggestions on how I could reflash the main bios chip? Of course, it may be time to invest in a chip programmer, for which I am open to recommendations.


This
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01DZC36GY/

I don't know about socket adapters; the RT809F comes with a bunch of them. Since the main bios is socketed (dip8 I think?), you just pull it out and put it in the programmer (maybe with an adapter) but not sure where to go with that, you're on your own there. The backup bios is soldered SOIC8, and a Pomona clip can flash that directly on the board; I don't know if the Pomona clip is compatible with socketed dip8 or not.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HHH65T4/

and https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/ for hooking up the clip to the programmer.


----------



## Madness11

I just order 1 kit , after 1 more 🙂 yes this memory in qvl list on aorus master.


----------



## Medvediy

Smokediggity said:


> It seems that I have bricked the main bios on my Master. I've tried the whole boot with backup bios, flip the switch to the broken bios, then flash using q-flash, but it isn't working. It just keeps flashing the backup bios. Anyone have any suggestions on how I could reflash the main bios chip? Of course, it may be time to invest in a chip programmer, for which I am open to recommendations.


How you bricked it? What you've done wrong?


----------



## robertr1

Madness11 said:


> I just order 1 kit , after 1 more 🙂 yes this memory in qvl list on aorus master.


Even if QVL, dont' let the board set auto timings for VCCIO/SA. Unless you hate your IMC.


----------



## Deathtech00

robertr1 said:


> Even if QVL, dont' let the board set auto timings for VCCIO/SA. Unless you hate your IMC.


Whats a good base value to start from with VCCIO/SA in your opinion?


----------



## thuNDa

Deathtech00 said:


> Whats a good base value to start from with VCCIO/SA in your opinion?


1.2V
I don't even need more with 4x 8GB @3900CL15, but YMMV with typical timings for B-Dies and 1.3V is ok too. Actually i would start with 1.3V and try to lower it when your RAM-OC is set.


----------



## Sheyster

Deathtech00 said:


> Whats a good base value to start from with VCCIO/SA in your opinion?



1.23/1.23 or 1.23/1.25. I prefer SA to be a little higher. Like the other guy said, YMMV. CPU IMC's are all different.


----------



## Smokediggity

Falkentyne said:


> This
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01DZC36GY/
> 
> I don't know about socket adapters; the RT809F comes with a bunch of them. Since the main bios is socketed (dip8 I think?), you just pull it out and put it in the programmer (maybe with an adapter) but not sure where to go with that, you're on your own there. The backup bios is soldered SOIC8, and a Pomona clip can flash that directly on the board; I don't know if the Pomona clip is compatible with socketed dip8 or not.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HHH65T4/
> 
> and https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/ for hooking up the clip to the programmer.


Thanks for the recommendation. I think I should be ok with out an adapter. Since the backup bios seems to be working fine I'll likely skip getting the clip for the time being.




KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, BIOS flash DON'T work, I had to use a BIOS programmer, but take a pic of the BIOS before you pull it out, put it back the wrong way and you'll fry it, I know, or buy a preprogrammed BIOS from ebay, they are cheap.


Thanks for the tip about taking a picture. I'll be sure to take note of its orientation.




Medvediy said:


> How you bricked it? What you've done wrong?


I stayed up way too late and was tired and accidentally used the Flash Programming Tool instead of the FWUpdate tool to update my ME firmware.


----------



## KedarWolf

Smokediggity said:


> Thanks for the recommendation. I think I should be ok with out an adapter. Since the backup bios seems to be working fine I'll likely skip getting the clip for the time being.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the tip about taking a picture. I'll be sure to take note of its orientation.
> 
> 
> 
> I stayed up way too late and was tired and accidentally used the Flash Programming Tool instead of the FWUpdate tool to update my ME firmware.


This one worked on my Master. You need to know which software works though. PM me when you're ready. 

https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Components-Burner-Adapter-Programmer/dp/B07M6P9BVJ


----------



## scaramonga

KedarWolf said:


> I'm pretty sure we are on OVERCLOCK.net but I might be wrong.


Yes we are, and when then is something worth clocking (and there is), apart from RAM, roll all you want


----------



## w3ggy

Can someone explain me how a motherboard decide which frequency she will use?
Now I use 3600 17 17 17 36 1T
But in reality it starts with 3700 17 17 17 36 1T

If I decrease 36 to 35 it starts with
2600 17 17 17 35 1T
What's going wrong? How to disable it?
I have a lot of issues with memory and it makes me angry sometimes.

My motherboard:
Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi
BIOS version is F10.


----------



## Falkentyne

w3ggy said:


> Can someone explain me how a motherboard decide which frequency she will use?
> Now I use 3600 17 17 17 36 1T
> But in reality it starts with 3700 17 17 17 36 1T
> 
> If I decrease 36 to 35 it starts with
> 2600 17 17 17 35 1T
> What's going wrong? How to disable it?
> I have a lot of issues with memory and it makes me angry sometimes.
> 
> My motherboard:
> Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi
> BIOS version is F10.


That is a verifiied bug. Contact support.


----------



## w3ggy

Falkentyne said:


> That is a verifiied bug. Contact support.


Ok, I contacted to support. But how can they help? They can just say that it will be fixed sometime in future in a new bios version, am I right? Or there were some cases when they helped with this problem? Because there were described problems with memory in this thread and they still exist.


----------



## thuNDa

scaramonga said:


> Yes we are, and when then is something worth clocking (and there is), apart from RAM, roll all you want


RAM is important for CPU performance(look at CPU-Render):

First pic:3000CL15 XMP, single rank
Second: 3900CL15 tuned, dual rank

You had to push the CPU in best case to 5.6GHz if you wanted the same performance as in the second pic, if you only had the RAM of the first pic.


----------



## KaRLiToS

HI guys, I will be a proud owner of the Gigabyte Aorus Master Z390. I have an old EK Supremacy CPU block that will fit my i9 9900k. I just want to know if it's better to get a monoblock to cool the VRMs too or it's useless?


----------



## KedarWolf

KaRLiToS said:


> HI guys, I will be a proud owner of the Gigabyte Aorus Master Z390. I have an old EK Supremacy CPU block that will fit my i9 9900k. I just want to know if it's better to get a monoblock to cool the VRMs too or it's useless?


No point on a monoblock. VRMs under air are all under 50C even stress testing. You'd be better with just your EVO and VRMs stock.


----------



## raad11

Is running 4x ram sticks more stable than 2x on this board?


----------



## KedarWolf

raad11 said:


> Is running 4x ram sticks more stable than 2x on this board?


Yes, Gigabyte Z390 boards use T-Topology and four DIMMs is better than two.


----------



## KaRLiToS

Oh, I just bought two sticks thinking less was better.

Will I be limited in overclocking?


----------



## Padinn

It will hold you back if you are going for a high ram oc,


----------



## shocker94

Linx 0.9.6 released

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## Arni90

KaRLiToS said:


> Oh, I just bought two sticks thinking less was better.
> 
> Will I be limited in overclocking?


My experience with B-die.

2x8GB had problems stabilizing at 3600 16-16-16-36, never mind tweaking subtimings, voltage didn't help scaling at all.
4x8GB easily posted at 4000 18-18-18-38, subtimings were easily tweaked, voltage helped scaling down timings.


----------



## raad11

Arni90 said:


> My experience with B-die.
> 
> 2x8GB had problems stabilizing at 3600 16-16-16-36, never mind tweaking subtimings, voltage didn't help scaling at all.
> 4x8GB easily posted at 4000 18-18-18-38, subtimings were easily tweaked, voltage helped scaling down timings.


Sheeee-it.

See my sig, I have had these RAM sticks since 2017. Do they still sell these? I had a lot of trouble getting these to stabilize at 4000 16-17-17-38-2T @ 1.4v, 1.25v VCCIO, 1.27v VCCSA. If I add two more, will it work even though they're of completely different batches (though same model). I want to lower the VCCIO/SA voltages a little.

System seems stable though. It crashed once yesterday unattended for the first time since I built the machine exactly a month ago. I have no idea why. One game crashed to desktop, also first time since I built the machine, no idea why (immediately restarted and ran for hours without a problem though). I upped the Vcore from 1.33 to 1.335 just in case it was CPU, but the RAM has passed Ramtest for many hours before.


----------



## Dannyele

I don't know if I'm using properly my DDR4 kits, but it's working so far so good...

The kits are: G.Skill F4-4266C19D-16GTZR on dual channgel (bay 2 and 4) with XMP ON but no luck working at 4266MHz so I just lowered the frequency to 4000MHz, so XMP ON but on 4000MHz (CL19 19-19-19-39-2T).


----------



## Deathtech00

Dannyele said:


> I don't know if I'm using properly my DDR4 kits, but it's working so far so good...
> 
> The kits are: G.Skill F4-4266C19D-16GTZR on dual channgel (bay 2 and 4) with XMP ON but no luck working at 4266MHz so I just lowered the frequency to 4000MHz, so XMP ON but on 4000MHz (CL19 19-19-19-39-2T).


You could likely tighten the timings a bit since you dropped frequency. Also, may need to adjust VCCIO / VCSA for clocking ram that high.

This is a good reference imo : integralfx GitHub DDR4 OC Guide


----------



## Dannyele

Deathtech00 said:


> You could likely tighten the timings a bit since you dropped frequency. Also, may need to adjust VCCIO / VCSA for clocking ram that high.
> 
> This is a good reference imo : integralfx GitHub DDR4 OC Guide


Well, actually I dropped the VCCIO around 1.17 and VCSAA about 1.2.


And about the timings, should I use something like 16-20-20-40?


----------



## Salve1412

Dannyele said:


> Well, actually I dropped the VCCIO around 1.17 and VCSAA about 1.2.
> 
> 
> And about the timings, should I use something like 16-20-20-40?


I've got the exact same RAM, CPU and Mobo. Trying to make the kit work at its XMP speed has been an absolute nightmare. I've even asked for an RMA twice from G.Skill, purchased (and returned) another identical kit in order to see if a configuration with four sticks could take advantage of the presumed T-Topology of the board, but with no luck at all. Tweaked everything I could (VCCSA, VCCIO, DRAM Voltage and Termination, secondary and tertiary timings), but every attempt was useless: with four DIMMs filled the system was a bit more stable but errors ultimately showed up. Probably the CPU's Memory controller is too weak, even though in the future I'd like to try my CPU and RAM combo on a RAMoverclocking-wise solid mobo such as a Maximus XI Apex and see how they'll behave.

I'll attach my current settings: they've passed 10000% Karhu RAMTest. Maybe you can try them and see if they are good for you (if so we could even compare AIDA benchmarks)!

X.M.P. ON
Memory Ref Clock: 133
DRAM Voltage: 1.44v
DRAM Termination: Normal
VCCIO: 1.22v
System Agent: 1.23v

Just a note on tWTR_S and tWTR_L. They are driven by tWRRD_dg and tWRRD_sg. So at first leave them on Auto and manually set only the second couple at the lowest number you can without compromising stability (you could try for example my values of 26 and 30 respectively). Then manually set the former in the BIOS after seeing in Asrock timing configurator which value is assigned to them. You'll find far better and more competent information about this in the guide you've been referred to.


----------



## KaRLiToS

Should I return this kit:

https://www.newegg.ca/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232822?Item=N82E16820232822

and get this: 

https://www.newegg.ca/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232763

???????????


----------



## Medvediy

Salve1412 said:


> X.M.P. ON
> Memory Ref Clock: 133
> DRAM Voltage: 1.44v
> DRAM Termination: Normal
> VCCIO: 1.22v
> System Agent: 1.23v


Oups. Please delete this msg.


----------



## KedarWolf

I found my Corsair Link USB dongle, my dongle is tiny, was hard to find.  Now I can turn PSU overcurrent protection off, might fix the random reboots with C-States disabled.


----------



## Medvediy

I've just found that 09.09.2019 Gigabyte updated WiFi and BT drivers for Aorus Master. And they updated RGB Fusion.
Can't find any change log info. Could anyone help me with that?


----------



## Dannyele

Salve1412 said:


> I've got the exact same RAM, CPU and Mobo. Trying to make the kit work at its XMP speed has been an absolute nightmare. I've even asked for an RMA twice from G.Skill, purchased (and returned) another identical kit in order to see if a configuration with four sticks could take advantage of the presumed T-Topology of the board, but with no luck at all. Tweaked everything I could (VCCSA, VCCIO, DRAM Voltage and Termination, secondary and tertiary timings), but every attempt was useless: with four DIMMs filled the system was a bit more stable but errors ultimately showed up. Probably the CPU's Memory controller is too weak, even though in the future I'd like to try my CPU and RAM combo on a RAMoverclocking-wise solid mobo such as a Maximus XI Apex and see how they'll behave.
> 
> I'll attach my current settings: they've passed 10000% Karhu RAMTest. Maybe you can try them and see if they are good for you (if so we could even compare AIDA benchmarks)!
> 
> X.M.P. ON
> Memory Ref Clock: 133
> DRAM Voltage: 1.44v
> DRAM Termination: Normal
> VCCIO: 1.22v
> System Agent: 1.23v
> 
> Just a note on tWTR_S and tWTR_L. They are driven by tWRRD_dg and tWRRD_sg. So at first leave them on Auto and manually set only the second couple at the lowest number you can without compromising stability (you could try for example my values of 26 and 30 respectively). Then manually set the former in the BIOS after seeing in Asrock timing configurator which value is assigned to them. You'll find far better and more competent information about this in the guide you've been referred to.


WOW! Thank you!

Will take a look and update!


----------



## w3ggy

Falkentyne said:


> That is a verifiied bug. Contact support.


They just said they didn't test motherboard with these modules.



w3ggy said:


> Can someone explain to me how a motherboard decide which frequency she will use?
> Now I use 3600 17 17 17 36 1T
> But in reality, it starts with 3700 17 17 17 36 1T
> 
> If I decrease 36 to 35 it starts with
> 2600 17 17 17 35 1T
> What's going wrong? How to disable it?
> I have a lot of issues with memory and it makes me angry sometimes.
> 
> My motherboard:
> Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi
> BIOS version is F10.


----------



## Padinn

Medvediy said:


> I've just found that 09.09.2019 Gigabyte updated WiFi and BT drivers for Aorus Master. And they updated RGB Fusion.
> Can't find any change log info. Could anyone help me with that?


Rgb fusion update broke my ram support, it's not detected at all now


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

Padinn said:


> Rgb fusion update broke my ram support, it's not detected at all now



I'm not at all surprised by this.


----------



## Padinn

reachthesky said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rgb fusion update broke my ram support, it's not detected at all now
> 
> 
> 
> I just finished trying out the new version of rgb fusion. It broke the aorus rgb nvme ssd support. My Gskill trident z rgb ended up working after a shutdown/reboot but the aorus rgb nvme ssd was stuck on old settings and was no longer recognized even after a shutdown/reboot. i'm on an aorus z390 master. I had to roll back to the previous version of rgb fusion to get everything working again.
Click to expand...

I've got trident z memory as well, tried rebooting and reinstall, no luck. *shrug*


----------



## KaRLiToS

Is it that bad to have the Royal Z 3600mhz 2 x 16GB. I received them today. Should I return them and get a 4 x 8GB kit ? Just wanna playbsome games. Benchmarking is over for me.


----------



## ntuason

The lighting options RGBFusion has for Trident Z Royals are really boring. You guys aren’t missing anything. G Skills RGB software is so much better but I can’t install it since my light box relies on RGBFusion and that hijacks my Trident Z Royals... Wish I could disable RAM lighting on RGBFusion.


----------



## Padinn

ntuason said:


> The lighting options RGBFusion has for Trident Z Royals are really boring. You guys arenâ€™️t missing anything. G Skills RGB software is so much better but I canâ€™️t install it since my light box relies on RGBFusion and that hijacks my Trident Z Royals... Wish I could disable RAM lighting on RGBFusion.


I couldn't get the g.skill to control the ram either, even with rgb fusion uninstalled. Icue is also running for mynh150i and may be part of it


----------



## Intrud3r

Padinn said:


> I couldn't get the g.skill to control the ram either, even with rgb fusion uninstalled. Icue is also running for mynh150i and may be part of it


Running on a Aorus Ultra F7 bios here ... no problems whatsoever with RGB Fusion + NZXT Cam software + iQue corsair software + G.Skill TridentZ RGB software. After a reboot I need to start RGB Fusion once to get the correct lightning ... then close it. Start G.Skill software (as RGB Fusion overrides it when started), close it immediately after and i'm all done ... lightning works flawlessly.


----------



## bigmike35

Padinn said:


> I couldn't get the g.skill to control the ram either, even with rgb fusion uninstalled. Icue is also running for mynh150i and may be part of it


Just upgraded to the new BIOS so this may or may not work. When I had troubles with Fusion and G.Skill, I had to uninstall both, reboot 2 times (or shutdown 2 times, can't recall), install G Skill and reboot. Before you uninstall Fusion make sure to put the ram back to "Default" mode.


----------



## Padinn

Intrud3r said:


> Padinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I couldn't get the g.skill to control the ram either, even with rgb fusion uninstalled. Icue is also running for mynh150i and may be part of it
> 
> 
> 
> Running on a Aorus Ultra F7 bios here ... no problems whatsoever with RGB Fusion + NZXT Cam software + iQue corsair software + G.Skill TridentZ RGB software. After a reboot I need to start RGB Fusion once to get the correct lightning ... then close it. Start G.Skill software (as RGB Fusion overrides it when started), close it immediately after and i'm all done ... lightning works flawlessly.
Click to expand...

I think part of it is the wave lighting for the fans requires rgb fusion to be running


----------



## Intrud3r

Padinn said:


> I think part of it is the wave lighting for the fans requires rgb fusion to be running


I only use static for the lightning option. Prolly that's why I don't need it running.


----------



## shocker94

Increasing vcore, is better than increasing vccio and vcssa?

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## robertr1

shocker94 said:


> Increasing vcore, is better than increasing vccio and vcssa?
> 
> Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


vcore is for core clock and uncore clock.

vccio/sa is for memory overclock. SA generally higher than vccio.


----------



## KedarWolf

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-9900ks-127w-tdp,40432.html

9900KS may have a 127W TDP.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-9900ks-127w-tdp,40432.html
> 
> 9900KS may have a 127W TDP.


Not unexpected at all. Base clock is higher and all-core at 5 GHz = moar TDP.


----------



## Alemancio

@KedarWolf: Thanks for recommending me the best binned b-die ram a week ago, I appreciate it.

---------

I'm getting *random Window Freezes when watching youtube or listening to music* (barely any load) - any idea?

CPU: 9900KF @ 5.0Ghz all Cores
Mobo: Aorus Master 10b by KedarWolf
Settings: Adaptive voltage Normal + 0.065v & High LLC
VRout: 1.25~1.275v (depends on benchmark)

Stress Tests:
Prime95 Small FTT (30min so far) & 1344k (30min so far)
RealBench (30min so far).
Gaming >4hrs
Temps always below 95c

Symptoms:
Random BSODs when stopping some benchmarks (win32kernel.sys)
Random Windows freezes when watching youtube or listening to Music

Any ideas what to look for?


----------



## Medvediy

What's the best BIOS for z390 Master for now? I've seen here 10b by KedarWolf, but can't find any info what changed in it by KedarWolf. 
And what about 10c?


----------



## KedarWolf

Alemancio said:


> @KedarWolf: Thanks for recommending me the best binned b-die ram a week ago, I appreciate it.
> 
> ---------
> 
> I'm getting *random Window Freezes when watching youtube or listening to music* (barely any load) - any idea?
> 
> CPU: 9900KF @ 5.0Ghz all Cores
> Mobo: Aorus Master 10b by KedarWolf
> Settings: Adaptive voltage Normal + 0.065v & High LLC
> VRout: 1.25~1.275v (depends on benchmark)
> 
> Stress Tests:
> Prime95 Small FTT (30min so far) & 1344k (30min so far)
> RealBench (30min so far).
> Gaming >4hrs
> Temps always below 95c
> 
> Symptoms:
> Random BSODs when stopping some benchmarks (win32kernel.sys)
> Random Windows freezes when watching youtube or listening to Music
> 
> Any ideas what to look for?


If it freezes and no BSOD screen probably cache is too high. Lower cache or raise vcore voltage. If the cache is still on stock, might be vcore voltage is too low for 5 GHZ.


----------



## Alemancio

KedarWolf said:


> If it freezes and no BSOD screen probably cache is too high. Lower cache or raise vcore voltage. If the cache is still on stock, might be vcore voltage is too low for 5 GHZ.


Thanks for the info, I'll keep iterating


----------



## Padinn

Alemancio said:


> @KedarWolf: Thanks for recommending me the best binned b-die ram a week ago, I appreciate it.
> 
> ---------
> 
> I'm getting *random Window Freezes when watching youtube or listening to music* (barely any load) - any idea?
> 
> CPU: 9900KF @ 5.0Ghz all Cores
> Mobo: Aorus Master 10b by KedarWolf
> Settings: Adaptive voltage Normal + 0.065v & High LLC
> VRout: 1.25~1.275v (depends on benchmark)
> 
> Stress Tests:
> Prime95 Small FTT (30min so far) & 1344k (30min so far)
> RealBench (30min so far).
> Gaming >4hrs
> Temps always below 95c
> 
> Symptoms:
> Random BSODs when stopping some benchmarks (win32kernel.sys)
> Random Windows freezes when watching youtube or listening to Music
> 
> Any ideas what to look for?


Might want to try medium or low LLC and raise offset a tad. That will raise voltagea under low load situations and allow more drop under high load. That worked for me


----------



## Padinn

I was able to fix my rgb issues. I had installed asus aura to try something out, big mistake. Followed g skill directions on how to do a full uninstall and it's working again


----------



## kazukun

Z390 AORUS XTREME

When will the compatible Core i9-9900KS CPU support BIOS be released?


----------



## shocker94

I think i understand, the reason why my CPU consume only 180w max. Probably, the intel adaptative thermal monitor, is holding my cpu.
But, i don't think i ls a good idea to disable it.

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## Dannyele

Salve1412 said:


> I've got the exact same RAM, CPU and Mobo. Trying to make the kit work at its XMP speed has been an absolute nightmare. I've even asked for an RMA twice from G.Skill, purchased (and returned) another identical kit in order to see if a configuration with four sticks could take advantage of the presumed T-Topology of the board, but with no luck at all. Tweaked everything I could (VCCSA, VCCIO, DRAM Voltage and Termination, secondary and tertiary timings), but every attempt was useless: with four DIMMs filled the system was a bit more stable but errors ultimately showed up. Probably the CPU's Memory controller is too weak, even though in the future I'd like to try my CPU and RAM combo on a RAMoverclocking-wise solid mobo such as a Maximus XI Apex and see how they'll behave.
> 
> I'll attach my current settings: they've passed 10000% Karhu RAMTest. Maybe you can try them and see if they are good for you (if so we could even compare AIDA benchmarks)!
> 
> X.M.P. ON
> Memory Ref Clock: 133
> DRAM Voltage: 1.44v
> DRAM Termination: Normal
> VCCIO: 1.22v
> System Agent: 1.23v
> 
> Just a note on tWTR_S and tWTR_L. They are driven by tWRRD_dg and tWRRD_sg. So at first leave them on Auto and manually set only the second couple at the lowest number you can without compromising stability (you could try for example my values of 26 and 30 respectively). Then manually set the former in the BIOS after seeing in Asrock timing configurator which value is assigned to them. You'll find far better and more competent information about this in the guide you've been referred to.



Well, did the changes. But to be honest, knowing that you have same rig as me I just set all the values as your image, so its working. The only problem is with one value that even if its set on the BIOS as "7" still being "8".


EDIT: Well, not that stable, apps/games crashes randomly and cinebench R15 freeze the PC so maybe must tweak something... But anyway, I will notice that difference in gaming tweaking the timmings or I will be "fine" just setting up the XMP (4266) and lowering to 4000MHz? I've attached the screenshot of the XMP RAM, then you can see the actual stable config...


*EDIT2: *Ok, im such a fool. I raised the dram voltage to 1.44 (before was set at 1.4 as XMP) and now all seems good. But still having the tWRWR_sg at 8 instead of 7...


----------



## vmanuelgm

F10b and F10c mods with microcodes C6 and latest 17.7.0.4404 raid modules:


https://mega.nz/#!pmREwI5a!1eFOEt2u49AQvo4PQxs1trpVW0_n-rmesPqfsagDLAQ

https://mega.nz/#!p6ZAXC5Z!CFzuJ3qex-r2X-Zjc63EkxWxhJRsKZ2zy0AbYdfHDBk


----------



## Falkentyne

vmanuelgm said:


> F10b and F10c mods with microcodes C6 and latest 17.7.0.4404 raid modules:
> 
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!pmREwI5a!1eFOEt2u49AQvo4PQxs1trpVW0_n-rmesPqfsagDLAQ
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!p6ZAXC5Z!CFzuJ3qex-r2X-Zjc63EkxWxhJRsKZ2zy0AbYdfHDBk


I would not recommend anyone use C6 unless they enjoy losing more than 100 mhz of performance. (Keep in mind this is overclock.net).


----------



## vmanuelgm

Falkentyne said:


> I would not recommend anyone use C6 unless they enjoy losing more than 100 mhz of performance. (Keep in mind this is overclock.net).



So u recommend which microcodes???



Here a version of the F10b with MC BE (for 906EC) and 17.7 Raid and latest modules:

https://mega.nz/#!VvoVlYiS!5Jaw8yEZ3qtwQdl7VUxMuBERfKPL_TvuToat4B1nN9E



Here a version of the F10c with MC BE (for 906EC) and 17.7 Raid and latest modules:

https://mega.nz/#!YzIG0SAL!4RBKRkPUPT0TOPEQWOZ0MoT-IKCsn7vX9v-U9n_Ucgs



Someone has opted for BE, guess that's your favourite one!!!


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> I would not recommend anyone use C6 unless they enjoy losing more than 100 mhz of performance. (Keep in mind this is overclock.net).


I'm sticking with the F9 version of the Pro board BIOS for now, it's very stable for me. F10 has a newer (but not the latest) microcode to mitigate some of the new vulnerabilities. I'd rather have speed than maximum security. I do not do anything with this build except gaming.


----------



## Falkentyne

Sheyster said:


> I'm sticking with the F9 version of the Pro board BIOS for now, it's very stable for me. F10 has a newer (but not the latest) microcode to mitigate some of the new vulnerabilities. I'd rather have speed than maximum security. I do not do anything with this build except gaming.


I'm with you there. I haven't had any problems with microcodes until C6. C6 is a real stinker..


----------



## KaRLiToS

I finished building my rig and started overclocking today. My RAM sucks on XMP at 3600, I will need to tweak it. I am new to this platform.

One thing I noticed is my RTX 2080ti is running at PCIE 3.0 x8 ins tead of x16. I have two GTX 1080ti plugged with risers mining Grin.

So first slot is directly occupied by a RTX 2080ti
Second slot below has a PCIe 1.0 risers connected externally to a GTX 1080ti
Third Slot below has another external GTX 1080ti via risers.

Is it why I'm running my RTX 2080ti in x8?


----------



## Bravoexo

Anyone having problems installing that latest Intel Wifi driver?


----------



## Salve1412

Dannyele said:


> Well, did the changes. But to be honest, knowing that you have same rig as me I just set all the values as your image, so its working. The only problem is with one value that even if its set on the BIOS as "7" still being "8".
> 
> 
> EDIT: Well, not that stable, apps/games crashes randomly and cinebench R15 freeze the PC so maybe must tweak something... But anyway, I will notice that difference in gaming tweaking the timmings or I will be "fine" just setting up the XMP (4266) and lowering to 4000MHz? I've attached the screenshot of the XMP RAM, then you can see the actual stable config...
> 
> 
> *EDIT2: *Ok, im such a fool. I raised the dram voltage to 1.44 (before was set at 1.4 as XMP) and now all seems good. But still having the tWRWR_sg at 8 instead of 7...


Glad these settings did work for you, at least for now. As for tWRWR timings, I admit that these are the only ones I left on Auto, so my motherboard assigned 7 to tWRWR_sg on its own. I think you can safely ignore it and stick with 8. As for the difference in gaming performance, I don't really know how much impact the fine-tuned values could have compared to the Auto X.M.P. settings with just the frequency lowered to 4000Mhz. For starters, I guess you can try to benchmark your memory and check the manual settings against the Auto ones. I'll attach my AIDA64 scores with my current settings as a touchstone (it would be interested to see if they diverge from yours or are nearly identical).


----------



## KaRLiToS

I'm trying to figure out why I can't run my G Skill Royal Z 3600Mhz at 3200mhz.

I will try to raise VCCIO and VCCSA above 1.2v but I even tried the ram at 1.37v and it wasn't booting correctly.

I saw on some forums that people are saying its important to respect the QVL (list) of the motherboard with RAM brand. Does that mean I will not be able to run the sticks at 3600mhz at all with the Aorus Master?


----------



## ntuason

KaRLiToS said:


> I'm trying to figure out why I can't run my G Skill Royal Z 3600Mhz at 3200mhz.
> 
> I will try to raise VCCIO and VCCSA above 1.2v but I even tried the ram at 1.37v and it wasn't booting correctly.
> 
> I saw on some forums that people are saying its important to respect the QVL (list) of the motherboard with RAM brand. Does that mean I will not be able to run the sticks at 3600mhz at all with the Aorus Master?



What timings? My board is really picky with timings and if it’s not in the QVL list it won’t boot up and just clear bios.


----------



## KaRLiToS

They are running at the XMP profile default timing: 19-20-20-49 IIRC


----------



## shocker94

Using 8 threads on linx, fixed the residuals and gflops. Now, the cpu, is pulling out 152amp and 202watt.

Config: Z390 AORUS MASTER, I9 9900K 5GHZ 1.31V LLC TURBO, HOF EXTREME OC 4GHZ CL16, CUSTOM LOOP 360x45mm 360x30mm, KFA2 EX OC 1080TI+WB BP HEATKILLER IV


----------



## xlur8

Hey guys been out of the overclocking game for a long time now just upgraded to a 9900k have it running at 5.2ghz with cache at 4.9 only setting i have touched is avx=0 with 1.35volts after some help with some settings to maybe get the volts down sorry if i sound dumb but these new bioses settings im really not up to scratch thanks any help appreciated running custom loop 360 Rad, EK Momentum Aorus Z390 Master D-RGB Plexi block


----------



## KaRLiToS

Hey guys, I don't understand, I can't run the RAM higher than 2400mhz. I am clueless where my issue is. I tried everything, VCCSA, VCCIO, Mem VOltgage, CPU Voltage, changed timings.

Am I missing something? CPU is at stock by the way.


----------



## Madness11

Hello guys , help )) for aorus master ( hyperx predator rgb 4000) Vccio Vccao 1.250 for both enough ?? Or send me ur )) thx


----------



## Dannyele

Maybe not stable at 100% but it can pass Cinebench R15 and couple of hours playing BF1.


Those values are after 1 hour playing BF1 on Ultra at 1440p ~ 144fps.


vcore 1.29, LLC on Turbo, all c-states disabled aswell MCE/Intel things.


----------



## Falkentyne

Dannyele said:


> Maybe not stable at 100% but it can pass Cinebench R15 and couple of hours playing BF1.
> 
> 
> Those values are after 1 hour playing BF1 on Ultra at 1440p ~ 144fps.
> 
> 
> vcore 1.29, LLC on Turbo, all c-states disabled aswell MCE/Intel things.


Please use HWinfo64 (so you can monitor the VRM and current loads and VR VOUT). Half the voltages listed in that garbage program called HWmonitor don't even make any sense! I'm still appalled that people STILL use hwmonitor.


----------



## Falkentyne

@KedarWolf or (sacwhoeveryournamewas? 
Feel free to try modding this, but please don't use that worst microcode known to man, C6


----------



## sinnedone

KaRLiToS said:


> Hey guys, I don't understand, I can't run the RAM higher than 2400mhz. I am clueless where my issue is. I tried everything, VCCSA, VCCIO, Mem VOltgage, CPU Voltage, changed timings.
> 
> Am I missing something? CPU is at stock by the way.


You running 2x16 or 4x8?

Probably just since not on the compatibility list the Bios setting some funky sub timings.


----------



## KaRLiToS

sinnedone said:


> KaRLiToS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey guys, I don't understand, I can't run the RAM higher than 2400mhz. I am clueless where my issue is. I tried everything, VCCSA, VCCIO, Mem VOltgage, CPU Voltage, changed timings.
> 
> Am I missing something? CPU is at stock by the way.
> 
> 
> 
> You running 2x16 or 4x8?
> 
> Probably just since not on the compatibility list the Bios setting some funky sub timings.
Click to expand...

I’m using 2 x 16GB. I didn’t know 4x sticks was better with the topology technology when I bought all my parts.

I’ll try to find the default timings for 2x16GB 3600Mhz CL19.

Maybe buying ram on the comptability list is another option but I love to tweak.

Anyone can share their timings for 3600MHZ CL19?


----------



## Name Change

I'm not sure which sensor in Hwinfo64 is for VRM temp's on my Z390 Ultra. I see VRM MOS but it seems much to low, between 34c idle and 44c load, I also see multiple VR Loop1 one is 49c to 58c and the other reads which I think might be VRM is 55c idle and 66c load. Seems high with 120mm ram blowing on it. Might try putting fan as exhaust see if it changed anything.

Anyone else with Ultra version what bios are you using, currently on F7.

5.1ghz 9900k
1.305v in bios LLC Turbo
1.22 viccio and SA
47 uncore
0 avx offset

NH-D15
all c states are off


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf or (sacwhoeveryournamewas?
> Feel free to try modding this, but please don't use that worst microcode known to man, C6


What fix is in that bios Falhentyne ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> @KedarWolf or (sacwhoeveryournamewas?
> Feel free to try modding this, but please don't use that worst microcode known to man, C6


1 - Disk Controller
EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.2001
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.2001
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14
> 
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝


Thank you.


----------



## WINTENDOX

Setup
z390 aorus alite bios f7
ram: G.Skill TridentZ RGB F4-4266C19D-16GTZR
tvideo: rtx 2080 aorus xtreme
ssd: pcisddcrucial
fuente: seasonic focus 1000w gold

*Config
5.0ghz 9700k
1.320v in bios LLC Turbo
1.23 viccio 1.22 SA
47 uncore
Auto avx offset
*
results test "estable"

Prime 5 hrs continuos ok


----------



## Intrud3r

Name Change said:


> I'm not sure which sensor in Hwinfo64 is for VRM temp's on my Z390 Ultra. I see VRM MOS but it seems much to low, between 34c idle and 44c load, I also see multiple VR Loop1 one is 49c to 58c and the other reads which I think might be VRM is 55c idle and 66c load. Seems high with 120mm ram blowing on it. Might try putting fan as exhaust see if it changed anything.
> 
> Anyone else with Ultra version what bios are you using, currently on F7.
> 
> 5.1ghz 9900k
> 1.305v in bios LLC Turbo
> 1.22 viccio and SA
> 47 uncore
> 0 avx offset
> 
> NH-D15
> all c states are off


I'm on a Aorus Ultra board and I'm running Bios F7.
F7 is nice for me for my memory overclock.

Settings I use are all in my signature.


----------



## KedarWolf

Don't make the mistake I made going direct die.

I neglected to clean the glue very well that kept the IHS on, now the direct die plate is not completely flush and I'm getting poor contact with the liquid metal and the die.

And I'm on hold until I get more Conductonaut to use after I clean it and reseat it. 'sigh'


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Don't make the mistake I made going direct die.
> 
> I neglected to clean the glue very well that kept the IHS on, now the direct die plate is not completely flush and I'm getting poor contact with the liquid metal and the die.
> 
> And I'm on hold until I get more Conductonaut to use after I clean it and reseat it. 'sigh'


Well, I figured out the Der8auer direct die frame doesn't work with my EK Velocity CPU block without making my own screws. It works with my Rockit direct die frame though.

Actually, no, temps a bit better but skyrocket even just running RamTest. I'm going to have to buy some screws and cut them to length. 

And yes, I never used the washers between the water block posts and the motherboard.


----------



## Alunais

Trivial question: Which M2 slot do you recommend for my only Samsung 1TB M.2 PCIe NVMe 970 EVO Plus on the Master motherboard? Which one has the best cooling and best speed? I have in the third slot (the one on the bottom), but I read at various places that only one slot works with the fastest speed, but I don't know which one it is. I like the 1st slot, because it has huge radiator, however the SSD is much shorter, and would need a special screw (is it included in the box?).


----------



## Madness11

Hey guys , buy another one kit ( hyperx predator rgb 4000) but 4x8 not work at 4000.... 3 sticks work , 4 no .... please help.
Ps: 3900 work 4 sticks , 4000 only 3 .....


----------



## Medvediy

Madness11 said:


> Hey guys , buy another one kit ( hyperx predator rgb 4000) but 4x8 not work at 4000.... 3 sticks work , 4 no .... please help.
> Ps: 3900 work 4 sticks , 4000 only 3 .....


We've allready found solution on russian OC forum. 
Just needed to put off all sticks and then place them in slots again one by one.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.2001
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.23
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.14
> 
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝


Hey mate just tried this modded bios and i get a error "mismatch oem id" what did i do wrong ?


----------



## bastian

BETA F10d BIOS is out for the Master.


----------



## The_Fog_Man

i try to mod the bios on master f8 update the disk controller and downgrade the microcode for remove the protection but i get error in bios invalid BIOS IMAGE and in afudos problem getting flash information. someone have some idea?


----------



## Falkentyne

The_Fog_Man said:


> i try to mod the bios on master f8 update the disk controller and downgrade the microcode for remove the protection but i get error in bios invalid BIOS IMAGE and in afudos problem getting flash information. someone have some idea?


What are you using "AFUDOS" for? That tool is obsolete and was used for some very old Asus motherboards (P5WDH, etc).
You're supposed to use Efiflash.exe biosname.extension /X

Sometimes efiflash.exe /NoOemID /X works.

Bios extension MUST be three letters or less (.BIN, .ROM, etc).
Bios name is best kept at 8 letters or lower (MS DOS 8+3 format).
like GIGABYTE.BIN or Z390.F8 etc etc.


----------



## The_Fog_Man

thanks and sorry im new in this things


----------



## Alemancio

Has anybody tried the Gskill Neo 3600CL14?

AFAIK the Neo series was planned for Ryzen 3rd Gen but I see that Aorus Master Z390 is on it's QVL (from GSKILL).


----------



## Sheyster

Alemancio said:


> Has anybody tried the Gskill Neo 3600CL14?
> 
> AFAIK the Neo series was planned for Ryzen 3rd Gen but I see that Aorus Master Z390 is on it's QVL (from GSKILL).


1.45v??? Don't bother.. Get 3200 CL14 and run it at 3600 CL15 (15-15-15-35) at less than 1.40v.


----------



## Dannyele

Falkentyne said:


> Please use HWinfo64 (so you can monitor the VRM and current loads and VR VOUT). Half the voltages listed in that garbage program called HWmonitor don't even make any sense! I'm still appalled that people STILL use hwmonitor.



Ok, gotcha! Better now?


I've raised the vCore to 1.335 on BIOS 'cuase it wasn't stable on Prime, now it seems fine. How it looks for you?


(This is testing BF1 on Ultra 1440p around 140fps. Temps during gameplay ~60º. On Prime95 it gets around 90-95º degrees).


----------



## fursko

Hey everybody. I'm new to this platform with Z390 aorus pro wifi and 9900kf. Currently trying overclocking and finding 7/24 daily overclock. My 7700k was 5ghz @1.34v for years. I have also custom loop but temps are still high.

My question is that in this bios there are too much settings. It was very simple with my 7700K and MSI Z270. Now with 9900K we have multicore enhancement, power limits and bunch of different settings in advanced menu. (Latest F10 bios). I just wanna simple static overclock like my old 7700K. Static voltage, static clock speed and no power saving feature. I've read and watched a lot of stuff but i'm confused. What should i change in the bios to achieve what i want ? I don't want anything introducing instability to my static overclock. Is disabling ''Enhanced Multi-Core Performance'' enough ? What other settings should i disable ? or enable maybe ? I'm having an ocd about this. What is the 100% correct way ? 

Thanks for any help!



Edit: I've reinstalled the windows and it fixed a lot of bs with bios. Now i'm able to change and observe the differences. Appereantly disabling ''Enhanced Multi-Core Performance'' is not enough. Gigabyte overclock guide says you can disable this instead of disabling these power saving features one by one which is wrong. I've checked the clock speeds and it's not static. I've also disabled every c state and speedshift stuff. My core clock and voltage static right now. I didn't touch any power limit settings. It seems like they are all for Enhanced Multi-Core Performance and turbo. So a lot of guide telling me max out all power limits are wrong. Especially core current limit. They are only limiting turbo with the Enhanced Multi-Core Performance so you can have 5ghz 1-2 core clocks for a longer time or heavier load.

Now i can also see ram settings works as intended after windows reinstall. I've overclocked my 3200 c16 4x8 kit to 3500 c16 with ''enhanced performance'' setting. I assume enhanced performance setting sets tighter timings for hidden tertiary timing. I can see very slight performance gain with it.


Now i'm trying to test my 9900kf silicon quality. Hope i can get at least 5ghz.


Edit2: Wow my chip is terrible or i'm doing something wrong. 1.4v with turbo llc, cores are crashing on prime95 nonavx small fft. VRVOUT is 1.315v during this load. Vcore 1.380-1.396 in windows. Temps 90-95. Are there any big losers like me ?



Edit3: Interesting... I've used Enhanced Multi-Core Performance for overclock. I've set all power limit to max and turbo all core 5ghz. Left everything auto including vcore and llc. 5ghz stable this time. I'm seeing 1.38 vcore, 1.31 vrvout during prime95 nonavx test. So voltage is even lower than my manual overclock voltage but this one perfectly stable. Temps are 1-2C lower. I need good source for information about dynamic vcore, auto voltage etc... This will be nice if i can squeeze out couple more voltage. This is a bit high.


Edit4: Intel XTU causing coil whine. First time i'm hearing coil whine because of cpu instead of gpu. Anyway i've just used XTU core voltage offset and decreased the voltage 0.1v. My 5ghz still stable. This is weird because now vcore is much lower. Vcore: 1.308v, VRVOUT: 1.240v. I also gained almost 10C because of lower voltage. I really liked this because both clock speeds and vcore dynamic, temps and power consumption tamed. Better than manual static overclock but i have to optimize this. Currently everything is auto with 8 core 5ghz, no power limit and -0.1v vcore offset.


----------



## wingman99

fursko said:


> Hey everybody. I'm new to this platform with Z390 aorus pro wifi and 9900kf. Currently trying overclocking and finding 7/24 daily overclock. My 7700k was 5ghz @1.34v for years. I have also custom loop but temps are still high.
> 
> My question is that in this bios there are too much settings. It was very simple with my 7700K and MSI Z270. Now with 9900K we have multicore enhancement, power limits and bunch of different settings in advanced menu. (Latest F10 bios). I just wanna simple static overclock like my old 7700K. Static voltage, static clock speed and no power saving feature. I've read and watched a lot of stuff but i'm confused. What should i change in the bios to achieve what i want ? I don't want anything introducing instability to my static overclock. Is disabling ''Enhanced Multi-Core Performance'' enough ? What other settings should i disable ? or enable maybe ? I'm having an ocd about this. What is the 100% correct way ?
> 
> Thanks for any help!
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: I've reinstalled the windows and it fixed a lot of bs with bios. Now i'm able to change and observe the differences. Appereantly disabling ''Enhanced Multi-Core Performance'' is not enough. Gigabyte overclock guide says you can disable this instead of disabling these power saving features one by one which is wrong. I've checked the clock speeds and it's not static. I've also disabled every c state and speedshift stuff. My core clock and voltage static right now. I didn't touch any power limit settings. It seems like they are all for Enhanced Multi-Core Performance and turbo. So a lot of guide telling me max out all power limits are wrong. Especially core current limit. They are only limiting turbo with the Enhanced Multi-Core Performance so you can have 5ghz 1-2 core clocks for a longer time or heavier load.
> 
> Now i can also see ram settings works as intended after windows reinstall. I've overclocked my 3200 c16 4x8 kit to 3500 c16 with ''enhanced performance'' setting. I assume enhanced performance setting sets tighter timings for hidden tertiary timing. I can see very slight performance gain with it.
> 
> 
> Now i'm trying to test my 9900kf silicon quality. Hope i can get at least 5ghz.
> 
> 
> Edit2: Wow my chip is terrible or i'm doing something wrong. 1.4v with turbo llc, cores are crashing on prime95 nonavx small fft. VRVOUT is 1.315v during this load. Vcore 1.380-1.396 in windows. Temps 90-95. Are there any big losers like me ?
> 
> 
> 
> Edit3: Interesting... I've used Enhanced Multi-Core Performance for overclock. I've set all power limit to max and turbo all core 5ghz. Left everything auto including vcore and llc. 5ghz stable this time. I'm seeing 1.38 vcore, 1.31 vrvout during prime95 nonavx test. So voltage is even lower than my manual overclock voltage but this one perfectly stable. Temps are 1-2C lower. I need good source for information about dynamic vcore, auto voltage etc... This will be nice if i can squeeze out couple more voltage. This is a bit high.
> 
> 
> Edit4: Intel XTU causing coil whine. First time i'm hearing coil whine because of cpu instead of gpu. Anyway i've just used XTU core voltage offset and decreased the voltage 0.1v. My 5ghz still stable. This is weird because now vcore is much lower. Vcore: 1.308v, VRVOUT: 1.240v. I also gained almost 10C because of lower voltage. I really liked this because both clock speeds and vcore dynamic, temps and power consumption tamed. Better than manual static overclock but i have to optimize this. Currently everything is auto with 8 core 5ghz, no power limit and -0.1v vcore offset.


Auto sets core voltage to Intel specification, if you can run that perfectly it is as good as it can be.


----------



## AndrejB

Flashed the matrix bios to my strix, now I need more core voltage to be stable in linx...

Nvm, maybe not, playing around with to many settings.


----------



## Deathtech00

AndrejB said:


> Flashed the matrix bios to my strix, now I need more core voltage to be stable in linx...
> 
> Nvm, maybe not, playing around with to many settings.



I think you are in the wrong forum. This is for Z390 Gigabyte Aorus Master boards, Strix is an Asus product.


----------



## AndrejB

Deathtech00 said:


> I think you are in the wrong forum. This is for Z390 Gigabyte Aorus Master boards, Strix is an Asus product.


Nope have a master with a 9900k, just read in a few places that a cpu oc can affect a gpu oc, so figured probably it could be vice versa, but now after some testing, I'm leaning towards that the hooked up screen has more effect on a gpu oc


----------



## shaolin95

delete


----------



## AndrejB

Hey @Falkentyne, apologies for bothering.

Is it safer to have:

Ia ac/dc 80
Llc low
Dvid -0.020
Min vout 1.090 in linx, 1.188 idle

Or

Ia ac/dc 90
Llc normal
Auto voltage
Min vout 1.105 in linx, 1,2 idle

These two are probably very similar, just wanted to see with you, which would you prefer to use?


----------



## KaRLiToS

Hi guys, I'll report on my progress. After sinnedone post...


sinnedone said:


> You running 2x16 or 4x8?
> 
> Probably just since not on the compatibility list the Bios setting some funky sub timings.


...I tested few more times on XMP profile 1 with no success at all, any voltages or loose timings didn't work. Nothing was working above 2400mhz. The Profile provided by the kit (G Skill Royal Z 3600mhz 1.35v (19-20-20-40)) wasn't working above 2400mhz, don't know if it was a bug or anything.

I then tried to Set the Extreme Memory Profile option (X.M.P.) to AUTO with timings at 20-22-22-44 and was able to raise the memory up to 4000mhz. I was super happy after spending so many hours trying to figure out why I couldn't overclock the memory at all. 

It needed to much voltage at 4000mhz on VCCSA, VCCIO and Dram voltage.

I settled for those settings:
-5.0GHZ Core
-4.7GHZ Uncore
-1.33v CPU voltage (LLC to Turbo) 
-1.24v VCCIO
-1.22v VCCSA
-1.06v PCH voltage
-3600Mhz RAM at 19-20-20-40
-1.43 DRAM voltage (It's a bit high but I cannot go lower...I don't care)


----------



## Sheyster

KaRLiToS said:


> I settled for those settings:
> -5.0GHZ Core
> -4.7GHZ Uncore
> -1.33v CPU voltage (LLC to Turbo)
> -1.24v VCCIO
> -1.22v VCCSA
> -1.06v PCH voltage
> -3600Mhz RAM at 19-20-20-40
> -1.43 DRAM voltage (It's a bit high but I cannot go lower...I don't care)


IMHO CL19 is way too high for 3600 MHz. Any chance to tighten that up to CL16 at least?


----------



## KaRLiToS

Still Rocking my Quad Damage Case (Corsair 800D)


----------



## KaRLiToS

Sheyster said:


> IMHO CL19 is way too high for 3600 MHz. Any chance to tighten that up to CL16 at least?


It's the default timings for the kit and it requires 1,43v.

I'm actually stress testing 16-20-20-40. Is that okay or you meant 16-18-18-36?


----------



## Sheyster

KaRLiToS said:


> It's the default timings for the kit and it requires 1,43v.
> 
> I'm actually stress testing 16-20-20-40. Is that okay or you meant 16-18-18-36?


As they say, tighter is better, so the latter option is best.


----------



## KaRLiToS

Sheyster said:


> As they say, tighter is better, so the latter option is best.


It stable for two hours with 16-20-20-40 but it can't post at 16-18-18-36.

I tried to raise vcore 1.37v, VCCSA 1.3v, VCCIO 1.3v, DRAM voltage 1.51v. 

Any ideas?


----------



## Sheyster

KaRLiToS said:


> It stable for two hours with 16-20-20-40 but it can't post at 16-18-18-36.
> 
> I tried to raise vcore 1.37v, VCCSA 1.3v, VCCIO 1.3v, DRAM voltage 1.51v.
> 
> Any ideas?


These boards like 4 sticks of memory. That is usually the best solution: Run 4 x 8 GB sticks that are on the QVL list. I recommend G.skill.


----------



## Falkentyne

KaRLiToS said:


> It stable for two hours with 16-20-20-40 but it can't post at 16-18-18-36.
> 
> I tried to raise vcore 1.37v, VCCSA 1.3v, VCCIO 1.3v, DRAM voltage 1.51v.
> 
> Any ideas?


Try the four tRDWR tertiary settings set manually to 15/15/15/15 or 15/15/15/16
Set primary timings to 16/18/18/40. Set tRTP to 6, set tWR to 12.


----------



## KaRLiToS

Sheyster said:


> These boards like 4 sticks of memory. That is usually the best solution: Run 4 x 8 GB sticks that are on the QVL list. I recommend G.skill.


Is it worth it to get a 4 x 8GB kit or the difference will be marginal in gaming? I'm not into benchmarking anymore since I don't have the time. But I love to OC though.

*If you think it's worth it, can you suggest a G Skill Kit from QVL that has RGB lighting. I live in Canada by the way*



Falkentyne said:


> Try the four tRDWR tertiary settings set manually to 15/15/15/15 or 15/15/15/16
> Set primary timings to 16/18/18/40. Set tRTP to 6, set tWR to 12.


Ok, will do when I come back in 2 hours, I'll report back

UPDATE: 16-18-18-40 doesn't work even with DRAM voltage up to 1.49v.


----------



## Sheyster

KaRLiToS said:


> *If you think it's worth it, can you suggest a G Skill Kit from QVL that has RGB lighting. I live in Canada by the way*


https://www.gskill.com/qvl/165/168/1536563902/F4-4133C17Q-32GTZR-Qvl

^ Master is on the QVL.


----------



## Wirerat

The rgb controls on my aorus pro leave a lot to be desired. As far as I can tell the two 12v ports are locked together to always sync. The two 5v adressable ports are the same way.

I like that I can control it all with one program. Its just limited on the 5v patterns. Its either rainbow vomit or a single color effects. 

According to many people having rgb fusion issues, I am lucky it even works at all I guess. I only have app center, siv and rgb fusion installed. 

On another note. The ek/bitspower mono blocks are limited to the ultra/master. I was hoping it could work with my pro anyway. I studied images of boards naked and the vrm mounting holes are a bit different. 

I was holding off on upgrading my block hoping for a monoblock. My vr loop temps would benefit nicely.


----------



## SDBolts619

I tried searching for the answer on this, but couldn't find anything definitive. Maybe I'm tired and just missed it. If so, sorry for the repeated question.

I have a Z390 Ultra. I currently run a 1080Ti with an Asus 1440 Ultrawide. I was thinking of adding a regular 1080 HD monitor and wanted to find out if it's possible to drive the Asus monitor through the 1080 and use the onboard graphics on my 9900k to drive the HD monitor. I primarily play Destiny 2 and want to run a browser window for DIM on the second monitor to make life a bit easier. Does the BIOS on the Ultra support simultaneous discrete and onboard video?

Thanks for any guidance!


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

Does anyone get this issue where their pc sits on the Aorus logo and never boots? It happens about one in five times. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Nammi

KaRLiToS said:


> *If you think it's worth it, can you suggest a G Skill Kit from QVL that has RGB lighting. I live in Canada by the way*





Sheyster said:


> https://www.gskill.com/qvl/165/168/1536563902/F4-4133C17Q-32GTZR-Qvl
> 
> ^ Master is on the QVL.


I run 2x F4-4133C17D-16GTZR, same sticks as the link. XMP vs oc @ 1.45v dram, to give an idea of what to expect from those sticks. Though other cheaper B-die should end up about the same when oc'ed.


----------



## KedarWolf

*F10 BIOS for the Aorus Pro Wifi, F9b for the Ultra, F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master, F8a BIOS for the XTreme. With Updated RST and GOP firmware. Best performing microcode, but not the latest.

Other Z390 motherboards available on request.

Found out the GOP 2001 was a beta between 1090 and 1092 and 1092 is the latest version.*

EFI IRST RAID for SATA - v17.7.0.4404
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - v17.7.0.4404

Updated Microcodes.

Microcodes:

906ED 1151v2\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin
906EC 1151v2\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906EB 1151v2\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
906EA 1151v2\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin

EFI GOP Driver SKL-CFL - v9.0.1092

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - v0.0.23
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - v0.1.14

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

For Aorus Pro WiFi

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f10 /x

For Ultra

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f9b /x

For Master

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.10b /x

For XTreme

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f8a /x


----------



## hickelpickle

I'm on F8e, are there any performance/stability benefit updating my bios to one of the more recent ones? I know its newer microcode, but from my understanding the security fixes slightly effect performance? I don't really care about security in my use case. Just wondering if its worth my time flashing and copying over my oc, if there are any memory/performance/ect. changes to make it worth it.


----------



## Falkentyne

hickelpickle said:


> I'm on F8e, are there any performance/stability benefit updating my bios to one of the more recent ones? I know its newer microcode, but from my understanding the security fixes slightly effect performance? I don't really care about security in my use case. Just wondering if its worth my time flashing and copying over my oc, if there are any memory/performance/ect. changes to make it worth it.


If mitigations are disabled, then there is no performance hit at all (or if you're in a windows build that is not mitigation aware).
The only bad microcode to avoid is C6 (9900K); I assume 9700K and 9600K have a similar branch. Even on an OS that is not mitigation aware (no security mitigations), this microcode has a >100 mhz hit in CPU raw speed just by installing it. Microcode BE is fine.

Gigabyte's official bioses are all on B4/B4/AE/B8 (not sure what the others are for, I assume B4 and B4 are 9700K and 9600K, AE is 9900K and B8 is 9900KF).


----------



## hickelpickle

I updated and seem to have gotten a 1.5-2% single core increase and a 0.3-0.4% multi-core decrease in geekbench 5(I know geekbench is kinda meh, just had a result in my history from where 5 came out recently and I gave it a run to see what was up, and to compare to other newer results). I also got about 20-30 points in cinebench @ 5324 vs 5290-5300 I normally get. Ran 3 passes of geek bench to check if multi stayed the same, and it pretty much did, and 5302 is the best I've ever gotten @ 5ghz in cinebench till now so the microcode seems to have some slight performance boost. I'm not gonna give much weight to geek bench multi as it appears I lost performance sightly in 2 of the test, yet all the other multi and all single threaded also had a slight gain.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> If mitigations are disabled, then there is no performance hit at all (or if you're in a windows build that is not mitigation aware).
> The only bad microcode to avoid is C6 (9900K); I assume 9700K and 9600K have a similar branch. Even on an OS that is not mitigation aware (no security mitigations), this microcode has a >100 mhz hit in CPU raw speed just by installing it. Microcode BE is fine.
> 
> Gigabyte's official bioses are all on B4/B4/AE/B8 (not sure what the others are for, I assume B4 and B4 are 9700K and 9600K, AE is 9900K and B8 is 9900KF).


So what your saying is your clock speed is at 5.0GHz. However, you needed 100mhz more clock speed to make up the difference for performance loss?


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> So what your saying is your clock speed is at 5.0GHz. However, you needed 100mhz more clock speed to make up the difference for performance loss?


Yes, and I'm not the only one. Everyone else noticed it too. And when several people mentioned this on the win-raid microcode section, the posts got deleted ....


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Yes, and I'm not the only one. Everyone else noticed it too. And when several people mentioned this on the win-raid microcode section, the posts got deleted ....


Is Intel going to fix the performance loss?


----------



## R3van

KedarWolf said:


> *F10 BIOS for the Aorus Pro Wifi, F9b for the Ultra, F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master, F8a BIOS for the XTreme. With Updated RST and GOP firmware. Best performing microcode, but not the latest.
> 
> Other Z390 motherboards available on request.
> ...*



Hi @KedarWolf,


just curious, i am on F10c for the Master, why do you not use the latest Beta BIOS (found f10d on TweakTown and two pages back here) for your mod?


----------



## AndrejB

AndrejB said:


> Hey @Falkentyne, apologies for bothering.
> 
> Is it safer to have:
> 
> Ia ac/dc 80
> Llc low
> Dvid -0.020
> Min vout 1.090 in linx, 1.188 idle
> 
> Or
> 
> Ia ac/dc 90
> Llc normal
> Auto voltage
> Min vout 1.105 in linx, 1,2 idle
> 
> These two are probably very similar, just wanted to see with you, which would you prefer to use?


Bump.

Should the ia dc be equal to ia ac?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Bump.
> 
> Should the ia dc be equal to ia ac?


Not always. IA DC is the droop on the VID that is reported to the operating system and helps influence CPU_Package_ Power_MSR (VID * Amps). DC Loadline is only for power measurements. Since the "default" Loadline calibration (VRM Loadline) that Intel specifies for electrical specifications is 1.6 mOhms (8 core processors) and 2.1 mOhms (6 /4 core processors), the "maximum" DC (And AC) Loadline setting is the default VRM loadline setting. Sorry if that confuses you.

If it helps, IA DC Loadline affects the CPU VID in the exact same way that VRM Loadline (Vcore Loadline Calibration) affects VR VOUT with respect to the initial BIOS set voltage.
(U=I*R). U=voltage drop over circuit, I=Current, R=Resistance in milliOhms (part of Ohm's law).

(on auto voltages, the starting voltage is based on a preset VID up to x49/x50, then boosted up (but not past 1.520v) depending on AC Loadline value and current draw. The VRM takes this value as initial voltage on "Auto" Vcore. DC Loadline then lowers the reported VID depending on DCLL value. (+/- DVID offsets affect the VRM After AC Loadline bias; DC loadline ignores this as it only is for power measurements).

IA DC is "best" set to the same value as vcore loadline calibration (in resistance), if known, so that allows VID to at least somewhat closely follow VR VOUT (even though if you are using static voltage, or auto voltage with an offset, VID and VR VOUT will be quite different, depending on the offset). Turbo vcore LLC is 0.4 mOhms, High LLC is 0.8 mOhms, Low LLC is either 1.0 or 1.3 mOhms (Standard/Normal are both 1.6 mOhms, which is Intel specifications. Auto is 1.6 mOhms if MCE is disabled. If MCE is enabled, Auto is whatever MCE wants it to be).

AC Loadline is the CPU internal power supply resistance circuit that is sent to the VRM, where higher values of AC Loadline will boost the load (and idle) voltages sent to the VRM if using AUTO (DVID) voltages (AC Loadline doesn't have an "intel default setting"--but the highest electrical setting Intel specifies for 8 core processors is 1.6 mOhms). AC Loadline has no effect on static voltages as static voltages program the VRM directly.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Not always. IA DC is the droop on the VID that is reported to the operating system and helps influence CPU_Package_ Power_MSR (VID * Amps). DC Loadline is only for power measurements. Since the "default" Loadline calibration (VRM Loadline) that Intel specifies for electrical specifications is 1.6 mOhms (8 core processors) and 2.1 mOhms (6 /4 core processors), the "maximum" DC (And AC) Loadline setting is the default VRM loadline setting. Sorry if that confuses you.
> 
> If it helps, IA DC Loadline affects the CPU VID in the exact same way that VRM Loadline (Vcore Loadline Calibration) affects VR VOUT with respect to the initial BIOS set voltage.
> (U=I*R). U=voltage drop over circuit, I=Current, R=Resistance in milliOhms (part of Ohm's law).
> 
> (on auto voltages, the starting voltage is based on a preset VID up to x49/x50, then boosted up (but not past 1.520v) depending on AC Loadline value and current draw. The VRM takes this value as initial voltage on "Auto" Vcore. DC Loadline then lowers the reported VID depending on DCLL value. (+/- DVID offsets affect the VRM After AC Loadline bias; DC loadline ignores this as it only is for power measurements).
> 
> IA DC is "best" set to the same value as vcore loadline calibration (in resistance), if known, so that allows VID to at least somewhat closely follow VR VOUT (even though if you are using static voltage, or auto voltage with an offset, VID and VR VOUT will be quite different, depending on the offset). Turbo vcore LLC is 0.4 mOhms, High LLC is 0.8 mOhms, Low LLC is either 1.0 or 1.3 mOhms (Standard/Normal are both 1.6 mOhms, which is Intel specifications. Auto is 1.6 mOhms if MCE is disabled. If MCE is enabled, Auto is whatever MCE wants it to be).
> 
> AC Loadline is the CPU internal power supply resistance circuit that is sent to the VRM, where higher values of AC Loadline will boost the load (and idle) voltages sent to the VRM if using AUTO (DVID) voltages (AC Loadline doesn't have an "intel default setting"--but the highest electrical setting Intel specifies for 8 core processors is 1.6 mOhms). AC Loadline has no effect on static voltages as static voltages program the VRM directly.


Why do they call it AC,DC?


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> Why do they call it AC,DC?


AC=alternating current (two way). DC=direct current (one way). At least as far as I know.

So AC affects the loadline power supply going *TO* the VRM.
DC Loadline affects the VID by drooping it, after the VRM receives the target signal from the AC loadline (the VRM doesn't function on the DC loadline at all).

However due to how the VRM is designed, DC loadline doesn't affect the vdroop. I don't know why. You would THINK it would affect the vdroop. But it doesn't.
Only the VID is affected. And the VRM only receives the voltage signal from AC Loadline. DC loadline is processed after. VRM loadline (Loadline calibration) affects what the VRM received from ACLL.

The VID droops the same way (starting from whatever AC loadline set it to and wrote to the VRM--this can go up to 1.520v safely (BEFORE VDROOP).

You can see it yourself by setting DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms and leaving AC Loadline at 1.6 mOhms.

I think that's because VRM loadline and DC Loadline are two different things. And the Intel sheets don't help matters at all.

In the description for DC Loadline, it says "Loadline Slope within the VR regulation loop capability", maximum value 1.6 mOhms. No typical, no min.

But in the detailed description, it says AC Loadline affects operating voltages, and DC Loadline affects CPU power measurements.
It seems like the maximum DC Loadline value is equal to the default VRM (Loadline calibration) value.



> 14. Load Line (AC/DC) should be measured by the VRTT tool and programmed accordingly via the BIOS Load Line override setup
> options. AC/DC Load Line BIOS programming directly affects operating voltages (AC) and power measurements (DC). A
> superior board design with a shallower AC Load Line can improve on power, performance, and thermals compared to boards
> designed for POR impedance.


I'm guessing that "Loadline Calibration" is a hardwired circuit with different presets (Auto is controlled by MCE, all other levels are preset mOhms values).
You would think that DC Loadline would control this if Loadline Calibration is set to 'Auto' or 'Normal', but it doesn't. I don't know why Intel seems to have two different "descriptions" for DC Loadline in the specification sheet. It's absurd.

Oh and you ain't seen nothing yet.

You see this hidden value over here?

I don't have any idea if it does anything or if it's even wired to anything (you can't unhide this menu or submenu without 'rerouting' this option to an unused option on the Gigabyte MIT menu by asking someone on win-raid.com. You can unhide it on MSI laptops (GT75VR, GT75 Titan, GT63, GT76, any 8th gen+MSI laptop) but I have no idea if this changes the default loadline calibration or not (laptops don't have an option for changing LLC).


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bump.
> 
> Should the ia dc be equal to ia ac?
> 
> 
> 
> IA DC is "best" set to the same value as vcore loadline calibration (in resistance), if known, so that allows VID to at least somewhat closely follow VR VOUT (even though if you are using static voltage, or auto voltage with an offset, VID and VR VOUT will be quite different, depending on the offset). Turbo vcore LLC is 0.4 mOhms, High LLC is 0.8 mOhms, Low LLC is either 1.0 or 1.3 mOhms (Standard/Normal are both 1.6 mOhms, which is Intel specifications. Auto is 1.6 mOhms if MCE is disabled. If MCE is enabled, Auto is whatever MCE wants it to be).
Click to expand...

Thank you Falkentyne, I knew I had it wrong as my vid wasn't drooping as my vout did.

Here's my test. linx 0.9.6
Settings:
48/44 (cstates, mce all disabled)
Voltage: auto
Llc normal
Ia ac: 90

Min VID/min VOUT >>> Max VID/Max VOUT

Ia dc 0:
1.127 (lowest core) + 1.16 (average other cores) / 1.135 >>> 1.3 (average) / 1.25

Ia dc 90:
1.23 (average) / 1.135 >>> 1.3 (average) / 1.25

Ia dc 160 for some reason gave me a CPU Cache L0 error, but this might be due to gigabytes famous bios bugs or I'm dumb and didn't understand something


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> AC=alternating current (two way). DC=direct current (one way). At least as far as I know.
> 
> So AC affects the loadline power supply going *TO* the VRM.
> DC Loadline affects the VID by drooping it, after the VRM receives the target signal from the AC loadline (the VRM doesn't function on the DC loadline at all).
> 
> However due to how the VRM is designed, DC loadline doesn't affect the vdroop. I don't know why. You would THINK it would affect the vdroop. But it doesn't.
> Only the VID is affected. And the VRM only receives the voltage signal from AC Loadline. DC loadline is processed after. VRM loadline (Loadline calibration) affects what the VRM received from ACLL.
> 
> The VID droops the same way (starting from whatever AC loadline set it to and wrote to the VRM--this can go up to 1.520v safely (BEFORE VDROOP).
> 
> You can see it yourself by setting DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms and leaving AC Loadline at 1.6 mOhms.
> 
> I think that's because VRM loadline and DC Loadline are two different things. And the Intel sheets don't help matters at all.
> 
> In the description for DC Loadline, it says "Loadline Slope within the VR regulation loop capability", maximum value 1.6 mOhms. No typical, no min.
> 
> But in the detailed description, it says AC Loadline affects operating voltages, and DC Loadline affects CPU power measurements.
> It seems like the maximum DC Loadline value is equal to the default VRM (Loadline calibration) value.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing that "Loadline Calibration" is a hardwired circuit with different presets (Auto is controlled by MCE, all other levels are preset mOhms values).
> You would think that DC Loadline would control this if Loadline Calibration is set to 'Auto' or 'Normal', but it doesn't. I don't know why Intel seems to have two different "descriptions" for DC Loadline in the specification sheet. It's absurd.
> 
> Oh and you ain't seen nothing yet.
> 
> You see this hidden value over here?
> 
> I don't have any idea if it does anything or if it's even wired to anything (you can't unhide this menu or submenu without 'rerouting' this option to an unused option on the Gigabyte MIT menu by asking someone on win-raid.com. You can unhide it on MSI laptops (GT75VR, GT75 Titan, GT63, GT76, any 8th gen+MSI laptop) but I have no idea if this changes the default loadline calibration or not (laptops don't have an option for changing LLC).


I believe there is only AC alternating +- to -+ current going in to the PSU and DC +- from the PSU to components.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Thank you Falkentyne, I knew I had it wrong as my vid wasn't drooping as my vout did.
> 
> Here's my test. linx 0.9.6
> Settings:
> 48/44 (cstates, mce all disabled)
> Voltage: auto
> Llc normal
> Ia ac: 90
> 
> Min VID/min VOUT >>> Max VID/Max VOUT
> 
> Ia dc 0:
> 1.127 (lowest core) + 1.16 (average other cores) / 1.135 >>> 1.3 (average) / 1.25
> 
> Ia dc 90:
> 1.23 (average) / 1.135 >>> 1.3 (average) / 1.25
> 
> Ia dc 160 for some reason gave me a CPU Cache L0 error, but this might be due to gigabytes famous bios bugs or I'm dumb and didn't understand something


Can you set IA DC to "0" again for me, then look in HWinfo "Extended CPU information" for the DC Loadline value (mOhms)? It will be there (latest HWinfo version, or a couple versions back is when this was added). ACLL is there too. Also what is the value for "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line?" I'd like to know this too. Because CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line is supposed to set presets for AC and DC Loadline:

Extreme: 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)
Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
Auto: 1.0/1.3 mOhms (4.7 ghz), 1.3/1.3 mOhms (5 ghz) <--this can vary. Auto in Bios sets whatever it wants.

However I have never tested the difference between Internal AC/DC Loadline=Turbo / DC Loadline=0, with AC Loadline set manually (0=auto by the way) vs DC Loadline 160 (Manual AC/DC loadline values in VR Settings override the CPU Internal AC/DC loadlines).

(VR Settings->AC/DC Loadline values have higher priority than CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline).


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Can you set IA DC to "0" again for me, then look in HWinfo "Extended CPU information" for the DC Loadline value (mOhms)? It will be there (latest HWinfo version, or a couple versions back is when this was added). ACLL is there too. Also what is the value for "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line?" I'd like to know this too. Because CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line is supposed to set presets for AC and DC Loadline:
> 
> Extreme: 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)
> Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
> Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
> Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
> Auto: 1.0/1.3 mOhms (4.7 ghz), 1.3/1.3 mOhms (5 ghz) <--this can vary. Auto in Bios sets whatever it wants.
> 
> However I have never tested the difference between Internal AC/DC Loadline=Turbo / DC Loadline=0, with AC Loadline set manually (0=auto by the way) vs DC Loadline 160 (Manual AC/DC loadline values in VR Settings override the CPU Internal AC/DC loadlines).
> 
> (VR Settings->AC/DC Loadline values have higher priority than CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline).


Right on the money /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
1.3 mOhms for DC and internal load line is on auto


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Right on the money /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 1.3 mOhms for DC and internal load line is on auto


I think your CPU L0 error was just bad luck.
(Probably borderline stable because AC Loadline was too low. Maybe try AC Loadline=100).


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> I think your CPU L0 error was just bad luck.
> (Probably borderline stable because AC Loadline was too low. Maybe try AC Loadline=100).


That may very well be it.
But I'm thinking it's maybe my vccsa of 1.12 and vccio of 1.02 that played a role in it. Will experiment further, maybe higher vccsa/vccio could allow lower AC


----------



## KedarWolf

R3van said:


> Hi @KedarWolf,
> 
> 
> just curious, i am on F10c for the Master, why do you not use the latest Beta BIOS (found f10d on TweakTown and two pages back here) for your mod?


F10b is the BIOS officially released by Gigabyte on their support website, and I find I get the best RAM overclocks with it. Plus when I tried F10c I had a random reboot and never have with F10b.


----------



## Rakanoth

Do you guys know if there is way to underclock or overclock PCIe bus in this mobo? I haven't found it in BIOS yet.


----------



## Deathtech00

Hey guys. Still tuning and tweaking. Loving this system. I wanted to say thank you to @*Falkentyne* and @*KedarWolf* for their work on this board and help here in the forums.

Had a few issues, but after much trial and error it turned out to be the powersupply. After it was replaced no more boot issues.

So I am running a delidded + Liquid Metal + Copper Relid (my XC7 wont go direct die, and since I just bought it, I decided to wait until i can get a different one in the future. Honestly, though, my temps never get above 65 in normal day to day use, and synthetics BARELY have a couple of cores tickle 80 Degrees until the fan curve catches up.)

I am currently running no AVX offset as well. I want to move to a voltage offset style overclock, but more just for longevity. Im fairly certain, considering without delidding the chip out of the box is comfy at 90-100 degrees (seriously, have you seen the prebuilts dell is putting out with a no-K 9900? My shop has gotten 5 of them, and all of them thermal throttle instantly and rarely go over 4.0 Ghz. These things live on 100 degrees operating temperature.)

Anyway, I was hoping I could get some critiques to my Voltages, settings, etc. I will post some BIOS screenshots later, but here is my HWinfo64 :


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> I think your CPU L0 error was just bad luck.
> (Probably borderline stable because AC Loadline was too low. Maybe try AC Loadline=100).


It was the vccsa/vccio @ 1.12/1.02
Now @ 1.15/1.05, I can run ac/dc 90/160

And now VID is much closer to vout.

Thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

Gigabyte claims that changing IOL's and RTL's/offsets works fine on the Aorus Master. But everyone here claims it doesn't work.
So what's going on?

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1126.html#post512382


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Gigabyte claims that changing IOL's and RTL's/offsets works fine on the Aorus Master. But everyone here claims it doesn't work.
> So what's going on?
> 
> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1126.html#post512382


I tried to play with RTL / IOL settings ... I changed the IOL's one up once to test is something would change with my RTL's, but after the reboot my ASRock timing tool didn't show any changes at all.

Had to change some other settings (secundairy / tertiary) to get those values to change.


----------



## Medvediy

And why auto RTL and IOL are so high on z390 aorus master? 68-70 for RTL and 13-15 for IOL? Really? I've tryed trainings for more than 10 times. And always they are so high.
On other mobos those RAM stick are works like 62-64 for RTL and 6-4 for IOL. So what's wrong with those trainings on z390 aorus master?


----------



## Salve1412

Medvediy said:


> And why auto RTL and IOL are so high on z390 aorus master? 68-70 for RTL and 13-15 for IOL? Really? I've tryed trainings for more than 10 times. And always they are so high.
> On other mobos those RAM stick are works like 62-64 for RTL and 6-4 for IOL. So what's wrong with those trainings on z390 aorus master?


I conducted some experiments with my Aorus Master (BIOS F10b) a while back with the G.Skill kit F4-4266C19D-16GTZR and a 9900k. The results showed lots of inconsistencies. I started from Default settings at 2133Mhz and raised gradually the frequency with X.M.P. disabled (by "gradually" I mean by steps of 100-133Mhz each). I noticed that up to 3733Mhz my board is at ease with setting aggressive RTLs and IOLs. From that point on it starts to struggle, but sometimes (I mean after forcing repeated trainings by playing with timings such as the Case Latency) it manages to set low values, as you can see in the image I attached. One can immediately ascertain that the training with these lower RTL and IOL values has gone well by looking at the section in the BIOS for those parameters: it will show correctly the numeric values. Here comes the first oddity: if I try to manipulate these numbers, lowering or raising them, the board ignores completely my changes and reverts to what I call "dumb" or "safe settings" for RTLs and IOLS (the higher values we're accustomed to when reaching higher frequencies, typically indicated, at least in my case, by the lack of numbers in the BIOS RTL and IOL section). So if I want low RTL and IOL I have to stick to what my board decides to set. After reaching 3866, if I want to keep low values and increase the frequency I've found two alternatives, both really dodgy and with odd consequences. I can simply try to raise the frequency, but already at 3900 the training either fails (even triggering the Backup BIOS most of the time) or goes back to the board "safe settings" for RTL and IOL. Or I can choose "Enable Fast Boot", option that skips completely memory training even when severe changes are made such as raising the frequency: this way, however, Windows is really unstable and BSODs a lot, sometimes right on startup. The picture I've attached shows the best combo i could reach without losing stability: it helped a lot with latencies, but the loss of bandwidth compared to 4000Mhz with "dumb" RTLs and IOLs made me give up on it. I don't know if any of this could be useful and I recognize that it may look really confused, but it is one of those thing that are more easily shown than explained.


----------



## tookenyip

Hi all. Just have a local store build and OC the below rig:

9900KF
Aorus Z390 Ultra

I didn’t went into details yet but I was told the 5Ghz OC running on 1.465V. So my question is that voltage number common? Assuming temp isn’t an issue.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Gigabyte claims that changing IOL's and RTL's/offsets works fine on the Aorus Master. But everyone here claims it doesn't work.
> So what's going on?
> 
> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1126.html#post512382


To be more clear, the settings I had to change to get my RTL's and IOL's in check were the green outlined ones in the picture below.

When my RTL's were off, I rebooted .... changed those values 1 up (all 4 of them) ... let the memory train again, and got the correct RTL's again ... at least .... nicely lining up (like in the pic) and not all over the board.


----------



## AndrejB

My +12V is fluctuating between 12.384 and 12.456 is this too much?


----------



## Sheyster

tookenyip said:


> Hi all. Just have a local store build and OC the below rig:
> 
> 9900KF
> Aorus Z390 Ultra
> 
> I didn’t went into details yet but I was told the 5Ghz OC running on 1.465V. So my question is that voltage number common? Assuming temp isn’t an issue.


That's way too high for a 5 GHz OC.


----------



## wingman99

AndrejB said:


> My +12V is fluctuating between 12.384 and 12.456 is this too much?


If your checking with software it's not accurate. The ATX standard calls for a +/- 5% tolerance. = +12.6v


----------



## AndrejB

wingman99 said:


> If your checking with software it's not accurate. The ATX standard calls for a +/- 5% tolerance. = +12.6v


I was thinking about the 0.07v fluctuation, it can be seen in the bios also, but I figure I'm just being paranoid.
Also yea I don't have a multimeter.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> My +12V is fluctuating between 12.384 and 12.456 is this too much?


What's the VR VIN voltage reported in the VRM section of HWInfo64 (the same spot where VR VOUT is?)
Check this reading when "Idle" (no load at all) and then with >150 amp load (prime95 small FFT 29.8 build 6, AVX or FMA3 enabled).


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> What's the VR VIN voltage reported in the VRM section of HWInfo64 (the same spot where VR VOUT is?)
> Check this reading when "Idle" (no load at all) and then with >150 amp load (prime95 small FFT 29.8 build 6, AVX or FMA3 enabled).


It's a 0.03v fluctuation, idle 12.125v, p95 small fft (160amps) 12.094v

It even fluctuates between these two values on idle


And now it went up to 12.188v in tomb raider

Thinking this 0.7% is a lot given that seasonic is stating microtolerance @ 0.5%
https://seasonic.com/prime-ultra-titanium


----------



## tookenyip

Sheyster said:


> That's way too high for a 5 GHz OC.


I’m getting the rig today and I should be able to provide more details.


----------



## Artroxa

Have you guys noticed any difference in frametime when running the board on 2x8 vs 4x8? 
Im having some issues with frametime bumps in enough games to make me question just putting it down to game engines, and im running on 9900k @5GHZ and a 2080ti, however i only have 2x8 3200 CL14 sticks and i kinda wanna try out 4x8 to see if it will change anything considering the board and stuff.


----------



## wingman99

Artroxa said:


> Have you guys noticed any difference in frametime when running the board on 2x8 vs 4x8?
> Im having some issues with frametime bumps in enough games to make me question just putting it down to game engines, and im running on 9900k @5GHZ and a 2080ti, however i only have 2x8 3200 CL14 sticks and i kinda wanna try out 4x8 to see if it will change anything considering the board and stuff.


Describe in more detail what is meant by frame bumps? Also list the complete PC including monitor.


----------



## Danya

*Intel AMT*

Im trying to setup intel AMT, but i struggled with problems. No one utility can see Intel ME is presented. 
Gigabyte aorus pro wifi


----------



## robertr1

Anyone know what the F11a beta bios for the Pro wifi board contains?


----------



## Alemancio

Deathtech00 said:


> Hey guys. Still tuning and tweaking. Loving this system. I wanted to say thank you to @*Falkentyne* and @*KedarWolf* for their work on this board and help here in the forums.


This is so underrated. Seriously guys, thank you!


----------



## Artroxa

What i mean in general is just frame time hikes, spikes, whatever you like to call them, hitching ^^ 

I run a pg279q screen, ive already tried gsync on, off, rtss limiting ( this helped slightly but not all the way ), latencymon monitoring, tried running every component unclocked just incase, nothing seems to work! 
Issue is almost no matter the game i can get a extremely smooth frame time outside of the spikes, and it doesnt seem to be affected by reducing graphics either, very annoying. 

The only two things i could think of maybe causing it is either the motherboard ( aorus master ) struggling for some reason because im running 2x8 ramsticks on it instead of 4x8, or potentially my DAC a fiio e10k olympus 2 ( the reason i suspect it might be that is because ive read alot about audio drivers and whatnot messing with frame timing, and i have this issue where the mouse sometimes need to be replugged in USB slot to even start, even tho it will light up for a split second when i click LMB, so maybe USB controller driver issue?? but then id think latencymon shouldv picked up on it? )


----------



## scaramonga

robertr1 said:


> Anyone know what the F11a beta bios for the Pro wifi board contains?


BIOS code I presume.


----------



## 66racer

Hello,

I know this is the Aorus thread but I have a z390 Designare on BIOS F7 that will not seem to stick to 100mhz baseclock. It hovers around 99.7x mhz and when I set Baseclock to 102 it still does not change. Anyone see this on the Aorus boards or have any suggestions? I think I have played with every BIOS setting that would make sense to me. I will be reflashing F7 later today then trying F6 as plan B.

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

robertr1 said:


> Anyone know what the F11a beta bios for the Pro wifi board contains?


1 - Disk Controller
EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13


Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ B4 │2019-04-01│PRD │0x18000│0xD70400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ B4 │2019-04-01│PRD │0x18400│0xD88400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ AE │2019-02-14│PRD │0x18000│0xDA0800│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ B8 │2019-03-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xDB8800│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝


----------



## KedarWolf

https://ca.ign.com/articles/2019/10/03/intel-core-x-cascade-lake-x-processors

Intel’s last top-end 18-core CPU, the Intel Core i9-9980XE, went for a cool $1,999 at launch, but its replacement, the Intel Core i9-10980XE, costs half as much at only $979.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel/core-i9-10980xe-5-1-ghz-overclock-standard-liquid-cooling

Intel's upcoming Cascade Lake X processors aren’t just suddenly way more affordable, they also seem to be pretty impressive overclockers too. At least that’s what Intel is telling us. The 18-core Core i9 10980XE – the HEDT CPU with an unfeasibly long number string – is reportedly capable of hitting 5.1GHz on all cores with just a little judicious core overclocking.

Guess what I'm getting tax refund time next spring!!

Well, will have to see the new Threadripper but I'm an Intel fanboy for sure, not really impressed with the 3900x etc.


----------



## robertr1

Thanks @KedarWolf I'll hold out for now.


----------



## Padinn

Artroxa said:


> What i mean in general is just frame time hikes, spikes, whatever you like to call them, hitching ^^
> 
> I run a pg279q screen, ive already tried gsync on, off, rtss limiting ( this helped slightly but not all the way ), latencymon monitoring, tried running every component unclocked just incase, nothing seems to work!
> Issue is almost no matter the game i can get a extremely smooth frame time outside of the spikes, and it doesnt seem to be affected by reducing graphics either, very annoying.
> 
> The only two things i could think of maybe causing it is either the motherboard ( aorus master ) struggling for some reason because im running 2x8 ramsticks on it instead of 4x8, or potentially my DAC a fiio e10k olympus 2 ( the reason i suspect it might be that is because ive read alot about audio drivers and whatnot messing with frame timing, and i have this issue where the mouse sometimes need to be replugged in USB slot to even start, even tho it will light up for a split second when i click LMB, so maybe USB controller driver issue?? but then id think latencymon shouldv picked up on it? )


Have you tried high performance power mode? This fixed a similar issue i had in VR games


----------



## Artroxa

Padinn said:


> Have you tried high performance power mode? This fixed a similar issue i had in VR games


Yeah ive even enabled the "ultimate power plan" that comes with windows 10 and played around with different settings on it :h34r-smi


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> https://ca.ign.com/articles/2019/10/03/intel-core-x-cascade-lake-x-processors
> 
> Intel’s last top-end 18-core CPU, the Intel Core i9-9980XE, went for a cool $1,999 at launch, but its replacement, the Intel Core i9-10980XE, costs half as much at only $979.
> 
> https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel/core-i9-10980xe-5-1-ghz-overclock-standard-liquid-cooling
> 
> Intel's upcoming Cascade Lake X processors aren’t just suddenly way more affordable, they also seem to be pretty impressive overclockers too. At least that’s what Intel is telling us. The 18-core Core i9 10980XE – the HEDT CPU with an unfeasibly long number string – is reportedly capable of hitting 5.1GHz on all cores with just a little judicious core overclocking.
> 
> Guess what I'm getting tax refund time next spring!!
> 
> Well, will have to see the new Threadripper but I'm an Intel fanboy for sure, not really impressed with the 3900x etc.


Thanks for the links. Intel cascade lake x sounds sweet.


----------



## hickelpickle

Artroxa said:


> What i mean in general is just frame time hikes, spikes, whatever you like to call them, hitching ^^
> 
> I run a pg279q screen, ive already tried gsync on, off, rtss limiting ( this helped slightly but not all the way ), latencymon monitoring, tried running every component unclocked just incase, nothing seems to work!
> Issue is almost no matter the game i can get a extremely smooth frame time outside of the spikes, and it doesnt seem to be affected by reducing graphics either, very annoying.
> 
> The only two things i could think of maybe causing it is either the motherboard ( aorus master ) struggling for some reason because im running 2x8 ramsticks on it instead of 4x8, or potentially my DAC a fiio e10k olympus 2 ( the reason i suspect it might be that is because ive read alot about audio drivers and whatnot messing with frame timing, and i have this issue where the mouse sometimes need to be replugged in USB slot to even start, even tho it will light up for a split second when i click LMB, so maybe USB controller driver issue?? but then id think latencymon shouldv picked up on it? )



Do You have c-states enabled in bios?


----------



## Artroxa

hickelpickle said:


> Do You have c-states enabled in bios?


Hmm no this i have not done, do you think it could impact frame time?

ended up buying 2 more sticks of ram now ( G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4 3200Mhz CL14 ) 
Il report back if it fixes my frame time issues


----------



## AndrejB

Artroxa said:


> hickelpickle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do You have c-states enabled in bios?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm no this i have not done, do you think it could impact frame time?
> 
> ended up buying 2 more sticks of ram now ( G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4 3200Mhz CL14 )
> Il report back if it fixes my frame time issues /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

By default c states are enabled in the bios, enabling sleep and other low power modes


----------



## EarlZ

How many watts does the usb-c port provide to devices, I see its spec at usb c 3.1 gen2 and In hoping it does 60w at least.


----------



## Salve1412

I tested my RAM overnight using HCI Memtest Pro 6.1 via the AutoHotkey script provided by Kedarwolf. This morning I found the situation showed in the picture attached.
I know that not all cores perform at the same speed but is this deviation between some instances (~1000% vs ~800% vs ~900%) normal, or maybe could it indicate that my overclock (9900k at 5Ghz) is not completely stable? Thanks!


----------



## Driller au

Salve1412 said:


> I tested my RAM overnight with HCI Memtest Pro 6.1 via the AutoHotkey script provided by Kedarwolf. This morning I found the situation showed in the picture attached.
> I know that not all cores perform at the same speed but is this deviation between some instances (~1000% vs ~800% vs ~900%) normal, or maybe could it indicate that my overclock (9900k at 5Ghz) is not completely stable? Thanks!


Mine has been like that on every system i have owned


----------



## AndrejB

@Falkentyne thank you the idea


----------



## KedarWolf

Salve1412 said:


> I tested my RAM overnight using HCI Memtest Pro 6.1 via the AutoHotkey script provided by Kedarwolf. This morning I found the situation showed in the picture attached.
> I know that not all cores perform at the same speed but is this deviation between some instances (~1000% vs ~800% vs ~900%) normal, or maybe could it indicate that my overclock (9900k at 5Ghz) is not completely stable? Thanks!


Yes, I get the variances as well.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

Driller au said:


> Mine has been like that on every system i have owned





KedarWolf said:


> Yes, I get the variances as well.


I see, so it's nothing I should worry about. Thank you guys!


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> Alrite folks. I've just finished some extensive testing in regards to Gigabyte RGB Fusion 2.0.
> I started this testing because I accidentally corrupt my windows drive yesterday when I tried running p95 smallest ffts with just a little too much vcore/IO/sa, insta shutdown and couldn't even boot into windows. keke.
> 
> 
> Alrite so here is the deal. Here is what works for syncing ALL of my devices.
> List of my devices that are rgb fusion 2.0 compatible all sync up together for me-
> rgb Aorus z390 Master motherboard
> rgb Aorus 2080 Ti xtreme waterforce 240mm AIO
> 4 fractal argb fans
> strimer rgb motherboard cable
> strimer rgb gpu cable
> aorus rgb nvme ssd
> t-force rgb MAX ssd
> g.skill trident z RGB ram
> aorus rgb headset
> aorus rgb keyboard
> 2x phanteks argb strips
> 
> 
> What you need to make this work:





Spoiler



Windows 1809 (1903 ****ed everything up, gigabyte also doesn't update their software at the same time as new windows releases roll out, Avoid upgrading to newer versions of software if what you are using works)

Nvidia GPU driver- 436.15(other newer and older nvidia 2080ti drivers would cause whitescreen freeze ups when used with aorus engine 1.73/1.67 & rgb fusion 2.0, MAKE SURE TO DO CLEAN INSTALLATION AND REMOVE OLD SETTINGS). I've tested every nvidia 2080 ti DCH driver from 436.02 till current(my 2080ti requires the DCH driver instead of the standard drivers, dunno why). 436.15 worked and caused rgb fusion 2.0 to recognize AND allow me to control the lighting. 

RGB Fusion 2.0 - version 3.19.801.2 (Newer versions would not recognize my aorus rgb nvme ssd at all or caused the ram to act silly sometimes)

Using older or newer nvidia drivers with aorus engine may still cause freeze ups or cause the GPU to not be recognized in RGB fusion 2.0 or it will be recognized but changing lighting does nothing.

After finding the best nvidia driver to pair with rgb fusion 2.0, I have not tested aorus engine again, I was using it previously but lost the working version when my old harddrive corrupt. The newest version of aorus engine(gpu ocing program for aorus cards) with newer nvidia drivers just whitescreens after booting into windows and then if you let it sit long enough, it goes back to working but gpu lighting still was unable to be controlled. I'm just going to use nzxt cam for ocing the card as i'm already using it for my aio since I don't feel like trying to hunt down an older version of aorus engine/testing them. Aorus Engine 1.73 is PROBABLY MADE FOR WINDOWS 1903. Only half of gigabyte's utilities/drivers have different variations specifically for each version of windows 10(1809/1903). If you are keen on using aorus engine, maybe try v. 1.51. 

I understand that gigabyte removes older versions of ALL of their supporting software/drivers from their website. This is bad. This makes it hard for us to roll back to previous versions if we didn't already have them saved or if gigabyte ****s something up in a newer update(which they always seem to do). If there is a gigabyte rep that browses these forums, please ******* tell them to stop removing old software, we need it for reference or to use incase your newer versions don't work. Luckily I had the rgb fusion 2.0 software on my usb stick. The file is 68mb in size. If someone knows of a website I can upload the zip file to, I'll upload it and share the link for anyone who might need it. I've had at least 1 PM from a user asking for the software but I could not find a free upload site that had a higher maximum upload size than 50mb. If you know of a site that will let me upload a 68mb file, let me know and i'll do it.

Shame on gigabyte for not working closely with nvidia and microsoft to ensure that everything works perfectly whenever any of the 3 providers roll out a new update. I love my gigabyte products but I ******* hate the company for being so evasive and for not properly ensuring a good customer experience. It seems that trying to get support for this **** is impossible when you try to go through their official channels, it's like nobody their has any solutions or even wants to help. I think i'm going to start flooding ALL of their social media till they fix the issue, I recommend all gigabyte product owners to do the same. Gigabyte has been aware of these issues for at least 2 years, this bull**** is unacceptable.

EDIT: I have a 360mm AIO from NZXT. The latest version of NZXT CAM software used for controlling the fan speed and lighting of the NZXT aio has conflicting behavior with rgb fusion software to where nzxt cam won't let you alter fan speeds/lighting of the aio. Contact NZXT, shame them for not making sure their software is compatible with rgb fusion and request a download link to an older version of nzxt cam. Then, contact gigabyte and shame them for not being in contact with NZXT to make sure consumers are guaranteed a good experience with their products. We are in 2019, I could understand if this was 20 or 30 years ago but it's not, THERE SHOULD BE ZERO EXCUSE FROM EITHER COMPANY AS TO WHY THEIR ARE ISSUES WITH THEIR PRODUCTS AREN't WORKING PROPERLY! SHAME THEM ALL. It takes barely any effort at all to reach out to companies and partner up to make sure everything works as advertised when products are utilized on the same system. STOP ******* YOUR CUSTOMER BASE OR WE ARE GOING TO PUT YOU OUT OF BUSINESS! Just remember, it takes years to build a reputation and only minutes to destroy one-I'm looking at you gigabyte and nzxt
.

To all my fellow purchasers of expensive overpriced technology that barely costs any money to produce- Until a company fixes their product, blast them on every advertisement and public outlet you can, THEY DESERVE IT. 

I paid good ******* money( over 3k usd) for my system. I EXPECT IT TO WORK FLAWLESSLY.

IF WE CAN PUT A ******* MAN OR WOMAN ON THE MOON, YOU CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE YOUR PRODUCTS WORK FLAWLESSLY! SHAME ON BOTH GIGABYTE AND NZXT HERE! NO EXCUSES, JUST SHUT THE **** UP AND MAKE IT WORK PROPERLY OR I"M GOING TO START CONTACTING LAWYERS FOR A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT!




So basically I should use an old OS version, old drivers and old software and say 3 Hail Mary's and 2 Our Father's and it might work?? You know what I have to say about that? TO HELL WITH RGB.


----------



## robertr1

I'm so glad I don't have a single piece of GB software installed.

You can control fan curves and pump speeds in bios. 

The software is many level of terrible and runs in the background. I have 0 faith in it for any security considerations.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> Well, you could make urself useful and contribute/figure out what the optimal setup/drivers are through testing when it comes to 1903/rgb fusion 2.0. Just sayin. .



No reason for personal attacks. Just sayin.  

FWIW my MSI video card and GB mobo both have addressable RGB capability, but I could care less and I use the default settings for both. Some of us would rather go fast than look good.  I'm sure some of the folks here appreciate what you did with the testing, I'm just not one of those folks.


----------



## Falkentyne

Can someone, anyone, please kindly answer this question?

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...clock-results-questions-198.html#post28157514
@GBT-MatthewH , any ideas?
(Screenshots higher up in that thread, showing the EPS current of the Z370 gaming 7 (23 amps) vs the clamped Aorus Master (15.969 amps).


----------



## arrow0309

Hi everyone folks, after a couple of days personal research I've decided to buy an Aorus Z390 Ultra for my (arriving) 9900KF (deliddel + custom copper ihs).
It's the sweetest spot imho for that amount of money (	£239.99 on amazon.co.uk) and I have to admit I kinda love it's vrm (no offence to any Aorus Master or higher end any other owner).
Hope will all go smooth, nice and easy (fingers crossed) also with my sig ram, right now they're in quad ch at 4000 (cl17-18-17-38-320-1T) @1.40v but I'm curious what will I be able to achieve on this Aorus Ultra.

However, before I hit the "buy it now" button on amazon, anyone think this mainboard should not be "that much" appreciated? 
Thanks guys! 

Edit:
Never mind, found a bargain and got myself a Taichi Ultimate, see ya


----------



## ezveedub

Hey guys, been playing around this weekend with some TeamGroup DDR4 4000 CL18. Is it better run 4 sticks of this DDR that 2? Its 8Gb sticks. It's not on QVL, but then again much of the DDR on QVL is either gone or expensive AF if still around. Was tempted to try another set just to see. Can't really get it at 4K speed, but right under at 3933 or 3866 I can get it to run so far, but still need some tweaks I assume. I do have some DDR4 3200 CL14 coming in also to try, but would like to see if getting this to run at 4000 is doable or not. As a note, I tried this DDR on my 9900K running F10b bios and it hates it. Will go only as high as 3600 from random testing done and it ended up being slower at 3600 16-16-16-36 when I ran a gaming test, so back in went my DDR3200 CL16 32Gb (4x8gb) for now. I have it on my 9700K now with that running F9 bios and it runs and boots under more settings in bios, just not at 4000, less speed, but same timings it rated for. 

https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/product/xcalibur-rgb-ddr4


----------



## robertr1

ezveedub said:


> Hey guys, been playing around this weekend with some TeamGroup DDR4 4000 CL18. Is it better run 4 sticks of this DDR that 2? Its 8Gb sticks. It's not on QVL, but then again much of the DDR on QVL is either gone or expensive AF if still around. Was tempted to try another set just to see. Can't really get it at 4K speed, but right under at 3933 or 3866 I can get it to run so far, but still need some tweaks I assume. I do have some DDR4 3200 CL14 coming in also to try, but would like to see if getting this to run at 4000 is doable or not. As a note, I tried this DDR on my 9900K running F10b bios and it hates it. Will go only as high as 3600 from random testing done and it ended up being slower at 3600 16-16-16-36 when I ran a gaming test, so back in went my DDR3200 CL16 32Gb (4x8gb) for now. I have it on my 9700K now with that running F9 bios and it runs and boots under more settings in bios, just not at 4000, less speed, but same timings it rated for.
> 
> https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/product/xcalibur-rgb-ddr4


You'll want to 4 sticks for best performance since these are T Topology boards.

If you're limited to 2 sticks, you'll need to hand tune the kit and will likely be limited to 3600-3800mhz.


----------



## ezveedub

robertr1 said:


> You'll want to 4 sticks for best performance since these are T Topology boards.
> 
> 
> 
> If you're limited to 2 sticks, you'll need to hand tune the kit and will likely be limited to 3600-3800mhz.




I’ve gotten them to run 3600-3833 O-K for now, just have to fiddle with memory settings some more. Will see how they compare to 16Gb 2 sticks of 3200 CL14 and then try to OC those. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Arni90

ezveedub said:


> Hey guys, been playing around this weekend with some TeamGroup DDR4 4000 CL18. Is it better run 4 sticks of this DDR that 2? Its 8Gb sticks. It's not on QVL, but then again much of the DDR on QVL is either gone or expensive AF if still around. Was tempted to try another set just to see. Can't really get it at 4K speed, but right under at 3933 or 3866 I can get it to run so far, but still need some tweaks I assume. I do have some DDR4 3200 CL14 coming in also to try, but would like to see if getting this to run at 4000 is doable or not. As a note, I tried this DDR on my 9900K running F10b bios and it hates it. Will go only as high as 3600 from random testing done and it ended up being slower at 3600 16-16-16-36 when I ran a gaming test, so back in went my DDR3200 CL16 32Gb (4x8gb) for now. I have it on my 9700K now with that running F9 bios and it runs and boots under more settings in bios, just not at 4000, less speed, but same timings it rated for.
> 
> https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/product/xcalibur-rgb-ddr4


You'll have a significantly easier time with 4 sticks, and get better results in the process.


----------



## Sheyster

arrow0309 said:


> Edit:
> Never mind, found a bargain and got myself a Taichi Ultimate, see ya


Good move, that's an excellent mobo.


----------



## Bravoexo

Anyone installed those new Wifi and Blutooth drivers from Aorus.com (says ver 1909 supported, does it mean i need it first before applying these?)

I don't think the last Wifi drivers installed cleanly however...really scrambled my system with constanly running WinInstall, even after rebooting and removing the startup string..)


----------



## ezveedub

Bravoexo said:


> Anyone installed those new Wifi and Blutooth drivers from Aorus.com (says ver 1909 supported, does it mean i need it first before applying these?)
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think the last Wifi drivers installed cleanly however...really scrambled my system with constanly running WinInstall, even after rebooting and removing the startup string..)




I believe I’m running them with no issues. I’ve used AppCenter to load drivers sometimes and then kill if from running on start-up. I have seen it try to load drivers that are already installed, but you can tell when it keeps restarting the install and doesn’t get past this, so I just cancel it. Haven’t had any issues in the last months with 1903 drivers....only with 1809 ones in the past. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Smokediggity

Bravoexo said:


> Anyone installed those new Wifi and Blutooth drivers from Aorus.com (says ver 1909 supported, does it mean i need it first before applying these?)
> 
> I don't think the last Wifi drivers installed cleanly however...really scrambled my system with constanly running WinInstall, even after rebooting and removing the startup string..)



I'm on 1903. The Bluetooth driver installed fine for me, but the WiFi driver won't install; it keeps giving me an error saying "The following extensions are blocked: Extensions\PieExtension.INF"


----------



## ezveedub

If you’re trying install the Intel WiFi 21.50.0.5g driver, do it from Device Manager and steer it to the driver folder and it will update.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## hickelpickle

robertr1 said:


> You'll want to 4 sticks for best performance since these are T Topology boards.
> 
> If you're limited to 2 sticks, you'll need to hand tune the kit and will likely be limited to 3600-3800mhz.


Wasn't true in my case I run 16-18-18-36 4100 with 8x2 hyperx b-die with tightened subs. Requires 1.24sa/1.25io and I cant get anything stable past other then cl15/4300 which I can get bench stable.. Anything past that is a hardwall I cant pass even with 1.65v or 1.35io/sa, which I feel is a board limitation from not running 4 dimms.


----------



## KedarWolf

For the Master, I want to buy an Aorus SLI bridge.

Is this the right spacing? 2 Slot, right?

https://www.amazon.ca/Gigabyte-RGB-...LI+bridge&qid=1571121776&s=electronics&sr=1-1


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> For the Master, I want to buy an Aorus SLI bridge.
> 
> Is this the right spacing? 2 Slot, right?
> 
> https://www.amazon.ca/Gigabyte-RGB-...LI+bridge&qid=1571121776&s=electronics&sr=1-1


check out the SLI bridge that came with your motherboard would do the job if your just going 1080Ti sli not pretty rgb though


----------



## Madness11

Hey guys , for aorus master and 9900k ( 2x ssd and 2x m2 nvme enough space?? Or need more pci lines


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> check out the SLI bridge that came with your motherboard would do the job if your just going 1080Ti sli not pretty rgb though


Yes. I'm using that one. Want a nicer one though. I contacted Gigabyte Support and asked.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> For the Master, I want to buy an Aorus SLI bridge.
> 
> Is this the right spacing? 2 Slot, right?
> 
> https://www.amazon.ca/Gigabyte-RGB-...LI+bridge&qid=1571121776&s=electronics&sr=1-1


EDIT - NVM - You have a Master board, you need the 81MM bridge.


----------



## Madness11

Guys , please help 😉


----------



## ezveedub

Well, got 2nd set of DDR4000 and dropped them in and set XMP and go.....no issues at all, unlike when running just 2 sticks. Will be testing it some more later this week.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> EDIT - NVM - You have a Master board, you need the 81MM bridge.[/QUOT]
> 
> Gigabyte Support says I need the Aorus 1 slot spacing bridge.


----------



## sygnus21

Madness11 said:


> Hey guys , for aorus master and 9900k ( 2x ssd and 2x m2 nvme enough space?? Or need more pci lines


Sadly if you're not talking about overclocking posts like yours tend to get overlooked or ignored. 

Anyway, I'm running a 9900K on a Z390 Xtreme and have 2 NVME drives, plus 3 SATA drives all running without issue. The only "cost" was a PCIe x8 slot, but the only PCIe slot I use is the first x16 slot for my GPU. Anyway I would advise you check the PCI / NVme table in your owners manual to see what slots are affected based on where you install your NVMe drives. For my configuration, the first NVMe slot needed to be avoided as it would have taken away a SATA port. The Master should be the same but check / download the owner's manual.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Sheyster said:
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT - NVM - You have a Master board, you need the 81MM bridge.[/QUOT]
> 
> Gigabyte Support says I need the Aorus 1 slot spacing bridge.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, maybe I'm confused.  If they say so, I believe that one is 60mm.
Click to expand...


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, maybe I'm confused.  If they say so, I believe that one is 60mm.
> 
> 
> 
> I Googled the model number that came with the motherboard.
> 
> https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Gigabyt...nVidia-GTX-1070-1080-Video-Card-/123891232208
> 
> GC-SLI2PL 6CM or 60MM.
> 
> So yes, the 60MM 1 slot Aorus bridge in the one.
Click to expand...


----------



## lester007

does aorus master have pci e bifurcation?


----------



## Smokediggity

Looks like the final F10 bios for the Master is available over at TweakTown. Anyone know what's new since F10c? I see they are still shipping old microcode.



1 - Disk Controller
EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ B4 │2019-04-01│PRD │0x18000│0xD70400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ B4 │2019-04-01│PRD │0x18400│0xD88400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ AE │2019-02-14│PRD │0x18000│0xDA0800│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ B8 │2019-03-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xDB8800│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> Looks like the final F10 bios for the Master is available over at TweakTown. Anyone know what's new since F10c? I see they are still shipping old microcode.
> 
> 
> 
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13
> 
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ B4 │2019-04-01│PRD │0x18000│0xD70400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ B4 │2019-04-01│PRD │0x18400│0xD88400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ AE │2019-02-14│PRD │0x18000│0xDA0800│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ B8 │2019-03-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xDB8800│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝


Would be nice if @KedarWolf could mod BE for us, but there seem to be a few things "renamed" in the BIOS, and a SPD info tab that wasn't there before (from looking at it in AMIBCP 5.02.0031).
I'm guessing the "KS" microcode is the same as 906EC (AE?)? I thought new steppings got new microcodes. Or where is KS? 906ED I'm guessing is the KF chip.

*Edit*
F10 has *SHOW STOPPER BUGS*, but looks really nice. A few new options (Some of questionable value--no one wants to enable TvB Ratio clipping, but disabling TvB voltage optimizations will stop CPU VID from decreasing 1.5C every 1C, starting at 100C--not sure if that will help anyone or not, for Auto/DVID voltages). Options rerouted for ease of access.

1) tREFI > 9998 does not work. Going higher sets it to 65534. No way to avoid this. I don't think many of you will be happy about this.

2) CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv is missing. It's in the AMIBCP 5.02.0031 "normal" location in MIT-voltages, but looks like they forgot to reroute it or something.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Would be nice if @KedarWolf could mod BE for us, but there seem to be a few things "renamed" in the BIOS, and a SPD info tab that wasn't there before (from looking at it in AMIBCP 5.02.0031).
> I'm guessing the "KS" microcode is the same as 906EC (AE?)? I thought new steppings got new microcodes. Or where is KS? 906ED I'm guessing is the KF chip.


Attached F10 Modded.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Attached F10 Modded.


It's buggy though.
Either your memory will gain a ton of speed or you can kiss your bandwidth goodbye 

Do you enjoy having 9998 tREFI, or 65534 ? D:


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> It's buggy though.
> Either your memory will gain a ton of speed or you can kiss your bandwidth goodbye
> 
> Do you enjoy having 9998 tREFI, or 65534 ? D:


Have to go back to F10b, desktop is really buggy, even with tREFI on Auto with exactly the same settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Have to go back to F10b, desktop is really buggy, even with tREFI on Auto with exactly the same settings.


Desktop is buggy, how? Memory instability?

Try to send a tag or PM to @GBT-MatthewH so he can let GB Support know.
I think this BIOS is required for 9900KS support, unless F10a / b will have microcode for it.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Desktop is buggy, how? Memory instability?
> 
> Try to send a tag or PM to @GBT-MatthewH so he can let GB Support know.
> I think this BIOS is required for 9900KS support, unless F10a / b will have microcode for it.


Actually, the desktop buggy was my Nvidia 'Manage 3D Settings' but the tREFI bug remains.


----------



## Smokediggity

Falkentyne said:


> Desktop is buggy, how? Memory instability?
> 
> Try to send a tag or PM to @*GBT-MatthewH* so he can let GB Support know.
> I think this BIOS is required for 9900KS support, unless F10a / b will have microcode for it.



I looked at a new MSI BIOS and they are also shipping the old microcode, so I assume the older microcodes support the KS, though that doesn't guarantee that the older BIOSes will be able to properly detect the CPU or have the necessary strings to display product specific info.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Actually, the desktop buggy was my Nvidia 'Manage 3D Settings' but the tREFI bug remains.


Disabling Thermal Velocity Boost voltage optimizations will raise the idle voltage considerably by allowing AC Loadline to boost the VID as high as the impedance allows, or up to 1.520v, whatever comes first (before vdroop, calm down ladies). The load voltage will also be higher, unless the impedance will put you at 1.520v (before vdroop), and it would also be at 1.520v if TvB voltage optimizations were enabled anyway (in which case the load voltage wouldn't change). If you disable TvB voltage optimizations, be prepared to adjust your AC Loadlines or DVID offsets for the VID increase that will result in VR VOUT increase.

Testing CPU stability is as bad as testing overclocked RAM. You never know if you're stable or 'partially stable' until a north wind blows your way. I "seem" to be maybe 5mv more stable than before, but I won't know for a few days of testing.


----------



## edhutner

Z390 Aorus Pro owner here.
Anywhere I could find changelog for F11 bios?
Currently I am on f11a, with "finalized" mem and cpu clocks. Dont want to blindly update.


----------



## Sheyster

edhutner said:


> Z390 Aorus Pro owner here.
> Anywhere I could find changelog for F11 bios?
> Currently I am on f11a, with "finalized" mem and cpu clocks. Dont want to blindly update.


Is that a Beta BIOS you found on Tweaktown? I don't see it on the official support page. Also, can you please upload it so we can figure out which microcode they're using.


----------



## johnyb0y

Sheyster said:


> Is that a Beta BIOS you found on Tweaktown? I don't see it on the official support page. Also, can you please upload it so we can figure out which microcode they're using.


He's probably talking about this thread on TweakTown: https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## edhutner

Yes the latest beta from tweaktown.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/g0pvqnuieg76fl1/Z390AORUSPRO.F11/file


----------



## johnyb0y

For my workstation I recently ordered this 32GB 4133Mhz C17 Kit from G.Skill: F4-4133C17Q-32GTZR 
http://www.gskill.com/product/165/1...GBDDR4-4133MHz-CL17-17-17-37-1.40V32GB-(4x8GB)

On my Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi (F10 Bios) I wasn't able to boot anything higher than 3800Mhz but I was able to tune the timings.
Currently I'm on 1.16v VCCIO & VCCSA and 1.40v on Ram. I even tried 1.3 VCCIO & VCCSA and 1.50v on Ram, but anything higher than 3800Mhz fails Ram Training.
It's possible that my IMC is just kinda ****ty. Anyway, I'm happy with my current results.

This is just FYI, maybe helpful to someone.


----------



## Sheyster

edhutner said:


> Yes the latest beta from tweaktown.
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/g0pvqnuieg76fl1/Z390AORUSPRO.F11/file


 @KedarWolf - can you please confirm the microcode used in this BIOS?


----------



## ezveedub

johnyb0y said:


> For my workstation I recently ordered this 32GB 4133Mhz C17 Kit from G.Skill: F4-4133C17Q-32GTZR
> 
> http://www.gskill.com/product/165/1...GBDDR4-4133MHz-CL17-17-17-37-1.40V32GB-(4x8GB)
> 
> 
> 
> On my Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi (F10 Bios) I wasn't able to boot anything higher than 3800Mhz but I was able to tune the timings.
> 
> Currently I'm on 1.16v VCCIO & VCCSA and 1.40v on Ram. I even tried 1.3 VCCIO & VCCSA and 1.50v on Ram, but anything higher than 3800Mhz fails Ram Training.
> 
> It's possible that my IMC is just kinda ****ty. Anyway, I'm happy with my current results.
> 
> 
> 
> This is just FYI, maybe helpful to someone.




That DDR actually lists as QVL for these Gigabyte Z390 mobos, but not the Pro.











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Sheyster

ezveedub said:


> That DDR actually lists as QVL for these Gigabyte Z390 mobos, but not the Pro.


The Pro is definitely much more picky than the Master, and also much harder to OC memory to 4000+.


----------



## Falkentyne

johnyb0y said:


> For my workstation I recently ordered this 32GB 4133Mhz C17 Kit from G.Skill: F4-4133C17Q-32GTZR
> http://www.gskill.com/product/165/1...GBDDR4-4133MHz-CL17-17-17-37-1.40V32GB-(4x8GB)
> 
> On my Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi (F10 Bios) I wasn't able to boot anything higher than 3800Mhz but I was able to tune the timings.
> Currently I'm on 1.16v VCCIO & VCCSA and 1.40v on Ram. I even tried 1.3 VCCIO & VCCSA and 1.50v on Ram, but anything higher than 3800Mhz fails Ram Training.
> It's possible that my IMC is just kinda ****ty. Anyway, I'm happy with my current results.
> 
> This is just FYI, maybe helpful to someone.


Try setting your RTL's and IOL's to (51/81/53/81), (Auto/auto/auto/auto), (60/60/120/120/40/40) in this order in that section of your BIOS.

Save and exit. Note that these will NOT apply at all until you go -back- in the BIOS, and then change the four TRDWR values.
So after you save and go back in the BIOS, set the four TRDWR's to one below your cas latency. Save, Exit, wait, then try to use a higher RAM speed than 3800 mhz. And pray.


----------



## johnyb0y

ezveedub said:


> That DDR actually lists as QVL for these Gigabyte Z390 mobos, but not the Pro.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yup, I also checked QVL before ordering. But even if 3800Mhz is all I can get, I'm pretty sure I still have some headroom on the timings. After all I'm only at 1.4v right now.



Falkentyne said:


> Try setting your RTL's and IOL's to (51/81/53/81), (Auto/auto/auto/auto), (60/60/120/120/40/40) in this order in that section of your BIOS.
> 
> Save and exit. Note that these will NOT apply at all until you go -back- in the BIOS, and then change the four TRDWR values.
> So after you save and go back in the BIOS, set the four TRDWR's to one below your cas latency. Save, Exit, wait, then try to use a higher RAM speed than 3800 mhz. And pray.


Thanks, will try and report back.


----------



## johnyb0y

Falkentyne said:


> Try setting your RTL's and IOL's to (51/81/53/81), (Auto/auto/auto/auto), (60/60/120/120/40/40) in this order in that section of your BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> Save and exit. Note that these will NOT apply at all until you go -back- in the BIOS, and then change the four TRDWR values.
> 
> So after you save and go back in the BIOS, set the four TRDWR's to one below your cas latency. Save, Exit, wait, then try to use a higher RAM speed than 3800 mhz. And pray.




Good news, I was able to boot 3900Mhz for the first time. 
But no chance on more than that. 
I even tried 4000Mhz with super relaxed timings, and 1.3v VCCIO & VCCSA - no luck. 

But it’s still a nice bump, so thanks a lot!

I‘m currently memtesting 3900Mhz with the same manual timings I had before - looks promising! 


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

johnyb0y said:


> Good news, I was able to boot 3900Mhz for the first time.
> But no chance on more than that.
> I even tried 4000Mhz with super relaxed timings, and 1.3v VCCIO & VCCSA - no luck.
> 
> But it’s still a nice bump, so thanks a lot!
> 
> I‘m currently memtesting 3900Mhz with the same manual timings I had before - looks promising!
> 
> 
> Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


Can you post your RTL/IOL values with a screenshot from Asrock Timing Configurator 4.0.4 ?


----------



## johnyb0y

Falkentyne said:


> Can you post your RTL/IOL values with a screenshot from Asrock Timing Configurator 4.0.4 ?


Sure, here you go!


----------



## Falkentyne

johnyb0y said:


> Sure, here you go!


Your Cas Write Latency (tWCL) and tRFC are way too tight.
Try setting tWCL to 15 (one below CAS) and tRFC to 450. See if you can do 4000 mhz now.


----------



## johnyb0y

Falkentyne said:


> Your Cas Write Latency (tWCL) and tRFC are way too tight.
> 
> Try setting tWCL to 15 (one below CAS) and tRFC to 450. See if you can do 4000 mhz now.




Thanks but I already tried 4000Mhz with the values from the default XMP profile (plus your changes) and also with even more relaxed timings. 
Sadly no luck. Seems like 3900Mhz is the end of the road for me. 


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


----------



## johnyb0y

Falkentyne said:


> Try setting your RTL's to (51/81/53/81) [...]



Just wanted to make sure this is not a typo. 51/81 and 53/81 is correct? 
Thanks




Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

johnyb0y said:


> Just wanted to make sure this is not a typo. 51/81 and 53/81 is correct?
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


Yes, I got those from buildzoid's video on the Aorus Master. Warning: I have no idea what they do. Nor what I'm doing.
(All I know is get primaries low, get tRFC as low as possible, tREFI as high as possible, then copy what everyone else is doing on the DDR4 thread and test for stability or bandwidth).
if I were you, I'd ask in that thread for help.


----------



## johnyb0y

Falkentyne said:


> Yes, I got those from buildzoid's video on the Aorus Master. Warning: I have no idea what they do. Nor what I'm doing.
> 
> (All I know is get primaries low, get tRFC as low as possible, tREFI as high as possible, then copy what everyone else is doing on the DDR4 thread and test for stability or bandwidth).
> 
> if I were you, I'd ask in that thread for help.




Okay will do. thanks again for your help!


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


----------



## xKnoxville

Hi guys, i want to ask you a question, i own a z390 aorus master with a 9900k, currently i have the official bios f10b, and although in a close range, i will not overclock for now, but there are certain options of the Bios like Hpet that are hidden , i would like to know, if there is any option to show them, and if there is not, what custom bios can you recommend, because I have never installed any custom. Thank you very much and greetings to all. (Excuse my English)


----------



## KedarWolf

Master F10 BIOS modded with.

══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝

[Current version]
EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404

[Current version]
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1092
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015

[Current version]
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.24
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.15


----------



## xKnoxville

KedarWolf said:


> Master F10 BIOS modded with.
> 
> ══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1092
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.24
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.15


First of all thank you very much for answering KedarWolf, i would only have two last questions (sorry to be heavy), before posting, i have read most threads, where you have put a lot of custom bios (very grateful for the work), and in them, you put the tutorial to install them, with rufus in freedos with efiflash.exe would be the same way for this one? And finally, those options like hpet, tco timer, me state, would be in the default options, or would we have to do something else? Thanks a lot again.


----------



## KedarWolf

xKnoxville said:


> First of all thank you very much for answering KedarWolf, i would only have two last questions (sorry to be heavy), before posting, i have read most threads, where you have put a lot of custom bios (very grateful for the work), and in them, you put the tutorial to install them, with rufus in freedos with efiflash.exe would be the same way for this one? And finally, those options like hpet, tco timer, me state, would be in the default options, or would we have to do something else? Thanks a lot again.


This BIOS only had the mods I mentioned, not modded for HPET etc.

It wasn't really an answer to your question, just an unfortunately timed post with new LAN firmware. 

Disabling HPET.

https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffe...making_csgo_feel_smooth_again_disabling_hpet/


----------



## xKnoxville

KedarWolf said:


> This BIOS only had the mods I mentioned, not modded for HPET etc.
> 
> It wasn't really an answer to your question, just an unfortunately timed post with new LAN firmware.
> 
> Disabling HPET.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffe...making_csgo_feel_smooth_again_disabling_hpet/


No problem haha, just a bad timing, and you wouldn't know where i could find any bios with all these visible options? I read somewhere that hpet is disabled by default, and i want turn on it on bios and disable in windows, because some tweekers with tests, get works better. Thank you anyway.


----------



## johnyb0y

Hello again,

I finished my Ram tuning and I thought I'd do a little write-up with all the info and screenshots. Maybe helpful to someone. 
Will post the same in the DDR4 OC Thread.

*Mainboard:* Gigabyte AORUS Z390 Pro Wifi 
*BIOS-Version:* F10
*CPU:* 9900K
*RAM-Kit:* G.Skill 4133Mhz 4x8GB C17 (F4-4133C17Q-32GTZR)

*VCCIO:* 1.16v
*VCCSA:* 1.16v
*Ram Voltage:* 1.40v

Short Summary: I was able to get stable 3900Mhz on the RAM using the marked values in Screenshot 5a. Without these I could only boot max 3800Mhz. Anything higher than 3900Mhz seems impossible for me, but I was able to tune the timings. Very happy with the results.


----------



## QQryQ

Can I ask what does that bios mods do? I'm currently looking for some OC for my i9 9900k and my rams G.Skill TridentZ 3200mhz


----------



## siven

@KedarWolf
any chance u can make bios what supports RGB fusion? even like basic 1 color for start.
we all know how terrible rgb fusion is...
maby you can steal it from older board bioses where it has all the options for RGBS?
you could even sell it i would BUY! and im sure many of us will do the same.


----------



## Driller au

@KedarWolf thanks for the modded F10 bios, bit of a *** moment when i first entered it but found my way around


----------



## KedarWolf

siven said:


> @KedarWolf
> any chance u can make bios what supports RGB fusion? even like basic 1 color for start.
> we all know how terrible rgb fusion is...
> maby you can steal it from older board bioses where it has all the options for RGBS?
> you could even sell it i would BUY! and im sure many of us will do the same.


Install RGBFusion once without App Centre. Run Fusion one time. Make sure it's not in the start-up programs in Task Manager.

Put this program in the RGBFusion folder in C:/Programs or where it installed. https://github.com/Cheerpipe/RGBFusion390SetColor

Open Admin command prompt in Fusion Folder.



Code:


RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --areas

 will show you your areas.

An area is a led zone or led array on your main board or any other rgbfusion device.

Each area is uniquely identified with a number.

It is important to note that area -1 represent all areas.

To change an area you must use --setarea command with the following parameters.

RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:area_id:mode:r:g:b

This example set all areas to red:


Code:


RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:-1:0:255:0:0

Green:


Code:


RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:-1:0:0:255:0

Blue:


Code:


RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:-1:0:0:255

Mode 0 is still, 1 is breath......"

*RGB colour map below.*

https://www.rapidtables.com/web/color/RGB_Color.html


----------



## raggazam

How do you see these values in my ram?
Are 4 modules of 32 gb in total.
With original frequency is 3200 16-18-18-36

Now use @3800 Mhz 19-23-23-45



Any value I can improve?


----------



## Sheyster

Spoiler






KedarWolf said:


> Install RGBFusion once without App Centre. Run Fusion one time. Make sure it's not in the start-up programs in Task Manager.
> 
> Put this program in the RGBFusion folder in C:/Programs or where it installed. https://github.com/Cheerpipe/RGBFusion390SetColor
> 
> Open Admin command prompt in Fusion Folder.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --areas
> 
> will show you your areas.
> 
> An area is a led zone or led array on your main board or any other rgbfusion device.
> 
> Each area is uniquely identified with a number.
> 
> It is important to note that area -1 represent all areas.
> 
> To change an area you must use --setarea command with the following parameters.
> 
> RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:area_id:mode:r:g:b
> 
> This example set all areas to red:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:-1:0:255:0:0
> 
> Green:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:-1:0:0:255:0
> 
> Blue:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> RGBFusion390SetColor.exe --setarea:-1:0:0:255
> 
> Mode 0 is still, 1 is breath......"
> 
> *RGB colour map below.*
> 
> https://www.rapidtables.com/web/color/RGB_Color.html





You gotta put in some work to get dat RGB goin' son.


----------



## Arni90

johnyb0y said:


> Hello again,
> 
> I finished my Ram tuning and I thought I'd do a little write-up with all the info and screenshots. Maybe helpful to someone.
> Will post the same in the DDR4 OC Thread.
> 
> *Mainboard:* Gigabyte AORUS Z390 Pro Wifi
> *BIOS-Version:* F10
> *CPU:* 9900K
> *RAM-Kit:* G.Skill 4133Mhz 4x8GB C17 (F4-4133C17Q-32GTZR)
> 
> *VCCIO:* 1.16v
> *VCCSA:* 1.16v
> *Ram Voltage:* 1.40v
> 
> Short Summary: I was able to get stable 3900Mhz on the RAM using the marked values in Screenshot 5a. Without these I could only boot max 3800Mhz. Anything higher than 3900Mhz seems impossible for me, but I was able to tune the timings. Very happy with the results.


The extremely high tWRRD_sg and tWRRD_dg reduces your read and copy performance significantly, if you set tWTR_S and tWTR_L to auto (they are automatically set based on your tertiary timings), and then start lowering tWRRD_dg and tWRRD_sg you should achieve better performance and lower latency.


----------



## johnyb0y

True, already did  did some more tuning. 
Thanks though!


----------



## ezveedub

lester007 said:


> does aorus master have pci e bifurcation?




Not that I know of...the Gigabyte Aires Gen4 AIC adapter lists only AMD & Intel X299 with bios settings for Bifurcation on PCI.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## kati

Hm how can the new F10 for Z390 be dated 28th october, the future!
On here,
https://www.aorus.com/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10

There was a F10 before but older one, and im sure they added this line
"BIOS Structure refresh"

Btw. had no idle reboot since i updated to F9c(and this time i did factory reset and manually changed all values),
now about 3 months 24/7 no crash no reboot, happy times! 
So dunno if i ever upgrade the Bios again as long theres no security update etc.


----------



## Falkentyne

kati said:


> Hm how can the new F10 for Z390 be dated 28th october, the future!
> On here,
> https://www.aorus.com/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10
> 
> There was a F10 before but older one, and im sure they added this line
> "BIOS Structure refresh"
> 
> Btw. had no idle reboot since i updated to F9c(and this time i did factory reset and manually changed all values),
> now about 3 months 24/7 no crash no reboot, happy times!
> So dunno if i ever upgrade the Bios again as long theres no security update etc.


Same as the leaked one on tweaktown beta forum.
No differences, byte for byte identical. (bios build date 10/14/2019).

So obviously the same bugs (tREFI doesn't work, CPU Current Limit missing, CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv missing, none of the settings in 'Internal VR Settings' do anything except AC/DC Loadline (IA and GT versions both work). I don't know about other Z390 boards, but on the Z370 Gaming 7, the other options worked fine (like IMON Slope/Offset to change "CPU Package Power", etc).


----------



## vmanuelgm

KedarWolf said:


> Master F10 BIOS modded with.
> 
> ══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM IRST RAID for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1092
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.24
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.15




F10 remod with these same versions (Microcodes BE and BA) except for the new 9.0.1095 GOP and HEX fix to allow easier flashing:

https://mega.nz/#!Yy4WhAKb!n-08O_RNjZrwgcjUHtHADH4FjlHU7i_-zbTsdZMLaKE


----------



## Dannyele

Guys, I need help please...


I don't know what happened exactly but my BIOS it downgraded itself the BIOS version... I mean I was on F10b and today while playing I noticed weird constantly crashes and checked what's is going on and saw that my RAM has on higher clocks and the CPU frequency was stock instead the 5Ghz stables...


I've went to BIOS and saw that I'm running F9 version and ALL my saved profiles of configurations was gone... I think that this mobo have some kind of "backup" on factory BIOS, maybe it changed auto? There is any way to swap to the other one?


----------



## Falkentyne

Dannyele said:


> Guys, I need help please...
> 
> 
> I don't know what happened exactly but my BIOS it downgraded itself the BIOS version... I mean I was on F10b and today while playing I noticed weird constantly crashes and checked what's is going on and saw that my RAM has on higher clocks and the CPU frequency was stock instead the 5Ghz stables...
> 
> 
> I've went to BIOS and saw that I'm running F9 version and ALL my saved profiles of configurations was gone... I think that this mobo have some kind of "backup" on factory BIOS, maybe it changed auto? There is any way to swap to the other one?


Just switch the bios switch to the other position. Sometimes 1 and 2 on the switch get reversed. I only saw this on the F7 versions.


----------



## Dannyele

Falkentyne said:


> Just switch the bios switch to the other position. Sometimes 1 and 2 on the switch get reversed. I only saw this on the F7 versions.



Sorry but I don't see any kind of switch... is this one?


https://prnt.sc/pnoyvs


EDIT: nevermind, im blind... Its on bottom left... going to try to switch it.


----------



## ezveedub

Dannyele said:


> Sorry but I don't see any kind of switch... is this one?
> 
> 
> https://prnt.sc/pnoyvs




Right below your PCIEX4 slot at the bottom of the mobo is your Bios switches.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Dannyele

Falkentyne said:


> Just switch the bios switch to the other position. Sometimes 1 and 2 on the switch get reversed. I only saw this on the F7 versions.





ezveedub said:


> Right below your PCIEX4 slot at the bottom of the mobo is your Bios switches.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



It worked guys! Thank you so much!


But I'm very very confused, because my switch was switched on left side (bios backup) instead on the right side!! What in the actual heck... this thing switches alone from one side to another?


----------



## Falkentyne

Dannyele said:


> It worked guys! Thank you so much!
> 
> 
> But I'm very very confused, because my switch was switched on left side (bios backup) instead on the right side!! What in the actual heck... this thing switches alone from one side to another?


The switches are not hardwired by circuit to a bios chip. It seems to just tell the system to boot from bios#1 or bios#2, but which bios is #1 or #2 seems to be stored or saved somewhere, rather than being locked to a trace circuit. That's why switching the active bios while the system is running live won't allow you to flash the backup bios by running a flasher right after. Then when the system is powered off and on (rather than rebooted), it reads which bios is set to bios 1 (or 2) and boots from there. Unlike something like the Radeon cards, where the switch selector actually electrically connects a switch to a direct BIOS connection and severs the other connection.

The bios switching by itself can be reduced by setting the SB mode to "single bios mode", but it still won't solve the lack of a direct circuit connection to each BIOS chip.


----------



## Dannyele

Falkentyne said:


> The switches are not hardwired by circuit to a bios chip. It seems to just tell the system to boot from bios#1 or bios#2, but which bios is #1 or #2 seems to be stored or saved somewhere, rather than being locked to a trace circuit. That's why switching the active bios while the system is running live won't allow you to flash the backup bios by running a flasher right after. Then when the system is powered off and on (rather than rebooted), it reads which bios is set to bios 1 (or 2) and boots from there. Unlike something like the Radeon cards, where the switch selector actually electrically connects a switch to a direct BIOS connection and severs the other connection.
> 
> The bios switching by itself can be reduced by setting the SB mode to "single bios mode", but it still won't solve the lack of a direct circuit connection to each BIOS chip.



Wow, nice explanation! Appreciate your help


----------



## AndrejB

Well this new bios is absolutely delightful.

Now I need ia ac/dc 30???/160 to get my previous voltages.

Does this even make sense?

And of course it isn't stable at all, very weird...


----------



## QQryQ

hey guys been past months since I have my i9 9900k + z390 aorus master mobo decided to flash newest bios to f10 and lost all my settings I saved.. fans curve and OC profiles, so had to set it again I dont remember everythink I did but I was running stable at [email protected] with temps max 80C ( Alphacool Eisaber LT 360 AiO ) https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302418&thumb=1



now I really dont know what happend but any of my settings that I remember doesnt work. So trying do it again but I'm not satisfieied much


https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302408&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302410&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302412&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302414&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302416&thumb=1

Please help me with setting it correctly or maybe somethink crashed thats why my temps are so high last time I replaced fans in case into SilientWings3 Highspeed and Noctua NF-A12x25 on cooler loosing my mind when I see those temps, volts etc..
heres my bios settings
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302394&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302396&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302398&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302400&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302402&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302404&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=302406&thumb=1

where should I start with setting it stable with 5.0 those settings seems to work did 30min Realbench 2.56 and still was running, clock was spiking and throttling was huge but test was going on everythink I tried to change manual voltage to 1.28V with LLC on Turbo rest on auto , 1.295 LLC Turbo / auto still cant pass 2min on realbench where should I look for solution? those temps can be because of bad connection of IHS and a pump? or should I change cooler in front direction but had it on top from months really dont know how to deal with it.


----------



## Driller au

I might be misunderstanding you here but those pictures are not of a master F10 bios ,this is my F10 master bios
Edit: this is Kedarwolfs modded bios a few pages back


----------



## QQryQ

where it came from I dont see that attachment Q_Q and yes actually have F8 bios cus were on it before F10 upgrade though it could be bios problems but not.


----------



## bastian

Gigabyte has officially removed F10b for the Master from the product page. F9 is the latest version now.


----------



## Driller au

QQryQ said:


> where it came from I dont see that attachment Q_Q and yes actually have F8 bios cus were on it before F10 upgrade though it could be bios problems but not.


OK NP 
put the image up on imgur


----------



## robertr1

QQryQ said:


> where it came from I dont see that attachment Q_Q and yes actually have F8 bios cus were on it before F10 upgrade though it could be bios problems but not.


It's your cooler. Something happened to your AIO. I have the same unit. You're not pulling enough amps (CURRENT IOUT) to get those temps. You also need to look at POWER POUT for proper readings and not cpu package power. 

Take the side panel off the PC and run the test and see if your temps are any better. Realbench also hits your gpu so you might have hot air being trapped.

If you take the side panel off and the temps are still 100c, you need to see examine our AIO.


----------



## QQryQ

robertr1 said:


> It's your cooler. Something happened to your AIO. I have the same unit. You're not pulling enough amps (CURRENT IOUT) to get those temps. You also need to look at POWER POUT for proper readings and not cpu package power.
> 
> Take the side panel off the PC and run the test and see if your temps are any better. Realbench also hits your gpu so you might have hot air being trapped.
> 
> If you take the side panel off and the temps are still 100c, you need to see examine our AIO.


thanks for advice will try do it in open case on table, but in my case air flow is really good so I dont think so graph card isnt even hot what would you examine in AiO at first? IHS contact with cpu pump? Not really sure what I should check here its AiO... can miss some fluid but how's that without seeing something strange.
and robert I asked you on PM about something would you mind help me?


funny thing because F10 was on page like 5 days ago and it was F10 without any letters and it wanst beta seems I need try modded version then


----------



## shaolin95

vmanuelgm said:


> F10 remod with these same versions (Microcodes BE and BA) except for the new 9.0.1095 GOP and HEX fix to allow easier flashing:
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!Yy4WhAKb!n-08O_RNjZrwgcjUHtHADH4FjlHU7i_-zbTsdZMLaKE


Flashing with the same steps from Kedarwolf or as a regular bios from Gigabyte you mean?


----------



## ezveedub

bastian said:


> Gigabyte has officially removed F10b for the Master from the product page. F9 is the latest version now.


There's two Gigabyte websites....F10 bios is listed here:

https://www.aorus.com/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10

The other site seem to have pulled other bios files as well, as I have bios files for my Z270 Gaming 5 going up to F14 I think and they are back to a lower version now.


----------



## Dannyele

It is worth the update from 10b to 10? I'm afraid if I update I screw up things as for now I'm stable and fine with 10b...


Not speaking about the modded one, just the official.


----------



## Chinmoy Barman

Gigabyte official support page removed the F8a version of the BIOS for Z390 AORUS XTREME motherboard , why is that ??

and I have also found a F8 version of BIOS from techtweak forum for Z390 AORUS XTREME motherboard and wen I flashed it, it was indeed a new version with complete GUI overhaul with might be a better VRM power control profile because I can now run the same with -10mv less VCC for CPU.

The problem is that this F8 BIOS doesnt have the option for disabling the Aquantia LAN card.

Any GIGABYTE rep here help me with that please ??? and also the older UI for the BIOS was better in my opinion


----------



## bastian

ezveedub said:


> There's two Gigabyte websites....F10 bios is listed here:
> 
> https://www.aorus.com/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10
> 
> The other site seem to have pulled other bios files as well, as I have bios files for my Z270 Gaming 5 going up to F14 I think and they are back to a lower version now.


Well, something is wrong with it as I get this when trying to update via QFLASH or EFI FLASH:

gigabyte oem id mismatch


----------



## Falkentyne

bastian said:


> Well, something is wrong with it as I get this when trying to update via QFLASH or EFI FLASH:
> 
> gigabyte oem id mismatch


You probably used a modded bios before.
Flash it with EFIFLASH /X /NoOemID

Please don't forget the bugs in this bios i already listed.
I opened a ticket with Gigabyte about it.

---------
tREFI setting doesn't work. tREFI values >9998 force it to 65534 (maximum) regardless of what you do. Not many RAM dimms can handle 65534 tREFI without bit corruption (too low tRFC simply tends to crash or not POST, instead of trashing windows silently).
This is a critical bug.

CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv is missing from the options

Vcore/VAXG Protection (100mv-400mv) is missing from the options.

CPU Current Limit (amps) is missing from the options.

All of the settings in "Internal VR Control" do not seem to do anything, except IA/GT AC DC Loadlines (which still work fine)


----------



## shaolin95

Falkentyne said:


> You probably used a modded bios before.
> Flash it with EFIFLASH /X /NoOemID
> 
> Please don't forget the bugs in this bios i already listed.
> I opened a ticket with Gigabyte about it.
> 
> ---------
> tREFI setting doesn't work. tREFI values >9998 force it to 65534 (maximum) regardless of what you do. Not many RAM dimms can handle 65534 tREFI without bit corruption (too low tRFC simply tends to crash or not POST, instead of trashing windows silently).
> This is a critical bug.
> 
> CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv is missing from the options
> 
> Vcore/VAXG Protection (100mv-400mv) is missing from the options.
> 
> CPU Current Limit (amps) is missing from the options.
> 
> All of the settings in "Internal VR Control" do not seem to do anything, except IA/GT AC DC Loadlines (which still work fine)


SO which Bios are you currently running, amigo? 
I like to run whatever you are running since you are always testing and finding out whats good or broken.


----------



## bastian

Falkentyne said:


> You probably used a modded bios before.
> Flash it with EFIFLASH /X /NoOemID
> 
> Please don't forget the bugs in this bios i already listed.
> I opened a ticket with Gigabyte about it.
> 
> ---------
> tREFI setting doesn't work. tREFI values >9998 force it to 65534 (maximum) regardless of what you do. Not many RAM dimms can handle 65534 tREFI without bit corruption (too low tRFC simply tends to crash or not POST, instead of trashing windows silently).
> This is a critical bug.
> 
> CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv is missing from the options
> 
> Vcore/VAXG Protection (100mv-400mv) is missing from the options.
> 
> CPU Current Limit (amps) is missing from the options.
> 
> All of the settings in "Internal VR Control" do not seem to do anything, except IA/GT AC DC Loadlines (which still work fine)


Well, I wasn't using a modded BIOS, but a beta bios posted over at tweaktown. F10d

I saw you mention those bugs, but are we sure those are still present in this public version?


----------



## KedarWolf

bastian said:


> Well, something is wrong with it as I get this when trying to update via QFLASH or EFI FLASH:
> 
> gigabyte oem id mismatch


I'd flash F9 or F10B. The new F10 bugged pretty bad.

If you need help with the oem id mismatch let me know, I got a version of efiflash with all checks bypassed that'll flash another BIOS.


----------



## davids40

*flash F10d beta to F10*

hello (excuse my english)

actually my Z390 Aorus master use F10d GK beta bios

when i try to flash with F10 official bios it was not possible ---> eomld mismatch error code

Q-flash / @BIOS (under Windows10) same problem 

someone could help me ?

thank you so much


----------



## KedarWolf

davids40 said:


> hello (excuse my english)
> 
> actually my Z390 Aorus master use F10d GK beta bios
> 
> when i try to flash with F10 official bios it was not possible ---> eomld mismatch error code
> 
> Q-flash / @BIOS (under Windows10) same problem
> 
> someone could help me ?
> 
> thank you so much


I'll PM you, don't want to put the efiflash file you need here, it'll flash ANY BIOS to your motherboard, even a wrong model type, so I prefer a private message.


----------



## Falkentyne

bastian said:


> Well, I wasn't using a modded BIOS, but a beta bios posted over at tweaktown. F10d
> 
> I saw you mention those bugs, but are we sure those are still present in this public version?


The public version and the tweaktown version are *byte for byte identical*.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> The public version and the tweaktown version are *byte for byte identical*.


Yes, if they were not the SHA-1 etc would be different.

Edit: I recall the conversation I had with someone after I said tweaktown gets release BIOS's early and they said, "No, they are beta versions of the release BIOS's."

I was, "Then why are the SHA-1's always the same on Gigabyte website and when tweaktown has them before the website releases them?"


----------



## davids40

KedarWolf said:


> I'll PM you, don't want to put the efiflash file you need here, it'll flash ANY BIOS to your motherboard, even a wrong model type, so I prefer a private message.


thank you 

it works

you're the best


----------



## Medvediy

Falkentyne said:


> ---------
> tREFI setting doesn't work. tREFI values >9998 force it to 65534...


But now the last F10 bios for Master got 28.10.2019 date. Maybe they just changed files and fixed that?


----------



## KedarWolf

Medvediy said:


> But now the last F10 bios for Master got 28.10.2019 date. Maybe they just changed files and fixed that?


tREFI bug still present, someone would have to test the rest.


----------



## Falkentyne

Medvediy said:


> But now the last F10 bios for Master got 28.10.2019 date. Maybe they just changed files and fixed that?


No it doesn't.
It's 10/14/2019.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> No it doesn't.
> It's 10/14/2019.


I checked the SHA-1, they're identical.


----------



## edhutner

tREFI bug also exist in Z390 Pro F11 bios.


----------



## Sheyster

edhutner said:


> tREFI bug also exist in Z390 Pro F11 bios.


Good to know, thanks. I will continue to stay on the trusty but vulnerable F9 BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> Good to know, thanks. I will continue to stay on the trusty but vulnerable F9 BIOS.


I can mod F9 or F10b with the latest most secure or the best performing microcodes, the latest RST firmware, GOP firmware and Ethernet firmware.

Let me know if you want F9 or F10b, I have them. F10b worked the best for me, not sure why they pulled it, using it now.


----------



## bastian

Falkentyne said:


> You probably used a modded bios before.
> Flash it with EFIFLASH /X /NoOemID


I tried this command and it doesn't work just says invalid?


----------



## Falkentyne

bastian said:


> I tried this command and it doesn't work just says invalid?


You put the name of the bios file before the switches.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> I can mod F9 or F10b with the latest most secure or the best performing microcodes, the latest RST firmware, GOP firmware and Ethernet firmware.
> 
> Let me know if you want F9 or F10b, I have them. F10b worked the best for me, not sure why they pulled it, using it now.


I would love an F10b with the latest stuff


----------



## bastian

Falkentyne said:


> You put the name of the bios file before the switches.


Yes, I did that and I still gives me an error.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> I can mod F9 or F10b with the latest most secure or the best performing microcodes, the latest RST firmware, GOP firmware and Ethernet firmware.
> 
> Let me know if you want F9 or F10b, I have them. F10b worked the best for me, not sure why they pulled it, using it now.


I have a Pro board though, not a Master.  Whichever most recent microcode that is not the slow one would be ideal.


----------



## Falkentyne

Sheyster said:


> I have a Pro board though, not a Master.  Whichever most recent microcode that is not the slow one would be ideal.


The super slow microcode is C6.
I just hope 9900KS's don't come with this by default.


----------



## metalspider

so what is new in the aorus pro F11 bios? all it says in the description is "BIOS Structure refresh"
just a new GUI?

currently running F10 with a cpu OC and ram heavily tweaked though not exactly an OC since xmp is 4266mhz but this board can do at most 3866mhz stable from my testing.


----------



## bastian

Well I finally got my BIOS issue sorted and decided to flash to F10. Haven't had any issues so far. So while there may be some settings missing and one has to refamiliarize themselves with the layout, I do like it more and I'm sure they will continue to improve it and hopefully add back in those settings.


----------



## KedarWolf

bastian said:


> Yes, I did that and I still gives me an error.


You need a version of Efiflash with all checks bypassed, I'll PM you, don't want to share it here as it'll flash even another boards BIOS which wouldn't be good.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> I have a Pro board though, not a Master.  Whichever most recent microcode that is not the slow one would be ideal.


Pro or Pro Wi-fi?


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> I would love an F10b with the latest stuff


Master MB?

Edit. Checked you sig, here's the Master F10b.

it has the faster microcode. If you want the most secure latest, but it's slower, let me know.


----------



## shaolin95

KedarWolf said:


> Master MB?


yep. thanks!!


----------



## KedarWolf

shaolin95 said:


> yep. thanks!!


See above, I edited my post with the BIOS.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Pro or Pro Wi-fi?


Just Pro (no Wi-Fi):

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-PRO-rev-10/support#support-dl-driver

If I could go back in time I'd get the Master instead.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> Just Pro (no Wi-Fi):
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-PRO-rev-10/support#support-dl-driver
> 
> If I could go back in time I'd get the Master instead.


Here an updated F10, DON'T flash the latest, too buggy.

This one has the fastest microcode, if you want the slower more secure latest, let me know.

Need to flash with efiflash.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Here an updated F10, DON'T flash the latest, too buggy.
> 
> This one has the fastest microcode, if you want the slower more secure latest, let me know.
> 
> Need to flash with efiflash.


Great thank you!  No need for the slower one.

EDIT - nm, file is there now.  Thanks again.


----------



## ksw1843

KedarWolf said:


> Here an updated F10, DON'T flash the latest, too buggy.
> 
> This one has the fastest microcode, if you want the slower more secure latest, let me know.
> 
> Need to flash with efiflash.


Hi KedarWolf,
Can you make one for pro wifi, please?


----------



## KedarWolf

ksw1843 said:


> Hi KedarWolf,
> Can you make one for pro wifi, please?


Pro Wi-fi, flash with Efiflash of course. If you need a how-to, I'll add it to this post, just tell me.


----------



## QQryQ

KedarWolf said:


> Pro Wi-fi, flash with Efiflash of course. If you need a how-to, I'll add it to this post, just tell me.


I would like to guide how to ;> I seen it somewhere but can't find using master board but process will be the same so please.


----------



## KedarWolf

QQryQ said:


> I would like to guide how to ;> I seen it somewhere but can't find using master board but process will be the same so please.


Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f10 /x


----------



## ksw1843

KedarWolf said:


> ksw1843 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi KedarWolf,
> Can you make one for pro wifi, please?
> 
> 
> 
> Pro Wi-fi, flash with Efiflash of course. If you need a how-to, I'll add it to this post, just tell me.
Click to expand...

Thank you!


----------



## QQryQ

KedarWolf said:


> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f10 /x


thank you


----------



## vmanuelgm

shaolin95 said:


> Flashing with the same steps from Kedarwolf or as a regular bios from Gigabyte you mean?



Sometimes efiflash will refuse to flash the bios, so with HEX edition u can make it easier without the need of any parameters.

So use efiflash without any parameters. U can also try as a regular bios, but u'll probably need efiflash.


----------



## KedarWolf

Had a request for my current BIOS settings, in Spoiler.

*DON'T forget the IA AC Loadline at 1, or your voltages will be way too high. * 



Spoiler


----------



## Falkentyne

Keep in mind that "CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline" changes the same settings (via presets) as Internal VR Settings-> AC and DC Loadline. but the Internal VR settings has a HIGHER Priority. "Turbo" is 1.6 mOhms for both which is Intel max specification. AC is only used for auto/dvid voltages (used for operating voltages based on current and default VID). DC Loadline is used for power measurements. AC Loadline=1 prevents any VID boosting to the VRM and relies purely on the default VID, any DVID offsets, and on loadline calibration to set idle and load voltages.

On fixed vcore, this setting is not important (although it could make your VID report weird values).

Use VR VOUT And Current IOUT for accurate voltage and watt monitoring.

One warning is to NEVER, EVER use a high AC Loadline value (> 1.0 mOhms) with a high VRM Loadline (Loadline calibration) setting. Even with a negative DVID offset, this is something you absolutely want to avoid.
1.6 mOhms ACLL is best left for Standard/Normal Vcore loadline calibration. 1.0 mOhms ACLL works ok with low Vcore Loadline calibration, and 0.01 (1 in the ACLL value) to 0.4 mOhms (40) can work ok with Low or Medium, usually used with a positive DVID offset.

Someone earlier asked me if using a "fixed" Vcore with "High" Vcore loadline calibration, with a target bios voltage of 1.30v is the same as using a "1 and 1" AC and DC Loadline (0.01 mOhms), with "High" Vcore loadline calibration and a DVID offset to get 1.30v idle VR VOUT (example: if idle VID is 1.215v, then +85mv DVID offset). That, I simply don't know, as "Thermal Velocity Boost" voltage optimizations will affect the default VID depending on core temps. TVB can be disabled in the very latest "buggy, reworked" Bios, I may test that out out of boredom.


----------



## Medvediy

*Falkentyne*, could you post here your BIOS settings on Master Mobo? I will really appreciate that


----------



## EpicSurvivor

I am going to start building on my Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro board in a couple of weeks. I really enjoy the sound from my Gigabyte z170 Gaming 7 Board as it has sound blaster software included.

I had two questions. Anyone using Z390 Aorus line of Motherboards can tell me how good is the sound on the motherboard? will I need a separate sound card? and also does this Motherboard come with sound blaster software as well?

Thanks.


----------



## Dannyele

Is it normal that raising he vcore from 1.360 to 1.365 (loadline turbo) hwinfo64 display 1.360>~1.365 to 1.365>1.380 and sometimes 1.368? It seems that rais too much just for rise 1 more value...


I tried loadline on high but my games randomly crash even with set like 1.38 in BIOS, with the current one (vcore 1.370 and LLC Turbo) it's not crashing anymore...


----------



## Falkentyne

Dannyele said:


> Is it normal that raising he vcore from 1.60 to 1.65 (loadline turbo) hwinfo64 display 1.60>~1.365 to 1.65>1.38 and sometimes 1.368? It seems that rais too much just for rise 1 more value...
> 
> 
> I tried loadline on high but my games randomly crash even with set like 1.38 in BIOS, with the current one (vcore 1.65 and LLC Turbo) it's not crashing anymore...


Check your typos, man.


----------



## Dannyele

Falkentyne said:


> Check your typos, man.


Damn, my bad... Fixed


----------



## LeGiTT

Hi OCers, 
I'm on the Z390 Aorus Pro, bios F10(06/05/19) since my purchase. I've read the last 7 pages of this thread and I'm still not sure if I should update to the the new one (F11). Is it a good idea, what is the best bios right now? Should I stay on the F10 or another one?


----------



## Sheyster

LeGiTT said:


> Hi OCers,
> I'm on the Z390 Aorus Pro, bios F10(06/05/19) since my purchase. I've read the last 7 pages of this thread and I'm still not sure if I should update to the the new one (F11). Is it a good idea, what is the best bios right now? Should I stay on the F10 or another one?


Use the modded F10 BIOS that Kedarwolf posted a few pages back. I would avoid anything newer for now.


----------



## Salve1412

Wrote to Gigabyte eSupport a few days ago asking for enlightenments about the tedious matter of setting RTLs and IOLs on Z390 boards (I'm on the Master). Their competent answer is attached below: I don't know, it seem that not even they can stick to the same side of the story (since the laconic reply I got contradicts the answer Gigabyte HQ gave to the user Stasio, answer that he published on tweaktown's Gigabyte Latest Beta BIOS thread and that I quoted in my ticket).


----------



## Sheyster

Salve1412 said:


> Wrote to Gigabyte eSupport a few days ago asking for enlightenments about the tedious matter of setting RTLs and IOLs on Z390 boards (I'm on the Master). Their competent answer is attached: I don't know, it seem that even they can't stick to the same side of the story (since the laconic reply I got contradicts the answer Gigabyte HQ gave to the user Stasio, answer that he published on tweaktown's Gigabyte Latest Beta BIOS thread and that I quoted in my ticket).


It's unfortunate that the Gigabyte BIOS does not live up to the hardware.  Overall it's not a great experience for their customers.


----------



## Zensou

KedarWolf said:


> Had a request for my current BIOS settings, in Spoiler.
> 
> *DON'T forget the IA AC Loadline at 1, or your voltages will be way too high. *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Am I a fool for copying your settings for my 9700k?
Realbench stress test stable for 15 minutes.
Should I lower DVID and try again?


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Had a request for my current BIOS settings, in Spoiler.
> 
> *DON'T forget the IA AC Loadline at 1, or your voltages will be way too high. *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler





Zensou said:


> Am I a fool for copying your settings for my 9700k?
> Realbench stress test stable for 15 minutes.
> Should I lower DVID and try again?


I have a personal hate for any DVID (Vcore=Normal) setting because of bios bugs. The reason DVID tends to work so well (I'm not talking about people who use C-states here) is because of Thermal velocity boost. TvB voltage optimizations raises the CPU's default VID by 1.5mv every 1C, starting at 1C and going up to 100C. So as the temps get higher, the default VID rises, which gives the VRM a voltage boost. In a way this "sort" of helps reduce the effect of loadline vdroop. Of course if you're not stable, you can just disable TVB Voltage optimizations, which forces the default VID to act as if your CPU were at TJMax instead (100C). But in effect, doing this with an AC Loadline value of "1" is no different than using fixed vcore(!!), except your CPU will both downvolt and downclock (instead of just downclock with a fixed vcore+c-states). But then you will have a higher idle voltage/VID by doing that.

I didn't realize this (despite all these months!!) until the new reworked bios came out, which allows you to disable TVB Optimizations. I assumed this whole time that AC Loadline was responsible for the VID boosting by itself, which really didn't make much sense---why would an AC/DC Loadline of "1" (both values set to 1?), which DISABLES ACLL boosting the VID, give a 1.215 VID at pure idle, and a 1.280v at full load anyway??? Well, that was because of TVB, which couldn't be disabled before.

AC Loadline will still boost the default VID (based on current), but with TVB disabled, the boost is more predictable (I'm sure some smart person reading this can find the formula for how much AC Loadline boosts VID, as DC Loadline drops VID based on the formula ( Original VID (After AC Loadline boosts it) minus (Amps * DC mOhms value)), or ACLL VID - ( Amps * DCLL mOhms value). I'm guessing AC Loadline works in the "Opposite" way, where it starts with whatever the default VID is + Thermal Velocity boost +mv, then boosts it based on current load (higher current=higher boost) and sends it to the VRM.

Anyway, that didn't answer anything I said.
The reason I "Hate" Using DVID is because of bios bugs.

If you use any DVID setting, and then switch directly to manual vcore and save, the DVID offset (From auto vcore) and the auto vcore is STILL IN EFFECT AFTER REBOOTING. Except now you're throwing tons of Vcore loadline calibration on top of it from your desired "Fixed' setting, causing a huge overvolt! Then when you enter the BIOS again and exit right away, suddenly the bios goes "oh, oops, I should have not used the auto setting!" and your fixed voltage suddenly works as expected.

I'm someone who likes to use different presets based on my mood, and because of bugs like this, I can't use DVID at all.
(please don't ask me to. I JUST TRIED this last night to make @KedarWolf happy. I tried disabling Thermal Velocity Boost and set AC/DC Loadline to 1, which set the base VID At 1.290v at 5 ghz (instead of 1.210v at 27C ambient). Then I set Vcore loadline calibration to "high" and a tiny DVID offset of +5mv. This gave me the exact same idle AND load vcore as 1.30v fixed vcore with LLC=High, which proved my theory. Then after being satisfied that i conquered life, I loaded up my fixed 5.1 ghz, 1.335v fixed vcore, LLC=Turbo preset and saved and rebooted.............

AND I SAW A BIOS VOLTAGE OF 1.524V !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(because with TVB disabled, this would cause a idle VID of 1.479v if I were using 'Auto' vcore-which I actually have saved in another preset for fun (which I sometimes use ONLY with Vcore LLC=Standard to be at Intel's max safe limits) and that gives a load VID and VR VOUT (They match) of 1.240v at 183 amps, but now it tried to load the "Fixed vcore" preset but applying the same "Auto" vcore (1.479v), a +5mv DVID offset and LLC=Turbo!).

I exited and rebooted the BIOS again and now the idle voltage was 1.356v as expected (1.324v VR VOUT).

This same stupid bug doesn't happen if you use "Auto" vcore, instead of Normal+DVID and then load a fixed vcore preset.

@Zensou : that's a really high VR VOUT for a 9700K at that amps load. You sure you can't go lower? 1.312v VR VOUT at 115 amps and high temps...I wouldn't be happy with that.


----------



## Zensou

Falkentyne said:


> @Zensou : that's a really high VR VOUT for a 9700K at that amps load. You sure you can't go lower? 1.312v VR VOUT at 115 amps and high temps...I wouldn't be happy with that.


I can but I run into instability during idle. Would playing with loadline calibration settings possibly fix this?


----------



## Falkentyne

Zensou said:


> I can but I run into instability during idle. Would playing with loadline calibration settings possibly fix this?


Instability during idle is the downside of trying to use C-states with an undervolt. The CPU has a default VID it is calibrated to work with, and this VID scales upwards starting at 800 mhz (approx 0.7v, each chip can be different), up to 5 ghz, where it's anywhere between 1.20v to 1.35v depending on silicon lottery (lower VID=better), taking Thermal Velocity Boost out of the picture by disabling it. Remember: TVB will lower the default VID, by 1.5mv every 1C temp decrease, starting at 100C and going down to 0C, so there's a 150mv range there. To make comparisons easy, you can disable TVB so you get a fixed range that doesn't change on temps. (e.g. you can find the default VID with TVB both disabled and enabled, by disabling TVB voltage optimizations and setting AC and DC Loadline to 1 (0.01 mOhms), and if you care about a fluctuating VID, enable TVB voltage optimizations with AC and DC still at 0.01 mOhms (1) and put a load on the processor).

When you apply a negative DVID offset, you're trying to undervolt the processor at full load. That's what everyone wants to do. But you're *also* undervolting it at IDLE too, and a chip that might run at -100mv at full load, is not going to be happy about -100mv when the voltage is already at 0.70v (700mv).

This problem gets compounded by messing with the AC Loadline value. The default AC Loadline written into the processor can be anywhere between 1.0 to 1.6 mOhms (higher values=higher operating voltages "above" default VID that is sent to the VRM as a "new" VID signal). So now you're taking away ALL of the AC Loadline boost by setting it to "1" (0.01 mOhms), AND then throwing an undervolt on top of it! Of course it's going to crash at idle !

What you need to do is to set AC Loadline back up to a normal value. Either between 1.0 to 1.6 mOhms (IA AC value= 100 to 160), or lesson or remove the undervolt.

The one big thing to watch out for is (this doesn't apply on fixed vcore, only on Auto (or Normal) Vcore: is using a "High" AC Loadline combined with an aggressive VRM Loadline (Vcore Loadline Calibration). This should be avoided at all times. An AC Loadline of 1.3 to 1.6 mOhms (130 to 160) works best when Vcore Loadline Calibration is left at Intel defaults (Standard or Normal). You can get away with setting it at "Low" at 1.0 mOhms.


----------



## Zensou

I followed KedarWolf's BIOS settings as a template but changed the following setings:

IA AC Loadline to 1
IA DC Loadline to 1
CPU Internal AC/DC Load line to Power Saving
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration to Turbo
Dynamic Vcore to +0.070

seem to be pretty stable during load as well as idle now but we'll see.
Before, I had CPU Internal AC/DC Load line set to Turbo and CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration set to Medium.


----------



## Falkentyne

Zensou said:


> I followed KedarWolf's BIOS settings as a template but changed the following setings:
> 
> IA AC Loadline to 1
> IA DC Loadline to 1
> CPU Internal AC/DC Load line to Power Saving
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration to Turbo
> Dynamic Vcore to +0.070
> 
> seem to be pretty stable during load as well as idle now but we'll see.
> Before, I had CPU Internal AC/DC Load line set to Turbo and CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration set to Medium.


Remember, the "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" setting is completely ignored if the IA settings are set to any non zero value (0= auto).
The IA settings have higher priority.

CPU Internal AC/DC are hardwired presets, like, power saving is 0.4 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms, while Turbo is 1.6 mOhms / 1.6 mOhms.

This is sort of similar to how "Multi-Core enhancement" can only change bios settings that are set to Auto.

In your example you just did, changing internal AC/DC loadline to power saving did absolutely nothing.


----------



## Zensou

Makes sense. 

I keep crashing while at low-medium loads (web browsing, World of Warcraft, etc) so I was curious what voltage the chip would pull with ALL settings on auto and multiplier at 50.

Quick cinebench r15 run shows this. Did I just get unlucky with a chip?

Pretty frustrating that my 9700k requires such high volts for 5.0 GHz.


----------



## EpicSurvivor

Zensou said:


> Makes sense.
> 
> I keep crashing while at low-medium loads (web browsing, World of Warcraft, etc) so I was curious what voltage the chip would pull with ALL settings on auto and multiplier at 50.
> 
> Quick cinebench r15 run shows this. Did I just get unlucky with a chip?
> 
> Pretty frustrating that my 9700k requires such high volts for 5.0 GHz.


man that is pretty high. Sorry I am not much help but which Z390 Aorus do you have?


----------



## Zensou

EpicSurvivor said:


> man that is pretty high. Sorry I am not much help but which Z390 Aorus do you have?


Z390 Aorus Master


----------



## EpicSurvivor

Zensou said:


> Z390 Aorus Master


Okay thank you. Just bought a Z390 Aorus PRO which I will be building in a couple weeks with a 9700k so I was curious. Sorry for not helping and thanks best of luck. Curious what could resolve your issue.


----------



## Falkentyne

Zensou said:


> Makes sense.
> 
> I keep crashing while at low-medium loads (web browsing, World of Warcraft, etc) so I was curious what voltage the chip would pull with ALL settings on auto and multiplier at 50.
> 
> Quick cinebench r15 run shows this. Did I just get unlucky with a chip?
> 
> Pretty frustrating that my 9700k requires such high volts for 5.0 GHz.


Using C-states makes this frustrating to see what's going on.

Please disable ALL c-states, ALL power saving, and set IA AC and IA DC Loadline to 1 and use any fixed vcore you think is stable. Try 1.350v and Vcore Loadline Calibration=Turbo.
Boot into windows and post the VID window (yes, VID) of idle and load. All you need to do is put a normal load on the cpu and show the min and max vid.

Please remember due to bios bugs, you may have to reboot *TWICE* when switching from any auto or dvid mode to a fixed vcore mode.


----------



## Zensou

Falkentyne said:


> Using C-states makes this frustrating to see what's going on.
> 
> Please disable ALL c-states, ALL power saving, and set IA AC and IA DC Loadline to 1 and use any fixed vcore you think is stable. Try 1.350v and Vcore Loadline Calibration=Turbo.
> Boot into windows and post the VID window (yes, VID) of idle and load. All you need to do is put a normal load on the cpu and show the min and max vid.
> 
> Please remember due to bios bugs, you may have to reboot *TWICE* when switching from any auto or dvid mode to a fixed vcore mode.


When going through the menus to look for power saving features to disable I came across SVID Offset (Disabled), MCE (Auto), and Turbo Boost (Auto). Values in parentheses are what was set, is that fine? I disabled all the C-States, Speed Step, etc., and set AC/DC Loadline to 1, Fixed Vcore to 1.35, vcore loadline to turbo.

Here is a screenshot of VID, VR OUT, etc, after a cinebench R15 run.


----------



## Falkentyne

Zensou said:


> When going through the menus to look for power saving features to disable I came across SVID Offset (Disabled), MCE (Auto), and Turbo Boost (Auto). Values in parentheses are what was set, is that fine? I disabled all the C-States, Speed Step, etc., and set AC/DC Loadline to 1, Fixed Vcore to 1.35, vcore loadline to turbo.
> 
> Here is a screenshot of VID, VR OUT, etc, after a cinebench R15 run.


Looks about right.
You can't do 5 ghz with Bios set 1.275v with Vcore Loadline Calibration=Turbo ?
That's unstable? (Cinebench / Realbench 2.56).


----------



## Zensou

Falkentyne said:


> Looks about right.
> You can't do 5 ghz with Bios set 1.275v with Vcore Loadline Calibration=Turbo ?
> That's unstable? (Cinebench / Realbench 2.56).


Set to 1.280v.
Stable in realbench and cinebench but, once again, unstable at 20-50% usage (WoW and Firefox crashing).


----------



## Falkentyne

Zensou said:


> Set to 1.280v.
> Stable in realbench and cinebench but, once again, unstable at 20-50% usage (WoW and Firefox crashing).


Try 1.30v with LLC Turbo, then.
If you have all power saving disabled, I'm not sure why world of warcraft would crash but Cinebench and Realbench 2.56 would run happily without any errors.


----------



## Zensou

I still get an error or BSOD when playing WoW. For the heck of it, I decided to go into BIOS and 'load optimized defaults' and I still crash ingame. Is it possible I damaged something with a voltage spike while having offset and LLC enabled. I have seen VR OUT reaching up to 1.45 for split second.

Not sure why this is happening or how to diagnose it. Thanks for all your help so far, Falk.


----------



## Falkentyne

Zensou said:


> I still get an error or BSOD when playing WoW. For the heck of it, I decided to go into BIOS and 'load optimized defaults' and I still crash ingame. Is it possible I damaged something with a voltage spike while having offset and LLC enabled. I have seen VR OUT reaching up to 1.45 for split second.
> 
> Not sure why this is happening or how to diagnose it. Thanks for all your help so far, Falk.


Are you sure your RAM is fully stable?
There are several ways to test RAM without forking over money. You can use testmem 0.12 advanced (which will do more tests without stopping),
https://hwtips.tistory.com/2548

Or you can use Google stress app tester (GSAT or whatever) by booting to Linux (check the DDR4 thread), Prime95 Blend (29.8 build 6) with AVX disabled, set to 75% of your RAM size or memtest86 on a uefi bootable USB drive.

You can test the CPU core for stock stability at these settings:
4.7 ghz / 4.4 ghz core and cache,
1.250v Bios set, Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo

Then run Prime95 29.8 build 6 small FFT preset (do not use old builds) with FMA3 enabled. If this passes, run a fixed in-place 112K FFT custom FMA3 and see if that passes.
When that's done, test L3 cache stability by running AVX disabled in-place FFT of 112K. If the AVX disabled 112k fails while FMA3 enabled one passes, there is something wrong with the L3 cache or memory controller.


----------



## Martin Perron

i check on overclock i when tried update z390 master bios f10 28 oct 19 i get when i try to flash with F10 official bios it was not possible ---> eomld mismatch error code


could you help me thanks


----------



## Wirerat

ballistix sport micron E 

2 x 8 gb, aorus pro, 9900k.

I have the ram stable at 3600mhz 16-19-19-40 2t trfc 520 @ 1.40v. 


My other kit (hynix cjr) does 3800mhz @ CL 17-21-21-41 2t 620 trfc on the mobo. 

I'm getting better performance with e die at 3600.

Not bad for a $69 ram kit imo.


----------



## robertr1

Here we go. 




Probinator on the GB boards. 

As suspected, Pro is meh for cpu and when you take into account it's poor mem oc performance, I'd put an "avoid" label on it for new buyers.


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> Here we go.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Probinator on the GB boards.
> 
> As suspected, Pro is meh for cpu and when you take into account it's poor mem oc performance, I'd put an "avoid" label on it for new buyers.


The maximum llc value is bad. Something we already knew to avoid on ambient cooling. Buildzoid says the pro is 30mv worse transient than the evga dark near the end of the video. 

Seems acceptable vs a $500 mobo.


----------



## warbucks

Currently playing around with this tonight. Let's see how far I can push it.


----------



## Falkentyne

warbucks said:


> Currently playing around with this tonight. Let's see how far I can push it.


Be careful with that chip and those voltages/loadlines.
Max safe VR VOUT for 113.5 amps is 1.340v.

You're way over that (1.402v judging from max current=most vdroop)--another reason why I have problems reading people's droop when they use c-states and get a 0.800 VR VOUT at minimum. You don't want to degrade it.


----------



## AndrejB

Anyone knows why in the new bios f10 the cpu goes to 800mhz for a split second?

All cstates, turbo, mce etc disabled...
Just vtb auto, (ac/dc 90/160 @ 48/44)

Also noticed that my idle voltage is much lower?


----------



## Driller au

I know i am way late on this but is the F10 master bios that is back up on the gigabyte sites the same as the one that Kedarwolf used and modded ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> I know i am way late on this but is the F10 master bios that is back up on the gigabyte sites the same as the one that Kedarwolf used and modded ?


Yes, it's identical to the earlier one. The SHA-1's match exactly.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, it's identical to the earlier one. The SHA-1's match exactly.


Thanks


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> I can mod F9 or F10b with the latest most secure or the best performing microcodes, the latest RST firmware, GOP firmware and Ethernet firmware.
> 
> Let me know if you want F9 or F10b, I have them. F10b worked the best for me, not sure why they pulled it, using it now.


Hey @KedarWolf just wanted to say thanks for all your contribution. 

I just got my main desktop back up and running finally and it's humming along. 

The Z390 Master is a great board. Very strong. As per my sig, I've ran benches w/ the 9900K @ 54x on all cores, but daily I run it at 50x (all cores) @ 1.26v.

I've been debating if I should upgrade the bios hmm... I think it's currently on F8 iirc. 

If I were to flash your modded F10 bios would I be able to roll back? Just wanted to make sure in case it was a one way road. 

Thanks again. It's great to see this thread thrive...I'll try to get catch up as much as I can lol and will keep an eye on this thread.


----------



## KedarWolf

iunlock said:


> Hey @KedarWolf just wanted to say thanks for all your contribution.
> 
> I just got my main desktop back up and running finally and it's humming along.
> 
> The Z390 Master is a great board. Very strong. As per my sig, I've ran benches w/ the 9900K @ 54x on all cores, but daily I run it at 50x (all cores) @ 1.26v.
> 
> I've been debating if I should upgrade the bios hmm... I think it's currently on F8 iirc.
> 
> If I were to flash your modded F10 bios would I be able to roll back? Just wanted to make sure in case it was a one way road.
> 
> Thanks again. It's great to see this thread thrive...I'll try to get catch up as much as I can lol and will keep an eye on this thread.


yes, you can flash back, but the new F10 is quite bugged, not really usable. 

My go-to BIOS is F10b. I can mod it with the latest firmwares if you want, it gives me the best overclock so far.


----------



## KedarWolf

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f9c /x

Use the modded F9c BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.10b /x
> 
> Use the modded F10b BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Fantastic. Thanks a bunch. 

Out of curiosity, what type of overclock improvements have you noticed?


----------



## warbucks

For anyone interested, I've gone ahead and stitched together the latest MEI firmware for the Z390 Master and attached it here.

To flash the firmware, extract the files from the zip archive and run the following in an elevated command prompt:



Code:


FWUpdLcl64.exe -F cse_image_FWU_Base.bin


----------



## Madness11

Guys , for 4000 mhz memory , what number for vccio and vccsa?? Thx )


----------



## AndrejB

Madness11 said:


> Guys , for 4000 mhz memory , what number for vccio and vccsa?? Thx )


Depends on your IMC, shouldn't be much more than 1.2 vccio, 1.22 vccsa


----------



## Dannyele

Madness11 said:


> Guys , for 4000 mhz memory , what number for vccio and vccsa?? Thx )



I have set 1.25 on both on x2 4000MHz (native speed 42666MHz) 19-19-19-39.


----------



## AndrejB

AndrejB said:


> Anyone knows why in the new bios f10 the cpu goes to 800mhz for a split second?
> 
> All cstates, turbo, mce etc disabled...
> Just vtb auto, (ac/dc 90/160 @ 48/44)
> 
> Also noticed that my idle voltage is much lower?


Solved.
Enable cstates option and disable sub options


----------



## hgomez2020

Martin Perron said:


> i check on overclock i when tried update z390 master bios f10 28 oct 19 i get when i try to flash with F10 official bios it was not possible ---> eomld mismatch error code
> 
> 
> could you help me thanks


I'm getting this as well

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

hgomez2020 said:


> I'm getting this as well
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


I'll PM you guys, you need an Efiflash with all checks bypassed. I don't share it in the thread because it'll flash even the wrong motherboard BIOS on our boards, which wouldn't be good.


----------



## hgomez2020

KedarWolf said:


> I'll PM you guys, you need an Efiflash with all checks bypassed. I don't share it in the thread because it'll flash even the wrong motherboard BIOS on our boards, which wouldn't be good.


Thank you, waiting on you PM

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

hgomez2020 said:


> Thank you, waiting on you PM
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


Just PM'd you.


----------



## gamervivek

I'm looking at pro/ultra for a 9900k build but hesitant due to the pro having terrible dpc latency in the anandtech review.

Can you guys post latencymon readings for five minutes at idle?


----------



## paxton676

*Modded F10b missing disable WiFi*

To KedarWolf,

I flashed the modded F10b bios on page 478 of this thread, thanks 

You said it was the same as the current F10 bios on Aeros Master Gigabyte page but the new F10 bios allows you to disable the WiFi and the UI has updated look. 

Please apply your fixes to the latest F10 bios so we can disable the WiFi.

Lastly, it also says there are 9900KS optimizations. I have the 9900KS so might be useful for me.

Thanks for the help


----------



## KedarWolf

paxton676 said:


> To KedarWolf,
> 
> I flashed the modded F10b bios on page 478 of this thread, thanks
> 
> You said it was the same as the current F10 bios on Aeros Master Gigabyte page but the new F10 bios allows you to disable the WiFi and the UI has updated look.
> 
> Please apply your fixes to the latest F10 bios so we can disable the WiFi.
> 
> Lastly, it says there are 9900KS optimizations. I have the 9900KS so might be useful for me.


No, I never said it was the same as F10, it's an earlier BIOS. And yes, you can disable wi-fi etc. You're just looking in the wrong place.

No way to make the BIOS like the F10. But if F10b is working on your KS I'd use it, lots of posts here how buggy the F10 is.

Edit: And if your overclocking and manually setting the core ratios etc. the F10b will work just fine.


----------



## bastian

Honestly running the official F10 for a bit now and have been rock stable.


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> yes, you can flash back, but the new F10 is quite bugged, not really usable.
> 
> My go-to BIOS is F10b. I can mod it with the latest firmwares if you want, it gives me the best overclock so far.


Flashed the modded F10b BIOS that you've provided and I've been running tests on my system all night. It's rock solid so far... I tried some timings with my RAM that didn't work before and it seems to be holding pretty well. 

Thanks again.


----------



## AndrejB

Master f10 bugs:

- Disabling CSM and numlock freezes the bios on save.
- Ia AC not applied after first save, need to reenter bios and save again to apply.
- Disable all c states menu item non functional. Need to disable sub items one by one.

(If anyone knows where to report these bugs, please let me know)


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Master f10 bugs:
> 
> - Disabling CSM and numlock freezes the bios on save.
> - Ia AC not applied after first save, need to reenter bios and save again to apply.
> - Disable all c states menu item non functional. Need to disable sub items one by one.
> 
> (If anyone knows where to report these bugs, please let me know)


Here.
https://esupport.gigabyte.com/


----------



## metalspider

havent seen much about the F11 bios for the aours pro so after a lot of waiting decided to try it out.these are my impressions after an hour so far trying things out.

ram doesnt seem to have gotten any better than F10 from my quick testing so far.
i did manage to boot at 4100mhz or 4000mhz only to discover the ram is really running at 3866mhz.

on F10 3866mhz seemed to be the most my ram can do even though its samsung bdie with a factory xmp of 4266mhz.

cpu OC its a little harder to find the cpu watt limits and not so sure how they are working now.
still trying things out.but im also trying to do adaptive vcore this time after seeing some tip to try recently,
so far seems to have lower temp under load but havent tested much for stability so far.
im running 5ghz and pulling a max of only 170 watts on cpu in hwinfo,a little strange.

the new menus remind me of asus motherboards,sure you can get to more settings quickly but some stuff still gets buried deep
and is a little hard to find.the old menus werent so bad once you got used to them and made a lot of sense.this new GUI idk.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Master f10 bugs:
> 
> - Disabling CSM and numlock freezes the bios on save.
> - Ia AC not applied after first save, need to reenter bios and save again to apply.
> - Disable all c states menu item non functional. Need to disable sub items one by one.
> 
> (If anyone knows where to report these bugs, please let me know)
> 
> 
> 
> Here.
> https://esupport.gigabyte.com/
Click to expand...

Thanks, reported.


----------



## shaolin95

Feeling like playing with manual voltage today instead of Vcore=Normal and c states on my 9900k to 5Ghz. Anyone mind sharing their 5Ghz settings (on Master mobo) so I can use as a base to begin tweaking?

Thanks!


----------



## ezveedub

shaolin95 said:


> Feeling like playing with manual voltage today instead of Vcore=Normal and c states on my 9900k to 5Ghz. Anyone mind sharing their 5Ghz settings (on Master mobo) so I can use as a base to begin tweaking?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!



Funny...I’ve been trying to set manual voltage on mine to 1.295v instead of Normal the last week or so and it still goes to 1.320 or so on F10B bios, lol....I guess others might have some settings to play with and chime in. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## iunlock

shaolin95 said:


> Feeling like playing with manual voltage today instead of Vcore=Normal and c states on my 9900k to 5Ghz. Anyone mind sharing their 5Ghz settings (on Master mobo) so I can use as a base to begin tweaking?
> 
> Thanks!





ezveedub said:


> Funny...I’ve been trying to set manual voltage on mine to 1.295v instead of Normal the last week or so and it still goes to 1.320 or so on F10B bios, lol....I guess others might have some settings to play with and chime in.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Hey guys, I've been tuning my 9900K the past few days. So far the lowest voltages for 50x on all cores is 1.234v. I have a few golden eggs (9900K's) in the arsenal. I also have some 9900KF's that I'm testing as well on the test bench... Since my main gaming rig is custom water cooled, I might put the best chip into my AW Area51M, since it would benefit it the most being that it's in a laptop environment. I don't see the purpose of putting the best into the desktop as the cooling is superb. 

Once the 9900KS gets back in stock I may get one to compare to one of the golden eggs, which all three can hit 54x and two of them can hit 55x for benching.


----------



## Falkentyne

ezveedub said:


> Funny...I’ve been trying to set manual voltage on mine to 1.295v instead of Normal the last week or so and it still goes to 1.320 or so on F10B bios, lol....I guess others might have some settings to play with and chime in.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Bios uses the Super I/O chip to read vcore. Don't rely on that. It will -always- have a vrise at LLC High or Higher. You want to rely on VR VOUT (which you cannot see in BIOS).


----------



## Captain Skyhawk

I'm pretty sure I'm the unluckiest PC builder at this point but wanted to run my issue by you guys to confirm. The first Aorus Z390 Pro I got wouldn't even post. I basically narrowed it down to the mobo so I returned it for another. Successfully posted and was able to boot into Windows. Installed all the drivers and then the next time I powered up the PC I got bsod, and have been on a loop ever since. Even with onboard video, 1 mem stick, and nvme it still bsod. Same with memory pulled from a working build and the brand new memory I bought. The bsod errors I get are all different. I get bsod even booting into a windows 10 usb and dvd drive. I'm thinking it has to be the motherboard at this point.

I know Gigabyte is a solid brand I'm just really unlucky. I've tried just about everything with no success. Running the latest BIOS.


----------



## metalspider

Captain Skyhawk said:


> I'm pretty sure I'm the unluckiest PC builder at this point but wanted to run my issue by you guys to confirm. The first Aorus Z390 Pro I got wouldn't even post. I basically narrowed it down to the mobo so I returned it for another. Successfully posted and was able to boot into Windows. Installed all the drivers and then the next time I powered up the PC I got bsod, and have been on a loop ever since. Even with onboard video, 1 mem stick, and nvme it still bsod. Same with memory pulled from a working build and the brand new memory I bought. The bsod errors I get are all different. I get bsod even booting into a windows 10 usb and dvd drive. I'm thinking it has to be the motherboard at this point.
> 
> I know Gigabyte is a solid brand I'm just really unlucky. I've tried just about everything with no success. Running the latest BIOS.



did you test your psu too?


----------



## thuNDa

@Captain Skyhawk
Might need a BIOS update. I guess some revisions of CPUs make problems otherwise(read it on reddit a couple of times, and it was all good after BIOS update).


----------



## coolkwc

Guys, need your help here.

I just change my Aorus Master to official F10 BIOS yesterday and i notice i no longer able to alter my memory timing when i OC.

Previously i OC my Kingston HyperX Predator 3200Mhz 32GB (16x2) to 3500Mhz with timing 16-18-18-42 which i manually forced in the BIOS.
I did the same in F10 BIOS however CPU-Z told me the timing is 18-20-20-42 despite i set it at 16-18-18-42 manually.

What's the problem here?


----------



## QQryQ

finally I changed cpu block ( alphacool support rocks ) and now temps look like:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=304858&thumb=1

1.28V core c-states enabled, LLC Turbo rest auto, 3200Hz X.M.P Profile. 

I tried KedarWolf's settings a little from this:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-440.html#post28121456

changed settings to similar without touching ram and did offset to 0.00 temps was greate but tasks was taking tooo long 4 min - 1 test where settings up was 2 min - 1 test, 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=304860&thumb=1

after changing offset to 0.145 was too hot
and on lettings I posted before https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/ the results was 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=304862&thumb=1


any sugestions how to set it propertly cold and stable ?


----------



## Wirerat

coolkwc said:


> Guys, need your help here.
> 
> I just change my Aorus Master to official F10 BIOS yesterday and i notice i no longer able to alter my memory timing when i OC.
> 
> Previously i OC my Kingston HyperX Predator 3200Mhz 32GB (16x2) to 3500Mhz with timing 16-18-18-42 which i manually forced in the BIOS.
> I did the same in F10 BIOS however CPU-Z told me the timing is 18-20-20-42 despite i set it at 16-18-18-42 manually.
> 
> What's the problem here?


 it failed to boot at your timings.

Make sure you also set " memory enhancement mode" to normal. 

Auto was changing my manual timings.

Don't clear cmos right away if it fails boot. Give it a couple mins. It will cycle back and allow you back into bios (at default clocks) most of the time.


----------



## Captain Skyhawk

metalspider said:


> did you test your psu too?


Yea, forgot to mention, tried with a brand new psu as well.



thuNDa said:


> @Captain Skyhawk
> Might need a BIOS update. I guess some revisions of CPUs make problems otherwise(read it on reddit a couple of times, and it was all good after BIOS update).


I updated to the latest bios F11 but was still seeing same issues.


----------



## edhutner

Hi.
Z390 Aorus Pro + 9700k owner. I am having issues with memory. I have been experimenting with different kits of samsung b-die memory.
2x8 Kingston HyperX 4133
2x8 Patriot Viper 4133
4x8 Patriot Viper 4133

I just cannot get it boot on ddr 4133 with any combination of kits. 
I also removed the cpu overclock. Tried to raise vccio/vccsa to 1.25, raised vddr to 1.5 - but it just does not want to boot at 4133. Best I could get is 3800 (with 4 dimms).
I believe that memory is ok, but the board or the cpu is problematic.

I am considering to sale my z390 pro and buy z390 master.

Any advices please?


----------



## Nammi

edhutner said:


> Hi.
> Z390 Aorus Pro + 9700k owner. I am having issues with memory. I have been experimenting with different kits of samsung b-die memory.
> 2x8 Kingston HyperX 4133
> 2x8 Patriot Viper 4133
> 4x8 Patriot Viper 4133
> 
> I just cannot get it boot on ddr 4133 with any combination of kits.
> I also removed the cpu overclock. Tried to raise vccio/vccsa to 1.25, raised vddr to 1.5 - but it just does not want to boot at 4133. Best I could get is 3800 (with 4 dimms).
> I believe that memory is ok, but the board or the cpu is problematic.
> 
> I am considering to sale my z390 pro and buy z390 master.
> 
> Any advices please?


Changing mobo is pretty much your only option. If 4133 is your target then the master will do fine(most likely only achievable with 4 sticks of ram), however if you're aiming for 4300+ then you'd have to look at the other vendors.


----------



## iunlock

Nammi said:


> Changing mobo is pretty much your only option. If 4133 is your target then the master will do fine(most likely only achievable with 4 sticks of ram), however if you're aiming for 4300+ then you'd have to look at the other vendors.


Out of curiosity, what has been the highest stable ram clocks for the Z390 master? I've been seeing a lot of 4133 among Z390 Master owners, but wasn't sure if someone got it to 4266 (stable).

I'm running my 4266 kit @ 4000 at the moment and it's rock solid. I'm sure it can do 4133 as well and I've got it to 4266 for benches, however, I haven't had much time to tune the ram higher than 4000 for daily use.

When I get some time I'll tackle the ram... Hopefully soon...


----------



## Nammi

iunlock said:


> Out of curiosity, what has been the highest stable ram clocks for the Z390 master? I've been seeing a lot of 4133 among Z390 Master owners, but wasn't sure if someone got it to 4266 (stable).
> 
> I'm running my 4266 kit @ 4000 at the moment and it's rock solid. I'm sure it can do 4133 as well and I've got it to 4266 for benches, however, I haven't had much time to tune the ram higher than 4000 for daily use.
> 
> When I get some time I'll tackle the ram... Hopefully soon...


I think 4200 is the highest I've seen so far. 4200 is the soft cap for me, where it still manages to boot. Anything beyond 4200 is literally a wall, I've been unable to get past memory training even with 1.35V SA&IO and 1.55V DRAM.


----------



## eagle7

hello! i have also the z390 aorus pro and i would like to install this bios, in the download link just i have found the 1.f10 file, how can i get the efiflash for this custom bios?


----------



## eagle7

*help please*



KedarWolf said:


> Here an updated F10, DON'T flash the latest, too buggy.
> 
> This one has the fastest microcode, if you want the slower more secure latest, let me know.
> 
> Need to flash with efiflash.





hello! i have also the z390 aorus pro and i would like to install this bios, in the download link just i have found the 1.f10 file, how can i get the efiflash for this custom bios?


----------



## AndrejB

eagle7 said:


> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here an updated F10, DON'T flash the latest, too buggy.
> 
> This one has the fastest microcode, if you want the slower more secure latest, let me know.
> 
> Need to flash with efiflash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hello! i have also the z390 aorus pro and i would like to install this bios, in the download link just i have found the 1.f10 file, how can i get the efiflash for this custom bios?
Click to expand...

The f10 is for the master mb


----------



## DIJRP

aorus pro f10 (last bios f11 unstable)

cpu 8350k 5,1 avx 3
16 gb (2x4 + 8 gb) ddr4 Ballistix Elite 3200 to 3600


----------



## edhutner

I believe I hit another bug in the new BIOS.
CPU temperature shown as -55. In windows it is shown properly but the fan related to CPU temperature were not working.
After reboot it still shows -55 in the BIOS. I had to shut down and then start up again in order to fix.



https://postimg.cc/MMqZdkg5


----------



## iunlock

Nammi said:


> I think 4200 is the highest I've seen so far. 4200 is the soft cap for me, where it still manages to boot. Anything beyond 4200 is literally a wall, I've been unable to get past memory training even with 1.35V SA&IO and 1.55V DRAM.


Oh interesting... thanks for the input... I'll try to tune around 4200 and 4266 and report back as I have some ideas that might make it stable... I can bench at 4266, but when gaming/streaming/recording/with a bunch of things open in the background it locks up sometimes and BOSD's... 

Being that these are 4266 sticks I'd be happy to run it at advertised speeds and call it a day... that's IF I can get it to be stable at 4266. 

I always have two RAM voices in my head... one side saying... "tighter timings, drop the frequency," while the other equally saying "higher frequency, looser timings." LOL

Mathematically and depending on the application IMO I'm always for higher frequencies with slightly looser timings... if I go the other way in dropping clocks just to get tighter timings, I just feels ever so slightly like I'm not getting the most out of the sticks. 

RAM is a funny thing indeed... with so many variables eh...


----------



## postem

Hi I'm considering changing my hero x for a new ultra z390 for my on mail 9900ks. For you owners of aorus boards, what is the current state of compatibility with 9900ks and general stability of bios? I'm worried because all I'm reading here.

It's a sad state of things, Asus bios is top, but trash hardware, but aorus is the opposite, greate hardware with crappy bios.


----------



## coolkwc

Guys, i have really no idea how to use adaptive offset vcore for an overclocked 9900k

Ok, let say now my 9900k stable at manual Vcore 1.3V with Turbo LLC, what kind of adaptive offset and LLC i shall set?

At 1st i though my normal Vcore is 1.2V, so i just use +0.1V offset and hell my vcore in Bios shown 1.5V, it frighten me. Any wrong with my setting? or i shouldn't use adaptive vcore for OC CPU??


----------



## Falkentyne

coolkwc said:


> Guys, i have really no idea how to use adaptive offset vcore for an overclocked 9900k
> 
> Ok, let say now my 9900k stable at manual Vcore 1.3V with Turbo LLC, what kind of adaptive offset and LLC i shall set?
> 
> At 1st i though my normal Vcore is 1.2V, so i just use +0.1V offset and hell my vcore in Bios shown 1.5V, it frighten me. Any wrong with my setting? or i shouldn't use adaptive vcore for OC CPU??


You need to learn how the AC Loadlines and base VID's work.
And the reason you had 1.5v is because you combined a high AC Loadline with an aggressive loadline calibration (VRM loadline). And *then* you threw on a +100mv offset on TOP of that. This can degrade the processor as well. AC Loadline is part of cpu internal power management and loadline calibration (VRM Loadline) is external power management (motherboard based).

Please take the time to read my other posts about that here and in the 9900k thread.

AC Loadline value that is used gets its values from CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline presets, unless AC Loadline in Internal VR Settings is set to a non auto (zero) value, then the VR setting takes higher priority and will overrule the presets.

Auto: Let motherboard decide based on multiplier.

Power saving: 0.4 mOhms AC, 1.3 mOhms DC (milliOhms)
Balanced: 1.0 mOhms AC, 1.3 mOhms DC
Turbo (max Intel spec 8 cores): 1.6 mOhms AC, 1.6 mOhms DC
Extreme (max Intel spec 6 cores): 2.1 mOhms AC, 2.1 mOhms DC.

Values in internal VR settings are 1/100 Ohm. 100=1.0 milliOhms, 1=0.01 milliOhms.

Basic rule: the higher the AC Loadline value, the LOWER the VRM Loadline (LLC) value should be (VRM Loadline calibration is also in milliOhms, even though the ODM's don't tell you this in the motherboard manuals; a higher level of Vcore loadline calibration=lower resistance (mOhms)=less vdroop. Lower levels=higher resistance=more vdroop. Intel doesn't factor in LLC into their specs, they design for spec vdroop loadline of 1.6 mOhms (8 cores), 2.1 mOhms vdroop loadline (4 and 6 core CFL chips).

If that didn't make sense:
Higher AC Loadline = use more vdroop (less aggressive loadline calibration or use Intel spec).
Lower AC Loadline = you can use less vdroop (more aggressive LLC).

1.6 mOhms ACLL is only safe with VRM Loadline at Standard or Normal (Intel spec vdroop of 1.6 mOhms).

HWinfo64 (extended CPU information section) will show the currently used AC and DC Loadline values.

I also wrote some stuff here.
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...oltage_for_a_247_overclock/f6r8fs6/?context=3

https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comm...ks_overclocking_statistics/f6h7bjp/?context=3

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki..._acdc_loadline_ufalkentyne/f64ro8l/?context=3


----------



## alv-OC

Hi guys!

Ive notice some wierd issues related with my OC. Summing up, everything looks fine and goes just ok except when I play Battlefield V where I get reports of CPU L0 cache Errors and random crashes (screen freezes)

For those who don't remember I was having awfull problems trying to OC the RAM, swaped almost every component (MoBo, CPU, RAMs) and I finnaly found that the issue was the Der8auer OC-Frame for Direct Die Contact... with the new 9900K i tested firstly with its IHS soldered, It worked as spected runing only XMP, then I did the Delid and problems came back. Since then i'm runing lapped IHS with liquid metal. 

This is my current system configuration:

Latest moded BIOS by Kedarwolf.
9900K 5.2GHz all cores, 4.8GHz caches @ 1.345v (it also pases R15 at 1.340v with no problem)
2x8GB GSkill 4000MHz CL17. Currently running :

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305180&thumb=1

IMC setted manually to: VCCIO: 1.220v // VCCSA:1.200v
DDR voltage 1.420 // Voltage trainig: 1.41v (also tested with 1.45v / 1.44v) 


- Some other readings from HWinfo:

Temp CPU: Max 79ºC, 36ºC average on idle
Temp RAM Max 37ºC, 29ºC average idle (active cooling, 2x85mm fans on top of the RAMs)
VR OUT: Max 1.336v, Min: 1.285v

- Some other BIOS settings:

LLC at Turbo
Switchin freq to 500KHz
All C-states: Disabled
All energy savings Disabled.
All power limits to Maximun.
Vtd and iGPU: Disabled

I passed many stress tests and none of them gave me a single error, even HCI-Memtest:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305192&thumb=1


I also tried XMP values setted manually and just XMP, lowered the caches to 46GHz, but the CPU L0 cache erros are still there:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305194&thumb=1


Any idea??


----------



## Falkentyne

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> Ive notice some wierd issues related with my OC. Summing up, everything looks fine and goes just ok except when I play Battlefield V where I get reports of CPU L0 cache Errors and random crashes (screen freezes)
> 
> For those who don't remember I was having awfull problems trying to OC the RAM, swaped almost every component (MoBo, CPU, RAMs) and I finnaly found that the issue was the Der8auer OC-Frame for Direct Die Contact... with the new 9900K i tested firstly with its IHS soldered, It worked as spected runing only XMP, then I did the Delid and problems came back. Since then i'm runing lapped IHS with liquid metal.
> 
> This is my current system configuration:
> 
> Latest moded BIOS by Kedarwolf.
> 9900K 5.2GHz all cores, 4.8GHz caches @ 1.345v (it also pases R15 at 1.340v with no problem)
> 2x8GB GSkill 4000MHz CL17. Currently running :
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305180&thumb=1
> 
> IMC setted manually to: VCCIO: 1.220v // VCCSA:1.200v
> DDR voltage 1.420 // Voltage trainig: 1.41v (also tested with 1.45v / 1.44v)
> 
> 
> - Some other readings from HWinfo:
> 
> Temp CPU: Max 79ºC, 36ºC average on idle
> Temp RAM Max 37ºC, 29ºC average idle (active cooling, 2x85mm fans on top of the RAMs)
> VR OUT: Max 1.336v, Min: 1.285v
> 
> - Some other BIOS settings:
> 
> LLC at Turbo
> Switchin freq to 500KHz
> All C-states: Disabled
> All energy savings Disabled.
> All power limits to Maximun.
> Vtd and iGPU: Disabled
> 
> I passed many stress tests and none of them gave me a single error, even HCI-Memtest:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305192&thumb=1
> 
> 
> I also tried XMP values setted manually and just XMP, lowered the caches to 46GHz, but the CPU L0 cache erros are still there:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305194&thumb=1
> 
> 
> Any idea??


Raise VCCIO to 1.30v and see if the L0 errors go away first. Of course that will take some time to test.


----------



## alv-OC

Hi @FalkEtyne! thanks for your answer 

Is 1.300v safe for 24/7 usage? do I keep VCCSA at 1.200v?

the time needed to test it is "easy"... as the errors only show up when playing BF V I just need to play 20 min or so hehe


**Quick Edit**----------------------------------

I tried VCCIO 1.300v and it gave more and much faste L0 errors followed by a total system crash....


----------



## QQryQ

Falkentyne said:


> You need to learn how the AC Loadlines and base VID's work.
> And the reason you had 1.5v is because you combined a high AC Loadline with an aggressive loadline calibration (VRM loadline). And *then* you threw on a +100mv offset on TOP of that. This can degrade the processor as well. AC Loadline is part of cpu internal power management and loadline calibration (VRM Loadline) is external power management (motherboard based).
> 
> Please take the time to read my other posts about that here and in the 9900k thread.
> 
> AC Loadline value that is used gets its values from CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline presets, unless AC Loadline in Internal VR Settings is set to a non auto (zero) value, then the VR setting takes higher priority and will overrule the presets.
> 
> Auto: Let motherboard decide based on multiplier.
> 
> Power saving: 0.4 mOhms AC, 1.3 mOhms DC (milliOhms)
> Balanced: 1.0 mOhms AC, 1.3 mOhms DC
> Turbo (max Intel spec 8 cores): 1.6 mOhms AC, 1.6 mOhms DC
> Extreme (max Intel spec 6 cores): 2.1 mOhms AC, 2.1 mOhms DC.
> 
> Values in internal VR settings are 1/100 Ohm. 100=1.0 milliOhms, 1=0.01 milliOhms.
> 
> Basic rule: the higher the AC Loadline value, the LOWER the VRM Loadline (LLC) value should be (VRM Loadline calibration is also in milliOhms, even though the ODM's don't tell you this in the motherboard manuals; a higher level of Vcore loadline calibration=lower resistance (mOhms)=less vdroop. Lower levels=higher resistance=more vdroop. Intel doesn't factor in LLC into their specs, they design for spec vdroop loadline of 1.6 mOhms (8 cores), 2.1 mOhms vdroop loadline (4 and 6 core CFL chips).
> 
> If that didn't make sense:
> Higher AC Loadline = use more vdroop (less aggressive loadline calibration or use Intel spec).
> Lower AC Loadline = you can use less vdroop (more aggressive LLC).
> 
> 1.6 mOhms ACLL is only safe with VRM Loadline at Standard or Normal (Intel spec vdroop of 1.6 mOhms).
> 
> HWinfo64 (extended CPU information section) will show the currently used AC and DC Loadline values.
> 
> I also wrote some stuff here.
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...oltage_for_a_247_overclock/f6r8fs6/?context=3
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comm...ks_overclocking_statistics/f6h7bjp/?context=3
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki..._acdc_loadline_ufalkentyne/f64ro8l/?context=3


Damn impressing knownledge, thanks.

Actually I'm using 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305200&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305202&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305204&thumb=1
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305206&thumb=1
with the prime result
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305208&thumb=1
its better use this settings or change it to LLC Turbo manual voltage of 1.29V and rest on auto? trying to reduce POUT and IOUT?
or just my cooling isnt good enough ( Alphacool Eisbaer 360LT ) to cool that heat ?


----------



## Falkentyne

alv-OC said:


> Hi @FalkEtyne! thanks for your answer
> 
> Is 1.300v safe for 24/7 usage? do I keep VCCSA at 1.200v?
> 
> the time needed to test it is "easy"... as the errors only show up when playing BF V I just need to play 20 min or so hehe
> 
> 
> **Quick Edit**----------------------------------
> 
> I tried VCCIO 1.300v and it gave more and much faste L0 errors followed by a total system crash....


The L0 cache is a virtual register store that sits directly on the CPU cores, and is used by the hyperthreaded cores, so that physical and logical threads think they are all operating on physical cores and running real instructions.
L3 cache is used heavily for this. Unfortunately, the same voltage rail controls the L3 cache and the memory controller.
Then it becomes very difficult to determine if the memory controller doesn't like the higher voltage or if the L3 cache doesn't like it.

Did you also raise VCCSA to 1.30v (or 1.35v maximum) when you did this?

Also what happens if you reduce VCCIO 50mv below what you originally had it at?

If none of these options do anything then all you can do is increase vcore or turn off hyperthreading.


----------



## Falkentyne

QQryQ said:


> Damn impressing knownledge, thanks.
> 
> Actually I'm using
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305200&thumb=1
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305202&thumb=1
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305204&thumb=1
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305206&thumb=1
> with the prime result
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=305208&thumb=1
> its better use this settings or change it to LLC Turbo manual voltage of 1.29V and rest on auto? trying to reduce POUT and IOUT?
> or just my cooling isnt good enough ( Alphacool Eisbaer 360LT ) to cool that heat ?


Prime 95? AVX enabled or AVX disabled?
I see some thermal throttling going on your clocks.
You also seem to have c-states enabled, which makes it impossible for me to see your "lowest" VR VOUT at maximum load, e.g., the VR VOUT in the "Minimum" column should match what "Current (OUT) shows in the "maximum" column, since highest current causes most vdroop. But instead I see a 0.70v VR VOUT. That makes things hard for me.

I'm going to assume it was between 1.195 to 1.20v VR VOUT in the 174 Amp current load. Either way that's going to be very hard to cool if you are not direct die.

When did you see a "1.5v Bios" voltage?
Your settings you showed in Bios show a +0mv DVID offset. Your HWinfo64 settings also don't point to any idle voltage being close to 1.5v.
But again, DVID mode on Gigabyte bios has bugs anyway. (Even if offset is 0).
If you switch from DVID mode to fixed vcore + loadline calibration, the "new" loadline calibration gets applied to the 'old' DVID mode without the fixed vcore working, until you reboot twice. (Either that, *OR* the DVID offset gets applied to your fixed vcore and LLC. Oof.)


----------



## QQryQ

Falkentyne said:


> Prime 95? AVX enabled or AVX disabled?
> I see some thermal throttling going on your clocks.
> You also seem to have c-states enabled, which makes it impossible for me to see your "lowest" VR VOUT at maximum load, e.g., the VR VOUT in the "Minimum" column should match what "Current (OUT) shows in the "maximum" column, since highest current causes most vdroop. But instead I see a 0.70v VR VOUT. That makes things hard for me.
> 
> I'm going to assume it was between 1.195 to 1.20v VR VOUT in the 174 Amp current load. Either way that's going to be very hard to cool if you are not direct die.
> 
> When did you see a "1.5v Bios" voltage?
> Your settings you showed in Bios show a +0mv DVID offset. Your HWinfo64 settings also don't point to any idle voltage being close to 1.5v.
> But again, DVID mode on Gigabyte bios has bugs anyway. (Even if offset is 0).
> If you switch from DVID mode to fixed vcore + loadline calibration, the "new" loadline calibration gets applied to the 'old' DVID mode without the fixed vcore working, until you reboot twice. (Either that, *OR* the DVID offset gets applied to your fixed vcore and LLC. Oof.)


Nah I just replied your post there was something about 1.5V not me ;-) 

Wonder its better to use all auto and LLC Turbo with 1.295 or so or just leave it like its now, under AVX2 load I had 158AMPs and 195W so yes there was thermalthrottling assume I cant cool that like you said without direct die? ( btw. does that reduce temps like 20%? or less ? )


----------



## sygnus21

On Gigabyte boards with dual BIOS (BTW I have the Aorus Z390 Xtreme), correct me if I'm wrong, but at the default settings doesn't flashing the BIOS update both?


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> On Gigabyte boards with dual BIOS (BTW I have the Aorus Z390 Xtreme), correct me if I'm wrong, but at the default settings doesn't flashing the BIOS update both?


On the Master, the only bios flashed is the "active" bios, and apparently, switching the bios switch from bios 1 to bios 2 (or vice versa) DOES NOT change the active bios until the system is POWERED OFF and restarted, which prevents a dead/corrupted BIOS from being flashed (which seems to be a serious design problem--those switches seem to only be checked at power on, rather than connected to a direct electrical SPDT circuit). Even a simple "start menu->restart" to reboot windows doesn't switch the active BIOS after switching the bios switch. (this is unlike the dual bios Radeon cards, where the switch electronically cuts off the bios and links the alternate one right away, allowing "hot flashing" a dead BIOS).

To flash the alternate BIOS (whichever one you are not using) on the Master, you need to switch the BIOS jumper switch to that BIOS, power off, then power on again, with the BIOS also set in "Single Bios mode" (a second switch).

Doesn't your Xtreme have USB Bios flashback, where you can flash a bios just by inserting a USB drive? I don't know if that works if the active BIOS is corrupted though.
I'm assuming 'hot switching' doesn't work on the Extreme either (no one has posted if it does or not--the number of people on this thread who have Aorus Xtremes can be counted on one hand. Yes, one hand).


----------



## vmanuelgm

New F10b mod (based on latest Kedarwolf mod) with the latest GOP 1096, RaidEfi 17.8.0.4414, and Intel Boot Agent 0.1.16, along with HEX edition to allow easier flashing.


https://mega.nz/#!UqJTUKqb!yYDNj54yHHG_KRUTPk5FyR1jndTpdTm-qbYgZjAEWzQ


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> Doesn't your Xtreme have USB Bios flashback, where you can flash a bios just by inserting a USB drive? I don't know if that works if the active BIOS is corrupted though.
> I'm assuming 'hot switching' doesn't work on the Extreme either (no one has posted if it does or not--the number of people on this thread who have Aorus Xtremes can be counted on one hand. Yes, one hand).


Yeah, it's called Q-Flash. 

Anyway I found this in the owner's manual (using Q-Flash Plus)….

"_After the main BIOS is flashed, the system will reboot automatically and then DualBIOS™ will continue to update the backup BIOS. After completion, the system will reboot again and boot from the main BIOS for normal operation._" So that sounds like both BIOS' get flashed during a firmware update.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here's F10b for the Master, with GOP v1096, RST EFIRaidDriver and RST RAID ROM v17.7.0.4404, and Intel Boot Agent v0.1.16.

RST RAID ROM v17.8.0.4414 isn't available yet.

https://www.win-raid.com/t19f13-Intel-EFI-quot-RaidDriver-quot-BIOS-Modules-52.html#msg96781

"As long as no Intel v17.8 series RST drivers are available, it doesn't make much sense to update the Intel RAID BIOS modules to a version of the v17.8 development branch.
The Intel RST drivers are regarding the BIOS RAID modules backwards compatible, but you may run into a problem if the in-use RAID driver belongs to a lower development branch than the related Intel RAID BIOS module."

Edit: Long week, tired, I'll update XTreme, Pro etc. soon.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Not probable, have tried lots of driver/firms without an issue when the versions are close between them. In fact, the most of users just update drivers and they don't usually come in trouble.

In regards to OROM, Fernando also said it could be not released. We also know this OROM's are not used in UEFI mode, so not worthy, yet I prefer to have all the modules updated to the same version.

Sometimes I feel we have a competition here, instead of helping each other... Don't understand it.


----------



## KedarWolf

vmanuelgm said:


> Not probable, have tried lots of driver/firms without an issue when the versions are close between them. In fact, the most of users just update drivers and they don't usually come in trouble.
> 
> In regards to OROM, Fernando also said it could be not released. We also know this OROM's are not used in UEFI mode, so not worthy, yet I prefer to have all the modules updated to the same version.
> 
> Sometimes I feel we have a competition here, instead of helping each other... Don't understand it.


I just prefer to wait until matching versions are available is all. And I think it's the best policy for RST firmware. That quote I posted is from Fernando.


----------



## Wirerat

I finally had some time to push this balistix sport kit a little higher. Its now at 3733mhz 16-19-19-40 2t 520trfc 1.42v.

I think that's it on the frequency headroom. Maybe I can get cl15 or 1t in the future.


----------



## vmanuelgm

KedarWolf said:


> I just prefer to wait until matching versions are available is all. And I think it's the best policy for RST firmware. That quote I posted is from Fernando.


I know whose the quote is, I was part of the conversation.

The point is Pacman only found this EFI driver, which is the important one for UEFI setups, and maybe the OROM is not to be released. Both SoniX and Fernando clarified the OROM is not needed right now but I like to update all the modules to the same versions and in some boards like my Omega u can't use UBU to update the OROM since the GUID is mixed with some other stuff and u have to update it manually.

We neither know, as is the case for the OROM, if Intel is releasing the 17.8 Driver, but recently the Drivers is being released a bit later hence we must wait. 

So, having all this in mind, updating to EFI 17.8 and using the previous 17.7 driver should not bring troubles. Of course the ideal, and that was Fernando said, is to use the same versions to avoid any kind of issues, but that doesn't mean there has to be any, specially if the versions are close like these ones.

Finally, I like to help people so not here to compete. I just post new updates if someone didn't before (for example u). Guess u don't have UBU exclusive in this thread, do u???


----------



## KedarWolf

vmanuelgm said:


> I know whose the quote is, I was part of the conversation.
> 
> The point is Pacman only found this EFI driver, which is the important one for UEFI setups, and maybe the OROM is not to be released. Both SoniX and Fernando clarified the OROM is not needed right now but I like to update all the modules to the same versions and in some boards like my Omega u can't use UBU to update the OROM since the GUID is mixed with some other stuff and u have to update it manually.
> 
> We neither know, as is the case for the OROM, if Intel is releasing the 17.8 Driver, but recently the Drivers is being released a bit later hence we must wait.
> 
> So, having all this in mind, updating to EFI 17.8 and using the previous 17.7 driver should not bring troubles. Of course the ideal, and that was Fernando said, is to use the same versions to avoid any kind of issues, but that doesn't mean there has to be any, specially if the versions are close like these ones.
> 
> Finally, I like to help people so not here to compete. I just post new updates if someone didn't before (for example u). Guess u don't have UBU exclusive in this thread, do u???


is Fernando refering to the drivers or 'Intel-RST_EFI-RaidDriver_v17.7.0.4404_without-header' firmware though?


----------



## vmanuelgm

KedarWolf said:


> is Fernando refering to the drivers or 'Intel-RST_EFI-RaidDriver_v17.7.0.4404_without-header' firmware though?


Fernando, in the comments of the link u posted, is referring to Drivers in combination to a new EFI Raid Module. But we also talked about the missing OROM, after I asked Pacman to clarify if he had the 17.8 OROM or not. Fernando replied in behalf of Pacman saying he probably does not have the OROM, since he would have posted it in the proper thread in the opposite case. Then he also pointed out OROM is not needed in UEFI setups, thing I knew but I still prefer to have all the modules updated, even when some OROM's in some boards like in my Omega, must be updated manually, which makes it more difficult.

As for the combination of a new EFI Raid module with a previous Driver, shouldn't cause any troubles at all if close between em, although the ideal is to match versions. That is what my experience says. Maybe other mates have a different opinion.


----------



## metalspider

looks like they did some stuff in the aorus pro F11 bios to the ram section,been able to boot ratios that never worked before like 3900mhz or 4000mhz but for now im still at 3866mhz with my settings from F10 and its still good as before.
dont really feel like going through all the testing for such a small jump to 3900mhz and im having a lot of issues getting 4000mhz to be a little stable.

if anything i need to mess up a lot more settings before the motherboard boot loops and i have to clear cmos so thats good i guess.


----------



## gamervivek

Falkentyne said:


> On the Master, the only bios flashed is the "active" bios, and apparently, switching the bios switch from bios 1 to bios 2 (or vice versa) DOES NOT change the active bios until the system is POWERED OFF and restarted, which prevents a dead/corrupted BIOS from being flashed (which seems to be a serious design problem--those switches seem to only be checked at power on, rather than connected to a direct electrical SPDT circuit). Even a simple "start menu->restart" to reboot windows doesn't switch the active BIOS after switching the bios switch. (this is unlike the dual bios Radeon cards, where the switch electronically cuts off the bios and links the alternate one right away, allowing "hot flashing" a dead BIOS).
> 
> To flash the alternate BIOS (whichever one you are not using) on the Master, you need to switch the BIOS jumper switch to that BIOS, power off, then power on again, with the BIOS also set in "Single Bios mode" (a second switch).
> 
> Doesn't your Xtreme have USB Bios flashback, where you can flash a bios just by inserting a USB drive? I don't know if that works if the active BIOS is corrupted though.
> I'm assuming 'hot switching' doesn't work on the Extreme either (no one has posted if it does or not--the number of people on this thread who have Aorus Xtremes can be counted on one hand. Yes, one hand).


I moved from X470 gaming 7 to Z390 Ultra yesterday, that's strange design choice because I read that you could do this on my older board with the BIOS switch. One of the reasons why I was considering the Master.

Early impressions of the intel platform, I'm suprised that I can't get 3600Mhz with same timings as I did on Ryzen 3600 with a 3000Mhz kit. Have got the 3600MHz B-die kit installed and will be checking how well it does later today.

edit: currently on F7 BIOS, how're the new ones?


----------



## Sheyster

metalspider said:


> looks like they did some stuff in the aorus pro F11 bios to the ram section,been able to boot ratios that never worked before like 3900mhz or 4000mhz but for now im still at 3866mhz with my settings from F10 and its still good as before.
> dont really feel like going through all the testing for such a small jump to 3900mhz and im having a lot of issues getting 4000mhz to be a little stable.
> 
> if anything i need to mess up a lot more settings before the motherboard boot loops and i have to clear cmos so thats good i guess.


I'm sure they've received many complaints (and probably Pro board returns too) regarding memory not working (even just booting) at 4000. I may eventually update to F11 and try 4000 again.


----------



## Sheyster

vmanuelgm said:


> Sometimes I feel we have a competition here, instead of helping each other... Don't understand it.


You two are kind of giving that impression. I was a heavy contributor to the Titan X Maxwell thread. We had multiple contributors and we all managed to get along great! I think the key is to be polite and not argue too much.  Not everyone likes to do things the same way.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> metalspider said:
> 
> 
> 
> looks like they did some stuff in the aorus pro F11 bios to the ram section,been able to boot ratios that never worked before like 3900mhz or 4000mhz but for now im still at 3866mhz with my settings from F10 and its still good as before.
> dont really feel like going through all the testing for such a small jump to 3900mhz and im having a lot of issues getting 4000mhz to be a little stable.
> 
> if anything i need to mess up a lot more settings before the motherboard boot loops and i have to clear cmos so thats good i guess.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure they've received many complaints (and probably Pro board returns too) regarding memory not working (even just booting) at 4000. I may eventually update to F11 and try 4000 again.
Click to expand...

It just won't properly train the secondarys. I wonder if the 4000mhz kit from the qvl actually work. That profile should be in the eprom. It was valided at 4 dimms though.

I'm happy with micron E 3200mhz running at 3733mhz cl16. I have a hynix kit that can run 3800mhz but at much worse timings.


----------



## metalspider

Wirerat said:


> It just won't properly train the secondarys. I wonder if the 4000mhz kit from the qvl actually work. That profile should be in the eprom. It was valided at 4 dimms though.
> 
> I'm happy with micron E 3200mhz running at 3733mhz cl16. I have a hynix kit that can run 3800mhz but at much worse timings.


well some of the "memory enhancement" settings do help a little with the training by making secondaries and tertiary looser but ive never gotten anything to pass hci memtest at those high speeds no matter how loose the timings or how many volts i set in dram or vccsa vccio.
seems i have not just a mobo issue for higher ram speeds but my cpu is also revision P0 which is supposedly older and a worse imc.
im using 2 kits of 2x8gb gskill with an xmp of 4266mhz 19-19-19-39 so thats frowned upon too since it was'nt a factory matched kit of 4x8gb.

i set most of the timings manually at 3866mhz a while ago so i have a pretty good known stable profile for that.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Sheyster said:


> You two are kind of giving that impression. I was a heavy contributor to the Titan X Maxwell thread. We had multiple contributors and we all managed to get along great! I think the key is to be polite and not argue too much.  Not everyone likes to do things the same way.



We here call it "to be a low profile"...

Thanks for your opinion. I agree u had a nice group in that thread u mention.


F8 Aorus Extreme mod:

https://mega.nz/#!V7Y3VIqZ!9047Aqc0rC02sbm3rloRHqeGdCAQwZzX3-UrZP-1tDY

One mate has just flashed his extreme board using this bios and confirms it can be flashed within the bios, not needing Efiflash.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> It just won't properly train the secondarys. I wonder if the 4000mhz kit from the qvl actually work. That profile should be in the eprom. It was valided at 4 dimms though.
> 
> I'm happy with micron E 3200mhz running at 3733mhz cl16. I have a hynix kit that can run 3800mhz but at much worse timings.


I had a G.skill 4000 kit on the QVL (2 x 8GB), max I could achieve on this Pro board was 3866. I've since upgraded to a 32GB (4 x8) 3200 CL14 B-Die kit, running it at 3600 CL15. Happy with that for now. I don't bench, gaming only these days. I don't think anyone can hit 4000 on the Pro board stable with only 2 sticks.


----------



## Falkentyne

gamervivek said:


> I moved from X470 gaming 7 to Z390 Ultra yesterday, that's strange design choice because I read that you could do this on my older board with the BIOS switch. One of the reasons why I was considering the Master.
> 
> Early impressions of the intel platform, I'm suprised that I can't get 3600Mhz with same timings as I did on Ryzen 3600 with a 3000Mhz kit. Have got the 3600MHz B-die kit installed and will be checking how well it does later today.
> 
> edit: currently on F7 BIOS, how're the new ones?


You can flash the backup BIOS with SPI Programming tools. A Pomona 5250 clip, male to female jumper cables and a Skypro programmer will direct flash it.

https://www.amazon.com/CPT-063-Test-Clip-SOIC8-Pomona/dp/B00HHH65T4/
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EV70C78/
https://www.amazon.com/WINGONEER®-high-Speed-Programmer-EZP2010-Supports/dp/B01DZC36GY/

The main BIOS chip is socketed and can be removed, but you need the proper adapter to attach it to the Skypro (I don't think it comes with the adapter). The Pomona clip can't inline flash that since it won't fit on it. My RT809F I wasted money on years ago comes with the correct adapter for the socketed main BIOS chip (and I don't even know what the adapter is called. I'm not a hardware guy).

I used the Skypro to flash/TDP hack GTX 1070 vbioses (with the 1.8v adapter on it).


----------



## gamervivek

I remember being recommended this when main BIOS on my B350 board went bad,

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01I1EU9LG

Too much hassle than just returning it to the service center.


----------



## robertr1

Is there a way to save my existing profiles onto a usb or is it pointless since the bios upgrade will make them unusable? Pro going from F9 to F11.

Also has anyone IPC testing? dont' want to lose performance from security patches. This is my gaming PC so it's not critical.


----------



## metalspider

robertr1 said:


> Is there a way to save my existing profiles onto a usb or is it pointless since the bios upgrade will make them unusable? Pro going from F9 to F11.
> 
> Also has anyone IPC testing? dont' want to lose performance from security patches. This is my gaming PC so it's not critical.


you can save profiles to usb but im pretty sure you cant use a profile from a different bios version.


----------



## robertr1

So I updated one of the bios to F11 on my pro wifi. Got my CPU settings back to normal. Then tried to see if RAM would run XMP. No luck. Instead, it boot cycled until it failed to back up bios. I laughed and left it alone.


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> Is there a way to save my existing profiles onto a usb or is it pointless since the bios upgrade will make them unusable? Pro going from F9 to F11.
> 
> Also has anyone IPC testing? dont' want to lose performance from security patches. This is my gaming PC so it's not critical.


I would roll with the F10 modded BIOS that Kedar posted for the Pro, or just stay on F9 which is good. Avoid F11 IMHO. You don't want the crappy microcode.

EDIT - Here is the direct link to the post:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-473.html#post28174488

This is the best option for the Z390 Pro.


----------



## shaolin95

Hello guys!
So I am back trying to get my 9900k to 5Ghz but on manual vcore. 
So to understand, I have it set to 1.26v in BIOS with LCC High. 
When under load running RealBench I see the VROUT (35201) showing and average of 1.17v but usually more like 1.66v-1.68 The MAX that showed before starting the stress test was 1.24v
This is just testing 4.8Ghz first to take it slowly back to 5Ghz.
Seems like I will need to put a lot higher to get the voltage I need under load, doesnt it?


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> Here's F10b for the Master, with GOP v1096, RST EFIRaidDriver and RST RAID ROM v17.7.0.4404, and Intel Boot Agent v0.1.16.
> 
> RST RAID ROM v17.8.0.4414 isn't available yet.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t19f13-Intel-EFI-quot-RaidDriver-quot-BIOS-Modules-52.html#msg96781
> 
> "As long as no Intel v17.8 series RST drivers are available, it doesn't make much sense to update the Intel RAID BIOS modules to a version of the v17.8 development branch.
> The Intel RST drivers are regarding the BIOS RAID modules backwards compatible, but you may run into a problem if the in-use RAID driver belongs to a lower development branch than the related Intel RAID BIOS module."
> 
> Edit: Long week, tired, I'll update XTreme, Pro etc. soon.


Thanks @KedarWolf. I flashed the F10b that you've provided prior to this one and it has been working great. Is there any reason to update to this new one? I keep my system very simple and don't use any intel storage related drivers/apps or raid etc... As for the GOP and Boot Agent... not really urgent updates eh? 

With my builds I try to keep drivers at a bare minimum, especially the bloat from the board makers... 



metalspider said:


> well some of the "memory enhancement" settings do help a little with the training by making secondaries and tertiary looser but ive never gotten anything to pass hci memtest at those high speeds no matter how loose the timings or how many volts i set in dram or vccsa vccio.
> seems i have not just a mobo issue for higher ram speeds but my cpu is also revision P0 which is supposedly older and a worse imc.
> im using 2 kits of 2x8gb gskill with an xmp of 4266mhz 19-19-19-39 so thats frowned upon too since it was'nt a factory matched kit of 4x8gb.
> 
> i set most of the timings manually at 3866mhz a while ago so i have a pretty good known stable profile for that.





Nammi said:


> I think 4200 is the highest I've seen so far. 4200 is the soft cap for me, where it still manages to boot. Anything beyond 4200 is literally a wall, I've been unable to get past memory training even with 1.35V SA&IO and 1.55V DRAM.



@metalspider, I take it that you have the g.skill tridentz 4266 kit? If so, that's the same one that I have in my gaming rig... I've been trying to find others who own the same kit for comparison and to bounce back ram tuning info.... When I had first booted up the system upon completing the build I had game tournaments going on so I needed something stable. Due to having to little time to tune the RAM, I just went with 3866 and it was rock stable, as expected, throughout the tournament. 

I've been tuning this kit (8GBx4 tridentz 4266) on my Z390 Master and so far it's pretty stable at 4133 @ 17-17-17-37 as it throws no errors with memtest and gaming...

The goal was to try and get it to it's advertised speeds of 4266, but I feel like the sweet spot for these particular sticks are right at 4133 on this Master board. I feel that it's not worth stretching it into unstable territory at 4266 if it takes walking on ice to get there... The gain would be minimal at best and possibly the same with the lower timing trade off on the 4133 settings.

I'd be curious to see how far you're able to stretch your kit...

@Nammi, what specific kit do you have? Are you running it at 4200 or 4133 daily? I think my camp on this Master board with my kit is 4133...I'm working on tightening up the timings and tuning the other settings... 



Falkentyne said:


> You need to learn how the AC Loadlines and base VID's work.
> And the reason you had 1.5v is because you combined a high AC Loadline with an aggressive loadline calibration (VRM loadline). And *then* you threw on a +100mv offset on TOP of that. This can degrade the processor as well. AC Loadline is part of cpu internal power management and loadline calibration (VRM Loadline) is external power management (motherboard based).
> 
> Please take the time to read my other posts about that here and in the 9900k thread.
> 
> AC Loadline value that is used gets its values from CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline presets, unless AC Loadline in Internal VR Settings is set to a non auto (zero) value, then the VR setting takes higher priority and will overrule the presets.
> 
> Auto: Let motherboard decide based on multiplier.
> 
> Power saving: 0.4 mOhms AC, 1.3 mOhms DC (milliOhms)
> Balanced: 1.0 mOhms AC, 1.3 mOhms DC
> Turbo (max Intel spec 8 cores): 1.6 mOhms AC, 1.6 mOhms DC
> Extreme (max Intel spec 6 cores): 2.1 mOhms AC, 2.1 mOhms DC.
> 
> Values in internal VR settings are 1/100 Ohm. 100=1.0 milliOhms, 1=0.01 milliOhms.
> 
> Basic rule: the higher the AC Loadline value, the LOWER the VRM Loadline (LLC) value should be (VRM Loadline calibration is also in milliOhms, even though the ODM's don't tell you this in the motherboard manuals; a higher level of Vcore loadline calibration=lower resistance (mOhms)=less vdroop. Lower levels=higher resistance=more vdroop. Intel doesn't factor in LLC into their specs, they design for spec vdroop loadline of 1.6 mOhms (8 cores), 2.1 mOhms vdroop loadline (4 and 6 core CFL chips).
> 
> If that didn't make sense:
> Higher AC Loadline = use more vdroop (less aggressive loadline calibration or use Intel spec).
> Lower AC Loadline = you can use less vdroop (more aggressive LLC).
> 
> 1.6 mOhms ACLL is only safe with VRM Loadline at Standard or Normal (Intel spec vdroop of 1.6 mOhms).
> 
> HWinfo64 (extended CPU information section) will show the currently used AC and DC Loadline values.
> 
> I also wrote some stuff here.
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...oltage_for_a_247_overclock/f6r8fs6/?context=3
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comm...ks_overclocking_statistics/f6h7bjp/?context=3
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki..._acdc_loadline_ufalkentyne/f64ro8l/?context=3


Great info. It's refreshing to see quality content.


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> Thanks @KedarWolf. I flashed the F10b that you've provided prior to this one and it has been working great. Is there any reason to update to this new one? I keep my system very simple and don't use any intel storage related drivers/apps or raid etc... As for the GOP and Boot Agent... not really urgent updates eh?
> 
> With my builds I try to keep drivers at a bare minimum, especially the bloat from the board makers...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @metalspider, I take it that you have the g.skill tridentz 4266 kit? If so, that's the same one that I have in my gaming rig... I've been trying to find others who own the same kit for comparison and to bounce back ram tuning info.... When I had first booted up the system upon completing the build I had game tournaments going on so I needed something stable. Due to having to little time to tune the RAM, I just went with 3866 and it was rock stable, as expected, throughout the tournament.
> 
> I've been tuning this kit (8GBx4 tridentz 4266) on my Z390 Master and so far it's pretty stable at 4133 @ 17-17-17-37 as it throws no errors with memtest and gaming...
> 
> The goal was to try and get it to it's advertised speeds of 4266, but I feel like the sweet spot for these particular sticks are right at 4133 on this Master board. I feel that it's not worth stretching it into unstable territory at 4266 if it takes walking on ice to get there... The gain would be minimal at best and possibly the same with the lower timing trade off on the 4133 settings.
> 
> I'd be curious to see how far you're able to stretch your kit...
> 
> @Nammi, what specific kit do you have? Are you running it at 4200 or 4133 daily? I think my camp on this Master board with my kit is 4133...I'm working on tightening up the timings and tuning the other settings...
> 
> 
> 
> Great info. It's refreshing to see quality content.


My mistake on the MSI laptop forums was thinking that this was tied to Loadline calibration because there is no vcore sensor on the MSI (and most other) laptops, only VID (meaning: internal power management is used).
But what I learned is that most laptops don't even use a "real" fixed vcore at all even if you set it to "Override". You're actually setting a VID override not a vcore value.
I think one of the Clevos shows "Core voltage" but that could be the same thing for all anyone knows.

They just use a strange "adaptive" setting, where instead of setting a true fixed vcore, the laptop overrides the actual CPU VID itself with the "Override" value, and passes it to AC Loadline.

Setting AC Loadline to 1 causes the starting vcore to match the "VID" before vdroop is applied. But then the laptops apply the full helping of vdroop afterwards (DC Loadline has no effect on vdroop even though the VID stops dropping, but it does very slightly skew the starting voltage).

The Gigabyte Aorus Xtreme 5G actually has a bios setting to override the CPU VID. (CPU Internal Vcore or CPU Internal Voltage (NOT the CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline, which is in the power management area) I think it's called), which none of the other Gigabyte boards have (I don't think the regular Xtreme has this).

Unfortunately the Xtreme Bios cannot be opened in AMIBCP 5.02.0031 (max # of strings exceeded).


----------



## Nammi

iunlock said:


> @Nammi, what specific kit do you have? Are you running it at 4200 or 4133 daily? I think my camp on this Master board with my kit is 4133...I'm working on tightening up the timings and tuning the other settings...


Here's what I run daily. https://www.overclock.net/forum/28145032-post4545.html

Sadly 4200 keeps on throwing errors at me, even with loose timings. So I'm in the same camp as you.


----------



## metalspider

iunlock said:


> Thanks @*KedarWolf* . I flashed the F10b that you've provided prior to this one and it has been working great. Is there any reason to update to this new one? I keep my system very simple and don't use any intel storage related drivers/apps or raid etc... As for the GOP and Boot Agent... not really urgent updates eh?
> 
> With my builds I try to keep drivers at a bare minimum, especially the bloat from the board makers...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @*metalspider* , I take it that you have the g.skill tridentz 4266 kit? If so, that's the same one that I have in my gaming rig... I've been trying to find others who own the same kit for comparison and to bounce back ram tuning info.... When I had first booted up the system upon completing the build I had game tournaments going on so I needed something stable. Due to having to little time to tune the RAM, I just went with 3866 and it was rock stable, as expected, throughout the tournament.
> 
> I've been tuning this kit (8GBx4 tridentz 4266) on my Z390 Master and so far it's pretty stable at 4133 @ 17-17-17-37 as it throws no errors with memtest and gaming...
> 
> The goal was to try and get it to it's advertised speeds of 4266, but I feel like the sweet spot for these particular sticks are right at 4133 on this Master board. I feel that it's not worth stretching it into unstable territory at 4266 if it takes walking on ice to get there... The gain would be minimal at best and possibly the same with the lower timing trade off on the 4133 settings.
> 
> I'd be curious to see how far you're able to stretch your kit...
> 
> @*Nammi* , what specific kit do you have? Are you running it at 4200 or 4133 daily? I think my camp on this Master board with my kit is 4133...I'm working on tightening up the timings and tuning the other settings...
> 
> 
> 
> Great info. It's refreshing to see quality content.


 @iunlock my ram is 2 kits of gskill F4-4266C19D-16GTZA each is 2X8GB.and im running the aorus pro motherboard.the fastest i could run stable is 3866mhz with tweaked timings.
yesterday i delided my 9900k and somehow it seems to have effected my ram speed,getting a lot further with tweaking timings at 4000mhz though its not totally stable yet,its looking like i might have to loosen timings too much compared to my 3866mhz timings.
ill keep testing it later.
for the delid i used rockit 89 with the quicksilver solder remover and the fritz polish.lost about 10c on hottest core in CB R20.



*
*


----------



## robertr1

metalspider said:


> @iunlock my ram is 2 kits of gskill F4-4266C19D-16GTZA each is 2X8GB.and im running the aorus pro motherboard.the fastest i could run stable is 3866mhz with tweaked timings.
> yesterday i delided my 9900k and somehow it seems to have effected my ram speed,getting a lot further with tweaking timings at 4000mhz though its not totally stable yet,its looking like i might have to loosen timings too much compared to my 3866mhz timings.
> ill keep testing it later.
> for the delid i used rockit 89 with the quicksilver solder remover and the fritz polish.lost about 10c on hottest core in CB R20.


Can you share your ram settings and voltage? I'm stuck at 3600mhz on my pro...

Asrock timing configurator is good for getting your timings.


----------



## metalspider

robertr1 said:


> Can you share your ram settings and voltage? I'm stuck at 3600mhz on my pro...
> 
> Asrock timing configurator is good for getting your timings.


dram 1.41v
dram training 1.41v
vccsa and vccio 1.2v
memory enhancement setting-->enhanced performance.


----------



## robertr1

Thanks a ton @metalspider I'm on 2 stick but I will try your settings out and see if they work. Generally these boards do better with 4 sticks. Good timings over all.


----------



## metalspider

robertr1 said:


> Thanks a ton @*metalspider* I'm on 2 stick but I will try your settings out and see if they work. Generally these boards do better with 4 sticks. Good timings over all.


you're welcome,i had all those bios pics anyway since i took them before upgrading to bios F11.
as for my continued efforts at getting 4000mhz to work so far it can pass initial testing ok with auto sub timings etc but then i get to the point i want to tweak all the subs etc and then it just doesnt test well 
and the gains i see in aida ram benchmarks are about an extra 2GB max read/write at the same latency.so its not much of a gain.


----------



## asdkj1740

Z390 AORUS MASTER G2 Edition
any special?
https://www.gigabyte.com/Comparison/Result/2?pids=7163,6637


btw i heard the z390 ultra is eol.


----------



## Falkentyne

asdkj1740 said:


> Z390 AORUS MASTER G2 Edition
> any special?
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Comparison/Result/2?pids=7163,6637
> 
> 
> btw i heard the z390 ultra is eol.


Esports edition.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Zensou

OCCT AVX2 Stress Test(C-States/Powersaving Off)	2 Hrs PASS
IA AC	1
IA DC	1
Multiplier 50
Uncore Ratio	47
BIOS CPU Vcore 1.325
Vcore LLC	Turbo
Avg Load VID	1.264
Max Load VR OUT	1.289
Avg Load VR OUT	1.284
Avg Idle VR OUT 1.316
Idle Avg Current	25.7A
Idle Avg CPU Package PWR	28.7W
Load Avg Current	105A
Load Avg CPU Package PWR	140.5W


Guys, I have finally found stable settings for my 9700k at 5.0 ghz with aorus master.
How can I transfer this overclock to a more power efficient offset overclock?
I would like to lower the average CPU Package power draw and amperage during idle to save some electricity costs and decrease temperatures while idle.


----------



## Falkentyne

Zensou said:


> OCCT AVX2 Stress Test(C-States/Powersaving Off)	2 Hrs PASS
> IA AC	1
> IA DC	1
> Multiplier 50
> Uncore Ratio	47
> BIOS CPU Vcore 1.325
> Vcore LLC	Turbo
> Avg Load VID	1.264
> Max Load VR OUT	1.289
> Avg Load VR OUT	1.284
> Avg Idle VR OUT 1.316
> Idle Avg Current	25.7A
> Idle Avg CPU Package PWR	28.7W
> Load Avg Current	105A
> Load Avg CPU Package PWR	140.5W
> 
> 
> Guys, I have finally found stable settings for my 9700k at 5.0 ghz with aorus master.
> How can I transfer this overclock to a more power efficient offset overclock?
> I would like to lower the average CPU Package power draw and amperage during idle to save some electricity costs and decrease temperatures while idle.


You would have to set Vcore to 'Auto' and Vcore loadline calibration to "Standard" and change the IA AC and IA DC loadlines to 160/160 and go from there and test if that is stable first.
From there, lower the AC loadline value by 10 (keep DCLL at 160), re-test, and keep testing until you wind up being unstable. Then raise it up by 10 again and write down the idle and load VR VOUT and Current IOUT values as the load values will be what you're trying to maintain. (don't worry about the idle high VR VOUT's as you are still within Intel's specs AS LONG AS LOADLINE CALIBRATION IS LEFT ON STANDARD OR NORMAL. NEVER EVER raise Vcore loadline calibration to higher than Standard when using Auto Voltage and AC Loadline is at 1.6 mOhms. Ever).

If you are NOT stable with "Auto" Vcore, Vcore LLC=Standard, and AC LL=160/DCLL=160, then you will need a positive DVID offset, but this also means you are going to pass Intel's maximum safe V/A curve as well, as this setting is based on the maximum safe curve. (Raising ACLL past 1.6 mOhms will NOT help you here. The only thing that will help at this point is EITHER a + DVID offset *OR* enabling "SVID OFFSET" which will remove the "1.520v" AC Loadline target limit to the VRM (before vdroop). I don't recommend you do either of these.

Once you know what AC Loadline value + Standard Loadline calibration+Auto voltage value you are stable at, you have 2 choices.
1) enable c-states and eist/speedshift/whatever (I don't use these--I can't help you with them) so you get your downvolt and downclock at idle with the "Auto" Vcore setting.

2) Use "Normal" Vcore (this is the exact same as "Auto" but allows you to use a fixed offset to BOTH THE IDLE AND LOAD VR VOUT) and +Dvid for an offset. You can choose whether to keep the same AC LL/Standard Vcore loadline calibration as before, or you can do what some other people do here and lower the ACLL value down drastically (to like 20-60) and raise Vcore Loadline Calibration to Low or Medium. Then enable your c-states. Can't help you with this.

The HUGE DRAWBACK of using a NEGATIVE -DVID offset *AND* a lower AC Loadline below 1.6 mOhms (=160) is idle BSOD's when enabling c-states.
You will never get these idle BSOD's if you use "Auto" Vcore without a negative DVID offset.


----------



## Medvediy

reachthesky said:


> Anyone manage to get lower than cl18 when it comes to 4200 stable on 4 dimms on the aorus master? If so, which bios? i'm currently on cl15/4100 using f9 bios


Is it really pass any memory tests? Testmem5 with hard config or smth like that? Looks great but sounds too good.
What VCCIO VCCSA and Dram Voltage do you use?


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Anyone manage to get lower than cl18 when it comes to 4200 stable on 4 dimms on the aorus master? If so, which bios? i'm currently on cl15/4100 using f9 bios


I'm jelly. That 9900k is doing 5ghz on the cache too.

Very nice.



Falkentyne said:


> The HUGE DRAWBACK of using a NEGATIVE -DVID offset *AND* a lower AC Loadline below 1.6 mOhms (=160) is idle BSOD's when enabling c-states.
> You will never get these idle BSOD's if you use "Auto" Vcore without a negative DVID offset.


The way I get around the cstates crash at idle. 

I use power save ac loadline and low Llc. 

Then set vcore normal with a positive offset. 

When setting this up just start with a small positive offset .03v or so just to get to desktop and veiw the voltages. 

From there you can judge how much offset to apply if you already know your manual oc vrout requirement.


----------



## robertr1

Wirerat said:


> I'm jelly. That 9900k is doing 5ghz on the cache too.
> 
> Very nice.
> 
> 
> 
> The way I get around the cstates crash at idle.
> 
> I use power save ac loadline and low Llc.
> 
> Then set vcore normal with a positive offset.
> 
> When setting this up just start with a small positive offset .03v or so just to get to desktop and veiw the voltages.
> 
> From there you can judge how much offset to apply if you already know your manual oc vrout requirement.


Yes. I found your method when I came across it on reddit to just be a lot simple to execute and troubleshoot. The only difference is I use auto llc instead of low for vcore. It's only because I forgot to change it so without checking I had been doing all my tuning against auto. I just stuck with it.

There are certainly different ways to handle voltage and llc on these boards. My personal goal is to keep things as simple as possible to trouble shoot and let the systems do their thing.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> Anyone manage to get lower than cl18 when it comes to 4200 stable on 4 dimms on the aorus master? If so, which bios? i'm currently on cl15/4100 using f9 bios


Wow, what a nice chip you have, and with that high cache too! A very strong IMC, it seems: my P0 9900k struggles to run four sticks of DDR4 at 4133 CL16 on an Aorus Master: guess the more recent revision has in fact an improved memory controller. Is it GSAT, Karhu RAMTest and HCI Memtest stable?


----------



## Dannyele

metalspider said:


> well some of the "memory enhancement" settings do help a little with the training by making secondaries and tertiary looser but ive never gotten anything to pass hci memtest at those high speeds no matter how loose the timings or how many volts i set in dram or vccsa vccio.
> seems i have not just a mobo issue for higher ram speeds but my cpu is also revision P0 which is supposedly older and a worse imc.
> im using 2 kits of 2x8gb gskill with an xmp of 4266mhz 19-19-19-39 so thats frowned upon too since it was'nt a factory matched kit of 4x8gb.
> 
> i set most of the timings manually at 3866mhz a while ago so i have a pretty good known stable profile for that.


Which kits are you using?

I have this ones: F4-4266C19D-16GTZR and the maximus clock that I can use and it's stable is 4000MHz at stock settings (XMP lowered at 4000MHz CL19)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> Yes. I found your method when I came across it on reddit to just be a lot simple to execute and troubleshoot. The only difference is I use auto llc instead of low for vcore. It's only because I forgot to change it so without checking I had been doing all my tuning against auto. I just stuck with it.
> 
> There are certainly different ways to handle voltage and llc on these boards. My personal goal is to keep things as simple as possible to trouble shoot and let the systems do their thing.


It's just nice to not have the vrout spike at idle as much.

I wonder what level llc auto is setting or if it's just running standard. I get too much droop at standard for this method.

Also I wish buildzoid would have done testing using some form of ac loadline. The transients seem improved based on what hwinfo64 shows anyway. Might just appear that way since the idle spike is reduced so much.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## dpap

So, what is the best alternative to the F8 bios for the Z390 xtreme? I was running F4 until yesterday, which was just fine, but then had the stupid idea to update it. F8 looks fine at first, but then my computer had a BSOD restart (BlueScreen 1e) at the middle of the night. I checked the REFt setting and it was at 12480. But did the F8 bios change voltage settings? 

I can also confirm that the F8 bios was pumping much more voltage at the same LLC settings than F4: water temp was 2c higher under F8 than f4 which is crazy.
My settings are IA: 80, LLC High, normal with 0 offset, 51/47

I guess I should stick to F4. If it ain't broken...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## cjd23

KedarWolf said:


> I'd flash F9 or F10B. The new F10 bugged pretty bad.
> 
> If you need help with the oem id mismatch let me know, I got a version of efiflash with all checks bypassed that'll flash another BIOS.


Hi Kedarwolf,

I am wondering if i am able to use your modded bios F10b with the faster micro code on the GA Aorus Master Z390 with the i7 9700k? Are these modded bios's for the Master boards that you make compatible with all 9 series cpus or only for the 9900k that you have? 

Thanks a lot for what you do, appreciate your time!


----------



## KedarWolf

cjd23 said:


> Hi Kedarwolf,
> 
> I am wondering if i am able to use your modded bios F10b with the faster micro code on the GA Aorus Master Z390 with the i7 9700k? Are these modded bios's for the Master boards that you make compatible with all 9 series cpus or only for the 9900k that you have?
> 
> Thanks a lot for what you do!


Should work with any 9*** series CPU's even the KS, someone said they had it running on that, I dunno if the GA master uses a different BIOS though, but I can mod that one when I get home from work. 

Oh, only the F9 or F10 available for the GS Master, can do F9 for you, though.

Edit: I checked the sha-1's of both the GA and regular Master BIOS and they are identical.

The last modded F10b I posted should work. 

Search this thread, advanced search, my username, KedarWolf.


----------



## cjd23

KedarWolf said:


> Should work with any 9*** series CPU's even the KS, someone said they had it running on that, I dunno if the GA master uses a different BIOS though, but I can mod that one when I get home from work.
> 
> Oh, only the F9 or F10 available for the GS Master, can do F9 for you, though.


Currently with my gigabyte aorus master z390 i am using stock f9 bios with my 9700k. If you could mod the f10b bios with the faster micro code and any other updates that you suggested over the final f10 release to work with my board and cpu that would be much appreciated!  Not 100% but does the f10b come with the new layout i heard about or was that only in the final f10? And lastly when you say faster micro code does that imply that it will perform better in gaming?

Thanks again!


----------



## KedarWolf

cjd23 said:


> Currently with my gigabyte aorus master z390 i am using stock f9 bios with my 9700k. If you could mod the f10b bios with the faster micro code and any other updates that you suggested over the final f10 release to work with my board and cpu that would be much appreciated!  Not 100% but does the f10b come with the new layout i heard about or was that only in the final f10?
> 
> Thanks again!


F10b has the old layout, not new one, but it gets the best results for me on my overclock.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## cjd23

KedarWolf said:


> F10b has the old layout, not new one, but it gets the best results for me on my overclock.


No worries thanks for clarifying. Looking to get the best performance out of my chip for gaming with better micro code so not worried about the security micro code. Will be interesting to see if i can improve my overclock  Thanks!


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> I might have replied to someone else's post to answer your questions, whoops, Please see my above posts.


Thank you very much for all this precious information, I will look through it. I am prone to consider not so good my P0 9900k both from the IMC standpoint (I watched Buildzoid video about Memory Overclocking on the Z390 Aorus Master and I couldn't get anywhere near his frequencies, struggling even at 4133MHz with an expensive 4266MHz TridentZ RGB 4x8GB kit) and from the overclocking point of view, although in this regard I am certainly limited by my air cooling and very likely by my lack of knowledge in regards of voltage settings: I had to give up on 5GHz and go for 4.9GHz, even though I delidded my CPU, because my good old NH-D14 can't tame it, and even at the latter frequency the hottest cores reach during Prime and OCCT 90°C in a few minutes. Guess a cooling upgrade is mandatory.


----------



## KedarWolf

reachthesky said:


> @KedarWolf
> The modded bioses you are giving out, Are these bioses using the old microcode that have security vulnerabilities?


It is the fastest one version before latest microcode, I'm not aware of any vulnerabilities with it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## dpap

Ugh. I take it back. I now get WHEA errors with F4 (level 0 cache). All while idle. The must have existed before the bios upgrade and I didn’t notice.

It may be related to the powersaving features of windows. I recently updated the ME driver. Could this be related? For now, I bumped up the voltage offset. 




dpap said:


> So, what is the best alternative to the F8 bios for the Z390 xtreme? I was running F4 until yesterday, which was just fine, but then had the stupid idea to update it. F8 looks fine at first, but then my computer had a BSOD restart (BlueScreen 1e) at the middle of the night. I checked the REFt setting and it was at 12480. But did the F8 bios change voltage settings?
> 
> I can also confirm that the F8 bios was pumping much more voltage at the same LLC settings than F4: water temp was 2c higher under F8 than f4 which is crazy.
> My settings are IA: 80, LLC High, normal with 0 offset, 51/47
> 
> I guess I should stick to F4. If it ain't broken...


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> @salve If you change over to adaptive voltage and use powersaving for ac/dc and standard or low vcore LLC, you might be able to do 5ghz on air cooling, at least for normal daily usage, maybe still not for stress testing. The temperature difference between a 1.32v manual vcore turbo llc 5ghz all core 4.7cache hyperthreading on vs using a powersaving ac/dc + standard llc with adaptive voltage is about 6c difference for me on an AIO during testing(avx testing, benchmarks etc). Maybe you will see similar results on air? But whether or not it will make enough of a difference for you is the main question I guess.


Yeah, actually I'm already on adaptive voltage with IA AC Loadline=40 (which is identical to setting Power Saving for CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline), -0.025 Offset and Vcore LLC High. Maybe I can try to lower the latter and switch to a positive Offset, although I don't know how much this could help with temperatures.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> I think using a positive offset with standard llc will still yield lower temps than a negative offset with high llc. I had to use a positive offset when using standard llc with powersaving ac/dc to achieve the same 5ghz oc as 1.32v manual vcore turbo llc but it still yielded lower temps than the turbo llc 5ghz oc. Give it a shot, it might be good enough for daily usage depending on what your usage cases/scenarios are. At worst you learn more about your chip/cooling limits.


I'll try it. Thanks for the tips!


----------



## shaolin95

Hello guys,
So I am trying to clarify..if LCC set to HIGH instead of Turbo, the recommended options for using manual voltage on the Master?
I currently need 1.36v in Bios (1.357 in VRout IDEL and about 1.275v under 100% load) to hit 5Ghz with no AVX offset and 47 Cache)
Thanks


----------



## metalspider

Dannyele said:


> Which kits are you using?
> 
> I have this ones: F4-4266C19D-16GTZR and the maximus clock that I can use and it's stable is 4000MHz at stock settings (XMP lowered at 4000MHz CL19)


my ram is 2 kits of gskill F4-4266C19D-16GTZA 2x8gb so i have 4x8gb.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## shaolin95

reachthesky said:


> @shaolin95 This depends on whether you are using the good P0 chips or the R0 chips that had the good chips removed from the chip pool to be sold as the 9900KS.


I'm confused. So the setting of LCC to high or turbo to pick the best option depends on which chips my 9900 has?


----------



## Wirerat

shaolin95 said:


> I'm confused. So the setting of LCC to high or turbo to pick the best option depends on which chips my 9900 has?


I don't think that's what was meant. Anyway. 

Turbo or High llc are fine for manual fixed vcore overclocking. Lower llc has advantages if you can get stable at high it will run cooler. 

Turbo won't hurt anything though. Just do not use any llc settings that are higher such as extreme.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> I don't think that's what was meant. Anyway.
> 
> Turbo or High llc are fine for manual fixed vcore overclocking. Lower llc has advantages if you can get stable at high it will run cooler.
> 
> Turbo won't hurt anything though. Just do not use any llc settings that are higher such as extreme.


Gigabyte has considerably worse transient response going from LLC High to Turbo than from LLC Medium to High. 






On the prime95 16K AVX test
Medium LLC minimum to RMS= 30mv
High LLC minimum to RMS=40 mv
Turbo LLC minimum to RMS=60mv.

(This isn't VR VOUT, it's transient response absolute minimum voltages).
Absolute minimums determine whether you crash 'randomly' after being stable for awhile at load.
RMS determines whether you instacrash or not.

The 128K test (which starts hitting L3 cache and shows wild transients) is pretty telling
Low, medium and high LLC all had 90mv from minimum to RMS
Turbo had 110mv

Keep in mind those were socket readings, not on-die sense load readings (Notice that the on-die sense voltage (VR VOUT) read lower than the RMS socket reading, but the die sense->socket reading gets more separated at higher LLC than at lower LLC).

It would have been interesting to see transient voltages from on-die sense, which would only be possible by probing the VRM directly with an oscilloscope (VR VOUT cannot show this at all).


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Gigabyte has considerably worse transient response going from LLC High to Turbo than from LLC Medium to High.
> 
> 
> 
> On the prime95 16K AVX test
> Medium LLC minimum to RMS= 30mv
> High LLC minimum to RMS=40 mv
> Turbo LLC minimum to RMS=60mv.
> 
> (This isn't VR VOUT, it's transient response absolute minimum voltages).
> Absolute minimums determine whether you crash 'randomly' after being stable for awhile at load.
> RMS determines whether you instacrash or not.
> 
> The 128K test (which starts hitting L3 cache and shows wild transients) is pretty telling
> Low, medium and high LLC all had 90mv from minimum to RMS
> Turbo had 110mv


 +20mv difference is not really hurting anything. Does it perform worse than high? Sure.

If we go by that BZ video the only mobo worth having is Evga Dark. It's not news that $600 mobo performs better than a $180 mobo. I think gigabyte did a good job. 

I say skip the manual oc completely on gigabyte aorus mobos.

I get tighter voltages at low Llc with + offset using this method. https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/ it also doesn't cause the cstates crash at idle as long as the offset is zero or positive. 

It's just another form of the advanced VR loadline you're always explaining. It's just really easy to get good results.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> I get tighter voltages at low Llc using this method. https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> It's just another form of the advanced VR loadline you're always explaining. It's just really easy to get good results.


Anyone else here besides @Wirerat using this method? I may try it...


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I get tighter voltages at low Llc using this method. https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> It's just another form of the advanced VR loadline you're always explaining. It's just really easy to get good results.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else here besides @Wirerat using this method? I may try it...
Click to expand...

 @robertr1 is using it.

Super easy to set up. I found it interesting that both my 9900k rig and 9900kf rig require the same offset +.080v for stability at 5ghz even though the end result is different voltages based on the VID table.

9900k 1.32v (1.245 vrout load) vs 9900kf 1.27v (1.90 vrout load). Both on aorus pros. It's just due to the VID tables lower on the better silicon I guess. 

It's only a sample size of two but interesting anyway.


----------



## Driller au

Sheyster said:


> Anyone else here besides @Wirerat using this method? I may try it...


Tried it once early on it works ok but if you start to increase the uncore i ended up at approximately the same voltages anyway and with auto S.A., VCCIO settings and XMP you will have 1.3V , would of liked a HWinfo64 screen shot in that post


----------



## Wirerat

Driller au said:


> Sheyster said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else here besides @Wirerat using this method? I may try it...
> 
> 
> 
> Tried it once early on it works ok but if you start to increase the uncore i ended up at approximately the same voltages anyway and with auto S.A., VCCIO settings and XMP you will have 1.3V , would of liked a HWinfo64 screen shot in that post
Click to expand...

 I manually set vccio and vccsa and also do not use xmp at all. I manually set the xmp primarys.

Hers an x264 run under load. 5.1ghz +.110 offset.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> @robertr1 is using it.
> 
> Super easy to set up. I found it interesting that both my 9900k rig and 9900kf rig require the same offset +.080v for stability at 5ghz even though the end result is different voltages based on the VID table.
> 
> 9900k 1.32v (1.245 vrout load) vs 9900kf 1.27v (1.90 vrout load). Both on aorus pros. It's just due to the VID tables lower on the better silicon I guess.
> 
> It's only a sample size of two but interesting anyway.


Thanks, I'll experiment with it this weekend. Will take the opportunity to also flash to the modded F10b BIOS Kedarwolf posted for the Pro.


----------



## Sheyster

Driller au said:


> Tried it once early on it works ok but if you start to increase the uncore i ended up at approximately the same voltages anyway and with auto S.A., VCCIO settings and XMP you will have 1.3V , would of liked a HWinfo64 screen shot in that post


Thanks, I'm at 47x uncore now. I'll probably set SA and IO manually since I know the best values for them already. My objective is to hopefully use less vcore for 5 GHz all-core and lower the temps a bit.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> @robertr1 is using it.
> 
> Super easy to set up. I found it interesting that both my 9900k rig and 9900kf rig require the same offset +.080v for stability at 5ghz even though the end result is different voltages based on the VID table.
> 
> 9900k 1.32v (1.245 vrout load) vs 9900kf 1.27v (1.90 vrout load). Both on aorus pros. It's just due to the VID tables lower on the better silicon I guess.
> 
> It's only a sample size of two but interesting anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, I'll experiment with it this weekend. Will take the opportunity to also flash to the modded F10b BIOS Kedarwolf posted for the Pro.
Click to expand...

 what are the advantages vs the regular f10?

I have a 4000mhz CL 19-19-19-38 1.35v b die kit otw. I'm hoping to get some tight timings at 3800mhz. Does that bios help with memory overclocking?


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> +20mv difference is not really hurting anything. Does it perform worse than high? Sure.
> 
> If we go by that BZ video the only mobo worth having is Evga Dark. It's not news that $600 mobo performs better than a $180 mobo. I think gigabyte did a good job.
> 
> I say skip the manual oc completely on gigabyte aorus mobos.
> 
> I get tighter voltages at low Llc with + offset using this method. https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/ it also doesn't cause the cstates crash at idle as long as the offset is zero or positive.
> 
> It's just another form of the advanced VR loadline you're always explaining. It's just really easy to get good results.


I agree with what you're saying.
However that 20mv does make a difference if you're unstable if your RMS is, let's say, 1.24v, and the transients drop to 1.18v on LLC Turbo and 1.20v on LLC High, and your "VMIN" (absolute minimum needed for stability) is 1.20v.

As I said before, I do not disagree with you. But I refuse to use offsets because the voltage bug that happens when switching from offset mode (even with +0.00mv offset!!) to fixed mode is VERY ANNOYING and can even damage a CPU if you boot windows before you see what happened. (I have not seen this happen when switching from auto mode to fixed mode).


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> +20mv difference is not really hurting anything. Does it perform worse than high? Sure.
> 
> If we go by that BZ video the only mobo worth having is Evga Dark. It's not news that $600 mobo performs better than a $180 mobo. I think gigabyte did a good job.
> 
> I say skip the manual oc completely on gigabyte aorus mobos. For me it didn't behave that way every boot but it's worth booting twice to be sure.
> 
> I get tighter voltages at low Llc with + offset using this method. https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/ it also doesn't cause the cstates crash at idle as long as the offset is zero or positive.
> 
> It's just another form of the advanced VR loadline you're always explaining. It's just really easy to get good results.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with what you're saying.
> However that 20mv does make a difference if you're unstable if your RMS is, let's say, 1.24v, and the transients drop to 1.18v on LLC Turbo and 1.20v on LLC High, and your "VMIN" (absolute minimum needed for stability) is 1.20v.
> 
> As I said before, I do not disagree with you. But I refuse to use offsets because the voltage bug that happens when switching from offset mode (even with +0.00mv offset!!) to fixed mode is VERY ANNOYING and can even damage a CPU if you boot windows before you see what happened. (I have not seen this happen when switching from auto mode to fixed mode).
Click to expand...

 I was able to validate that bug. On both rigs.

I just do not run manual at all. My vdroop is way better with the method I'm using.

When I want a stable frequency, I just swap to performance mode in windows to lock the frequency.

Vrout at load 1.29v vs max 1.34v at 5.1ghz here under x264 load (in image). I cannot get that low droop any other way. This is at 200w pout. 

Manual Oc turbo will spike higher 1.38v and high requires me to set 1.4v+ in bios. So I don't bother using it anymore.

I totally understand you not wanting to boot twice going back forth to manual Oc though.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> I was able to validate that bug. On both rigs.
> 
> I just do not run manual at all. My vdroop is way better with the method I'm using.
> 
> When I want a stable frequency, I just swap to performance mode in windows to lock the frequency.
> 
> Vrout at load 1.29v vs max 1.34v at 5.1ghz here under x264 load (in image). I cannot get that low droop any other way. This is at 200w pout.
> 
> Manual Oc turbo will spike higher 1.38v and high requires me to set 1.4v+ in bios. So I don't bother using it anymore.
> 
> I totally understand you not wanting to boot twice going back forth to manual Oc though.


What happens if you use Auto mode (instead of offset mode) and Standard Vcore LLC, and then play with the AC Loadlines to set your desired load voltage?
Is there a drawback in doing that? Or is there still the too high idle voltage (Even though you are going to be below intel max safe spec as long as Vcore LLC is at Standard?).

Another caveman way (if AC LL = 160 and Vcore LLC=standard is not enough for full load stability, e.g., past 5 ghz) is to enable SVID Offset, which removes the AC LL -> VRM 1.520v cap limit, but will -greatly- increase your load voltage even after vdroop. I don't remember if idle is affected as much as load (provided you did NOT disable Thermal Velocity Boost voltage optimizations!).

I found a way to determine what voltage (if DVID is 0.00v, this doesn't work accurately otherwise) the AC Loadline is sending to the VRM, you can set DC Loadline to 1 (0.01 mOhms) and then look at the CPU VID. Of course doing that is meaningless on fixed vcore.


----------



## Wirerat

I did the method you always talk about. 5ghz is stable easy. 5.1 is a no go. I run out of VID room. Well I don't like seeing 1.52 vcore (not vrout). 

5ghz also works auto vcore performance ac loadline with standard llc.

But even then the vrout transient looks worse than what I can get with my offset profiles.

I spent a lot of time trying to match the voltages using Advanced VR. In the end I 5ghz was easy but with larger spikes. 5.1 seemed out of reach ( I never tried the dvid).

It's a really cool way to OC. So different than anything I ve done before. 

I'm not saying any of this method is wrong. I just really like the tighter voltages at low llc the offset can achieve.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> what are the advantages vs the regular f10?
> 
> I have a 4000mhz CL 19-19-19-38 1.35v b die kit otw. I'm hoping to get some tight timings at 3800mhz. Does that bios help with memory overclocking?


It has a newer microcode (but not the newer "C6" slow one) than the official F10 BIOS. He may have also updated the IRST module and network module as well. I would avoid the newest F11 BIOS, it's buggy AF. It should be a good BIOS for memory and CPU OC'ing.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> I did the method you always talk about. 5ghz is stable easy. 5.1 is a no go. I run out of VID room. Well I don't like seeing 1.52 vcore (not vrout).
> 
> 5ghz works also works auto vcore performance ac loadline with standard llc.
> 
> But even then the vrout transient looks worse than what I can get with my offset profiles.
> 
> I spent a lot of time trying to match the voltages using Advanced VR. In the end I 5ghz was easy but with larger spikes. 5.1 seemed out of reach ( I never tried the dvid).
> 
> It's a really cool way to OC. So different than anything I ve done before.


You mean SVID?
SVID offset removes the 1.520v limit that AC Loadline can send to the VRM (there's the "VID Room" you're referring to). The intel documents say this adds up to 200mv of offset voltage range, so, up to 1.720v. (don't confuse this with DVID).

For example if you went back to your 5 ghz (without DVID offsets) profile, and tried "Auto" Vcore, Standard Vcore LLC and AC Loadline 1.60 mOhms (160), you would get "'about" 1.404v idle (if C-states were disabled) and at maximum amps rating for SKU (193 amps), e.g. Prime95 small FFT + AVX in 29.8 b6), about 1.220-1.250v VR VOUT.

Since the VRM would be starting at 1.520v originally and then dropping the voltage via vdroop (e.g. 1520 - ( 193 * 1.6 mOhms) = 1213 mv.
The reason the idle VR VOUT Would be 1.404v instead of 1.480v is because of Thermal Velocity Boost decreasing the VID based on temps.

At 5.1 ghz, the load VR VOUT would still be 1.240v at 180 amps or so, because AC Loadline cannot exceed 1.520v to the VRM.
However if you enabled SVID OFFSET, I'm not sure if the idle would change much, but the load VR VOUT would be about 1.32v (!)

If you set DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms (1), you would see a VID of about 1.65v or so at full load.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> what are the advantages vs the regular f10?
> 
> I have a 4000mhz CL 19-19-19-38 1.35v b die kit otw. I'm hoping to get some tight timings at 3800mhz. Does that bios help with memory overclocking?
> 
> 
> 
> It has a newer microcode (but not the newer "C6" slow one) than the official F10 BIOS. He may have also updated the IRST module and network module as well. I would avoid the newest F11 BIOS, it's buggy AF. It should be a good BIOS for memory and CPU OC'ing.
Click to expand...

thanks for info.
@Falkentyne - yes I meant svid. The setting that raises the 1.52v VID limit.


----------



## Medvediy

Oh, and just in case, how can we use THB-C header on Z390 Aorus master?


----------



## robertr1

Sheyster said:


> Anyone else here besides @Wirerat using this method? I may try it...


I use it. It's a simpler method, to me. Compared to fixed my load voltage is a fair bit lower. 

I used my fixed turbo as a baseline. Example, I needed 1.32v turblo LLC for 51/47x to be stable.

I then used an offset of +0.120v and worked my way down. I eventually ended up at +0.080v for 51/47. 

This gave me more voltage and thermal headroom to push for higher clocks. 

I'm on a pro board also so not sure if it's different on the master since Pro = isl69138 voltage controller and master = ir35201


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> I use it. It's a simpler method, to me. Compared to fixed my load voltage is a fair bit lower.
> 
> I used my fixed turbo as a baseline. Example, I needed 1.32v turblo LLC for 51/47x to be stable.
> 
> I then used an offset of +0.120v and worked my way down. I eventually ended up at +0.080v for 51/47.
> 
> This gave me more voltage and thermal headroom to push for higher clocks.
> 
> I'm on a pro board also so not sure if it's different on the master since Pro = isl69138 voltage controller and master = ir35201



Thanks for the feedback. What LLC setting are you using with +.08v offset at 5.1 GHz? I have a Pro board as well.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> I agree with what you're saying.
> But I refuse to use offsets because the voltage bug that happens when switching from offset mode (even with +0.00mv offset!!) to fixed mode is VERY ANNOYING and can even damage a CPU if you boot windows before you see what happened.



Please remind me how to mitigate this? Was it booting twice? Cold boot?


----------



## robertr1

Sheyster said:


> Thanks for the feedback. What LLC setting are you using with +.08v offset at 5.1 GHz? I have a Pro board as well.


Powersavings for ac/dc
auto for vcore


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> Sheyster said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the feedback. What LLC setting are you using with +.08v offset at 5.1 GHz? I have a Pro board as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Powersavings for ac/dc
> auto for vcore
Click to expand...

 I suspect auto is doing the same thing based your results though. 

I set power save and Low.


----------



## Pandemic4444

Hey, new here. I was wondering what the memory enhancement settings do. ive got it on auto/standard atm but i was thinking of putting it on enhanced performance. would i see any possible benefit?

Also, how do i set my rig info like the guy above me?


----------



## Wirerat

Pandemic4444 said:


> Hey, new here. I was wondering what the memory enhancement settings do. ive got it on auto/standard atm but i was thinking of putting it on enhanced performance. would i see any possible benefit?
> 
> Also, how do i set my rig info like the guy above me?


I just use normal for the memory preset. 


The rig builder is accessible in the desktop veiw only. It is a link in the top tool bar.


----------



## Pandemic4444

Wirerat said:


> I just use normal for the memory preset.
> 
> 
> The rig builder is accessible in the desktop veiw only. It is a link in the top tool bar.


So what do the other settings do? 

and the link.....is it the rigbuilder tab? if i click on it i dont see an area to build mine.
EDIT: o wait. i got it


----------



## Zensou

For the life of me, I cannot get my system stable with an offet/normal vcore. I have tried all IA AC/DC values and LLC combinations and always crash while browsing or watching youtube; during AVX2 loads the system is rock stable.

System is stable at fixed vcore with 1.325v in bios, 1.314v in HWINFO while idle, and 1.284v in HWINFO under avx2 stress.


----------



## cjd23

KedarWolf said:


> F10b has the old layout, not new one, but it gets the best results for me on my overclock.


Sorry to bother you again kedarwolf, Was just checking in again about the modded bios in case you forgot. Sorry if this is a busy time for you.


----------



## Wirerat

Zensou said:


> For the life of me, I cannot get my system stable with an offet/normal vcore. I have tried all IA AC/DC values and LLC combinations and always crash while browsing or watching youtube; during AVX2 loads the system is rock stable.
> 
> System is stable at fixed vcore with 1.325v in bios, 1.314v in HWINFO while idle, and 1.284v in HWINFO under avx2 stress.


Are you certain your memory is stable? What do you have uncore/cache set to? 

My settings are

Ac loadline powersave
Llc low
Vcore normal
Offset +.080
Core 5ghz
Uncore 45
Speed step enabled. 

Clear cmos and only touch those settings.

I do not use xmp. I set timings and ram manually then 1.2v vssa/vcca.


----------



## Falkentyne

Sheyster said:


> Please remind me how to mitigate this? Was it booting twice? Cold boot?


Booting twice "fixes" it.


----------



## Salve1412

Sorry for the dumb question, but does Memory Overclocking affect temperatures in such a significant way (about 20°C)? At 4.9GHz Uncore Ratio 46 my delidded 9900k passes one hour OCCT Large Data Set No AVX peaking at 71°C with RAM at stock frequency (2133MHz) and untouched timings, while during the same test with the same RAM overclocked at 4100MHz with fine-tuned timings it reaches 88°C in just a few minutes (DVID remained unvaried and I didn't notice different VR VOUT readings in HWInfo; the only changes compared to the "Auto" settings with non-overclocked RAM were VCCIO 1.22V, VCCSA 1.20V, DRAM Voltage 1.45V). I know both that a temperature increment is inevitable because of the much higher stress on the IMC and that being on air cooling (Noctua NH-D14) doesn't help, but I was wondering if that increment is a bit too much.


----------



## Driller au

Zensou said:


> For the life of me, I cannot get my system stable with an offet/normal vcore. I have tried all IA AC/DC values and LLC combinations and always crash while browsing or watching youtube; during AVX2 loads the system is rock stable.
> 
> System is stable at fixed vcore with 1.325v in bios, 1.314v in HWINFO while idle, and 1.284v in HWINFO under avx2 stress.


Try disabling all the C-states except C3 that fixes it for me


----------



## KedarWolf

cjd23 said:


> Sorry to bother you again kedarwolf, Was just checking in again about the modded bios in case you forgot. Sorry if this is a busy time for you.


If you do an Advanced search of this thread with my username, you'll find the latest F10b with updated firmwares.


----------



## Salve1412

How can i analyze a BIOS file for the Master in order to know the microcodes, ROM modules etc. it contains? I noticed a performance loss of my NVMe 960 Pro testing it with Anvil's Storage Utilities using the latest Kedarwolf's modded F10b BIOSes. The best performance was with BIOS F9 (non-modded, I guess, although I don't remember exactly since the screenshot I'm posting was taken in July), while the F8e I had at hand and tried yesterday (non-modded too, I think) gave a little increment over the F10b. I'm using the same Intel driver in Windows. I'll try the original F9 BIOS downloading it from the motherboard site, but I'd like to analyze all the files in the meantime.


----------



## Wirerat

This is probably old news but the aorus pro/elite/designare/ultra is actually running as a phat 6 phase. 

The doublers are in synchronous mode. Only the current balancing is active in the doublers. 

This helps explain how the master (actual 12 phase mode) got better transients.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> This is probably old news but the aorus pro/elite/designare/ultra is actually running as a phat 6 phase.
> 
> The doublers are in synchronous mode. Only the current balancing is active in the doublers.
> 
> This helps explain how the master (actual 12 phase mode) got better transients.


Wait a minute
How did buildzoid even find out this information?
Did he mention the Aorus Master / Xtreme at all?

(tinfoil hat).

Is this why the Aorus Master is clamped at 15.969 amps of current input (Current IIN), while I've seen the others go up to 20 amps, etc?

BTW Here's a good read for the day if you guys are bored.

https://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/21417/motherboard-vrm-power-guide


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is probably old news but the aorus pro/elite/designare/ultra is actually running as a phat 6 phase.
> 
> The doublers are in synchronous mode. Only the current balancing is active in the doublers.
> 
> This helps explain how the master (actual 12 phase mode) got better transients.
> 
> 
> 
> Wait a minute
> How did buildzoid even find out this information?
> Did he mention the Aorus Master / Xtreme at all?
> 
> (tinfoil hat).
> 
> Is this why the Aorus Master is clamped at 15.969 amps of current input (Current IIN), while I've seen the others go up to 20 amps, etc?
> 
> BTW Here's a good read for the day if you guys are bored.
> 
> https://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/21417/motherboard-vrm-power-guide
Click to expand...

I was reading this overview. 

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8833/gigabyte-z390-aorus-pro-intel-motherboard-review/amp3.html




> The VRM is a large 12+1 phase VRM with the CPU and iGPU power rails using the Intersil ISL69138 in 6+1 phase mode, and doublers on the rear (ISL6617) work in synchronous mode and are used for current balancing the DrMOS



Again here about designare



> The doublers are in synchronous mode, so a PWM readout would look like a large 6-phase VRM instead of a 12-phase one, so the doublers are used exclusively to balance the current between pairs of phases.
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8862/gigabyte-z390-designare-intel-motherboard-preview/index3.html


Then I messaged Buildzoid cause it didn't match what he says in the reviews. 

I was surprised. He responded fast.

The master is using the doublers in asynchronous mode. So it's in 12 phase mode. It's using IR components. So it's a totally different VRM.


----------



## GeneO

Well I just ordered a Aorus Master, should have it tomorrow. I had a hard time choosing, have some trepidation as I have been OC on Asus for a long time - Asus Code X now. I use their adaptive with additional turbo voltage and that just isn't available with other manufacturers. I will run my 8086k at 5.1 GHz on it for now, I guess manual, maybe voltage mode normal? Will see. 

Reason for switching is I need more RAM for Photoshop since I have tripled the MP on my gear. I had 2 x 16 GB g.skill 3200CL14, so ordered 2 more to get me to 64 GB. Go to install it and one of the two unused memory slots is dead (probably always was). Still under warranty, but it is Asus so what is that ordeal worth? Certainly not $300 to me. Anyhow I did not like Asus Z390 lineup except for the Apex XI, but that doesn't satisfy my memory requirement, and it looks like the Aorus is the best for overclocking and gaming, especially as I might get a 9900 in the future. 

Seem to be a lot of hardware QA issues with this board. Hope I am not unlucky. 

Cheers


----------



## GeneO

So here is a question for those who have had a foot in both Asus and Gigabyte camps. 

In preparation for my Aorus Master, I have given up Asus adaptive and tried both offset (comparable to Ggabyte normal) and manaul overclock. 

For 5.1 GHz on my de-lidded8086k, under real-bench 2.43, my vcore needs to be around 1.3v (AVX 0) under load. this is stable for AVX loads as well (prime 95 etc.) as well. 

I can achieve this as follows:

Manual:
1.28v BIOS LLC 6

Offset:
-25mv LLC6
+25mv LLC5

On Asus, the manual mode does not drop voltage at idle. It does for offset. I prefer offset with speedshift and C-states enabled. 

I assume GB turbo LLC ~= Asus LLC6 and I would try normal mode one click less than turbo (=Asus LLC5) with a positive offset and speedshift and C-states enabled without any other guidance. 

What would you suggest for the master with this info?


----------



## shaolin95

GeneO said:


> Well I just ordered a Aorus Master, should have it tomorrow. I had a hard time choosing, have some trepidation as I have been OC on Asus for a long time - Asus Code X now. I use their adaptive with additional turbo voltage and that just isn't available with other manufacturers. I will run my 8086k at 5.1 GHz on it for now, I guess manual, maybe voltage mode normal? Will see.
> 
> Reason for switching is I need more RAM for Photoshop since I have tripled the MP on my gear. I had 2 x 16 GB g.skill 3200CL14, so ordered 2 more to get me to 64 GB. Go to install it and one of the two unused memory slots is dead (probably always was). Still under warranty, but it is Asus so what is that ordeal worth? Certainly not $300 to me. Anyhow I did not like Asus Z390 lineup except for the Apex XI, but that doesn't satisfy my memory requirement, and it looks like the Aorus is the best for overclocking and gaming, especially as I might get a 9900 in the future.
> 
> Seem to be a lot of hardware QA issues with this board. Hope I am not unlucky.
> 
> Cheers


Do you really need that much memory for Photoshop? 
Even when I have Premiere, Photoshop and CaptureOne all working, I am still fine with 64GB but I wanted the peace of mind of course since I always have a lot of browsing tabs etc. Sucks that the memory slot is bad..having to switch all that is a pain..well at least for me with all the crap I have on my PC 
Hope you are lucky with the Master but just dont expect much memory OC (if that is your thing) with 4x16GB ..or at least mine wont do much at all.


----------



## GeneO

shaolin95 said:


> Do you really need that much memory for Photoshop?
> Even when I have Premiere, Photoshop and CaptureOne all working, I am still fine with 64GB but I wanted the peace of mind of course since I always have a lot of browsing tabs etc. Sucks that the memory slot is bad..having to switch all that is a pain..well at least for me with all the crap I have on my PC
> Hope you are lucky with the Master but just dont expect much memory OC (if that is your thing) with 4x16GB ..or at least mine wont do much at all.


Yes, I need that much memory. 30 MP and stitching and processing multiple photos with many layers quite often crashes photoshop now. Ans I also run DXO Photolab alongside photoshop. 

Memory OC is not that important to me. I have RGB 3200 CL14 and even though it is B-die, it doesn't OC that well. I will be OK with XMP 3200, 64 GB.


----------



## shaolin95

GeneO said:


> Yes, I need that much memory. 30 MP and stitching and processing multiple photos with many layers quite often crashes photoshop now. Ans I also run DXO Photolab alongside photoshop.
> 
> Memory OC is not that important to me. I have RGB 3200 CL14 and even though it is B-die, it doesn't OC that well. I will be OK with XMP 3200, 32 GB.


Yeah I dont care much for memory OC but I did try it and it was a big failure. As long as my 5Ghz is stable I am happy. Good luck!


----------



## GeneO

shaolin95 said:


> Yeah I dont care much for memory OC but I did try it and it was a big failure. As long as my 5Ghz is stable I am happy. Good luck!


Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> So here is a question for those who have had a foot in both Asus and Gigabyte camps.
> 
> In preparation for my Aorus Master, I have given up Asus adaptive and tried both offset (comparable to Ggabyte normal) and manaul overclock.
> 
> For 5.1 GHz on my de-lidded8086k, under real-bench 2.43, my vcore needs to be around 1.3v (AVX 0) under load. this is stable for AVX loads as well (prime 95 etc.) as well.
> 
> I can achieve this as follows:
> 
> Manual:
> 1.28v BIOS LLC 6
> 
> Offset:
> -25mv LLC6
> +25mv LLC5
> 
> On Asus, the manual mode does not drop voltage at idle. It does for offset. I prefer offset with speedshift and C-states enabled.
> 
> I assume GB turbo LLC ~= Asus LLC6 and I would try normal mode one click less than turbo (=Asus LLC5) with a positive offset and speedshift and C-states enabled without any other guidance.
> 
> What would you suggest for the master with this info?


Your Maximus X does not support proper on-die sense voltage readings. Your vcore will be reported higher to significantly higher than what your CPU is actually using.
If you wanted to compare the Asus vcore reading to "VR VOUT" on Gigabyte, you would need to be using an XI board (any of them). God I hate getting mixed up between "XI" and "IX"

Your board would be the light blue line, basically.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

And it would also show strange spikes and dips that don't really correspond to anything.

On the Gigabyte, when using a fixed voltage, you get the best transients vs vdroop amount with LLC High (= LLC5 on your X), which is 0.8 mOhms of Loadline. Actually you get the "Completely" best transients with "Standard/Normal" (1.6 mOhms loadline) but vdroop is so massive (1.6 * Amps), that you basically have to use Auto vcore + AC Loadline (1.0 to 1.6 mOhms)+LLC Standard/Normal + Thermal Velocity Boost (this drops your base VID and VR VOUT (auto/dvid mode ONLY) at lower temps and raises it at higher temps) to be able to mitigate some of this vdroop.

I can't help you with c-states, speedstep or any of that stuff. I don't use power saving, and I despise DVID mode because you have to reboot twice to get vcore to work correctly when going from DVID to fixed mode, otherwise you get far too many volts (Auto vcore mode doesn't seem to suffer from this bug). I do NOT like seeing a BIOS voltage showing as 1.536v when Loadline Calibration is set to High/Turbo, etc. (Oddly enough, a BIOS set fixed voltage of 1.520v with Vcore LLC set to "Standard" or "Normal" is still at the very far edge of Intel specification (Borderline), but 1.520v set in BIOS with LLC=Low is OUT of specifications already, so you can imagine what a more aggressive LLC would be leapfrogging).

I was able to use the transient improvement going from LLC Turbo (1.405v fixed set+ LLC Turbo @ 5.2 ghz=CPU L0 error) going to LLC High (1.430v set, LLC High @ 5.2 ghz=Battlefield 5 runs) to play BF5 with HT enabled at 5.2 ghz.


----------



## GeneO

nm, double post


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Your Maximus X does not support proper on-die sense voltage readings. Your vcore will be reported higher to significantly higher than what your CPU is actually using.
> If you wanted to compare the Asus vcore reading to "VR VOUT" on Gigabyte, you would need to be using an IX board (any of them).
> 
> Your board would be the light blue line, basically.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> And it would also show strange spikes and dips that don't really correspond to anything.
> 
> On the Gigabyte, when using a fixed voltage, you get the best transients vs vdroop amount with LLC High (= LLC5 on your X), which is 0.8 mOhms of Loadline. Actually you get the "Completely" best transients with "Standard/Normal" (1.6 mOhms loadline) but vdroop is so massive (1.6 * Amps), that you basically have to use Auto vcore + AC Loadline (1.0 to 1.6 mOhms)+LLC Standard/Normal + Thermal Velocity Boost (this drops your base VID and VR VOUT (auto/dvid mode ONLY) at lower temps and raises it at higher temps) to be able to mitigate some of this vdroop.
> 
> I can't help you with c-states, speedstep or any of that stuff. I don't use power saving, and I despise DVID mode because you have to reboot twice to get vcore to work correctly when going from DVID to fixed mode, otherwise you get far too many volts (Auto vcore mode doesn't seem to suffer from this bug). I do NOT like seeing a BIOS voltage showing as 1.536v when Loadline Calibration is set to High/Turbo, etc. (Oddly enough, a BIOS set fixed voltage of 1.520v with Vcore LLC set to "Standard" or "Normal" is still at the very far edge of Intel specification (Borderline), but 1.520v set in BIOS with LLC=Low is OUT of specifications already, so you can imagine what a more aggressive LLC would be leapfrogging).
> 
> I was able to use the transient improvement going from LLC Turbo (1.405v fixed set+ LLC Turbo @ 5.2 ghz=CPU L0 error) going to LLC High (1.430v set, LLC High @ 5.2 ghz=Battlefield 5 runs) to play BF5 with HT enabled at 5.2 ghz.


Yes,m I am aware that the reported vcore is higher than it actuality is. Do Gigabyte boards drop voltage diown at idle when using manual voltage control? (Asus does not).

Is DVID mode different from normal? I though normal enabled DVISD offset from what I saw??

EDIT: I would have thought Asus offset mode with zero offset would be the same as Gigabyte normal with 0 offset - i.e. the nominal Intel load-line curve. Is that not the case?


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Yes,m I am aware that the reported vcore is higher than it actuality is. Do Gigabyte boards drop voltage diown at idle when using manual voltage control? (Asus does not).
> 
> Is DVID mode different from normal? I though normal enabled DVISD offset from what I saw??


All boards drop voltage down at idle. Just the sensor won't show it properly without on-die measurements.
The Super I/O chip will often show a voltage rise at idle if your LLC is high enough (But that rise is completely baloney).

Voltage drop at idle is EXACTLY equal to :

Target voltage - (VRM Loadline * Amps), where loadline is in milliohms and target voltage is in millivolts.
This formula doesn't work exactly this way for idle vcore on "Auto" or any DVID mode because AC Loadline and Thermal Velocity Boost start messing with the "Original" target voltage, making it difficult to impossible to know what the target voltage is. (there IS a way but it's complicated).

DVID is the "offset" mode for Normal mode. Normal is the exact same thing as Auto, except 1) it's bugged if you switch back to fixed, 2) it allows DVID offsets, while Auto does not.

SVID Offset is a completely different story and not related to this as that simply removes the 1.520v VRM cap from AC Loadline.


----------



## KedarWolf

New microcodes available for 9*** series, will update F10b when I get home from work and test before and after in Cinebench R20.


----------



## AndrejB

Regarding the new WIFI driver 1909, to get it to install:
Drag the setup executable and setup.xml to the 'Extensions' folder containing the
"PieExtension.inf" extension and retried installing via the setup.exe. It worked.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> New microcodes available for 9*** series, will update F10b when I get home from work and test before and after in Cinebench R20.


New Microcodes. Yikes.
Time to load them in cpucodeupdate VMware loader and see if they tank my FPS again.

I'll report back and tell you guys if they're good or bad.

https://www.win-raid.com/t3355f47-I...CPU-Microcode-Repositories-Discussion-22.html

OH YAY CA microcode.
Who wants to bet me $100 they will be as bad--or worse--than C6 ?

If you guys want to use them without flashing your BIOS, copy microcode.dat from the solo zip into the microcode updater folder (erase the old one in the main updater package because it's obsolete) and run it AS ADMIN.
I already converted the microcodes on win-raid and put them in microcode.zip.

Run uninstall to revert.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> All boards drop voltage down at idle. Just the sensor won't show it properly without on-die measurements.
> The Super I/O chip will often show a voltage rise at idle if your LLC is high enough (But that rise is completely baloney).
> 
> Voltage drop at idle is EXACTLY equal to :
> 
> Target voltage - (VRM Loadline * Amps), where loadline is in milliohms and target voltage is in millivolts.
> This formula doesn't work exactly this way for idle vcore on "Auto" or any DVID mode because AC Loadline and Thermal Velocity Boost start messing with the "Original" target voltage, making it difficult to impossible to know what the target voltage is. (there IS a way but it's complicated).
> 
> DVID is the "offset" mode for Normal mode. Normal is the exact same thing as Auto, except 1) it's bugged if you switch back to fixed, 2) it allows DVID offsets, while Auto does not.
> 
> SVID Offset is a completely different story and not related to this as that simply removes the 1.520v VRM cap from AC Loadline.


No, Asus boards, when on manual voltage overclock, do not drop voltage, even if Speedstep/Speedshift or C-staes are enabled. Asus interprets manual voltage as - fixed voltage at what you set no matter what. 

I would still like to know whether Asus offset is equivalent to Gigabyte normal without noise about milliohms.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> No, Asus boards, when on manual voltage overclock, do not drop voltage, even if Speedstep/Speedshift or C-staes are enabled. Asus interprets manual voltage as - fixed voltage at what you set no matter what.
> 
> I would still like to know whether Asus offset is equivalent to Gigabyte normal without noise about milliohms.


They're exactly the same.
It's in the APTIO user capsule if you open it in AMIBCP 5.02.0031 except it's called "adaptive mode" there, rather than offset mode. 
I "believe" Asus simply exposes the "Additional turbo voltage" option, although I have no way to test this. Gigabyte I *think* only exposes this in the Xtreme 5G Bios (i can't check because trying to open it just bombs with "Max # of strings exceeded").

also, How are you measuring the voltage to know if it's dropping or not? As I said you can't rely on sensors.
Gigabyte for example, on the "Socket" reading (MLCC caps), which is also linked to the onboard read points, do not show a voltage drop either on "Turbo" LLC, regardless of how much current you're pulling.
(ITE 8792E Vcore reading in HWinfo64). But everyone here knows now that is inaccurate and not possible (Turbo LLC is not a flat loadline)


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> They're exactly the same.
> It's in the APTIO user capsule if you open it in AMIBCP 5.02.0031 except it's called "adaptive mode" there, rather than offset mode.
> I "believe" Asus simply exposes the "Additional turbo voltage" option, although I have no way to test this. Gigabyte I *think* only exposes this in the Xtreme 5G Bios (i can't check because trying to open it just bombs with "Max # of strings exceeded").
> 
> also, How are you measuring the voltage to know if it's dropping or not? As I said you can't rely on sensors.
> Gigabyte for example, on the "Socket" reading (MLCC caps), which is also linked to the onboard read points, do not show a voltage drop either on "Turbo" LLC, regardless of how much current you're pulling.
> (ITE 8792E Vcore reading in HWinfo64). But everyone here knows now that is inaccurate and not possible (Turbo LLC is not a flat loadlin


I am just looking at the voltage I set in BIOS vs. the vcore reported by the board. 

OK. So if I am stable at Assus Offset LLC5 with a 25 mv offset, I should, in principle, be stable with Gigabyte normal mode and +25mv offset then, correct? Modulo the difference in the voltage (but I think that shouldn't matter in these modes)


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> I am just looking at the voltage I set in BIOS vs. the vcore reported by the board.
> 
> OK. So if I am stable at Assus Offset LLC5 with a 25 mv offset, I should, in principle, be stable with Gigabyte normal mode and +25mv offset then, correct? Modulo the difference in the voltage (but I think that shouldn't matter in these modes)


Yes, more or less. Depends on the VRM quality on the Maximus X.
But the VRM's will run cooler so you should be more stable.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> The master is using the doublers in asynchronous mode. So it's in 12 phase mode. It's using IR components. So it's a totally different VRM.


If I could go back I'd roll with the Master for sure, or better yet an ASrock Taichi Z390.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> New microcodes available for 9*** series, will update F10b when I get home from work and test before and after in Cinebench R20.


9900k 5.1 / 4.7:

Cinebench R15

AE/BE: 2273
CA: 2205

Cinebench R20
AE/BE: 5409
CA: 5338


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Yes, more or less. Depends on the VRM quality on the Maximus X.
> But the VRM's will run cooler so you should be more stable.


So what did you mean by this? ". Actually you get the "Completely" best transients with "Standard/Normal" (1.6 mOhms loadline) but vdroop is so massive (1.6 * Amps), that you basically have to use Auto vcore + AC Loadline (1.0 to 1.6 mOhms)+LLC Standard/Normal + Thermal Velocity Boost (this drops your base VID and VR VOUT (auto/dvid mode ONLY) at lower temps and raises it at higher temps) to be able to mitigate some of this vdroop."

With the Asus offset, I am stable with an offset 0f +25 mv LLC5 at load with the droop that gives. If this is equivalent to the Gigaabyte why should there be a massive vdroop?


----------



## KedarWolf

C6 microcodes, fast ones.










Latest microcodes.


----------



## sdvuh

Hello! Can someone explain the difference between "auto", "normal" and "standard" LLC?


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> So what did you mean by this? ". Actually you get the "Completely" best transients with "Standard/Normal" (1.6 mOhms loadline) but vdroop is so massive (1.6 * Amps), that you basically have to use Auto vcore + AC Loadline (1.0 to 1.6 mOhms)+LLC Standard/Normal + Thermal Velocity Boost (this drops your base VID and VR VOUT (auto/dvid mode ONLY) at lower temps and raises it at higher temps) to be able to mitigate some of this vdroop."
> 
> With the Asus offset, I am stable with an offset 0f +25 mv LLC5 at load with the droop that gives. If this is equivalent to the Gigaabyte why should there be a massive vdroop?


I can't explain this to you without going back into what you don't want to hear. I'm sorry about that.

Regardless of what your Asus board sets, --every-- LLC level has vdroop except LLC8, and LLC8 has -terrible- transient dips, and its the "VMIN" which determines your overall stability as power draw goes up, not your voltage the sensors show (Even VR VOUT or die-sense Vcore on Maximus XI boards). The more vdroop you have, the less the transient dips (tighter voltage regulation). Also, the more current you pull, the larger the transient dips become.

LLC "Standard/Normal" on Gigabyte Z390 is equal to LLC2 on Maximus XI boards.

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

You can see what I'm talking about. With much higher vdroop (less LLC), your "VMIN" (transient minimum) will be VERY close to your on-die sense voltage that VR VOUT or maximus XI boards can show. With less vdroop, your transient VMIN will be much lower than what VR VOUT can show.

What you're basically asking people to do is to do a side by side comparison between the two boards, when none of us have the two boards to do side by side comparisons!

Read Elmor's post I quoted over here comparing LLC6 vs LLC8 on a Maximus XI Gene.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...about-Transient-Response-(to-Shamino-and-Raja)

You can see, LLC6+Load voltage final vdroop was stable at 1.079 real (measured by multimeter on the VRM directly),
but LLC8 load voltage required being 1.135v for the same stability! That's because of the transients that were NOT shown on the multimeter in those number reads.

(Multimeters can't show transients!)

The Elmor labs graph shows transients, taken via oscilloscope. That tells you what's really going on behind the scenes.

When you want the BEST Transient response possible, you have to disable higher LLC and use intel default vdroop (Standard / Normal LLC) or LLC2 (Asus), but the vdroop is too high to set a realistic manual fixed vcore for that, so you have to use 'Auto' vcore (or DVID with an offset). AC Loadline and Thermal Velocity Boost will then help reduce the idle voltage somewhat (NOT talking about c-states here!!). AC/TVB don't work on fixed vcore.


----------



## Falkentyne

sdvuh said:


> Hello! Can someone explain the difference between "auto", "normal" and "standard" LLC?


Auto=Normal=Standard if MCE is disabled (1.6 mOhms of VRM Loadline on 8 core CFL).
The only difference is that MCE being enabled can change "Auto" to whatever it wants it to be. MCE cannot change loadline calibration if it's set on a specific value. (MCE cannot change any settings on your motherboard unless they are set to 'Auto').


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I can't explain this to you without going back into what you don't want to hear. I'm sorry about that.
> 
> Regardless of what your Asus board sets, --every-- LLC level has vdroop except LLC8, and LLC8 has -terrible- transient dips, and its the "VMIN" which determines your overall stability as power draw goes up, not your voltage the sensors show (Even VR VOUT or die-sense Vcore on Maximus XI boards). The more vdroop you have, the less the transient dips (tighter voltage regulation). Also, the more current you pull, the larger the transient dips become.
> 
> LLC "Standard/Normal" on Gigabyte Z390 is equal to LLC2 on Maximus XI boards.
> 
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> You can see what I'm talking about. With much higher vdroop (less LLC), your "VMIN" (transient minimum) will be VERY close to your on-die sense voltage that VR VOUT or maximus XI boards can show. With less vdroop, your transient VMIN will be much lower than what VR VOUT can show.
> 
> What you're basically asking people to do is to do a side by side comparison between the two boards, when none of us have the two boards to do side by side comparisons!
> 
> Read Elmor's post I quoted over here comparing LLC6 vs LLC8 on a Maximus XI Gene.
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...about-Transient-Response-(to-Shamino-and-Raja)
> 
> You can see, LLC6+Load voltage final vdroop was stable at 1.079 real (measured by multimeter on the VRM directly),
> but LLC8 load voltage required being 1.135v for the same stability! That's because of the transients that were NOT shown on the multimeter in those number reads.
> 
> (Multimeters can't show transients!)
> 
> The Elmor labs graph shows transients, taken via oscilloscope. That tells you what's really going on behind the scenes.
> 
> When you want the BEST Transient response possible, you have to disable higher LLC and use intel default vdroop (Standard / Normal LLC) or LLC2 (Asus), but the vdroop is too high to set a realistic manual fixed vcore for that, so you have to use 'Auto' vcore (or DVID with an offset). AC Loadline and Thermal Velocity Boost will then help reduce the idle voltage somewhat (NOT talking about c-states here!!). AC/TVB don't work on fixed vcore.


I am actually happy to hear anything that is enlightening. Yes, I am aware that anything but the top level LLC has droop, and that it is masked by inaccurate vcore reporting due to backplane resistance, and that the higher the LLC, the larger the transients in general. My understanding is that Master is best around turbo from Builzoid's video. From that I don't think it follows that the lower your LLC the better the transient - it seems to plateau at some point - being turbo on the Aorus Master? 

I wasn't asking for a side-by-side comparison, but I imagine there are a number of people that jumped ship from Asus to Gigabyte and others with z390 that might have insight.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> I am actually happy to hear anything that is enlightening. Yes, I am aware that anything but the top level LLC has droop, and that it is masked by inaccurate vcore reporting due to backplane resistance, and that the higher the LLC, the larger the transients in general. My understanding is that Master is best around turbo from Builzoid's video. From that I don't think it follows that the lower your LLC the better the transient - it seems to plateau at some point - being turbo on the Aorus Master?
> 
> I wasn't asking for a side-by-side comparison, but I imagine there are a number of people that jumped ship from Asus to Gigabyte and others with 390x that might have insight.


Buildzoid said the Master is best at High LLC, not Turbo.






RMS to transient min was 60mv at LLC Turbo while it was 40mv at LLC High in the prime95 16k AVX test.
To compare, LLC Medium was 30mv from RMS to transient min.

Using LLC High allowed me to play Battlefield 5 at 5.2 ghz with HT on and kept the CPU at 81C, with a pretty nice helping of vcore.
LLC Turbo would give L0 errors at the same "Load" VR VOUT. That 20mv of transient improvement made a difference.

I no longer use LLC Turbo. I use High (or Standard if on auto vcore) in all of my fixed vcore profiles.

Here is a newer video based on 1.3v "Die sense" for most boards.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Buildzoid said the Master is best at High LLC, not Turbo.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86Ri3zAjNUI
> 
> RMS to transient min was 60mv at LLC Turbo while it was 40mv at LLC High in the prime95 16k AVX test.
> To compare, LLC Medium was 30mv from RMS to transient min.
> 
> Using LLC High allowed me to play Battlefield 5 at 5.2 ghz with HT on and kept the CPU at 81C, with a pretty nice helping of vcore.
> LLC Turbo would give L0 errors at the same "Load" VR VOUT. That 20mv of transient improvement made a difference.
> 
> I no longer use LLC Turbo. I use High (or Standard if on auto vcore) in all of my fixed vcore profiles.
> 
> Here is a newer video based on 1.3v "Die sense" for most boards.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUPzADCcuTc


Right, I meant the transients 1 click down from turbo, He also said he wouldn't run his CPU on high because of the excessive droop - that he would prefer something in between (exactly my feeling between LLC5 and LLC6 on the Asus).


----------



## GeneO

Say, another question. With Asus Rog boards you could flash moded bios with flashback. Can you do this with Gigabyte boards?


----------



## vmanuelgm

GeneO said:


> Say, another question. With Asus Rog boards you could flash moded bios with flashback. Can you do this with Gigabyte boards?


U can either use Efiflash under DOS (Pendrive boot) or try to HEX modify the modded bios to allow inbios flashing.


----------



## gamervivek

My 9900KF is P0 stepping, and the Z390 ultra is at F7 BIOS, running fine for about a week now. Any improvement/degradation with BIOS upgrade?


----------



## Wirerat

gamervivek said:


> My 9900KF is P0 stepping, and the Z390 ultra is at F7 BIOS, running fine for about a week now. Any improvement/degradation with BIOS upgrade?


Some may not agree with me on this but my veiw on bios updates are simple. 

If it's all working, don't try to fix it. 

Unless there is a specific need or something not functional, there is little reason to update the bios imo.


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> C6 microcodes, fast ones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Latest microcodes.


This is my PR so far on the Master board... Pretty strong board for what it is. 










This is my PR so far with my 9900K on the Master...









https://valid.x86.fr/flvj1i


----------



## iunlock

Wirerat said:


> Some may not agree with me on this but my veiw on bios updates are simple.
> 
> If it's all working, don't try to fix it.
> 
> Unless there is a specific need or something not functional, there is little reason to update the bios imo.


I agree 100%. Newer isn't always better. 



shaolin95 said:


> Do you really need that much memory for Photoshop?
> Even when I have Premiere, Photoshop and CaptureOne all working, I am still fine with 64GB but I wanted the peace of mind of course since I always have a lot of browsing tabs etc. Sucks that the memory slot is bad..having to switch all that is a pain..well at least for me with all the crap I have on my PC
> Hope you are lucky with the Master but just dont expect much memory OC (if that is your thing) with 4x16GB ..or at least mine wont do much at all.





GeneO said:


> Yes, I need that much memory. 30 MP and stitching and processing multiple photos with many layers quite often crashes photoshop now. Ans I also run DXO Photolab alongside photoshop.
> 
> Memory OC is not that important to me. I have RGB 3200 CL14 and even though it is B-die, it doesn't OC that well. I will be OK with XMP 3200, 64 GB.





shaolin95 said:


> Yeah I dont care much for memory OC but I did try it and it was a big failure. As long as my 5Ghz is stable I am happy. Good luck!


Regarding RAM overclocking on the Master board, it's actually pretty good for what it is...

I've been tuning my RAM (G.Skill 4266MHz TridentZ RGB 32GB kit [8GBx4] lately to get the most out of it at the right timings, speed etc.. to my liking...

So far this has been rock solid for me... hours of gaming, memtest 20x run @ 75% mem capacity etc... 

4133MHz @ 17-17-17-37









Note: I've ran more Aida tests after these runs and actually scored higher, but this screenshot gets the point across so it's all good... Check out the Read/Write/Copy and Cache speeds...

BZ got this same kit to 4533 iirc on the Master board, so RAM OC'ing on this board is actually really good for this class/price point. 

When you guys have some time on a rainy day, definitely go for it with some RAM tweaking. 

Edit: Just realized that the image doesn't expand when you click on it so I've attached it as well.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> Some may not agree with me on this but my veiw on bios updates are simple.
> 
> If it's all working, don't try to fix it.
> 
> Unless there is a specific need or something not functional, there is little reason to update the bios imo.


+1

I've been on F9 for quite a while and will probably upgrade to the F10b Kedarwolf modded BIOS soon, just for newer/faster microcode.

I have no plans to upgrade to F11 anytime soon.

And I'll just say it, some of these GB updates are a bit questionable.

"Gigabyte BIOS is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get".


----------



## shaolin95

iunlock said:


> I agree 100%. Newer isn't always better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regarding RAM overclocking on the Master board, it's actually pretty good for what it is...
> 
> I've been tuning my RAM (G.Skill 4266MHz TridentZ RGB 32GB kit [8GBx4] lately to get the most out of it at the right timings, speed etc.. to my liking...
> 
> So far this has been rock solid for me... hours of gaming, memtest 20x run @ 75% mem capacity etc...
> 
> 4133MHz @ 17-17-17-37
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note: I've ran more Aida tests after these runs and actually scored higher, but this screenshot gets the point across so it's all good... Check out the Read/Write/Copy and Cache speeds...
> 
> BZ got this same kit to 4533 iirc on the Master board, so RAM OC'ing on this board is actually really good for this class/price point.
> 
> When you guys have some time on a rainy day, definitely go for it with some RAM tweaking.
> 
> Edit: Just realized that the image doesn't expand when you click on it so I've attached it as well.


Note that we are running 16GBx4 3200 C14 not 8GBx4. That makes a BIG difference for overclocking when the CPU is already at 5GHZ all cores


----------



## KedarWolf

iunlock said:


> I agree 100%. Newer isn't always better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regarding RAM overclocking on the Master board, it's actually pretty good for what it is...
> 
> I've been tuning my RAM (G.Skill 4266MHz TridentZ RGB 32GB kit [8GBx4] lately to get the most out of it at the right timings, speed etc.. to my liking...
> 
> So far this has been rock solid for me... hours of gaming, memtest 20x run @ 75% mem capacity etc...
> 
> 4133MHz @ 17-17-17-37
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note: I've ran more Aida tests after these runs and actually scored higher, but this screenshot gets the point across so it's all good... Check out the Read/Write/Copy and Cache speeds...
> 
> BZ got this same kit to 4533 iirc on the Master board, so RAM OC'ing on this board is actually really good for this class/price point.
> 
> When you guys have some time on a rainy day, definitely go for it with some RAM tweaking.
> 
> Edit: Just realized that the image doesn't expand when you click on it so I've attached it as well.


See my timings, you may want to weak yours.


----------



## iunlock

shaolin95 said:


> Note that we are running 16GBx4 3200 C14 not 8GBx4. That makes a BIG difference for overclocking when the CPU is already at 5GHZ all cores


Indeed. 3200 @ C14 is solid...


KedarWolf said:


> See my timings, you may want to weak yours.


Thanks. I'll test it out some more tonight. What's your dram and training voltage at, along with SA & IO? Any other changes in the bios? Do you have any of the memory enhancements enabled to normal etc...?


----------



## KedarWolf

iunlock said:


> Indeed. 3200 @ C14 is solid... Thanks. I'll test it out some more tonight. What's your dram and training voltage at, along with SA & IO? Any other changes in the bios? Do you have any of the memory enhancements enabled to normal etc...?


----------



## GeneO

Well, testing manual overclock @5GHZ with my XMP 3200Cl14 on new Aorus Master.. Trying 1.215 VROUT load on Realbench 2.43 now. I think this is over clocking better than my Asus code did. 
RAM seems to run cooler as well as my960 Pro m.2.

Everything appears to be working. 

So far I am a happy camper. I would like to be able to lower voltage at idle. Is that possible with this board?


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


>


Thanks. Here are some variables that I'm seeing between our settings...

- I'm running 50x on all cores @ 1.23v, similar to your vcore but different clock sequences.
- Your SA and IO is a tad higher too... hmm I'll try to adjust those. 
- My DRAM voltage is at 1.45v
- Memory Enhancement settings... I though we wanted that off no? Recommended to keep it on Enhanced Performance for our Master boards? That's one of those settings that differ from board manufactures... sometimes it interferes with RAM tuning... hmmm..

As for the DDRVPP and DRAM Termination voltages, I haven't tweaked those much yet as the tests weren't throwing any errors so I left it be; with the goal of adjusting as little as possible to achieve stability. 

I'll do some testing and report back... cheers.


----------



## KedarWolf

iunlock said:


> Thanks. Here are some variables that I'm seeing between our settings...
> 
> - I'm running 50x on all cores @ 1.23v, similar to your vcore but different clock sequences.
> - Your SA and IO is a tad higher too... hmm I'll try to adjust those.
> - My DRAM voltage is at 1.45v
> - Memory Enhancement settings... I though we wanted that off no? Recommended to keep it on Enhanced Performance for our Master boards? That's one of those settings that differ from board manufactures... sometimes it interferes with RAM tuning... hmmm..
> 
> As for the DDRVPP and DRAM Termination voltages, I haven't tweaked those much yet as the tests weren't throwing any errors so I left it be; with the goal of adjusting as little as possible to achieve stability.
> 
> I'll do some testing and report back... cheers.


I found Auto sets DRAM Termination way too high and it affects my stability. In HWInfo it'll be around 2.75v and I do better at 2.6v or so.


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> I found Auto sets DRAM Termination way too high and it affects my stability. In HWInfo it'll be around 2.75v and I do better at 2.6v or so.


Interesting... I just checked and my DDR VTT is 0.715v current / 0.726v Max ...

When quoting your voltages were you referring to DDR VPP? If so, mine are ~2.5v


----------



## KedarWolf

iunlock said:


> Interesting... I just checked and my DDR VTT is 0.715v current / 0.726v Max ...
> 
> When quoting your voltages were you referring to DDR VPP? If so, mine are ~2.5v


My bad, I meant .750 and I like it around .600


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> My bad, I meant .750 and I like it around .600


No worries, figured that's what you had meant. I've been testing everything with the DDRVTT on Auto and so far so good. I'll test it with a manual input as well if I experience any bsod or freezes on auto.


----------



## Wirerat

I was not really expecting to be validating 15-15-15-34 at 3800mhz 1.45v on my aorus pro but here it is.

I imagine trfc can go lower.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> I was not really expecting to be validating 15-15-15-34 at 3800mhz 1.45v on my aorus pro but here it is.
> 
> I imagine trfc can go lower.


I'm not too surprised. At 3866 and lower the Pro boards do OK even with tight timings. The problem/wall is at 4000, just can't get it stable there even with loose timings and RAM that is rated at that speed or higher.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was not really expecting to be validating 15-15-15-34 at 3800mhz 1.45v on my aorus pro but here it is.
> 
> I imagine trfc can go lower.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not too surprised. At 3866 and lower the Pro boards do OK even with tight timings. The problem lies at 4000, just can't get it stable there even with loose timings and RAM that is rated at that speed or higher.
Click to expand...

4000mhz is a no go. This kit xmp is 4000 19-19-19-36 1.35v. It won't even post at 25-25-25-50.

I thought it was a bandwidth limitation though. It's just a frequency limitation. The bandwidth is still scaling.


----------



## ElGreco

*DR vs SR memory modules on AORUS MASTER Z390*

Hi all!

It has been quite a few years since my last build and i decided to start buying components for a new one (AORUS MASTER, I9-9900K, 32GB RAM, ASUS ROG STRIX OC RTX 2080TI etc).
Even though i have seen all buildzoid's videos and have read through this thread, i still dont know and would appreciate your opinion, regarding the type of memory i should use for the Master Aorus Z390 mobo.

T-topology, dual channel, mobo... should i use DOUBLE RANK 2 X16GB memory sticks OR SINGLE RANK 4X 8GB memory modules. Even though many reviews focus on the number on sticks, it seems that no review checks the DR vs SR memory modules on this specific mobo.

Thank you!


----------



## Falkentyne

ElGreco said:


> Hi all!
> 
> It has been quite a few years since my last build and i decided to start buying components for a new one (AORUS MASTER, I9-9900K, 32GB RAM, ASUS ROG STRIX OC RTX 2080TI etc).
> Even though i have seen all buildzoid's videos and have read through this thread, i still dont know and would appreciate your opinion, regarding the type of memory i should use for the Master Aorus Z390 mobo.
> 
> T-topology, dual channel, mobo... should i use DOUBLE RANK 2 X16GB memory sticks OR SINGLE RANK 4X 8GB memory modules. Even though many reviews focus on the number on sticks, it seems that no review checks the DR vs SR memory modules on this specific mobo.
> 
> Thank you!


Are you overclocking RAM or not? If not, it doesn't matter.

If you are:
Single rank if you only want 32 gb maximum.
If you want more than 32 GB, your only choice is dual rank. I don't know if 16 GB single rank dimms even exist.


----------



## ElGreco

Falkentyne said:


> Are you overclocking RAM or not? If not, it doesn't matter.
> 
> If you are:
> Single rank if you only want 32 gb maximum.
> If you want more than 32 GB, your only choice is dual rank. I don't know if 16 GB single rank dimms even exist.


Thank you for the reply!
16 GB SR DDR4 memory modules are not available (at least in the QVL).

Yes, I intend to overclock (not to the sky) the ram. (was thinking to hopefully reach 3700 to 4000 from a 3200CL14 or 3600CL16 kit)
I would like to have the option to increase to 64GB, IF I ever need to, BUT primary concern to me is not to bottleneck somehow the system by using only 2x16 GB ram sticks because these are DOUBLE RANK (if such an assumption is valid!?).

As an additional item for consideration, in case i decide to go for 4x 8GB SR dimms, should i prefer:

Option A: 2x kits of 2x DUAL CHNL 8GB SR modules (obviously same brand, etc)
or
Option B: 1x kit of 4x QUAD CHNL 8GB SR modules. 

Too many questions, which i am kind of surprised that have not already been analyzed with all these amazing builds you guys have.


----------



## Wirerat

Finally broke through 40ns latency. Unfortunately 14-14-14 won't be possible without 1.5v. 

All my intakes have rads (front and bottom) so the ram doesn't get a lot of direct airflow + the patriot heat spreaders are cheap af. So I rather not run the voltage that high 24/7.


----------



## iunlock

Wirerat said:


> I was not really expecting to be validating 15-15-15-34 at 3800mhz 1.45v on my aorus pro but here it is.
> 
> I imagine trfc can go lower.


Nice timings mate. 



ElGreco said:


> Hi all!
> 
> It has been quite a few years since my last build and i decided to start buying components for a new one (AORUS MASTER, I9-9900K, 32GB RAM, ASUS ROG STRIX OC RTX 2080TI etc).
> Even though i have seen all buildzoid's videos and have read through this thread, i still dont know and would appreciate your opinion, regarding the type of memory i should use for the Master Aorus Z390 mobo.
> 
> T-topology, dual channel, mobo... should i use DOUBLE RANK 2 X16GB memory sticks OR SINGLE RANK 4X 8GB memory modules. Even though many reviews focus on the number on sticks, it seems that no review checks the DR vs SR memory modules on this specific mobo.
> 
> Thank you!


Congrats and welcome back into the game. The Master is a strong board. If you scroll back a few pages or do a search, you'll see that I've been tuning RAM on my Master. All of the relevant info. that may interest you are contained in my posts. (Post #4964)



ElGreco said:


> Thank you for the reply!
> 16 GB SR DDR4 memory modules are not available (at least in the QVL).
> 
> Yes, I intend to overclock (not to the sky) the ram. (was thinking to hopefully reach 3700 to 4000 from a 3200CL14 or 3600CL16 kit)
> I would like to have the option to increase to 64GB, IF I ever need to, BUT primary concern to me is not to bottleneck somehow the system by using only 2x16 GB ram sticks because these are DOUBLE RANK (if such an assumption is valid!?).
> 
> As an additional item for consideration, in case i decide to go for 4x 8GB SR dimms, should i prefer:
> 
> Option A: 2x kits of 2x DUAL CHNL 8GB SR modules (obviously same brand, etc)
> or
> Option B: 1x kit of 4x QUAD CHNL 8GB SR modules.
> 
> Too many questions, which i am kind of surprised that have not already been analyzed with all these amazing builds you guys have.


4000 is definitely doable on the Master, easily. I have mine set at 4133 as that seems to be the sweet spot and so does other fellow chaps like @KedarWolf



Wirerat said:


> Finally broke through 40ns latency. Unfortunately 14-14-14 won't be possible without 1.5v.
> 
> All my intakes have rads (front and bottom) so the ram doesn't get a lot of direct airflow + the patriot heat spreaders are cheap af. So I rather not run the voltage that high 24/7.


Nice. Do you happen to have the patriot viper steel kit? If so, yea those are very cheap and there will be some insane BF deals on those kits.


----------



## Wirerat

> Nice. Do you happen to have the patriot viper steel kit? If so, yea those are very cheap and there will be some insane BF deals on those kits.



Yes. $99 for 19-19-19-36 1.35v 4000mhz and a 32gb thumb drive recently at Newegg.


----------



## Timur Born

Quick FYI: My replacement Aorus Master board exhibits just the same amount of high VRM noise as did my first one (which was broken). It's especially bad when running RAR compression (loud) and during C-state (C3) transitions (=permanent noise).


----------



## Rbk_3

So I have the 9900KS and the Aurous Elite Z390 and a Noctua D15. 


I can do 5ghz with a manual Vcore of 1.27 and LLC on High and pass all stability tests I throw at it. Trying to get 5.1ghz, I can pass non AVX Prime 95 for a few minutes if I set my voltage at 1.37V with some thermal throttling and it will eventually fail. Same case for Realbench. 

Am I likely out of luck for anything over 5ghz?


----------



## Sheyster

Rbk_3 said:


> So I have the 9900KS and the Aurous Elite Z390 and a Noctua D15.
> 
> 
> I can do 5ghz with a manual Vcore of 1.27 and LLC on High and pass all stability tests I throw at it. Trying to get 5.1ghz, I can pass non AVX Prime 95 for a few minutes if I set my voltage at 1.37V with some thermal throttling and it will eventually fail. Same case for Realbench.
> 
> Am I likely out of luck for anything over 5ghz?


On air cooling, probably. If you de-lid it and go water probably not.


----------



## Rbk_3

Sheyster said:


> On air cooling, probably. If you de-lid it and go water probably not.


Yeah, I probably won't bother upgrading my cooling or de-lidding. 




Wirerat said:


> I did the method you always talk about. 5ghz is stable easy. 5.1 is a no go. I run out of VID room. Well I don't like seeing 1.52 vcore (not vrout).
> 
> 5ghz also works auto vcore performance ac loadline with standard llc.
> 
> But even then the vrout transient looks worse than what I can get with my offset profiles.
> 
> I spent a lot of time trying to match the voltages using Advanced VR. In the end I 5ghz was easy but with larger spikes. 5.1 seemed out of reach ( I never tried the dvid).
> 
> It's a really cool way to OC. So different than anything I ve done before.
> 
> I'm not saying any of this method is wrong. I just really like the tighter voltages at low llc the offset can achieve.


What settings did you change to get to 5.1 ? Is it still: 
AC/DC LL: Power Saving 
LLC Low

?

I will give this a try before I give up on 5.1


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> Sheyster said:
> 
> 
> 
> On air cooling, probably. If you de-lid it and go water probably not.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I probably won't bother upgrading my cooling or de-lidding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I did the method you always talk about. 5ghz is stable easy. 5.1 is a no go. I run out of VID room. Well I don't like seeing 1.52 vcore (not vrout).
> 
> 5ghz also works auto vcore performance ac loadline with standard llc.
> 
> But even then the vrout transient looks worse than what I can get with my offset profiles.
> 
> I spent a lot of time trying to match the voltages using Advanced VR. In the end I 5ghz was easy but with larger spikes. 5.1 seemed out of reach ( I never tried the dvid).
> 
> It's a really cool way to OC. So different than anything I ve done before.
> 
> I'm not saying any of this method is wrong. I just really like the tighter voltages at low llc the offset can achieve.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What settings did you change to get to 5.1 ? Is it still:
> AC/DC LL: Power Saving
> LLC Low
> 
> ?
> 
> I will give this a try before I give up on 5.1
Click to expand...

Okay we were discussing a different method in that post. 


My 5.1ghz profile looks like this:

Core normal
Offset +.110v
Uncore 46
Llc low
Ac loadline power save 
Intel speed step on


Xmp is also disabled with manually configured ram and vccsa/vccio voltages.


----------



## Rbk_3

Wirerat said:


> Okay we were discussing a different method in that post.
> 
> 
> My 5.1ghz profile looks like this:
> 
> Core normal
> Offset +.110v
> Uncore 46
> Llc low
> Ac loadline power save
> Intel speed step on
> 
> 
> Xmp is also disabled with manually configured ram and vccsa/vccio voltages.


Thanks, I will try this tonight. A couple questions before I do. 

I am on bios F9 which changed the UI and it seems to have removed options for Uncore as well as TJ Max, unless they were renamed. Any idea?

Also, I have never played around with manually configuring RAM, I always just enabled profile 1. Any tips for a beginner? I have 3000mhz GSkill Ripjaw IV

Also, what is the max volts you see with +.110v? 

Also one thing I never did when I switched out my 9600K for the KS is reset the CMOS. I should also do that before.


----------



## wingman99

Rbk_3 said:


> Thanks, I will try this tonight. A couple questions before I do.
> 
> I am on bios F9 which changed the UI and it seems to have removed options for Uncore as well as TJ Max, unless they were renamed. Any idea?
> 
> Also, I have never played around with manually configuring RAM, I always just enabled profile 1. Any tips for a beginner? I have 3000mhz GSkill Ripjaw IV
> 
> Also, what is the max volts you see with +.110v?
> 
> Also one thing I never did when I switched out my 9600K for the KS is reset the CMOS. I should also do that before.




You don't have to reset CMOS before the CPU upgrade, setting default BIOS setting will do the same clearing.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> You don't have to reset CMOS before the CPU upgrade, setting default BIOS setting will do the same clear.


Actually you do sometimes. Jpmboy mentioned this in the DDR4 thread.

Clearing CMOS resets all of the RAM registers and timings completely back to stock.
Sometimes, even a BIOS flash doesn't fully reset everything fully. For example, after a BIOS flash, you will see "SGX extensions" disabled, if you had them disabled before the BIOS flash, but the default value is "Auto".
When you clear CMOS, you will see this reset back to auto. 
That's just one example of shenanigans at work.

But using an XMP profile and then loading bios defaults doesn't always reset things properly (especially RAM), even if it "Looks" reset (remember this IS Gigabyte we're talking about here).

There was another person many pages up who had a ton of stability issues after an upgrade, until he cleared CMOS, and redid his settings then everything worked perfectly.


----------



## Rbk_3

wingman99 said:


> You don't have to reset CMOS before the CPU upgrade, setting default BIOS setting will do the same clearing.





Falkentyne said:


> Actually you do sometimes. Jpmboy mentioned this in the DDR4 thread.
> 
> Clearing CMOS resets all of the RAM registers and timings completely back to stock.
> Sometimes, even a BIOS flash doesn't fully reset everything fully. For example, after a BIOS flash, you will see "SGX extensions" disabled, if you had them disabled before the BIOS flash, but the default value is "Auto".
> When you clear CMOS, you will see this reset back to auto.
> That's just one example of shenanigans at work.
> 
> But using an XMP profile and then loading bios defaults doesn't always reset things properly (especially RAM), even if it "Looks" reset (remember this IS Gigabyte we're talking about here).
> 
> There was another person many pages up who had a ton of stability issues after an upgrade, until he cleared CMOS, and redid his settings then everything worked perfectly.



Do you guys have any idea about Uncore as well as TJ Max settings not being options anymore on F9? F9 is the only bios option for the 9900KS on the Elite, unfortunately.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Actually you do sometimes. Jpmboy mentioned this in the DDR4 thread.
> 
> Clearing CMOS resets all of the RAM registers and timings completely back to stock.
> Sometimes, even a BIOS flash doesn't fully reset everything fully. For example, after a BIOS flash, you will see "SGX extensions" disabled, if you had them disabled before the BIOS flash, but the default value is "Auto".
> When you clear CMOS, you will see this reset back to auto.
> That's just one example of shenanigans at work.
> 
> But using an XMP profile and then loading bios defaults doesn't always reset things properly (especially RAM), even if it "Looks" reset (remember this IS Gigabyte we're talking about here).
> 
> There was another person many pages up who had a ton of stability issues after an upgrade, until he cleared CMOS, and redid his settings then everything worked perfectly.


I suppose if you have unstable memory settings or unstable CPU settings, then when letting the CPU and memory calculate and set default settings there could be a error in calculations by the processor or memory. I don't run into any default BIOS setting problems with my Gigabyte motherboard, unless playing with any form of overclocking. Setting your BIOS overclocked is always a risk.


----------



## TMatzelle60

I read the Aorus Software for RGB control is horrible is this true. I have a specific color scheme I need to have and worried if I get the Z390 Master or Extreme I will have problems


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> Actually you do sometimes. Jpmboy mentioned this in the DDR4 thread.
> 
> Clearing CMOS resets all of the RAM registers and timings completely back to stock.
> Sometimes, even a BIOS flash doesn't fully reset everything fully. For example, after a BIOS flash, you will see "SGX extensions" disabled, if you had them disabled before the BIOS flash, but the default value is "Auto".
> When you clear CMOS, you will see this reset back to auto.


Best practice for any CPU or memory change is to: Reset CMOS, reboot, load BIOS optimized defaults, save BIOS (F10), reboot, then finally make any new changes with the newly installed CPU and/or memory, and save again. Do this and you can't go wrong.


----------



## Wirerat

TMatzelle60 said:


> I read the Aorus Software for RGB control is horrible is this true. I have a specific color scheme I need to have and worried if I get the Z390 Master or Extreme I will have problems


It's working correctly for me. I have the digital and regular rgb headers in use on my aorus pro.


----------



## wingman99

With Gigabyte I have changed the processors all the time without CMOS clear or setting default BIOS. What happens is the new CPU boots up with previous settings or it won't boot with the previous settings and it will automatically fail safe boot or you will need to clear CMOS. That is all of what happens.


----------



## Falkentyne

Rbk_3 said:


> Do you guys have any idea about Uncore as well as TJ Max settings not being options anymore on F9? F9 is the only bios option for the 9900KS on the Elite, unfortunately.


Uncore=Cache.
TJMax=Overtemp protection.


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> Also, what is the max volts you see with +.110v?



my max vrout is 1.34v.


----------



## Rbk_3

Wirerat said:


> Okay we were discussing a different method in that post.
> 
> 
> My 5.1ghz profile looks like this:
> 
> Core normal
> Offset +.110v
> Uncore 46
> Llc low
> Ac loadline power save
> Intel speed step on
> 
> 
> Xmp is also disabled with manually configured ram and vccsa/vccio voltages.




I am not seeing intel speed step, but Intel Speed Shift Technology. Is that the same thing ?




Falkentyne said:


> Uncore=Cache.
> 
> TJMax=Overtemp protection.




I don’t see Cache. Would it be Ring Ratio?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

Rbk_3 said:


> I am not seeing intel speed step, but Intel Speed Shift Technology. Is that the same thing ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t see Cache. Would it be Ring Ratio?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Cache=Ring. Same thing.
I'm really surprised you didn't know this.


----------



## Rbk_3

Falkentyne said:


> Cache=Ring. Same thing.
> 
> I'm really surprised you didn't know this.



This is the only board I’ve ever known and it was always Vcore. Odd they felt the need to change it. 

I got everting set to Wirerat’s suggestions except the Ram voltages. Wish me luck

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wirerat

I never touch any of the power limits. All the manual overclocking must disable them.

I don't think auto enforces the Intel limits either. Can't remember the review that showed it.


----------



## Rbk_3

Wow, at 5.1 Prime 95 26.6 would fail after a few minutes before at anything under 1.35v manually set in bios. Now with his suggestion it is running at 5.1 with a max VR VOUT of 1.222V. 

I used an offset of +0.03 to start. Looks like I have a lot of room to play with there if this isn’t stable. 





Wirerat said:


> I never touch any of the power limits. All the manual overclocking must disable them.
> 
> I don't think auto enforces the Intel limits either. Can't remember the review that showed it.




The only power related thing I turned off was MCE

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> Wow, at 5.1 Prime 95 26.6 would fail after a few minutes before at anything under 1.35v manually set in bios. Now with his suggestion it is running at 5.1 with a max VR VOUT of 1.222V.
> 
> I used an offset of +0.03 to start. Looks like I have a lot of room to play with there if this isnâ€™️t stable.


Very nice.


----------



## Rbk_3

Wirerat said:


> Very nice.




Thank you so much for the settings. I would have never thought using a lower adaptive voltage would be better than a set manual one. 

Only thing I can’t find to change is VCCSA and VCCIO voltages. I see I should set them to approx 1.10V. I’ll have to do more digging 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Very nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you so much for the settings. I would have never thought using a lower adaptive voltage would be better than a set manual one.
> 
> Only thing I canâ€™️t find to change is VCCSA and VCCIO voltages. I see I should set them to approx 1.10V. Iâ€™️ll have to do more digging
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yea it's an odd thing. It's just working with the loadline instead of trying to force a manual voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

Rbk_3 said:


> Thank you so much for the settings. I would have never thought using a lower adaptive voltage would be better than a set manual one.
> 
> Only thing I can’t find to change is VCCSA and VCCIO voltages. I see I should set them to approx 1.10V. I’ll have to do more digging
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Using a lower vcore via adaptive voltage works because you are able to reduce the Loadline calibration (pretty much the same thing as using 'Auto' vcore and using the AC Loadline to control the load voltages, but offsets apply a fixed +/- vcore offset to both idle and load final voltages).

Reducing the loadline calibration reduces the "peak to peak" voltage oscillations (these oscillations are higher with heavy current and lower with less current), and it's the 'dips' that randomly crash you.
Vdroop is increased, but this is "Partially" countered by "AC Loadline" (behind the scenes--if you really want to see what's going on, set "DC Loadline" to 0.01 mOhms (1 in Internal VR Settings) and look at the CPU VID showing at full load. That VID is before vdroop takes effect. Then compare the VID to the VR VOUT. However if you are using any offsets, you need to add the offset to whatever that VID shows).

When you use a fixed vcore, you are programming the VRM directly and the only thing that reduces vdroop is Loadline calibration. But again--the more you reduce vdroop, the larger the transient voltage peak to peak spikes become...

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/


----------



## Rbk_3

Wirerat said:


> Yea it's an odd thing. It's just working with the loadline instead of trying to force a manual voltage.




I am even able to do 5.2ghz, with an offset of +0.100 but start to get some thermal throttling in Prime 95. After 10 minutes most cores had max temps in the high 90s. 

Cinebench 15 I get a score of 2220 and Cinebench 20 5384 but temps get in the mid to high 90s on 20. 

A lot of experimenting to do but this has me feeling a lot better about my chip 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GeneO

dup


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I can't explain this to you without going back into what you don't want to hear. I'm sorry about that.
> 
> Regardless of what your Asus board sets, --every-- LLC level has vdroop except LLC8, and LLC8 has -terrible- transient dips, and its the "VMIN" which determines your overall stability as power draw goes up, not your voltage the sensors show (Even VR VOUT or die-sense Vcore on Maximus XI boards). The more vdroop you have, the less the transient dips (tighter voltage regulation). Also, the more current you pull, the larger the transient dips become.
> 
> LLC "Standard/Normal" on Gigabyte Z390 is equal to LLC2 on Maximus XI boards.
> 
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> You can see what I'm talking about. With much higher vdroop (less LLC), your "VMIN" (transient minimum) will be VERY close to your on-die sense voltage that VR VOUT or maximus XI boards can show. With less vdroop, your transient VMIN will be much lower than what VR VOUT can show.
> 
> What you're basically asking people to do is to do a side by side comparison between the two boards, when none of us have the two boards to do side by side comparisons!
> 
> Read Elmor's post I quoted over here comparing LLC6 vs LLC8 on a Maximus XI Gene.
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...about-Transient-Response-(to-Shamino-and-Raja)
> 
> You can see, LLC6+Load voltage final vdroop was stable at 1.079 real (measured by multimeter on the VRM directly),
> but LLC8 load voltage required being 1.135v for the same stability! That's because of the transients that were NOT shown on the multimeter in those number reads.
> 
> (Multimeters can't show transients!)
> 
> The Elmor labs graph shows transients, taken via oscilloscope. That tells you what's really going on behind the scenes.
> 
> When you want the BEST Transient response possible, you have to disable higher LLC and use intel default vdroop (Standard / Normal LLC) or LLC2 (Asus), but the vdroop is too high to set a realistic manual fixed vcore for that, so you have to use 'Auto' vcore (or DVID with an offset). AC Loadline and Thermal Velocity Boost will then help reduce the idle voltage somewhat (NOT talking about c-states here!!). AC/TVB don't work on fixed vcore.





GeneO said:


> So what did you mean by this? ". Actually you get the "Completely" best transients with "Standard/Normal" (1.6 mOhms loadline) but vdroop is so massive (1.6 * Amps), that you basically have to use Auto vcore + AC Loadline (1.0 to 1.6 mOhms)+LLC Standard/Normal + Thermal Velocity Boost (this drops your base VID and VR VOUT (auto/dvid mode ONLY) at lower temps and raises it at higher temps) to be able to mitigate some of this vdroop."
> 
> With the Asus offset, I am stable with an offset 0f +25 mv LLC5 at load with the droop that gives. If this is equivalent to the Gigaabyte why should there be a massive vdroop?


Well here are my initial mpressions and results after a day with this board and my 8086k + 2 sets of 32 GB Trident Z RGB. My BIOS is F9.

The Bad:

1. I can overclock fixed voltage stable at what I expected from my Asus boards 5.1 GHz @ ~ 1.3v vcore. But I get micro-freezes for a short period after boot (I don't get them with normal/offset as described later). This also puts me at fairly high core voltages at low load, which I am not comfortable with. Stable at where I expect it. 
2. I tried using software fan control via SIV. Twice my CPU fan quit (wasn't even recognized by hwinfo64 after it quit, and one of those times under Realbench my temperature got in the 90s - delidded! normally in the 60s) before I realized it. I have used Asus software fan control for many years and across numerous motherboards without such an incident. I had to uninstall SIV to get the BIOS to control the fans because there appears to be no way to turn off SIV's fan control. 
3. I have gotten some hints of coil whine, but rare. Hopefully that won't increase. 
4. Seems too difficult to OC in offset mode. When under load it is rock solid, but idle voltages fluctuate a lot. Asus was more stable at idle and much more intuitive and had additional turbo voltage in their adaptive mode. 
5. Why can't I disable Bluetooth in BIOS? Also virtualization? The latter affects performance. 
6. The Gigabyte Fusion RGB doesn't recognize my g.skill TridentZ RGB or my addressable LED strip. Only the Aorus MB. "Fusion" seems a misnomer. It is essentially worthless in its current state. . 
7. Other software complaints that I shouldn't have to mention. 
8. I had two sets of 16 GB g.skill 3200CL14 triidentZ RBG B-die. I had hoped they might be a little overclock-able to say 16-16-36 3600 (which I could almost do on Asus, but if I set the timings for this in BIOS, it trained to 16-25-?. I thought it would fail rather than change the setting I specified. 
9. THIS IS BIG. The ME firmware in F9 has unaddressed vulnerabilities. Intel has ME firmware out. Asus has had it for some time. When is Gigabyte going to address this? It apparently isn't addressed in F10 either. 

The good:

1. The BIOS fan control is very good and flexible. I only used ASUS fan control because the BIOS control was so rudimentary, A bit of a pain to change, but I prefer BIOS with this level of control. 
2. As I mentioned, lacking the Asus "adaptive mode", I estimated that a LLC level of high with a 25mv offset would be comparable to my Asus LLC5 with same offset. It turns out I needed a little higher offset 0f +30mv to be stable. I also tired an LLC of turbo with a negative offset of 10 mv. These with both wityh load line AC and DC = 1. No freezing with normal mode. 
a. LLC high yielded ave idle around 750mv, and load of 1.3v llc with peaks of 1.35-1.36v 
b, turbo with -0.01v yielded p95 1344/1344 ave load 1.3434 vcore/1.295 VRout, 1.308/1.265 and idle low at 0.65v. 
Both are stable under OCCT medium AVX2 set. P95 and Realbench. The Turbo has lower peak. Prefer the latter as it is stable but smaller low load peaks.
3. 3200 14-14-14-34 trident Z RGB composed of two different 2x16 sets are stable. Good enough for me as I need quantity for Photoshop.
4. Lots of temperature sensors, comes with two temperature probes, lots of PWM fan headers, and tons of BIOS settings for which I (and probably anybody) haven;'t a clue for what they do 
5. I presume this is better than the Asus Z390 boards for OC, but I am not so sure compared to their Z370.

So I am overall pretty happy.


----------



## iunlock

Wirerat said:


> Yes. $99 for 19-19-19-36 1.35v 4000mhz and a 32gb thumb drive recently at Newegg.


On BF that kit will be $89.99. Very decent for the money in fact, nothing comes close for value... there is also the 4400 kit for a little more as I'm sure you're aware. 

It makes you think...how can Samsung B-Die be so cheap? My theory is that they are just trying to move stock for their (Samsungs) new chips... what better time to do that then the end of the year with BF & Holidays eh?



Rbk_3 said:


> So I have the 9900KS and the Aurous Elite Z390 and a Noctua D15.
> 
> I can do 5ghz with a manual Vcore of 1.27 and LLC on High and pass all stability tests I throw at it. Trying to get 5.1ghz, I can pass non AVX Prime 95 for a few minutes if I set my voltage at 1.37V with some thermal throttling and it will eventually fail. Same case for Realbench.
> 
> Am I likely out of luck for anything over 5ghz?


For your set up and with it being air cooled, not too shabby. I'm running a regular 9900K in the other rig at 1.265v @ 5.0GHz on all cores, but it's water cooled. I've seen some KS's run much lower at 50x on all cores, but again it was on a water cooled system. Since you're on air, IMO getting the most efficient chip like the KS makes all the sense as you could benefit from every bit of temp drop. 

Although you're running 50x @ 1.27v if you were to put that on a water cooled system, the voltages should fall into the territory of the average voltages of binned 9900K's and KF's, which is pretty good. 



Falkentyne said:


> Actually you do sometimes. Jpmboy mentioned this in the DDR4 thread.
> 
> Clearing CMOS resets all of the RAM registers and timings completely back to stock.
> Sometimes, even a BIOS flash doesn't fully reset everything fully. For example, after a BIOS flash, you will see "SGX extensions" disabled, if you had them disabled before the BIOS flash, but the default value is "Auto".
> When you clear CMOS, you will see this reset back to auto.
> That's just one example of shenanigans at work.
> 
> But using an XMP profile and then loading bios defaults doesn't always reset things properly (especially RAM), even if it "Looks" reset (remember this IS Gigabyte we're talking about here).
> 
> There was another person many pages up who had a ton of stability issues after an upgrade, until he cleared CMOS, and redid his settings then everything worked perfectly.





Sheyster said:


> Best practice for any CPU or memory change is to: Reset CMOS, reboot, load BIOS optimized defaults, save BIOS (F10), reboot, then finally make any new changes with the newly installed CPU and/or memory, and save again. Do this and you can't go wrong.


^^ That's exactly how I perform it as well... in the phone world we call it "clean flashing," vs "dirty flashing."  

ie... always clear CMOS in my books. 



TMatzelle60 said:


> I read the Aorus Software for RGB control is horrible is this true. I have a specific color scheme I need to have and worried if I get the Z390 Master or Extreme I will have problems


Although I try my best to avoid stock software as usually they are terrible from GB and even other board makers, the Aorus RGB software is working perfectly for my set up on my Master board + LED's ...

When I had first got my Master board I tried installing the Aorus RGB Fusion software and it was a mess. However, they've updated it since (10/31/19) and it's working as intended. 
https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Utility/mb_utility_rgb_fusion_B19.1030.1.zip

What brand of fans are you using? I'm using 14x Corsair's all around, all of which are controlled by Corsairs Commander Pro HUB + Lightening HUB's. As for the LED strips for the water reservoir and CPU block they are all controlled through the Aorus RGB Fusion. 



GeneO said:


> Well here are my initial mpressions and results after a day with this board and my 8086k + 2 sets of 32 GB Trident Z RGB. My BIOS is F9.
> 
> The Bad:
> 
> 1. I can overclock fixed voltage stable at what I expected from my Asus boards 5.1 GHz @ ~ 1.3v vcore. But I get micro-freezes for a short period after boot (I don't get them with normal/offset as described later). This also puts me at fairly high core voltages at low load, which I am not comfortable with. Stable at where I expect it.
> 2. I tried using software fan control via SIV. Twice my CPU fan quit (wasn't even recognized by hwinfo64 after it quit, and one of those times under Realbench my temperature got in the 90s - delidded! normally in the 60s) before I realized it. I have used Asus software fan control for many years and across numerous motherboards without such an incident. I had to uninstall SIV to get the BIOS to control the fans because there appears to be no way to turn off SIV's fan control.
> 3. I have gotten some hints of coil whine, but rare. Hopefully that won't increase.
> 4. Seems too difficult to OC in offset mode. When under load it is rock solid, but idle voltages fluctuate a lot. Asus was more stable at idle and much more intuitive and had additional turbo voltage in their adaptive mode.
> 5. Why can't I disable Bluetooth in BIOS? Also virtualization? The latter affects performance.
> 6. The Gigabyte Fusion RGB doesn't recognize my g.skill TridentZ RGB or my addressable LED strip. Only the Aorus MB. "Fusion" seems a misnomer. It is essentially worthless in its current state. .
> 7. Other software complaints that I shouldn't have to mention.
> 8. I had two sets of 16 GB g.skill 3200CL14 triidentZ RBG B-die. I had hoped they might be a little overclock-able to say 16-16-36 3600 (which I could almost do on Asus, but if I set the timings for this in BIOS, it trained to 16-25-?. I thought it would fail rather than change the setting I specified.
> 9. THIS IS BIG. The ME firmware in F9 has unaddressed vulnerabilities. Intel has ME firmware out. Asus has had it for some time. When is Gigabyte going to address this? It apparently isn't addressed in F10 either.
> 
> The good:
> 
> 1. The BIOS fan control is very good and flexible. I only used ASUS fan control because the BIOS control was so rudimentary, A bit of a pain to change, but I prefer BIOS with this level of control.
> 2. As I mentioned, lacking the Asus "adaptive mode", I estimated that a LLC level of high with a 25mv offset would be comparable to my Asus LLC5 with same offset. It turns out I needed a little higher offset 0f +30mv to be stable. I also tired an LLC of turbo with a negative offset of 10 mv. These with both wityh load line AC and DC = 1. No freezing with normal mode.
> a. LLC high yielded ave idle around 750mv, and load of 1.3v llc with peaks of 1.35-1.36v
> b, turbo with -0.01v yielded p95 1344/1344 ave load 1.3434 vcore/1.295 VRout, 1.308/1.265 and idle low at 0.65v.
> Both are stable under OCCT medium AVX2 set. P95 and Realbench. The Turbo has lower peak. Prefer the latter as it is stable but smaller low load peaks.
> 3. 3200 14-14-14-34 trident Z RGB composed of two different 2x16 sets are stable. Good enough for me as I need quantity for Photoshop.
> 4. Lots of temperature sensors, comes with two temperature probes, lots of PWM fan headers, and tons of BIOS settings for which I (and probably anybody) haven;'t a clue for what they do
> 5. I presume this is better than the Asus Z390 boards for OC, but I am not so sure compared to their Z370.
> 
> So I am overall pretty happy.


Great insight and thanks for sharing... I just wanted to comment on a few things.

1. The micro freezes that you've mentioned I haven't experienced on my end. I too have tested some of my 8086K golden eggs in the system for giggles and the Master crushed it with ease.... 5.4GHz on all cores with the 8086K. I do see in your "The good," section that you had mentioned setting the AC & DC to 1. Have you tried setting those to 0? Hmm.. perhaps there are other variables here at play... but I just wanted to report that my 8086K's ran just fine, absent of any micro stutters. 

2. I wonder if the SIV control is in the GB software? I honestly avoid using any stock software's so I'm not sure if such options exist related to SIV. Maybe someone could chime in regarding this...

3. Coil wine eh? Hmm... I haven't noticed any here and I've tested 2x Master boards so far (personal rigs) and a handful of other Master boards (client systems) ... never noticed any coil whine.

4. The GB BIOS, despite the lazy criticisms of some of the yt'ers is very intuitive and very feature rich. It's definitely not as pretty or polished as Asus, but it's functional. With the GB boards you'll have to experiment with the settings to achieve what you want... it's definitely trial and error, but there are things that I was also used to on the Asus bios that took some time to translate over to my Master board. 

5. Those BIOS limitations are odd indeed. Why in the world would GB remove those features right? Very idiotic move for sure. 

6. The GB Fusion RGB recognizes my TridentZ kits just fine. I'm also able to control the LED strip on the water reservoir. Are you using the newest RGB Fusion app? (Release date: 10/31/19)
https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Utility/mb_utility_rgb_fusion_B19.1030.1.zip

7-8. Did you mean 16-16-16-25? Or 16-25-25-36? So far I've been able to achieve much stronger RAM settings than on my previous Asus boards. The Master board is quite strong and IMO from my experience it has been the strongest yet in this class of boards (~$250ish +/- depending on sales...) I've posted my RAM speed and timings a few pages back... It can post at 4266, but I have it at 4133/17-17-17-37 currently and it's rock stable. 

9. I'm using @KedarWolf f10b modded bios and it has been fantastic. Zero issues... I'm not sure if it contains the latest ME firmware, but he did compile another f10b I think that contained some firmware updates... Honestly for me my gaming rig is just for gaming so when it comes to any security/privacy vulnerabilities, it doesn't concern me as the rig is only for gaming. (I use Linux for important stuff...never Windows.) - I do get that for most people their Windows system is their main daily driver...that's fine... but as with any firmware etc... it doesn't hurt to hold off to see the reports from other users for bugs or whatnot. 

* GB/Aorus really hit a home run with their Z390 boards. It's not perfect by any means, but I've recommended it over Asus Z390 boards many times over to my clients. Now when it comes to Z370 boards GB/Aorus was terrible..absolutely rubbish boards all around and Asus was king as they dominated that era... but the tables have turned significantly with the Z390 line up. (It's not to say that Asus Z390 boards are bad, but there are many reasons from personal experience to numerous validations online from real enthusiasts that confirm its downfalls, much of which contributed to it being dethroned in the Z390 category.)

Anyhow, welcome board mate and thanks for sharing. Looking forward to seeing you around. 

Cheers


----------



## Falkentyne

Spoiler






iunlock said:


> On BF that kit will be $89.99. Very decent for the money in fact, nothing comes close for value... there is also the 4400 kit for a little more as I'm sure you're aware.
> 
> It makes you think...how can Samsung B-Die be so cheap? My theory is that they are just trying to move stock for their (Samsungs) new chips... what better time to do that then the end of the year with BF & Holidays eh?
> 
> 
> 
> For your set up and with it being air cooled, not too shabby. I'm running a regular 9900K in the other rig at 1.265v @ 5.0GHz on all cores, but it's water cooled. I've seen some KS's run much lower at 50x on all cores, but again it was on a water cooled system. Since you're on air, IMO getting the most efficient chip like the KS makes all the sense as you could benefit from every bit of temp drop.
> 
> Although you're running 50x @ 1.27v if you were to put that on a water cooled system, the voltages should fall into the territory of the average voltages of binned 9900K's and KF's, which is pretty good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ That's exactly how I perform it as well... in the phone world we call it "clean flashing," vs "dirty flashing."
> 
> ie... always clear CMOS in my books.
> 
> 
> 
> Although I try my best to avoid stock software as usually they are terrible from GB and even other board makers, the Aorus RGB software is working perfectly for my set up on my Master board + LED's ...
> 
> When I had first got my Master board I tried installing the Aorus RGB Fusion software and it was a mess. However, they've updated it since (10/31/19) and it's working as intended.
> https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Utility/mb_utility_rgb_fusion_B19.1030.1.zip
> 
> What brand of fans are you using? I'm using 14x Corsair's all around, all of which are controlled by Corsairs Commander Pro HUB + Lightening HUB's. As for the LED strips for the water reservoir and CPU block they are all controlled through the Aorus RGB Fusion.
> 
> 
> 
> Great insight and thanks for sharing... I just wanted to comment on a few things.
> 
> 1. The micro freezes that you've mentioned I haven't experienced on my end. I too have tested some of my 8086K golden eggs in the system for giggles and the Master crushed it with ease.... 5.4GHz on all cores with the 8086K. I do see in your "The good," section that you had mentioned setting the AC & DC to 1. Have you tried setting those to 0? Hmm.. perhaps there are other variables here at play... but I just wanted to report that my 8086K's ran just fine, absent of any micro stutters.
> 
> 2. I wonder if the SIV control is in the GB software? I honestly avoid using any stock software's so I'm not sure if such options exist related to SIV. Maybe someone could chime in regarding this...
> 
> 3. Coil wine eh? Hmm... I haven't noticed any here and I've tested 2x Master boards so far (personal rigs) and a handful of other Master boards (client systems) ... never noticed any coil whine.
> 
> 4. The GB BIOS, despite the lazy criticisms of some of the yt'ers is very intuitive and very feature rich. It's definitely not as pretty or polished as Asus, but it's functional. With the GB boards you'll have to experiment with the settings to achieve what you want... it's definitely trial and error, but there are things that I was also used to on the Asus bios that took some time to translate over to my Master board.
> 
> 5. Those BIOS limitations are odd indeed. Why in the world would GB remove those features right? Very idiotic move for sure.
> 
> 6. The GB Fusion RGB recognizes my TridentZ kits just fine. I'm also able to control the LED strip on the water reservoir. Are you using the newest RGB Fusion app? (Release date: 10/31/19)
> https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Utility/mb_utility_rgb_fusion_B19.1030.1.zip
> 
> 7-8. Did you mean 16-16-16-25? Or 16-25-25-36? So far I've been able to achieve much stronger RAM settings than on my previous Asus boards. The Master board is quite strong and IMO from my experience it has been the strongest yet in this class of boards (~$250ish +/- depending on sales...) I've posted my RAM speed and timings a few pages back... It can post at 4266, but I have it at 4133/17-17-17-37 currently and it's rock stable.
> 
> 9. I'm using @KedarWolf f10b modded bios and it has been fantastic. Zero issues... I'm not sure if it contains the latest ME firmware, but he did compile another f10b I think that contained some firmware updates... Honestly for me my gaming rig is just for gaming so when it comes to any security/privacy vulnerabilities, it doesn't concern me as the rig is only for gaming. (I use Linux for important stuff...never Windows.) - I do get that for most people their Windows system is their main daily driver...that's fine... but as with any firmware etc... it doesn't hurt to hold off to see the reports from other users for bugs or whatnot.
> 
> * GB/Aorus really hit a home run with their Z390 boards. It's not perfect by any means, but I've recommended it over Asus Z390 boards many times over to my clients. Now when it comes to Z370 boards GB/Aorus was terrible..absolutely rubbish boards all around and Asus was king as they dominated that era... but the tables have turned significantly with the Z390 line up. (It's not to say that Asus Z390 boards are bad, but there are many reasons from personal experience to numerous validations online from real enthusiasts that confirm its downfalls, much of which contributed to it being dethroned in the Z390 category.)
> 
> Anyhow, welcome board mate and thanks for sharing. Looking forward to seeing you around.
> 
> Cheers






What's wrong with the Z390 Apex XI ?


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> What's wrong with the Z390 Apex XI ?


I did a build with the XI Apex Hero with a full loop and it did not handle OC well for me both on the CPU and RAM. Perhaps it could have just been that board, but for the money when it comes to the >$300 boards, I'd still pick the Master. Just personal preference.

iirc.... The Master uses the PWM IC IR35201, whereas the Asus uses the PWM IC ASP1400TB in a different configuration... The Master just feels stronger like how my EVGA Z390 Dark feels stronger than my Master. Where GB excelled with their Z390 line is with the use of strong VRM's and it shows from the Overclocking potential it has shown so far. Despite some issues with the Master board that people had the overall consensus is that the Asus boards seem to be a lot less reliable. It's ironic I know considering GB's track record, but I've known quite a few enthusiasts (XOC guys ...not OC to 5.0Ghz on one core guys lol) that ditched Asus all together after varies issues they've experienced with the board. Again, it's not to say that it's a bad board, but hardware wise the Master is much stronger in this scenario.


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> I did a build with the XI Apex Hero with a full loop and it did not handle OC well for me both on the CPU and RAM. Perhaps it could have just been that board, but for the money when it comes to the >$300 boards, I'd still pick the Master. Just personal preference.
> 
> iirc.... The Master uses the PWM IC IR35201, whereas the Asus uses the PWM IC ASP1400TB in a different configuration... The Master just feels stronger like how my EVGA Z390 Dark feels stronger than my Master. Where GB excelled with their Z390 line is with the use of strong VRM's and it shows from the Overclocking potential it has shown so far.


What about the Aorus Xtreme? That had 8 phases doubled to 16 rather than 6 phases doubled to 12.


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> 7-8. Did you mean 16-16-16-25? Or 16-25-25-36? So far I've been able to achieve much stronger RAM settings than on my previous Asus boards. The Master board is quite strong and IMO from my experience it has been the strongest yet in this class of boards (~$250ish +/- depending on sales...) I've posted my RAM speed and timings a few pages back... It can post at 4266, but I have it at 4133/17-17-17-37 currently and it's rock stable.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyhow, welcome board mate and thanks for sharing. Looking forward to seeing you around.
> 
> Cheers


I meant 16-25-25 (forget the tras). Crazy huh?

Thanks mate.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> What about the Aorus Xtreme? That had 8 phases doubled to 16 rather than 6 phases doubled to 12.


That's a $600+ board.  I'm talking about sub >$300 boards. I personally don't have any hands on experience working with that particular board (Aorus Xtreme) but it sure is beautiful and a complete monster. Overboard of a board? IMO of course, but hey to each his own. It's an awesome board.

Regarding the power phase layout on the Aorus Xtreme, it uses newer components such as the 60amp TDA 21462 power stages, which are superior to what Asus uses if that was what you were referencing with your question. GB also uses pretty much the same IR3599 found on their other boards, whereas some other board makers use inferior phase doublers for their different lines. This is one area where GB really shines and again..it shows from the impressive OC's we've seen to date... 

GB would have never been on my short list due to their lack luster Z370 boards, but talk about an under dog rising to the top with their Z390 boards... I know plenty of people (regular gamers not the XOC folks) that still went with Asus due to being familiar with their eco system (specifically BIOS lol) and are very happy with it... which is not surprising as any of the boards in the price range were talking about will work and get the job done.


----------



## iunlock

GeneO said:


> I meant 16-25-25 (forget the tras). Crazy huh?
> 
> Thanks mate.


Ah ok...yea pretty goofy eh? Did you enable any of the memory enhancement options by any chance? If so, try keeping that off and see what the system registers for the default timings, because those timing values even at 25 is higher than my stock 4600MHz kit lol. It could be maybe voltage related in one of the settings that's throwing it off? I'm really curious now... perhaps @Falkentyne could chime in as well.


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> Ah ok...yea pretty goofy eh? Did you enable any of the memory enhancement options by any chance? If so, try keeping that off and see what the system registers for the default timings, because those timing values even at 25 is higher than my stock 4600MHz kit lol. It could be maybe voltage related in one of the settings that's throwing it off? I'm really curious now... perhaps @Falkentyne could chime in as well.


I tried with and without,. Weird though it changed values I entered and booted. I tried 1.35v (which it should have been able to do) and 1.38v


----------



## iunlock

GeneO said:


> I tried with and without,. Weird though it changed values I entered and booted. I tried 1.35v (which it should have been able to do) and 1.38v


Try upping your voltage just a tad on your CPU as cache memory increases you need more voltage. It could be the culprit and/or it may be that you need to adjust your SA/IO as well.


----------



## mmcneil

*Gigabyte noob needs help*

Upgrading from an i7 4790K to an i7 9700k and was hoping to get a little advice. I'm planning on getting the Aorus Pro, along with 32GB of RAM. I plan to OC the memory and OC the the 9700K to 5ghz and I have a custom cooling loop. This is would be my first Gigabyte board, so I wanted to know: 

1. are there any issues I need to be aware of as far as using this board/CPU combo? 
2. for 32mb, should I use 4x8GB DIMMS or 2x16GB?
3. Should I bump up to the latest F10 bios? (dumb question, but I figured I'd ask just to be sure)

Thanks in advance


----------



## iunlock

mmcneil said:


> Upgrading from an i7 4790K to an i7 9700k and was hoping to get a little advice. I'm planning on getting the Aorus Pro, along with 32GB of RAM. I plan to OC the memory and OC the the 9700K to 5ghz and I have a custom cooling loop. This is would be my first Gigabyte board, so I wanted to know:
> 
> 1. are there any issues I need to be aware of as far as using this board/CPU combo?
> 2. for 32mb, should I use 4x8GB DIMMS or 2x16GB?
> 3. Should I bump up to the latest F10 bios? (dumb question, but I figured I'd ask just to be sure)
> 
> Thanks in advance


Hey there,

That'd be a nice upgrade...congrats.

1. A few pages back, there were some fellow Pro owners who were talking about the RAM OC limitations on the Pro. iirc 3866 was about the sweet spot on the Pro board. If you find a sale on the Master board and can make that happen, it would yield you better RAM OC overall. The sweet spot for the Master is ~4133 with some decent timings. 

2. I always like to populate all the dimm slots... I went 4x8GB on my Master as I didn't want to have two open slots. It's personal preference really. Only for major RAM OC'ing cases, 2x sticks would have better scalability, but going 4x8GB may even be cheaper too, while filling up your dimm slots.

3. The actual F10 bios from the website is buggy... I would recommend updating the bios to Kedarwolf's modded (F10b) BIOS. It works perfectly.


----------



## bigfootnz

Hi @Falkentyne, I've question for you. I was running my 9900k on manual voltage in BIOS 1.295v with turbo LLC, with this voltage my PC was stable in everything except Prime95 or LinX. For these two programs I need at least 1.35v (VR Vout~1.27v) in BIOS to be stable. 
But after reading your few last posts I've tried these settings, CPU voltage Auto, LLC standard and AC Loadline=80 and DC Loadline=0. With these settings I'm stable even now in Prime95 29.8b6 smallest FFT AVX and Linx 0.9.5 with VR Vout~1.24v. Of course temp are much better. My question is any problems for me running AC Loadline=80? Thanks


----------



## Rbk_3

On my 9900ks, I ran OCCT Linpack overnight and it passed with no errors at 5.1ghz and adaptive voltage set to +0.075.

Looking at max voltage readings in HWInfo.

Vcore was 1.46 with averages around 1.35V
VR VOUT was 1.37 with averages around 1.28V
Max Temps were in the mid to high 90s though averages were a lower. Can’t remember what they were specifically. 


Does that look ok? 

I set it to run today again and dropped the voltages to +0.050 to see if it is stable with a lower voltage. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lurifaks

Hi. Have some questions.

I got a 9900ks , and have the Master motherboard.

I only want to have the cpu running 5ghz all core all the time, with lowest voltage (i know i have to test this)

But there are so many settings in the bios that i hope someone could provide me a little list of settings to change for me to get started

Regards


----------



## Rbk_3

Lurifaks said:


> Hi. Have some questions.
> 
> 
> 
> I got a 9900ks , and have the Master motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> I only want to have the cpu running 5ghz all core all the time, with lowest voltage (i know i have to test this)
> 
> 
> 
> But there are so many settings in the bios that i hope someone could provide me a little list of settings to change for me to get started
> 
> 
> 
> Regards




https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

These will get you the lowest voltage. It works much better than manually setting voltage. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

bigfootnz said:


> Hi @Falkentyne, I've question for you. I was running my 9900k on manual voltage in BIOS 1.295v with turbo LLC, with this voltage my PC was stable in everything except Prime95 or LinX. For these two programs I need at least 1.35v (VR Vout~1.27v) in BIOS to be stable.
> But after reading your few last posts I've tried these settings, CPU voltage Auto, LLC standard and AC Loadline=80 and DC Loadline=0. With these settings I'm stable even now in Prime95 29.8b6 smallest FFT AVX and Linx 0.9.5 with VR Vout~1.24v. Of course temp are much better. My question is any problems for me running AC Loadline=80? Thanks


No issues at all. But how did you manage to cool it? What temps were you getting in those tests?


----------



## Wirerat

Lurifaks said:


> Hi. Have some questions.
> 
> I got a 9900ks , and have the Master motherboard.
> 
> I only want to have the cpu running 5ghz all core all the time, with lowest voltage (i know i have to test this)
> 
> But there are so many settings in the bios that i hope someone could provide me a little list of settings to change for me to get started
> 
> Regards


Most settings you don't need to touch. 

I'm using an adaptive offset method I found 

https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

It's not that many settings to change. For example, my 5ghz profile looks like:

Core 50
Uncore 46
Ac loadline powersave
Llc low
Vcore normal
Offset +.080v
Intel speed shift enabled

For my ram I manually tuned but xmp will also work. 

Above gives me a 5ghz oc with voltages that drop at idle.

A few other users here been running this method with nice results. 

The manual Oc version is also simple. 

Llc turbo or high
Vcore 1.31v 
Core 50
Uncore 46

Then tune the ram or enable xmp. 

Below is my offset/adaptive profile 5ghz. My voltages are example only. You need to dial that in.


----------



## Grobro

Hi guys,
I'm running a 9700k on Aorus Master, stable at 5Ghz at a static 1.25v.
I was checking and trying some adaptive setting (as discussed here some time ago, after another user posted a sort of tutorial). Using those adaptive (-0.09 offset) settings I peak at 1.36v under load and i'm wondering if it's worth it...
And or what would be best for a 5ghz overclock.


----------



## Wirerat

Grobro said:


> Hi guys,
> I'm running a 9700k on Aorus Master, stable at 5Ghz at a static 1.25v.
> I was checking and trying some adaptive setting (as discussed here some time ago, after another user posted a sort of tutorial). Using those adaptive (-0.09 offset) settings I peak at 1.36v under load and i'm wondering if it's worth it...
> And or what would be best for a 5ghz overclock.


 negative offsets can be tricky. Many report instability at low loads like chrome and YouTube.

I suggest reducing the llc so you can run a more stable +offset.

But if it's stable for you in everything you do that -.090v is fine.


----------



## KedarWolf

mmcneil said:


> Upgrading from an i7 4790K to an i7 9700k and was hoping to get a little advice. I'm planning on getting the Aorus Pro, along with 32GB of RAM. I plan to OC the memory and OC the the 9700K to 5ghz and I have a custom cooling loop. This is would be my first Gigabyte board, so I wanted to know:
> 
> 1. are there any issues I need to be aware of as far as using this board/CPU combo?
> 2. for 32mb, should I use 4x8GB DIMMS or 2x16GB?
> 3. Should I bump up to the latest F10 bios? (dumb question, but I figured I'd ask just to be sure)
> 
> Thanks in advance


The Ultra is a much better board than the Pro. If you can afford the extra $20, get it.

Also, 4x8GB overclocks much better than 2x8GB or even 2x16GB or Dual Rank 4x16GB. Gigabyte Z390 are T-Topology and 4x8GB, all four DIMMs filled are best for maximising your overclock. Single Rank 4x8GB overclocks much better than Dual Rank 4x16GB. Google 'b-die finder' and make sure your RAM is b-die. 

4x8GB CL14 Trident Z 3200 or CL16 Trident Z 3600 is the way to go. Non-RGB overclocks better than RGB RAM as well.


----------



## Grobro

Wirerat said:


> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi guys,
> I'm running a 9700k on Aorus Master, stable at 5Ghz at a static 1.25v.
> I was checking and trying some adaptive setting (as discussed here some time ago, after another user posted a sort of tutorial). Using those adaptive (-0.09 offset) settings I peak at 1.36v under load and i'm wondering if it's worth it...
> And or what would be best for a 5ghz overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> negative offsets can be tricky. Many report instability at low loads like chrome and YouTube.
> 
> I suggest reducing the llc so you can run a more stable +offset.
Click to expand...

I'll give that a try tomorrow or so. Because i'm not so satisfied with peaking at 1.36v, maybe your advice may help with that.


----------



## Wirerat

Grobro said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi guys,
> I'm running a 9700k on Aorus Master, stable at 5Ghz at a static 1.25v.
> I was checking and trying some adaptive setting (as discussed here some time ago, after another user posted a sort of tutorial). Using those adaptive (-0.09 offset) settings I peak at 1.36v under load and i'm wondering if it's worth it...
> And or what would be best for a 5ghz overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> negative offsets can be tricky. Many report instability at low loads like chrome and YouTube.
> 
> I suggest reducing the llc so you can run a more stable +offset.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'll give that a try tomorrow or so. Because i'm not so satisfied with peaking at 1.36v, maybe your advice may help with that.
Click to expand...

Ac loadline powersave + low llc give me the tightest vrout voltages. It also runs .020v less vcore. 

In this image there is only like .05v delta.


----------



## Grobro

Thanks! 
Will let you know for sure how it ended up.

Also how would i go tightening positive offsets? Start from 0, add 10mv and test or something else?


----------



## Wirerat

Grobro said:


> Thanks!
> Will let you know for sure how it ended up.
> 
> Also how would i go tightening positive offsets? Start from 0, add 10mv and test or something else?


I knew what I needed for manual vrout under x264 stressor load. 

So the way I did it was boot with a small +.050v offset then put it under load to see how much to add to keep vrout at 1.24v.

If you already stress tested at a manual Oc you should know the min voltage you need after vdroop.


----------



## Lurifaks

Rbk_3 said:


> https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> These will get you the lowest voltage. It works much better than manually setting voltage.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks, but would the cpu hold all core 5ghz and dont drop down after the turbo period is over and drop down to 127w ?



Wirerat said:


> Most settings you don't need to touch.
> 
> I'm using an adaptive offset method I found
> 
> https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> It's not that many settings to change. For example, my 5ghz profile looks like:
> 
> Core 50
> Uncore 46
> Ac loadline powersave
> Llc low
> Vcore normal
> Offset +.080v
> Intel speed shift enabled
> 
> For my ram I manually tuned but xmp will also work.
> 
> Above gives me a 5ghz oc with voltages that drop at idle.
> 
> A few other users here been running this method with nice results.
> 
> The manual Oc version is also simple.
> 
> Llc turbo or high
> Vcore 1.31v
> Core 50
> Uncore 46
> 
> Then tune the ram or enable xmp.
> 
> Below is my offset/adaptive profile 5ghz. My voltages are example only. You need to dial that in.


Thanks, but would the cpu hold all core 5ghz and dont drop down after the turbo period is over to 127w ?


----------



## AndrejB

@KedarWolf which ram kit do you recommend here in Canada.
Just sold my dual rank sticks


----------



## mmcneil

iunlock said:


> Hey there,
> 
> That'd be a nice upgrade...congrats.
> 
> 1. A few pages back, there were some fellow Pro owners who were talking about the RAM OC limitations on the Pro. iirc 3866 was about the sweet spot on the Pro board. If you find a sale on the Master board and can make that happen, it would yield you better RAM OC overall. The sweet spot for the Master is ~4133 with some decent timings.
> 
> 2. I always like to populate all the dimm slots... I went 4x8GB on my Master as I didn't want to have two open slots. It's personal preference really. Only for major RAM OC'ing cases, 2x sticks would have better scalability, but going 4x8GB may even be cheaper too, while filling up your dimm slots.
> 
> 3. The actual F10 bios from the website is buggy... I would recommend updating the bios to Kedarwolf's modded (F10b) BIOS. It works perfectly.





KedarWolf said:


> The Ultra is a much better board than the Pro. If you can afford the extra $20, get it.
> 
> Also, 4x8GB overclocks much better than 2x8GB or even 2x16GB or Dual Rank 4x16GB. Gigabyte Z390 are T-Topology and 4x8GB, all four DIMMs filled are best for maximising your overclock. Single Rank 4x8GB overclocks much better than Dual Rank 4x16GB. Google 'b-die finder' and make sure your RAM is b-die.
> 
> 4x8GB CL14 Trident Z 3200 or CL16 Trident Z 3600 is the way to go. Non-RGB overclocks better than RGB RAM as well.


First, thank you both iunlock and Kedarwolf for your replies. Right now, Amazon has the Master for $4 more than the Ultra, so if I can get a good Black Friday deal on the Master, then that's what I'll go with. I'll go with the Trident Z sticks that Kedarwolf recommended as well. A few more questions; What are your idle temps sitting at when OC'd at 5Ghz? Is there an OC guide for the Gigabyte BIOS? Where can I get a copy of Kedarwolfs BIOS? 

Thanks again!

Thanks again!


----------



## Lurifaks

With the Master , where is the most trustable cpu vcore reading? I belive in HWinfo , but there is so many readings for cpu and so many different values

Thanks


----------



## Wirerat

Lurifaks said:


> Thanks, but would the cpu hold all core 5ghz and dont drop down after the turbo period is over to 127w ?


Gigabyte aorus mobos do not enforce the standard Intel power limits when set on auto. 

If you want it to throttle at 127w you will need to set those limits manually.

I must have miss understood what you were asking.



> With the Master , where is the most trustable cpu vcore reading? I belive in HWinfo , but there is so many readings for cpu and so many different values


Vrout is the most accurate representation of vcore.


----------



## Falkentyne

Lurifaks said:


> With the Master , where is the most trustable cpu vcore reading? I belive in HWinfo , but there is so many readings for cpu and so many different values
> 
> Thanks


VR VOUT in the IR 35201 section.


----------



## Lurifaks

Wirerat said:


> Gigabyte aorus mobos do not enforce the standard Intel power limits when set on auto.
> 
> If you want it to throttle at 127w you will need to set those limits manually.
> 
> I must have miss understood what you were asking.
> 
> 
> 
> Vrout is the most accurate representation of vcore.





Falkentyne said:


> VR VOUT in the IR 35201 section.


Thank you guys


----------



## bigfootnz

Falkentyne said:


> No issues at all. But how did you manage to cool it? What temps were you getting in those tests?


Average temps with Prime were low to mid 80C and max was 91C, with LinX was 2-3 degrees more. I've custom loop with two 360 rads and 12 fans with low rpm. On this setup I've reduced temp under stress test 10-15C which is great.

At the moment I'm testing AC=70, both Prime95 and LinX were failing with AVX. I'll do testing with Realbench v2.56, Battlefield V and AC Odyssey later on to see is it stable. As with AC=70 I've reduced voltage for 20mV and temp for additional 5 degrees.

I was under impression that I've lost silicon lottery with my CPU as it was asking for a lot voltage under manual settings, but with this setup it is completely different story. Thank you for the tip regarding using auto voltage and adjusting AC.


----------



## wingman99

Grobro said:


> Hi guys,
> I'm running a 9700k on Aorus Master, stable at 5Ghz at a static 1.25v.
> I was checking and trying some adaptive setting (as discussed here some time ago, after another user posted a sort of tutorial). Using those adaptive (-0.09 offset) settings I peak at 1.36v under load and i'm wondering if it's worth it...
> And or what would be best for a 5ghz overclock.


If you set AC/DC load line to 0 that will allow + offset so your not using negative DVID. Using AC/DC load line 0 with + DVID will keep the idle voltage from lowering below stock default, to prevent low CPU load crashes.


----------



## Grobro

@Falkentyne
Sorry for asking as you might have said it already but i guess i missed it... i remember reading you saying you would NEVER use adaptive voltage but what was the reason for that?
thanks


----------



## Zensou

9700k, z390 master. I manually set DDR voltage to 1.35. How come HWINFO always shows it at 1.368 and often jumps to 1.38?


----------



## Falkentyne

Grobro said:


> @Falkentyne
> Sorry for asking as you might have said it already but i guess i missed it... i remember reading you saying you would NEVER use adaptive voltage but what was the reason for that?
> thanks


Bios bugs.
I tried using DVID voltage. Didn't like the settings (was not stable with kedarwolf's settings).

Got bored and switched to a fixed saved profile (1.375v + Vcore LLC High @ 5.1) and loaded it.
Saved and entered Bios.

Saw 1.54v.
Instantly rebooted fast.
Saw 1.36v when I entered BIOS again.

Never again am I using DVID.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Bios bugs.
> I tried using DVID voltage. Didn't like the settings (was not stable with kedarwolf's settings).
> 
> Got bored and switched to a fixed saved profile (1.375v + Vcore LLC High @ 5.1) and loaded it.
> Saved and entered Bios.
> 
> Saw 1.54v.
> Instantly rebooted fast.
> Saw 1.36v when I entered BIOS again.
> 
> Never again am I using DVID.


When setting DVID, also set AC/DC load-line to 0 and you won't have over voltage problem.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> When setting DVID, also set AC/DC load-line to 0 and you won't have over voltage problem.


It wasn't overvoltage in DVID mode. DVID mode was working fine. It's a BIOS bug.
It was switching from DVID mode to fixed mode but kept the DVID offset applied in fixed mode, WITH fixed mode's loadline calibration, until i rebooted twice 
That's= lots of voltage D:

There were other bugs before.
Example:
Switching from X cache frequency to auto cache frequency used to use the last "fixed" cache frequency. No idea if that bug was fixed, I think it was.


----------



## Wirerat

That bug @Falkentyne mentions only matters if you switch back to manual overclocking often.


It's not a bad idea when making lots of changes to go back into bios on reboot and make certain the changes stuck before going to desktop.

I usually do this anyway. Its why I never seen the bug until he mentioned it. 

Rebooting twice clears it up.


----------



## Rbk_3

So here is my HWinfo information after a 2 hour run of OCCT Linpak. Does everything look ok? It passed 8 hours last night.


----------



## Falkentyne

Rbk_3 said:


> So here is my HWinfo information after a 2 hour run of OCCT Linpak. Does everything look ok? It passed 8 hours last night.


Do you think you can reupload your sensors window because you uploaded it to a strange site and it's tiny and not zoomable in at all. Can't read your voltages/VR VOUT at all.

IMGUR "direct link to image post" would be better (if you can't upload them directly on OCN).


----------



## GeneO

wingman99 said:


> If you set AC/DC load line to 0 that will allow + offset so your not using negative DVID. Using AC/DC load line 0 with + DVID will keep the idle voltage from lowering below stock default, to prevent low CPU load crashes.


Actually I think you want these both set to 1. 0 is auto and will give you too high a voltage. You can do a positive DVID with 1.

Ran into the same thing on my Asus, but the units were different.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> Bios bugs.
> I tried using DVID voltage. Didn't like the settings (was not stable with kedarwolf's settings).
> 
> Got bored and switched to a fixed saved profile (1.375v + Vcore LLC High @ 5.1) and loaded it.
> Saved and entered Bios.
> 
> Saw 1.54v.
> Instantly rebooted fast.
> Saw 1.36v when I entered BIOS again.
> 
> Never again am I using DVID.


I'm with you mate. Having only used static voltages ... zero issues. I get that some people want to save power etc... totally understandable, but efficiency is something I focus on with laptops, not gaming/work station desktops that we are overclocking to go all out.


----------



## iunlock

mmcneil said:


> First, thank you both iunlock and Kedarwolf for your replies. Right now, Amazon has the Master for $4 more than the Ultra, so if I can get a good Black Friday deal on the Master, then that's what I'll go with. I'll go with the Trident Z sticks that Kedarwolf recommended as well. A few more questions; What are your idle temps sitting at when OC'd at 5Ghz? Is there an OC guide for the Gigabyte BIOS? Where can I get a copy of Kedarwolfs BIOS?
> 
> Thanks again!
> 
> Thanks again!


Very welcome mate. Glad to be of help. Definitely go with the Master if you can, especially for such a small price difference. I'm keeping an eye out for BF sales on the Master myself for another build. That's how satisfied I am with the board. 

As for the RAM kit the TridentZ's are great...and as Kedarwolf said, if you don't care for RGB, just go with the non RGB for better overclocking. 

My idle temps at 5.0GHz on all cores on my main gaming rig is 20C. 

There are a lot of information contained within this thread on OC'ing, however, as a reminder every silicon is different so one size doesn't fit all. KedarWolf's bios is also contained in this thread. A quick search will take you right there.


----------



## Wirerat

iunlock said:


> I'm with you mate. Having only used static voltages ... zero issues. I get that some people want to save power etc... totally understandable, but efficiency is something I focus on with laptops, not gaming/work station desktops that we are overclocking to go all out.


Efficiency is not why I run this way. I get lower vrout by .020v stable and a tighter vdroop. The name "powersave" ac loadline is just a preset that runs the lowest VID table of the canned VR loadline options. 

Being able to run low llc instead of turbo is where the benefits are.

But if manual gives the results you want no need to fix something that is working for you. 🙂 

I think it's great the aorus boards have three viable methods to OC. 

1.Auto vcore with VR loadline tweaks

2. Offset with powersave ac loadline

3. Manual vcore with high/turbo LLC.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> Efficiency is not why I run this way. I get lower vrout by .020v stable and a much tighter vdroop.
> 
> Being able to run low llc instead of turbo is where the benefits are.


This is true.
Going from Turbo LLC to high LLC (even without offsets or auto vcore/low LLC) allows you to reduce your load VR VOUT by about 20mv. I'm assuming because you're doubling the vdroop (0.4 mOhms to 0.8 mOhms).

So going from high LLC to Standard LLC should be another 20mv improvement I'm guessing with very dirty science (high=0.8 mOhms to standard=1.6 mOhms). This improvement is purely from "random instability" from transient dips, not from "RMS voltage". Like, if you get an L0 error after 30 minutes or a thread crash after an hour, not from "insta-crash".


----------



## iunlock

Wirerat said:


> Efficiency is not why I run this way. I get lower vrout by .020v stable and a tighter vdroop.
> 
> Being able to run low llc instead of turbo is where the benefits are.
> 
> It's a very specific bug. I don't run manual so never happens.


Yes I agree...having options is great.

What are you running on all your cores and what is your vrout voltages? (min. / avg. / max.)

I get that one size doesn't fit all, trust me... that's one of the things that enthusiasts like about being able to tune to find the sweet spot for their given hardware etc...

It's always interesting to see what works for people and what doesn't. 

There will always be different configurations depending on the usage case of the user. 

Have you tried static voltages?



Falkentyne said:


> This is true.
> Going from Turbo LLC to high LLC (even without offsets or auto vcore/low LLC) allows you to reduce your load VR VOUT by about 20mv. I'm assuming because you're doubling the vdroop (0.4 mOhms to 0.8 mOhms).
> 
> So going from high LLC to Standard LLC should be another 20mv improvement I'm guessing with very dirty science (high=0.8 mOhms to standard=1.6 mOhms). This improvement is purely from "random instability" from transient dips, not from "RMS voltage". Like, if you get an L0 error after 30 minutes or a thread crash after an hour, not from "insta-crash".


Well said. Speaking of LLC have you tried any other combos with using static voltage? Honestly, I haven't even bothered as the system is running very solid and didn't find the need to drop below Turbo in respect to my settings.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> This is true.
> Going from Turbo LLC to high LLC (even without offsets or auto vcore/low LLC) allows you to reduce your load VR VOUT by about 20mv. I'm assuming because you're doubling the vdroop (0.4 mOhms to 0.8 mOhms).
> 
> So going from high LLC to Standard LLC should be another 20mv improvement I'm guessing with very dirty science (high=0.8 mOhms to standard=1.6 mOhms). This improvement is purely from "random instability" from transient dips, not from "RMS voltage". Like, if you get an L0 error after 30 minutes or a thread crash after an hour, not from "insta-crash".


If you go back to builzoid's video:

Turbo -> High gets a 20mv better margin
High -> medium 10mv

The last is in the noise and probably YMMV.


----------



## mmcneil

iunlock said:


> Very welcome mate. Glad to be of help. Definitely go with the Master if you can, especially for such a small price difference. I'm keeping an eye out for BF sales on the Master myself for another build. That's how satisfied I am with the board.
> 
> As for the RAM kit the TridentZ's are great...and as Kedarwolf said, if you don't care for RGB, just go with the non RGB for better overclocking.
> 
> My idle temps at 5.0GHz on all cores on my main gaming rig is 20C.
> 
> There are a lot of information contained within this thread on OC'ing, however, as a reminder every silicon is different so one size doesn't fit all. KedarWolf's bios is also contained in this thread. A quick search will take you right there.


Thanks man, I appreciate that. About the Trident Z.. I see a lot of them, but most are RGB. The ones that I've found that aren't RGB, say that they're for Z370 chipsets. Do you have a link to the ones you're recommending?

EDIT: KedarWolf hooked me up with the link for the SDRAM


----------



## iunlock

mmcneil said:


> Thanks man, I appreciate that. About the Trident Z.. I see a lot of them, but most are RGB. The ones that I've found that aren't RGB, say that they're for Z370 chipsets. Do you have a link to the ones you're recommending?
> 
> EDIT: KedarWolf hooked me up with the link for the SDRAM


There a few kits. With BF rolling around if you can find a good deal on either a RGB or non RGB kit that is Samsung B-Die, you'll be good either way.
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232306

Although non RGB kits may ever so slightly scale better (not definite and a few clicks past a theory), keep in mind that a lot of the record holders for varies benchmarks use RGB kits. In fact, most of my kits are all RGB (TridentZ and RoyalZ) and they OC just fine. Most of all the high end RAM's in the 4600+ range are RGB. 

If you see a good deal, go for it.


----------



## Wirerat

iunlock said:


> Yes I agree...having options is great.
> 
> What are you running on all your cores and what is your vrout voltages? (min. / avg. / max.)
> 
> I get that one size doesn't fit all, trust me... that's one of the things that enthusiasts like about being able to tune to find the sweet spot for their given hardware etc...
> 
> It's always interesting to see what works for people and what doesn't.
> 
> There will always be different configurations depending on the usage case of the user.
> 
> Have you tried static voltages?


Yes. I ran static at first. 

5ghz all cores no avx offsets. Some screen shots below. Windows Power mode was set to performance so no clocks drop.

Vrout doesn't go above 1.288v. The min is 1.237v. That is .051v droop.

My 9900k is simply average. My fastest profile is 5.1ghz.


----------



## iunlock

Wirerat said:


> Yes. I ran static at first.
> 
> 5ghz all cores no avx offsets. Some screen shots below. Windows Power mode was set to performance so no clocks drop.
> 
> Vrout doesn't go above 1.288v. The min is 1.237v. That is .051v droop.
> 
> My 9900k is simply average. My fastest profile is 5.1ghz.


Very nice... yea that droop. All good though. Makes all the sense to run it with your method in your case indeed.


----------



## Grobro

Wirerat said:


> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> Will let you know for sure how it ended up.
> 
> Also how would i go tightening positive offsets? Start from 0, add 10mv and test or something else?
> 
> 
> 
> I knew what I needed for manual vrout under x264 stressor load.
> 
> So the way I did it was boot with a small +.050v offset then put it under load to see how much to add to keep vrout at 1.24v.
> 
> If you already stress tested at a manual Oc you should know the min voltage you need after vdroop.
Click to expand...

I've been trying dynamic again at 5Ghz and somehow it looks like the normal vcore is at 1.3v and not 1.2 as it's supposed to be. 
VRVOUT *sometimes* drops to 0.7v or so but it's pretty much static at around 1.3v

Anybody with any idea as why that could be?!


----------



## Grobro

Already when i just boot in the bios, vcore is at 1.368v
Something is fishy


----------



## Rbk_3

Falkentyne said:


> Do you think you can reupload your sensors window because you uploaded it to a strange site and it's tiny and not zoomable in at all. Can't read your voltages/VR VOUT at all.
> 
> 
> 
> IMGUR "direct link to image post" would be better (if you can't upload them directly on OCN).




https://i.imgur.com/B1aQoNi.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/kA3WeuF.jpg





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GeneO

Grobro said:


> Already when i just boot in the bios, vcore is at 1.368v
> Something is fishy


Did you change IA loadline AC and DC from 0 to 1?


----------



## Falkentyne

Rbk_3 said:


> https://i.imgur.com/B1aQoNi.jpg
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/kA3WeuF.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thank you. That's much better.
That's a good chip. Is that a KS or a K ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Grobro said:


> I've been trying dynamic again at 5Ghz and somehow it looks like the normal vcore is at 1.3v and not 1.2 as it's supposed to be.
> VRVOUT *sometimes* drops to 0.7v or so but it's pretty much static at around 1.3v
> 
> Anybody with any idea as why that could be?!





Grobro said:


> Already when i just boot in the bios, vcore is at 1.368v
> Something is fishy


Working as expected.
C-states and power saving do not work in the BIOS.
"Normal" and "Auto" Vcore is not 1.2v. It's based partially on the CPU VID and every CPU will have a different VID. Thermal Velocity Boost and the "AC Loadline" value also affects the VID. The VID rises or drops depending on CPU multiplier and it stops scaling at the 1 core turbo multiplier.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> 3. Coil wine eh? Hmm... I haven't noticed any here and I've tested 2x Master boards so far (personal rigs) and a handful of other Master boards (client systems) ... never noticed any coil whine.
> 
> 
> 6. The GB Fusion RGB recognizes my TridentZ kits just fine. I'm also able to control the LED strip on the water reservoir. Are you using the newest RGB Fusion app? (Release date: 10/31/19)
> https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Utility/mb_utility_rgb_fusion_B19.1030.1.zip
> 
> 
> Anyhow, welcome board mate and thanks for sharing. Looking forward to seeing you around.
> 
> Cheers


3. I have only heard the coil whine it since when running a benchmark on my SSD and it was very intermittent. IDK, maybe it is something else. 

6. The newest (2.0) version of RGB Fusion does not recognize my RAM. I managed to find an older version and it does recognize and let me set my RAM. Neither version recognizes my Asus addressable strip (even though it is lit up).

Another weird thing I noticed about fixed vs. offset overclocking. The realbench benchmark scores are 9% lower on the fixed than the offset OC, even though they are running the same voltage. Think that is related to the stuttering I saw. Haven't been able to isolate the cause. 

5.1 GHz with Offset (turbo, -.015v offset, IA AC/DC=1) @ VRVOUT (ave) = 1.26v integer load, 1.29v avx.

I can't so offset for 5.0 GHz because of the defaults in my chip won't lower vcore to below 1.3, though I can run it fixed at around 1.24v IIRC.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> The scores are also lower in cbr15/cbr20 when using a manual OC as opposed to dvid offset. Memory performance in aida64 cache/memory benchmark is also better when using a dvid offset instead of fixed voltage. Curious as to why that is, i was always under the assumption that fixed voltage yielded the best results. I'm fine with it being this way as I prefer to have my voltage drop on idle but just curious.


I thought so too and am also curious.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Heads up for those who are debating or working on tuning via DVID Offset voltage overclock vs Manual voltage overclock on the auros z390 master with a 9900k.
> 
> I noticed I get better sustained performance in all benchmarks and tests when using a dvid offset with S3/Speedstep + ac/dc both set to 1 + medium LLC + windows balanced powerplan as opposed to the same frequency overclock on manual voltage with Turbo LLC + windows maximum powerplan. An example is more consistent performance during encoding tests in realbench. During h264 encoding, the dvid overclock maintains a sustained performance from work load to work load, scores are consistently in the same ballpark. With the same overclock using manual voltage + turbo LLC during h264 encoding, it will score well at first but the score will drop 10%-20% lower after a few runs.
> 
> DVID OC 5.2ghz ht off h264 encoding average - 140k
> static voltage OC 5.2ghz ht off h264 encoding average - 125k
> 
> The performance gap is also there when comparing 5gz HT on dvid vs static voltage.
> 
> A few things i've noticed when using AC/DC loadlines set to 1 with a DVID offset....
> 
> Medium LLC tends to be the sweet spot for overclocks that have a requirement for more than 50mv extra voltage. The same clocks can be had using high LLC with slightly less voltage but temperatures are also slightly higher by 2c. Standard/low llc allow too much flex or idle voltage when at full clocks. Standard/low LLC work better for overclocks requiring very little extra voltage otherwise the overshoots/flex is pretty high. Here is an example of what I mean:
> 
> 5.2ghz HT OFF standard llc +175mv dvid offset acdc/1 = 1.33v vrout load voltage but overshoot/flex when coming off of a load can go over 1.4v vrout. Idle at full clock speed is also at or slightly above 1.4v vrout. This set up offers the best temperatures out of all 3 but overshoot was too much for my liking.
> 
> 5.2Ghz HT OFF medium llc +100mv dvid offset acdc/1= 1.33v vrout load voltage, overshoot/flex when coming off of a load can sometimes up to 1.375v. Idle at full clockspeed is also 1.33v vrout.
> 
> 5.2ghz HT OFF high llc +85mv dvid offset acdc/1=1.33v vrout load voltage, overshoot/flex when coming off of a load goes up to 1.352v. Idle at fullclockspeed is somewhere between 1.25v vrout to 1.3v vrout. I'm going to take a wild guess that setting LLC to high when using ac/dc ll both set to 1 produces a similar effect to when using extreme llc on manual voltage. To anyone reading this, you probably don't want to use llc high with ac/dc ll both set to 1 when doing dvid offset overclocks, stick with medium llc or lower for dvid offset.
> 
> 5.2GHz HT OFF Turbo LLC Static Voltage 1.375v =1.328v vrout load voltage, no overshoot. Idle at 1.367v. Temperatures are about 4c-5c hotter than medium LLC dvid overclock. Worst sustained performance over time compared to any of the dvid offset overclocks in all testing.
> 
> During aida64 FPU AVX testing each OC drew roughly 120-127 amps with a steady vrout of 1.33v, Right on the edge when it comes to staying within intel's voltage/amp curve.
> 
> H264 encoding in realbench gives consistent scores of around 140k for the dvid offset overclocks during nonstop runs. When using static voltage(1.375v) with turbo llc for 5.2ghz HT/OFF, scores start off around 140k but were consistently around 125k after a few runs.
> 
> Even in cinebench r15/r20, dvid overclocks perform better than the manual voltage overclocks. It didn't make a difference if I was OCed to 5ghz with HT on or oced to 5.2ghz with HT off, dvid consistently outperformed manual voltage. These scores are using the official F9 bios, no mods. Ram was pushed as high/fast as possible without having to add any additional vcore for stability, cl15 4000(cl15 4133mhz requires additional vcore). Priority was set to realtime in task manager for each run with minimal programs running in the background. @KedarWolf If I use your modded F9 bios, how much higher is my performance going to be? These are the numbers i'm currently getting with the official F9 stock bios.
> 
> dvid offset 5ghz ht on cbr15 - 2204
> dvid offset 5ghz ht on cbr20 - 5305
> manual voltage ht on 5ghz cbr15- 2179
> manual voltage ht on 5ghz cbr20 - 5240
> 
> dvid offset 5.2ghz ht off cbr15- 1771
> dvid offset 5.2ghz ht off cbr20 - 4286
> manual voltage 5.2ghz ht off cbr15 - 1732
> manual voltage 5.2ghz ht off cbr20 - 4226
> 
> Temperature wise, the biggest difference was 5ghz ht on dvid offset vs 5ghz ht on manual voltage, up to 8c gap in cinebench.
> 
> Reflecting on this, I have to recommend to everyone to work on getting a solid dvid offset overclock if you are currently on a static voltage overclock. You'll save money over time with your electric bill with using S3/speedstep to drop the voltage/power on idle and the performance is better at the same clockspeeds compared to static voltage overclocks.
> 
> On a side note, I'm not sure if this is common knowledge or not but higher cpu clockspeeds with HT on will require more DRAM voltage, more SA voltage and more IO voltage and, even at the same ram frequencies/timings. There also comes a certain point where you'll need to add more vcore if you are pushing high ram frequencies with really tight timings on 4dimms. I figured this out last night so I dropped back down from cl15 4133 to cl15 4000. The difference in vcore was at least 15mv, more if HT was on, so I went back to cl15 4000 so that I would stay within Intel's voltage/amp curve while underload.
> 
> An example of what I mean:
> 5ghz ht on cl15 4133 ram, fine at validated OC settings.
> 5.1ghz ht on cl15 4133mhz ram, required more vcore(additional vcore outside of adding vcore to compensate from switching from 5g to 5.1g), more dram voltage and an extra 50mv of SA/IO.
> 
> So if you are working on higher CPU OC and you are wondering why your previously validated ram OC is suddenly magically unstable, this could be why.
> 
> In regards to non-rgb dimms overclocking better, I think this is accurate or at least from my personal experience. I tried out 2 different kits, one rgb and one non-rgb. Both gskill. The non-rgb 4000mhz kit with 18-19-19-39 timings had an easier time booting/training 4400mhz than the rgb 4000 kit with 17-17-17-37 timings. I ended up keeping the rgb kit because rgb is life . The highest frequency stable ram oc i've been able to achieve on the zorus z390 master is 4200mhz but at 18-20-20-42 timings, which is garbage by my standards lol. Latency was obviously not as good as 16-16-16-36 4133mhz or 15-15-15-32 4000mhz or 15-15-15-32 4133mhz. 16-16-16-35 4133mhz and 15-15-15-32 4000mhz and 18-20-20-42 4200mhz did not require any additional vcore to be added while 15-15-15-32 4133mhz required more vcore than my cpu OC would normally need.
> 
> Anyone here like to run higher overclocks on their 9900k with HT off? Curious on what other users have been seeing success with. Cheers.


Wait....
I already knew about needing slightly more VCCIO and VCCSA (up to a point)...the 112k FFT AVX Disabled in-place prime95 test (29.8 build 6) is a good way to test if the L3 cache (VCCIO) is crapping out, but DRAM VOLTAGE??

Why you do this to me  I already had enough BSOD's for the day 
Excellent post.

However please explain this simple thing to me please.

5.2 ghz/4.7 cache, Vcore loadline calibration: High (0.8 mOhms VRM loadline), HT on, 1.430v fixed voltage Bios set, 1.415v idle, 1.305v full load: Battlefield 5 runs for an hour no problem. (AC Loadline, Thermal Velocity Boost are ignored on fixed vcore; fixed vcore programs the VRM directly).

5.2 ghz/4.7 cache, Auto voltage, Vcore loadline calibration=Standard (1.6 mOhms VRM Loadline), AC Loadline= 135, DC Loadline=160 (the DC LL value isn't important), Thermal Velocity Boost optimizations disabled.
This is 1.440v idle, 1.310v full load @ 150 amps. Cinebench R20 runs ok for a few runs. <--take note of that.

Battlefield 5? Insta-BSOD trying to just launch the game (fans ramp up to 100%, CPU load =100% all cores which BF5 likes to do when you launch it), SYSTEM SERVICE EXCEPTION, WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE ERROR or IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL.

According to your post, using auto vcore (DVID is auto with an offset) should be more consistent performance than fixed + reasonable LLC. But BF5 doesn't like it.
(I have yet to try something like a positive DVID offset + lower AC Loadline + stronger LLC). I was using "standard" LLC+Auto voltage+ tweaking the AC Loadline to try to tighten the transient response, but I think AC Loadline isn't responding fast enough to Battlefield 5 pushing the current up quickly. But why does cinebench not insta-BSOD?

--------

Intel V/A Curve:

(sorry I don't have a graph and I'm artistically challenged so I doubt I can make one in windows paint that doesn't look like a 5 year old did it. I never did charts or graphs before. I'm assuming some of you have tools to make straight charts and lines)

Max VRM Target: 1.520v BEFORE VDROOP!!!!!!!!!!!
Max VRM Target with offset (VRM command 33h): 1.520v +200mv via SVID=1.720v <--exceeding 1.520v is not safe on ambient cooling.
Max amps: 193 amps (8 cores), 138 amps (6 cores).
Intel loadline defaults used: 1.6 mOhms VRM loadline slope (Loadline resistance). "Vcore LLC: Standard/Normal".

(for some reason, 6 cores don't seem to specify supporting SVID Offset mode, only 8 cores do).

All based on 1.6 mOhms VRM Loadline slope: (LLC: Standard/Normal)

193 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.214v
150 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.280v
125 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.320v
100 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.360v
75 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.400v
50 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.440v
0 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.520v <--max VID.

VRM target voltage----->(base VID/AC Loadline/Thermal Velocity Boost) ------->(VDROOP loadline slope [amps * mOhms LLC])--------> CPU output vcore (VR VOUT):

V/A Curve:

1520 mv- ( amps * loadline resistance)
e.g.:

1520 - ( 193 * 1.6) =1.214v
1520 - ( 150 * 1.6) = 1.280v

etc.


----------



## Wirerat

@Falkentyne

Is medium llc safe combined with power save VR loadline?

I was under the impression that standard/low was as high as I should go with an auto/offset vcore.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> The scores are also lower in cbr15/cbr20 when using a manual OC as opposed to dvid offset. Memory performance in aida64 cache/memory benchmark is also better when using a dvid offset instead of fixed voltage. Curious as to why that is, i was always under the assumption that fixed voltage yielded the best results. I'm fine with it being this way as I prefer to have my voltage drop on idle but just curious.


Ha.We cross posted on this at the same time. Lol

Something is not right with the manual OC on this board, at least with F9 BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> When it came to dram voltage, I was specifically running into this issue where I had to increase it when at higher cpu frequencies on an already validated ram overclock or I couldn't even boot into windows. I specifically started to run into this issue with cl15 4100 and cl15 4133 when testing 5.1ghz ht on. It's quite possible that cl15 4000 and cl16 4133 validated OCs could run into the same issue if I was trying to push 5.2ghz HT on or higher.
> 
> IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL is one of 2 things, not enough dram voltage or not enough system agent voltage.
> SYSTEM SERVICE EXCEPTION can mean you need more system agent voltage/IO voltage or even vcore if i'm not mistaken.
> WHEA bsod is specifically vcore.
> 
> I'd start off by adding 50mv to both SA/IO and see if you still get the IRQL/System service exception. If it keeps happening, increase dram voltage by 50mv. If IRQL goes away after the dram voltage increase, you can then try to work down the sa/IO down to your original oc values.
> 
> Try adding vcore too. You might need 1.44v-1.46v in bios for 5.2ghz ht on but then you still might error out/crash due to the temps and approaching the end of the silicon(I view 1.52v as "the very end of the sillicon, the closer you are to this number, the more unstable you'll be).
> 
> In terms of bf5, I think it could partially also have to do with your cache. Default cache for the 9900K is 43 and default turbo all core is 47. The cache is kept 4 bins below the all core turbo at all times. Everytime you raise the all core frequency by 1 notch, you should also raise the cache by 1 notch each time to keep them 4 bins apart. Your cache is currently behind 1 bin. You need to bump your cache up for your 5.2ghz OC to 4.8ghz from 4.7ghz. It could also be that your chip just can't handle 5.2ghz HT on without an avx offset(bf5 uses avx if i recall correctly). You are probably going to need more vcore regardless.
> 
> You are going to need around 1.3v vccSA and vccIO voltages or more for 5.2ghz ht on if you are running higher ram frequencies with 4 dimms on an R0 stepping 9900K.
> 
> Start by trying to address the irql/system service exception bsods, then move onto vcore. Also, When you are using dvid offset, are you using ac/dc ll=1 or are you using powersaving? Are you using S3/Speedstep?


I had AC loadline at 140 in that test.
I don't have any power saving (all c-states, speedstep disabled).
The BSOD was 100% related to the CPU. <---MY GUESS IS THAT AC LOADLINE CAN NOT RESPOND FAST ENOUGH TO BATTLEFIELD 5 CURRENT DRAW
I already tried cache at x37. Does not help at all whatsoever.

I just got another BSOD.
Again these settings:

5.2 ghz, 4.7 cache (x37 does NOT help!), AC LL: 145 (1.45 mOhms). DC Loadline 160 (1.6 mOhms). Thermal Velocity Boost disabled. Vcore Loadline Calibration: Standard
SVID OFFSET: ENABLED (required as I run out of VID headroom for AC Loadline). If SVID offset is disabled, Load VR VOUT would be 1.260v only <--insta BSOD.

I set DDR voltage to 1.45v.
VCCIO to 1.30v
VCCSA to 1.35v.

Idle voltage: 1.440v
Load voltage: 1.315v.
Max amps: 148

Tried to launch Battlefield 5.
Black screen (like always), RTSS OSD appeared, fans ramped to 100% (like always):

"KMODE EXCEPTION NOT HANDLED".

So......
Back to fixed Vcore: 
1.430v Bios set. Loadline Calibration: High.
Idle voltage: 1.415v
Load voltage @ 147 amps: 1.315v.

Battlefield 5 boots like nothing went wrong in the world (blackscreen, fans @ 100%, CPU load 100%, RTSS overlay appears, main menu appears, no crashes).



> IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL is one of 2 things, not enough dram voltage or not enough system agent voltage.
> SYSTEM SERVICE EXCEPTION can mean you need more system agent voltage/IO voltage or even vcore if i'm not mistaken.
> WHEA bsod is specifically vcore.


This is not fully accurate.
These "memory looking related errors" happen when hyperthreading is enabled only. They're related to the virtualized hyperthreaded cores (instruction registers) crashing. They look like memory errors. 
The CPU L0 cache is the actual virtualized register store. A L0 error "Cache hierarchy error" means an error occured there but was corrected.
If an error is uncorrected, you're going to get a system service exception or IRQL, etc.

Increasing IO/SA voltages can help to a point, but this is vcore related with respect to hyperthreading.

If you disable hyperthreading, you will only get "CLOCK WATCHDOG TIMEOUT" or "WHEA Uncorrectable error" almost all the time.

Have you noticed that you almost never get "CPU Cache L0 errors" when Hyperthreading is disabled?


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> Is medium llc safe combined with power save VR loadline?
> 
> I was under the impression that standard/low was as high as I should go with an auto/offset vcore.


Power Save VR loadline=0.4 mOhms ACLL.
Yes Medium LLC is fine with that.

basic rule is: The higher the AC Loadline (higher AC operating voltage), the lower the VRM loadline (you should have more vdroop) should be.


----------



## Timur Born

A profile saved with F7 not only is unusable after updating to F9, but is loaded without error message and then changes completely different settings. So watch out for these kind of things after updating.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> @Falkentyne
> These are the voltage/amp cruve values you gave me on reddit to value. I've been tuning with these values for the past couple weeks. Today you give me different values on this forum.
> 
> Values you gave me on reddit(can be verified via screenshot).
> 
> Values you gave me today on this forum
> 193 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.214v
> 150 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.280v
> 125 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.320v
> 100 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.360v
> 75 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.400v
> 50 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.440v
> 0 amps: max VR VOUT: 1.520v <--max VID.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/2ZrPD5J
> 
> 
> Why did you give me 2 sets of different data?


Because I have trouble doing math sometimes. 
I typed them from memory.
It's basically every 25 amps, = 40mv. And I always get mixed up with inbetween values like 125 amps and 75 amps so I gave wrong values.

You can plug in the numbers into the formula and check them for yourself.
*Disclaimer* I can't even guarantee that the 'formula' is safe. That's just a combination of the Intel max amps, max VID and Loadline calibration values. I asked Intel about this on reddit (an engineer) to clarify this and he told me "that's under NDA, sorry". So everything I'm saying is an educated guess. If you want hard values you need to contact Intel.

No need to get mad at me for that. I make mistakes. I've even admitted my numbers were wrong after 1.280v/150 amps several times. Those mistakes have cost me chess tournaments in real life and even got me 'grounded' by my mother in highschool because I made a multiplication mistake during a trigonometry test, like something like 4*2=6 and similar stuff. Sorry ?


----------



## GeneO

Well I found what was causing theperformance issue with fixed OC l

I had my setup with 
Multi-core Enhancements disabled
All C states on auto 
Enabled EIST and a few others.

I enable Multi-core enhancment with all the rest the same and now I get slightly better Realbench scores on manual than with offset.

Now I wuill have to see if offset has improved equally with multi-core enhjancement enabled.


----------



## GeneO

This is very odd behavior. 

1. On fixed, multicore enhancement = enabled and C-states auto give alightly better scores than offset with multi-core disabled and c-states auto

2. offset with multi-core enhancement and c-states auto, vcore does not drop at idle. 
3. I explicitly enable C-states + multi-core enabled. vcore drops much more than with multui-core enabled and c-states auto. However the benchmark is worse.

So, barring any further elucidation, it looks like I may do fixed with multi-core enabled. 

BTW, I did hit that bug going from offset to fixed - 1.5v! The reason isn't because the offset is applied to the fixed as suggested by Falkentyne, since I had a negative offset. Anyhow I have done a clear-cmos after that but I think I will try optimized default then reboot to see if that avoids it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> This is very odd behavior.
> 
> 1. On fixed, multicore enhancement = enabled and C-states auto give alightly better scores than offset with multi-core disabled and c-states auto
> 
> 2. offset with multi-core enhancement and c-states auto, vcore does not drop at idle.
> 3. I explicitly enable C-states + multi-core enabled. vcore drops much more than with multui-core enabled and c-states auto. However the benchmark is worse.
> 
> So, barring any further elucidation, it looks like I may do fixed with multi-core enabled.
> 
> BTW, I did hit that bug going from offset to fixed - 1.5v! The reason isn't because the offset is applied to the fixed as suggested, since I had a negative offset. Anyhow I have done a clear-cmos after that but I think I will try optimized default then reboot to see if that avoids it.


Is the bug that switching from offset to fixed keeps the offset mode active after the first boost but applies loadline calibration to it?
(so you wind up applying aggressive LLC to it until you reboot again?)

I could find out but I don't like seeing 1.54v in the BIOS 
I do think that this bug still happens when switching from "DVID" to "Auto" (this was actually reported WAY back in the forum).

Back in one of the old BIOS branches, someone else reported that switching from "offset" mode to another mode (I think it was "Auto") kept the offset active. which was very similar to switching from a fixed Cache ratio (like x47) to "Auto" kept the old fixed ratio active which was also reported by someone.

I thought I verified the source of the DVID-->override +offset) setting at least on my laptop when in the "Overclocking Performance Menu" , where if you set an offset in adaptive mode then switch to override mode, the offset is still there (and shown right on the screen). But that's because laptops don't use a real 'fixed' vcore--their fixed mode is simply adaptive reprogramming the VID itself.

I'm not sure if Gigabyte reroutes options from the overclocking performance menu or not (which is hidden from us but it's in the APTIO), but you can open the BIOS in AMIBCP 5.02.0031 and find it there. (safer to dump your backup directly however with FPTW64 -d biosbackup.bin -BIOS with the ME tools on win-raid however).


----------



## GeneO

So here is the simplist way I have found to avoid that offset -> fixed OC bug that would wind you up with 1.5v core:

1. offset -> optimized default
2. restart, to uefi, no large voltage encountered
3. optimized -> fixed settings 
4. restart


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Is the bug that switching from offset to fixed keeps the offset mode active after the first boost but applies loadline calibration to it?
> (so you wind up applying aggressive LLC to it until you reboot again?)


IDK



> I could find out but I don't like seeing 1.54v in the BIOS


no one does 



> I do think that this bug still happens when switching from "DVID" to "Auto" (this was actually reported WAY back in the forum).


No. I tired loading optimized defaults and it does not happen


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> IDK
> 
> 
> 
> no one does
> 
> 
> 
> No. I tired loading optimized defaults and it does not happen


Actually the bug doesn't happen if you turn off the power after saving settings 
Unfortunately there's no way to do a "Hard power off" after saving BIOS settings except by toggling SVID OFFSET or disabling/re-enabling cpu cores. 
(*edit* I'm guessing, knowing Gigabyte Bios shenanigans, it might even happen if you hard power off the first time as a restart....)


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Actually the bug doesn't happen if you turn off the power after saving settings
> Unfortunately there's no way to do a "Hard power off" after saving BIOS settings except by toggling SVID OFFSET or disabling/re-enabling cpu cores.


Or you can load optimized defaults, which you probably should anyhow.


----------



## GeneO

Advice? If I upgraded my Aorus Master BIOS from F9 to F10, since there is no ME firmware involved, can I revert back to F9? Can you do this at will on Gigabyte boards?


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Advice? If I upgraded my Aorus Master BIOS from F9 to F10, since there is no ME firmware involved, can I revert back to F9? Can you do this at will on Gigabyte boards?


Why though?

I'm running the f10 bios on both my 9900k/aorus pro and 9900kf aorus pro rigs.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> Why though?
> 
> I'm running the f10 bios on both my 9900k/aorus pro and 9900kf aorus pro rigs.


F10 on your Pro is the old non-buggy GUI version.
F10 on the Master is equal to "F11" on your Pro--the new GUI version (with thermal velocity boost settings added), that has bugs and is missing some voltage settings (CPU PLL Overvoltage, CPU amps limit, VAXG/Vcore protection, and tREFI memory setting is broken).



GeneO said:


> Advice? If I upgraded my Aorus Master BIOS from F9 to F10, since there is no ME firmware involved, can I revert back to F9? Can you do this at will on Gigabyte boards?


Yes you can.
Why not simply switch to "Single Bios Mode" and the "Backup BIOS" via the two jumper switches and flash the backup to F10?
Then if you don't like something (like that tREFI bug), you can just power off, flip the main bios/backup bios switch and power right back on again.


----------



## Timur Born

Out of curiosity I left all voltage settings on Auto while overclocking the CPU. Hit 220 Amps IOUT with a short P95 run. Ouch.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> Out of curiosity I left all voltage settings on Auto while overclocking the CPU. Hit 220 Amps IOUT with a short P95 run. Ouch.


This is not an auto vcore. But I did run an hour of P95 with avx enabled at 5ghz a while back.

It was hot considering my loop has 840mm of rad space. I don't recommend it unless delided. I am not and it was really hot.

My water temp never went above 32c (bottum right tool bar). That tells me the heat had issues getting through to the block. Delid would improve it

Everything except P95 avx has good temps though.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> Why though?
> 
> I'm running the f10 bios on both my 9900k/aorus pro and 9900kf aorus pro rigs.


I have an 8086k. I have heard that the F10 was specifically targeted to 9900KS and that those with 8700k were having issues and that Gigabyte support recommended that, unless you have a KS, you should not upgrade to F10.

So yes or no?


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> This is not an auto vcore. But I did run an hour of P95 with avx enabled at 5ghz a while back.
> 
> It was hot considering my loop has 840mm of rad space. I don't recommend it unless delided. I am not and it was really hot.


Yes, P95 Small FFT usually runs the CPU into temperature limits. On my CPU cores 2 and 4 usually limit first, core 5 is the next hot contender. I suspect that these cores are also responsible for how much voltage I have to pump into my CPU to run these loads error-free, which in turn increases temps again (or drops multipliers to stay below temp limits).

That's too bad, because I can run 7 cores (+HT) at 200 MHz higher than 8 cores (+HT). If I want all 8 cores to run that high, I need to increase VCore and I am still not sure how stable that really is without further tests. The jury is still out whether I will use C3 + dynamic clocks (per core usage) with BIOS version F9. VRM (coil) whine may be somewhat quieter, but it's still present. On the other hand it stays present on specific loads anyway, regardless of C-state usage (especially when using WinRAR for compression).


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> Yes, P95 Small FFT usually runs the CPU into temperature limits. On my CPU cores 2 and 4 usually limit first, core 5 is the next hot contender. I suspect that these cores are also responsible for how much voltage I have to pump into my CPU to run these loads error-free, which in turn increases temps again (or drops multipliers to stay below temp limits).
> 
> That's too bad, because I can run 7 cores (+HT) at 200 MHz higher than 8 cores (+HT). If I want all 8 cores to run that high, I need to increase VCore and I am still not sure how stable that really is without further tests. The jury is still out whether I will use C3 + dynamic clocks (per core usage) with BIOS version F9. VRM (coil) whine may be somewhat quieter, but it's still present. On the other hand it stays present on specific loads anyway, regardless of C-state usage (especially when using WinRAR for compression).


On my 9900k and 9900kf both on aorus pros, The voltage required to pass 1 hour p95 small with avx is +.02v vs x264 25 loop stability.

So knowing that I just dial in my profiles at +.02v above the minimum x264 stressor requirements.


----------



## Rbk_3

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you. That's much better.
> 
> That's a good chip. Is that a KS or a K ?




KS on a Noctua D15. I thought it was a dud until I used Wirerats settings. The man is a hero. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you. That's much better.
> 
> That's a good chip. Is that a KS or a K ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KS on a Noctua D15. I thought it was a dud until I used Wirerats settings. The man is a hero.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's not my method. Lol. I just copied from:

https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

I do appreciate it though 🙂


----------



## Grobro

Falkentyne said:


> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been trying dynamic again at 5Ghz and somehow it looks like the normal vcore is at 1.3v and not 1.2 as it's supposed to be.
> VRVOUT *sometimes* drops to 0.7v or so but it's pretty much static at around 1.3v
> 
> Anybody with any idea as why that could be?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Already when i just boot in the bios, vcore is at 1.368v
> Something is fishy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Working as expected.
> C-states and power saving do not work in the BIOS.
> "Normal" and "Auto" Vcore is not 1.2v. It's based partially on the CPU VID and every CPU will have a different VID. Thermal Velocity Boost and the "AC Loadline" value also affects the VID. The VID rises or drops depending on CPU multiplier and it stops scaling at the 1 core turbo multiplier.
Click to expand...

Well it seems there clearly is no point in me trying to go adaptive if my average VRVOUT is so much higher than on a static OC.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grobro said:


> Well it seems there clearly is no point in me trying to go adaptive if my average VRVOUT is so much higher than on a static OC.


The benefit of dynamic voltage is to:
1) enable c-states and downvolting while at idle, because the base voltage is based on the CPU VID, and the CPU VID rises or lowers depending on multiplier.

C-states work on a fixed voltage but only the clocks will downclock. It won't downvolt.

2) To reduce your loadline calibration to allow you tighter transients so you can be a bit more stable, and using the AC Loadline parameter via Internal VR settings or the internal ac/dc presets to help compensate somewhat
The drawback of using a high AC to compensate for vdroop is I believe the ACLL can't compensate quickly for a sudden current load at a very high overclock (still not fully sure about this). No one uses adaptive/offset overclocking when pushing extremely high clocks usually (like subzero/sub ambients).


----------



## Wirerat

Grobro said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been trying dynamic again at 5Ghz and somehow it looks like the normal vcore is at 1.3v and not 1.2 as it's supposed to be.
> VRVOUT *sometimes* drops to 0.7v or so but it's pretty much static at around 1.3v
> 
> Anybody with any idea as why that could be?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Already when i just boot in the bios, vcore is at 1.368v
> Something is fishy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Working as expected.
> C-states and power saving do not work in the BIOS.
> "Normal" and "Auto" Vcore is not 1.2v. It's based partially on the CPU VID and every CPU will have a different VID. Thermal Velocity Boost and the "AC Loadline" value also affects the VID. The VID rises or drops depending on CPU multiplier and it stops scaling at the 1 core turbo multiplier.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well it seems there clearly is no point in me trying to go adaptive if my average VRVOUT is so much higher than on a static OC.
Click to expand...

 what ac loadline and llc did you try?

I use powersave + low llc.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> what ac loadline and llc did you try?
> 
> I use powersave + low llc.


Wait, who, me?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grobro

Wirerat said:


> I use powersave + low llc.


I used the exact same!


----------



## Grobro

reachthesky said:


> Had someone PM me for settings to convert from a static voltage overclock to a dvid offset overclock. Figured i'd share a method I use.
> 
> For anyone who wants to convert their current fixed voltage turbo LLC OC to a DVID offset overclock for the best temperatures/power management possible do the following:
> 
> all core multiplier - Whatever you normally use
> Cache multiplier - exactly 4 steps behind your core multiplier
> AC/DC loadlines both set to 1
> vcore LLC - standard
> *vcore voltage- normal, dvid offset *********
> 
> *DVID offset formula* when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC = Your current turbo LLC overclock vcore voltage that is set in bios minus(-) 1.2v = the amount of positive offset to add plus an additional+5mv.
> For example, If your 9900K required 1.32v manual voltage in bios with turbo LLC, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be 1.32v minus 1.2v = 120mv plus additional 5mv = +125mv DVID offset
> 
> If you only required 1.3v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be +105mv(1.3v minus 1.2v = 100mv + the additional 5mv =+105mv dvid offset
> If you only required 1.25v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be 1.25v minus 1.2v = 50mv + additional 5mv voltage = +55mv dvid offset
> 
> etc etc
> 
> This formula only applies for figuring out the dvid offset when using it specifically with ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC. This formula gets completely thrown out the door if LLC is raised at all or if ac/dc is changed from 1/1.
> 
> I can tell you that for medium LLC + ac/dc=1/1, the dvid offset is equal to roughly HALF of the calculated number you ended up with when making the calculation with standard LLC in mind, plus that additional 5mv or 10mv. If I required 1.32v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, my dvid offset for medium llc + ac/dc=1/1 would be roughly +60mv.
> 
> 
> 
> Disable all c-states except S3(keep S3 enabled or you crash while browsing/idle)
> Disable voltage optimization, ring to core, speedshift, energy efficient turbo, race to halt
> enable speedstep
> use windows balanced power plan
> Multicore-enchancement - auto
> Disable Turbo (leave all power limits on auto too as I believe gigabyte leaves them completely unlocked)
> disable vt-d(assumng you don't use it)
> disable the iGPU (assuming you don't use it)
> Dram and SA/IO voltage requirements should be the same as before
> 
> If you change the below values to normal instead of these suggested values, you can lower temperatures even further if that is a concern.
> cpu vcore protection - 400mv
> cpu vcore current protection - extreme
> cpu vcore pwm switch rate - 500 khz
> pwm phase control - xtreme perf
> 
> Switching from a turbo llc manual voltage overclock to a standard llc + ac/dc=1/1 overclock at the same clockspeeds/voltage requirements under load will net you lower temperatures overall and even lower temperatures if you change the 4 settings above. It will also save on your electric bill + make your chip last longer. It also means that if you want to push your chip even further in frequency/voltage, you'll have a little more thermal headroom than usual.


Thanks i'll give this a try after work!


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> what ac loadline and llc did you try?
> 
> I use powersave + low llc.





Grobro said:


> I used the exact same!


What DVID offset and AC/DC loadlines are you guys using? I know the offset will vary depending on CPU quality, just curious what you're both using.


----------



## GeneO

Grobro said:


> Thanks i'll give this a try after work!


A key is to set AC/DC load lines to 1, as I already suggested you do. Otherwise you will get very high boltages.


----------



## GeneO

Dup


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grobro

I'll definitely give it a (couple)good read(s) before changing my settings.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

Sheyster said:


> What DVID offset and AC/DC loadlines are you guys using? I know the offset will vary depending on CPU quality, just curious what you're both using.


EDIT: had it the wrong way around see Falkentyne's post below

After this came up a few pages back i remembered i used this way of O/C before and had bios pictures so i loaded it up again I am using a DVID of 0.000 any lower gives me a low load crash
On page 338 of this thread is the 51/47 OC i did this way with high LLC my usual OC of 50/46 uses low LLC


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> If you use the powersaving setting it will override the IA AC/DC setting this comes from @Falkentyne so i trust it
> 
> After this came up a few pages back i remembered i used this way of O/C before and had bios pictures so i loaded it up again I am using a DVID of 0.000 any lower gives me a low load crash
> On page 338 of this thread is the 51/47 OC i did this way with high LLC my usual OC of 50/46 uses low LLC


Nonono
Any "non zero" value for IA AC loadline will override any of the "CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline" presets for the AC Loadline value.
(the same goes for DC Loadline as well, but DC Loadline is used for power measurements. However there seems to be a small negative voltage skew of about 15mv, if DC LL is set to 1, compared to DC Loadline at 160).

Extreme: 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)
Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
Auto: 1.0/1.3 mOhms (4.7 ghz), 1.3/1.3 mOhms (5 ghz), or whatever the BIOS feels like setting (not sure where it gets the auto values from, probably whatever GB wants it to be. I've seen 1.2 mOhms set on Asus Z390 from a preset).


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> The benefit of dynamic voltage is to:
> 1) enable c-states and downvolting while at idle, because the base voltage is based on the CPU VID, and the CPU VID rises or lowers depending on multiplier.


And to enable higher clocks (turbo bins) when fewer cores are being used. You need to enable at least C3 to do that.


----------



## Timur Born

I am a bit confused by the "100 amps at 1.4 volts" "discussion". I get the point that it makes sense to edit wrongly numbers on Reddit, so that people landing there don't use wrong numbers. I also found the following table by @Falkentyne, where he calculated 1.36 volts for 100 amps and only 75 amps for 1.4 volts.

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...ats_the_max_safe_voltage_for_a_247_overclock/

*Anyway*, the maximum listed in the same table is 193 amps at 1.213 volts = 234,11 watts. Why would I care for anything other/less than the maximum wattage and amps? 1.36V x 100A = 136W and 1.4V x 100A = 140W, both of which are far below the maximum amps and wattage. So what do I miss here?

In my overclocking tests I regularly hit over 193 amps and over 234 watts (even at lower amps, because of higher voltages), which is not considered "safe", but it's on me whether to kill my CPU or not. 

And yes, there is too much drama around.


----------



## Grobro

reachthesky said:


> AC/DC loadlines both set to 1


In your recommendations, do you mean IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## criskoe

I think the best thing moving forward is for everyone to realize that the formula 1520 - (1.6 * AMPS) = Maximum safe voltage is a guide line from of a educated estimation. Even then we cannot be 100% sure that this is even really safe. My intuition tells me that its kinda safe. But to still use with caution and always double double check stuff. And stay far below these numbers if you dont like taking risks cause remember you always take risks adjusting this stuff. Truth is using this Formula IS A RISK! It may not be SAFE at all. Especially considering that these numbers have not actually been provided by intel. 

Another way i look at it is like a car RPM dial. Just cause the red doesn't start till say 7000 RPM doesn't mean you can drive your car around at 6999 RPMs and be 100% safe from engine failure. 

This formula from what i understand is a operating range. A operating range to cover the golden to garbage chips. A formula that goes so high so that poor silicon will operate. Does that mean a garbage chip will fail faster then a golden chip? Does that mean running a golden chip at garbage chip specs is SAFE? No one knows. 

In my mind and intuition tells me the formula 1520 - (1.6 * AMPS) = ABSOLUTE MAX SPEC = RED LINE!!!!!! 

How close to said line and comfortable you are being to that red line is up to you. But know your **** can fail even below that red line. 


Also, When ever a equation is involved and a risk is involved. Double Double check the MATH ALWAYS....... Dont just go poking in numbers you see online into your bios with out double checking the numbers and understanding the equation and math... Doesn't mater WHO tells you its safe. PERIOD!


----------



## Grobro

reachthesky said:


> Had someone PM me for settings to convert from a static voltage overclock to a dvid offset overclock. Figured i'd share a method I use.
> 
> 
> 
> For anyone who wants to convert their current fixed voltage turbo LLC OC to a DVID offset overclock for the best temperatures/power management possible do the following(for a 9900K/kf/ks + aorus master, don't know how the other motherboards work)
> 
> all core multiplier - Whatever you normally use
> Cache multiplier - exactly 4 steps behind your core multiplier
> AC/DC loadlines both set to 1
> vcore LLC - standard
> *vcore voltage- normal, dvid offset *********
> 
> *DVID offset formula* when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC = Your current turbo LLC overclock vcore voltage that is set in bios minus(-) 1.2v = the amount of positive offset to add plus an additional+5mv.
> For example, If your 9900K required 1.32v manual voltage in bios with turbo LLC, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be 1.32v minus 1.2v = 120mv plus additional 5mv = +125mv DVID offset
> 
> If you only required 1.3v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be +105mv(1.3v minus 1.2v = 100mv + the additional 5mv =+105mv dvid offset
> If you only required 1.25v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be 1.25v minus 1.2v = 50mv + additional 5mv voltage = +55mv dvid offset
> 
> etc etc
> 
> This formula only applies for figuring out the dvid offset when using it specifically with ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC. This formula gets completely thrown out the door if LLC is raised at all or if ac/dc is changed from 1/1.
> 
> I can tell you that for medium LLC + ac/dc=1/1, the dvid offset is equal to roughly HALF of the calculated number you ended up with when making the calculation with standard LLC in mind, plus that additional 5mv or 10mv. If I required 1.32v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, my dvid offset for medium llc + ac/dc=1/1 would be roughly +60mv. The only reason to use medium llc instead of standard is when you are trying to push really high frequency overclocks that require higher levels of vcore because overshoots are lower at the top end of medium llc compared to standard. If you were to put +205mv dvid offset with standard llc + ac/dc=1/1(produces the same voltage under load as an oc with turbo llc 1.4v manual voltage in bios), your overshoot will go beyond 1.4v unlike turbo LLC which has virtually no overshoot. So if you were thinking of pushing higher clocks that would normally need turbo llc with static/fixed voltages of 1.38v or higher by switching to a dvid offset, medium llc is a better option than standard llc since medium llc overshoot is much lower than standard llc.
> 
> 
> Due to the amount of overshoot difference between standard llc/medium llc in combination with ac/dc=1/1.....
> I'd recommend using ac/dc=1/1 + standard llc + dvid offset for converting any manual overclock that requires 1.35v or less bios static/fixed voltage with turbo llc.
> I'd recommend using ac/dc=1/1 + medium llc + dvid offset for converting any manual overclock that requires more than 1.35v bios static/fixed voltage with turbo llc.
> Why didn't I mention Low llc at all or share much about it? It has too much overshoot to be useful at higher voltage overclocks compared to medium llc and doesn't yield as good of a temperature decrease as standard llc does. It's kind of a middle of a road not really great at anything type of llc imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disable all c-states except C3(keep C3 enabled or you crash while browsing/idle)
> Disable voltage optimization, ring to core, speedshift, energy efficient turbo, race to halt
> enable speedstep
> use windows balanced power plan
> Multicore-enchancement - auto
> Disable Turbo (leave all power limits on auto too as I believe gigabyte leaves them completely unlocked)
> disable vt-d(assumng you don't use it)
> disable the iGPU (assuming you don't use it)
> Dram and SA/IO voltage requirements should be the same as before
> 
> If you change the below values to normal instead of these suggested values, you can lower temperatures even further if that is a concern.
> cpu vcore protection - 400mv
> cpu vcore current protection - extreme
> cpu vcore pwm switch rate - 500 khz
> pwm phase control - xtreme perf
> 
> Double restart before entering windows when making the dvid offset/ac/dc changes in the bios to avoid any potential voltage bugs.
> 
> Switching from a turbo llc manual voltage overclock to a standard llc + ac/dc=1/1 overclock at the same clockspeeds/voltage requirements under load will net you lower temperatures overall and even lower temperatures if you change the 4 settings above. It will also save on your electric bill + make your chip last longer(assuming your OC stays within intel spec when it comes to voltage/amps drawn underload). It also means that if you want to push your chip even further in frequency/voltage, you'll have a little more thermal headroom than usual to do so than if you were working with turblo LLC + a manual voltage.


Ok so i just gave this a try with a DVID of 55mv. 

(for 5Ghz on my 9700k, I needed 1.25v in static oc and turbo llc)

I still need to stress test thoroughly but i'm pretty much where i want to be from a core voltage point of view, very decent temps.

Thanks for the great explanations! 

I will let you guys know how this turns out.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

criskoe said:


> I think the best thing moving forward is for everyone to realize that the formula 1520 - (1.6 * AMPS) = Maximum safe voltage is a guide line from of a educated estimation. Even then we cannot be 100% sure that this is even really safe. My intuition tells me that its kinda safe. But to still use with caution and always double double check stuff. And stay far below these numbers if you dont like taking risks cause remember you always take risks adjusting this stuff. Truth is using this Formula IS A RISK! It may not be SAFE at all. Especially considering that these numbers have not actually been provided by intel.
> 
> Another way i look at it is like a car RPM dial. Just cause the red doesn't start till say 7000 RPM doesn't mean you can drive your car around at 6999 RPMs and be 100% safe from engine failure.
> 
> This formula from what i understand is a operating range. A operating range to cover the golden to garbage chips. A formula that goes so high so that poor silicon will operate. Does that mean a garbage chip will fail faster then a golden chip? Does that mean running a golden chip at garbage chip specs is SAFE? No one knows.
> 
> In my mind and intuition tells me the formula 1520 - (1.6 * AMPS) = ABSOLUTE MAX SPEC = RED LINE!!!!!!
> 
> How close to said line and comfortable you are being to that red line is up to you. But know your **** can fail even below that red line.
> 
> 
> Also, When ever a equation is involved and a risk is involved. Double Double check the MATH ALWAYS....... Dont just go poking in numbers you see online into your bios with out double checking the numbers and understanding the equation and math... Doesn't mater WHO tells you its safe. PERIOD!


I actually complained about that awhile back but only a few people took notice.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...clock-results-questions-136.html#post27908122

Notice that in the core 2 datasheet, go to page 31, Intel actually specifies 'absolute max' (that red line limit you gave) and even says that if you are here, your processor may still work if you pull it back but may have its longevity degraded?

Then below that, they give functional limits. They're even nice enough to actually show us the loadline slope on page 43 for the core 2 sheet.

Check out those three datasheets then compare them to the anemic 8th/9th gen specification sheet.

Some time after that, they completely removed any reference to 'functional limits' except the good old 'processor may be compromised if functional limits are exceeded' and just give us 'max' now, without telling us if those are absolute max or functional max. They even condensed the loadline information and put it as a number. I think that started happening around X58 or Sandy Bridge and I think I was the only person on any forum anywhere who complained about that (not about loadline--I didn't even know or understand that stuff. Probably why I degraded two 2600k's (being well under "Max VID") while flamers here on OCN kept saying 'degradation is a myth', which is why I stopped posting here for years, and stuck to mice and monitors).

When I asked Intel to clarify the difference and to explain 'functional limits' on the 9900K and if max VID, max amps and the loadline (1.6 mOhms) are 'functional' or 'absolute max', the engineer I contacted said "That's under NDA".

Oh and you guys remember this idle voltage degradation test here?
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...t-death-degradation-stories.html#post27026097

He didn't say what loadline calibration he used, and that matters a lot because LLC affects vdroop at idle too. Did he degrade at intel spec LLC (1.8 mOhms) at beyond max VID (1.55v > 1.520v)? Or did he use a tight LLC which may have just accelerated the process at 20 amps of current?


----------



## criskoe

Falkentyne said:


> I actually complained about that awhile back but only a few people took notice.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...clock-results-questions-136.html#post27908122
> 
> Notice that in the core 2 datasheet, go to page 31, Intel actually specifies 'absolute max' (that red line limit you gave) and even says that if you are here, your processor may still work if you pull it back but may have its longevity degraded?
> 
> Then below that, they give functional limits. They're even nice enough to actually show us the loadline slope on page 43 for the core 2 sheet.
> 
> Check out those three datasheets then compare them to the anemic 8th/9th gen specification sheet.
> 
> Some time after that, they completely removed any reference to 'functional limits' except the good old 'processor may be compromised if functional limits are exceeded' and just give us 'max' now, without telling us if those are absolute max or functional max. They even condensed the loadline information and put it as a number. I think that started happening around X58 or Sandy Bridge and I think I was the only person on any forum anywhere who complained about that (not about loadline--I didn't even know or understand that stuff. Probably why I degraded two 2600k's (being well under "Max VID") while flamers here on OCN kept saying 'degradation is a myth', which is why I stopped posting here for years, and stuck to mice and monitors).
> 
> When I asked Intel to clarify the difference and to explain 'functional limits' on the 9900K and if max VID, max amps and the loadline (1.6 mOhms) are 'functional' or 'absolute max', the engineer I contacted said "That's under NDA".


Yeah. 

I feel like with all this talk about max VID and what is “safe” is there’s way too many factors that come into play that make it even more cloudy to ever give a concrete answer. Like operating temps. Mother board quality. VRM quality. Overshoots. LLC settings. It’s quite obvious that different brand mbs act differently. Even the exact same models can have slight real world variances. Which changes everything. How about inaccurate sensors? As well avg user loads. Like heavy load users to a light load user. It all changes the equation I feel.

Take for example. If I drop my 9900ks into my Maximus xi extreme and leave everything auto but set intel typical scenario svid. And touch nothing else. It has voltages up to 1.54v automatically. Asus auto volts for typical user? Wow


----------



## wingman99

@Falkentyne max Intel specified voltage?

Using ohm's law I don't know where Intel is measuring 1.6 milliohm resistance from? At 193 Amps, 0.0016 Ohms (193x.0016)= 0.3088 voltage = 59.5984 watts.

1.52 voltage 193 Amps (1.52 ÷ 193) = 0.00787564767 Ohms resistance = 293.36 watts.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> @Falkentyne max Intel specified voltage?
> 
> Using ohm's law I don't know where Intel is measuring 1.6 milliohm resistance from? At 193 Amps, 0.0016 Ohms (193x.0016)= 0.3088 voltage = 59.5984 watts.
> 
> 1.52 voltage 193 Amps (1.52 ÷ 193) = 0.00787564767 Ohms resistance = 293.36 watts.


Beats me.
Did you look at the older datasheets?
There's a lot more useful loadline information in them.
I used to love reading those things.

Now you tell me what is more useful.

THIS:
1.6 mOhms

Or this? (chart attached).
I think you're interpreting it incorrectly, because I don't think watts comes into that picture.

The graphic from the Core 2 shows "-2.1 mv / A" meaning at every 1 amp of current, vcore drops by 2.1mv (0.0021v).
So at 60 amps, that's a 126mv voltage drop.

So for 9900k, that would mean 1.6mv every amp, for 308mv (0.308v) at 193 amps.

That means the Core 2 loadline is 2.1 mOhms then.


----------



## GeneO

Does anybody understand this difference between VR VOUT and Vcore (from the super i/o)? This was taken with all c-states enabled, and speedshift enabled, EIST disabled (I normally run with EIST disabled and use speedshift and autonomous mode enabled in OS - so it is the same depicted for me in this mode, same if you use EIST instead). If I disable all c-states it is the same, so it is not some affect of core idling. It only goes away if I disable EIST and speedshift. In that case with these enabled, voltage doesn't drop on vcore or VR VOUT as expected. I think the vcore is showing a real voltage drop when VR VOUT isn't. Thoughts?


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Does anybody understand this difference between VR VOUT and Vcore (from the super i/o)? This was taken with all c-states enabled, and speedshift enabled, EIST disabled (I normally run with EIST disabled and use speedshift and autonomous mode enabled in OS - so it is the same depicted for me in this mode, same if you use EIST instead). If I disable all c-states it is the same, so it is not some affect of core idling. It only goes away if I disable EIST and speedshift. In that case with these enabled, voltage doesn't drop on vcore or VR VOUT as expected. I think the vcore is showing a real voltage drop when VR VOUT isn't. Thoughts?


VR VOUT monitoring doesn't seem to work right with CPU power saving in all configurations. But I don't use c-states so I can't say much. Probably because it's coming from the VRM itself.

C-states actually put "part" of the CPU to sleep at idle. It's not just a downclock and downvolt.
That's why some C-states can use as low as 1 watt!

I've seen some screenshots where VR VOUT was 1.10v and Super I/O was 0.70v, and others where they matched. I'm assuming that's from different levels of C-states enabled or disabled.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> VR VOUT monitoring doesn't seem to work right with CPU power saving in all configurations. But I don't use c-states so I can't say much. Probably because it's coming from the VRM itself.
> 
> C-states actually put "part" of the CPU to sleep at idle. It's not just a downclock and downvolt.
> That's why some C-states can use as low as 1 watt!
> 
> I've seen some screenshots where VR VOUT was 1.10v and Super I/O was 0.70v, and others where they matched. I'm assuming that's from different levels of C-states enabled or disabled.


If you re-read what I posted you would see I did state that I disabled all c-states and it is the same, i.e. the drop is related to EIST speedstep or speeddhift lowering the voltage, It has nothing to do with c-states,


----------



## GeneO

GeneO said:


> If you re-read what I posted you would see I did state that I disabled all c-states and it is the same, i.e. the drop is related to EIST speedstep or speeddhift lowering the voltage, It has nothing to do with c-states,


I think I will post this in the VRM topic, way too much noise here right now.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> If you re-read what I posted you would see I did state that I disabled all c-states and it is the same, i.e. the drop is related to EIST speedstep or speeddhift lowering the voltage, It has nothing to do with c-states,


I don't use speedshift or c-states so I don't know  (at least not through the BIOS. I use Throttlestop to control speedshift but I'm on fixed vcore).
Sorry.


----------



## Timur Born

GeneO said:


> Does anybody understand this difference between VR VOUT and Vcore (from the super i/o)? This was taken with all c-states enabled, and speedshift enabled, EIST disabled (I normally run with EIST disabled and use speedshift and autonomous mode enabled in OS - so it is the same depicted for me in this mode, same if you use EIST instead). If I disable all c-states it is the same, so it is not some affect of core idling. It only goes away if I disable EIST and speedshift. In that case with these enabled, voltage doesn't drop on vcore or VR VOUT as expected. I think the vcore is showing a real voltage drop when VR VOUT isn't. Thoughts?


This is what I wrote earlier. Please replace "mostly useless" with "mostly useless for idle states" (aka both C-states and P-states) in the following sentence, though.

"I measured wattage at the wall and based on that I suspect that the "OUT" measurements done by HWinfo are mostly useless. Either the polling rate is too low or the averaging is too coarse.

During idle times POUT (in combination with VOUT and IOUT) suggest over 20 watts average load - with peaks over 40 watts - at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt average at Speedshift 100%.

The real difference at the wall is much closer to what "CPU Package Power" measures, aka more like 2 - 4 watts higher average draw at 0% compared to 100% during Idle.

Turning off C-states pushes this to even more dramatic differences. Idle wattage according to POUT is around 35 watts at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt at Speedshift 100%. So 15 watts more compared to using C-states... not! Because according to the wall meter the difference is less than 2 watts, not 15 watts.

No idea what those "OUT" numbers are meant to measure, but I suggest to take these with a big grain of salt."


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does anybody understand this difference between VR VOUT and Vcore (from the super i/o)? This was taken with all c-states enabled, and speedshift enabled, EIST disabled (I normally run with EIST disabled and use speedshift and autonomous mode enabled in OS - so it is the same depicted for me in this mode, same if you use EIST instead). If I disable all c-states it is the same, so it is not some affect of core idling. It only goes away if I disable EIST and speedshift. In that case with these enabled, voltage doesn't drop on vcore or VR VOUT as expected. I think the vcore is showing a real voltage drop when VR VOUT isn't. Thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> This is what I wrote earlier. Please replace "mostly useless" with "mostly useless for idle states" (aka both C-states and P-states) in the following sentence, though.
> 
> "I measured wattage at the wall and based on that I suspect that the "OUT" measurements done by HWinfo are mostly useless. Either the polling rate is too low or the averaging is too coarse.
> 
> During idle times POUT (in combination with VOUT and IOUT) suggest over 20 watts average load - with peaks over 40 watts - at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt average at Speedshift 100%.
> 
> The real difference at the wall is much closer to what "CPU Package Power" measures, aka more like 2 - 4 watts higher average draw at 0% compared to 100% during Idle.
> 
> Turning off C-states pushes this to even more dramatic differences. Idle wattage according to POUT is around 35 watts at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt at Speedshift 100%. So 15 watts more compared to using C-states... not! Because according to the wall meter the difference is less than 2 watts, not 15 watts.
> 
> No idea what those "OUT" numbers are meant to measure, but I suggest to take these with a big grain of salt."
Click to expand...

I always assumed those measurements are taken after the vrm does its thing.

I'm far from a power delivery expert though. 

The numbers can at least be compared to them self. Like lower p out vs higher p out.


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> This is what I wrote earlier. Please replace "mostly useless" with "mostly useless for idle states" (aka both C-states and P-states) in the following sentence, though.
> 
> "I measured wattage at the wall and based on that I suspect that the "OUT" measurements done by HWinfo are mostly useless. Either the polling rate is too low or the averaging is too coarse.
> 
> During idle times POUT (in combination with VOUT and IOUT) suggest over 20 watts average load - with peaks over 40 watts - at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt average at Speedshift 100%.
> 
> The real difference at the wall is much closer to what "CPU Package Power" measures, aka more like 2 - 4 watts higher average draw at 0% compared to 100% during Idle.
> 
> Turning off C-states pushes this to even more dramatic differences. Idle wattage according to POUT is around 35 watts at Speedshift 0% compared to less than 1 watt at Speedshift 100%. So 15 watts more compared to using C-states... not! Because according to the wall meter the difference is less than 2 watts, not 15 watts.
> 
> No idea what those "OUT" numbers are meant to measure, but I suggest to take these with a big grain of salt."


Interesting. Maybe something is amiss there. But I would think if it were coarse grained sampling or sampling speed, since this at idle and the vcore is indicating low voltage almost all of the time, that the VR OUT sampling would almost have to reflect this.


----------



## gamervivek

Have been testing RAM OC with Hynix M-die 16GBx2 3000MHz 15-15-15-35 Ripjaws on Ultra, and surprisingly they can't do 3600MHz CL16 while they worked easily on X470 gaming 7 with lower voltage. The latter's manual had 2nd and 4th slots from CPU as the best slots while Ultra's manual doesn't say anything, so I'm thinking the gaming7 was daisy chained while this is T-topology?



Wirerat said:


> Some may not agree with me on this but my veiw on bios updates are simple.
> 
> If it's all working, don't try to fix it.
> 
> Unless there is a specific need or something not functional, there is little reason to update the bios imo.


I took this advice, but I'm having a bug where the trfc I set in the BIOS with the above sticks is different than what I see in Hwinfo. Also, is there a comparable software on intel's side that shows memory timings like Ryzen master does in detail?


edit: Tested more, I can set 460, 490 without issues but 420 doesn't change from 460 and 340 gave 380. :headscrat


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Interesting. Maybe something is amiss there. But I would think if it were coarse grained sampling or sampling speed, since this at idle and the vcore is indicating low voltage almost all of the time, that the VR OUT sampling would almost have to reflect this.


What if VR VOUT is measuring the voltage leaving the VRM to the CPU after vdroop but the Super I/O is measuring what is going to the CPU pins (affected by power plane impedance?)
If the CPU cuts stuff out from certain power saving, that's like having a water line coming from a filter right outside the house, to your house, but removing the hose so it doesn't go into the faucet but gets dumped on the street when you turn on the valve.

Sorry, bad analogy.


----------



## Wirerat

@gamervivek does the computer cycle few times on start up after making the trfc change?

Try raising it some and see if it sticks.


----------



## wingman99

wingman99 said:


> @Falkentyne max Intel specified voltage?
> 
> Using ohm's law I don't know where Intel is measuring 1.6 milliohm resistance from? At 193 Amps, 0.0016 Ohms (193x.0016)= 0.3088 voltage = 59.5984 watts.
> 
> 1.52 voltage 193 Amps (1.52 ÷ 193) = 0.00787564767 Ohms resistance = 293.36 watts.





Falkentyne said:


> Beats me.
> Did you look at the older datasheets?
> There's a lot more useful loadline information in them.
> I used to love reading those things.
> 
> Now you tell me what is more useful.
> 
> THIS:
> 1.6 mOhms
> 
> Or this? (chart attached).
> I think you're interpreting it incorrectly, because I don't think watts comes into that picture.
> 
> The graphic from the Core 2 shows "-2.1 mv / A" meaning at every 1 amp of current, vcore drops by 2.1mv (0.0021v).
> So at 60 amps, that's a 126mv voltage drop.
> 
> So for 9900k, that would mean 1.6mv every amp, for 308mv (0.308v) at 193 amps.
> 
> That means the Core 2 loadline is 2.1 mOhms then.


I was just using Ohms law for watts (Voltage X AMPs) = watts. I was comparing the Processor power package watts.

The Intel specification for loadline slope within the VR regulation loop capability 8 core is 1.6 mOhms. Note 14 in the right column looks like the 1.6 mOhms is for load line AC/DC programming.


----------



## gamervivek

Wirerat said:


> @gamervivek does the computer cycle few times on start up after making the trfc change?
> 
> Try raising it some and see if it sticks.


No issues with booting with the trfc changes I'm doing. Cycling happens only on changing to higher frequencies 3800 and more. Now trfc is stuck at 460 while set at 340 in BIOS.

I've seen that software, but is there an official link from asrock's site?


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> I was just using Ohms law for watts (Voltage X AMPs) = watts. I was comparing the Processor power package watts.
> 
> The Intel specification for loadline slope within the VR regulation loop capability 8 core is 1.6 mOhms. Note 14 in the right column looks like the 1.6 mOhms is for load line AC/DC programming.
> 
> View attachment 307522


The 1.6 is also for VRM loadline.
Do you see the problem though?
They don't have a loadline graph anywhere in their 9th gen spec sheet!

All they say is "Loadline Slope within the VRM regulation capability", which means "Slope" is the graph they refused to give us (= 1.6 mOhms) 
Back they they gave us a simple to understand -2.1 mv / Amp, which if we look in later 4 core datasheets, it says 2.1 mOhm.

So the 1.6 mOhm would be -1.6mv / Amp, if Intel were being nice. 

The AC Loadline is supposed to match the "default" VRM loadline, and is designed to boost operating voltages on auto or offset modes, and is limited by the 1.52v limit (if SVID offset capability is not enabled).
It seems like Asus boards bypass this limitation by default, while Gigabyte requires you enable a setting for it. The confusing part is DC Loadline. First they say "Loadline Slope within the VR regulation loop capability (= VRM)" then in the notes they say "DC Loadline= power measurements", which is confusing as all hell, since changing DC Loadline does not change the loadline calibration--it only changes the CPU Package Power and the VID you see.

I'm telling you. The old Intel spec sheets were fun to look at even if you didn't understand 80% of the stuff in there. There were graphs galore and a lot of better explanations.


----------



## wingman99

wingman99 said:


> I was just using Ohms law for watts (Voltage X AMPs) = watts. I was comparing the Processor power package watts.
> 
> The Intel specification for loadline slope within the VR regulation loop capability 8 core is 1.6 mOhms. Note 14 in the right column looks like the 1.6 mOhms is for load line AC/DC programming.
> 
> View attachment 307522





Falkentyne said:


> The 1.6 is also for VRM loadline.
> Do you see the problem though?
> They don't have a loadline graph anywhere in their 9th gen spec sheet!
> 
> All they say is "Loadline Slope within the VRM regulation capability", which means "Slope" is the graph they refused to give us (= 1.6 mOhms)
> Back they they gave us a simple to understand -2.1 mv / Amp, which if we look in later 4 core datasheets, it says 2.1 mOhm.
> 
> So the 1.6 mOhm would be -1.6mv / Amp, if Intel were being nice.
> 
> The AC Loadline is supposed to match the "default" VRM loadline, and is designed to boost operating voltages on auto or offset modes, and is limited by the 1.52v limit (if SVID offset capability is not enabled).
> It seems like Asus boards bypass this limitation by default, while Gigabyte requires you enable a setting for it. The confusing part is DC Loadline. First they say "Loadline Slope within the VR regulation loop capability (= VRM)" then in the notes they say "DC Loadline= power measurements", which is confusing as all hell, since changing DC Loadline does not change the loadline calibration--it only changes the CPU Package Power and the VID you see.
> 
> I'm telling you. The old Intel spec sheets were fun to look at even if you didn't understand 80% of the stuff in there. There were graphs galore and a lot of better explanations.


loadline slope within the VR regulation loop capability 8 core is 1.6 mOhms, is VRM. VR(voltage regulator) VRM(voltage regulator module).


----------



## Wirerat

gamervivek said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> @gamervivek does the computer cycle few times on start up after making the trfc change?
> 
> Try raising it some and see if it sticks.
> 
> 
> 
> No issues with booting with the trfc changes I'm doing. Cycling happens only on changing to higher frequencies 3800 and more. Now trfc is stuck at 460 while set at 340 in BIOS.
> 
> I've seen that software, but is there an official link from asrock's site?
Click to expand...

http://asrock.pc.cdn.bitgravity.com/Utility/Formula/TimingConfigurator(v4.0.4).zip

That's the link. It works on all brands motherboard.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Thread cleaned. 

Please lets keep it civil. I get we disagree with the actions of others sometimes, but report the issue and move on. Lets not bring down a quality conversation with arguments. Please note that if the disruption resumes warnings/infractions will be issued as appropriate. 

Thanks,
E


----------



## Timur Born

GeneO said:


> Interesting. Maybe something is amiss there. But I would think if it were coarse grained sampling or sampling speed, since this at idle and the vcore is indicating low voltage almost all of the time, that the VR OUT sampling would almost have to reflect this.


We don't know the sampling-rate of the board, but I suspect that it cannot keep up with Speedshift changes. It also seems that the board's sampling-rate of both VCore sensors is more coarse (slower) than the VOUT sensor. And any or all of the sensors may be averaging internally and then report at a lower than their true sample-rate, I don't they their specs in that regard.

What I do know is that with Speedshift the derived POUT reports too high values during idle times compared to what I measure at the wall. So for idle readings I trust the VCore sensors more than VOUT. That being said, the graphs demonstrate that VCore S1 and S2 can be in complete disagreement, reading opposite values at the same time. So all of these sensors are meant to be interpreted with a big grain of salt.

Here are screenshots done at 100 ms HWinfo sampling-rate. Some remarks that are not visible in the graphs:

- Average voltage readings of VOUT are higher than both VCore sensors for both "Balanced" and "Power Saver" profiles when Speedshift is enabled (via Windows' "Autonomous" setting).

- Average voltage readings of VOUT are lower than both VCore sensors for "Balanced" when Speedshift is disabled.

- Average voltage readings are practically the same as both VCore sensors for "Power Saver" when Speedshift is disabled (unsurprisingly with no spikes happening at all).

Windows' power profiles are generally more aggressive towards power-saving compared to their Speedshift equivalents.


----------



## Rbk_3

Just a question.

What are the Core 0 T0 Effective Clock, Core 1 T0 Effective Clock readings? They are only an average of mid to low 4000ghz


----------



## Rbk_3

reachthesky said:


> Had someone PM me for settings to convert from a static voltage overclock to a dvid offset overclock. Figured i'd share a method I use.
> 
> EDIT:I'll be updating this post regularly. There is no where on the internet with a definitive guide or a guide with enough depth/details for dvid offset overclocks(or atleast that i'm aware of, please chime in with a source if I am wrong, I'll link the guide here too if it is thorough enough/easy enough to understand "for dummies" for my standards). There are small simple guides here and there but nothing all that indepth. I'll do my best to try and provide a good starting point at the very least.
> 
> 
> For anyone who wants to convert their current fixed voltage turbo LLC OC to a DVID offset overclock for the best temperatures/power management possible do the following(for a 9900K/kf/ks + aorus master, don't know how the other motherboards work)
> 
> all core multiplier - Whatever you normally use
> Cache multiplier - exactly 4 steps behind your core multiplier
> AC/DC loadlines both set to 1
> vcore LLC - standard
> *vcore voltage- normal, dvid offset *********
> 
> EDIT: I needed only +5mv added for the 5ghz OC, another user needed +10mv for 5ghz medium llc, Another user had to add +15mv. Megaohm mentioned earlier that when DC loadline is set to 1, he said there is about 15mv drop off between dcll 1 and dcll 160. This is probably why myself and other users had to add the +5mv to +15mv at the end of the calculation. I figured I would mention this otherwise megaohm(falkentyne) might accuse you of "stealing" his "work" when in reality all that is happening is constant circulation of information learned and shared with others, you know, basic every day happenings in every day life).
> 
> *DVID offset formula* when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC = Your current turbo LLC overclock vcore voltage that is set in bios minus(-) 1.2v = the amount of positive offset to add plus an additional+5mv.
> For example, If your 9900K required 1.32v manual voltage in bios with turbo LLC, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be 1.32v minus 1.2v = 120mv plus additional 5mv = +125mv DVID offset
> 
> If you only required 1.3v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be +105mv(1.3v minus 1.2v = 100mv + the additional 5mv =+105mv dvid offset
> If you only required 1.25v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, Your dvid offset when using ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC would be 1.25v minus 1.2v = 50mv + additional 5mv voltage = +55mv dvid offset
> 
> etc etc
> 
> This formula only applies for figuring out the dvid offset when using it specifically with ac/dc=1/1 + standard LLC. This formula gets completely thrown out the door if LLC is raised at all or if ac/dc is changed from 1/1.
> 
> I can tell you that for medium LLC + ac/dc=1/1, the dvid offset is equal to roughly HALF of the calculated number you ended up with when making the calculation with standard LLC in mind, plus that additional 5mv or 10mv. If I required 1.32v static voltage in bios with turbo llc, my dvid offset for medium llc + ac/dc=1/1 would be roughly +60mv. The only reason to use medium llc instead of standard is when you are trying to push really high frequency overclocks that require higher levels of vcore because overshoots are lower at the top end of medium llc compared to standard. If you were to put +205mv dvid offset with standard llc + ac/dc=1/1(produces the same voltage under load as an oc with turbo llc 1.4v manual voltage in bios), your overshoot will go beyond 1.4v unlike turbo LLC which has virtually no overshoot. So if you were thinking of pushing higher clocks that would normally need turbo llc with static/fixed voltages of 1.38v or higher by switching to a dvid offset, medium llc is a better option than standard llc since medium llc overshoot is much lower than standard llc.
> 
> 
> Due to the amount of overshoot difference between standard llc/medium llc in combination with ac/dc=1/1.....
> I'd recommend using ac/dc=1/1 + standard llc + dvid offset for converting any manual overclock that requires 1.35v or less bios static/fixed voltage with turbo llc.
> I'd recommend using ac/dc=1/1 + medium llc + dvid offset for converting any manual overclock that requires more than 1.35v bios static/fixed voltage with turbo llc.
> Why didn't I mention Low llc at all or share much about it? It has too much overshoot to be useful at higher voltage overclocks compared to medium llc and doesn't yield as good of a temperature decrease as standard llc does. It's kind of a middle of a road not really great at anything type of llc imo. That is not to say low llc doesn't have it's uses, I just think it has a much smaller niche and is probably more useful on a case by case basis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disable all c-states except C3(keep C3 enabled or you crash while browsing/idle)
> Disable voltage optimization, ring to core, speedshift, energy efficient turbo, race to halt
> enable speedstep
> use windows balanced power plan
> Multicore-enchancement - auto
> Disable Turbo (leave all power limits on auto too as I believe gigabyte leaves them completely unlocked)
> disable vt-d(assumng you don't use it)
> disable the iGPU (assuming you don't use it)
> Dram and SA/IO voltage requirements should be the same as before
> 
> If you change the below values to normal instead of these suggested values, you can lower temperatures even further if that is a concern.
> cpu vcore protection - 400mv
> cpu vcore current protection - extreme
> cpu vcore pwm switch rate - 500 khz
> pwm phase control - xtreme perf
> 
> Double restart before entering windows when making the dvid offset/ac/dc changes in the bios to avoid any potential voltage bugs.
> 
> Switching from a turbo llc manual voltage overclock to a standard llc + ac/dc=1/1 overclock at the same clockspeeds/voltage requirements under load will net you lower temperatures overall and even lower temperatures if you change the 4 settings above. It will also save on your electric bill + make your chip last longer(assuming your OC stays within intel spec when it comes to voltage/amps drawn underload). It also means that if you want to push your chip even further in frequency/voltage, you'll have a little more thermal headroom than usual to do so than if you were working with turblo LLC + a manual voltage.
> 
> 
> If you think I missed anything or if you think you have anything valuable to add to this sort of guide in progress, please chime in with full details/sources. Want to make sure this is a meaty guide for users to switch over to after they've gotten their feet wet learning how to fixed voltage OC.


Can you explain "AC/DC loadlines both set to 1" 

I have the option for Power Saving etc. Not numbers


----------



## GeneO

@Rbk_3

I am guessing here. The T0 and T1 are thread 0 and thread 1 in each core, the effective clock is the core frequency x duty cycle of the thread, where duty cycle is the fraction of the time the thread runs, so when bboth run, their effect rate is around half the 5100 (the minimum in hwinfo). Having said that, if this is correct, why is the average not half?


----------



## Wirerat

ENTERPRISE said:


> Thread cleaned.
> 
> Please lets keep it civil. I get we disagree with the actions of others sometimes, but report the issue and move on. Lets not bring down a quality conversation with arguments. Please note that if the disruption resumes warnings/infractions will be issued as appropriate.
> 
> Thanks,
> E


Thank you 🙂


----------



## ansontzcheung

Hi all, I am new to here. Yesterday when I first boot up the pc with a Z390 AORUS Master, it went into a boot loop but eventually boot up in backup bios. I just knew it because I saw the b_bios LED coming off, and all my previous settings were gone, especially the Windows 8/10 WHQL boot one. 

Is there any way for me to go back to main bios?

Thanks


----------



## GeneO

Rbk_3 said:


> Can you explain "AC/DC loadlines both set to 1"
> 
> I have the option for Power Saving etc. Not numbers


in menu MIT-> Advanced Voltage Settings -> Internal VR Control 
IA AC loadline 
IA DC loadline


----------



## GeneO

ansontzcheung said:


> Hi all, I am new to here. Yesterday when I first boot up the pc with a Z390 AORUS Master, it went into a boot loop but eventually boot up in backup bios. I just knew it because I saw the b_bios LED coming off, and all my previous settings were gone, especially the Windows 8/10 WHQL boot one.
> 
> Is there any way for me to go back to main bios?
> 
> Thanks


Dip switches on the board let you select single BIOS and another switch which one. It is in the manual.

I generally have it set to single, first BIOS. If I get into trouble I do a Clear CMOS.


----------



## Rbk_3

GeneO said:


> in menu MIT-> Advanced Voltage Settings -> Internal VR Control
> 
> IA AC loadline
> 
> IA DC loadline




Thanks. Will this be even lower than the Power Savjng preset?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wingman99

Rbk_3 said:


> Thanks. Will this be even lower than the Power Savjng preset?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes Setting loadline AC/DC to 1 will be lower turbo boost DVID voltage lower than power Saving preset.:specool: Instead of using negative offset and using loadline AC/DC 1 keeps the idle core voltage default stock.


----------



## GeneO

It's the lowest IA loadline you can get = 1/100 mohm


----------



## ansontzcheung

GeneO said:


> Dip switches on the board let you select single BIOS and another switch which one. It is in the manual.
> 
> I generally have it set to single, first BIOS. If I get into trouble I do a Clear CMOS.


If I clear CMOS, will settings on BOTH bios be reset? Also, will I be able to get back to main bios after clearing CMOS?


----------



## GeneO

ansontzcheung said:


> If I clear CMOS, will settings on BOTH bios be reset? Also, will I be able to get back to main bios after clearing CMOS?


No they won't.

EDIT: I misread that. I do not know. I always save my settings to a profile and have it set to use dingle BIOS. 
I would expect it would only clear the settings in the currently active BIOS, but I have not tested this.


----------



## ansontzcheung

GeneO said:


> No they won't.
> 
> EDIT: I misread that. I do not know. I always save my settings to a profile and have it set to use dingle BIOS.
> I would expect it would only clear the settings in the currently active BIOS, but I have not tested this.


Thanks a lot anyway.

The BIOS is now stuck in the backup one. That’s why I’m wondering if clearing CMOS helps switching back to main bios.


----------



## KedarWolf

ansontzcheung said:


> Thanks a lot anyway.
> 
> The BIOS is now stuck in the backup one. That’s why I’m wondering if clearing CMOS helps switching back to main bios.


What happens when you change the BIOS switch to Single BIOS and the second switch to the main BIOS?


----------



## Grobro

So after achieving a stable dynamic OC to 5Ghz of my 9700k on a Z390 Aorus Master and still benchmarking, I figured... hey why not buy DDR4 4400 16Gb of Viper Patriot Steel (found them at quite a decent price).



I received them and until now was using the F9 bios. I couldn't boot with the new RAM using either XMP profile 1 (4400) or 2 (4200). I updated to F10 bios but it still is a no go.



I thought the Aorus Master could handle that or is there something i am missing?

Edit: looks like 4100 is the highest it will boot on


----------



## Timur Born

Curious observation: My Windows installation does not boot with CSM being enabled (optimized default).


----------



## KedarWolf

Grobro said:


> So after achieving a stable dynamic OC to 5Ghz of my 9700k on a Z390 Aorus Master and still benchmarking, I figured... hey why not buy DDR4 4400 16Gb of Viper Patriot Steel (found them at quite a decent price).
> 
> 
> 
> I received them and until now was using the F9 bios. I couldn't boot with the new RAM using either XMP profile 1 (4400) or 2 (4200). I updated to F10 bios but it still is a no go.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the Aorus Master could handle that or is there something i am missing?
> 
> Edit: looks like 4100 is the highest it will boot on


2x8GB will not overclock as good as 4x8GB on Gigabyte boards, they use T-Topology and four single rank DIMMs are better.

That being said, even with four sticks most people not getting higher than 4133MHZ, it's just much the limit on four slot boards. Two slot boards like the Asus Apex with do 4400MHz pretty easy and I've seen as high as 4600MHz, even in a few cases, 4800MHz.


----------



## Grobro

KedarWolf said:


> Grobro said:
> 
> 
> 
> So after achieving a stable dynamic OC to 5Ghz of my 9700k on a Z390 Aorus Master and still benchmarking, I figured... hey why not buy DDR4 4400 16Gb of Viper Patriot Steel (found them at quite a decent price).
> 
> 
> 
> I received them and until now was using the F9 bios. I couldn't boot with the new RAM using either XMP profile 1 (4400) or 2 (4200). I updated to F10 bios but it still is a no go.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the Aorus Master could handle that or is there something i am missing?
> 
> Edit: looks like 4100 is the highest it will boot on
> 
> 
> 
> 2x8GB will not overclock as good as 4x8GB on Gigabyte boards, they use T-Topology and four single rank DIMMs are better.
> 
> That being said, even with four sticks most people not getting higher than 4133MHZ, it's just much the limit on four slot boards. Two slot boards like the Asus Apex with do 4400MHz pretty easy and I've seen as high as 4600MHz, even in a few cases, 4800MHz.
Click to expand...

I can be happy with 4100MHz although it seems i have lost my overclock stability, as i BSOD'd after a tiny bit of Prime95 at small FFTs.

Now Prime seems to be running fine but with the Ram at stock settings...

(i haven't checked the ram with memtest yet though)


----------



## gamervivek

KedarWolf said:


> 2x8GB will not overclock as good as 4x8GB on Gigabyte boards, they use T-Topology and four single rank DIMMs are better.
> 
> That being said, even with four sticks most people not getting higher than 4133MHZ, it's just much the limit on four slot boards. Two slot boards like the Asus Apex with do 4400MHz pretty easy and I've seen as high as 4600MHz, even in a few cases, 4800MHz.


I don't get why 2 sticks would be worse than 4 similar ones on the same motherboard.

I'm getting worse results on Z390 ultra compared to X470 gaming 7 with the same RAM, (CL17 vs. CL16, and TRFC 380 vs. 340), but I doubt it's because only two RAM slots are filled on it.


----------



## Wirerat

gamervivek said:


> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2x8GB will not overclock as good as 4x8GB on Gigabyte boards, they use T-Topology and four single rank DIMMs are better.
> 
> That being said, even with four sticks most people not getting higher than 4133MHZ, it's just much the limit on four slot boards. Two slot boards like the Asus Apex with do 4400MHz pretty easy and I've seen as high as 4600MHz, even in a few cases, 4800MHz.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't get why 2 sticks would be worse than 4 similar ones on the same motherboard.
> 
> I'm getting worse results on Z390 ultra compared to X470 gaming 7 with the same RAM, (CL17 vs. CL16, and TRFC 380 vs. 340), but I doubt it's because only two RAM slots are filled on it.
Click to expand...

The Aorus motherboards are T topology ram trace layouts. The max performance is actually with 4 ram sticks.

Check the ram Qvl list for the mobo. You will see the top speeds tested for the qvl were using 4 sticks.


----------



## robertr1

Am I the only one who doesn't use AC/DC loadline at 1? 

I just leave then at 0, set my offset and apply auto LLC on vcore and power savings on AC/DC

What's the difference between what I'm doing and what AC/DC 1 does?


----------



## Grobro

Wirerat said:


> gamervivek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KedarWolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2x8GB will not overclock as good as 4x8GB on Gigabyte boards, they use T-Topology and four single rank DIMMs are better.
> 
> That being said, even with four sticks most people not getting higher than 4133MHZ, it's just much the limit on four slot boards. Two slot boards like the Asus Apex with do 4400MHz pretty easy and I've seen as high as 4600MHz, even in a few cases, 4800MHz.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't get why 2 sticks would be worse than 4 similar ones on the same motherboard.
> 
> I'm getting worse results on Z390 ultra compared to X470 gaming 7 with the same RAM, (CL17 vs. CL16, and TRFC 380 vs. 340), but I doubt it's because only two RAM slots are filled on it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Aorus motherboards are T topology ram trace layouts. The max performance is actually with 4 ram sticks.
> 
> Check the ram Qvl list for the mobo. You will see the top speeds tested for the qvl were using 4 sticks.
Click to expand...

Also with those 2 sticks, it boots at 4100Mhz but seems to be stable only at 4000Mhz. 

I'll just wait a bit, get a couple more and see what's up.


----------



## wingman99

robertr1 said:


> Am I the only one who doesn't use AC/DC loadline at 1?
> 
> I just leave then at 0, set my offset and apply auto LLC on vcore and power savings on AC/DC
> 
> What's the difference between what I'm doing and what AC/DC 1 does?


If you have the desired core voltage I would not change anything.

Setting loadline AC/DC to 1 will be lower turbo boost DVID core voltage calibration lower than power savings AC/DC. Instead of using negative DVID offset, using power savings on loadline AC/DC and loadline AC/DC 1 keeps the idle core voltage default stock. Power savings loadline AC/DC and loadline AC/DC 1 both do the same thing.


----------



## robertr1

wingman99 said:


> If you have the desired core voltage I would not change anything.
> 
> Setting loadline AC/DC to 1 will be lower turbo boost DVID core voltage calibration lower than power savings AC/DC. Instead of using negative DVID offset, using power savings on loadline AC/DC and loadline AC/DC 1 keeps the idle core voltage default stock. Power savings loadline AC/DC and loadline AC/DC 1 both do the same thing.


My voltage is pretty good. +0.140v offset for 52/47x so nothing to complain about.

I don't have the idle crash issue with c states, speedstep and windows balanced plan enabled.


----------



## wingman99

Grobro said:


> Also with those 2 sticks, it boots at 4100Mhz but seems to be stable only at 4000Mhz.
> 
> I'll just wait a bit, get a couple more and see what's up.


Going from 2 sticks of memory to 4 sticks usually reduces the overclock.

Here is a video to explain.


----------



## KedarWolf

wingman99 said:


> Going from 2 sticks of memory to 4 sticks usually reduces the overclock.
> 
> Here is a video to explain.
> 
> https://youtu.be/3vQwGGbW1AE


Two slot boards like the Apex do much better with overclocking RAM. four slot Daisy Chain boards do okay with two sticks, but it's been found here Gigabyte boards overclock RAM better on T-Topology with all four slots filled here than with two. Like I tried my Master with two slots filled, it wouldn't even boot at the very same RAM speed as with four slots filled, needs much less RAM speed to boot.

Edit: Fixed a typo.

Second edit: I just two stick sticks out, instant BSOD booting into Windows without changing the speed or timings, put the two sticks back in, boots fine, and running RamTest it works just fine.

As I said, two sticks don't work as well as four.


----------



## Wirerat

The qvl only shows 4 sticks populated at the highest speeds for all the aorus mobos. 

I know it's not the normal scenario but it's how these boards perform. 

https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Memory/mb_memory_z390-aorus-master_191113.pdf


----------



## Timur Born

Where do I find the Thermal Velocity Boost setting in F10?

_Edit: Just found it myself._


----------



## wingman99

KedarWolf said:


> Two slot boards like the Apex do much better with overclocking RAM. four slot Daisy Chain boards do okay with two sticks, but it's been found here Gigabyte boards overclock RAM better on T-Topology with all four slots filled here than with two. Like I tried my Master with two slots filled, it wouldn't even boot at the very same RAM speed as with four slots filled, needs much less RAM speed to boot.
> 
> Edit: Fixed a typo.
> 
> Second edit: I just two stick sticks out, instant BSOD booting into Windows without changing the speed or timings, put the two sticks back in, boots fine, and running RamTest it works just fine.
> 
> As I said, two sticks don't work as well as four.





Wirerat said:


> The qvl only shows 4 sticks populated at the highest speeds for all the aorus mobos.
> 
> I know it's not the normal scenario but it's how these boards perform.
> 
> https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Memory/mb_memory_z390-aorus-master_191113.pdf


Thanks for the information on Gigabyte Aorus motherboards.


----------



## Grobro

Report on @reachthesky 's DVID overclocking method

With a 9700k on Z390 Aorus Master, I was stable on a static vcore of 1.25v (will need to recheck about max temps after hours of heavy load as I didn't take notes then)

Using reachthesky's settings and the formula he wrote, I needed an offset of +0.070v ; meaning 1.25-1.2=0.05v + 20mv .
Note: I first started with adding +5mv to the 0.05v but had a BSOD. Same with +10mv, etc.
Also it seems I was stable with DVID +0.065v until I changed my RAM.


Overall my core voltage varies between 0.734 and 1.332v and is at 1.21v under heavy load (Prime95) with temps up to 77C after a few hours of it running.


----------



## edhutner

Wirerat said:


> Finally broke through 40ns latency. Unfortunately 14-14-14 won't be possible without 1.5v.
> 
> All my intakes have rads (front and bottom) so the ram doesn't get a lot of direct airflow + the patriot heat spreaders are cheap af. So I rather not run the voltage that high 24/7.


Hi @Wirerat
I have similar two kits Patriot Viper Steel 4133-19-21-21-41 (PVS416G413C9K). I am trying to find their best.
Could you please post your full timings and what vccio/sa and vddr have you used to achieve the amazing results.

Regards,
Georgi


----------



## Timur Born

Timur Born said:


> Curious observation: My Windows installation does not boot with CSM being enabled (optimized default).


Going from F9 to F10 seems to have fixed this issue.


----------



## Timur Born

criskoe said:


> In my mind and intuition tells me the formula 1520 - (1.6 * AMPS) = ABSOLUTE MAX SPEC = RED LINE!!!!!!


If I want to run all cores of my 9900K at 50-1 AVX offset then I unfortunately have to cross that line. AVX offset 2 for all cores works, for 7 cores even up to 51-1 AVX works.


----------



## criskoe

Timur Born said:


> If I want to run all cores of my 9900K at 50-1 AVX offset then I unfortunately have to cross that line. AVX offset 2 for all cores works, for 7 cores even up to 51-1 AVX works.



My guess is this line becomes more important as the amps and wattage goes up. Like crossing this line over 180 AMPs constantly as opposed to lets say only 100 amps gaming. 

Truth is and the point of my post there was just to say that no one really knows if that equation is even legitimately safe. The equation makes perfect sense and follows intel curve fundamentals which makes me personally believe its safe but Intel will not confirm if its absolute MAX or functional max so in my mind if you treat it as absolute max your probably "safe"???. But even then there is ALWAYS a risk. Dont trust just someone on the internet saying "its safe" without realizing the risks and acknowledging they are your choices and responsibility. These people are not going to provide you "Warranty if you blow up your cpu" LOL. Take your time to understand the equation first and then make a choice yourself if its safe or not. 

I used the word red line cause of the car rpm dial red line comparison i made. I know its apples to oranges but what i meant was just cause you rev your car into the red doesnt mean your gunna instantly explode your engine. Or even damage it for that fact. Prolonged constant revs into the red well thats where problems generally happen. Also even engines driven under said "red Line" Fail all the time too. So who knows with these cpus. From my experience. Ive had cpus fail running at stock voltage and clocks and on the other hand I have a 3930k thats strait juiced and wont die and is going on 8 years and still going. lol. But what we do know is this forum isnt filled with "MY 9900k died" so they are probably fine. 

With that said yeah I get for sure why people still wana push the limits. And like you said in your other post. Your willing to take that risk. Thats the way this stuff works.


----------



## gamervivek

Wirerat said:


> The Aorus motherboards are T topology ram trace layouts. The max performance is actually with 4 ram sticks.
> 
> Check the ram Qvl list for the mobo. You will see the top speeds tested for the qvl were using 4 sticks.


Strange. I have two kits of 32GB, so I'm wondering putting both in would be better. Though their XMP profiles are very different. 

Anyway, updated BIOS from F7 to F8 to F9, with the FAST option selected in Q-flash, and now rebooting takes 5 minutes. The new layout in F9 is much better though.


----------



## Wirerat

gamervivek said:


> Strange. I have two kits of 32GB, so I'm wondering putting both in would be better. Though their XMP profiles are very different.
> 
> Anyway, updated BIOS from F7 to F8 to F9, with the FAST option selected in Q-flash, and now rebooting takes 5 minutes. The new layout in F9 is much better though.


 don't expect great results unless the kits are the same.

Mixed ram is not known to do that great.

@Timur Born 

You are better off dialing in the Overclock without an Avx offset. Fma and even sse instructions often trigger the avx offset. 

So you end up running at the offset often but at a higher voltage than if you just dialed it in at the lower frequency. 

@edhutner

Vccio and vssa 1.225v
Ram voltage 1.46v set in bios
Training voltage 1.45v
Memory enhancement normal

I manually set the primarys, secondarys and Trefi. The rest was left auto. 

Pics of timings below.


----------



## ElGreco

*Which one Memory Kit?*

Hi all!

I have been searching for a proper memory kit for my upcoming build with z390 aorus master (i9-9900k) and thanks to your replies (thank you) and @KedarWolf posts I came to the decision to buy a 4-module Single Rank per module kit of 4x8GB. 

Initially I wanted to buy the following (which would look really nice with the Obsidian 1000D case i intend to buy and supports iCue): 

Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4-3600MHz (CMW32GX4M4C3600C18) ver4.31,

but I did not know if it would be available in the 4.31 version as listed in the motherboard QVL (and Samsung B-die) or 3.31 version (Micron-not icluded in the QVL). 

N.B: There is a very nice review for this kit showing the differences between Samsung and Micron kits of the same memory. 
Apparently Micron has lower first timings while Samsung b-die has lower 2nd - 3rd timings of the same memory kit.
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/RAM-...Byte-DDR4-3600-mit-Micron-vs-Samsung-1294813/


Anyway, I ended up with one of the following kits and I would really appreciate your opinion on these:

1. Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4-3600MHz (CMW32GX4M4C3600C18) ver4.31
https://www.corsair.com/eu/en/Categ.../Vengeance-PRO-RGB-Black/p/CMW32GX4M4C3600C18
Price: 272 euros
QVL of Aorus Master Z390: Includes this kit but ONLY in the 4.31 version which is more than a year old and don't know if i can find.

2. Trident Z RGB DDR4-4000MHz CL18-19-19-39 1.35V 32GB (4x8GB)
https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-4000MHz-CL18-19-19-39-1.35V32GB-(4x8GB)
Price: 502 euros
QVL of Aorus Master Z390: Does NOT include this module, but includes the 64GB version F4-4000C18Q2-64GTZR.
QVL Of G-Skill: Includes the Aorus Master Z390

3. Trident Z RGB DDR4-3600MHz CL16-16-16-36 1.35V 32GB (4x8GB)
https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-3600MHz-CL16-16-16-36-1.35V32GB-(4x8GB)
Price: 375 euros
QVL of AMZ390: Does NOT include this module
QVL Of G-Skill: Includes the Aorus Master Z390

Looking forward to your replies!


----------



## Timur Born

criskoe said:


> My guess is this line becomes more important as the amps and wattage goes up. Like crossing this line over 180 AMPs constantly as opposed to lets say only 100 amps gaming.


Maybe electrons pass isolation barriers when high voltages are coupled with high amperage?! Some reason for those below maximum power limits must exist?!



> Truth is and the point of my post there was just to say that no one really knows if that equation is even legitimately safe. The equation makes perfect sense and follows intel curve fundamentals which makes me personally believe its safe but Intel will not confirm if its absolute MAX or functional max so in my mind if you treat it as absolute max your probably "safe"???.


There is evidence that this is not an absolute maximum, using voltages and amperage defined by the CPU itself (Auto/Normal + Auto/255) allow higher values to happen. Even manually setting slightly lower numbers in UEFI allow higher values to happen.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> don't expect great results unless the kits are the same.
> 
> Mixed ram is not known to do that great.
> 
> @Timur Born
> 
> You are better off dialing in the Overclock without an Avx offset. Fma and even sse instructions often trigger the avx offset.
> 
> So you end up running at the offset often but at a higher voltage than if you just dialed it in at the lower frequency.


Kind of, yes. Especially anti-virus software and even Windows indexing trigger AVX, but only for very short period of time (Defender is bad in this, though). HWinfo has a hard time keeping up with these short AVX dips, using a 2 digit average in multipliers can help. Throttlestop often even disagrees with HWInfo on the current multipliers being used based on AVX offset.

One problem with measuring this is that multipliers/clock seems to be measured for different cores one after another. So between measuring one to the next core it can already change. This likely is the reason why HWinfo often displays single cores to be affected by AVX offset, even when the whole CPU is affected at once (9900K) even with only single threaded AVX load.

Anyway, up to now I used the offset and set voltage accordingly. I don't think the voltage difference between AVX offset 1 or going lower frequency is big enough to forgo the offset, but I will do some more tests again once I find time.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> Anyway, up to now I used the offset and set voltage accordingly. I don't think the voltage difference between AVX offset 1 or going lower frequency is big enough to forgo the offset, but I will do some more tests again once I find time.


Then consider stabilizing the current frequency and set it avx zero. Might require slightly more vcore. 

As long as the cooling can handle it, you should be able to just set avx zero. 

Also, I'm not sure what your uncore is set to but sometimes dropping it back to 44/45 can reduce required vcore and add stability.


----------



## Timur Born

Currently I am running x43 uncore. The combination of CPU overclock and RAM overclock needs me to lower it to something between x43-45. Once I am done with my current OC tests using F10 I will try to increase it again.

Running all cores at x50 without AVX offset is a hard barrier compared to using x48-49, this really needs an unhealthy jump in voltages when I am already breaking the 193A barrier (in some tests close to 210A according to HWinfo). So trying x50 on all cores without AVX offset just does not seem like a good idea on my particular CPU. I can live with using C3 and setting 7 cores to higher clocks than 8 cores, it's a workable compromise if VRM noise doesn't get too bad (still testing F10).

I also deliberately lowered the Tjmax to something like 93-95°C in order to allow for loads like P95 Small FFT to at least work at temperature limited clocks. Many don't care whether such power virus loads are stable or not, but I only consider an OC 100% stable if it can do all things a non OC can do. Temp limiting leads to voltage jumps due to ongoing clock jumps, so it is another stress situation on its own. My cores 2 and 4 are worst when it comes to limiting early on temps.

Audible noise from both VRMs, pump and fans is something to consider as well. I like my computers quiet.


----------



## Wirerat

@Timur Born I can pass 1 hour P95 small fft w/avx but it's hot and just past the safe limits. I stopped at an hour. 

I prefer x264 stressor 50 loops then real bench 30mins+. Those loads stay inside the Intel spec. 

Forcing a power throttle through a test is a different approach. Not sure I have seen anyone doing that. Most reviewers raise tjmax run stress then lower it after proving stability. 

Not saying your method is wrong. It's just different. 

@ElGreco I would choose 4000C18Q2 64GTZR. That kit is certainly B die. The 3600mhc CL 16 could be be cjr, Rev e or b die.


----------



## GeneO

I would add that in addition to the x264 and Realbench wirerat mentioned, a good way to test AVX stability at reasonable temps and loads is prime95 with a custom 1344/1344 FFT and large memory load. For some reason this FFT size catches instabilities fairly quickly but doesn't generate a lot of heat or load. Use the latest prime95.

Also Realbench 2.43 generates mostly Integer (non-AVX) loads and si good for testing non-AVX. 

While you run any of these, make sure to monitor for WHEA errors in hwinfo64 (the Total errors in the WHEA section). The count here is the number of corrected hardware errors. If you get even one of these while stressing, you are not really stable.


----------



## NDUS

The newest F11 BIOS for the Z390 Aorus Pro is... bad. Things are wrong.

For one thing, it causes my hard drive to buzz. I have literally no idea why it could even possibly do this. The storage settings are identical.
For another thing, my overclock doesn't work on the F11 BIOS. I've been using it now for months without a BSOD on the f10. As soon as I updated to F11, I was getting BSODs within minutes of boot. Voltages also seemed to be 10-20mv higher (???) despite choosing the exact same static vcore and load line settings.

I reverted to F10 for now. Hopefully F11 is not actually final.


----------



## Wirerat

NDUS said:


> The newest F11 BIOS for the Z390 Aorus Pro is... bad. Things are wrong.
> 
> For one thing, it causes my hard drive to buzz. I have literally no idea why it could even possibly do this. The storage settings are identical.
> For another thing, my overclock doesn't work on the F11 BIOS. I've been using it now for months without a BSOD on the f10. As soon as I updated to F11, I was getting BSODs within minutes of boot. Voltages also seemed to be 10-20mv higher (???) despite choosing the exact same static vcore and load line settings.
> 
> I reverted to F10 for now. Hopefully F11 is not actually final.


I had given this advice earlier in the thread. 

If everything is functional, don't do bios updates. No reason to fix a working machine. 

If there is a compatibility issue then by all means update bios.

I'm on the f10 bios on both my aorus pro rigs.


----------



## ElGreco

ElGreco said:


> Hi all!
> 
> I have been searching for a proper memory kit for my upcoming build with z390 aorus master (i9-9900k) and thanks to your replies (thank you) and @KedarWolf posts I came to the decision to buy a 4-module Single Rank per module kit of 4x8GB.
> 
> Initially I wanted to buy the following (which would look really nice with the Obsidian 1000D case i intend to buy and supports iCue):
> 
> Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4-3600MHz (CMW32GX4M4C3600C18) ver4.31,
> 
> but I did not know if it would be available in the 4.31 version as listed in the motherboard QVL (and Samsung B-die) or 3.31 version (Micron-not icluded in the QVL).
> 
> N.B: There is a very nice review for this kit showing the differences between Samsung and Micron kits of the same memory.
> Apparently Micron has lower first timings while Samsung b-die has lower 2nd - 3rd timings of the same memory kit.
> https://www.pcgameshardware.de/RAM-...Byte-DDR4-3600-mit-Micron-vs-Samsung-1294813/
> 
> 
> Anyway, I ended up with one of the following kits and I would really appreciate your opinion on these:
> 
> 1. Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4-3600MHz (CMW32GX4M4C3600C18) ver4.31
> https://www.corsair.com/eu/en/Categ.../Vengeance-PRO-RGB-Black/p/CMW32GX4M4C3600C18
> Price: 272 euros
> QVL of Aorus Master Z390: Includes this kit but ONLY in the 4.31 version which is more than a year old and don't know if i can find.
> 
> 2. Trident Z RGB DDR4-4000MHz CL18-19-19-39 1.35V 32GB (4x8GB)
> https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-4000MHz-CL18-19-19-39-1.35V32GB-(4x8GB)
> Price: 502 euros
> QVL of Aorus Master Z390: Does NOT include this module, but includes the 64GB version F4-4000C18Q2-64GTZR.
> QVL Of G-Skill: Includes the Aorus Master Z390
> 
> 3. Trident Z RGB DDR4-3600MHz CL16-16-16-36 1.35V 32GB (4x8GB)
> https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-3600MHz-CL16-16-16-36-1.35V32GB-(4x8GB)
> Price: 375 euros
> QVL of AMZ390: Does NOT include this module
> QVL Of G-Skill: Includes the Aorus Master Z390
> 
> Looking forward to your replies!





Wirerat said:


> @ElGreco I would choose 4000C18Q2 64GTZR. That kit is certainly B die. The 3600mhc CL 16 could be be cjr, Rev e or b die.


Unfortunately, the 4000C18Q2 64GTZR costs 720 euros which is way more than the CPU costs and also 64 GB is way more than I need. That’s why I limited the options to the 32GB RAM kits and the Tridents I mentioned were all included in the b-die finder site as b-die guaranteed... unless that site is not valid?


----------



## Grobro

I don't necessarily trust the b die finders sites so much and I guess depending on the guaranteed speeds, it may or may not be b die.
I have two sets of 2x8Gb trident z 3000 (don't remember the exact reference), bought 6 months apart, one is samsung the other is hynix.


----------



## criskoe

Timur Born said:


> There is evidence that this is not an absolute maximum, using voltages and amperage defined by the CPU itself (Auto/Normal + Auto/255) allow higher values to happen. Even manually setting slightly lower numbers in UEFI allow higher values to happen.


Defiantly could be right. With that in perspective it makes sense. 

I ended up being lucky with my KS. Get to stay nicely under this equation @ 5ghz - 0 AVX offset. I’ve always got either “bad or ok” samples in the past for my cpus. This is my first good one. 

8 hour pass P95.29.8b6 AVX Small FFTs @ 1.172v full load and 175 amps.

Screenshot taken at 8th hour


----------



## Wirerat

Grobro said:


> I don't necessarily trust the b die finders sites so much and I guess depending on the guaranteed speeds, it may or may not be b die.
> I have two sets of 2x8Gb trident z 3000 (don't remember the exact reference), bought 6 months apart, one is samsung the other is hynix.


3200mhz CL 14 is always b-die. Kits the are 4000mhz and above also seem to be b-die.

3600mhz CL 16 is a loot box more or less. 


@criskoe

Umm that's a really nice cpu congrats. 

If you still also have an aorus board it would be really cool to see how it compares to that result.


----------



## criskoe

Wirerat said:


> @criskoe
> 
> Umm that's a really nice cpu congrats.
> 
> If you still also have an aorus board it would be really cool to see how it compares to that result.


Sorry. I was just talking to Timur about “safe values”. I’ve been reading all the threads that relate to OCing the 9900k(s) for relevant information. This being a new platform to me, I have found a lot of good information about OCing the 9900k in various brand motherboard threads. It’s helped. Some smart peoples out there that don’t own the same gear as me but have good input and conversation. But no sorry I don’t own a aorus board. Defiantly wasn’t meaning to disturb anyone. My bad. I’ll see myself out.


----------



## Wirerat

criskoe said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> @criskoe
> 
> Umm that's a really nice cpu congrats.
> 
> If you still also have an aorus board it would be really cool to see how it compares to that result.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry. I was just talking to Timur about â€œsafe valuesâ€. Iâ€™️ve been reading all the threads that relate to OCing the 9900k(s) for relevant information. This being a new platform to me, I have found a lot of good information about OCing the 9900k in various brand motherboard threads. Itâ€™️s helped. Some smart peoples out there that donâ€™️t own the same gear as me but have good input and conversation. But no sorry I donâ€™️t own a aorus board. Defiantly wasnâ€™️t meaning to disturb anyone. My bad. Iâ€™️ll see myself out.
Click to expand...

You didn't hurt anything. Lol. 

It was just confusing me when I tried to compare hwinfo64 readings. 🙂


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> @Timur BornForcing a power throttle through a test is a different approach. Not sure I have seen anyone doing that. Most reviewers raise tjmax run stress then lower it after proving stability.
> 
> Not saying your method is wrong. It's just different.


Just because a CPU is unstable at 95°C does not mean that it is unstable at 90°C. And Tjmax can be abused to throttle current, too.


----------



## Timur Born

criskoe said:


> With that said yeah I get for sure why people still wana push the limits. And like you said in your other post. Your willing to take that risk. Thats the way this stuff works.


At +-0 Vcore offset and Standard LLC my CPU automatically pushes voltage/current over calculated "limit". This at least seems like an indication that it is not necessarily a maximum.


----------



## Timur Born

GeneO said:


> ...a good way to test AVX stability at reasonable temps and loads is prime95 with a custom 1344/1344 FFT and large memory load. For some reason this FFT size catches instabilities fairly quickly but doesn't generate a lot of heat or load. Use the latest prime95.


1344 FFT has a very different voltage/current/power profile. It does not quickly catch instabilities that happen at much higher loads, like P95 AVX small FFT.

I did find that OCCT's "Small Data Set" catches some instabilities really quick, sometimes within seconds. Among those are uncore/cache instabilities.



> Also Realbench 2.43 generates mostly Integer (non-AVX) loads and si good for testing non-AVX.


I did not know that 2.43 creates mostly non AVX load, so I tested it. It creates about 80% non AVX load, the rest is invoking the AVX offset, sometimes in very quick succession. This makes RB 2.43 more of a load change test, quite a good one even.

Even using an AVX offset of 3 (4.7 GHz) leads to considerable droop compared to non AVX load at higher clocks (5 GHz).The appended image demonstrates Vcore changes during a phase where RB 2.43 switches between non AVX and AVX load (using an AVX offset of 3). The lower voltage periods are when the AVX offset is invoked.

This seems to cause WHEAs that other tests do not catch. Currently I am testing the effect of Thermal Velocity Boost on these instabilities.


----------



## Wirerat

@Timur Born

Careful with the double and triple posting. Mods will get bent outta shape over it. 

I know it's annoying especially on mobile to fit reply's into one post. 

The reason forcing a tjmax throttle during a test skews the stability result is because the cpu voltage doesn't drop but the cpu frequency does.

So 5ghz 1.3v hitting tjmax becomes 4.8ghz at 1.3v. That's what my testing shows anyway.

I understand your thought process here and there is nothing wrong with being sure a certain load will not cause a crash. 

You could also use a power limit to cause the simular results.


----------



## GeneO

I have always found 1344/1344 catches instabilities fairly quickly myself. It is something about that pattern. 

I don't look at voltage when i run Realbench, I look at average clock speed. When I run Realbench 2.43 @ say 5100 MHz, my average clock speed is pretty near 5100 with AVX offset. But I have only run and offset of 1 with it. Realbench catches WHEA instabilities even with AVX = 0. 

I have run enough stress testing on my chip across two motherboards no, I try to keep it lower impact so I don't crush my chip.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> I have always found 1344/1344 catches instabilities fairly quickly myself. It is something about that pattern.


You should try x264 stressor. It also finds errors really fast. 

I run it with the following settings:

Name : 5ghz

Threads : 32 (will stay locked at 100% load at 32)

Loops : 10 (first run then 50)

Priorty: low ( allows hwinfo64 to update regularly during the test. High will cause some freezes).

This test uses avx at a realistic load.

I have had good luck with it validating Overclocks. I also use real bench, and P95 small. 

I just don't run P95 small w/avx very long. It's too hot. I like to know it won't instantly crash though.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> @Timur BornThe reason forcing a tjmax throttle during a test skews the stability result is because the cpu voltage doesn't drop but the cpu frequency does.


Maybe, but when I already know that the CPU is not stable at higher temperatures then trying to keep it stable at lower temps + temp clipping may still be better than having to lower clocks or increase voltage even more. It's a compromise.



> So 5ghz 1.3v hitting tjmax becomes 4.8ghz at 1.3v. That's what my testing shows anyway.


When the frequency is lowered due to hitting TJmax then the current runs lower, that's the main benefit and goal. Unfortunately clocks and voltage keep jumping around quite a bit at TJmax + throttling, which may cause its own problems. And then there is Thermal Velocity Boost on top of it all.



> You could also use a power limit to cause the simular results.


Kind of, yes. Which UEFI setting would be the correct one to use then? I did not look into power related settings yet, but remember having seen more than one. Which sensors do power limits use, though, since values can differ considerably. POUT can read 225 watts while CPU Package Power reads 245 watts.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> You should try x264 stressor. It also finds errors really fast.
> 
> I run it with the following settings:
> 
> Name : 5ghz
> 
> Threads : 32 (will stay locked at 100% load at 32)
> 
> Loops : 10 (first run then 50)
> 
> Priorty: low ( allows hwinfo64 to update regularly during the test. High will cause some freezes).
> 
> This test uses avx at a realistic load.
> 
> I have had good luck with it validating Overclocks. I also use real bench, and P95 small.
> 
> I just don't run P95 small w/avx very long. It's too hot. I like to know it won't instantly crash though.


Thanks, I do use that too (16 threads for my 8086k) with 10 loops. I usually use a higher priority. I have never caught any instabilities with it, but it is one of the latter tests I run. 
Yeah, I run blend for a short period, which includes small.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Thanks, I do use that too (16 threads for my 8086k) with 10 loops. I usually use a higher priority. I have never caught any instabilities with it, but it is one of the latter tests I run.
> Yeah, I run blend for a short period, which includes small.


That makes sense. It's not gonna find much running after blend. 

It's nice to know you're encoding stable though. 

A combination of stress tests is the best way to go. Followed by the games you play (if any). 

Overwatch at 300fps is really cpu/ram stability sensitive. Bf5 and Apex legends is too.


----------



## mmcneil

iunlock said:


> There a few kits. With BF rolling around if you can find a good deal on either a RGB or non RGB kit that is Samsung B-Die, you'll be good either way.
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232306
> 
> Although non RGB kits may ever so slightly scale better (not definite and a few clicks past a theory), keep in mind that a lot of the record holders for varies benchmarks use RGB kits. In fact, most of my kits are all RGB (TridentZ and RoyalZ) and they OC just fine. Most of all the high end RAM's in the 4600+ range are RGB.
> 
> If you see a good deal, go for it.


Found this:
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232439

It's listed on the B-Die finder as well. Thoughts?

Thanks,


----------



## KedarWolf

After a long time with the Master, I think I'm going to go with the ROG Maximus XI Apex with my Xmas bonus this year.

I really have no use for 32GB of RAM and the Apex pretty much the best two DIMM board you can buy.

Will miss you peeps.


----------



## Timur Born

Have fun with it, @KedarWolf, and report back.


----------



## ElGreco

KedarWolf said:


> After a long time with the Master, I think I'm going to go with the ROG Maximus XI Apex with my Xmas bonus this year.
> 
> I really have no use for 32GB of RAM and the Apex pretty much the best two DIMM board you can buy.
> 
> Will miss you peeps.


Apex better than the Master? Since I am in the process to buy a brand new system, could you please elaborate on your decision. I thought the master had the coolest VRMs and quality regarding Z390 only boards.

But I am more than happy to reconsider this if you have different facts.

Thank you for all your guidance and feedback!


----------



## Medvediy

ElGreco said:


> Apex better than the Master? Since I am in the process to buy a brand new system, could you please elaborate on your decision. I thought the master had the coolest VRMs and quality regarding Z390 only boards.
> 
> But I am more than happy to reconsider this if you have different facts.
> 
> Thank you for all your guidance and feedback!


Apex better for memory OC. If you want to get 4300Mhz RAM speed and more - Apex is your choice. But it's only 2 slots of RAM.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> After a long time with the Master, I think I'm going to go with the ROG Maximus XI Apex with my Xmas bonus this year.
> 
> I really have no use for 32GB of RAM and the Apex pretty much the best two DIMM board you can buy.
> 
> Will miss you peeps.


Thanks for all the tips and modded bios enjoy that new M/B


----------



## Wirerat

@KedarWolf I was a about to buy an apex to replace my pro until I found how tall the dimm.2 card is. No way it will have clearance to my top 360mm rad in R5.

You selling that master? Lol.


----------



## scaramonga

KedarWolf said:


> After a long time with the Master, I think I'm going to go with the ROG Maximus XI Apex with my Xmas bonus this year.
> 
> I really have no use for 32GB of RAM and the Apex pretty much the best two DIMM board you can buy.
> 
> Will miss you peeps.


End of life board


----------



## KedarWolf

F10b Master BIOS with latest firmwares, updated RST and Ethernet, latest GOP, best microcodes etc.


----------



## Wirerat

F11 On the aorus pro is absolute trash. 

Cannot even boot 3800mhz.

VRout was also overshooting much higher than normal at idle. 

I tried clearing cmos and flashing it twice. 

Back on f10. My saved profile worked first boot.


----------



## GeneO

I am back. Look at this. This is right after I boot. First my overclock is rock solid. I mean, look at the graphs - how could I be running 5.1 GHz at .672v and be stable - even on one core. I also found someone who was looking into this and he found the voltage measured with a DMM at the provided points on the board agreed with vcore on HWINFO (his conclusion was that they are measuring the same thing, whatever that is). It looks to me like VR VOUT is actually correct and that vcore on this board and offset overclocking is a lie. I am perplexed.


----------



## GeneO

Ah, nm on that last one,. It seems it is a C-state thing (the tracking of vcore with core frequency. I disabled all C-states and lest only speedshift enabled. vcore more closely tracks the frequency. 

So that leaves why is VR VOUT not tracking. Is VR VOUT the actual voltage meant to be supplied to the CPU? I know there is a doubler and a power stage following the controller chip generated frequency, etc but all controlled by the VRM controller. I assumed that the VR VOUT from the VRM controller was supposed to be the delivered voltage. Is that a correct assumption?


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> F10b Master BIOS with latest firmwares, updated RST and Ethernet, latest GOP, best microcodes etc.


Any chance to get the F10 Aorus Pro version you previously posted updated like this as well? Several of us would really appreciate that!


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Ah, nm on that last one,. It seems it is a C-state thing (the tracking of vcore with core frequency. I disabled all C-states and lest only speedshift enabled. vcore more closely tracks the frequency.
> 
> So that leaves why is VR VOUT not tracking. Is VR VOUT the actual voltage meant to be supplied to the CPU? I know there is a doubler and a power stage following the controller chip generated frequency, etc but all controlled by the VRM controller. I assumed that the VR VOUT from the VRM controller was supposed to be the delivered voltage. Is that a correct assumption?


VRout will drop some times. It's just not exactly like vcore does when using offset.

The big advantage is not efficiency. The voltage control is better using this method.

My vrout dropped in the image below. Check the min.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> VRout will drop some times. It's just not exactly like vcore does when using offset.
> 
> The big advantage is not efficiency. The voltage control is better using this method.
> 
> My vrout dropped in the image below. Check the min.


I have had a read through the VRM controller datasheet. VR VOUT Should be the voltage supplied to the CPU. It's sensed value is obtained from the VRM controller. vcore should track it (and vice versa) except vcore should be a little higher because of how it is measured. I looked at the other values of VRM POUT and IOUT (output power and current) from the controller and there is no difference in these at at idle between speedshift on and all other power savers disabled, and with speedshift disabled in addition (basically equivalent to fixed voltage OC). At the same time IA cores power and IA cores current are much more for the latter as you would expect. But these are derived values using vcore. Unless I misunderstand something, though I don't think I do. Something seems pretty fishy to me.

If VR VOUT is *actually* what is being supplied to the processor, as it appears in hwinfo, then there is no advanatage to using offsets ecept that you can take advantage of c-states.


----------



## Wirerat

@GeneO

My spikes at idle are much lower. It never goes above 1.3v using offset.

On a manual 5ghz Oc it would spike above 1.31v (set in bios). 

My 5.1ghz profile even spiked to 1.4v on manual with 1.36v set in bios. Using offset it never goes above 1.37v.

Thats enough reason to run offset for me.

If it doesn't make sense for you then run a manual Oc. It was never suggested as a power saving method. It's just tighter voltage control.

It shaves off around .02v+ from the voltage spikes.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> @GeneO
> 
> My spikes at idle are much lower. It never goes above 1.3v using offset.
> 
> On a manual 5ghz Oc it would spike above 1.31v (set in bios).
> 
> My 5.1ghz profile even spiked to 1.4v on manual with 1.36v set in bios. Using offset it never goes above 1.37v.
> 
> Thats enough reason to run offset for me.
> 
> If it doesn't make sense for you then run a manual Oc. It was never suggested as a power saving method. It's just tighter voltage control.
> 
> It shaves off around .02v+ from the voltage spikes.


You mean vcore spikes? I am not sure what voltage reporting to trust in offset now - VR VOUT, which shows no spikes, but is basically the same as fixed OC, or vcore. Not comfortable because things are not adding up.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> @GeneO
> 
> My spikes at idle are much lower. It never goes above 1.3v using offset.
> 
> On a manual 5ghz Oc it would spike above 1.31v (set in bios).
> 
> My 5.1ghz profile even spiked to 1.4v on manual with 1.36v set in bios. Using offset it never goes above 1.37v.
> 
> Thats enough reason to run offset for me.
> 
> If it doesn't make sense for you then run a manual Oc. It was never suggested as a power saving method. It's just tighter voltage control.
> 
> It shaves off around .02v+ from the voltage spikes.
> 
> 
> 
> You mean vcore spikes? I am not sure what voltage reporting to trust in offset now - VR VOUT, which shows no spikes, but is basically the same as fixed OC, or vcore. Not comfortable because things are not adding up.
Click to expand...

The only voltage that matters is VRvout. Yes VRvout spikes higher at idle on manual Oc on my aorus pro. 

The VID and vcore can be ignored. 
VRvOUT is the same as die sense. It's the actual voltage at the core. 

This doesn't change no matter how you OC. 

VRvout is the only voltage to watch. 

The VID + offset is very close to VR vout except it will not always drop at idle with the VID. 

VID is just the value the cpu is requesting. Each cpu has a different VID table. 

But if you don't like what you see. Reboot and load manual Oc.

Below is my P95 small fft with avx run. Vrvout drops way down between tests.


----------



## karbri

KedarWolf said:


> F10b Master BIOS with latest firmwares, updated RST and Ethernet, latest GOP, best microcodes etc.


Thank you so much! Can i use it with 9900*KS*? I am so struggle with the official one


----------



## Grobro

Since this morning, after a night of ram test, my computer has been doing a light clicking sound at regular interval, every 1.5s or so. 

I don't have any hdd (only ssd), doesn't seem to be one of the fans and i can't seem to be able to pin the noise down to any place in particular. 
Before i dig any further (probably not before the weekend), anybody happen to have an idea?

Edit: my dram voltage was at 1.46v, i lowered it back at 1.45v and no clicking sound for now

Edit2: it's back with a vengeance and seems to have to do with ram, either frequency or voltage or both.


----------



## edhutner

Yesterday I upgraded from 9700K to i9-9900KF
And the problems started. I can not get it run stable even at stock speeds!!
Probably motherboard or CPU fault. I need help 

Here are the system specs:
i9-9900kf
z390 aorus master
arctic liquid freezer ii 360
32GB (4x8) patriot viper steel ddr4133 (samsung b-die)
1000w be quiet dark power (single rail mode)
1080ti
windows 10 1909

Here is shortened version of my observations:
1. initial temperature/voltage measurements F9 bios, all defaults in the BIOS, xmp disabled,
- running OCCT small avx for 5 minutes - no errors, max temp 87 degree, POUT 206W, vrout 1.158-1.182

3. trying to get straight to 5.0Ghz
- no go - too hot or crash/freeze/reboot - forget about this for now

3. trying to enable xmp profile1 with cpu default clocks (47)
- not booting at all

4. update to f10 bios, xmp profile1 (4133)
- not booting at all

5. enabled xmp profile2 (ddr4000), vddr 1.45, vccio/sa 1.22, core voltages and llcs on auto
- running OCCT small avx for 5 minutes - no errors, max temp 87 degree, POUT 208W
- running chorme - *random reboot*

6. switching to offset mode - dvid +20mv, vcore llc low, internal ac/dc power save (40/130), vccio/sa 1.24
- running OCCT small avx for 5 minutes - no errors, max temp 83 degree, POUT 193W, vrout 1.131-1.150
- running karhu memtest - error at 3%

At this point I increased dvid to +30 and then to +50mv and still cannot pass karhu memtest.

Later today when I get home I will try to let xmp set vccio/sa to where it wants, but I don't think that it will make things better.
Will also increase the dvid offset but I believe that +50 at stock speed (4700) is pretty much enough. But for such kind of offset vrout seems low. This makes me think that may be the problem could be in the motherboard.
I believe I could get it stable but will be unable to cool it. This cooler should be enough for stock 9900kf. At least it was for clocked 9700k.


This same memory has been running fine at 4000-16-16-16 1.45V on the same mother board, but with my previous cpu 9700k. So I don't believe that the memory is problem.
On this same board I have run 9700K at 4.9 stable with vrout under load (occt small) 1.238-1.283 with about the same temperatures and wattage.

Is it possible that my new cpu is complete lottery looser requiring a lot more power? Or is it possible that my mother board is defective?


Need help.
Thanks in advance.


----------



## Wirerat

@edhutner

Whats the uncore setting with the new cpu?

9900kf is much hotter than 9700k. Disable hyperthreading then temps should be very close to 9700k temps.

I can't imagine how it would be the mobo. Consider re-pasting/re-mounting the cpu cooler.


----------



## edhutner

Its 43 default. I put vccio and vccsa on auto and they went to 1.35, but so far (currently) running karhu about 200% no errors.
Later I will repaste as you suggest. I have delid tool, but I intend to use it only if cpu is good enough at least at stock.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> The only voltage that matters is VRvout. Yes VRvout spikes higher at idle on manual Oc on my aorus pro.
> 
> The VID and vcore can be ignored.
> VRvOUT is the same as die sense. It's the actual voltage at the core.
> 
> This doesn't change no matter how you OC.
> 
> VRvout is the only voltage to watch.
> 
> The VID + offset is very close to VR vout except it will not always drop at idle with the VID.
> 
> VID is just the value the cpu is requesting. Each cpu has a different VID table.
> 
> But if you don't like what you see. Reboot and load manual Oc.
> 
> Below is my P95 small fft with avx run. Vrvout drops way down between tests.


It is not a matter or what I want to see, it is a matter of what the board is doing. In svid/offset mode, the processor is supposed to supply the VID it needs to the VRM controller, and the VRM controller is supposed to supply it on VR VOUT. According to the monitoring, this is not what is happening.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only voltage that matters is VRvout. Yes VRvout spikes higher at idle on manual Oc on my aorus pro.
> 
> The VID and vcore can be ignored.
> VRvOUT is the same as die sense. It's the actual voltage at the core.
> 
> This doesn't change no matter how you OC.
> 
> VRvout is the only voltage to watch.
> 
> The VID + offset is very close to VR vout except it will not always drop at idle with the VID.
> 
> VID is just the value the cpu is requesting. Each cpu has a different VID table.
> 
> But if you don't like what you see. Reboot and load manual Oc.
> 
> Below is my P95 small fft with avx run. Vrvout drops way down between tests.
> 
> 
> 
> It is not a matter or what I want to see, it is a matter of what the board is doing. In svid/offset mode, the processor is supposed to supply the VID it needs to the VRM controller, and the VRM controller is supposed to supply it on VR VOUT. According to the monitoring, this is not what is happening.
Click to expand...

The VID is a request from the cpu. It is not an actual voltage that is happening.

What you describe will work perfectly when you set vcore to auto. The offset changes the vrout. 

The method @Falkentyne talks about all the time with auto vcore and VR loadline adjustments match the VID and vcore. 

It has never worked like that using offset. 

Clear cmos. Load optimized defaults. Boot into windows and check the values. 

VID and vrout will be very close (not exact) with auto vcore.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> The VID is a request from the cpu. It is not an actual voltage that is happening.
> 
> What you describe will work perfectly when you set vcore to auto. The offset changes the vrout.
> 
> The method @Falkentyne talks about all the time with auto vcore and VR loadline adjustments match the VID and vcore.
> 
> It has never worked like that using offset.
> 
> Clear cmos. Load optimized defaults. Boot into windows and check the values.
> 
> VID and vrout will be very close (not exact) with auto vcore.


Yes, I know what the VID is. The processor supplies the VID to the VRM controller on its signal lines and the VRM is supposed to supply that voltage as VOUT as I said. The offset ony offsets the VOUT. So the VRM is supposed to maintain VOUT = VID + offset as best it can

You seem agree that VOUT is supposed to be what the VRM is supplying to the CPU? Then how can vcore not track it? 

I am not trying to be difficult and it is not a matter of not seeing what I want, but not seeing what is expected. 

I will try optimized defaults.


----------



## GeneO

GeneO said:


> Yes, I know what the VID is. The processor supplies the VID to the VRM controller on its signal lines and the VRM is supposed to supply that voltage as VOUT as I said. The offset ony offsets the VOUT. So the VRM is supposed to maintain VOUT = VID + offset as best it can
> 
> You seem agree that VOUT is supposed to be what the VRM is supplying to the CPU? Then how can vcore not track it?
> 
> I am not trying to be difficult and it is not a matter of not seeing what I want, but not seeing what is expected.
> 
> I will try optimized defaults.


Same with optimized.


----------



## Wirerat

@GeneO 

The vcore reading is different because it is measured at a different location on the vrm. 

The VR Vout is the most accurate reading to what is actually happening. 

So you tested optimized defaults and the numbers look the same? Then it's not a specific problem related to offset oc'ing.

I just don't think any of this is an actual issue. It's just how the boards behave. 
@Falkentyne could definitely explain better than me. Hes on a bit of a break from this thread.


----------



## Timur Born

@GeneO

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-129.html#post28206454


----------



## ElGreco

*New Aorus Master G2*

Oh my... should i wait more for this to be available in the shops?

***NEW*** Z390 AORUS MASTER G2 Edition

https://id.aorus.com/product-detail.php?p=1357&t=53&t2=&t3=


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> @GeneO
> 
> The vcore reading is different because it is measured at a different location on the vrm.
> 
> The VR Vout is the most accurate reading to what is actually happening.
> 
> So you tested optimized defaults and the numbers look the same? Then it's not a specific problem related to offset oc'ing.
> 
> I just don't think any of this is an actual issue. It's just how the boards behave.
> @Falkentyne could definitely explain better than me. Hes on a bit of a break from this thread.


You don't understand. Yes the vcore should be different (higher) that vR VOUT because of imppedence differences between where they are measured. That is just s slight offset between them. But the changes in voltage in each should be near identical and follow the changes in the VID that the processor requested. If the VRM doesn't change VOUT how can the vcore change?

Anyhow, I am throguh discussing this I guess, nobody seems to understand what is going on here. 

Have a great Turkey day! 

BTW, the Auros master is $249 at Amazon right now.


----------



## Wirerat

@GeneO

I completely understand. I just don't have the answers you are after. 

You did get the same results at optimized defaults. So this is how board is intended to run. 

I know gigabyte does not enforce all the Intel spec power limits at optimized defaults/out the box settings. 

I wonder if all the power limits were manually set to Intel spec if it would change the behavior. 



@Timur Born gave some good information on post #5149



Edit: to avoid double posting. 

@Timur Born those graphs are Awsome. That's a very solid explanation. Thank you.

I wondered why my VR Vout would drop occasionally but not consistently. I just kinda shrugged it off since it was running great.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> @[MENTION=477254]Timur Born those graphs are Awsome. That's a very solid explanation. Thank you.
> 
> I wondered why my VR Vout would drop occasionally but not consistently. I just kinda shrugged it off since it was running great.


Thanks for the flowers! Also keep in mind that HWInfo's 100 ms sample-rate still is quite coarse compared to what happens on a more atomic level.

And then different programs use different ways of attaining and displaying their data. Compare HWinfo's multiplier display with Throttlestop's, especially when it comes to short blips of single-core multiplier changes.


----------



## edhutner

Some progress here.
Disabling HT lowered the temperatures about 7 degrees and POUT by 30W. Voltage drop is also lower.
Here is hwinfo log from last three minutes of OCCT 542 small data set run.
core 47, uncore 43, llc low, internal ac/dc power safe, dvid +0.010, vccio/sa 1.3 (unable to lower here ... with ddr4000)
HT enable (red) vs disable (green).
Does it look normal for stock clock?
Later will repaste and will try some oc. It seems that I have 20 degree spare temperature to push it


----------



## Wirerat

edhutner said:


> Some progress here.
> Disabling HT lowered the temperatures about 7 degrees and POUT by 30W. Voltage drop is also lower.
> Here is hwinfo log from last three minutes of OCCT 542 small data set run.
> core 47, uncore 43, llc low, internal ac/dc power safe, dvid +0.010, vccio/sa 1.3 (unable to lower here ... with ddr4000)
> HT enable (red) vs disable (green).
> Does it look normal for stock clock?
> Later will repaste and will try some oc. It seems that I have 20 degree spare temperature to push it /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Am I reading this correctly? 

High 70c's low 80c's at stock under load? What's the ambient temperature? 

Make sure the pump speed and fans are maxed during stress testing. That 360mm aio is comparable to my custom loop.

Is that the same cooler you used on the 9700k?


----------



## edhutner

Its 22 ambient, aio is running on full speed. Yes it is the same as on 9700k.


----------



## Wirerat

edhutner said:


> Its 22 ambient, aio is running on full speed. Yes it is the same as on 9700k.


Okay then. I haven't ran that test specifically. 

How are temps with real bench or x264 stressor?


----------



## edhutner

Wirerat said:


> Okay then. I haven't ran that test specifically.
> 
> How are temps with real bench or x264 stressor?



I reinstalled the cpu and repasted, but things got worse - 90 degrees (with HT) same test as above. May be I put too less this time (using thermal grizzly Kryonaut paste). Will do it again tomorrow.

Just run RealBench 2.56 stress. Temperature is 71 degree on vrout 1.15-1.16v


----------



## Sheyster

edhutner said:


> Its 22 ambient, aio is running on full speed. Yes it is the same as on 9700k.


What 360mm AIO are you using? Also, how did you apply the thermal paste?


----------



## GeneO

@Timur Born @Wirerat

I wasn't ignoring your post about windows power management.
I started playing with the power plan settings and I found out what is causing the problems I am seeing, though I don't understand why. I had speedshift enabled in the BIOS (and EIST disabled). so I had processor autonomous mode enabled in Windows (usually hidden, this is supposed to tell windows that the processor is determining the running states of the cores via speedshift and that the OS does not have to). This is the way I always have run and it is supposed to work this way. 

So I stumbled across the fact that disabling autonomous mode in the power settings allowed VR VOUT to drop. 
I now have EIST enabled, speedshift and autonomous mode disabled, and C-states off. My average idle VR VOUT is now .824 (was 1.25v something). and POUT is likewise reduced. 

So I guess this autonomous mode is not ready for prime-time. This might have been the case on my Asus Code board as well, since I didn't have access to the VRM VOUT and POUT to clue me in that something was wrong. 

So I will enable c-sates again now. 

Happy turkey day!


----------



## GeneO

@Timur Born @Wirerat

I wasn't ignoring your post about windows power management.
I started playing with the power plan settings and I found out what is causing the problems I am seeing, though I don't understand why. I had speedshift enabled in the BIOS (and EIST disabled). so I had processor autonomous mode enabled in Windows (usually hidden, this is supposed to tell windows that the processor is determining the running states of the cores and that the OS does not have to). This is the way I always have run and it is supposed to work this way. 

So I stumbled across the fact that disabling autonomous mode in the power settings allowed VR VOUT to drop. 
I now have EIST enabled, speedshift and autonomous mode disabled, and C-states off. My average idle VR VOUT is now .824 (was 1.25v something). and POUT is likewise reduced. 

So I guess this autonomous mode is not ready for prime-time. This might have been the case on my Asus Code board as well, since I didn't have access to the VRM VOUT and POUT to clue me in that something was wrong. 

So I will enable c-sates again now. 

Have a happy turkey day!


----------



## Wirerat

edhutner said:


> I reinstalled the cpu and repasted, but things got worse - 90 degrees (with HT) same test as above. May be I put too less this time (using thermal grizzly Kryonaut paste). Will do it again tomorrow.
> 
> Just run RealBench 2.56 stress. Temperature is 71 degree on vrout 1.15-1.16v


I get consistent results using the little spatuala and spreading as thin of a layer as possible over the whole ihs. 

This method will have a very tiny amount of squeeze out but not enough for a mess. 

I know paste application is a bit of a religion and sparks a lot of arguments. 

Since I started applying it this way a few years back I rarely ever have to re-seat the water block. 

Did you tighten the cooler down enough? I know it's a dumb question but I have found a corner not tightened all the way On my on setup before.


----------



## Timur Born

There is no need to disable Speedshift/Autonomous mode, power draw decreases even when HWinfo does not show Vout to drop. Speedshift is supposed to very often and quickly change P states. If you find it too aggressive you could use Throttlestop or Windows power profile settings (hidden) to change its reaction curve.


----------



## GeneO

ElGreco said:


> Oh my... should i wait more for this to be available in the shops?
> 
> ***NEW*** Z390 AORUS MASTER G2 Edition
> 
> https://id.aorus.com/product-detail.php?p=1357&t=53&t2=&t3=


IDK. There seems to be little to differentiate it from the regular master. 
The master is on sale at Amazon for $249. That is a $40 priice drop. Wish I would have waited a week and a half more. LOL.


----------



## KedarWolf

scaramonga said:


> End of life board


9900k' s are still topping the gaming benchmarks even over the new AMD's etc.


----------



## KedarWolf

ElGreco said:


> Apex better than the Master? Since I am in the process to buy a brand new system, could you please elaborate on your decision. I thought the master had the coolest VRMs and quality regarding Z390 only boards.
> 
> But I am more than happy to reconsider this if you have different facts.
> 
> Thank you for all your guidance and feedback!


The Apex is pretty much the best Z390 board out there, I've even seen 4800MHz HCI MemTest stable in a few instances. 16 stage well designed VRM, people are saying they are getting a better CPU overclock with lower voltages than the Master as well. Only downside is two RAM slots but do we really need 32GB for gaming and benching etc.?


----------



## Wirerat

KedarWolf said:


> The Apex is pretty much the best Z390 board out there, I've even seen 4800MHz HCI MemTest stable in a few instances. 16 stage well designed VRM, people are saying they are getting a better CPU overclock with lower voltages than the Master as well. Only downside is two RAM slots but do we really need 32GB for gaming and benching etc.?


It has better voltage regulation. Expect .02v to.03v lower vcore over the master.

I had one in my cart when Newegg had the board at $380. I just don't want to change my top rad to get clearance of that tall m.2 dimm board.

It's taller than the i/o shield. I though about doing something jank like getting a pcie nvme adapter. But now the price went up a lot here. 

You will like the board no doubt.


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> There is no need to disable Speedshift/Autonomous mode, power draw decreases even when HWinfo does not show Vout to drop. Speedshift is supposed to very often and quickly change P states. If you find it too aggressive you could use Throttlestop or Windows power profile settings (hidden) to change its reaction curve.


Yes those are the very reasons I have speedshift and autonomous mode enabled. But I just told you it reduced my VR VOUT and power draw at idlle significantly by doing so. It isn't just too aggressive, it is tantamount to running fixed voltage OC (modulo wirerats spikes). It is not working as it is supposed to. It is supposed to let the processor determine load and set the P-states/ frequency instead of the OS, but not affect the voltages. So at idle it *should not* be maxing out voltage on the VRM. 

Realbench, in fact, benchmarks a little better for me now.


----------



## Timur Born

GeneO said:


> Yes those are the very reasons I have speedshift and autonomous mode enabled. But I just told you it reduced my VR VOUT and power draw at idlle significantly by doing so.


Did you measure this via HWinfo? Power draw POUT in HWinfo is calculated from VOUT and IOUT, with VOUT being measured as too high and thus POUT calculated too high. "CPU Package Power" is closer to reality when Speedshift is enabled during idling. And when you measure at the wall you will see that the difference between enabling and disabling Speedshift is much lower than what you see in HWinfo.



> Realbench, in fact, benchmarks a little better for me now.


Speedshift goes both ways, up and down. So it is well possible that the CPU downclocks less aggressive during very short non-max-load blips. This depends on how aggressive Speedshift is set for performance vs. power-saving.


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> Did you measure this via HWinfo? Power draw POUT in HWinfo is calculated from VOUT and IOUT, with VOUT being measured as too high and thus POUT calculated too high. "CPU Package Power" is closer to reality when Speedshift is enabled during idling. And when you measure at the wall you will see that the difference between enabling and disabling Speedshift is much lower than what you see in HWinfo.
> 
> 
> Speedshift goes both ways, up and down. So it is well possible that the CPU downclocks less aggressive during very short non-max-load blips. This depends on how aggressive Speedshift is set for performance vs. power-saving.


We are talking about extensive idle periods here, not very short maximum load blips. It is just f*d up. Sorry.


----------



## edhutner

Sheyster said:


> What 360mm AIO are you using? Also, how did you apply the thermal paste?


 @Sheyster
It's Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360



Wirerat said:


> I get consistent results using the little spatuala and spreading as thin of a layer as possible over the whole ihs.
> 
> This method will have a very tiny amount of squeeze out but not enough for a mess.
> 
> I know paste application is a bit of a religion and sparks a lot of arguments.
> 
> Since I started applying it this way a few years back I rarely ever have to re-seat the water block.
> 
> Did you tighten the cooler down enough? I know it's a dumb question but I have found a corner not tightened all the way On my on setup before.


 @Sheyster, @Wirerat
First time I put a "X" lines with thermal paste (Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut). After removing for the second repaste it seemed that it was even spread, but may be too thick.
The second time I did thin layer with the dispenser.
Both times I tightened evenly each screw all the way down.

Before applying it the second time I made a quick check if the IHS is curved (using razor blade and light method). Actually in the one direction it was curved .. the middle part is lower than outer.

I have one more option. I still have my old mother board aorus pro and will try the 9900kf in it.
I am 99% sure that I will return the cpu. One reason is that it requires 1.35 vccsa/io in order to get stable with xmp 4000 ddr. My old 9700k required 1.22 with the same memory.


----------



## Sheyster

edhutner said:


> @Sheyster
> It's Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360
> 
> 
> 
> @Sheyster, @Wirerat
> First time I put a "X" lines with thermal paste (Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut). After removing for the second repaste it seemed that it was even spread, but may be too thick.
> The second time I did thin layer with the dispenser.
> Both times I tightened evenly each screw all the way down.
> 
> Before applying it the second time I made a quick check if the IHS is curved (using razor blade and light method). Actually in the one direction it was curved .. the middle part is lower than outer.
> 
> I have one more option. I still have my old mother board aorus pro and will try the 9900kf in it.
> I am 99% sure that I will return the cpu. One reason is that it requires 1.35 vccsa/io in order to get stable with xmp 4000 ddr. My old 9700k required 1.22 with the same memory.



It seems like a decent AIO at a very good price. Have you done the razer blade test to ensure there is no issue with the contact surface? (Too concave/convex.)

FWIW, I prefer *option 4* in this video:


----------



## edhutner

Yes I performed the razor test its a bit concaved at the center, cant tell exactly how much, I've seen worse.

Hour ago I did again repaste, but this time I used arctic silver 5 method 4 from the above video. Temperatures returned to the first apply - about 81 after 5 minute of occt small avx load on 4.7ghz.


----------



## hickelpickle

edhutner said:


> @Sheyster
> It's Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360
> 
> 
> 
> @Sheyster, @Wirerat
> First time I put a "X" lines with thermal paste (Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut). After removing for the second repaste it seemed that it was even spread, but may be too thick.
> The second time I did thin layer with the dispenser.
> Both times I tightened evenly each screw all the way down.
> 
> Before applying it the second time I made a quick check if the IHS is curved (using razor blade and light method). Actually in the one direction it was curved .. the middle part is lower than outer.
> 
> I have one more option. I still have my old mother board aorus pro and will try the 9900kf in it.
> 
> I am 99% sure that I will return the cpu. One reason is that it requires 1.35 vccsa/io in order to get stable with xmp 4000 ddr. My old 9700k required 1.22 with the same memory.



Did you apply the teflon stickers that protect the mounting holes on the top side of the board? When I first got mine temperatures were ****, then upon inspection, my paste didn't even fully spread, removed the stickers that protect the holes on the top(almost didn't install them anyway but went against my own judgement) and it fixed it. They added just enough height to affect mounting since the screw bottom out and clearances are so tight.


----------



## edhutner

I had doubts about the length of the standoffs. I didnt put the original ones. I found in my spare parts old ones from corsair that are about 0.8mm shorter and put them with the protective washers.
So the pressure is higher than designed, and I think there is no problem with the cooler at all.


----------



## Wirerat

@edhutner

Here is my real bench temps at 5ghz 1.3v. You can run the same test to compare.

This is a custom loop but your 360mm aio should be very comparable.


----------



## robertr1

Just a tip for those with a pro board. If you're running offset with cstates, speed step and windows power plan at balanced, you can get an occasional L0. If you change to windows high performance, it doesn't happen. It might have to do with the board not being able to keep up with intense downclocks and spikes. Just fyi.

Took a few days to track down the issue but I'm able to replicate it consistently so certainly not a fluke.


----------



## Lurifaks

robertr1 said:


> Just a tip for those with a pro board. If you're running offset with cstates, speed step and windows power plan at balanced, you can get an occasional L0. If you change to windows high performance, it doesn't happen. It might have to do with the board not being able to keep up with intense downclocks and spikes. Just fyi.
> 
> Took a few days to track down the issue but I'm able to replicate it consistently so certainly not a fluke.


Thanks for info, i might have this problem with Master. But how do u find out if its L0 ?


----------



## edhutner

Wirerat said:


> @edhutner
> 
> Here is my real bench temps at 5ghz 1.3v. You can run the same test to compare.
> 
> This is a custom loop but your 360mm aio should be very comparable.


 @Wirerat
Here are my RealBench at almost finalized voltage settings for stock clock (4.7 all cores) and ddr4000 with custom timings. (dvid +0.010, llc low, ac/dc pow.save=40/130)

Later I will do the same test with 4.9ghz - hope it will pass because I dont have yet stable settings.
However I dont think I will be able to match your temperatures, at 1.28 i cannot cool it .. and i dont think that the cooler is bad)


----------



## Wirerat

@edhutner

Max temp at 65cish? stock. That looks like everything is working perfectly.

I have a lot of rad space two 240's plus a 360mm. The ihs is a bottleneck though. My water temp won't go above 31c no matter what load I put onto the cpu. Even P95 small w/avx.

I have to load the gpu+cpu to get the water to hit 35c.
@robertr1

L0? Are you talking about a Whea error?
I have never had one using balanced on the aorus pro with offset. 

I did find something strange yesterday. My ram overclock 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 2t 340 trfc 1.47v is not stable with manual Oc.

I was gonna jump back to manual to do some vrm temperature comparisons vs offset. 

With my known stable profile 1.31v 5ghz 4.6 uncore. I cannot get into OS with my ram oc.

I double checked vccsio and sa voltages both 1.23v same as offset.

I set ram to 3200mhz just to be certain (the Led was already telling me ram issue) and it booted right up.

I have no idea what's different running offset vs manual as far as ram is concerned. It's not anything the bios shows me.


----------



## robertr1

Lurifaks said:


> Thanks for info, i might have this problem with Master. But how do u find out if its L0 ?


HWinfo64 last section.


----------



## robertr1

Wirerat said:


> @edhutner
> 
> 
> @robertr1
> 
> L0? Are you talking about a Whea error?
> I have never had one using balanced on the aorus pro with offset.
> 
> I did find something strange yesterday. My ram overclock 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 2t 340 trfc 1.47v is not stable with manual Oc.
> 
> I was gonna jump back to manual to do some vrm temperature comparisons vs offset.
> 
> With my known stable profile 1.31v 5ghz 4.6 uncore. I cannot get into OS with my ram oc.
> 
> I double checked vccsio and sa voltages both 1.23v same as offset.
> 
> I set ram to 3200mhz just to be certain (the Led was already telling me ram issue) and it booted right up.
> 
> I have no idea what's different running offset vs manual as far as ram is concerned. It's not anything the bios shows me.


Yeah. WHEA L0 error in hwinfo. For me at least I can repeat it and important evenly if bump up vcore well past what's p95 avx small stable, it'll still do it with the right conditions with running balanced plan. I'm on F9 bios so maybe something there? Anyway, there's no impact to anything so just more of a FYI incase someone else is banging their head trying to figure it out.

I've stuck to my 15/3600 with 255trfc and manual timings so just gonna leave it be.


----------



## Wirerat

@robertr1

If I remember correctly, You run different settings than I do for the llc and ac loadline. 

Using powersave ac loadline + low llc with a + offset does not have the L0 error at balanced. I been running that for 6 months.

I have never had a low load Whea error of any kind. 

This setup is on two rigs both aorus pro. One has 9900k other 9900kf both 5ghz w/offset.

Since you can duplicate the issue. Try my ac loadline and llc settings. I'm interested to see if you can cause it.


----------



## robertr1

@Wirerat

I'm running 
AC = 0
DC= 0
AC/DC load line = power savings
vcore load line = auto

You're doing the same but with low instead of auto?


----------



## Wirerat

@robertr1



Ac loadline powersave 
Llc low
Vcore normal 
Offset +.070v

I have the advanced VR disabled.


----------



## GeneO

robertr1 said:


> Just a tip for those with a pro board. If you're running offset with cstates, speed step and windows power plan at balanced, you can get an occasional L0. If you change to windows high performance, it doesn't happen. It might have to do with the board not being able to keep up with intense downclocks and spikes. Just fyi.
> 
> Took a few days to track down the issue but I'm able to replicate it consistently so certainly not a fluke.


Don't see it here with master, 8086k (I have been monitoruing WHEA.


----------



## edhutner

@Wirerat
Here is RealBench at 4.9ghz. 
Temperature doesnt seem much. Voltage too. But RealBench is very forgiving compared to occt or prime95.

I have used setting dvid -0.010, llc low, int ac 60 dc 130. If I go lower I get whea errors, if i go higher I get thermal throttling in occt or prime95 40k.


Edit:
same settings just got error in prime95 192k - fatal error: rounding 0.5, expected less than 0.4
I cant get it running on 4.9 

Going to put this sh**ty cpu in the other board (pro) just in to verify that the current board (master) is ok.


----------



## Wirerat

@edhutner

Unlucky. Sry man. Is that a ro or po stepping?


----------



## edhutner

I did the tests 9900kf aorus pro vs master.



Code:


core:   47
uncore: 43
llc:    low
int.vr: pow.save (ac40/dc130)
dvid:   +0.010

mb      time temp  Pout  Vrout        Comment
        sec  cels  W     V            
------------------------------------------------------		     		    
master  300  87    191   1.119-1.143
pro     300  90    174   1.127-1.150


core:   49
uncore: 43
llc:    low
int.vr: ac60/dc130
dvid:   -0.010

mb      time temp  Pout  Vrout        Comment
        sec  cels  W     V
------------------------------------------------------
master  180  99    254   1.221-1.246  thermal throttle
pro      60  99    231   1.229-1.248  thermal throttle


core:   49
uncore: 43
llc:    low
int.vr: ac10/dc1
dvid:   +0.050

mb      time temp  Pout  Vrout        Comment
        sec  cels  W     V
------------------------------------------------------
master                                fail bsod
pro     180  99    222   1.208-1.228  thermal throttle

Very strange results. Especially the Pout reading - on pro it's consistently lower. In the same time the temperature is higher. This is checkmate paragraph 22.

On the other hand on pro for 4.9ghz I was able to lower power even more, where the master crashes almost immediately for such settings. I didn't expect that.

I don't know which sensors to thrust. For sure there is something wrong. I am getting really frustrated.
I think I am going to RMA both the aorus master and 9900kf.

I am beginning to lose fate in Gigabyte. Couple of months ago I already returned one z390 gigabyte board because it was defective, now the master shows worse results than my old pro. And that is unexpected according to the buildzoid and to other people on this forum the master has better vrms.


----------



## robertr1

edhutner said:


> I did the tests 9900kf aorus pro vs master.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> core:   47
> uncore: 43
> llc:    low
> int.vr: pow.save (ac40/dc130)
> dvid:   +0.010
> 
> mb      time temp  Pout  Vrout        Comment
> sec  cels  W     V
> ------------------------------------------------------
> master  300  87    191   1.119-1.143
> pro     300  90    174   1.127-1.150
> 
> 
> core:   49
> uncore: 43
> llc:    low
> int.vr: ac60/dc130
> dvid:   -0.010
> 
> mb      time temp  Pout  Vrout        Comment
> sec  cels  W     V
> ------------------------------------------------------
> master  180  99    254   1.221-1.246  thermal throttle
> pro      60  99    231   1.229-1.248  thermal throttle
> 
> 
> core:   49
> uncore: 43
> llc:    low
> int.vr: ac10/dc1
> dvid:   +0.050
> 
> mb      time temp  Pout  Vrout        Comment
> sec  cels  W     V
> ------------------------------------------------------
> master                                fail bsod
> pro     180  99    222   1.208-1.228  thermal throttle
> 
> Very strange results. Especially the Pout reading - on pro it's consistently lower. In the same time the temperature is higher. This is checkmate paragraph 22.
> 
> On the other hand on pro for 4.9ghz I was able to lower power even more, where the master crashes almost immediately for such settings. I didn't expect that.
> 
> I don't know which sensors to thrust. For sure there is something wrong. I am getting really frustrated.
> I think I am going to RMA both the aorus master and 9900kf.
> 
> I am beginning to lose fate in Gigabyte. Couple of months ago I already returned one z390 gigabyte board because it was defective, now the master shows worse results than my old pro. And that is unexpected according to the buildzoid and to other people on this forum the master has better vrms.


Just fyi. I found running a negative offset to be unstable on my Pro. It wanted a + value. 

I don't use any of the AC/DC stuff. I just leave it on "0"

You can try my approach:
- AC/DC loadline: power savings
- vcore loadline: auto
vcore = normal
offset = +0.100v 
Core = 50
uncore = 43

Try that as a start?


----------



## edhutner

I have already tried that - cpu immediately hits 99degrees throttles and I stop the test. I am posting just the results that are at least runnable (not saying fully stable).

I have tried many many variations.

I have previous experience with oc (being doing it for each cpu/gpu I owned for the last 15 years).


----------



## AndrejB

I found that on the master you have two choices:
Ac/dc: 1/1
Llc: medium - turbo
Vcore: normal/fixed
Dvid: positive/none

Or

Ac/dc: 90-140/160 (depending on the clock)
Llc: normal
Vcore: auto

I'm using:
Ac/dc: 100/160 (47/43)
Llc: normal
Vcore: auto
Vccsa/vccio: 1.22 (mem at 4133)
With this I get 82c in Linx @ 1.12v on a h150i, 200w @ 175amps...


----------



## Wirerat

@edhutner

Do you have another cooler you can test? 

Getting a temp throttle at 4.9ghz 1.24v vrout at load doesn't seem right unless that was p95 small fft w/avx.

Or maybe it's the solder application in the cpu that's bad. 

It's seems hot to be under a 360mm aio.

My 9900kf rig has a single old 38mm swiftech 360mm cooling both the cpu and a gtx 1070. Also on aorus pro. It doesn't throttle under stress testing unless I run P95 w/avx.


----------



## edhutner

I have one old be quiet dark rock 3 air cooler, but I dont want to bother trying it as I am almost sure it will be useless for stress testing loads.

You could try occt - https://www.ocbase.com/ . AVX2 load with 128MB I think is similar to p95 avx small ffts.
But the same test, with the same cooler was fine 89 degree on [email protected] 1.28 vrout. The hyper thread could not be so so much overhead. The cooler has not leaked its almost brand new, I have inspected it several times. There has to be something wrong and I gave up and I spoke with support and I arranged returning of both the 9900kf and the aorus master.

Will be without a PC for some time until I decide I what exact components to put my money.


----------



## Wirerat

@edhutner




> But the same test, with the same cooler was fine 89 degree on [email protected] 1.28 vrout. The hyper thread could not be so so much overhead.


Hyperthreading scales with power linearly. It adds roughly 20% more multicore performance at the cost of 20% more power draw. 

If I disable hyperthreading my temps drop 10-15c depending on the test. 

If you haven't boxed it up yet. Do a comparison with hyperthreading disabled. 

If that test is simular P95 small w/avx then that's the issue. 

Very few can pass P95 small fft w/avx. I only ran it for 1 hour because it was pushing pout outside Intel spec. 

This is with what I consider a very large custom loop (840mm rad space) . I am just a couple of degrees away from tjmax.

My main rig in image below. I cannot run that on my 9900kf rig. It overwhelms the 360mm rad very fast.


----------



## edhutner

@Wirerat
I'm not an expert of custom coolings, but probably I would expect more from such large loop, may be it's time to delid or direct die cool 
btw I've been keeping der8auer oc frame and was hoping to use it on the kf... It will have to wait.

I have not already boxed, but have disassembled and started preparing the old parts (9700k and the z390 pro) for my friend.
If you remember, 2 days ago maybe, I already ran it with hyperthread disabled and it gave me 7 degrees lower temperature (in occt small avx that is almost the same as p95 4k fft avx), but that was on 4.7ghz. On 4.9ghz it probably will be more.


----------



## Wirerat

@edhutner

My temps are great in every other test. I don't care enough about P95 small to delid and kill my warranty for one test.

Thats something I'll do later after it's older. 

I only ran it to prove to myself I found stability using other tests. (x264 + real bench +.02v over the min requirement) 

My point was it takes a golden 9900k to even pass that test without delid at 5ghz all core no offsets. 

Siliconlottery.com best bin of the 9900k/9900kf only validated at 4.9ghz w/avx. They validate avx with small fft. 



> I already ran it with hyperthread disabled and it gave me 7 degrees lower temperature


Yea I recall. My bad. 🙂 

Anyways, I understand the frustration. 

Are you gonna do a refund or swap the cpu?


----------



## edhutner

Refund (Amazon). I decided to take some time and rethink. Most probably will fire again but this time for 9900K version. Hope for better luck.
I also has thoughts about KS, but actually it will cost me a lot more and will lose the pleasure (or pain) to overclock it, cause most probably the KS is just gold sample K. And final option is AMD 3900x/3950x, but I think it's too early for them.
@Wirerat thanks for trying to help me  And thanks to the other guys who also gave me advises and help.


----------



## robertr1

@Wirerat did you ever find any definite answers on siliconlottery's testing methodology? I never have.


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> @Wirerat did you ever find any definite answers on siliconlottery's testing methodology? I never have.


I have also spoken with r/siliconlottery's on reddit about it. 

It's mostly explained :

https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...s-coming-silicon-lottery.html#/topics/1633654



> We will primarily test with non-AVX Prime95, AVX Prime95, and Intel Linpack, but our exact methodology will be kept a trade secret.


They are bound to the qvl list they provide. They want to make sure their results can be duplicated by the end user. 

They only go up to 1.312v w/-2 avx offset on 9900k because that's the highest vcore that can be cooled by all the coolers on the Qvl list.


----------



## robertr1

I still find it not transparent enough because there is a lot of wiggle room in that. In some ways just saying 1 hr of real bench is actually more transparent. 

I prefer something simple like this: https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-core-i9-9900k-5-0-ghz-advanced-edition-hpit-541.html

"In order to explore the maximum clock values ​​of the binned CPUs and to ensure their stability, der8auer tests each individual copy for at least one hour under Prime95 26.6 with 1344K. Through this massive continuous load each processor is thoroughly pre-tested and the clock stability guaranteed, which is why we compensate for the overclocking associated loss of manufacturer 's warranty through its own 24-month King-Mod-Guarantee .

On the packaging of each pre-tested CPU is also specified by us and specified for stable OC operation core voltage specified, with a tolerance range of about +/- 30 mV depending on the power supply of the motherboard used. However, in order to protect the silicon, the maximum core voltage is at most at harmless 1.35 volts. "

It's a translation but you get the gist of it. Now you can choose to disagree with their test but they are very clear about what they do and what your expectation should be from it. The voltage variance also makes sense as we know that to be the case between various motherboards.


----------



## Wirerat

@robertr1

Debuarer is definitely more transparent. 

I just referrence the siliconlottery.com history results for the i9 statistics.


----------



## uplink

Hey there buddies

Any idea whether I can use *EZ BiOS* for *NVMe SSD M.2* drives too? Because no matter what I do, I'm just ending up in a reset loop and each time I try to enter EZ Bios, BiOS wants me to reset, so I reset, and that's that. I have 3 x Gigabyte NVMe drives [2 x GIGABYTE NVMe SSD 1TB and 1 x AORUS RGB M.2 NVMe SSD 512GB] on my *Aorus Z390 Xtreme*. I'm running latest *F8 BiO*.

Please advise

With kind regards

uplink


----------



## Dannyele

Hello guys,


What does it means the 04 or O4 debud code in the mobo display? I mean, all it is working fine but even once the windows booted up it stays in this code, the code that I get used to get was A0.


Searching on net about this debud code i found this: Asus mobos (04 - PCH initialization before microcode loading) and MSI mobos (04 - Power on South Bridge Initialization), but different meaning... also on the Aorus manual it doesn't appear the 04/O4.


----------



## AlexauwaHL

*Full performance using 3 x M.2 on Aorus Master?*

Hey guys,


do I run full performance on the Z390 Aorus Master when using three M.2 MVMe drives? Can the mainboard give full speed to all drives at the same time with now performance loss? According to the manual book only SATA3 1 would share bandwith with the second M2 slot. At the moment I am only using SATA3 0 and the first PCIE slot for my graphics card. So all should have full speed?

Also will I get additional heat by using all three? I guess no as they are lifted up from the board, right?


Thank you!


----------



## sygnus21

AlexauwaHL said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> 
> do I run full performance on the Z390 Aorus Master when using three M.2 MVMe drives? Can the mainboard give full speed to all drives at the same time with now performance loss? According to the manual book only SATA3 1 would share bandwith with the second M2 slot. At the moment I am only using SATA3 0 and the first PCIE slot for my graphics card. So all should have full speed?
> 
> Also will I get additional heat by using all three? I guess no as they are lifted up from the board, right?
> 
> 
> Thank you!


You shouldn't lose any speed as long as you aren't sharing lanes. That said, I'm not sure if there's a saturation point were all drives transferring data at full speed. I suspect no one can really answer that except for the board designers.

As for added heat due to having 3 NVMe drives, I suppose that also has to do with system cooling - case and system fans. I've got 2 NVMe drives installed on my Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme and things are fine there. The OS NVMe drive runs around 48ish while in use, while my other one used for photography work only reaches around 40ish in full use.

Hope this helps


----------



## Lurifaks

Dannyele said:


> Hello guys,
> 
> 
> What does it means the 04 or O4 debud code in the mobo display? I mean, all it is working fine but even once the windows booted up it stays in this code, the code that I get used to get was A0.
> 
> 
> Searching on net about this debud code i found this: Asus mobos (04 - PCH initialization before microcode loading) and MSI mobos (04 - Power on South Bridge Initialization), but different meaning... also on the Aorus manual it doesn't appear the 04/O4.


I had same problem.

I did what "terabyte" wrote in his post , and it was solved for me.

http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/7337/motherboard-post-code-04


----------



## lilpetamoix

*ballistix sport micron E*



Wirerat said:


> ballistix sport micron E
> 
> 2 x 8 gb, aorus pro, 9900k.
> 
> I have the ram stable at 3600mhz 16-19-19-40 2t trfc 520 @ 1.40v.
> 
> 
> My other kit (hynix cjr) does 3800mhz @ CL 17-21-21-41 2t 620 trfc on the mobo.
> 
> I'm getting better performance with e die at 3600.
> 
> Not bad for a $69 ram kit imo.


Hi Wirerat,

Were you able to get the micron E die stable at 3800mhz by any chance?

I have the same kit albeit 2 x 16gb instead and am having trouble oc'ing this thing.

Also, did you have to manually adjust VCCIO/SA at all or did you put it in auto?


----------



## Wirerat

@lilpetamoix

With the aorus pro 3600mhz was as high as my Micron e could go. I think it's the mobo since I have two 16gb kits that both max out there.

I manually set vccsio/vssa to 1.2v (could probably run this lower).

The timings do not scale with voltage on micron E. The frequency does. I had the best results around 1.41v. 

It seemed like feeding it to much voltage would make it worse.


----------



## hickelpickle

Wirerat said:


> @robertr1
> 
> Debuarer is definitely more transparent.
> 
> I just referrence the siliconlottery.com history results for the i9 statistics.



1344 no avx is a pretty easy test to pass though, and he bins @ 1.35v. I feel SL test heavier and bins @ a lower voltage that even with an avx offset you're likely to get better chips for the price. You could buy a 5ghz binned cpu @ 1.35v that could easily need another 30-50mv to be avx stable which means your paying more for a processor, that could be worse than a large majority of chips out there.


----------



## Wirerat

@hickelpickle

Good points. 

Binning to 1.312v leaves a good amount of overhead.


----------



## Sheyster

@Wirerat, what trfc value are you running with 3600 CL15 on your Pro board?


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> @Wirerat, what trfc value are you running with 3600 CL15 on your Pro board?


I'm no longer running that ram in my main rig. I have two sets of micron E in my 9900kf rig currently xmp 3200mhz.

I have not had time to dial it in at 4 x 8gb.

But here is an image of my best clocks on the 2 x 8gb.

This was 800% hci memtest stable.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> I'm no longer running that ram in my main rig. I have two sets of micron E in my 9900kf rig currently xmp 3200mhz.
> 
> I have not had time to dial it in at 4 x 8gb.
> 
> But here is an image of my best clocks on the 2 x 8gb.
> 
> This was 800% hci memtest stable.


Thanks. I'm gonna play with trfc this week and see how low I can get it down. Hoping for 350~ish. I'm running 4x8 B-die which I've been able to get running stable at 3866 CL18, but that's as good as it gets with this Pro board. 4000 is a no-go.


----------



## GeneO

This is the first time I ever bothered to really push for 5.2 GHz on my 8086k. The Asus Code X I had wouldn't have it. 

Got it going stable at average VR VOUT of 1.336v (prime95 1344/1344 / 30 GB) and average core max of 64c (VRM 42c). Turbo LLC and offset mode with offset +0.035v.

Happy with 5.2 GHz on air (I have no illusions about a 9900k though), but will stick with my 5.1 GHz for everyday until/if I get a 9900k.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no longer running that ram in my main rig. I have two sets of micron E in my 9900kf rig currently xmp 3200mhz.
> 
> I have not had time to dial it in at 4 x 8gb.
> 
> But here is an image of my best clocks on the 2 x 8gb.
> 
> This was 800% hci memtest stable.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. I'm gonna play with trfc this week and see how low I can get it down. Hoping for 350~ish. I'm running 4x8 B-die which I've been able to get running stable at 3866 CL18, but that's as good as it gets with this Pro board. 4000 is a no-go.
Click to expand...

 @Sheyster

Sorry, maybe I got confused about what you asked. 

Here is my current ram setup with b-die.

3800mhz CL 15-15-15-32 2t 1.47v 

Im happy with these results for the limitations the aorus pro has. 

Trfc = 360
Trefi = 60000

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/21825906


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> Okay, maybe I got confused. Here is my current ram setup with b-die.
> 
> 3800mhz CL 15-15-15-32 2t 1.47v
> 
> Im happy with these results on the pro.
> 
> *
> Trfc = 360
> Trefi = 60000
> *


Thanks, this is helpful!


----------



## Wirerat

@Sheyster

No problem. 

Post your results back here. 🙂


----------



## AlexauwaHL

sygnus21 said:


> You shouldn't lose any speed as long as you aren't sharing lanes. That said, I'm not sure if there's a saturation point were all drives transferring data at full speed. I suspect no one can really answer that except for the board designers.
> 
> As for added heat due to having 3 NVMe drives, I suppose that also has to do with system cooling - case and system fans. I've got 2 NVMe drives installed on my Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme and things are fine there. The OS NVMe drive runs around 48ish while in use, while my other one used for photography work only reaches around 40ish in full use.
> 
> Hope this helps



Thanks mate. Actually I've did some research. From what I found is that all three M.2 slots are sharing bandwidth with the chipset. So also USB, and other devices are sharing that lane. So you should actually lose performance there more you got going on there. So I stayed with my 2 x m.2 and just got a sata SSD.


----------



## BradleyW

What is the benefit of using all 4 DIMM slots on the Z390 ULTRA with its T-Topology over using just slots 1 and 3 for dual channel? 

Thank you.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> @Sheyster
> 
> No problem.
> 
> Post your results back here. 🙂


So far trfc 374 is working fine, fully memtest and gaming stable. I got that number from an old memory OC I had dialed in on a G.skill 16GB (2x8) 4000 B-die kit. Note this result is with 32GB of 3200 CL14 B-die. I'll try for 360 trfc.


----------



## Sheyster

BradleyW said:


> What is the benefit of using all 4 DIMM slots on the Z390 ULTRA with its T-Topology over using just slots 1 and 3 for dual channel?
> 
> Thank you.


I can confirm I get better results OC-wise with 4 sticks than with 2. I believe that is the consensus, 4 sticks can be dialed in better than 2 on these boards. QVL results indicate the same.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the benefit of using all 4 DIMM slots on the Z390 ULTRA with its T-Topology over using just slots 1 and 3 for dual channel?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> I can confirm I get better results OC-wise with 4 sticks than with 2. I believe that is the consensus, 4 sticks can be dialed in better than 2 on these boards. QVL results indicate the same.
Click to expand...

So this is true up to a point. The mobo itself won't limit 4 sticks vs 2. Sometimes even better speeds at 4 dimms. 

The memory controller of the cpu however still may prefer 2 dimms vs 4.

My 9900kf + aorus pro rig cannot run 4 dimms micron E at the same speed as 2.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> So this is true up to a point. The mobo itself won't limit 4 sticks vs 2. Sometimes even better speeds at 4 dimms.
> 
> The memory controller of the cpu however still may prefer 2 dimms vs 4.
> 
> My 9900kf + aorus pro rig cannot run 4 dimms micron E at the same speed as 2.


Indeed, the IMC can always be a limiting factor.


----------



## Name Change

Having problems getting 4 sticks of ram working in this board z390 Ultra. if I enable XMP i get boot loop and have to remove cmos battery,
also tried manual setting up ram and same thing happens.. Using Team Group Dark pro 8gb stick 3200 b-die kits.

is there some trick or something using F7 bios, should I go with newest one F9 i think. Also have to install 1 stick at a time, will not boot up with 4 sticks
2 sticks then add a third and then a fourth, hope its not the board going out.. will test both kits later in my Ryzen system makes sure both are working fine.


----------



## Wirerat

Name Change said:


> Having problems getting 4 sticks of ram working in this board z390 Ultra. if I enable XMP i get boot loop and have to remove cmos battery,
> also tried manual setting up ram and same thing happens.. Using Team Group Dark pro 8gb stick 3200 b-die kits.
> 
> is there some trick or something using F7 bios, should I go with newest one F9 i think. Also have to install 1 stick at a time, will not boot up with 4 sticks
> 2 sticks then add a third and then a fourth, hope its not the board going out.. will test both kits later in my Ryzen system makes sure both are working fine.


It could be the bios. It's worth a try. You can always re-flash the old bios if there are issues.

Try increasing the ram voltage. Set 1.45v. That's the first thing I would do.

Also vccio and vssa can be set at 1.2v.

It's not the mobo if all 4 dimms work without xmp enabled.

I don't know the rest of the ram timings but since it's b-die raising the ram voltage should get it to boot without loosening timings.

That being said raising trfc and setting 2t can also help get it to boot.


----------



## GeneO

AlexauwaHL said:


> Thanks mate. Actually I've did some research. From what I found is that all three M.2 slots are sharing bandwidth with the chipset. So also USB, and other devices are sharing that lane. So you should actually lose performance there more you got going on there. So I stayed with my 2 x m.2 and just got a sata SSD.


It doesn't actually "share" bandwidth. You can use 2 of the m.2 for pci-e SSD with no loss of SATA ports. If you put the third in, you don't share it with two of the SATA ports, you actually loose two of the SATA ports. 

For any chipset provided i/o, You will ultimately be limited by the DMI link between the processor and the chipset. It is only 4 PCI-E 3.0 lanes worth of bandwidth, about 3.9 GB/s I believe.


----------



## Name Change

Wirerat said:


> It could be the bios. It's worth a try. You can always re-flash the old bios if there are issues.
> 
> Try increasing the ram voltage. Set 1.45v. That's the first thing I would do.
> 
> Also vccio and vssa can be set at 1.2v.
> 
> It's not the mobo if all 4 dimms work without xmp enabled.
> 
> I don't know the rest of the ram timings but since it's b-die raising the ram voltage should get it to boot without loosening timings.
> 
> That being said raising trfc and setting 2t can also help get it to boot.


Tried updating bios, 4 sticks won't work at 3200 aka xmp unless I raise voltage to 1.45 and Vcio and Vssa to 1.24, ram will not go above 3200mhz
with 4 sticks installed.. no matter voltage or timmings, tried 3400 at 17,17,17,38 nope failed to boot even 3300mhz fails, boot loop then enters bios failed to boot..


----------



## Wirerat

Name Change said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> It could be the bios. It's worth a try. You can always re-flash the old bios if there are issues.
> 
> Try increasing the ram voltage. Set 1.45v. That's the first thing I would do.
> 
> Also vccio and vssa can be set at 1.2v.
> 
> It's not the mobo if all 4 dimms work without xmp enabled.
> 
> I don't know the rest of the ram timings but since it's b-die raising the ram voltage should get it to boot without loosening timings.
> 
> That being said raising trfc and setting 2t can also help get it to boot.
> 
> 
> 
> Tried updating bios, 4 sticks won't work at 3200 aka xmp unless I raise voltage to 1.45 and Vcio and Vssa to 1.24, ram will not go above 3200mhz
> with 4 sticks installed.. no matter voltage or timmings, tried 3400 at 17,17,17,38 nope failed to boot even 3300mhz fails, boot loop then enters bios failed to boot..
Click to expand...

Did you try setting the cpu to default clocks w/auto voltage?

You may need to redo the OC after you get the ram up and running.

Just throwing out ideas I would try. 🙂


----------



## Name Change

Wirerat said:


> Did you try setting the cpu to default clocks w/auto voltage?
> 
> You may need to redo the OC after you get the ram up and running.
> 
> Just throwing out ideas I would try. 🙂


I left my cpu stock and just tried to work on ram, very odd.

Fact it won't do 3300 or something, just boots lights/fans spin up tried to go forward and
then turns off and boots to bios. Or sometimes a black screen..

Gonna try sticks in my ryzen rig tm. tired of this tonight lol.
thx.


----------



## Wirerat

@Name Change

I understand the frustration.Both my micron E 2 x 8gb kits can do 3600mhz cl 16.

I settled at xmp 3200mhz whenever I paired both sets 4 x 8gb. I couldn't get 3400 to boot, so I figured not much point it pushing it.

Aorus pro is not fun to memory oc on. That automatic backup bios needs a way to be disabled with a jumper.


----------



## Nephalem89

Good Morning.

Currently I have a problem I am trying to make 4 ram modules oc but when I modify the trfi I put a value of 30,000 and it marks the value of 65,000 it changes only ... it can be a f8 bug of the gigabyte z390 xtrem ...I'm desperate


----------



## Wirerat

Nephalem89 said:


> Good Morning.
> 
> Currently I have a problem I am trying to make 4 ram modules oc but when I modify the trfi I put a value of 30,000 and it marks the value of 65,000 it changes only ... it can be a f8 bug of the gigabyte z390 xtrem ...I'm desperate


Thats a bios problem on F11 for my aorus pro. I had to roll back to bios F10 to fix.

Can you try going back to F7?

Edit: that's the "new UI" bios for your xtreme. You should definitely roll back. The new Ui bios has memory problems.


----------



## Nephalem89

Wirerat said:


> Thats a bios problem on F11 for my aorus pro. I had to roll back to bios F10 to fix.
> 
> Can you try going back to F7?
> 
> Edit: that's the "new UI" bios for your xtreme. You should definitely roll back. The new Ui bios has memory problems.


Thanks a lot !! Its posible modification bios F7 for last microcode of intel ? Thanks


----------



## Name Change

Wirerat said:


> @Name Change
> 
> I understand the frustration.Both my micron E 2 x 8gb kits can do 3600mhz cl 16.
> 
> I settled at xmp 3200mhz whenever I paired both sets 4 x 8gb. I couldn't get 3400 to boot, so I figured not much point it pushing it.
> 
> Aorus pro is not fun to memory oc on. That automatic backup bios needs a way to be disabled with a jumper.


Im hoping it's not the board, 1 kit is running 14,14,14,32 3400mhz on my 2700x + MSI M7 x470 board, while the other kit
is running 16,16,16,36 3900mhz on my this intel system lol. Wonder if it's ram slots or something. 1.41v on both systems
as I type this. Slapped it in them and let it go no tweaking.

I should of said, I had one of the kits for last year and bought another to go with it, since it was so cheap..



So, running 4x8gb 3466mhz on the ryzen system 14,14,14,32 1.43v. and I can't do over 3200 on my intel. Not sure what else to
try lol. Wish I had another board to test lol.


----------



## BradleyW

Sheyster said:


> I can confirm I get better results OC-wise with 4 sticks than with 2. I believe that is the consensus, 4 sticks can be dialed in better than 2 on these boards. QVL results indicate the same.





Wirerat said:


> So this is true up to a point. The mobo itself won't limit 4 sticks vs 2. Sometimes even better speeds at 4 dimms.
> 
> The memory controller of the cpu however still may prefer 2 dimms vs 4.
> 
> My 9900kf + aorus pro rig cannot run 4 dimms micron E at the same speed as 2.


What sort of performance advantage are we looking at here, if any?

On my Z390 Ultra I use 2 sticks of DDR4 3800MHz (XMP, GSAT Stable). I get a MIN FPS of around 78 in Ghost Recon Breakpoint (benchmark, Ultra Preset, 1080p 21:9 Ultrawide). 

If I drop to the following memory speeds, I get the following MIN FPS:
3600 MHz = 75 FPS
3400 MHz = 72 FPS
3000 MHz = 68 FPS
2133 MHz = 58 FPS

So I was wondering if 4 sticks, given the special feature of this board, would result in increased FPS (in the scenario above)?

I've tested memory before, and made a thread about it, showing how it can increase FPS in various games....but these gains in my test above are pretty large to say the least! I'd understand these gains if I was CPU and memory limited, but the GPU is showing a solid 100% utilization. Agreed, not the best way to determine bottlenecks..

System is in my sig, apart from the GPU is now a 5700 XT.

Thank you.


----------



## Wirerat

@BradleyW

4 sticks are better on T-topology for the max overclocking frequency. 

At no point is using 4 dimms superior to faster 2 dimms at the same capacity. 

For example. 2 x 16 gb 3200mhz vs 4 x 8gb 3200mhz.. Roughly the same performance. 

There can be slight differences double sided vs single sided ram but this is all small in comparison to higher frequency/tighter timings performance gains.

On aorus master/ultra the chance of getting 4100mhz + is better with 4 sticks. That's the only advantage.


----------



## Sheyster

BradleyW said:


> If I drop to the following memory speeds, I get the following MIN FPS:
> 3600 MHz = 75 FPS
> 3400 MHz = 72 FPS
> 3000 MHz = 68 FPS
> 2133 MHz = 58 FPS



If we're talking strictly minimum FPS performance (which is important for gamers obviously), it has been shown that anything over 3600 does not help much, 3600 is the sweet spot for gaming. However, if you're benching, everything counts. A few points can often separate the top benchers.


----------



## Alphaz

Hey fellas, building a gaming PC for 1080p CPU-intensive games where RAM is giving significant improvements in minimum and average FPS.
I am a complete beginner in terms of overclocking, so i would really appreciate if someone could help me out here.

I decided on Z390 Aorus Master, I9-9900K and RTX 2080 Super. I want to have 32 GB of RAM (4x8GB) and run them at a XMP profile of 3600 MHz or 3800 MHz.
My problem is that i have seen multiple people mention that they buy RAM advertised for say 4000 MHz but can't run it at 4000 and have to lower it to say 3600 to even boot the PC.

Now with my lack of experience i am wondering, is this a problem only for high speeds like 4000+ or is this happening on all of them?
Say i purchase a 3600 MHz one, is it also very likely that i'll have to lower it to 3400 or 3200?

The FPS difference between 3600 and 4000 or 4133 is really not that big, so 3600 is my goal. But because i don't know whether this problem is related to only high frequency sticks or all of them, i am struggling to figure out whether i should overpay for a 4000 MHz and run it at 3600 stable or pay a lot less for a 3600 MHz one and pray it will run at 3600 MHz.


----------



## Wirerat

@Alphaz

Your Aorus Master can run 4000mhz with two sticks and 4133mhz with 4.

Memory controller could limit it but the mobo can handle it. 

Those of us on the Aorus Pro are limited to 3600-3866mhz.

I have a 4000mhz CL 19 b die kit dialed in at 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 340trfc 2t. 1.47v.


----------



## Alphaz

Wirerat said:


> @Alphaz
> 
> Your Aorus Master can run 4000mhz with two sticks and 4133mhz with 4.
> 
> Memory controller could limit it but the mobo can handle it.
> 
> Those of us on the Aorus Pro are limited to 3600-3866mhz.
> 
> I have a 4000mhz CL 19 b die kit dialed in at 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 340trfc 2t. 1.47v.


Yes, i understand that my motherboard is capable of running 4133 MHz on 4 sticks, in fact an updated version of QVL seems to mention quite a bit of 4200-4266 MHz and even one 4333 MHz.
-link-

But that doesn't answer my question. QVL is not a guarantee, people buy sticks from QVL adveristed for say 4000 MHz and are unable to run them at 4000 MHz and have to lower it.
My question is whether this happens only with high speed sticks or is this the case with every single ram stick out there whether it's advertised as 4000, 3600, 3200, 2800 etc.

Because if it's only happening on high speeds then logic tells me i can just buy a 3600 MHz one for 2x less the price and run it on 3600 MHz, instead of buying a 4000 MHz for 2x the price to run it at 3600 MHz.


----------



## Wirerat

@Alphaz

Ram with xmp 3600mhz/3800mhz will run on that board in 2 or 4 dimms.

You won't have any issues with that.


Frequency is not everything. My 4000mhz CL 19 kit performs better at my 3800mhz settings.

If you want the best timings then buy B-die.

The kit I have was only $89 for b die at 4000mhz. I purchased it knowing it was bdie and I planned to run at 3800mhz with tighten timings.

If you want the best value ram that can do 3600mhz, you should buy balistix sport Micron E-die.


----------



## BradleyW

Thanks for the help guys, I appreciate it.


----------



## Nephalem89

@Wirerat It's possible a capture your timing ram? thanks a lot!


----------



## Wirerat

Nephalem89 said:


> @Wirerat It's possible a capture your timing ram? thanks a lot!


Here is the ASRock configurator.


I will be honest with you though. I'm not great at ram overclocking. I copied these secondarys from a redditor with the same kit.

It was 800% hci memtest stable. No crashes or issues during gaming at all so far.


----------



## Name Change

Update

So I have kit of XPG SPECTRIX D80 3600 17,18,18 running in my Ryzen rig @ 3533 15,15,15,32 b-die kit, so I added my new kit of Team group dark pro 3200 14,14,14,31 to it and boom booted fine 1.43v, Ran benchmarks and
memtest everything is good, then I took out the adata kit and added it to my Intel rig, booted fine @ 3900 cas 16 with my old Dark pro 3200 b-die kit. Ran more benches and such, took out adata kit and added new kit of Dark pro
and boom running fine at 3900mhz cas 17 1.44v, vccio 1.24 and agent 1.25 just making sure ram works.
.
Going to try to lower cas and tighten things up now.. Weird **** its working now.. Save a profile and see if I can lower voltage a smudge. Who would of thought the 2700x would of been easier to get ram working.
lol.


----------



## Alphaz

Hey guys, i'm building a new machine with i9-9900K, Z390 Aorus Master and RTX 2080 Super.
My problem is choosing the right RAM, here is QVL list of my mobo: -link-

I want 32 GB and willing to spend 300$ for that 32 GB (4x8GB preferable because of T-topology of my mobo).
I'm struggling to figure out which RAM to go with, some 3600 MHz with CL16 picked my interest but the "chipset" block is empty on the list, so not sure whether i should worry about that.


----------



## Wirerat

@Alphaz

With $300 to spend I would buy a kit that is known samsung B-die. 3200mhz CL 14 kit would give you the really tight timings at 3600mhz and fit your budget.

The qvl list is not great. I have ran 4 kits that are not listed without issues. They don't add any new kits that came out after the mobo release.


----------



## spin5000

delete


----------



## spin5000

Intrud3r said:


> New Intel drivers for your Aorus Ultra:
> 
> Intel Management Engine Interface
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[1914.12.0.1256]	82.28 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel INF installation
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[10.1.17969.8134]	3.36 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel Serial I/O driver
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[30.100.1915.1]	1.55 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Also a new realtek driver.





MacG32 said:


> These are the latest drivers from https://www.station-drivers.com/
> 
> Intel Chipset Device Software v10.1.18015.8142 WHQL
> 
> Intel Management Engine (ME) Firmware v12.0.35.1427 (S&H)(1.5Mo)
> 
> Intel Management Engine Interface (MEI) v1916.12.0.1263 WHQL
> 
> Intel Network Connections Software v23.5.2 WHQL
> 
> Intel Proset-Wireless Bluetooth Software v21.10.1.1
> 
> Intel PROSet-Wireless WiFi Software v21.10.1.2 WHQL
> 
> Intel Serial IO Driver v30.100.1915.1 WHQL
> 
> Realtek High Definition Audio (HDA) R2.8x (8703) WHQL


.
1) Hmmm... Intel's official website says Intel ME drivers version 1909.12.0.1236 (3/26/2019) are the latest for the Z390 chipset ( https://downloadcenter.intel.com/product/133293/Intel-Z390-Chipset ). Those newer versions above are not for Z390 according to Intel's website...

2) Should we download/install the Serial IO Driver? I've never had to install a Serial I/O driver, or even heard of one, in my life and I've been building PCs for 15 years and have used lots of low, mid, & high-end motherboards (MSI XPower, ASUS ROG Maximus, ASUS ROG Rampage, ASRock X99X Killer, etc.). Kind of confused......

3) Why is there an ME Firmware download? I thought ME firmware is auto-included in BIOS updates?

4) The Intel INF chipset drivers version 10.1.18 says it's for Win 10 only while 10.1.17 says also for Win 8.1 (& 10). Is this just Intel not "officially" labeling the brand new stuff as Win 8.1 anymore even though they're truly just as compatible as older versions or should Win 8.1 users actually not go beyond 10.1.17?

5) Why does Intel's INF page not list 9th gen Intel processors. It only says up to 8? 9th gen has been out for a year...So confused.

6) Why is the Realtek ALC1220 not listed in the Realtek download's section? Where can I find Realtek's official ALC1220 audio drivers without resorting to 3rd-part websites?


I just just got a Z390 Aorus Pro & Z390 Aorus Ultra (2 PCs) and am trying to figure out exactly what versions of software to download due to using Win 8.1 64-bit, not to mention not always trusting motherboard manufacturer websites when it comes to the latest versions of software. It's a little difficult and vague trying to find what's for what. I would really appreciate some help and information......It's getting a little frustrating. 3.5 hours so far researching & searching driver versions for a new build...Kind of ridiculous actually...


----------



## Sheyster

Alphaz said:


> Hey guys, i'm building a new machine with i9-9900K, Z390 Aorus Master and RTX 2080 Super.
> My problem is choosing the right RAM, here is QVL list of my mobo: -link-
> 
> I want 32 GB and willing to spend 300$ for that 32 GB (4x8GB preferable because of T-topology of my mobo).
> I'm struggling to figure out which RAM to go with, some 3600 MHz with CL16 picked my interest but the "chipset" block is empty on the list, so not sure whether i should worry about that.


G.skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZ is B-die, however Newegg seems to be out of stock on all the variants/colors of it.


----------



## edhutner

I am also searching for new 2x16G kit. (I gave up on z390 master, and changed it for maximus xi gene - it has 2 dimm slots)
I wonder between 4000c19 and 3200c14 b-dies. At the end most probably I will run them at 3600c15 hopefully. From price point of view 3200c14 are cheaper.
For example prices (without vat) for G.skill kits:
F4-3200C14D-32GVR (Ripjaws V) - 206eur
F4-4000C19D-32GTZR (Trident Z color) - 307eur

100eur difference. Which one will clock better?

My previous experience is with b-dies single ranks rated high frequency running on lower frequency but with very nice low timings. Now I am tempted to test the opposite.

Any opinions?


----------



## Falkentyne

If you're using an Aorus Master, set your PWM switching Frequency to 300 khz instead of 500 khz when at LLC: Turbo. (Improves LinX 0.9.6 35000 size transient response stability, at least at 4.7 ghz. No idea what happens at 5 ghz).


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> If you're using an Aorus Master, set your PWM switching Frequency to 300 khz instead of 500 khz when at LLC: Turbo. (Improves LinX 0.9.6 35000 size transient response stability, at least at 4.7 ghz. No idea what happens at 5 ghz).


I saw the light and just went down to LLC High. Still stable at 1.26 vcore and a little cooler.


----------



## Wirerat

Wb @Falkentyne

I got weird one here.

My ram profile 3800mhz CL 15-15-15-32 1.47v won even boot when I tryed going back to manual Oc for some testing..

I let it run to 1200% hci memtest. I'm certain it's stable. It's just that with manual Oc the mobo won't train at those settings. I get ram Led unless I drop back to 3700mhz. 

Really makes me wonder what's happening different at boot on adaptive/offset.

On F10 bios. F11 was garbage. Gigabyte posted a F12b that supposedly fixed the trefi bug. I haven't tried it yet though.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

Wb @reachthesky


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## sygnus21

AlexauwaHL said:


> Thanks mate. Actually I've did some research. From what I found is that all three M.2 slots are sharing bandwidth with the chipset. So also USB, and other devices are sharing that lane. So you should actually lose performance there more you got going on there. So I stayed with my 2 x m.2 and just got a sata SSD.


I won't argue that point and as it does make sense to me. I actually should have said that when I mentioned a saturation point, rather than saying "not losing speed".

Thanks.


----------



## sygnus21

reachthesky said:


> Hi everyone. I'd like to apologize to everyone here for my behavior a couple weeks ago. It was unacceptable. I should have approached the situation differently and shouldn't have thrown falkentyne under the bus like I did, I'm sorry @Falkentyne. Sorry to @criskoe as well. If you'll allow me to stay, I'd like to be apart of the group.


Wasn't involved in that ordeal, but just want to say it takes a man to own up to his mistakes. I applaud you.

Peace


----------



## mmcneil

So since KedarWolf has moved on to the Asus board, does that mean we won't get anymore modified BIOS builds?


----------



## BradleyW

spin5000 said:


> Intrud3r said:
> 
> 
> 
> New Intel drivers for your Aorus Ultra:
> 
> Intel Management Engine Interface
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[1914.12.0.1256]	82.28 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel INF installation
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[10.1.17969.8134]	3.36 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Intel Serial I/O driver
> (Note) Win10 ver.1903 supported.	[30.100.1915.1]	1.55 MB	2019/05/29
> 
> Also a new realtek driver.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MacG32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are the latest drivers from https://www.station-drivers.com/
> 
> Intel Chipset Device Software v10.1.18015.8142 WHQL
> 
> Intel Management Engine (ME) Firmware v12.0.35.1427 (S&H)(1.5Mo)
> 
> Intel Management Engine Interface (MEI) v1916.12.0.1263 WHQL
> 
> Intel Network Connections Software v23.5.2 WHQL
> 
> Intel Proset-Wireless Bluetooth Software v21.10.1.1
> 
> Intel PROSet-Wireless WiFi Software v21.10.1.2 WHQL
> 
> Intel Serial IO Driver v30.100.1915.1 WHQL
> 
> Realtek High Definition Audio (HDA) R2.8x (8703) WHQL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .
> 1) Hmmm... Intel's official website says Intel ME drivers version 1909.12.0.1236 (3/26/2019) are the latest for the Z390 chipset ( https://downloadcenter.intel.com/product/133293/Intel-Z390-Chipset ). Those newer versions above are not for Z390 according to Intel's website...
> 
> 2) Should we download/install the Serial IO Driver? I've never had to install a Serial I/O driver, or even heard of one, in my life and I've been building PCs for 15 years and have used lots of low, mid, & high-end motherboards (MSI XPower, ASUS ROG Maximus, ASUS ROG Rampage, ASRock X99X Killer, etc.). Kind of confused......
> 
> 3) Why is there an ME Firmware download? I thought ME firmware is auto-included in BIOS updates?
> 
> 4) The Intel INF chipset drivers version 10.1.18 says it's for Win 10 only while 10.1.17 says also for Win 8.1 (& 10). Is this just Intel not "officially" labeling the brand new stuff as Win 8.1 anymore even though they're truly just as compatible as older versions or should Win 8.1 users actually not go beyond 10.1.17?
> 
> 5) Why does Intel's INF page not list 9th gen Intel processors. It only says up to 8? 9th gen has been out for a year...So confused.
> 
> 6) Why is the Realtek ALC1220 not listed in the Realtek download's section? Where can I find Realtek's official ALC1220 audio drivers without resorting to 3rd-part websites?
> 
> 
> I just just got a Z390 Aorus Pro & Z390 Aorus Ultra (2 PCs) and am trying to figure out exactly what versions of software to download due to using Win 8.1 64-bit, not to mention not always trusting motherboard manufacturer websites when it comes to the latest versions of software. It's a little difficult and vague trying to find what's for what. I would really appreciate some help and information......It's getting a little frustrating. 3.5 hours so far researching & searching driver versions for a new build...Kind of ridiculous actually...
Click to expand...

I'll save you some hassle, grab the drivers from the motherboard manufacturer website. They'll be more than fine, and are often updated frequently. You'll find everything you need on there.

However, for the INF, I don't install it. I leave Windows update to download the latest. Same for LAN. The drivers provided are more up to date than what GIGABYTE has listed for my Z390 Ultra.


----------



## Sheyster

mmcneil said:


> So since KedarWolf has moved on to the Asus board, does that mean we won't get anymore modified BIOS builds?



@vmanuelgm has also provided modded BIOS files. Maybe he'll be available to help out sometimes.


----------



## GeneO

I have modded my Asus BIOS quite often and I will be doing so on the my Aorus Master as well. But right now I am stable on F9 and it will take me a bit. Will post any once I get started.


----------



## Sheyster

GeneO said:


> I have modded my Asus BIOS quite often and I will be doing so on the my Aorus Master as well. But right now I am stable on F9 and it will take me a bit. Will post any once I get started.


Look for Kedar's modded F10b BIOS in this thread. That's probably the best one currently available. Stay away from the F11 BIOS.


----------



## GeneO

Sheyster said:


> Look for Kedar's modded F10b BIOS in this thread. That's probably the best one currently available. Stay away from the F11 BIOS.


? No F11 for the master. I am good with F9. Will try f10 soon.


----------



## bigfootnz

I've upgraded my 9900k to 9900ks. At the moment I'm running F10 bios, as that is recommendation for 9900ks, and I know that F10 has some/lots of bugs. But I've found another possible bug. On F7 and 9900k I was using auto voltage with AC/DC 65/0 and LLC standard and it was working much better than with manual voltage. But with F10 and 9900ks if I use AC/DC 45/0 (as it needs less voltage than 9900k) I've noticed that Vdroop is bigger in Prime95 v29.8b6 (no difference if is it small/smallest FFT or just blend) with AVX disabled then with just AVX2 disabled. And Vdroop with AVX disabled is almost the same like with AVX enabled. But when I switch to manual voltage it is opposite, just how it should be, AVX disabled has less Vdroop than AVX2 disabled. In my opinion this is another bug in F10.

If someone is running similar setup with any bios prior F10 and running auto voltage with any AC/DC settings can they check what has bigger Vdroop in Prime95 AVX disabled or just AVX2 disabled? Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

bigfootnz said:


> I've upgraded my 9900k to 9900ks. At the moment I'm running F10 bios, as that is recommendation for 9900ks, and I know that F10 has some/lots of bugs. But I've found another possible bug. On F7 and 9900k I was using auto voltage with AC/DC 65/0 and LLC standard and it was working much better than with manual voltage. But with F10 and 9900ks if I use AC/DC 45/0 (as it needs less voltage than 9900k) I've noticed that Vdroop is bigger in Prime95 v29.8b6 (no difference if is it small/smallest FFT or just blend) with AVX disabled then with just AVX2 disabled. And Vdroop with AVX disabled is almost the same like with AVX enabled. But when I switch to manual voltage it is opposite, just how it should be, AVX disabled has less Vdroop than AVX2 disabled. In my opinion this is another bug in F10.
> 
> If someone is running similar setup with any bios prior F10 and running auto voltage with any AC/DC settings can they check what has bigger Vdroop in Prime95 AVX disabled or just AVX2 disabled? Thanks


This is not a bug, at least not on a 9900k.
AC Loadline raises VRM input voltages depending on current. (In order to see the input voltage, set "DC Loadline" to 1, and then check CPU VID at idle and load--this will tell you the VRM input voltage BEFORE VDROOP IS APPLIED.

This value is not only based on the AC Loadline value, and how much current is being pulled at load, it is also based on the CPU's original VID for that multiplier.
The 9900KS has a completely different VID table in most circumstances than a 9900k--since the KS is binned, they in general will have a lower default VID than the 9900k. So you therefore cannot compare your 9900k examples with Vdroop on Auto vcore+Standard Loadline calibration with a 9900ks, because the base multiplier VID will be different.

In order to compare the KS at x50, the closest comparison is the old "k" at x47. And yes I've tested that, but with AC Loadline and DC Loadline at 1.6 mOhms on a 9900k at x47 and LLC at Standard. There is no bug there. The curve was different than at x50, and yes it seemed like FMA3 had less vdroop than AVX at lower multipliers (like x47) but not at x50, because FMA3 and AVX were both limited by the 1.52v VID ceiling. Most likely, this ceiling would be removed by enabling "SVID OFFSET", which removes this cap, but there is a BIOS bug with enabling SVID Offset at multipliers lower than x50 so don't do that. I also remember back in the old days that an AVX instruction would raise the CPU VID by about 30mv on Haswell. No idea if that still happens, but someone mentioned it on the Gigabyte and tweaktown forum threads that it still should happen. 

Another thing you need to remember is the 1.520v VID limit. AC Loadline cannot exceed 1.520v VID target to the VRM. This would only come into play generally around ACLL of 90 or so at x50.
From what I've seen, the worst 9900KS samples have about the same VID at x50 as middle of the road 9900K chips. (about 1.210v idle VID if both AC and DC Loadlines are set to "1", and Thermal Velocity Boost Voltage optimizations is enabled or auto).


----------



## Wirerat

bigfootnz said:


> I've upgraded my 9900k to 9900ks.


What type of OC gains did you get VS the 9900k?

I considered the move at release but talked myself out of it. If I wasn't able to stabilize 5.1ghz I probably would have jumped. That lower voltage is sweet.


----------



## ScomComputers

Hello.
Please help me,how to update backup(second) bios on z390 aorus pro m.board?
Thanks...


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> If you're using an Aorus Master, set your PWM switching Frequency to 300 khz instead of 500 khz when at LLC: Turbo. (Improves LinX 0.9.6 35000 size transient response stability, at least at 4.7 ghz. No idea what happens at 5 ghz).


How did you measure thatr and what was the PWM Phase Control set to?


----------



## Wirerat

ScomComputers said:


> Hello.
> Please help me,how to update backup(second) bios on z390 aorus pro m.board?
> Thanks... /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


I suggest leaving it on a different bios. That way you know when your on the back up. 🙂

It's there incase a failure happens. It doesn't need to be on latest as long as it can post.


----------



## AndrejB

Some observations (9900k + master):

All stress tests are stable (Linx (usually equal residuals (read that background process can affect this, gave up on chasing ghosts)), HCI, GSAT, p95 1344k in place, p95 blend)

47/43 - Xmp 4000cl17 (io/sa 1.2):
- On optimized Apex Legends stable, Witcher 3 doesn't have frame skipping when turning the camera.
- On ac/dc 100/160, llc standard (cstates and everything disabled) everything is stable, Apex isn't (dxgi_device_hung).
- So ac/dc 110/160 Apex should be stable, nope (dxgi_device_hung) ... and higher temps in linpack tests.
- On 100/130, llc standard (cstates and everything disabled) Apex is stable. But Witcher 3 camera has frame skips.

47/43 - Xmp 4000cl17 (io/sa 1.24):
- Optimized or any of the above, Apex errors(dxgi_device_hung)

47/43 - 4133cl17 @ 1.4v (io/sa 1.14/1.16):
- Optimized, Apex and Witcher stable
- On 100/130, llc standard (cstates and everything disabled) Apex is stable. But Witcher 3 camera has frame skips.

Still working down io/sa...
Edit: setting io/sa to 1.1/1.15 in a reboot in linx. In my case with loose (auto) secondary and third timings, 1.15 io/sa look to be good

Conclusion (in my case):
- io/sa being to high for your particular CPU can cause instability but not in stress tests.
- io/sa being too low will give you a L0 cache error (in hwinfo) in LinX (test will stop).
- Bringing down io/sa also reduced crackling (less intense) in my headphones (usb, only happens when starting windows).
- Optimized settings seem to provide better frame times, than full power @ 47/43 (this one is confusing)

I settled for now on (didn't change too much):
- optimized, leds off, all fans manual/voltage on cpu
- 4133, enhanced performance, enabled interleave/rank, 17-17-17-37, 1.4v drr
- io/sa 1.14/1.16

Very glad everyone is getting along again 🙂


----------



## Sheyster

GeneO said:


> ? No F11 for the master. I am good with F9. Will try f10 soon.


I believe F10 is equivalent to F11 on the Pro. Might want to get opinions before you flash. I know the latest versions are rather buggy.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> ? No F11 for the master. I am good with F9. Will try f10 soon.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe F10 is equivalent to F11 on the Pro. Might want to get opinions before you flash. I know the latest versions are rather buggy.
Click to expand...

F11 has memory overclocking bugs on the pro. Trefi cannot be manually set. It maxes out to 65000 If adjusted.

They listed F12b as a fix. I haven't tested it though. Definitely avoid f11 on the pro.


----------



## ScomComputers

Wirerat said:


> I suggest leaving it on a different bios. That way you know when your on the back up. 🙂
> 
> It's there incase a failure happens. It doesn't need to be on latest as long as it can post.


Ok,but I want 9900KF, if the bios comes back due to a bug, it won't work.


----------



## Wirerat

ScomComputers said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest leaving it on a different bios. That way you know when your on the back up. 🙂
> 
> It's there incase a failure happens. It doesn't need to be on latest as long as it can post.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok,but I want 9900KF, if the bios comes back due to a bug, it won't work. /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
Click to expand...

 I understand.

Which bios is the backup on?


----------



## bigfootnz

Falkentyne said:


> This is not a bug, at least not on a 9900k.
> AC Loadline raises VRM input voltages depending on current. (In order to see the input voltage, set "DC Loadline" to 1, and then check CPU VID at idle and load--this will tell you the VRM input voltage BEFORE VDROOP IS APPLIED.
> 
> This value is not only based on the AC Loadline value, and how much current is being pulled at load, it is also based on the CPU's original VID for that multiplier.
> The 9900KS has a completely different VID table in most circumstances than a 9900k--since the KS is binned, they in general will have a lower default VID than the 9900k. So you therefore cannot compare your 9900k examples with Vdroop on Auto vcore+Standard Loadline calibration with a 9900ks, because the base multiplier VID will be different.
> 
> In order to compare the KS at x50, the closest comparison is the old "k" at x47. And yes I've tested that, but with AC Loadline and DC Loadline at 1.6 mOhms on a 9900k at x47 and LLC at Standard. There is no bug there. The curve was different than at x50, and yes it seemed like FMA3 had less vdroop than AVX at lower multipliers (like x47) but not at x50, because FMA3 and AVX were both limited by the 1.52v VID ceiling. Most likely, this ceiling would be removed by enabling "SVID OFFSET", which removes this cap, but there is a BIOS bug with enabling SVID Offset at multipliers lower than x50 so don't do that. I also remember back in the old days that an AVX instruction would raise the CPU VID by about 30mv on Haswell. No idea if that still happens, but someone mentioned it on the Gigabyte and tweaktown forum threads that it still should happen.
> 
> Another thing you need to remember is the 1.520v VID limit. AC Loadline cannot exceed 1.520v VID target to the VRM. This would only come into play generally around ACLL of 90 or so at x50.
> From what I've seen, the worst 9900KS samples have about the same VID at x50 as middle of the road 9900K chips. (about 1.210v idle VID if both AC and DC Loadlines are set to "1", and Thermal Velocity Boost Voltage optimizations is enabled or auto).


Yes, you were right. I've done test with DC set to 1 and VID with AVX was 1.401V, with AVX2 disabled was 1.399 and with AVX disabled was 1.329V. Thanks for detailed explanation.

I've to do test AC/DC set to 1 and Thermal Velocity Boost Voltage optimizations is enabled or auto. What VID should be for average 9900ks and what for good ones?


----------



## bigfootnz

Wirerat said:


> What type of OC gains did you get VS the 9900k?
> 
> I considered the move at release but talked myself out of it. If I wasn't able to stabilize 5.1ghz I probably would have jumped. That lower voltage is sweet.


I'm still tuning voltages, as I got this 9900ks just few days ago. At the moment I'm passing Prime95 non-AVX @ ~1.165V and Prime95 AVX2 disabled/Realbench [email protected] ~1.19V. Comparing to my old 9900k @5GHZ I need almost 0.1V less.
When I finish with 5GHz tune I'll check what are OC limits, but my goal is to run 5GHz at lowest voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

bigfootnz said:


> Yes, you were right. I've done test with DC set to 1 and VID with AVX was 1.401V, with AVX2 disabled was 1.399 and with AVX disabled was 1.329V. Thanks for detailed explanation.
> 
> I've to do test AC/DC set to 1 and Thermal Velocity Boost Voltage optimizations is enabled or auto. What VID should be for average 9900ks and what for good ones?


I don't know. I don't even have that chip. I have a 9900k. With AC/DC set to 1, idle vid on "average" 9900K was about 1.210v at 5 ghz.

A 9900KS with an idle VID of 1.210v at 5 ghz with AC and DC Loadline set to 1 at 5 ghz is a garbage CPU, from the feedback I've seen randomly (from the few people who set AC/DC to 0.01, usually on Asus boards as SVID=best case scenario sets it to 0.01 mOhms unless they are set manually).


----------



## Falkentyne

You guys should be using 300 khz switching frequency if you are using Turbo LLC. 500 khz apparently causes a loss of minimum stability from worse minimum transient voltages (not shown on VR VOUT).
Reasons completely unknown.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...ximus-xi-extreme-oc-help-31.html#post28228612

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki..._switching_freq_to_300_khz/fa5mukw/?context=3


1) 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz, 1.210v, Vcore LLC: Turbo, 500 khz

2) 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz, 1.210v, Vcore LLC: Turbo, 300 khz (only one wrong residual. Did another test 20 loops last night, 19 of 20 were correct here).


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> You guys should be using 300 khz switching frequency if you are using Turbo LLC. 500 khz apparently causes a loss of minimum stability from worse minimum transient voltages (not shown on VR VOUT).
> Reasons completely unknown.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...ximus-xi-extreme-oc-help-31.html#post28228612
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki..._switching_freq_to_300_khz/fa5mukw/?context=3
> 
> 
> 1) 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz, 1.210v, Vcore LLC: Turbo, 500 khz
> 
> 2) 4.7 ghz/4.4 ghz, 1.210v, Vcore LLC: Turbo, 300 khz (only one wrong residual. Did another test 20 loops last night, 19 of 20 were correct here).


What was the PWM Phase Control set to? The reason I ask is I can imagine there may be coupling between the switching frequency and the phase control (e.g. temperature effects) that could be eliminated my using extreme phase control. Could this also be a peculiarity of your board?


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> What was the PWM Phase Control set to? The reason I ask is I can imagine there may be coupling between the switching frequency and the phase control (e.g. temperature effects) that could be eliminated my using extreme phase control. Could this also be a peculiarity of your board?


I tried everything from Mid Power to Extreme.
There was very little difference. I spent hours and hours doing this stuff.

And did you read the links I posted?
Two other people saw improvements by using 300 vs 500. One on the reddit thread.
So it's not a quirk with my board. It's something with the VRM, IR 35201 or the BIOS itself.

An Xtreme user saw improvement in the other OCN thread I linked, also and that has 8 (16) doubled phases instead of 6 (12) but he didn't give details.

*Edit* : Cmarr:


> from cmarr1073 via /r/overclocking sent 9 hours agoShow Parent
> I have a 9900KS with a Gigabyte Aorus Master. I had previously tried to do 5.1ghz at 1.285. I was needing 1.30 bios vcore in order for it to run P95 custom 112k in place non avx. I set the switching frequency to 300 khz and was able to run 5.1ghz at 1.275 bios vcore. I have no idea whats going on.... but your find could be amazing for Gigabyte board owners.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I tried everything from Mid Power to Extreme.
> There was very little difference. I spent hours and hours doing this stuff.
> 
> And did you read the links I posted?
> Two other people saw improvements by using 300 vs 500. One on the reddit thread.
> So it's not a quirk with my board. It's something with the VRM, IR 35201 or the BIOS itself.
> 
> An Xtreme user saw improvement in the other OCN thread I linked, also and that has 8 (16) doubled phases instead of 6 (12) but he didn't give details.


No, I had just rerad what you posted in the other threads. You did not mention others seeing improvements in this thread, which ya could have.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> No, I had just rerad what you posted in the other threads. You did not mention others seeing improvements in this thread, which ya could have.


I copied and pasted one reply (Edited).


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I copied and pasted one reply (Edited).


I meant you could have mentioned it here in this thread, one additional sentence to justify and motivate why I should spend hours retesting based on "you should be using...but I don't know why..." 

Anyhow, I am trying it on my everyday 5.1 GHz 8086k overclock offset (-0.015, turbo, 500 KHz) @ -0.03v and 300 KHz. Will run it through P95 1344/1344/32GB, Realbench and probably medium data-set OCCT. It is running 1.273 VR VOUT on P95 now.


----------



## AndrejB

GeneO said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> I copied and pasted one reply (Edited).
> 
> 
> 
> I meant you could have mentioned it here in this thread, one additional sentence to justify and motivate why I should spend hours retesting based on "you should be using...but I don't know why..."
> 
> Anyhow, I am trying it on my everyday 5.1 GHz 8086k overclock offset (-0.015, turbo, 500 KHz) @ -0.03v and 300 KHz. Will run it through P95 1344/1344/32GB, Realbench and probably medium data-set OCCT. It is running 1.273 VR VOUT on P95 now.
Click to expand...

Be nice.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> I meant you could have mentioned it here in this thread, one additional sentence to justify and motivate why I should spend hours retesting based on "you should be using...but I don't know why..."
> 
> Anyhow, I am trying it on my everyday 5.1 GHz 8086k overclock offset (-0.015, turbo, 500 KHz) @ -0.03v and 300 KHz. Will run it through P95 1344/1344/32GB, Realbench and probably medium data-set OCCT. It is running 1.273 VR VOUT on P95 now.


Seems like the lower the LLC level, the less the benefit, and may be reversed at very low LLC. I'll test that later.
Turbo LLC is greatly affected however, on fixed vcore.

I can test Auto vcore+Standard (1.6 mOhms) LLC later, maybe at 4.7 ghz.



> from SherriffB via /r/overclocking sent 16 minutes agoShow Parent
> Do you think it might be dependent on LLC level?
> 
> My 5.0Ghz OC is running at Low LLC and I find I'm more stable at 500 than 300.
> 
> After plugging away at it all day I have yet to have any mismatches at 500 but have only seen matching residuals with 300 a couple of times.
> 
> Here's my final 4 runs just to sanity check before I replied with 500Khz and 300Khz (with my RAM bumped back up to 3000Mhz).
> 
> 500 1
> https://imgur.com/CkTkKnI
> 500 2
> https://imgur.com/i2BMnwQ
> 300 1
> https://imgur.com/DNpnKve
> 300 2
> https://imgur.com/gw9ZHCg
> If you like I'll try again when I have some time with Turbo LLC


----------



## Wirerat

I guess I just love to punish myself. Going to test bios F12b.

Edit: it still has the trefi bug. Cannot manually set any value above 9999. It automatically set 65534.

I might actually be stable at the setting anyway. I was already running 60,000.

It does boot with my ram profile besides that trefi thing. Gonna dial the oc profile.


----------



## GeneO

AndrejB said:


> Be nice.


Was nice.


----------



## Wirerat

Unfortunately, my aorus pro doesn't let me choose vrm frequency.

Running memtest at the new trefi settings. So far F12b seems stable. I ran P95 small fft avx for 15 mins with no errors. Vdroop looks the same as f10.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> Unfortunately, my aorus pro doesn't let me choose vrm frequency.
> 
> Running memtest at the new trefi settings. So far F12b seems stable. I ran P95 small fft avx for 15 mins with no errors. Vdroop looks the same as f10.


I don't think small FFT has enough transient oscillations to show much difference. LinX 35000 samples is the worst case stress test known to man (getting matching residuals each loop)

Buildzoid showed that 16K AVX only had 40mv average to min on LLC High and 60mv average to min at LLC Turbo. But at 128k AVX FFT, it was like 100mv (!) The transients are much much worse in LinX and 128k AVX than in small FFT.


----------



## Wirerat

@Falkentyne

I also ran 10 loops of x264, I was just making sure things look normal.

I will run 128k after memtest hits 400%.

You forget I'm running adaptive offset. Buildzoid said that the aorus pro tied the Asus Z390 A when both running adaptive.

He went on to say it's because you can run such low llc the transient are improved.


----------



## GeneO

Well here are the results I got on my Aorus Master in offset mode. Since I had this dialed in pretty tightly with 500 KHz and a -15 mv offset, I think it is a very good dign it is fully stable at 300 KHz - 30mv offset. And the VRM power and current and temperature are reduced.

Nice catch @Falkentyne


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Well here are the results I got on my Aorus Master in offset mode. Since I had this dialed in pretty tightly with 500 KHz and a -15 mv offset, I think it is a very good dign it is fully stable at 300 KHz - 30mv offset. And the VRM power and current and temperature are reduced.
> 
> Nice catch


You are running offset at turbo llc?


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> You are running offset at turbo llc?


yup. At 5.2 GHz as well with a + offset, though not 24x7.

If I drop down below turbo @ 5.1 GHz, the + offset is pretty large.


----------



## Wirerat

@Falkentyne

128k avx enabled run in place - see image 

1.236v - 1.302v 

128k forces more power usage but the vdroop is not as bad as small fft. It looks just like x264 stressor. 

When I deselect run in place the vdroop doesn't even drop below 1.27v.


@GeneO 

I haven't really tested higher than medium with offset. My 5.1ghz profile needs +.110v at low. 

5.2 would push me above 1.4v. I'm sure I could get it stable for benchmarks. I wouldn't stress test there though.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Well here are the results I got on my Aorus Master in offset mode. Since I had this dialed in pretty tightly with 500 KHz and a -15 mv offset, I think it is a very good dign it is fully stable at 300 KHz - 30mv offset. And the VRM power and current and temperature are reduced.
> 
> Nice catch @Falkentyne


Thank you very much for the tests and for confirming something interesting's going on with the VRM's or the controller.

Took me awhile but I did a Standard LLC test (Intel spec vdroop, 1.6 mOhms) on Auto Vcore.
4.7 ghz, 4.4 cache, AC Loadline=90 (to try to reduce load voltage to the borderline point), DC Loadline=160 (to match vdroop VRM loadline). I had already tested this before and knew it would fail random residuals at 500 khz.

1) 300 khz CPU VRM/VAXG switch freq:
https://i.imgur.com/tXqdj2O.jpg (no wrong residuals/20 loops)

2) 500 khz switching freq:
https://i.imgur.com/ZGQ4r72.jpg (1 wrong residual/20 loops).

Seems to point to the lower amount of LLC used, the less the improvement going to 300 khz.


----------



## Rbk_3

I replaced my Noctua NH-D15 stock NF-A15 fans with Chromax F12’s and it is actually cooling my 5.1GHZ OC'd 9900KS better than the larger stock fans. Very odd. I thought it would be the other way around. 

With an OC to 5.1GHz and a 6 hour stress test with OCCT Linpack on my default motherboard fan curve I got the following max temps

A15s

Core 0 94
Core 1 93
Core 2 99
Core 3 96
Core 4 99
Core 5 95
Core 6 97
Core 7 90



F12s

Core 0 89
Core 1 89
Core 2 97
Core 3 91
Core 4 96
Core 5 91
Core 6 93
Core 7 87


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> I replaced my Noctua NH-D15 stock NF-A15 fans with Chromax F12â€™️s and it is actually cooling my 5.1GHZ OC'd 9900KS better than the larger stock fans. Very odd. I thought it would be the other way around.
> 
> With an OC to 5.1GHz and a 6 hour stress test with OCCT Linpack on my default motherboard fan curve I got the following max temps


It's actually not Odd at all. 120mm fans have more static pressure than 140mm fans. They generally perform better on radiators and heat sinks.


----------



## Rbk_3

Wirerat said:


> It's actually not Odd at all. 120mm fans have more static pressure than 140mm fans. They generally perform better on radiators and heat sinks.




Hmmm. Why would they not just include F12s then, instead of bigger less effective ones? 

Makes me wonder how much more I could improve with the A12x25’s. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bigfootnz

Falkentyne said:


> I don't know. I don't even have that chip. I have a 9900k. With AC/DC set to 1, idle vid on "average" 9900K was about 1.210v at 5 ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> A 9900KS with an idle VID of 1.210v at 5 ghz with AC and DC Loadline set to 1 at 5 ghz is a garbage CPU, from the feedback I've seen randomly (from the few people who set AC/DC to 0.01, usually on Asus boards as SVID=best case scenario sets it to 0.01 mOhms unless they are set manually).




I’ve changed AC/DC to 1 and as I couldn’t find anywhere in bios thermal velocity boost, my pc didn’t want to boot at all. Do you know where in bios thermal velocity boost should be?


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's actually not Odd at all. 120mm fans have more static pressure than 140mm fans. They generally perform better on radiators and heat sinks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm. Why would they not just include F12s then, instead of bigger less effective ones?
> 
> Makes me wonder how much more I could improve with the A12x25â€™️s.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The 140's can move a simular amount of air at lower rpm. They are included because they are more quiet.

You traded a bit of noise for better cooling.

120mm fans of the same type generally have higher rpm. That higher rpm is partially responsible for the higher static pressure. 

I'm Sure an industrial 140mm 3,000 rpm noctua would perform even better but be very loud.

The A12's are so great because of the performance to noise level.


----------



## Rbk_3

BradleyW said:


> What sort of performance advantage are we looking at here, if any?
> 
> On my Z390 Ultra I use 2 sticks of DDR4 3800MHz (XMP, GSAT Stable). I get a MIN FPS of around 78 in Ghost Recon Breakpoint (benchmark, Ultra Preset, 1080p 21:9 Ultrawide).
> 
> If I drop to the following memory speeds, I get the following MIN FPS:
> 3600 MHz = 75 FPS
> 3400 MHz = 72 FPS
> 3000 MHz = 68 FPS
> 2133 MHz = 58 FPS
> 
> So I was wondering if 4 sticks, given the special feature of this board, would result in increased FPS (in the scenario above)?
> 
> I've tested memory before, and made a thread about it, showing how it can increase FPS in various games....but these gains in my test above are pretty large to say the least! I'd understand these gains if I was CPU and memory limited, but the GPU is showing a solid 100% utilization. Agreed, not the best way to determine bottlenecks..
> 
> System is in my sig, apart from the GPU is now a 5700 XT.
> 
> Thank you.


Wow, I didn't know ram speed could make this much of a difference. I have 3000mhz at the moment. 
What scenarios does this big of a difference happen? 

What if I get a 3600mhz kit and pair it with my 3000mhz kit? Will that still speed things up? Currently have 16gb Ripjaws 4 DDR4-3000MHz CL15-16-16-35 1.35V


----------



## Rbk_3

Wirerat said:


> The 140's can move a simular amount of air at lower rpm. They are included because they are more quiet.
> 
> You traded a bit of noise for better cooling.
> 
> 120mm fans of the same type generally have higher rpm. That higher rpm is partially responsible for the higher static pressure.
> 
> I'm Sure an industrial 140mm 3,000 rpm noctua would perform even better but be very loud.


A15s that come with the cooler and the F12s are both 1500 RPM. Both were running on the default fan curves the motherboard provided when I did the test so they should have been running at the same speed.


----------



## Wirerat

Rbk_3 said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 140's can move a simular amount of air at lower rpm. They are included because they are more quiet.
> 
> You traded a bit of noise for better cooling.
> 
> 120mm fans of the same type generally have higher rpm. That higher rpm is partially responsible for the higher static pressure.
> 
> I'm Sure an industrial 140mm 3,000 rpm noctua would perform even better but be very loud.
> 
> 
> 
> A15s that come with the cooler and the F12s are both 1500 RPM. Both were running on the default fan curves the motherboard provided when I did the test so they should have been running at the same speed.
Click to expand...

F12 are 2.61 h20 static pressure
https://noctua.at/en/nf-f12-pwm/specification

A15 are 1.51 h20 static pressure.
https://noctua.at/en/nf-a15-pwm/specification


----------



## Falkentyne

bigfootnz said:


> I’ve changed AC/DC to 1 and as I couldn’t find anywhere in bios thermal velocity boost, my pc didn’t want to boot at all. Do you know where in bios thermal velocity boost should be?


You **MUST** use FIXED VCORE when you set AC/DC loadline to 1 (unless you are using a higher amount of Loadline Calibration on Auto or offset voltage, e.g. High or Turbo).

If you are using auto or offset mode without an +offset, and your LLC is at Intel spec or Low, AC Loadline=1 will probably drop your voltage FAR too low to boot.


----------



## GeneO

Tepeat


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> You **MUST** use FIXED VCORE when you set AC/DC loadline to 1.
> 
> If you are using auto or offset mode without an +offset, AC Loadline=1 will drop your voltage FAR too low to boot.


I am running with a negative offset And ac/dc = 1 with no issues with stability.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> I am running with a negative offset And ac/dc = 1 with no issues with stability.


You're using Turbo loadline calibration though with offsets so you won't have a low voltage problem 

That's no different than setting a fixed vcore, except the benefit of you gaining downclocking/c-states/fine tuning management, except there is another bug in the VRM's / Bios, I found by reading the IR 35201 datasheet and running smack into it some months back.

If you set AC/DC Loadline to 1 and use Ultra Extreme LLC and a low safe voltage or offset and run a heavy stress test, even far below 193 amps, the VRM's will OCP trip and shut off.
(i did not test this on a fixed vcore for very long due to terrible transients).

It says that when "LLC is disabled" in the VRM (0 vdroop), other registers must be set to change the OCP value, otherwise OCP will trip. The IR 35201 has a special section for this.
Not sure if Gigabyte is aware of that.

(in the IR 35201 section under "0 mOhm loadline" in the datasheet).

I tested this by setting AC/DC Loadline to 1/1, Vcore to Auto and LLC to Ultra Extreme, then running Prime95 FMA3.
VR VOUT was 1.14v, slowly rose to 1.18v then the system shut off 

Anyway back on topic:

I think the other person is using Auto LLC or a much lower LLC value (which means HUGE vdroop).
AC/DC LL of 1 + Auto Vcore+Standard/Low LLC is like <1.1v or lower.

I did this once on accident and found myself unable to boot and had to clear CMOS.


----------



## bigfootnz

Falkentyne said:


> You **MUST** use FIXED VCORE when you set AC/DC loadline to 1.
> 
> 
> 
> If you are using auto or offset mode without an +offset, AC Loadline=1 will drop your voltage FAR too low to boot.




Got it, thanks. What about that thermal velocity boost, do you know where it is in bios?




Falkentyne said:


> Anyway back on topic:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the other person is using Auto LLC or a much lower LLC value (which means HUGE vdroop).
> 
> AC/DC LL of 1 + Auto Vcore+Standard/Low LLC is like <1.1v or lower.
> 
> 
> 
> I did this once on accident and found myself unable to boot and had to clear CMOS.


You are right, I’m using auto voltage with standard LLC. And I was able once to start windows booting but then it froze. And I’ve to do twice clear CMOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

bigfootnz said:


> Got it, thanks. What about that thermal velocity boost, do you know where it is in bios?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are right, I’m using auto voltage with standard LLC. And I was able once to start windows booting but then it froze. And I’ve to do twice clear CMOS.


Thermal Velocity Boost is only in the very latest BIOS with the GUI rework.
It's not a very important setting. However it can help if you are using different turbo boost ratios at >50 multipliers. It can also help you at "Low and medium load" voltages on auto or DVID, if you find yourself voltage starved at medium loads but not at heavy loads. It is not used on fixed voltage (Neither is AC Loadline).

Thermal Velocity Boost is on by default. It is explained here.
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others&highlight=explanations

If you set AC and DC Loadline to 1 in Internal VR control, use a fixed vcore and then look at the CPU VID, and then run a stress test like Prime95 small FFT, if you watch the VID, the VID will slowly rise as the temps climb. That is thermal velocity boost at work. This scaling is disabled at x40 multiplier and below. At x50, it's -1.5mv VID every 1C temp drop. 

Disabling Thermal Velocity Boost will set the base VID as if the CPU were at 100C at all times, rather than scaling it down based on temps dropping.


----------



## bigfootnz

Falkentyne said:


> Thermal Velocity Boost is only in the very latest BIOS with the GUI rework.
> It's not a very important setting. However it can help if you are using different turbo boost ratios at >50 multipliers. It can also help you at "Low and medium load" voltages on auto or DVID, if you find yourself voltage starved at medium loads but not at heavy loads. It is not used on fixed voltage (Neither is AC Loadline).
> 
> Thermal Velocity Boost is on by default. It is explained here.
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others&highlight=explanations
> 
> If you set AC and DC Loadline to 1 in Internal VR control, use a fixed vcore and then look at the CPU VID, and then run a stress test like Prime95 small FFT, if you watch the VID, the VID will slowly rise as the temps climb. That is thermal velocity boost at work. This scaling is disabled at x40 multiplier and below. At x50, it's -1.5mv VID every 1C temp drop.
> 
> Disabling Thermal Velocity Boost will set the base VID as if the CPU were at 100C at all times, rather than scaling it down based on temps dropping.


I was not able to find anywhere in bios Thermal Velocity Boost. Also when I do testing VID do not increase with temperature, so it is somehow disabled. Here are all my settings from BIOS.

With these settings and AC/DC set to 1 in idle my VID is 1.190V, and maybe else something is wrong? As I've just now passed Prime95 with just AVX2 disabled with load voltage of 1.170V. Maybe is not great CPU but I would not call it bad either.

I'm also testing your theory with 500/300KHz switching frequency and maybe you right also with this. But I still need to do more testing.


----------



## Falkentyne

bigfootnz said:


> I was not able to find anywhere in bios Thermal Velocity Boost. Also when I do testing VID do not increase with temperature, so it is somehow disabled. Here are all my settings from BIOS.
> 
> With these settings and AC/DC set to 1 in idle my VID is 1.190V, and maybe else something is wrong? As I've just now passed Prime95 with just AVX2 disabled with load voltage of 1.170V. Maybe is not great CPU but I would not call it bad either.
> 
> I'm also testing your theory with 500/300KHz switching frequency and maybe you right also with this. But I still need to do more testing.


TVB= Thermal Velocity Boost (voltage optimizations). 
it's auto or enabled.
If you had it disabled, your idle VID would be more like 1.3v with AC/DC at 1.

VID will not increase with temps visually if DC Loadline's mOhms value (DC Loadline will drop the target VID based on "CPU Amps * DC LL mOhms") is greater than what TVB will increase the VID by. I can't explain this to you without confusing you and everyone else, and I've tried many times, but you need to learn how AC loadline and DC loadline affect the CPU's "VRM target" VID. I have written many other posts about this in this thread and in the 9900k thread. You can try to search for them.

AC Loadline=CPU operating voltages (this affects the CPU +12v line to the mosfets, after it reads the "CPU base VID" from the processor, then Thermal Velocity Boost drops this VID (based on temps) then this is sent to the VRM as a "target" voltage. Up to 1.520v. This is "SVID" or "Serial VID control".

Fixed vcore ignores this and programs the VRM directly.

DC Loadline=power measurements only (Does not affect voltages, only VID/CPU Package Power)

This target voltage can be seen directly *IF* you set DC Loadline to 1 but keep AC loadline at its original value.

If DC Loadine is 160 for example, (1.6 mOhms), the "reported VID" (you would have seen *IF* DC Loadline was 1 !), is DROPPED by VRM value (Current IOUT * DC Loadline mOhms (1.6 in this case).
Example, 193 amps: DCLL=160, 193 * 1.6 = 308 mv (0.308v) drop on VID.


----------



## Driller au

@Falkentyne
What bios ver. are you using doing these VRM switching frequency tests ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> @Falkentyne
> What bios ver. are you using doing these VRM switching frequency tests ?


F10, but the BIOS Version doesn't matter, as far as I know.


----------



## Wirerat

@Falkentyne



> Disabling Thermal Velocity Boost will set the base VID as if the CPU were at 100C at all times, rather than scaling it down based on temps dropping.


So, it sounds like if an OC profile passes stability testing (high load, high temps) but crashes in games (low load, low temps) disabling this could be the fix vs raising the offset.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> 
> 
> So, it sounds like if an OC profile passes stability testing (high load, high temps) but crashes in games (low load, low temps) disabling this could be the fix vs raising the offset.


Maybe. I don't know, but someone could test that.
It will do nothing if you crash with c-states/low load/watching youtube with downclocking. TVB doesn't work below x40 and the reduction decreases below x50 as explained by Asus.


----------



## Sheyster

Just wanted to mention that I finally tried @Wirerat offset method (I know, not actually his method but he uses and recommends it). I've decided to stick with fixed voltage and HIGH LLC (I was using Turbo before). At load I'm at 1.248v 100% stable (8 x 5 GHz OC, 47x uncore). Temps are very reasonable given that I'm air cooled.

Also been tweaking RAM a bit and have settled on 3600 15-15-15-35 trfc=374. This will be my final tweaking of this system.


----------



## Falkentyne

Sheyster said:


> Just wanted to mention that I finally tried @Wirerat offset method (I know, not actually his method but he uses and recommends it). I've decided to stick with fixed voltage and HIGH LLC (I was using Turbo before). At load I'm at 1.248v 100% stable (8 x 5 GHz OC, 47x uncore). Temps are very reasonable given that I'm air cooled.
> 
> Also been tweaking RAM a bit and have settled on 3600 15-15-15-35 trfc=374. This will be my final tweaking of this system.


Please set your PWM Switching frequency to 300 khz and see if you can reduce voltages and retain stability.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> Please set your PWM Switching frequency to 300 khz and see if you can reduce voltages and retain stability.


I'll try it and report back.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Please set your PWM Switching frequency to 300 khz and see if you can reduce voltages and retain stability.


This works , even at med. LLC i could drop my Vcore 0.010 and be stable in a 15 min run in realbench which normally will crash in that time if unstable. It is just to hot and humid here for a long run 37 deg C 50% humidity, even at idle i am at 40~45 deg core temp normally low 30s


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> F10, but the BIOS Version doesn't matter, as far as I know.


I could not find the option in the Aorus Pro BIOS. Guess this is a Master only BIOS option?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> What is the best ac/dc preset to overclock to 5.2ghz with? powersaving doesn't give enough juice and everything else draws a **** ton of voltage at idle or at load. I'm thinking it makes more sense to use llc to send the extra voltage upwards instead of having to droop down from 1.44v. I'm getting so frustrated ><. I've tried all sorts of ac/dc 1-1 stuff, I tried standard llc/turbo ac/dc preset etc. I tried ac/dc 18/18, ac/dc 70/70. Not sure where to go from here.





reachthesky said:


> disabling Tvb doesn't help. on f10 now, i'm about to roll back, it's a pretty bad bios.


Disabling Thermal Velocity Boost Voltage Optimizations will raise the idle voltage a lot. Load voltages will be raised, depending on temps...the higher the temps, the less the voltage will be raised compared to TVB Voltage optimizations at Auto or Enabled. Instead of disabling TVB, try SVID Offset as explained below.

If you need voltage you need voltage. As long as you're not trying to pull 150 amps at 1.4v VR VOUT or something thats all you can do.
Your only choice is used a fixed voltage and turbo LLC (or a higher bios voltage with High LLC for better transients), drop the PWM switching frequency to 300 khz (this is helping many people lower their voltage floor by 15-20mv), raise the AC Loadline value manually (you don't need to change DC loadline with it, DC Loadline is actually best left at your LLC "Vdroop" level---example Standard LLC is 1.6 mOhms so DC LL should be set to 160, Turbo LLC is 0.4 mOhms, High is 0.8 mOhms, etc etc), or increase the DVID offset. Welcome to trying to overclock to the edge of the chip's limits.

AC Loadline can go up to 1.6 mOhms. Vcore LLC must be left at Standard at this point. If 1.6 mOhms still isn't enough, use a DVID offset. Your only other option is to remove the DVID offset, switch to "Auto" voltage, and enable SVID Offset, which will remove the 1.520v "before vdroop" limit of AC Loadline. (you can see this limit in effect if you set DC Loadline to "1" and look at CPU VID!). you absolutely MUST NOT have LLC higher than Standard if you enable SVID Offset.

Due to bios bugs, only enable SVID Offset (with standard LLC and auto vcore) at a x50 or higher multiplier. This will allow your load voltage to be higher but while keeping the same idle voltage as before (if AC Loadline is 1.6 mOhms or lower). I have NOT tried SVID Offset with a positive DVID offset. Again you are warned NOT to use anything except Intel default Loadline Calibration if SVID Offset is enabled on auto vcore. Then feel free to increase AC LL to 160 if you need to, but you will be past the safe limits for load VR VOUT.

Just how much load VR Out do you need for 5.2 ghz anyway?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Sheyster said:


> @vmanuelgm has also provided modded BIOS files. Maybe he'll be available to help out sometimes.



Of course mates, if u need me, ask (quote) and I will help if I can!!!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Here is what i'm looking at during the run
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/ULeVrkk
> 
> 
> cache error spits out literally right after it finishes the run every time. I tried lowering the cache to 48, it won't even complete a run. I tried 43-48 cache ratio, only bsods or incomplete runs. 49 cache ratio completes runs but with cache error afterwards.


Please set your PWM switching frequency to 300 khz and test again.

And did you say 'enabling' thermal velocity boost voltage optimizations helped?
Default is Enabled. It's enabled on F9 bios. Auto and enabled are the same thing right?

Disabling TVB voltage optimizations (not ratio clipping) causes the VID to start as if the CPU were at 100C all the time. All previous Bioses before this option was exposed had it auto (thus enabled).

Enabling TVB causes the VID to drop -1.5mv every 1C temp drop starting at 100C, for -150mv VID at 0C.
This reduction gets lower the lower the multiplier is. It's greatest at x50+ and it's disabled at x40 and below.

Auto and enabled "should" be the exact same thing. Usually an auto setting allows the BIOS to control it, or other options like MCE.
For example,, "Auto" loadline calibration sets LLC to 1.6 mOhms, which is the same as Standard and Normal. However if you enable MCE, LLC is set to Turbo if it's on Auto.
If LLC is set to a direct value, MCE can't change it anymore.

Please note that I never actually tested DVID modes with TVB Auto and Enabled. I only use fixed voltage but I do look at the VID often (because it's there). But whenever I set it to enabled, and compared it to the Auto setting, the VID was the same on both (for me, equal to older Bioses).

I have seen Gigabyte bugs where auto keeps the last value that was set (until the computer is hard powered off).
Are you saying that you saw different behavior with "Auto" compared to "Enabled"? I only saw them act the same.



reachthesky said:


> Since i'm using adaptive/dvid voltage, Is it possible that me using EIST + c3 is causing the cache errors to pop off as soon as I come off a load when frequency drops?


Only one way to find out  Disable EIST+C3.
I remember that C3 was one of the causes of the 0x124 BSOD at idle on Sandy Bridge (according to posts on xtremesystems).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Correct, I enabled it. Auto/Disabling it allows all that extra voltage just like I had back on F9 bios unless i've encountered some sort of bug.
> 
> in the f9 bios there was no option for tvb that I recall.
> 
> I disabled eist/c3, also went with windows max power plan, didn't make a difference so i reenabled them.
> 
> I did complete one run without any errors( kept bumping up sa/io all the way up to 1.3v SA and 1.31v IO) but it could have been a fluke run. I still can't figure out if it is flat out a cooling issue or if the chip just can't do it or if i'm just not experienced enough to stabilize it or a combination of all of those lol.
> 
> Is it possible that LLC high with dvid-offset is too similar to xtreme llc with fixed vcore? (transient wise). I was working with llc medium with dvid/offset + lower switch rate but it wasn't completing runs at 5.2ghz, though that was on the other bios.


Maybe @Wirerat can help

I have no idea how DVID offsets affect things.
You would have to test with fixed vcore, LLC High, 300 khz, and enough BIOS voltage to get the same VR VOUT at max load that you get currently in DVID offset mode, then see if the L0 errors disappear on what seems to be "load release".

BTW did you try enabling SVID Offset yet? Make sure LLC is set to Standard. This will allow AC Loadline to continuously raise the load voltages and not be limited to 1.520v (before vdroop).
One time I left LLC on Turbo when testing SVID Offset bugs that happen at below 5 ghz (This option along with 'Auto' vcore gets very buggy below 5 ghz) and was greeted to a huge helping of 230 Amps during a LinX 0.9.6, 35000 run at 4.7 ghz. Yikes....



reachthesky said:


> heh and now it stops completing runs. I really don't understand this stuff. Why does none of this stuff come with a real instruction booklet? Why do I have to rely on hearsay on the internet for stuff? Why doesn't intel have a official employees ready to serve people that bought their ****? I get so frustrated that I can't figure this **** out nd then I keep having to tax people's time over and over. ugh.


Means you are borderline stable.
I encountered stuff like this many times when testing non rock solid settings over the last year. Tests passing for 10 hours one day, then the exact same test bombing with a roundoff error at the SAME AMBIENTS the next day, in **TEN MINUTES** (prime), or, four days of 10 hour pass FMA3 tests then the 5th day bombs at the 9 hour mark the instant I move the mouse (moving the mouse causes a transient/system interrupt (IRQ)). etc etc.

It was weird stuff like this that made me start switching every BIOS setting known to man (besides vcore) until I stumbled into the 300 khz "Bug" (feature?).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> But yeah, i tried enabling svid offset, computer locked up when I booted with it. Figured I just sent 1.7v to my chip so i'm not messing with that feature any more.


That option is buggy but works if you get the primary settings to work first.

someone else earlier in this thread said that on these GB boards, it's important to only change one setting at a time and then reboot, to make sure the setting got applied properly, with the voltage controls.

I only got SVID offset to work at 5 ghz exactly, but only when I set Vcore to Auto first and LLC to Standard, and then saved the bios BEFORE enabling SVID offset.
Once Auto and LLC Standard (ACLL: 1.6 mOhms) were confirmed on the next reboot, (if Bios voltage was 1.392v-1.404v, it worked), I enabled SVID offset, system powered off and on and offset mode was enabled.

Then I simply changed multipliers and AC Loadline manually.
I know how you feel though. It scared me too until I found out how to make it work properly.
My first attempt at using SVID offset was at 4.7 ghz back on the old F7a BIOS. I didn't even know what it did. I just enabled it and was greeted to a Post code 7F nonstop. Had to clear CMOS and assumed the setting was just broken.

My next attempt was months later at 5 ghz on auto vcore, when I saw AC Loadline limiting VRM VID to 1.520v. LLC was on Standard. That attempt worked fine.

My next gotcha was when I had SVID offset enabled and tried to run prime95 AVX at 5 ghz. With offset disabled I got 1.238v and 185 amps and 98C after 10 minutes. With offset enabled, I got 1.320v VR VOUT and 220 amps and 105C after 10 seconds. Oof. But the option was working as intended. I checked and AC Loadline was boosting VRM target VID to 1.665v before vdroop.

Then: 220 amps * 1.6 VRM (standard LLC) loadline =352mv. 1665mv - 352mv = 1.313v. Close enough. It was doing its job.
I then set AC Loadline from 1.6 to 0.95, and then got 1.245v VR VOUT and 186 amps. Since I limited the target voltage by reducing AC Loadline.

But again this option is buggy. Not only is it buggy, it disables all voltage control and locks it on the last used voltage mode (meaning you only can use AC Loadline to control output at this point).


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok so I let my room get cool, aio water was 24c. Completed run no cache error max temp 87c. Still can't tell if it is a cooling issue or if the errorless run was a fluke/cpu just can't do it. Is there a quick way to figure that out?


When you are pushing clocks to the limit, there is a point where stability plummets off a cliff hard, and that point is based on temps. That's why sub-ambient or sub-zero cooling lets the chip scale so well.
It's very hard to find the temps where things go south because again, it isn't a 'stable then massively unstable' thing--you start getting bit errors and corrupt instruction registers 'randomly'. The higher the temps go, the more likely you get errors. Yes it's very annoying and I dealt with this for a year and it sucks. You want repeatable results, but with these computers, it's hard to get repeatable results unless you go from stable to very unstable with one setting.

The 300 khz->500 khz thing was lucky enough good enough to show stable vs unstable, and other users have verified this.

One reason why LinX 0.9.6, 35000 is used in stress testing is it can find errors FAST. If the residuals don't match on each loop it means the load VR VOUT / temps/amps draw is too much/voltage too low for that test, although real world games or tests may still pass.

The problem is, this test is so brutal that you can't run it at higher overclocks. It just makes the chip uncoolable.


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> heh and now it stops completing runs. I really don't understand this stuff. Why does none of this stuff come with a real instruction booklet? Why do I have to rely on hearsay on the internet for stuff? Why doesn't intel have a official employees ready to serve people that bought their ****? I get so frustrated that I can't figure this **** out nd then I keep having to tax people's time over and over. ugh.


You're overclocking, so everything is unofficial and unsupported. Additionally, every chip, mobo and memory combos are different. That's part of the fun of this in my opinion.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> The 300 khz->500 khz thing was lucky enough good enough to show stable vs unstable, and other users have verified this.


 @Falkentyne - you may have missed my previous post. I've looked and I can't find this switching option in the Pro BIOS (F9). Is this a Master only option?


----------



## BradleyW

Hey everyone!

What is the best way to test stability on the 9900K. AVX loads preferred.
Is it safe to adjust the values for CPU internal AC/DC Loadline combined with an offset voltage to achieve the desired Vcore?

I current have both set to 1, and LLC at high with offset Vcore @ +0.080. This gives a full load Vcore of 1.32 (Realbench load).

Thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

Sheyster said:


> @Falkentyne - you may have missed my previous post. I've looked and I can't find this switching option in the Pro BIOS (F9). Is this a Master only option?


I don't know. It's in the Master and Xtreme, and should be in the Ultra (i think). The Pro is missing some of the extra voltage and protection options. (it's in APTIO if you dump the BIOS with "FPTW64 -d bios.bin -BIOS", and then open it with AMIBCP 5.02.0031, but it seems to be hidden on purpose).

You need to ask the people in win-raid.com to see if they can unhide it for you. Assuming the options will be linked to a command if unhidden.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> I don't know. It's in the Master and Xtreme, and should be in the Ultra (i think). The Pro is missing some of the extra voltage and protection options. (it's in APTIO if you dump the BIOS with "FPTW64 -d bios.bin -BIOS", and then open it with AMIBCP 5.02.0031, but it seems to be hidden on purpose).
> 
> You need to ask the people in win-raid.com to see if they can unhide it for you. Assuming the options will be linked to a command if unhidden.


Thanks.
@Wirerat - do you have a Pro board BIOS with this feature unlocked?


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know. It's in the Master and Xtreme, and should be in the Ultra (i think). The Pro is missing some of the extra voltage and protection options. (it's in APTIO if you dump the BIOS with "FPTW64 -d bios.bin -BIOS", and then open it with AMIBCP 5.02.0031, but it seems to be hidden on purpose).
> 
> You need to ask the people in win-raid.com to see if they can unhide it for you. Assuming the options will be linked to a command if unhidden.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> @Wirerat - do you have a Pro board BIOS with this feature unlocked?
Click to expand...

The pro does Not have the switching frequency option. 

Only the mobo's with the IR35201 pwm controller have that option. So master and Xtreme.

I don't have it unlocked or access to it.

I assume it's a limitation of the ISL69138. The Z390 ASRock gaming X has the exact same vrm and it also doesn't allow that adjustment.

Maybe something to do with using the doublers for current balancing.


----------



## AndrejB

Master official F9 bios - MCE disabled, nothing else changed, still hitting 5ghz all cores when idle on desktop.
Does this mean MCE can't be disabled with everything else on auto (tried resetting cmos and powering off)?


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> The pro does Not have the switching frequency option.
> 
> Only the mobo's with the IR35201 pwm controller have that option. So master and Xtreme.
> 
> I don't have it unlocked or access to it.
> 
> I assume it's a limitation of the ISL69138. The Z390 ASRock gaming X has the exact same vrm and it also doesn't allow that adjustment.
> 
> Maybe something to do with using the doublers for current balancing.


Thanks. I still have many regrets about rolling with the Pro. I should have spent a little more $$$ on a better mobo.


----------



## Sheyster

AndrejB said:


> F9 bios - MCE disabled, nothing else changed, still hitting 5ghz all cores when idle on desktop.
> Does this mean MCE can't be disabled with everything else on auto (tried resetting cmos and powering off)?


What power mode are you using in Windows?


----------



## AndrejB

Sheyster said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> F9 bios - MCE disabled, nothing else changed, still hitting 5ghz all cores when idle on desktop.
> Does this mean MCE can't be disabled with everything else on auto (tried resetting cmos and powering off)?
> 
> 
> 
> What power mode are you using in Windows?
Click to expand...

Performance, but still don't get how all cores can hit 5ghz at the same time, isn't this exactly what mce is supposed to be doing?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Performance, but still don't get how all cores can hit 5ghz at the same time, isn't this exactly what mce is supposed to be doing?


MCE maxes all power limits, sets many settings that are on "Auto" to fixed values Gigabyte "Thinks" most people need to sustain a 5 ghz overclock, e.g. it sets Loadline Calibration to Turbo (it won't change LLC if you have it set to a manual value), maxes power and current limits, and changes other undocumented settings that are set on "Auto". It may disable C-states too. I have absolutely no idea if it sets a manual voltage or not. I don't believe it does because the one time I tried it with everything set to auto, I "think" I maybe saw a higher VR VOUT at load than at idle, which seems to imply its using "Auto" voltage+the AC Loadlines, but then again I don't waste too much time testing such things. Maybe it didn't, I do not remember.

If you want downclocking you need to enable c-states, enable EIST/speedstep, possibly enable speedshift, then possibly edit the power processor plan in windows to set minimum processor state to 0% or 1% and max processor state to 100%. If you also want to downvolt as well, you can't use fixed vcore.


----------



## GeneO

AndrejB said:


> Performance, but still don't get how all cores can hit 5ghz at the same time, isn't this exactly what mce is supposed to be doing?


When you overclock to 5GHz you can always get 5 GHz on all cores. Unless you explicitly have Turbo enables and use per core mulipliers. MCE is really meant for enbling all cores to be able to run max turbo on all cores simultaneously when running stock.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Thanks. I still have many regrets about rolling with the Pro. I should have spent a little more $$$ on a better mobo. /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif


My only complaint is there is no monoblock available. I assumed there would be one.

I have two systems using this board and both hold 5ghz or 5.1ghz no sweat.

I considered upgrading but the added features of a higher tier board would just go to waste. The pro is solid for a gaming rig.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Performance, but still don't get how all cores can hit 5ghz at the same time, isn't this exactly what mce is supposed to be doing?
> 
> 
> 
> MCE maxes all power limits, sets many settings that are on "Auto" to fixed values Gigabyte "Thinks" most people need to sustain a 5 ghz overclock, e.g. it sets Loadline Calibration to Turbo (it won't change LLC if you have it set to a manual value), maxes power and current limits, and changes other undocumented settings that are set on "Auto". It may disable C-states too. I have absolutely no idea if it sets a manual voltage or not. I don't believe it does because the one time I tried it with everything set to auto, I "think" I maybe saw a higher VR VOUT at load than at idle, which seems to imply its using "Auto" voltage+the AC Loadlines, but then again I don't waste too much time testing such things. Maybe it didn't, I do not remember.
> 
> If you want downclocking you need to enable c-states, enable EIST/speedstep, possibly enable speedshift, then possibly edit the power processor plan in windows to set minimum processor state to 0% or 1% and max processor state to 100%. If you also want to downvolt as well, you can't use fixed vcore.
Click to expand...

Sorry, think you missed the question. I disabled mce but am still hitting 5g all core instead of one on idle desktop?

Regarding the LLC it seems it's set to Standard as it's hitting the same vrout in linx as on manual (llc standard, ac/dc 100/130) settings, also cstates are enabled.

Honestly, trying to figure out why Apex is stable on all auto settings and not on:
All frequency settings disabled
47/43
Llc standard
Vcore auto
Ac/dc 100/130


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> My only complaint is there is no monoblock available. I assumed there would be one.
> 
> I have two systems using this board and both hold 5ghz or 5.1ghz no sweat.
> 
> I considered upgrading but the added features of a higher tier board would just go to waste. The pro is solid for a gaming rig.


My main complaint is the terrible memory support at higher speeds (4000+). If I could check that box I'd be much happier with it.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Sorry, think you missed the question. I disabled mce but am still hitting 5g all core instead of one on idle desktop?
> 
> Regarding the LLC it seems it's set to Standard as it's hitting the same vrout in linx as on manual (llc standard, ac/dc 100/130) settings, also cstates are enabled.
> 
> Honestly, trying to figure out why Apex is stable on all auto settings and not on:
> All frequency settings disabled
> 47/43
> Llc standard
> Vcore auto
> Ac/dc 100/130


Apex Legends crashing randomly?
Do you have PWM Switching frequency set to 300 khz?

Most likely your AC loadline is too low. Raise it to 120 if 300 khz doesn't fix apex legends.


----------



## Wirerat

Played around with TVB. I can't say I find disabling it useful. 

It may actually be the reason I get less vdroop running offset. I didn't try enabled but it seems auto = enabled as @Falkentyne said. 

The strange thing is I never see the VRvout go as high as it does with TVB disabled.


----------



## Dannyele

I did the 300 khz->500 khz thing that you have been discussing last couple of pages but unfortunately it didn't helped for me lowering the vCore (fixed 1.335 with LLC on high if I remember right, at 5GHz on all cores on a 9900k)... still need the same value for being stable at least in cinebench.

Anyway I will let both PWM options to 300 khz just in case.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok i think i'm making progress. doing a bit of messing around with everything.
> 
> Raised my tjmax to 110. figured out tjmax voltage required for 5.2 is 1.36v when setting ac/dc 1-1 with turbo llc + fixed voltage. Though it wasn't stable enough to complete a cinebench run. I switched to acdc preset powersaving, dvidoffset +120mv, llc low, TVB enabled.
> 
> still cache errors, even if i lowered cache ratio to 43. Tried sa/io dram voltage bumps incase or even more vcore, still errors.
> 
> i'm back to acdc preset powersaving, dvidoffset +120mv, llc low, TVB enabled again.
> 
> i opened up throttlestop and used the memory feature here.
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/HecBp5i
> 
> Now i'm using speedshift Epp 0 with this and no cache errors at all. was just looping timespy cpu test.
> 
> no cache errors at all. I don't understand as i already had all limits disabled in the bios so using that memory feature in throttlestop to disable turbo limits did something.


EPP 0 with SpeedShifit (SST) basically prevents any downclocking. So keeping the processor at full frequency would prevent any transient penalties whatsoever from the clocks changing at load release.
Not sure about the disable turbo power limits thing. Didn't pay much attention to it in the notebookreview thread when TS 8.70 came out, but I thought it was to prevent laptops from reapplying turbo power limits when you try to disable them, because some laptops would reapply a cancer turbo power limit like 45 watts even when you disabled it, because of how awful their EC or Bioses were.
Changing clock speeds with TS is very convenient. Just don't do it while a stress test is running or be prepared to insta-BSOD (explained under transient response)

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others&highlight=explanations

Unfortunately I can't comment on this more since I don't use offset voltage. I do have a SST=0 profile on my laptop with Throttlestop, however.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Cinebench results are pretty solid so far. 20 points higher than the best 5g all core OC cbr15 result on hwbot.org. Achievement unlocked lol.


What ram do u have ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## toolmaker03

ok so I have a question, I have a Z390 Aorus master motherboard, and Aorus 1080 ti video cards. would putting Aorus 3200 memory and a 1T Aorus M.2 SSD in this system, make the system any more stable, than just using mismatched hardware?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

toolmaker03 said:


> ok so I have a question, I have a Z390 Aorus master motherboard, and Aorus 1080 ti video cards. would putting Aorus 3200 memory and a 1T Aorus M.2 SSD in this system, make the system any more stable, than just using mismatched hardware?


No it won't. Aorus memory and SSD are like any other vendors based on standards - nothing special about them really. If you are worried, stick to the QVL.


----------



## toolmaker03

GeneO said:


> No it won't. Aorus memory and SSD are like any other vendors based on standards - nothing special about them really. If you are worried, stick to the QVL.



"stick to the QVL" this is funny, because I would be surprised if the Aorus parts where not on the QVL. if they are not officially compatible, what would be the point of making them? so to answer your question, yes they are on the QVL. what I am wondering, is if they took steps to ensure stability with other products, that carry the same name. kind of like Asus, and ROG components, as they are made to be compatible with each other.


----------



## Wirerat

toolmaker03 said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it won't. Aorus memory and SSD are like any other vendors based on standards - nothing special about them really. If you are worried, stick to the QVL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "stick to the QVL" this is funny, because I would be surprised if the Aorus parts where not on the QVL. if they are not officially compatible, what would be the point of making them? so to answer your question, yes they are on the QVL. what I am wondering, is if they took steps to ensure stability with other products, that carry the same name. kind of like Asus, and ROG components, as they are made to be compatible with each other.
Click to expand...

 Other than a theme for the look of the system you gain nothing.

Performance of Aorus nvme and Aorus DDR4 will not be any faster or more stable paired with aorus mobo.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

toolmaker03 said:


> "stick to the QVL" this is funny, because I would be surprised if the Aorus parts where not on the QVL. if they are not officially compatible, what would be the point of making them? so to answer your question, yes they are on the QVL. what I am wondering, is if they took steps to ensure stability with other products, that carry the same name. kind of like Asus, and ROG components, as they are made to be compatible with each other.


? I did not say Gigabyte components were not on the QVL - I said if you are worried about compatability, stick to components that are on the QVL when choosing. I doubt Gigabyte does anything special that would warrant choosing their product. Also the QVL list is limited. But memory vendors like g.skill do their own testing and have a QVL list of motherboards their products work with - and they will back that up.


----------



## Wirerat

Qvl lists on the consumer platform are not great. I rarely ever refer to them. 

It's different with pre-built. Random stuff won't work with those stripped down mobos/bios. 

Hedt platform goes a bit further with validation generally speaking.


----------



## Intrud3r

Wirerat said:


> Qvl lists on the consumer platform are not great. I rarely ever refer to them.
> 
> It's different with pre-built. Random stuff won't work with those stripped down mobos/bios.
> 
> Hedt platform goes a bit further with validation generally speaking.


In the early days (years back, about 10 for me) I didn't pay attention to QVL lists either. Nowadays ... I tend to check them first for memory compatibaility only as I've learned with an old motherboard (p45 chipset if i'm not mistaken).


----------



## Leito360

Is there a way to disable CPU cores in the Aorus z390 Pro? I can't find the option anywhere in the BIOS!


----------



## Falkentyne

Leito360 said:


> Is there a way to disable CPU cores in the Aorus z390 Pro? I can't find the option anywhere in the BIOS!


Can't find # of cores setting in the BIOS?
It should be right below or above the hyperthreading setting.
If you don't see it, clear CMOS.
I saw one user who had a Master and didn't have the "TJMAX" temperature setting visible for some reason.


----------



## spin5000

How do we enable adaptive voltage on the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro? I've had an option for adaptive voltage on 3 other brands ASUS, MSI, ASRock) and 3 other Intel chips but I just switched to a 9700K and my first ever Gigabyte board (Gigabyte was the only motherboard brand I've never tried).

I see something about adjusting some strange, obscure settings like IA DC AC or something? I've read to either set them both to 0.01 or 1.00???.........

I also read that you're not supposed to use load line calibration when using adaptive voltage? That doesn't sound right at all.

I currently have my 9700KF stable @ 5.1 GHz 1.375v and LLC "turbo" (3rd most aggressive). I'm trying to get my voltage to drop along with my CPU's frequency like I've had on every other motherboard brand & CPU over the past 5 or 6 years (4930K, 5930K, 8700K). I was even able to do this with a bottom-of-the-line, budget Z370 motherboard (MSI Z370-A Pro).

Something doesn't seem right for there to simply not be an adaptive voltage setting...


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Can't find # of cores setting in the BIOS?
> It should be right below or above the hyperthreading setting.
> If you don't see it, clear CMOS.
> I saw one user who had a Master and didn't have the "TJMAX" temperature setting visible for some reason.


Funny you should mention that. I havenot seen a TJMax setting in my F9 BIOS. Where should it be?


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> How do we enable adaptive voltage on the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro? I've had an option for adaptive voltage on 3 other brands ASUS, MSI, ASRock) and 3 other Intel chips but I just switched to a 9700K and my first ever Gigabyte board (Gigabyte was the only motherboard brand I've never tried).
> 
> I see something about adjusting some strange, obscure settings like IA DC AC or something? I've read to either set them both to 0.01 or 1.00???.........
> 
> I also read that you're not supposed to use load line calibration when using adaptive voltage? That doesn't sound right at all.
> 
> I currently have my 9700KF stable @ 5.1 GHz 1.375v and LLC "turbo" (3rd most aggressive). I'm trying to get my voltage to drop along with my CPU's frequency like I've had on every other motherboard brand & CPU over the past 5 or 6 years (4930K, 5930K, 8700K). I was even able to do this with a bottom-of-the-line, budget Z370 motherboard (MSI Z370-A Pro).
> 
> Something doesn't seem right for there to simply not be an adaptive voltage setting...


The only board that has an actual 'adaptive' mode is the Aorus Xtreme. It has both an adaptive voltage setting and allows configuring "Ring" voltage (possibly in combination with it), as well as "CPU Internal Voltage" (this reprograms the CPU VID, very similar to what laptops do for their 'Override' voltage).

All the other GB boards only have DVID, which is "Offset voltage mode" that you see on Asus and other boards.
The "Additional Turbo Voltage" mode, which is part of Asus' adaptive mode, is not present (I do not know how this setting works, it has something to do with setting a voltage floor based on CPU VID).

The "overclocking performance menu", which has this option, is hidden, but can be unlocked by people on win-raid.com but may have to be re-routed to other options that are not being used, since the "hidden" APTIO Bios option folders cannot be unhidden directly as only the "MIT" menu is available. It's also VERY unknown whether any settings changed here would conflict with the "MIT" voltage settings. There are already a bunch of voltage bugs, where changing from DVID mode to fixed voltage sets a completely wrong (and far too high!) voltage until the board is powered off and rebooted again! That would not help one bit.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Funny you should mention that. I havenot seen a TJMax setting in my F9 BIOS. Where should it be?


F9? Old GUI right?
In Advanced frequency settings?

Should be at this exact location here (within the GUI of course).
Right below AVX Offset.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> F9? Old GUI right?
> In Advanced frequency settings?
> 
> Should be at this exact location here (within the GUI of course).
> Right below AVX Offset.


I have 8th Gen, maybe it is a 9th gen thing.


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> The only board that has an actual 'adaptive' mode is the Aorus Xtreme. It has both an adaptive voltage setting and allows configuring "Ring" voltage (possibly in combination with it), as well as "CPU Internal Voltage" (this reprograms the CPU VID, very similar to what laptops do for their 'Override' voltage).
> 
> All the other GB boards only have DVID, which is "Offset voltage mode" that you see on Asus and other boards.
> The "Additional Turbo Voltage" mode, which is part of Asus' adaptive mode, is not present (I do not know how this setting works, it has something to do with setting a voltage floor based on CPU VID).


Hmmm. Not sure I understand. I'm not looking for any "additional turbo voltage" mode...In all other boards - MSI, ASRock, ASUS - you are able to adjust the CPU core voltage. Then, you have the option of keeping that core voltage static or simply have it auto-reduce as the frequency drops by enabling adaptive voltage. That's it. Extremely straightforward and on every MSI, ASRock, and ASUS motherboard I've had for years from bottom-of-the-line super-budget boards (MSI Z370-A Pro) to high-end HEDT boards (ASUS ROG RAMPAGE).



Falkentyne said:


> The "overclocking performance menu", which has this option, is hidden, but can be unlocked by people on win-raid.com but may have to be re-routed to other options that are not being used, since the "hidden" APTIO Bios option folders cannot be unhidden directly as only the "MIT" menu is available. It's also VERY unknown whether any settings changed here would conflict with the "MIT" voltage settings. There are already a bunch of voltage bugs, where changing from DVID mode to fixed voltage sets a completely wrong (and far too high!) voltage until the board is powered off and rebooted again! That would not help one bit


??? So there's a hidden "overclocking performance menu" that is risky to enable as it's not properly integrated?

So Gigabyte motherboard users are stuck with having to blast a static voltage 24/7 into their CPU unlike users with any other brand of motherboard over the past 5+ years? This just doesn't seem right...


P.S. I just went back into the BIOS and there's a DVID mode available in plain sight. There's no secret, locked BIOS needed therefore I'm not sure what you meant by that. I'm now even more confused, lol.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Hmmm. Not sure I understand. I'm not looking for any "additional turbo voltage" mode...In all other boards - MSI, ASRock, ASUS - you are able to adjust the CPU core voltage. Then, you have the option of keeping that core voltage static or simply have it auto-reduce as the frequency drops by enabling adaptive voltage. That's it. Extremely straightforward and on every MSI, ASRock, and ASUS motherboard I've had for years from bottom-of-the-line super-budget boards (MSI Z370-A Pro) to high-end HEDT boards (ASUS ROG RAMPAGE).
> 
> ??? So there's a hidden "overclocking performance menu" that is risky to enable as it's not properly integrated?
> 
> This doesn't seem right. So Gigabyte motherboard users are stuck with having to blast a static voltage 24/7 into their CPU unlike users with any other brand of motherboard over the past 5+ years? This just doesn't seem right...


The 'additional turbo voltage' *IS* Asus adaptive voltage, combined with the 'Adaptive' setting shown in my attached imagea.
You enter a voltage for adaptive mode on Asus boards.

That is exactly what additional turbo voltage is in the Asus BIOS when you enable adaptive voltage.
It's just not called that in the Asus Bios.

The Gigabyte Aorus Xtreme rerouted this over to an "adaptive" section in their MIT menu.
AMIBCP 5.02.0031 bombs with an error when I try to open the Xtreme BIOS so I have no way to show you what I'm talking about. I'm sorry about that.

The Gigabyte BIOS simply allows "Override' (fixed voltage) and 'Adaptive' voltage (DVID mode).
DVID mode is the same thing as Asus "offset" mode, without using adaptive mode.
The AMI Bios calls this "Adaptive" mode however. Gigabyte calls it "Dynamic Voltage Offset" mode.
You just don't have access to "additional turbo voltage" on the non-Xtreme board. 
Asus allows access to this and calls it "Adaptive voltage."

This setting is explained either on their Maximus IX sticky ROG forum or their X/XI forum. I do not remember which. The Kaby Lake ROG guide explains this also.



> This doesn't seem right. So Gigabyte motherboard users are stuck with having to blast a static voltage 24/7 into their CPU unlike users with any other brand of motherboard over the past 5+ years? This just doesn't seem right...


No, no and no.
You can use OFFSET mode for this.
You just can't set a minimum voltage floor with it when in "Turbo" multiplier modes. You need the 'actual' adaptive voltage mode to do that, where you enter a voltage, not just an offset.

You also will have to deal with possible idle BSOD's with too low negative offsets if C3 state is enabled, if the AC Loadline value (you can tweak this) is too low.

Fun fact:
The APTIO Bios actually allows you to enter an "offset" in override mode, which applies the offset to override mode. You can do this on unlocked MSI and Clevo laptops.
This is part of the reason for the DVID -> Fixed vcore bugs on our Gigabyte boards. The board forgets to zero out the offset when you switch to override (even though it greys out the selection)..


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> NYou also will have to deal with possible idle BSOD's with too low negative offsets if C3 state is enabled, if the AC Loadline value (you can tweak this) is too low.


I disabled C3 state and idle voltage hasn't changed one bit, it's still down-volting all the way to 0.612v regardless of wether C3 is enabled or disabled...

The low voltage itself doesn't bother me (as long as it's stable), in fact, it's what I'm trying to do. The weird thing now is that the voltage lowers to 0.612v even if the CPU is @ 5.1 GHz. The voltage does increase to 1.3xx volts when the CPU load goes up, but on all my previous intel CPUs and other brand motherboards, the voltage would change according to the frequency only - it would never drop to idle 800 MHz voltages if the frequency was at 5 GHz regardless of wether the CPU was at 2% or 100% load. If using 0.612v vcore @ 5.1 GHz is stable as long as the load is low then that's great but it's just concerning and brand-new to me.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> I disabled C3 state and idle voltage hasn't changed one bit, it's still down-volting all the way to 0.612v regardless of wether C3 is enabled or disabled...
> 
> The low voltage itself doesn't bother me (as long as it's stable), in fact, it's what I'm trying to do. The weird thing now is that the voltage lowers to 0.612v even if the CPU is @ 5.1 GHz. The voltage does increase to 1.3xx volts when the CPU load goes up, but on all my previous intel CPUs and other brand motherboards, the voltage would change according to the frequency only - it would never drop to idle 800 MHz voltages if the frequency was at 5 GHz regardless of wether the CPU was at 2% or 100% load.


You need to disable all C-states, not just C3.
C1E / C3 are the first two highest sleep states. Then it goes deeper all the way down to C10.

It lowers it to 0.612v because I think the CPU VID at 800 mhz is 0.612v.
If you want to see the VID at 800 mhz, disable C-states then use a fixed vcore and turbo LLC (let me finish, please).
Then, download Throttlestop 8.70. Run it, enable "Speed shift" and "speedshift when TS starts", enter 8 for minimum multiplier and your CPU max multiplier you set in BIOS for max multiplier,
then click SST in the main menu, enter a value (0-max speed always, 96=default, 128=balanced, 255=max power savings),
Then finally, if you want to check the exact VID at a specific frequency, set "Min and max Speedshift ratios to the exact same value. e.g. x8 / x8. Then look at the VID shown in throttlestop.

That will tell you where the voltage is coming from.

That's how downclocking and C-states work. Unfortunately, i do not downclock nor do I use c-states so I cannot help more with this.
The AC Loadline value and "thermal velocity boost (TVB) voltage optimizations" (latest BIOS only) also will affect the value of this VID.

I do not believe the CPU can be at 5.1 ghz in live frequency and 0.612v--it would instacrash.


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> The AC Loadline value and "thermal velocity boost (TVB) voltage optimizations" (latest BIOS only) also will affect the value of this VID.
> 
> I do not believe the CPU can be at 5.1 ghz in live frequency and 0.612v--it would instacrash.


Yup, vcore @ 0.612v makes sense, it's probably due to the 800 MHz CPU VID which makes perfect sense and is exactly what should be happening (vcore dropping in accordance with CPU frequency). The weird part is that HWMonitor & HWInfo both also report the same 0.612v @ 5.1 GHz during little-to-no CPU load. I thought this would have been insta-crash as well - seems insane regardless of there being little-to-no CPU load. HWInfo & HWMonitor report 1.3xx volts @ 5.1 GHz during high CPU loads so it doesn't seem like their reporting is wrong. I have no idea how a CPU can stay stable @ 5.1 GHz with only 0.612 vcore even if there's only 1% CPU load.


----------



## GeneO

spin5000 said:


> Yup, vcore @ 0.612v makes sense, it's probably due to the 800 MHz CPU VID which makes perfect sense and is exactly what should be happening (vcore dropping in accordance with CPU frequency). The weird part is that HWMonitor & HWInfo both also report the same 0.612v @ 5.1 GHz during little-to-no CPU load. I thought this would have been insta-crash as well - seems insane regardless of there being little-to-no CPU load. HWInfo & HWMonitor report 1.3xx volts @ 5.1 GHz during high CPU loads so it doesn't seem like their reporting is wrong. I have no idea how a CPU can stay stable @ 5.1 GHz with only 0.612 vcore even if there's only 1% CPU load.


I see this too. I do not think the voltaage reporting is correct. It seems worse if you have speedshift enabled.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## kamyk155

Hello guys - at first sorry for my bad english.
I have a big problem with my new setup - 9900KS + Aorus Master G2 + 2 sets 2x8GB of Viper Steel 4000MHz.
First of all - everything works nice and fast. Quick fresh windows 1909 instalation with newest drivers to all hardware + XMP profile 4000MHz.
After some time I saw high temperatures and voltages in windows (even in idle - some www sites only).
I went to the bios and I saw that my normal CPU Vcore is 1,332V, RAM 1,35V, and I set VCCIO and VCSSA both to 1,25V (lowered them from XMP 1,35 nad 1,25).
After hours of fighting I can see that my Vcore is badly high and VID cores are extremly high.
For example:
- first test - Intel Burn Test V2 - Vcore little above 1,4V and VIDs even 1,5V !! Temperatures little over 80*C
- second test - LinX - Vcore more less 1,4V and some VIDs 1,46V - temperatures little over 70*C
- third test - Prime95 - max Vcore 1,286V and VIDs almost the same - under 1,3V !!!!!!! - max temperatures on two cores 90*C. HOW and WHY so low Voltages.

I tried alot of settings in bios - voltages, llc, c-states, bios F9 and now F10 - nothing - still bios Vcore 1,33V and weird VID in tests.
High temps are only in tests but after few seconds of idle - back to about 30*C.
My cooling is 3x 360RAD, 23 120mm fans and few others, heatkiller IV Pro and EK pump (only CPU is cooled with water).
I tried to lower voltages for CPU - 1,2V BSOD, 1,25V BSOD, 1,285 freeze in windows after few sec, 1,3V - mega drops to even 1,1V in test and I aborted it.
After lowering RAM to 2133 - temperatures few *C lower but Vcore and VID still jumping high.
20-30min in game - BFV 3440x1440 ultra with my 2080Ti - temperatures on CPU max 86*C - it is waaaaay to high.
For example - my older [email protected] with 1,285V in this game max 60*C on one of cores.


----------



## AndrejB

kamyk155 said:


> Hello guys - at first sorry for my bad english.
> I have a big problem with my new setup - 9900KS + Aorus Master G2 + 2 sets 2x8GB of Viper Steel 4000MHz.
> First of all - everything works nice and fast. Quick fresh windows 1909 instalation with newest drivers to all hardware + XMP profile 4000MHz.
> After some time I saw high temperatures and voltages in windows (even in idle - some www sites only).
> I went to the bios and I saw that my normal CPU Vcore is 1,332V, RAM 1,35V, and I set VCCIO and VCSSA both to 1,25V (lowered them from XMP 1,35 nad 1,25).
> After hours of fighting I can see that my Vcore is badly high and VID cores are extremly high.
> For example:
> - first test - Intel Burn Test V2 - Vcore little above 1,4V and VIDs even 1,5V !! Temperatures little over 80*C
> - second test - LinX - Vcore more less 1,4V and some VIDs 1,46V - temperatures little over 70*C
> - third test - Prime95 - max Vcore 1,286V and VIDs almost the same - under 1,3V !!!!!!! - max temperatures on two cores 90*C. HOW and WHY so low Voltages.
> 
> I tried alot of settings in bios - voltages, llc, c-states, bios F9 and now F10 - nothing - still bios Vcore 1,33V and weird VID in tests.
> High temps are only in tests but after few seconds of idle - back to about 30*C.
> My cooling is 3x 360RAD, 23 120mm fans and few others, heatkiller IV Pro and EK pump (only CPU is cooled with water).
> I tried to lower voltages for CPU - 1,2V BSOD, 1,25V BSOD, 1,285 freeze in windows after few sec, 1,3V - mega drops to even 1,1V in test and I aborted it.
> After lowering RAM to 2133 - temperatures few *C lower but Vcore and VID still jumping high.
> 20-30min in game - BFV 3440x1440 ultra with my 2080Ti - temperatures on CPU max 86*C - it is waaaaay to high.
> For example - my older [email protected] with 1,285V in this game max 60*C on one of cores.


Had something similar (not this extreme) with my first 9900k it ran at 1.3v on stock settings. 
Replaced it and got one that runs at 1.22v

Now I know why the ks has 1 year warranty...


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Hello guys - at first sorry for my bad english.
> I have a big problem with my new setup - 9900KS + Aorus Master G2 + 2 sets 2x8GB of Viper Steel 4000MHz.
> First of all - everything works nice and fast. Quick fresh windows 1909 instalation with newest drivers to all hardware + XMP profile 4000MHz.
> After some time I saw high temperatures and voltages in windows (even in idle - some www sites only).
> I went to the bios and I saw that my normal CPU Vcore is 1,332V, RAM 1,35V, and I set VCCIO and VCSSA both to 1,25V (lowered them from XMP 1,35 nad 1,25).
> After hours of fighting I can see that my Vcore is badly high and VID cores are extremly high.
> For example:
> - first test - Intel Burn Test V2 - Vcore little above 1,4V and VIDs even 1,5V !! Temperatures little over 80*C
> - second test - LinX - Vcore more less 1,4V and some VIDs 1,46V - temperatures little over 70*C
> - third test - Prime95 - max Vcore 1,286V and VIDs almost the same - under 1,3V !!!!!!! - max temperatures on two cores 90*C. HOW and WHY so low Voltages.
> 
> I tried alot of settings in bios - voltages, llc, c-states, bios F9 and now F10 - nothing - still bios Vcore 1,33V and weird VID in tests.
> High temps are only in tests but after few seconds of idle - back to about 30*C.
> My cooling is 3x 360RAD, 23 120mm fans and few others, heatkiller IV Pro and EK pump (only CPU is cooled with water).
> I tried to lower voltages for CPU - 1,2V BSOD, 1,25V BSOD, 1,285 freeze in windows after few sec, 1,3V - mega drops to even 1,1V in test and I aborted it.
> After lowering RAM to 2133 - temperatures few *C lower but Vcore and VID still jumping high.
> 20-30min in game - BFV 3440x1440 ultra with my 2080Ti - temperatures on CPU max 86*C - it is waaaaay to high.
> For example - my older [email protected] with 1,285V in this game max 60*C on one of cores.


VID is not vcore. 

use HWinfo64 to look at VR VOUT and use that for your vcore.
1.3v to 1.1v? Sounds like you set voltage manually and didn't set loadline calibration right or you confused loadline calibration with "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" which is NOT the same thing!

Set Bios voltage to 1.30v.
Set CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration to Turbo.
Set CPU VRM switching frequency and the other switching frequency to 300 khz.
Now test this. No more BSOD I bet.

If that is stable, lower your BIOS voltage from 1.30v to 1.250v. Then test that and report back.


----------



## kamyk155

I checked one more time that my cpu block is proper installed.
Thermal paste looks good - whole cpu covered. Then I thing about something - I put my old RAM set - 4x8 2400 hyperx. Set load defaults and XMP.
Then I saw in bios - Vcore 1,26V (with 4000MHz it was 1,33V). But after starting tests - back to normal bad things - almost 1,4V and VIDs more that it.
Back to 4000MHz set and once again - 1,33V in bios as auto and teste like before - hot and jumps of Voltage.
Now after again Intel burn test V2 - Vcore 1,38V, VIDs max 1,415V and temperatures 76 to 85*C............


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> I checked one more time that my cpu block is proper installed.
> Thermal paste looks good - whole cpu covered. Then I thing about something - I put my old RAM set - 4x8 2400 hyperx. Set load defaults and XMP.
> Then I saw in bios - Vcore 1,26V (with 4000MHz it was 1,33V). But after starting tests - back to normal bad things - almost 1,4V and VIDs more that it.
> Back to 4000MHz set and once again - 1,33V in bios as auto and teste like before - hot and jumps of Voltage.
> Now after again Intel burn test V2 - Vcore 1,38V, VIDs max 1,415V and temperatures 76 to 85*C............


Read my post again please and try what I suggested.


----------



## kamyk155

I just tried.
1,300V - LLC both for CPU - turbo. Switch for CPU 300kHz.
First test in Intel Burn Test V2 - rock solid 1,296V with XMP 4000MHz.

Now the sensors in HWMonitor PRO v1.20:
Vcore rock solid 1,296V min/msx/average
VIDs still high to max 1,492V on core 0.

Now HWinfo64 v6.20 sensors:
Vcore solid rock 1,296V min/max/average from sensor1
Vcore max 1,287 to 1,276 min from second sensor
VIDs are almost the same - max 1,467V 

Temps from 69 to 77*C.

Now I need to test other two benchmarks - Prime95 and LinX to see stability.


----------



## kamyk155

Two more tests - solid 1,296V. Prime heat cpu to max 94*C - not good.
One more question - what about VCCIO and agent - now my memory set them both to 1,35 and 1,35V in XMP.
Any info about safe voltages to check ? When i set them to 1,20V both - something is not right. 1,3 and 1,25 looks good or it is too high ?


----------



## Wirerat

kamyk155 said:


> Two more tests - solid 1,296V. Prime heat cpu to max 94*C - not good.
> One more question - what about VCCIO and agent - now my memory set them both to 1,35 and 1,35V in XMP.
> Any info about safe voltages to check ? When i set them to 1,20V both - something is not right. 1,3 and 1,25 looks good or it is too high ?


Try 1.225 for vccio/sa. 1.25v would also be okay. You should not need higher than 1.25v.


----------



## AndrejB

kamyk155 said:


> Two more tests - solid 1,296V. Prime heat cpu to max 94*C - not good.
> One more question - what about VCCIO and agent - now my memory set them both to 1,35 and 1,35V in XMP.
> Any info about safe voltages to check ? When i set them to 1,20V both - something is not right. 1,3 and 1,25 looks good or it is too high ?


I'm running 1.15v sa/io for 4133 17-17-17-37 @ 1.4v
My board as well set the io/sa at 1.35v for 4000cl17 xmp

Here is Falkentynes comment on these from a reddit post, the last bit is important, testing:

VCCIO and VCCSA have maybe a 1C core temp difference between being set at 0.95 / 1.05v and 1.25/1.30v. The voltage rail for these two settings are not even on the main VR Loop. They use VERY little power.

Yes the auto values for these a bit high for 3600 mhz memory. You can try 1.15v to 1.20v for VCCIO and 1.20v to 1.25v for VCCSA.

To test if VCCIO is too low, you can use prime95 29.8 build 6, disable AVX in the stress options, and test 112K-112K in-place fixed FFT and look for CPU Cache L0 errors. If you get them, your VCCIO is too low.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> I just tried.
> 1,300V - LLC both for CPU - turbo. Switch for CPU 300kHz.
> First test in Intel Burn Test V2 - rock solid 1,296V with XMP 4000MHz.
> 
> Now the sensors in HWMonitor PRO v1.20:
> Vcore rock solid 1,296V min/msx/average
> VIDs still high to max 1,492V on core 0.
> 
> Now HWinfo64 v6.20 sensors:
> Vcore solid rock 1,296V min/max/average from sensor1
> Vcore max 1,287 to 1,276 min from second sensor
> VIDs are almost the same - max 1,467V
> 
> Temps from 69 to 77*C.
> 
> Now I need to test other two benchmarks - Prime95 and LinX to see stability.


Remember I said use VR VOUT for your sensors. Only hwinfo64 supports VRM monitoring. HWmonitor does not. No need to use hwmonitor.
Do you remember? Your load vcore is a LOT lower than 1.276v.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Which mobo are we talking about?


In my signature - master.


----------



## kamyk155

Ok one more time.

Intel Burn Test V2.
Vcore bios 1,30V. In HWinfo64 - max 1,296V min 1,284V. VR VOUT - 1,299V max and 1,242V min. Core VIDs from 1,391V to 1,423V. CPU max temp 61 to 68*C.

Another LinX.
Vcore bios 1,30V. In HWinfo64 - max 1,296V, min 1,276V. VR VOUT - 1,297V max and 1,244V min. Core VIDs from 1,384V to 1,461V. CPU max temp 58 to 65*C.

Prime95 again but without AVX and AVX2 - small FFTs.
Vcore bios 1,30V. In HWinfo64 - max 1,296V, min 1,276V. VR VOUT - 1,297V max and 1,244 min. Core VIDs from 1,369V to 1,439V. CPU max temp 65 to 71*C.

VCCSA and System Agent - 1,25V in bios - VCCSA 1,248V in sensor (don't see Sytem Agent)
Looks much better now. Tomorrow I will try to fight with cpu core voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Ok one more time.
> 
> Intel Burn Test V2.
> Vcore bios 1,30V. In HWinfo64 - max 1,296V min 1,284V. VR VOUT - 1,299V max and 1,242V min. Core VIDs from 1,391V to 1,423V. CPU max temp 61 to 68*C.
> 
> VCCSA and System Agent - 1,25V in bios - VCCSA 1,248V in sensor (don't see Sytem Agent)
> Will test more and try to lower Vcore.
> 
> Another LinX.
> Vcore bios 1,30V. In HWinfo64 - max 1,296V, min 1,276V. VR VOUT - 1,297V max and 1,244V min. Core VIDs from 1,384V to 1,461V. CPU max temp 58 to 65*C.


System agent=VCCSA.
You can see VR VOUT makes more sense and follows vdroop properly.

There is no reason to list the core VID like you are doing. VID is based on AC Loadline value, DC Loadline value, Default multiplier VID, and Thermal Velocity Boost.
If you want to list the VID, you can set "AC Loadline" to 1 and "DC Loadline" to 1 in Internal VR Control/Settings then you can report the "IDLE" VID to us in windows.
The "load VID" is not important.
Generally, the lower the "IDLE VID" when ACLL=1, and DCLL=1, the better the CPU quality.

Note that maximum Intel Reference Value for AC Loadline is 160 (1.6 mOhms) and DC Loadline is also 160 (1.6 mOhms).
AC Loadline is used to control auto (or dynamic offset) operating "target" voltages to the VRM, BEFORE Vdroop. DC Loadline is used to control "droop" on VID (NOT On Vcore or operating voltages!) as it is reported to windows 
(DC Loadline does not control operating voltages).

Vcore Loadline Calibration controls vdroop on operating voltages (on all Auto, DVID or Fixed vcores).


----------



## Alemancio

What VRM switching do you recommend on the Master?

I remember Buildzoid saying 500kHz but now I'm reading 300kHz?


----------



## Emmanuel

Hey everyone, I got my 9900K stable at 5GHz and 1.294v VR OUT based on my current stress partial testing (2H 128K AVX/FMA3 Prime95 29.8). You can look at the picture attached.

My issue is that the computer resets during light loads and idle. I disabled all P-states, RTH, Speed shift. I do have EIST enabled. I have all power and current limits maxed out, which is obvious considering I can run stress testing for hours straight.

At first I thought my idle voltage maybe dropped too low (I OC with a negative offset of 100) at idle, so I brought the CPU multiplier down to 36, set the offset to 0 and the computer still reset while I was in the middle of typing this post. If I understand correctly, an offset of 0 for a normal vCore is just like setting the vCore to AUTO.

What do you think is the culprit here?

I am currently running my ram at 2133MHz 1.2v (it's 24H Memtest86 UEFI stable) and cache at 43x to isolate the core overclock. In summary, my computer stayed on for 2 hours of Prime95 and resets within 5-30 minutes of light load (web browsing, typing this post etc.)

Thanks!


----------



## Emmanuel

Alemancio said:


> What VRM switching do you recommend on the Master?
> 
> I remember Buildzoid saying 500kHz but now I'm reading 300kHz?


I went from AUTO to 300KHz and it stabilized my OC without changing the voltage.


----------



## Alemancio

Emmanuel said:


> In summary, my computer stayed on for 2 hours of Prime95 and resets within 5-30 minutes of light load (web browsing, typing this post etc.)
> 
> Thanks!


This happened to me when I was trying to figure out adaptive voltage. What happpens (I think) is that during low loads, your vcore is so low, it causes instability. I tried to fight it by raising the voltage offset (say from 80mv to 120mv) and decreasing the loadline levels.

To be honest, I returned to fixed voltages and it runs perfectly 5Ghz @ 1.32v in Bios w/ High LLC


----------



## Emmanuel

Alemancio said:


> This happened to me when I was trying to figure out adaptive voltage. What happpens (I think) is that during low loads, your vcore is so low, it causes instability. I tried to fight it by raising the voltage offset (say from 80mv to 120mv) and decreasing the loadline levels.
> 
> To be honest, I returned to fixed voltages and it runs perfectly 5Ghz @ 1.32v in Bios w/ High LLC


I've been wanting to avoid doing that. I like that my CPU downclocks and downvolts when all I'm doing is editing word documents for 8 hours. Although ~1.3v is safe, I'd rather not run it 24/7 if I don't need to.


----------



## kamyk155

Falkentyne - thanks for help. Great to have someone with helping hand.
I'm not a typical noob if we talk about computers - I'm middle aged guy who started from intel 386 but still with lack of some important informations about today hardware.
I just started to ask questions when I saw almost 1,5V in CPU VID because in 14nm cpu it is way too much and I tought it is single core voltage.
One more question - why there are two sensors from mobo with V CPU voltages and they differ some (ITE8688E and ITE8792E) - first 100% stable 1,296V and on the other sensor 1,287 to 1,276V.

So for now - tomorrow I will try to lowering voltages.

PS. Do You have any important infos about other motherboard settings ?
I disabled CPU GPU and sound card (I have Sound blaster katana soundbar with somekind of sb-z card inside).
I enabled all cpu power states. Disabled all SSDs and HDDs for faster boot - only left on the list my system SSD - Samsung 950Pro.

My actual spec is:
- i9 9900KS
- Aorus Z390 Master G2 bios F10
- RTX 2080 Ti MSI Trio X
- 4x8GB Viper Steel 4000MHz CL 19-19-19
- M.2 SSD Samsung 950 Pro 512GB for system only
- M.2 SSD Adata 8200 Pro 1TB for games only
- SATA SSD IRIDIUM PRO 480GB for downloads only
- SATA HDD WD Green 6TB for big storage
- PSU 1000W Leadex Platinum
- water cooling for CPU only - 3x360 RADS with zylions of 120mm fans in Lian Li PC-D888WX 8Pack Limited Edition case


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> What VRM switching do you recommend on the Master?
> 
> I remember Buildzoid saying 500kHz but now I'm reading 300kHz?


Buildzoid didn't test 300 khz at all. However I paid VERY CAREFUL attention to the "Auto" (400 khz) and 500 khz test he did, and I noticed that 500 khz had a larger transient dip/spike (10mv) than 400mv on his probinator chart for the Aorus Master.

He isn't aware of the "bug" or "Feature" that is causing 300 khz to allow many people to use lower vcore for the same stability. I gained at least 15mv vcore reduction from it.

I sent him an email about this and asked him to test it, but I honestly don't think he cares one bit.
I even linked threads and results for him. I pleaded with him to test this but again I don't think he cares.

You can see that his peak to peak is higher at 500 khz than at auto. 






He really should have tested 300 khz.

@elmor is aware of this.
And I reached out to Gigabyte in a support ticket asking them what is going on with the 300 khz setting, but something like this..an end user trying to reach a BIOS department about "Transient response" and "Adaptive Transient Algorithm" on an IR 35201?

Good luck with that...


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Falkentyne - thanks for help. Great to have someone with helping hand.
> I'm not a typical noob if we talk about computers - I'm middle aged guy who started from intel 386 but still with lack of some important informations about today hardware.
> I just started to ask questions when I saw almost 1,5V in CPU VID because in 14nm cpu it is way too much and I tought it is single core voltage.
> One more question - why there are two sensors from mobo with V CPU voltages and they differ some (ITE8688E and ITE8792E) - first 100% stable 1,296V and on the other sensor 1,287 to 1,276V.
> 
> So for now - tomorrow I will try to lowering voltages.
> 
> PS. Do You have any important infos about other motherboard settings ?
> I disabled CPU GPU and sound card (I have Sound blaster katana soundbar with somekind of sb-z card inside).
> I enabled all cpu power states. Disabled all SSDs and HDDs for faster boot - only left on the list my system SSD - Samsung 950Pro.
> 
> My actual spec is:
> - i9 9900KS
> - Aorus Z390 Master G2 bios F10
> - RTX 2080 Ti MSI Trio X
> - 4x8GB Viper Steel 4000MHz CL 19-19-19
> - M.2 SSD Samsung 950 Pro 512GB for system only
> - M.2 SSD Adata 8200 Pro 1TB for games only
> - SATA SSD IRIDIUM PRO 480GB for downloads only
> - SATA HDD WD Green 6TB for big storage
> - PSU 1000W Leadex Platinum
> - water cooling for CPU only - 3x360 RADS with zylions of 120mm fans in Lian Li PC-D888WX 8Pack Limited Edition case



ITE 8688E is the Super I/O chip. This chip is responsible for many things, like fan monitoring, motherboard, CPU temps (package), PCH, ATX voltage monitoring and so on. The SIO chip has been used for years. But cpu voltages read by this have gotten more and more inaccurate as core counts go up, current goes up and the power plane gets more complicated. The SIO chip is *heavily* influenced by power plane impedance (resistance along the DC circuit--e.g. one directional voltage flow). You can see the effect of this here. The Super I/O chip will not show loadline calibration vdroop properly at all! It will be way off.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

The ITE 8792E I believe is another chip, and this one controls the SOCKET (MLCC)--multilayered ceramic caps reading as well as other voltages (like DDR VTT, etc). This is the reading you get when you use the onboard multimeter read points. I know very little about this chip but you can see what it reads in HWINFO64. The ITE 8792E chip will show the same idle/load voltage if Vcore loadline calibration is set to 'Turbo', regardless of how much vdroop there is, making people falsely think that LLC Turbo is a flat loadline--it is NOT. It's 0.4 mOhms on a 9900k. Ultra Extreme is a flat loadline --and NEVER use UE. Ever. It's gross.

LLC8 in this graph is the same as Ultra Extreme.

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

The IR 35201 is the VRM controller and this chip supports its own power monitoring. It can read voltages, power draw and current going directly to the CPU, so it is not affected by the power plane. This reading is also known as "Differential on-die sense". The only thing the IR35201 cannot show is "transient voltage spikes/dips"--only an oscilloscope set to 100 mhz bandwidth+ can read that. The Asus maximus XI boards have a special diode which allows their super i/o chip to read on-die sense accurately (but limited to 12mv resolution rather than the IR 35201's 2mv resolution).



Emmanuel said:


> I went from AUTO to 300KHz and it stabilized my OC without changing the voltage.


300 khz has helped a lot of people!
@GeneO's excellent chart showed very vividly how 300 khz compared to 500 khz.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-539.html#post28229682


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> ITE 8688E is the Super I/O chip. This chip is responsible for many things, like fan monitoring, motherboard, CPU temps (package), PCH, ATX voltage monitoring and so on. The SIO chip has been used for years. But cpu voltages read by this have gotten more and more inaccurate as core counts go up, current goes up and the power plane gets more complicated. The SIO chip is *heavily* influenced by power plane impedance (resistance along the DC circuit--e.g. one directional voltage flow). You can see the effect of this here. The Super I/O chip will not show loadline calibration vdroop properly at all! It will be way off.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> The ITE 8792E I believe is another chip, and this one controls the SOCKET (MLCC)--multilayered ceramic caps reading as well as other voltages (like DDR VTT, etc). This is the reading you get when you use the onboard multimeter read points. I know very little about this chip but you can see what it reads in HWINFO64. The ITE 8792E chip will show the same idle/load voltage if Vcore loadline calibration is set to 'Turbo', regardless of how much vdroop there is, making people falsely think that LLC Turbo is a flat loadline--it is NOT. It's 0.4 mOhms on a 9900k. Ultra Extreme is a flat loadline --and NEVER use UE. Ever. It's gross.
> 
> LLC8 in this graph is the same as Ultra Extreme.
> 
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> The IR 35201 is the VRM controller and this chip supports its own power monitoring. It can read voltages, power draw and current going directly to the CPU, so it is not affected by the power plane. This reading is also known as "Differential on-die sense". The only thing the IR35201 cannot show is "transient voltage spikes/dips"--only an oscilloscope set to 100 mhz bandwidth+ can read that. The Asus maximus XI boards have a special diode which allows their super i/o chip to read on-die sense accurately (but limited to 12mv resolution rather than the IR 35201's 2mv resolution).
> 
> 
> 
> 300 khz has helped a lot of people!
> 
> @GeneO's excellent chart showed very vividly how 300 khz compared to 500 khz.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-539.html#post28229682


Looking at bulzoid's chart, which pparently motivated this, I started having doubts. I am at this moment rerunning the same tests at the same lower voltage setting but with 500 KHz switching frequency. If those results in the table I posted are meaningful, I should see some test fail.


----------



## Wirerat

@Falkentyne 



> And I reached out to Gigabyte in a support ticket asking them what is going on with the 300 khz setting, but something like this.


I sent gigabyte support a ticket to let them know trefi was bugged in bios F11 on Aorus Pro. Any manual setting above 9999 jumps straight to 65534.

A few days later they responded "have you tried the new F12b bios"? 

I reported back the F12b still has trefi bug and he responded "it's a beta bios". 

I won't waste anymore time with them.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Looking at bulzoid's chart, which pparently motivated this, I started having doubts. I am at this moment rerunning the same tests at the same lower voltage setting but with 500 KHz switching frequency. If those results in the table I posted are meaningful, I should see some test fail.


The problem is that it is not consistent at 500 khz.
I think the VRM is being set into a certain mode after certain BIOS changes. And the only thing I could think of was what is said on page 31 of the IR 35201 datasheet.

https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infin...N.pdf?fileId=5546d462576f347501579c95d19772b5

Then once it's set there, it works for awhile.
I had a case myself where 500 khz was suddenly passing (just like 300 khz) then later it was failing completely. Then I switched to 300 khz and it was passing again.
Since VR VOUT was not changing, or IOUT, it had to be something with the VRM settings.

I noticed this erratic behavior ever since a year ago when I first built this system and started stress testing.

That's why I was hoping @elmor can help us.
The one thing I did find out (and I tested this with two reboots back to back) was that 300 khz did much better on my 4.7 ghz LinX test than 500 khz.

This was my 500 khz test.

https://i.imgur.com/oNoxSZN.jpg

instantly after that, I rebooted and did 300 khz.

https://i.imgur.com/itzksuR.jpg


----------



## spin5000

Man, I know all Motherboard brands are a touch different from eachother here and there which is natural being they're from different manufacturers but Gigabyte boards go wayyy beyond that. I feel like I've gone over to an AMD CPU using this Gigabyte board. Why does one company (Gigabyte) have to make their motherboards behave so weird compared to every other motherboard company (ASUS, MSI, ASRock, etc.)? I don't even know what the heck is going on with this board like I'm some sort of noob at overclocking:

- 3 or 4 different vcore voltages in HWInfo that show quite different values and having no idea which one I'm supposed to be looking at unlike every other motherboard I've had in the past 15 years

- VCore supposedly changing massively based on CPU load even if the frequency doesn't change (if I'm even reading the correct vcore since there's 3 or 4)

- Then there's load line calibration which is apparently NOT supposed to be used beyond a very low/poor setting if you want to use dynamic voltage with offset (when vcore set to "Normal"). How are overclockers supposed to get away without upping LLC? Lol.

- Some sort of IA AC & IA DC settings that no other motherboard brand users need to touch but they seem important for Gigabyte OCing.

- You aren't even able to set a vcore unless you use a fixed/static vcore. So if you want to use a dynamic vcore, you're stuck using offset relative to the CPU's ridiculously high stock VID settings (eg. 1.500v @ 5.2 GHz) rather than specifying a max-frequency Vcore (eg. 1.385v @ 5.2 GHz) for that offset to be based on for the max clocks.

- There isn't even a true Adaptive mode which simply allows you to specify a max-frequency vcore while keeping normal voltage & frequency reduction intact - this should be the primary default way to overclock yet it's not even available as an option. Instead, you're forced to use the frequency-range-wide (eg. 800 MHz - 5.2 GHz) offset mode and, to make matters worse, you're also forced to use that offset based on the stock CPU's ridiculously high VID without even being able to set your own max-frequency vcore (as I mentioned in my previous point)

- If those last 2 options weren't enough, some motherboard brands & models (not talking high-end models either) even allow a combination of both options - ie. using adaptive voltage with a specified max-frquency vcore + also using a frequency-range-wide offset


.....but hey, who cares about all that, the motherboard has better VRMs than the competition and "feeling better" about lower VRM temps is what matters. All I heard from forums, videos, reviews, etc. was "Gigabyte is the best this generation because...VRMssss". Never falling for that hype again - such simplistic thinking.




GeneO said:


> reachthesky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which mobo are we talking about?
Click to expand...

The Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro which would almost certainly also apply to the Elite & Ultra and possibly others.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Man, I know all Motherboard brands are a touch different from eachother here and there which is natural being they're from different manufacturers but Gigabyte boards go wayyy beyond that. I feel like I've gone over to an AMD CPU using this Gigabyte board. Why does one company (Gigabyte) have to make their motherboards behave so weird compared to every other motherboard company (ASUS, MSI, ASRock, etc.)? I don't even know what the heck is going on with this board like I'm some sort of noob at overclocking:
> 
> - 3 or 4 different vcore voltages in HWInfo that show quite different values and having no idea which one I'm supposed to be looking at unlike every other motherboard I've had in the past 15 years


Super IO chip is ITE 8688E.
Other onboard chip (including what handles DDR aux voltage and onboard multimeter read points, and I think VCCIO) is ITE 8792E.
IR 35201 contains its own voltage, amps and power monitoring so you can't bash Gigabyte for that. IR 35201 is most accurate as long as a deep sleep power state/C-state isn't active.



> - VCore supposedly changing massively based on CPU load even if the frequency doesn't change (if I'm even reading the correct vcore since there's 3 or 4)


VR VOUT responds directly to amps via Vdroop. Vdroop formula is Loadline (VRM loadline calibratoin) mOhms * Amps. LLC Turbo is 0.4 mOhms. So 100 amps of current (Current IOUT) will cause a 40mv drop in voltage from BIOS set voltage to load voltage. (based on fixed vcore being used). LLC High is 0.8 mOhms. This is Ohm's law, science and 100% predictable.



> - Then there's load line calibration which is apparently NOT supposed to be used beyond a very low/poor setting if you want to use dynamic voltage with offset (when vcore set to "Normal"). How are overclockers supposed to get away without upping LLC? Lol.


AC Loadline controls the idle and load VRM target voltages when Dynamic Offset (DVID) or Auto vcore is used. Higher AC Loadline (up to 1.6 mOhms, max Intel specification, do not confuse this with "VRM Loadline (loadline calibration)) will cause higher operating voltages. AC Loadline comes from the +12v line, and factored along with CPU default multiplier VID and voltage increase/decrease via Thermal Velocity Boost. TVB is explained here.
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others&highlight=explanations

AC loadline is the power (VRM target voltage) based on current, on the AC line (PSU +12v line that is duty cycled to an operating voltage, like 1.2v (90% duty cycle) etc.

Since AC Loadline boosts operating voltages on its own, a high AC loadline must NOT be combined with a low mOhms of VRM loadline. Lower mOhms means less vdroop or more loadline calibration strength. Using a high AC Loadline mOhms value (like 1.6 mOhms) with a high amount of VRM loadline calibration (low mOhms) will give excessive voltages. . Easy memory tool is: High AC Loadline mOhms needs low VRM Loadline mOhms. VRM loadline is the loadline (based on current) on the DC circuit. So: High mOhms AC=use high mOhms loadline calibration (high vdroop=less LLC). Low mOhms AC Loadline= use low mOhms loadline calibration (less vdroop=more LLC)

LLC: Standard/Normal=1.6 mOhms
LLC: Low=1.3 mOhms
LLC: medium: 1.0 mOhms
LLC: High: 0.8 mOhms
LLC: Turbo=0.4 mOhms
LLC: Extreme=0.2 mOhms
LLC: Ultra Extreme=0 mOhms.



> - Some sort of IA AC & IA DC settings that no other motherboard brand users need to touch but they seem important for Gigabyte OCing.


See above. Asus boards also use this setting, but "SVID Behavior" usually sets this to 0.01 mOhms or 1.2 mOhms or 1.6 mOhms (Best case, Typical, Worst Case / Intel Fail Safe).
Asus uses who use "offset" mode usually just set AC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms and crank up Loadline calibration to compensate.



> - You aren't even able to set a vcore unless you use a fixed/static vcore. So if you want to use a dynamic vcore, you're stuck using offset relative to the CPU's ridiculously high stock VID settings (eg. 1.500v @ 5.2 GHz) rather than specifying a max-frequency Vcore (eg. 1.385v @ 5.2 GHz) for that offset to be based on for the max clocks.


Use the AC Loadline (low mOhm ACLL values) with a higher Loadline Calibration (lower vdroop or low mOhms of LLC). Or a higher ACLL Value with low VRM LLC (standard/low)



> - There isn't even a true Adaptive mode which simply allows you to specify a max-frequency vcore while keeping normal voltage & frequency reduction intact - this should be the primary default way to overclock yet it's not even available as an option. Instead, you're forced to use the frequency-range-wide (eg. 800 MHz - 5.2 GHz) offset mode and, to make matters worse, you're also forced to use that offset based on the stock CPU's ridiculously high VID without even being able to set your own max-frequency vcore (as I mentioned in my previous point)


Agree with this.



> - If those last 2 options weren't enough, some motherboard brands & models (not talking high-end models either) even allow a combination of both options - ie. using adaptive voltage with a specified max-frquency vcore + also using a frequency-range-wide offset


Again agree with this. Aorus Xtreme has an adaptive voltage mode (I saw it in a BIOS screenshot but no idea how it works compared to Asus. I guess product segmentation?)



> .....but hey, who cares about all that, the motherboard has better VRMs than the competition and "feeling better" about lower VRM temps is what matters. All I heard from forums, videos, reviews, etc. was "Gigabyte is the best this generation because...VRMssss". Never falling for that hype again - such simplistic thinking.
> 
> 
> The Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro which would almost certainly also apply to the Elite & Ultra and possibly others.


----------



## Sheyster

spin5000 said:


> The Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro which would almost certainly also apply to the Elite & Ultra and possibly others.


Master is far superior to Pro and well worth the extra money. This said, there are better Z390 choices than Gigabyte.


----------



## GeneO

Sheyster said:


> Master is far superior to Pro and well worth the extra money. This said, there are better Z390 choices than Gigabyte.


Care to elaborate? In what way?


----------



## GeneO

GeneO said:


> Looking at bulzoid's chart, which pparently motivated this, I started having doubts. I am at this moment rerunning the same tests at the same lower voltage setting but with 500 KHz switching frequency. If those results in the table I posted are meaningful, I should see some test fail.


Hard crash in prime 95 1344/1344 after about 45 minutes.


----------



## Sheyster

GeneO said:


> Care to elaborate? In what way?


Biggest con for the Pro: Poor high frequency memory support. This is well documented in this thread and on the Gigabyte forums. Also, the BIOS is more limited and the backup BIOS implementation is terrible compared to the Master. There is more, feel free to search this thread.


----------



## GeneO

Sheyster said:


> Biggest con for the Pro: Poor high frequency memory support. This is well documented in this thread and on the Gigabyte forums. Also, the BIOS is more limited and the backup BIOS implementation is terrible compared to the Master. There is more, feel free to search this thread.


I meant your statement that there are better choices than gigabyte, not Gigabyte pro vs master. 

I don't see it as absolutes but pros vs. cons, and pros won for me: 

Gigabyte (master) 
pros:
VRM (Asus and other manufacturers have no competitor in this price range)
decent overclocking (got higher overclock with same 8086k chip than my Asus Code X could do, at less voltage, and it worked with two unmatched sets of 2x16 3200CL14 @3600CL16)
comprehensive set of features (great BIOS fan control, number of fans, temperature probes)
Good m.2 cooling capability
cons:
BIOS flashing (compared to Asus flashback)
BIOS stability and comprehensibility/consistency and control (e.g. memory overclocking is wonky)

The only other boards I considered were the Asus Apex and the EVGA Dark 390, except
1. Cost
2. Only 2 memory slots and I need 4


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> I meant your statement that there are better choices than gigabyte, not Gigabyte pro vs master.
> 
> I don't see it as absolutes but pros vs. cons, and pros won for me:
> 
> Gigabyte (master)
> pros:
> VRM (Asus and other manufacturers have no competitor in this price range)
> decent overclocking (got higher overclock with same 8086k chip than my Asus Code X could do, at less voltage, and it worked with two unmatched sets of 2x16 3200CL14 @3600CL16)
> comprehensive set of features (great BIOS fan control, number of fans, temperature probes)
> Good m.2 cooling capability
> cons:
> BIOS flashing (compared to Asus flashback)
> BIOS stability and comprehensibility/consistency and control (e.g. memory overclocking is wonky)
> 
> The only other boards I considered were the Asus Apex and the EVGA Dark 390, except
> 1. Cost
> 2. Only 2 memory slots and I need 4


You didn't look at the Gigagbyte Aorus Xtreme? (8 phases doubled to 16 and a few more Bios options, like Ring voltage, direct VID voltage, and that "missing" adaptive voltage setting finally.
Then again, I can't confirm that the Xtreme has those extra Bios options. I saw them in the Xtreme Waterforce 5G, but I do not know if the regular Xtreme has them. AMIBCP 5.02.0031 won't show the BIOS menus 

Of course someone in the 9900KS Maximus XI thread tested the Aorus Xtreme and saw the 300 khz "feature" work in that board also...(Not surprising since it's an IR 35201 board too).


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> You didn't look at the Gigagbyte Aorus Xtreme? (8 phases doubled to 16 and a few more Bios options, like Ring voltage, direct VID voltage, and that "missing" adaptive voltage setting finally.
> Then again, I can't confirm that the Xtreme has those extra Bios options. I saw them in the Xtreme Waterforce 5G, but I do not know if the regular Xtreme has them. AMIBCP 5.02.0031 won't show the BIOS menus
> 
> Of course someone in the 9900KS Maximus XI thread tested the Aorus Xtreme and saw the 300 khz "feature" work in that board also...(Not surprising since it's an IR 35201 board too).


Consider Gigabyte was pretty much my last choice. I had to get a new MB because when I went to add more memory to my Asus Code X, I found a dead DIMM slot. 
extreme is e-atx (why? only 4 dimm slots) and I don't need thunderbolt (which is most of the additional cost I reckon)
master has what I need


----------



## lucasfrance

Falkentyne said:


> You didn't look at the Gigagbyte Aorus Xtreme? (8 phases doubled to 16 and a few more Bios options, like Ring voltage, direct VID voltage, and that "missing" adaptive voltage setting finally.
> Then again, I can't confirm that the Xtreme has those extra Bios options. I saw them in the Xtreme Waterforce 5G, but I do not know if the regular Xtreme has them. AMIBCP 5.02.0031 won't show the BIOS menus
> 
> Of course someone in the 9900KS Maximus XI thread tested the Aorus Xtreme and saw the 300 khz "feature" work in that board also...(Not surprising since it's an IR 35201 board too).


Xtreme Z390/9900KS/Bios F8 here : I do not see the mentioned options in the Bios (Ring voltage, direct VID voltage, and that "missing" adaptive voltage setting). Where should they be ???


----------



## Falkentyne

lucasfrance said:


> Xtreme Z390/9900KS/Bios F8 here : I do not see the mentioned options in the Bios (Ring voltage, direct VID voltage, and that "missing" adaptive voltage setting). Where should they be ???


CPU Internal Voltage=VID direct voltage.
Ring voltage=idk what it does.
Adaptive voltage=idk what it does.

Your BIOS doesn't have these options?

That means only the Xtreme 5G Waterforce has them...
*edit*

I found the BIOS screenshots.

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/cph0xq/i_need_help_asap_bios_settings/

That product segmentation....yikes...


----------



## Lurifaks

When you talk about switching to 300khz , you do this with both options , or just one ?


----------



## Falkentyne

Lurifaks said:


> When you talk about switching to 300khz , you do this with both options , or just one ?


I used both. Might as well.


----------



## kamyk155

One more problem - BSOD with information about bad closing the system and he cant find winload.efi. He sugested go to bios or try again or repair system.
I saw this two times - yesterday and this morning after turning on computer.
After pressing reset - system loads normally.
Is this from too low Vcore or VCCSA or System Agent ?

PS my samsung 950 Pro isn't visible in bios from first day. Even in m.2 slot - n/a.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

I must admit that playing with AC / DC Loadline values manually instead of 1 - 1 gives me more fine tuning abilities ... Running 5.0 / 4.7 atm at CPU Internal AC / DC Loadline = 40 / 40 with a Vcore loadline = Low


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Your load voltage required to be stable doesn't change though when deviating from acdc 1-1. I tested this by trying ALL the settings. No matter what, my 9900k requires the same load voltages to be stable for avx/non-avx loads at 5ghz ht on, 5.1ghz ht on, 5.2ghz ht off, 5.3ghz ht off(didn't bother testing 5.0/5.1 ht off) regardless of acdc loadlines whether manual or preset and LLC. 5.2ghz ht on and 5.3ghz ht on are just not feasible for this chip, cache errors no matter what settings I use after benching(yes I even matched the vid too by trying turbo llc + static voltage + acdc 1/1 + windows maximum and then also replicating the same voltage numbers with dvid mode. errors no matter what, yes I tried increasing vccio all the way, no xmp, xmp, manual ram, everything. It's a turd chip).
> 
> 
> *So when you say "fine tuning capabilities", please tell me these EXTRA capabilities. What are you capable of doing now with low llc that you weren't capable of doing before with medium llc or higher for daily use?*


When you manually enter ac / dc loadline values you can lower your load voltage for example to the exact needed voltage, as to where you use a 1 - 1 setting with an offset for example and medium llc as an example would get you close to the needed voltage but with a margin imho ... I could be wrong tho 

Just as an example:
set 40 / 40 results in 1.248V load
set 38 / 38 results in 1.242V load

Just more on point imho


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Ok so instead of regular bios voltage 5mv increments you are tuning at 3mv increments? am I perceiving this correctly?


Yes that is what I'm trying to say ...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

What load vr out is 5.1 stable at?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Ok tested this:
> acdc 40/40
> llc low
> +140mv dvid offset
> all c-states enabled + ring to core enabled
> 5.2ghz cores, cache operates at 49
> 1.25v sa/io
> cl15/4000 ram
> 1.5vdimm
> 
> load voltage in cpu-z benchmark was 1.4v, no good.
> 
> I then rebooted with +100mv instead of +140mv. Load voltage in cpu-z benchmark was 1.359v. Vid request was 1.357v. Temps 81c-82c
> 
> About to try cinebench.


You should reduce that uncore until you get 5.2 stable. At 4.9 it is increasing the required vcore.

Just temporarily set it to 44 until you get 5.2 stable. Then work it back up.

I would also drop the ram back until core is stable. What the memory controller can do at 5.1ghz may not be the same as 5.2ghz.

Getting 5.2ghz OC on the core might just require starting over and only Oc'ing the core until you find stability.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Right, but if the chip still isn't stable at the requested vid, What difference does this make? Even if I match the vid under load and even add a little extra voltage, it still isn't stable at 5.2ghz. Am i missing something? Sorry, maybe i'm being too self centered and thinking this was supposed to help me or something. Still pulling my hair out trying to get 5.2ghz stable. Gonna go drink some soco and have a cig. Sorry if I come off snappy or like a douche, just been mad frustrated trying to stabilize 5.2ghz, Definitely not intentional. Thank you for sharing this information though and putting out there, better to have it out there than not.


No problem and you understood what I tried to achieve ... Just trying to put information in here that people can use.
Maybe it helps somebody ... maybe it doesn't ... it's just another way to deliver voltage to a cpu (if I describe this in the correct way).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Absolutely, again i'm sorry.


Really ... no need for an apology. Didn't take it the wrong way so all is good.

(btw, for my 5.1 / 4.7 - 4.8 setting I needed Vcore loadline = medium to get better results using AC / DC 74 / 74)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> 2 cache errors popped up right after that screenshot. going to reboot with cache at 44 like you suggested.


Check my edited comment ... ac / dc 74 with medium loadline for 5.1 on my cpu


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> lower uncore always resulted in runs not even completing in the past, like even if I turn off ring to core and set cache to auto or 43 or 44 or even 46 or 47, the run wouldn't complete. I'll try it again though right now to see if it still behaves that way.


Try setting ram to jedec spec 2100 or 2666mhz at the same time.

Need to go about this like tuning ram. Oc only one thing at a time. 

I know you been working at this for a while. I'm just offering what I would do.

You are so close. I really think if you can only oc core it will pass. Then you will need to re validate memory and uncore.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

Post hwinfo64 results. You are running cinebench? R15?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> I rebooted with ram at 2133. sa/io on auto, vdimm on auto. cache 44, ring to core disabled. The run would not complete. How much sa/io do i need to feed this thing?


With ram at auto non xmp you can set those back to auto. 

I think we have proven it will require more load voltage. You have taken cache and ram out of the equation. 

Can you adjust for +.02v more vrvout at load?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

20mv is what I would try. Hitting 90c in cinebench is not ideal.

I think you can get cinebench stable but this not a profile I would run 24/7.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> If i can stabilize it to never ever spit cache errors i might as well run it 24/7. Heh and now cinebench doesn't complete again. See this chip? It behaves like a ******.


You tried manual vcore with turbo llc?

I never tried booting 4.2 on adaptive offset. About to see if I can.

My 5.1ghz needs 1.34-1.36v. Is that close to your 5.1?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

Here is my 5.2ghz cinebench run for comparison of the hwinfo64 voltages. 

Not certain how stable this is. Gonna run some x264 right now. I never even attempted 5.2 before.

Edit : try real-time priorty while it runs cinebench.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

It failed immediately in x264. Got bsod. So I'm not remotely close to stable there.

Don't feel bad man. There are a lot of 9900k out there that can't even hit 5ghz all core.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Ay i think i'm done here. Tired of seeing everyone's chips do substantially better than mine. I feel like I got ripped off.


What cooling u use, and is it 5.3 you try to get stable ?


----------



## kamyk155

Today I tried to lower volatage on CPU.
From 1,30V to 1,285V. + VCCIO and Agent 1,28V. In sensors it's droping some more than in previous 1,3V.
1,285V in bios and in sensors 1,282 droping to 1,272V. Teamps are much better low 70*C on cores.
Half hour of LinX with 28GB RAM used, Prime95 without AVXs and Intel Burn Test V2 without problems.
After that I checked Cinebench 11,5 + 15 + 15 Extreme and three games - one round in BFV and one round in Modern Warfare and about 20min in The Division 2.
Still stable. Now checking 1,28V plus VCCIO and System Agent in 1,28V too.

Still worried about that BSOD in the morning with winload.efi.
Ano infos about that BSOD ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> load voltage during cbr15 run during 51 all core turbo


Your 5.1 is beating my shoddy 5.2 cinebench run.



Is cache at 5.1 or 4.8? It looks like it's boosting to 5.1.

I did manage to break into the top ten on unigine superposition 720p low.

I'm at 9th place 
https://benchmark.unigine.com/leaderboards/superposition/1.x/720p-low/single-gpu/page-1


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> O **** never mind, I didn't realize you had to actually buy the software to race/post in leaderboards /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif.


Yea it's dumb. I got it for $5 a long time ago. Don't pay $20 for it.

Still interested in your scores though. 🙂


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> .7 out of 1.2GB. Should I leave hwinfo64 on minimized in the background or should I exit it before starting the benchmark?


I leave it running.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Here is the run using direct x.
> Using turbo per core OC
> 51x 6-8 cores
> 52x 4-5 cores
> 53c 3 cores
> 54x 1-2 cores


That would have took 12th. Not bad at all. My score is 39192 @ 5.2ghz 4.6 cache 3800mhz CL 15. 2075mhz 1080ti

You will smoke me at any other res of the test. 1080p medium/high/extreme are all gpu bound.

Edit. It was at 5.2. I scored 37441 5.1ghz. The runs dated today were 5.2. Then there are 5.1,5.0 and my old 4790k in the image.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky check my edits above.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> gotcha so that was at 5.2ghz. Mind linking me to your 5.1ghz run details? i'm curious what the minimum fps is during the test. currently questioning my ram overclock.


Min fps looks in order. That's the 0.1% low.

You have the cpu and ram running very well with that score. You would have placed top 12 without even fully optimizing for the test.

Think about it. There are hundreds of entries.

My highest 5.1ghz score below with my current ram oc.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Do i even dare trying this?


I say why not? You could actually raise voltage to pass that if you get error or it crashes.

Its not gonna heat up the cpu like cinebench did.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

I kinda gave up on trying to OC using offsets.
My PC keeps resetting randomly under light load even though I managed to increase the lowest perceivable vCore from 0.590v to 0.760v. By playing with the AC loadline, I managed to use a positive DVID offset of 0.070v while keeping my load VR VOUT at 1.29v, and although that's stable under load, it's not at idle.

Having wasted 2 days on different LLC, AC/DC and DVID combinations, I just fired up my OC with what seems to be the most popular option here, static voltage.

With a BIOS setting of 1.300v and turbo LLC, I drop from an average of 1.293v at idle to 1.238v under load. This is excessive as I need around 1.28v to be stable at 5GHz based on my current partial testing.

In order to get my load voltage up to 1.275v (currently being tested in P95), I need to set my BIOS vCore to 1.320v. This also means that at idle, I'll be a little over 1.3v VR VOUT. Is this how people are overclocking their 9900k on this motherboard? Temperatures are not an issue, my load average is currently 68C in P95 128K in-place AVX/FMA3.

Thanks!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Maybe i'll just settle for this. This is the best thing I can possibly run since 5.2ghz isn't stable
> 
> Per core OC
> 6-8cores 51x
> 4-5 cores 52 x
> 3 cores 53 x
> 1-2 cores 54 x


Interesting  , can u show me how to run per core OC like this?

Regards


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> BTW, most people are using the f10 bios, i'm one of the only people around I see still using f9 on the aorus z390 master.


My motherboard came with the F9 BIOS, first thing I did was flash F10. I then realized how buggy it was and that a few settings were missing from screenshots and videos I'd seen online, so I flashed F9 back.

Correction to my previous post, I had to set the vCore to 1.330v which the BIOS reports as 1.320v and the VR OUT under load reads ~ 1.275v.

Unfortunately, I just got a 0x3b BSOD after about 40 minutes into my P95 128K AVX test, possibly because the voltage occasionally dropped to 1.256 which I know is unstable.

I just increased the BIOS vCore to 1.340v which the BIOS reports as 1.330v. Idle VR OUT is an average of 1.334v.

My current load VR OUT is about 1.282v which is likely to be stable. I don't expect it to have momentary drops lower than 1.266v and so far, it hasn't dropped below 1.275v.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> yes, I should do a guide at some point because I want internet glory, no joke lol. I watch all these youtubers and pro overclockers do all this stuff and its so cool. i'm inspired and I want the glory too
> 
> I actually feel like I have something good enough to offer/share so I'll make a video guide. I'm not a pro at video editing or anything like that so don't expect great production quality or anything.


 

Keep going


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

Nah, these days a lot of people are moving away from P95 and at the very least, AVX P95. It's mainly because it drives the temperatures through the roof for people with air cooling and even AIO loops. When temperatures increase, the CPU might become unstable just because of that which limits the stable OC potential. However because I have my temperatures under good control (~70C), being P95 AVX stable pretty much guarantees that no load would crash my system or cause errors.

I'm old school though, I've been overclocking for the past 15 years with Prime95 and it's always been a reliable indicator of stability.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Keep going as in? I'm not going up to LN2 if that's what you are hinting at. I'm poor, I can't afford to buy hardware just to XOC. If I was wealthy, I would do it. But then again, if I was wealthy, i'd probably be spending my time doing other things than OCing. I'm the type of person that likes to go all in, i'd want to have at least a full ln2 tank at all times at my disposal.


As in making the video or something so i can learn per core


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> BTW, most people are using the f10 bios, i'm one of the only people around I see still using f9 on the aorus z390 master.


F9 here.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Ah, yeah i'll do it. I'm just afraid that someone is gonna be like "ThIs ISn'T p95 StaBlE dErP" and try to discredit me and then try to take my work and make it their own( but like i mentioned earlier, i don't use p95 for stability testing for a gaming machine). The first person to make the video on this method of OC will get all the glory and gigabyte will sell more motherboards because of it unless there are other motherboards with the same exact feature.
> 
> I honestly don't want people making money off my work, I want the money. I spend 8 hours a day every single day ocing for the last 3-4 months learning everything I can learn about this bios and my chip. I'll be the one who takes home a pay check first.


If this is something i can set in bios, i just need a printscreen of the bios setting, u don`t have to make a video, it was your suggestion in the first place


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

No worry, i just seek the information elsewhere


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> @Emmanuel That is one method of OCing on it yes, Your chip is a silicon lottery binned 5.0ghz 9900K avx offset/2 that does non-avx stable loads at 1.3v static voltage in bios turbo llc. You need the 1.32v or 1.325v static voltage in bios w/ turbo llc to be avx stable. Many people oc this way. It's the fastest OC possible.
> 
> I guess this means my chip is also technically a 5ghz silicon lottery binned quality 9900k then too if I have the same voltage requirements for 5ghz? Or am I wrong completely that it isn't a 5ghz silicon lottery binned quality chip?
> 
> 
> You can also overclock via auto voltage manually tuning acdc loadlines or via dvid offset mode. Both of these options are for fluctuating voltage but auto voltage has never been good for me, I think it is suboptimal compared to dvid mode. It's much harder to OC this way and takes lots of time to tune.
> 
> 
> but yeah, a lot of people OC with static voltage and a lot of people tune with acdc loadlines or dvid mode.
> 
> Also, are you using c-states at all when you were tuning fluctuating voltage?


Silicon Lottery: 35% of chips can do 5 ghz, LLC Turbo, 1.30v Bios set, AVX offset of -2. (This was 49% at the end of 2018, dropping to 43% by February).
7% of chips can do 5.1 ghz, Bios set 1.312v, AVX offset -2, LLC Turbo. I believe this was 13% in december 2018.
The 2% 5.2 ghz $999 dollar 9900k bin was removed.

Now the 5.3 ghz 9900KS bin for $1299 was removed now it's the 5.2 ghz 9900KS bin for $1299. All use AVX offset -2.

Your chip is a silicon lottery winner, not a loser. It's just not a KS tier winner.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> My motherboard came with the F9 BIOS, first thing I did was flash F10. I then realized how buggy it was and that a few settings were missing from screenshots and videos I'd seen online, so I flashed F9 back.
> 
> Correction to my previous post, I had to set the vCore to 1.330v which the BIOS reports as 1.320v and the VR OUT under load reads ~ 1.275v.
> 
> Unfortunately, I just got a 0x3b BSOD after about 40 minutes into my P95 128K AVX test, possibly because the voltage occasionally dropped to 1.256 which I know is unstable.
> 
> I just increased the BIOS vCore to 1.340v which the BIOS reports as 1.330v. Idle VR OUT is an average of 1.334v.
> 
> My current load VR OUT is about 1.282v which is likely to be stable. I don't expect it to have momentary drops lower than 1.266v and so far, it hasn't dropped below 1.275v.


Please set CPU VRM and VAXG switching frequencies to 300 khz and re-do the 128k prime95 tests before giving up and raising the vcore. Also make sure your VCCIO is at least 1.15v.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> i'll never understand why people spend the extra money on a binned 9900KS. Like you can get 2 9900KS chips brand new for less than the price of a single low voltage 5.2ghz binned KS, Crank the voltage all the way up to hit 5.2ghz and ride it till it degrades and then have a second 9900KS to do the same thing with and you'll get the same lifespan total for less money total than if you went with a single SL binned low voltage 5.2ghz 9900KS. Who are these idiots throwing away money, Stop creating a secondary market business model that screws with the available supply of retailer sold chips through mass market buyouts.


Economies of scale.
If you made $500,000 a year, would you think twice about buying a $1299 SL KS chip?
Nope. You'd also grab some RTX Titans and a 50" 4k 120hz display because you wouldn't want to waste time playing the lotteries yourself.
Like the people who would buy a Ferrari to drive around instead of a Lexus.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> Please set CPU VRM and VAXG switching frequencies to 300 khz and re-do the 128k prime95 tests before giving up and raising the vcore. Also make sure your VCCIO is at least 1.15v.


Thanks. I was running my VCCIO at the stock 0.950v, I'm going to try 1.170v to see if it eliminates my WHEA cache errors. I didn't think VAXG settings would matter as I am not using the integrated GPU.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

No problem. 

Definitely nothing wrong with your 9900k + 2080ti. 🙂


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Hey I got a very serious question. I was thinking of sending my chip to silicon lottery to be delidded/binned.
> 
> I have no way to tell if I'm getting my same chip back that I sent them since the same IHS can be put back on top of ANY 9900k r0 chip. What if they bin my chip, it ends up being better than I think it is And what if they then decide they want to keep it? They could then claim that the processor was damaged during delidding and that they are replacing it with another one as per their successful delidding promise giving me a lesser chip. And I would never be able to prove it. Is there a way to tell if you received the same chip back that you sent them for delidding?
> 
> 
> Let's be clear, I am not questioning silicon lottery's integrity here, But I am pointing out that there is a very obvious and abusable loophole in their service that would allow them to steal people's good chips while cycling out crappier chips without customers ever being able to prove it. I like to prevent myself from getting scammed because i've been scammed in the past and this is a very obvious loophole that can be abused to scam people.


Just buy the delid tool and do it yourself if you wanna delid. It's not difficult. 

If you are not planning to go direct die I don't think delid is worth it.

Deliding might not get your 5.2ghz any more stable.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Thanks. I was running my VCCIO at the stock 0.950v, I'm going to try 1.170v to see if it eliminates my WHEA cache errors. I didn't think VAXG settings would matter as I am not using the integrated GPU.


0.950v VCCIO causes a massive increase of CPU Cache L0 errors on the prime95 29.8 b6, 112k in-place fixed FFT test with AVX disabled if hyperthreading is enabled.
The L3 cache (I don't know the workings of the IMC or how the IMC relates to hyperthreading) is very important for hyperthreaded stability.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Hey I got a very serious question. I was thinking of sending my chip to silicon lottery to be delidded/binned.
> 
> I have no way to tell if I'm getting my same chip back that I sent them since the same IHS can be put back on top of ANY 9900k r0 chip. What if they bin my chip, it ends up being better than I think it is And what if they then decide they want to keep it? They could then claim that the processor was damaged during delidding and that they are replacing it with another one as per their successful delidding promise giving me a lesser chip. And I would never be able to prove it. Is there a way to tell if you received the same chip back that you sent them for delidding?
> 
> 
> Let's be clear, I am not questioning silicon lottery's integrity here, But I am pointing out that there is a very obvious and abusable loophole in their service that would allow them to steal people's good chips while cycling out crappier chips without customers ever being able to prove it. I like to prevent myself from getting scammed because i've been scammed in the past and this is a very obvious loophole that can be abused to scam people. Is there any way at all to identify that the chip I send them is the same exact chip I receive back from them or am I automatically at risk of getting scammed if I opt to go with their service? Does the chip have some sort of serial number that I can view in windows?
> 
> EDIT:NEVERMIND, IT IS INDEED POSSIBLE TO VIEW YOUR CHIP'S SERIAL NUMBER IN WINDOWS USING COMMAND PROMPT. May send it to them after all.


You can buy the entire delid kit including the direct die frame for $35. This does not include the relid kit.
https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/co...ucts/9th-gen-direct-to-die-frame-kit-complete

The delid and relid kit is $39.
https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/collections/9th-gen-cpu/products/rockit-89-i9-9900k-delid-relid-kit
It does not include the quicksilver and flitz polish however..

Much better to just buy the kit instead of having SL do it for you. Rockitcool also guarantees their kit won't destroy your CPU.



reachthesky said:


> Could stock vccio be why my 5.2ghz with 4.3 cache with ht on be why the chip spits cache errors in cbr15?


Only one way to find out, right? 
I know on my chip, when VCCIO was 0.95v, I neeeded a *LOT* more vcore to stop L0's from happening in 112k prime95 AVX disabled in-place fixed FFT at 5 ghz.
You need to increase IO and SA however not just IO.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> 0.950v VCCIO causes a massive increase of CPU Cache L0 errors on the prime95 29.8 b6, 112k in-place fixed FFT test with AVX disabled if hyperthreading is enabled.
> The L3 cache (I don't know the workings of the IMC or how the IMC relates to hyperthreading) is very important for hyperthreaded stability.


I'm going to do more testing but it seems like increasing the VCCIO and VAXG PWM decreased my stability. I'm only running the cache at 43x at the moment.


Prime 95 128K in-place FMA3 test results.

With VAXG PWM normal rate and VCCIO at 0.950v, I got:
BIOS = 1.330v = BSOD after 40 minutes
BIOS = 1.340v = 1 cache error after 1H50

When I increased the VAXG PWM to 300KHz and VCCIO to 1.150v, I got:
BIOS = 1.330v = 1 cache error after 1 minute
BIOS = 1.340v = P95 error after 36 minutes

Unstable means unstable so it might just be a fluke. However, I don't think setting the VAXG PWM changes anything for CPU overclocks, especially when the VAXG voltage is 0.0v because the integrated GPU is disabled. Based on this limited sample, it appears that increasing the VCCIO at my current cache multiplier (43x) just creates instability.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> I'm going to do more testing but it seems like increasing the VCCIO and VAXG PWM decreased my stability. I'm only running the cache at 43x at the moment.
> 
> 
> Prime 95 128K in-place FMA3 test results.
> 
> With VAXG PWM normal rate and VCCIO at 0.950v, I got:
> BIOS = 1.330v = BSOD after 40 minutes
> BIOS = 1.340v = 1 cache error after 1H50
> 
> When I increased the VAXG PWM to 300KHz and VCCIO to 1.150v, I got:
> BIOS = 1.330v = 1 cache error after 1 minute
> BIOS = 1.340v = P95 error after 36 minutes
> 
> Unstable means unstable so it might just be a fluke. However, I don't think setting the VAXG PWM changes anything for CPU overclocks, especially when the VAXG voltage is 0.0v because the integrated GPU is disabled. Based on this limited sample, it appears that increasing the VCCIO at my current cache multiplier (43x) just creates instability.


Did you forget to change system agent voltage?
VCCSA should be higher than VCCIO. Usually its set 50mv higher (e.g. 1.150v IO, 1.20v SA).

Try that first.
Also, 300 khz is decreasing, not increasing.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> Did you forget to change system agent voltage?
> VCCSA should be higher than VCCIO. Usually its set 50mv higher (e.g. 1.150v IO, 1.20v SA).
> 
> Try that first.
> Also, 300 khz is decreasing, not increasing.


I thought 300KHz was up from "normal".

No I did not increase the SA, should I aim for BIOS values of 1.150v and 1.20v or HWinfo64 values?


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> I thought 300KHz was up from "normal".
> 
> No I did not increase the SA, should I aim for BIOS values of 1.150v and 1.20v or HWinfo64 values?


AFAIK, "Normal" and "Auto" are both 400 khz.
Yes, IO and SA voltages are related. 1.15 and 1.20v sound like a good start. On my sample if I go lower than 1.15v IO and 1.20v SA, the chances of marginal L0 errors increases.
If I overclock my RAM to 3600 mhz, I need 1.20 IO and 1.25v SA or games start randomly crashing to desktop (and the 256k-512K AVX disabled prime95 test errors out randomly like crazy on random threads).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I still have the urge to aim for 5.2ghz HT on so I can per core OC with 5.2-5.5ghz clockspeeds. Like, is there any hope left that 5.2ghz is doable or is it a fact that I cannot do 5.2ghz and that I should happily accept what I currently have. lol why do I always want more ><
> 
> Maybe i'll give it one last shot and disable the ram oc/xmp again.


Try 1.45v fixed voltage, HT Enabled, Bios set, LLC= High (not turbo), PWM switching frequency 300 khz.
This is the limit to what buildzoid recommended as a Bios voltage.

Be VERY careful of the DVID bug. If you re-enter BIOS and see 1.50+v on the sensors, you know you ran into it. Reboot a second time.

If you can complete multiple runs of CB R20 without L0 errors like this, then there's a chance.
If you can't, then it's best to just disable hyperthreading.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok, gonna give it another shot. What should I set the IO/SA at with the ram at 2133? 1.15 io and 1.2 sa? Should I start at 1.2 io and 1.25 sa? Auto sa/io wouldn't do anything. And should I set the cache to auto, 43 or a different multiplier or should I leave my ring to core enabled to get the 4.9 cache? nvm, just re-read the previous page. gonna start with 1.15/1.2 like you did.


Yeah that's what I did. I used x47 cache multiplier but cache is also part of the lottery. I gained no stability improvement going from x47 to x43.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok so I tried this:
> 
> cache on auto(sets it to 43 by default)
> 1.15 io
> 1.2 sa
> 2133 ram
> vdimm on auto
> 52 multiplier
> ring to core disabled
> acdc 1-1
> llc high
> bios voltage 1.45v
> switching frequency 300khz
> 
> 
> System service exception bsod
> 
> Increased io/sa by 50mv each
> 
> IRQL not less than or equal bsod
> 
> increase io/sa by 50mv each again
> 
> whea uncorrectiable error bsod
> 
> lowest I saw vrout go before the bsod happened was 1.33v during cbr 15, which i think I should need 1.34v for cbr15 since my chip scales every 50mv.
> 
> I guess the whea bsod indicates I still need more vcore, but 1.45v was the limit. I've already tried 1.44v with turbo llc as well awhile back, was a nogo.
> 
> I guess that's a wrap when it comes to 5.2ghz all core ht on right? I can do 5.2-5.5 ht off. I can do a flat all core 5.3 all core ht off. for HT on, 5.1ghz-5.4ghz turbo per core is as good as it gets, unless I tune the bus clock right? in theory a 101 bus clock would give me 5.15ghz-5.45ghz and a cache speed up to 5.15ghz. I need to run some TSbench for 4 threads on my 2c/4t multiplier to see if i have thermal room for anything higher than 5.40. I think i might actually need to delid/lap the IHS if I want to go higher than 5.40 on 2c/4t because if I recall correctly 5.40 got pretty hot as it was.


Yeah. Your chip wall for reasonable voltage is 5.1 ghz. A delid may get 5.2 ghz working.
You seem like you can do +200 mhz for 5.3 ghz with HT off on all cores.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> In regards to the delid, the IHS could use a lapping after a delid too. It dips inwards towards the center. Liquid metal won't even stay on the edges of the IHS, it just goes back towards the center of the IHS where the dip is and sort of sits in a puddle. Definitely needs to be lapped. If i send the chip to SL for delidding, I have to make sure I lap it after and not before because they won't work with previously modified processors. It would be nice if they could add a lapping option to their services offered.


Ow, that's a pretty bad IHS. Mine has LM under the IHS and on top of the IHS to the NH-D15 and is reasonably flat. (A Kyronaut X spread when I still used that spread evenly and accurately).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I can also boot up in turbo per core oc mode with one of the cores at 5.6ghz but obviously can't even complete a single core cb run with it. This was awhile back, can't remember if that was with ht on or ht off, pretty sure ht off. I can also boot 5.4ghz ht off but no benchmarks, insta bsod. 5.5ghz ht off will not boot, I think some of my cores are too weak or it just requires more than 1.52v
> 
> I have a feeling this would be a decent chip for XOC, nothing amazing though. Could probably get 6.5ghz-6.6ghz out of it under ln2 at crazy voltage. I think 9900k ln2 top records are around 7ghz nowadays and those scores more than likely probably require a KS quality binned cpu(aka top P0 bin or the rare oddball 1.279 5.1ghz R0 bin that runs hotter than the 1.315v 5.1ghz p0 bin). I don't know a damn thing about XOC though, just kind of basing the numbers off the way i've seen the different chips scale.
> 
> Anywho, I really appreciate you taking the time to guide me through this process.
> 
> I have a question(like always, lol). If i recall correctly awhile back I read somewhere that higher levels of LLC + dvid mode or auto voltage mode + acdc-1/1 has weird crashing problems at idle or low load browsing. At what level llc does this usually happen? medium? high?


I don't know because I don't use offset voltage. But I remember the lower the DVID offset, the higher the chance that will happen. And it only happens with c-states enabled obviously.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> I have a question(like always, lol). If i recall correctly awhile back I read somewhere that higher levels of LLC + dvid mode or auto voltage mode + acdc-1/1 has weird crashing problems at idle or low load browsing. At what level llc does this usually happen? medium? high?


I cannot answer for those exact settings but power save ac loadline with low llc and a positive offset does not have any type of low load / idle crashes. 

I been running that on both our gaming rigs both Z390 aorus pro's, one 9900k other 9900kf for over 8 months.

I think that issue mostly happens when running a negative offset.


----------



## AndrejB

Something maybe interesting I found, too low vccsa/vccio voltages cause gpu instability. Even if stable (equal residuals) in Linx...

In my case I was running, 1.15v for both io/sa and as soon as I would move the power limits on my gpu (300 > 360w) I would start getting crashes.

Going to 1.2v io/sa seems to have fixed it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

AndrejB said:


> Something maybe interesting I found, too low vccsa/vccio voltages cause gpu instability. Even if stable (equal residuals) in Linx...
> 
> In my case I was running, 1.15v for both io/sa and as soon as I would move the power limits on my gpu (300 > 360w) I would start getting crashes.
> 
> Going to 1.2v io/sa seems to have fixed it.


Got the same thing when i flashed the 380w galax bios and 360 matrix bios to my card the error was "Video Scheduler Internal Error " fixed it the same way


----------



## AndrejB

Let me know what you guys think of the below settings. Anything you would change?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> I was always under the impression we were supposed to boot with xmp profile, then modify the timings/frequency of the xmp profile after xmp has already been trained. Have I been doing this wrong?
> 
> still looking at your settings before I can give you a definitive opinion.
> 
> Ok, after looking at the settings, I can't really say whether it is optimal or not, I don't tune with anything other than dvid mode or the basic set it and forget it fixed voltage mode. I'm not too great at balancing the higher acdc settings. Am curious about the ram thing I mentioned earlier.
> 
> I am curious though, Why not just run stock if you were going to run 47x? You'll get more performance in other areas while still having your 47x all core multiplier.


These are more or less stock settings, but running a constant frequency.
Don't like my voltage jumping all over the place.
If I go by Falkentynes recommendation of ac/dc 100/160 I get an unequal residual every once in a while, these settings provide equal residuals after 16+ h powered off.

Regarding the memory, this seems to be completely stable, I copied how Kedarwolf did it (same kit as yours)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are more or less stock settings, but running a constant frequency.
> Don't like my voltage jumping all over the place.
> If I go by Falkentynes recommendation of ac/dc 100/160 I get an unequal residual every once in a while, these settings provide equal residuals after 16+ h powered off.
> 
> Regarding the memory, this seems to be completely stable, I copied how Kedarwolf did it (same kit as yours)
> 
> 
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> I'll have to try out kedarwolf's method, I never tried that before. I wonder if it will yield better latency or if RTLs will train better or w/e. Right now i'm getting 38.x ns latency at cl15/4000, i don't know if that is where it should be or not.
> 
> Yeah I guess I can't really offer much advice on your set up, just kind of out of my realm of knowledge, sorry mate.
Click to expand...

Nw, hopefully you'll yield better results with the memory but note Kedarwolf had all his timings set (he spent quite a bit of time on the 24/7 stability thread)

Honestly I'm pretty happy with these, Apex finally isn't crashing at max pl + oc scanner (I knew it wasn't the card giving errors)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> btw, on the aorus master with a 9900k, you can do CL 16-16-16-36(or 34)-372-65534-2T @4133mhz with 1.45v vdimm/training voltage or less and with 1.25v sa/io or less with that kit as long as your IMC is decent and as long as you have enough case airflow for the dimms.
> 
> 
> Please do me a favor since you have the same kit. Please try to train 4200mhz with those dimms using auto motherboard timings. What timings does it give you? You should be able to train it with dram voltage on auto and sa/io 1.25v but once it trains, go back into bios right away and raise the dram/training voltage to 1.4v or 1.43v to get into windows. Then please screenshot the timings in asrock timing configurator and post here. Let me know if you need asrock timing configurator.



Didn't need 1.4v to boot into windows. This is XMP + 4200
Also put the 4133 @ 1.4v (enhanced performance)



Now you got my itch going again


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> And was that starcraft or starcraft 2 in the background? lol


Nah just a space wallpaper 🙂

Regarding the memory tuning, that'll have to wait sometime as I nothing about it.

Still trying to figure out how much io/sa affect gpu oc...


----------



## kamyk155

Guys - is the Vcore/VCCSA/SysAgent all three in 1,28V safe ?
Someone wrote here that SA/VCCIO should be 0,05V difference ?

Testing now 1,260V on all three settings.
Cpu drops to 1,248V. IO drops to 1,243V.
Three tests passed without errors.


----------



## Wirerat

kamyk155 said:


> Guys - is the Vcore/VCCSA/SysAgent all three in 1,28V safe ?
> Someone wrote here that SA/VCCIO should be 0,05V difference ?
> 
> Testing now 1,260V on all three settings.
> Cpu drops to 1,248V. IO drops to 1,243V.
> Three tests passed without errors.


I have always ran vccio and sa at the same voltage. 1.225 is what both mine are with 3800mhz CL 15 ram.

The general idea is xmp/mce puts those voltages too high. 1.35v is way too high.

1.25v ish is fine. Some are running below 1.2v.

I never even bothered to work it down. 1.225v has worked so I left it for all my profiles on both rigs.


----------



## BradleyW

I have an issue with the F9 BIOS on the Z390 Ultra.
I am unable to set a value higher than 9999 for the memory tREFI. Anything above 9999 sets it to 65000. I require a value of 15600.
Thank you.


----------



## Wirerat

BradleyW said:


> I have an issue with the F9 BIOS on the Z390 Ultra.
> I am unable to set a value higher than 9999 for the memory tREFI. Anything above 9999 sets it to 65000. I require a value of 15600.
> Thank you.


This is a known issue. I reported it to gigabyte. They released F12b for aorus pro. It still has the issue but 65534 is at least stable on beta bios.

If you are using bdie 65000 could be stable at 1.45-1.5v.


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> This is a known issue. I reported it to gigabyte. They released F12b for aorus pro. It still has the issue but 65534 is at least stable on beta bios.
> 
> If you are using bdie 65000 could be stable at 1.45-1.5v.


Thank you for the information.

My tREFI is set to 15,087 by the system when XMP is disabled. With XMP enabled, the system will set tREFI to 15,600. 

However, I can't use XMP because regardless of what adjustments I make to the VCCIO/SA/vDIMM and timings, the system is always unable at any RAM speed.


----------



## Wirerat

BradleyW said:


> Thank you for the information.
> 
> My tREFI is set to 15,087 by the system when XMP is disabled. With XMP enabled, the system will set tREFI to 15,600.
> 
> However, I can't use XMP because regardless of what adjustments I make to the VCCIO/SA/vDIMM and timings, the system is always unable at any RAM speed.


Well, if you are not stable at 65000 trefi then there are only a couple of options.

1. Run trefi at 9999 - not optimal since this will reduce ram performance.

2. Roll back the bios to previous that doesn't have the trefi bug. - this will be probably be the old UI bios.

I would just roll back the bios.


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> Well, if you are not stable at 65000 trefi then there are only a couple of options.
> 
> 1. Run trefi at 9999 - not optimal since this will reduce ram performance.
> 
> 2. Roll back the bios to previous that doesn't have the trefi bug. - this will be probably be the old UI bios.
> 
> I would just roll back the bios.


The tREFI is set correctly when I set the RAM to 4000MHz, but I can't achieve 4000Mhz at all, so I have to run the RAM at 3866MHz, which lowers tREFI sadly. I may have to revert to an older BIOS as you suggested.

I wish I could hit 4000MHz on the RAM but unfortunately, regardless of what I try, it is just not stable. 3866MHz is my maximum, even though the RAM is rated at 4000Mhz. Must be my CPU's memory controller reaching it's limit. It is very sensitive the VCCIO/SA changes too. Anything above 1.22v on either is completely unstable. 

Also, as stated above, XMP does not work on my system. Every speed is unstable with XMP on. Terrible!


----------



## EpicSurvivor

Hello. I am having a weird problem with my Z390 PRO and RGB Fusion 2.0. When I change LED_C2 the LED_C1 changes with it. I can't pick separate colors of each to C2 and C1 they both sync. Is this normal or is there a work around? Gigabyte AORUS PRO.

Thanks


----------



## kamyk155

Another great problem - third time in three days.

BSOD at startup of computer. After power on and Aorus logo - BSOD of restore system.
Code - 0xc0000225
Damaged or missing file - winload.efi

Most interesting is - he give me a choice to repair using installation ubs/dvd, go to bios or try start again BUT.......I just can press reset and he is again fully working.

What is going on ? It is all about voltages or what ? PS As I told before - bios didn't see my m.2 ssd - empty slot and windows boot loader info without name of the disk list.


----------



## Emmanuel

What's the recommended app these days to display all RAM timings and subtimings? I remember seeing an app made by Asrock or something.


----------



## EpicSurvivor

BUMP to my question above I know there's a lot of people on this thread but if someone could clarify please.


----------



## Emmanuel

BradleyW said:


> The tREFI is set correctly when I set the RAM to 4000MHz, but I can't achieve 4000Mhz at all, so I have to run the RAM at 3866MHz, which lowers tREFI sadly. I may have to revert to an older BIOS as you suggested.
> 
> I wish I could hit 4000MHz on the RAM but unfortunately, regardless of what I try, it is just not stable. 3866MHz is my maximum, even though the RAM is rated at 4000Mhz. Must be my CPU's memory controller reaching it's limit. It is very sensitive the VCCIO/SA changes too. Anything above 1.22v on either is completely unstable.
> 
> Also, as stated above, XMP does not work on my system. Every speed is unstable with XMP on. Terrible!


I'm on F9 also and using RAM that is not on the QVL list, but I got a great deal for them. My RAM is rated for 4266MHz 19-19-19-39 at 1.40v

I had to bump my VCCIO and VCCSA to 1.35v, and drop the RAM to 4000MHz (with slightly tighter timings: 17-17-17-37) to become stable; I'm still stability testing though. XMP seems to make the computer unstable so I dial in the frequency and primary timings.


----------



## Wirerat

EpicSurvivor said:


> BUMP to my question above I know there's a lot of people on this thread but if someone could clarify please.


The two 12v rgb ports are always synced. The digital 5v ports are synced together as well.

I was equally disappointed by this. I eventually bought a $10 controller to get around it.



Emmanuel said:


> What's the recommended app these days to display all RAM timings and subtimings? I remember seeing an app made by Asrock or something.


ASRock timings configurator

https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/X299 OC Formula/index.asp#Download  

You have to download it from the official asrck mobo site. It works on all boards.



kamyk155 said:


> BSOD at startup of computer. After power on and Aorus logo - BSOD of restore system.
> Code - 0xc0000225
> Damaged or missing file - winload.efi
> What is going on ? It is all about voltages or what ? PS As I told before - bios didn't see my m.2 ssd - empty slot and windows boot loader info without name of the disk list.


I assume you eventually can get into windows? If not you may have to reinstall. 

If you get into windows open cmd prompt and type Sfc /scannow 

Allow the process to finish. It might be able to correct the error files.

If it ends with unable to repair then you will have to reinstall. You can reinstall from inside windows without formatting and you won't loose any files.

A dying hardrive, faulty memory stick or unstable memory overclock all can be what caused this. Make sure to test memory oc's properly.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

EpicSurvivor said:


> BUMP to my question above I know there's a lot of people on this thread but if someone could clarify please.


Asrock timing configuration or Asus Memtweakit. Personally I prefer the organization iof the latter. 

Assock: http://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/X299 OC Formula/index.asp#osW1064

Asus (in the utilities section downloads): https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-CODE/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Enabled xmp with the same io/sa values, crash.
> 
> rebooted with +50mv on each, 1.30v
> 
> completed no errors again. ok, i think i'm making progress finally.


Thats nice. Congrats. 

From what I see that profile can never be more than a benchmark profile. 

There is noway you can properly stress test if you are hitting 95c in cinebench.

Even cooler stress tests like x264 are way hotter than cinebench.


Do you have vr loop 1 and vr out hidden? Need to watch both of those in hwinfo64.


----------



## Emmanuel

Thanks guys!
I was reading that this board has bugs setting the subtimings sometimes. Does anything look out of the ordinary here or should be manually adjusted?

I only set the primary timings manually, the rest is determined by the motherboard's "enhanced performance" preset.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky you should be able to get 3rd for sure.

If you run the base clock up 25-50mhz you will probably take 3rd.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> ty ty,
> ya it's way too hot. vcore readout=vrout renamed as vcore. vr loop 1 is hidden, what is vr loop 1? I ended up turning off hyperthreading and bumped up to 5.3ghz all core 5.0 ghz cache at the same voltage. Much less heat/amp draw.


According to the IR 35201 spec sheet, VR Loop 1 is the first VR phase group and VR Loop2 is the second group.

It talks about the VR config being in possibilities of 6+2, 7+1, 8+0, and other configurations, where the front part is CPU and second part is iGPU.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> @reachthesky you should be able to get 3rd for sure.
> 
> That 1st place is probably on phase-change, dice or ln2.
> 
> I never tried disabling two cores and running it. If 1st place is on 8700k then it must not hold anything back.
> 
> 
> 
> 1st and 2nd are using 4400 ram. I can definitely get 3rd though if I go CL 15 4133 @1.55v vdimm
Click to expand...

Just raise base clock a few digits. It will slightly oc core/ram/cache 25mhz won't hurt for a bench run.

Set base clock to 102 or 103 and run again.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just raise base clock a few digits. It will slightly oc core/ram/cache 25mhz won't hurt for a bench run.
> 
> Set base clock to 102 or 103 and run again.
> 
> 
> 
> I might just boot 5.4ghz ht off and try to bench.
Click to expand...

Don't hide Vrloop1. That's your VRM temps. Important to avoid throttling and or shutdown. 

When doing benchmark and stress test runs you should definitely unhide those.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Happen to have a ballpark of how hot it is allowed to get?


The datasheet is here.

https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infin...N.pdf?fileId=5546d462576f347501579c95d19772b5


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> 3rd place /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif 5.3ghz ht off cl15/4133. 1st and 2nd place, I wonder what their cpu frequency/cooling is. 2nd place must be 5.4ghz for sure, maybe a little bus clock oc as well. Maybe I should try 5.4g again but with 1.35v sa/io. Will 5.4ghz cores 5.1ghz cache be enough to take 2nd place?



There is a trick for getting crazy high ram oc. Go into msconfig and disable all the ram except 2500mb. Maybe allow a bit more for the benchmark. Seen buildzoid do this and get 4600mhz CL 12 or something insane like that.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Btw, Thank you Wirerat and Falkentyne for your training. I could not achieve this type of result without your guidances.


Still disappointed? Lol

It's np man.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Karlovsky120

Hi!
I need to pick out a board for 9900KS build and I've (kinda) gotten in down to Aorus Master and Asrock Phantom gaming 9. I might bump it to Phantom gaming X if I find that the extra two phases significantly improve the CPU overclock potential, but I'd like to stay around Aorus Master price.
I already have my ram, F4-3200CL14D-32GVK. It should be b-die, but unfortunately it's not on the QVL on any of the two boards. I had a limited choice.

I like Master because of the high quality VRMs, but I dislike the fact that it's a T-topology board since my kit only has two sticks. I also dislike the fact that it has Gigabyte BIOS, I've heard some really bad things about it. Is it just badly designed, or does it malfunction as well? 

On the other hand, Phantom gaming 9 doesn't have as good VRMs, but it's a daisy chain board and it has an Asrock BIOS which should be a lot better than the Gigabyte one (I have Z97 Extreme4 and I quite like it).

I'm looking to get the most enjoyable gaming performance by getting the most out of the CPU and the memory. Memory overclock will, for the most part, improve the minimum frame times, while overclocking the processor will increase the average framerate. If my assumptions are right, I'm slightly more inclined to choose Asrock board over the Gigabyte, especially since I play on a 5120x1440 screen using a 2080Ti, so my framerate might be limited by the GPU at that point anyway, pushing me further towards the Asrock board.

Then again, I might be completely wrong and there might be a better board for me altogether.

What say you?
Should I focus more on the memory or on the CPU? What board would get me the most out of it?

Thank you.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@Karlovsky120

The ASRock gaming X has the exact same vrm as the mid/low range aorus boards. 

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-z390-phantom-gaming-x/4.html

Exactly the same components as aorus ultra/elite/pro. 

The aorus master has a better cpu power delivery.

That said memory Oc'ing is possibly better on the gaming X.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Medvediy

If I use fixed voltage like 1.32 for 5ghz with high/turbo llc on Aorus Master for 9700k/9900k which else special functions in BIOS am I need to turn on?
I don't forget about memory, turning off MCE and so on. I mean only specials for voltage

1) CPU VRM and VAXG switching frequencies to 300 khz as said Falkentyne
2) ...?


----------



## kamyk155

About my BSOD - 0xc0000225, winload.efi.
Yesterday I googled a lot and found lots of problems with Aorus motherboards and Samsung 950 Pro.
People having problem simmilar to my first one - bios didn't see this ssd from beginning.
When I built this computer and installed windows 10 pro 1909 from prepared before USB (uefi boot and install), bios didn't see him but system did.
I installed system on fully empty disk. I deleted previous two partitions from disk and on all empty space I installed system.
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB was the only disk connected to mobo. Rest of SSD/HDD/DVD - after installation of the system.
After that I saw full list of all drives without Samsung - he's name on the list was windows boot drive. 
Now after googe-ing I changed in bios STORAGE BOOT OPTION to LEGACY and he is on the list and inside M.2 list of occupied slots in M2M.
Maybe samsung disappearing sometimes because of that ? I will try if that help with that missing boot file.
If not - what should I try in bios ? Voltages / functions ? Which one of the stability programs to check RAM should I use ? I checked before LinX with max ram available to test - 28GB - without errors.
My whole system is now stock 5GHz with 1,260V for CPU, 1,260V for VCCIO, 1,260V for System Agent and 1,36V for DDR (today I'm testing 1,37V). DDR4 4000MHz 19-19-19-39-700-2T.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> Adjust trfc and trefi. Aim for around 320-360 on trfc if you can. Take trefi as high as it will go.


Thanks, will do and I'll report back


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

@reachthesky how do you set your memories?

Interested in the IOT values because it seems that some of the timings change between reboots.


----------



## Karlovsky120

reachthesky said:


> Memory OC with 2 dimms on aorus master will be 3600 MAYBE 3800 if I recall correctly. If you use 4 dimms, you can reach at least 4133mhz if they are good dimms. As usual, your chip's IMC will always play a role here. My IMC is good, it can hit cl15/4133 for daily use. A great IMC will do the full 4400 at cl16 *i think*.
> CPU OC depends on the chip. there are 4 different methods of OC on this board for 9900k, Classic static voltage, auto voltage ac/dc tuning, dvid offset mode and turbo per core(There is also variation specific to f9 bios that is close to hedt per core tuning though I don't think f9 bios is compatible with 9900KS and they removed that feature from f10 bios). As with many motherboards, there are some bios bugs. Vrms are amazing on this board. I can't really comment on asrock boards, I have no experience with them, sorry.
> 
> In regards to qvl, Both of my ramkits are not on the qvl list. One is a quad channel 4x8gb kit and the other is a dual channel 4x8gb kit. Both are b-die and both work fine.


Thank you for so much info!

I'm really tempted to return my kit and look for another.
I paid 2200 money units for the dual 3200CL14-14-14-34 kit. I believe that to be a fair price for the kit, so you can judge the following prices:
I can get quad 3200CL14-14-14-34 for 2600/2700 money units (F4-3200C14Q-32GVR / F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW)
I can also get quad 3600CL16-16-16-36 for 2800 money units (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZSW)
There is also a quad 3733CL17-17-17-37 kit for 3400 money units (F4-3733C17Q-32GTZR)

(dual/quad as in the number of dimms)

From what I understand about ram, since you want higher frequency and lower CAS latency, you can compare kits by dividing their frequency with CAS latency: the bigger the number, the better.

3200CL14 wins over all of the kits mentioned above and I'm inclined to take the quad 3200CL14, especially since it's the cheapest.
Is there any reason to take the higher speed ones? Could they be better binned?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> higher speed is usually better binned, yes.
> 
> If you want to OC really tight timings or increase frequency beyond xmp, higher bin will always scale better than lower bin. I think cl14 3200 bdie can hit cl16 4000 if I recall correctly.


You should mention that CPU IMC and the mobo itself play a HUGE role in memory OC. The Aorus Pro boards can't do 4000 period at any CAS. I'm not aware of a single sample that can do it.


----------



## kamyk155

Today no BSOD winload.efi. DDR4 4000MHz 19-19-19-39-700-2T Voltage incrased to 1,370V. 
Ram tested to 90% in memtest86 from bootable USB (then I need to stop) and after few hours again whole 100% - no errors at all.
Still testing and shuting down/restarting pc.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

kamyk155 said:


> Today no BSOD winload.efi. DDR4 4000MHz 19-19-19-39-700-2T Voltage incrased to 1,370V.
> Ram tested to 90% in memtest86 from bootable USB (then I need to stop) and after few hours again whole 100% - no errors at all.
> Still testing and shuting down/restarting pc.


I would not consider a single loop of Memtest86 necessarily stable. At a minimum, I would do 32 passes and actually run certain individual tests 32 to 50 times before running all tests in a loop.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> Here are my bios settings for turbo per core overclocking. If your chip normally needs 1.27v-1.275v VR OUT during avx loads to be stable at 5ghz all core, With the exception of the ram settings, These exact settings should work for you minus the ram timings. You will need the 1.25v sa/io for the 5.0ghz cache to be stable during 5.3ghz 2c/4t work loads. Yes, keep all C-states enabled. You can choose to either windows balanced power plan this to downclock on idle, or you can windows maximum power plan and always be boosting between 5ghz-5.3ghz on your cores. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.


So you posted the settings you were going to make a video about?


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> Good call! I don't know about aorus boards so I can't comment on them, was speaking solely about the z390 aorus master.


Master is much better than Pro, wish I had one.  Too much of a hassle to upgrade now.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> I'm too ******* lazy to make a video. You're welcome


With some exceptions, I've come to very close settings myself but this is greatly appreciated 
What's your VR OUT under load when using that positive offset?


----------



## kamyk155

One more thing I saw in bios.

At the beginning Samsung 950 Pro wasn't visible in bios. 
After installing windows I saw only this on boot list:
- windows boot option #1 - windows boot manager

After turning on LEGACY now I can see this on boot list:
- windows boot option #1 - windows boot manager (Samsung 950 pro 512GB)
- windows boot option #2 - Samsung 950 pro 512gb

Is there a possibility that I had that BSOD because he didn't see disk ? He saw only boot partition - that smaller 100MB ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> One more thing I saw in bios.
> 
> At the beginning Samsung 950 Pro wasn't visible in bios.
> After installing windows I saw only this on boot list:
> - windows boot option #1 - windows boot manager
> 
> After turning on LEGACY now I can see this on boot list:
> - windows boot option #1 - windows boot manager (Samsung 950 pro 512GB)
> - windows boot option #2 - Samsung 950 pro 512gb
> 
> Is there a possibility that I had that BSOD because he didn't see disk ? He saw only boot partition - that smaller 100MB ?


You can google this and get all the information you need as to why the BSOD happens. Here's one link. Yes it's an issue with partitions and detection. Winload.efi has nothing to do with unstable CPU or memory.
https://kb.paragon-software.com/article/270

The Samsung vanishing issue has happened in the past with a firmware bug with certain firmware versions of the drive and Bios.
I believe this was discussed in the main 960 Pro/Evo thread over here (on OCN).
The main reason this otherwise happens is improper seating, even if you think it's seated. Might want to read this thread.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...O-M-2-not-recognized-in-bios/page3#post648668

Deoxit D5 is excellent for contact issues like this.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

I got a pretty good deal on a 9900KS so I'll be enjoying stock performance for a little while and in the meantime isolate my stability testing to just the RAM.

I'm a little torn on which BIOS version I should use. F11 is not out yet, F10 is full of bugs but advertises 9900KS compatibility, F9 is currently pretty solid.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

Nothing better than yours. What I had settled on before reverting to stock was + 0.070 offset, 15/15 AC/DC and medium LLC.


----------



## Wirerat

I wanna see pictures of those Aorus mobo rigs. I know you guys have 'em. 

Air cooled, aio, custom loops doesn't matter! 

Let's see it!



I will start us off!


----------



## Falkentyne

lucasfrance said:


> Xtreme Z390/9900KS/Bios F8 here : I do not see the mentioned options in the Bios (Ring voltage, direct VID voltage, and that "missing" adaptive voltage setting). Where should they be ???


You may be able to crossflash the Xtreme 5G Waterforce Bios onto the Xtreme. Use the modified version of EFIflash with OEM checks disabled. @KedarWolf has it. I have it but I don't remember which EXE is which!

It should at least boot as the hardware seems to be identical VRM and controller-wise, and from what I can tell, the ports and everything else seem to be identical or near identical. If I had the regular Xtreme board I'd definitely risk flashing the 5G Waterforce Bios and see what happens.

I take NO responsibility if it doesn't work.

You may have to use /NoOemID or \NoOemID (don't remember which slash) for it to work. (you can also just use a hardware programmer instead).

If it flashes then bricks, you will need to boot from the other BIOS, then use a Skypro programmer and Pomona 5250 clip and jumper wires (SOIC8 soldered chip) or a socket adapter with the removable chip (Dip 8) to reflash the bios.


----------



## Emmanuel

Here's mine, although there is a temporary, small but unsightly PCIe USB2.0 card that I'm using to have working USB ports in Windows 7. I'm using my current installation of Windows 7 to run and test all my unstable overclocks so that when I migrate to Windows 10, I'll be done corrupting the OS


----------



## Wirerat

Emmanuel said:


> Here's mine, although there is a temporary, small but unsightly PCIe USB2.0 card that I'm using to have working USB ports in Windows 7. I'm using my current installation of Windows 7 to run and test all my unstable overclocks so that when I migrate to Windows 10, I'll be done corrupting the OS /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Nice. It looks good! 

I have had all my watercooling parts through a couple of rigs now. I only needed the gpu block when I upgraded. The rest is all from a build I done originally in 2014.

Is that a ek Xe 240mm?

My 9900kf rig looks better than my main. It's in a 570x. Note the universal gpu block with vrm cooler. Lol.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I'm too ******* lazy to make a video. You're welcome


How do you test the per core stability for the 53x with 1 or 2 cores actrive? Curious how people handle this. Some cores may be weaker than others meaning to really test stability you would need to test each individual core and also all possible paitr combinations.


----------



## Emmanuel

Wirerat said:


> Nice. It looks good!
> 
> I have had all my watercooling parts through a couple of rigs now. I only needed the gpu block when I upgraded. The rest is all from a build I done originally in 2014.
> 
> Is that a ek Xe 240mm?
> 
> My 9900kf rig looks better than my main. It's in a 570x. Note the universal gpu block with vrm cooler. Lol.


Thanks, yours too 

It's the most compact watercooled build I ever made, two independent loops in a medium tower. Everything is nice and cozy in there and a pain for my (large hands) when maintenance is required!
You sure have an eye for radiators, it is the XE 240mm


----------



## Emmanuel

GeneO said:


> How do you test the per core stability for the 53x with 1 or 2 cores actrive? Curious how people handle this. Some cores may be weaker than others meaning to really test stability you would need to test each individual core and also all possible paitr combinations.


This might not be a popular opinion, but personally I don't bother with running different cores at different speeds. It's not very easy to test and the OS/programs in the end decide how the load gets split which can lead to the frequency constantly fluctuating. If I really wanted to optimize single threaded performance above all, I would disable the weakest cores and overclock the better ones.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> This might not be a popular opinion, but personally I don't bother with running different cores at different speeds. It's not very easy to test and the OS/programs in the end decide how the load gets split which can lead to the frequency constantly fluctuating. If I really wanted to optimize single threaded performance above all, I would disable the weakest cores and overclock the better ones.


I don't think you can control which cores get disabled when you disable them in the BIOS. It seems to be in a certain order (LIFO?)


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I don't think you can control which cores get disabled when you disable them in the BIOS. It seems to be in a certain order (LIFO?)


exactly...


----------



## Wirerat

Emmanuel said:


> This might not be a popular opinion, but personally I don't bother with running different cores at different speeds. It's not very easy to test and the OS/programs in the end decide how the load gets split which can lead to the frequency constantly fluctuating.


The same reason I don't care for avx offsets. I mean just for some benchmarking I understand but not a 24/7 profile.



Emmanuel said:


> Thanks, yours too /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> It's the most compact watercooled build I ever made, two independent loops in a medium tower. Everything is nice and cozy in there and a pain for my (large hands) when maintenance is required!
> You sure have an eye for radiators, it is the XE 240mm /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Been considering upgrading my ek PE 360 to a XE for a while. It's just gonna cover so much of the mobo/cpu block. It might look weird in the R5. It's a thick Boi!


----------



## GeneO

You can run, say, a single thread or two of Prime 95 and set the affinity so that it runs on one or two specific cores. I did this when I ran per-core on a 4790k for awhile. but the more cores you have, the more arduous it is to do a comprehensive test,


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> I don't think you can control which cores get disabled when you disable them in the BIOS. It seems to be in a certain order (LIFO?)


I haven't checked on this board yet but on my previous motherboard (Evga X99 Classified), I could pick the cores. As a matter of fact, I bought a used 5960X that had a defective core and I turned it off and used the computer normally for a few days lol.


----------



## Emmanuel

Wirerat said:


> The same reason I don't care for avx offsets. I mean just for some benchmarking I understand but not a 24/7 profile.
> 
> Been considering upgrading my ek PE 360 to a XE for a while. It's just gonna cover so much of the mobo/cpu block. It might look weird in the R5. It's a thick Boi!


Same! No AVX offset here. I went with the XE because that's the longest radiator I could fit above my 2 pumps, so I expanded in thickness instead


----------



## GeneO

Well it makes sense for no AVX offset since there are less and less non-AVX loads, so there is not much advantage of having an offset. But there are frequent situations where only a couple of cores are loaded, e.g. web browsing and streaming. I just don't think there would be much of a discernible difference in those situations.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Well it makes sense for no AVX offset since there are less and less non-AVX loads, so there is not much advantage of having an offset. But there are frequent situations where only a couple of cores are loaded, e.g. web browsing and streaming. I just don't think there would be much of a discernible difference in those situations.


I agree but difference in performance is going to be so negligible. 

Outside of benchmarking it will just have you running a higher voltage than is actually required for that all core frequency.

I understand what Intel trys to do with the stock power limits. 4.2ghz all core vs 5ghz dual core. That might make a difference. But a split of 2 or 3 hundred mhz isn't worth a higher all time voltage to me anyway.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> I agree but difference in performance is going to be so negligible.
> 
> Outside of benchmarking it will just have you running a higher voltage than is actually required for that all core frequency.
> 
> I understand what Intel trys to do with the stock power limits. 4.2ghz all core vs 5ghz dual core. That might make a difference. But a split of 2 or 3 hundred mhz isn't worth a higher all time voltage to me anyway.


Agree. I was just toying with the idea of trying per-core again but decided it is not worth it.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Agree. I was just toying with the idea of trying per-core again but decided it is not worth it.


I mean. It might be fun to play with. The bios doesn't give us the optimal settings for setting it up.

If it let us isolate the hottest or weakest core that might change things.


----------



## Emmanuel

Is it typical to be able to run tREFI (65534) maxed out stable? I just manually increased mine from the auto 15600 to that and Memtest is showing a nice boost in GB/s.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Is it typical to be able to run tREFI (65534) maxed out stable? I just manually increased mine from the auto 15600 to that and Memtest is showing a nice boost in GB/s.


My Kingston 2400 mhz sodimm laptop memory can run at 65535 trefi, it seems the B-die 3200mhz CL14 kits can do it too (should be 65535 as the max value not 65534 but whatever). I think it's the higher clocked dimms or other chips that can have issues.


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Emmanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it typical to be able to run tREFI (65534) maxed out stable? I just manually increased mine from the auto 15600 to that and Memtest is showing a nice boost in GB/s.
> 
> 
> 
> My Kingston 2400 mhz sodimm laptop memory can run at 65535 trefi, it seems the B-die 3200mhz CL14 kits can do it too (should be 65535 as the max value not 65534 but whatever). I think it's the higher clocked dimms or other chips that can have issues.
Click to expand...

65534 is what the bios locks it at.
My 4000mhz bdie has no issues with that setting at 3800 CL 15.


----------



## Emmanuel

I have 4266 B-die that I'm running at 4000 at the moment. I'm going to run my battery of Memtets for 24H at 16-16-16-36 and if that's stable, I'll repeat the testing with tREFI 65534 and tRFC at 260 which I've just tested stable in very preliminary testing.



Wirerat said:


> 65534 is what the bios locks it at.
> My 4000mhz bdie has no issues with that setting at 3800 CL 15.


What tRFC are you running at?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> I don't mind the voltage, under all core load i'm still using what I normally need , when i'm not fully loaded, I get more performance while still within intel's recommended voltage-amp curve. I just don't see the point in leaving 300mhz cache/core speed on the table so i'll take the free performance.


Do you have a link for Intel's recommended voltage-amp curve or is it simply 1520 - (1.6 * amps) across?


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> You isolate the cores by assigning specific frequencies to the specific cores in the "turbo per core limit control" menu. You can use whatever program you stress with and set windows affinity to the same cores you marked in the bios with the frequency you want to test.


Not the way it works. You are not marking cores in the BIOS, you are only specifying numbers. For example, your two core frequency setting is for any two cores being active, not specific ones. so you have to test against the weakest pair in this case.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Do you have a link for Intel's recommended voltage-amp curve or is it simply 1520 - (1.6 * amps) across?


That's what the spec sheet says and that's all we have to go by.
In the Core 2 days, they gave a graph of this loadline, with -2.1 mv / A (2.1 mOhms), but I forget what this processor family was for.

All the 2nd generation Core notes say is "The VCC specifications represents static and transient limits" next to the loadline (which is 1.7 mOhms for min/standard/max).
It doesn't even show a loadline 'graph' nor does it show functional max limits. 
I assume this is for the Sandy Bridge processors. It's as stupid as the 8th and 9th gen datasheets.

https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...eets/2nd-gen-core-desktop-vol-1-datasheet.pdf


Yet the "Core 2 Duo/Mobile/Extreme" datasheet does show this information. (page 43)
https://www.versalogic.com/support/Downloads/Leopard/Intel_Core2_DUO_Datasheet.pdf
They're even nice enough to tell you what VCC_SENSE is ! (page 100).

One thing interesting is the comparison between page 31 and page 32, with "max VID range" voltage, or rather, max VCCDAM (VCC/VID) being 1.325v and absolute max being 1.45v.
The reading in note 1 on page 32 has the exact same text that you see in the newer including 9th generation notes about "VID", so it's not dumb to assume they are the same thing.

So is that 1.325v maximum functional range for those processors equal to 1.52v on newer processors at the stock loadline (2.1 mOhms to 1.6 mOhms)? That's for you guys to decide or not decide.
And since Intel left out absolute minimum and maximums on every newer datasheet...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Here is an example of randomizing it a little more. Look at the turbo per core limit control list, and look at the maximum frequencies hit by those same exact cores in hwinfo64:


Did you test to see which cores are the weakest cores?
There are two ways to test that.

First in prime95 AVX (at a lower frequency at 4.7-4.9 ghz and a lower voltage), with fixed vcore and LLC high/Turbo, and drop voltage until a thread fails in less than 5 minutes without a BSOD happening.
Then test repeatedly to see which group of threads fail consistently. (The first two threads in Prime are the first core, the second two are the second core, etc). In many cases, two sets of cores will fail consistently, unless you are very unstable and cores start crashing in 10 seconds, then you need to raise the voltage a bit.

Or when running Realbench 2.56 at a higher frequency (again on fixed vcore), noticing on which APIC ID's the CPU Cache L0 errors happen on (In windows event viewer, cache hierarchy errors), where 0/1 is the first core, 2/3=second, etc. That tends to be more time consuming, and there's less leeway between L0 error and BSOD.

Once you determine the two cores that give the fastest errors on a borderline/unstable voltage, you can set those for the lowest frequencies.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky


> I just


You OK? Lol


Do you see the cpu hitting 5.3 in any games?

I would like see you reset hwinfo64 after loading up a game. I'd like to know what the core speed runs in that type of usage with this config.

I don't know what you play, apex, overwatch or fallen jedi? Something newish or popular if you don't mind.


----------



## stasio

To better understand new GB BIOS for Z390, X570, X299X and TRX40 motherboards.....please read.....

bios article_edited_final


Btw,
just posted new beta BIOS on Tweaktown......


----------



## Driller au

stasio said:


> To better understand new GB BIOS for Z390, X570, X299X and TRX40 motherboards.....please read.....
> 
> bios article_edited_final
> 
> 
> Btw,
> just posted new beta BIOS on Tweaktown......


Thank you


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> That's what the spec sheet says and that's all we have to go by.
> In the Core 2 days, they gave a graph of this loadline, with -2.1 mv / A (2.1 mOhms), but I forget what this processor family was for.
> 
> All the 2nd generation Core notes say is "The VCC specifications represents static and transient limits" next to the loadline (which is 1.7 mOhms for min/standard/max).
> It doesn't even show a loadline 'graph' nor does it show functional max limits.
> I assume this is for the Sandy Bridge processors. It's as stupid as the 8th and 9th gen datasheets.
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...eets/2nd-gen-core-desktop-vol-1-datasheet.pdf
> 
> 
> Yet the "Core 2 Duo/Mobile/Extreme" datasheet does show this information. (page 43)
> https://www.versalogic.com/support/Downloads/Leopard/Intel_Core2_DUO_Datasheet.pdf
> They're even nice enough to tell you what VCC_SENSE is ! (page 100).
> 
> One thing interesting is the comparison between page 31 and page 32, with "max VID range" voltage, or rather, max VCCDAM (VCC/VID) being 1.325v and absolute max being 1.45v.
> The reading in note 1 on page 32 has the exact same text that you see in the newer including 9th generation notes about "VID", so it's not dumb to assume they are the same thing.
> 
> So is that 1.325v maximum functional range for those processors equal to 1.52v on newer processors at the stock loadline (2.1 mOhms to 1.6 mOhms)? That's for you guys to decide or not decide.
> And since Intel left out absolute minimum and maximums on every newer datasheet...


Thanks! If the LLC was changed to turbo for example, would the formula change using the new ohm value? Has anyone ever measured or posted what the resistance values are for each LLC setting on this motherboard?


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Thanks! If the LLC was changed to turbo for example, would the formula change using the new ohm value? Has anyone ever measured or posted what the resistance values are for each LLC setting on this motherboard?


No the formula is the same but using LLC reduces your vdroop compared to what is shown in the docs. I measured all the LLC values and have stated them several times here.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

I swapped out my 8086K to a 9900KS and updated the bios to F10 prior to the change. It appears all settings work ok that I needed to change except for XMP. If I enable that, the system won't even boot or reboot without having to reset the bios.

On F9, XMP worked flawlessly. I'm using Gskill 3200 CL14 B-die.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> No the formula is the same but using LLC reduces your vdroop compared to what is shown in the docs. I measured all the LLC values and have stated them several times here.


Thanks. Well it's hard to navigate through almost 600 pages of threads. I have gone through a good number of them randomly but didn't get lucky enough to stumble on that information.


----------



## Sheyster

Emmanuel said:


> I have 4266 B-die that I'm running at 4000 at the moment. I'm going to run my battery of Memtets for 24H at 16-16-16-36 and if that's stable, I'll repeat the testing with tREFI 65534 and tRFC at 260 which I've just tested stable in very preliminary testing.


Do you mean trfc 360?? 260 is too low.


----------



## Emmanuel

Sheyster said:


> Do you mean trfc 360?? 260 is too low.


I meant 280 which is probably too low but was stable during my very short testing. Right now I'm testing my RAM without touching tRFC and tREFI and once I determine that 16-16-16-36 4000MHz is stable, I'll mess with these two subtimings.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Thanks. Well it's hard to navigate through almost 600 pages of threads. I have gone through a good number of them randomly but didn't get lucky enough to stumble on that information.


You didn't use the search button?

Ok. Values are in mOhms.

Standard/Normal: 1.6
Auto (1.6 unless MCE is enabled)

Low: 1.3 (15% reduced vdroop)
medium: 1.0 (idk what % vdroop)
High: 0.8 (50% reduced vdroop)
Turbo: 0.4 (75% reduced vdroop)
Ext: 0.2
Ultra Ex: 0 (no vdroop)


----------



## lucasfrance

Falkentyne said:


> You may be able to crossflash the Xtreme 5G Waterforce Bios onto the Xtreme. Use the modified version of EFIflash with OEM checks disabled. @KedarWolf has it. I have it but I don't remember which EXE is which!
> 
> It should at least boot as the hardware seems to be identical VRM and controller-wise, and from what I can tell, the ports and everything else seem to be identical or near identical. If I had the regular Xtreme board I'd definitely risk flashing the 5G Waterforce Bios and see what happens.
> 
> I take NO responsibility if it doesn't work.
> 
> You may have to use /NoOemID or \NoOemID (don't remember which slash) for it to work. (you can also just use a hardware programmer instead).
> 
> If it flashes then bricks, you will need to boot from the other BIOS, then use a Skypro programmer and Pomona 5250 clip and jumper wires (SOIC8 soldered chip) or a socket adapter with the removable chip (Dip 8) to reflash the bios.


Will think about it....  The BIOS IC is removable on the Xtreme MB. Will let you know the result if I feel to make the trial


----------



## Wirerat

How safe is it to run bdie above 1.5v? 

I can do 3800 CL 14 if I go slightly above 1.5v. I was thinking bios set 1.52-1.53 shouldn't really hurt.

It scales so good with voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

lucasfrance said:


> Will think about it....  The BIOS IC is removable on the Xtreme MB. Will let you know the result if I feel to make the trial


If i had that board, I would have crossflashed without thinking twice.
I have a Skypro programmer (and a Skypro II I broke the LCD screen on, no hate plz) and some socket adapters from my RT809F I wasted money on several years ago.

I checked the website. It looks like everything is identical on both boards.

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-XTREME-WATERFORCE-5G-rev-10#kf

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-XTREME-rev-10#kf

The only thing I can even see different is the direct touch heatpipe for water cooling, and the headers for watercooling or something (sensors or pumps?)

I don't know which efiflash is the one with checks bypassed or which works with the /NoOemID commandline switch.
But: you can't use Qflash obviously. If you do decide to take your chances, it's either /NoOemID or \NoOemID


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

reachthesky said:


> F10 is a little buggy from what I hear. I'd recommend switching back to F9 until they roll out a new f10. There is also a feature in f9 that allows you to control individual maximum corespeeds that was removed in f10. You might be able to get 5.2-5.5ghz on your chip within safe voltage/amp limits with f9 bios.
> 
> Also, just out of curiousity, did you try setting dram/training voltages and sa/io voltages manually when trying to boot xmp?


No, I didn't alter any dram voltages. Didn't need to on F9.

F10 changelog says it added support for the 9900KS. Could I still run that chip on the F9?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> I found somewhere between 320-360 to be suitable for ddr4 4000 daily use. Your kit is higher quality than mine though, you might actually be able to do 280 trfc for daily use. What kind of testing are you doing?
> 
> I'm currently tweaking a few timings and looking at the minimum fps differences in unigine superposition 1080p medium.
> 
> Lowering twr from 12 to 10 and RRDs_L from 6 to 4 increased my 1% lows by roughly 30 fps in the benchmark(in combination with my other timings). Trying to lower trfc from 360 to 280 caused me to drop back down in fps.


Considering the board failed to post at 260, I have a feeling 280 is still too low but I'll find out tomorrow when I'm done testing my primary timings.

I use Memtest7.5 and loop particular tests, one at a time for a total of around 24 hours total. When I'm done with that, I'll run some tests in Windows also.

I have my RAM currently set to 1.50v which reads 1.488v. I'm fine with either reading and wouldn't push it higher just to avoid damaging the IMC.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I found somewhere between 320-360 to be suitable for ddr4 4000 daily use. Your kit is higher quality than mine though, you might actually be able to do 280 trfc for daily use. What kind of testing are you doing?
> 
> I'm currently tweaking a few timings and looking at the minimum fps differences in unigine superposition 1080p medium.
> 
> Lowering twr from 12 to 10 and RRDs_L from 6 to 4 increased my 1% lows by roughly 30 fps in the benchmark(in combination with my other timings). Trying to lower trfc from 360 to 280 caused me to drop back down in fps.


Isn't tWR supposed to be tRTP * 2 ? Then CL + tRCD + tRTP = TRAS? @Jpmboy


----------



## lucasfrance

Falkentyne said:


> If i had that board, I would have crossflashed without thinking twice.
> I checked the website. It looks like everything is identical on both boards.
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-XTREME-WATERFORCE-5G-rev-10#kf
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-XTREME-rev-10#kf
> 
> The only thing I can even see different is the direct touch heatpipe for water cooling, and the headers for watercooling or something (sensors or pumps?)
> 
> I don't know which efiflash is the one with checks bypassed or which works with the /NoOemID commandline switch.
> But: you can't use Qflash obviously. If you do decide to take your chances, it's either /NoOemID or \NoOemID


Thanks! Will first give a go to the new Xtreme f9b BIOS and check the waterforce BIOS afterwards....


----------



## Falkentyne

Voodoo Rufus said:


> No, I didn't alter any dram voltages. Didn't need to on F9.
> 
> F10 changelog says it added support for the 9900KS. Could I still run that chip on the F9?


F9 works on the 9900KS. F8 should also work. But the MCE, Turbo ratios and Auto settings will probably be messed up.
Set everything manually.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Should I lower tRTP to 5 here to keep the tWR at 10? I used cl + trcd + tRP + 2 for tras calculation. There seems to be a split on what is correct or what is optimal, i truly don't know. Perhaps I should start testing it.


The formula originally came from Raja @ Asus, when he was still active here. He posted it on the DDR4 thread. I always set mine to match that, including the tFAW=4xTRRD_S one.

One thing I do know is that wrong values in one or two of those will completely tank your gflops in LinX 0.9.6, 35000 sample size.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> O yeah if you aren't posting at 260, 280 definitely won't be stable for daily usage. Probably looking around the 315 range minimum for stability i think.


My tRFC is rock solid at 280. 270 also works but 250 5 beeps then resets the BIOS . Then again I'm at 3200 Cas 14 CR 1T. (only tested up to 3333 CL 14 CR 1T, as any higher won't post on dual rank dimms with 1T)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> My tRFC is rock solid at 280. 270 also works but 250 5 beeps then resets the BIOS . Then again I'm at 3200 Cas 14 CR 1T. (only tested up to 3333 CL 14 CR 1T, as any higher won't post on dual rank dimms with 1T)


What do you set the interleaving settings to?


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> What do you set the interleaving settings to?


What's interleave?


----------



## Emmanuel

Channel interleaving and rank interleaving. Two settings in the BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Channel interleaving and rank interleaving. Two settings in the BIOS.


I have absolutely no idea, sorry.
I Just set the primaries, set tRTP, tWR, tFAW, TRRD_S, TRRD_L, and command rate, tRFC and tREFI.

Then I'll look for random people's b-die values for some tertiaries and just see if they work. That's how dirty and messy I am.
I do have the four tRDWR values set to 10/10/10/11 however, at cas 14.
9/9/9/9 worked (at 3200 mhz at least) but 8/8/8/8 was me reaching for the Clear CMOS button 8^


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@Falkentyne

Very simular to how I got my secondarys. I couldn't be bothered to go through the thirds. 

It had already taken me 3 days to validate at that point.

Corrupt OS is not fun to deal with. Been through that and learned the hard way.


----------



## Emmanuel

Wirerat said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> Very simular to how I got my secondarys. I couldn't be bothered to go through the thirds.
> 
> It had already taken me 3 days to validate at that point.
> 
> Corrupt OS is not fun to deal with. Been through that and learned the hard way.


Ya, I'm skeptical of RAM OC and I'm pretty much setting my primary timings to those found on similar kits. I'm actually a little weary of even messing with the tREFI and tRFC but I need to do a little more research on those.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> Very simular to how I got my secondarys. I couldn't be bothered to go through the thirds.
> 
> It had already taken me 3 days to validate at that point.
> 
> Corrupt OS is not fun to deal with. Been through that and learned the hard way.


Best to back it up with something like macrium reflect and restore once you have a stable memory OC. Takes me < 4 minutes to back-up and around 3 minutes to restore. Well worth the small effort.


----------



## GeneO

Anybody try the F11b master BIOS yet? Be interesting to hear your experience.


----------



## Emmanuel

GeneO said:


> Anybody try the F11b master BIOS yet? Be interesting to hear your experience.


When did that come out? Are we looking at a final F11 release soon?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> There is/was(?) a rumor that too high of trefi can lead to file corruption. Only way to test for it is to do sfc /scan now in command prompt as an admin. I've had file corruption before but I wasn't able to pin point if it was because of using max trefi or if it was because I was screwing around with other timings/frequencies/bsoding etc.


Delaying the refresh of volatile memory could do something like that


----------



## GeneO

Emmanuel said:


> When did that come out? Are we looking at a final F11 release soon?


It is a few posts up, by stasio, in this thread. So today.


----------



## Emmanuel

GeneO said:


> It is a few posts up, by stasio, in this thread. So today.


Found it. I'll wait to see some release notes or feedback, looking forward to a final F11 release though. I think I'll be running my 9900KS on F9 until F11 is out.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Anybody try the F11b master BIOS yet? Be interesting to hear your experience.


Seems identical to F10. The same bugs/missing bios options are still missing. 
I haven't lost any stability at least.
I know that the first "a" beta of the new GUI branch for the other boards addressed some sort of memory compatibility issue.


----------



## Wirerat

I am on the F12b which is the aorus pro version.

Memory OC is fixed vs the F11. I could not even boot with my current profile.

It still has the Trefi bug that maxes out above 9999.


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> I am on the F12b which is the aorus pro version.
> 
> Memory OC is fixed vs the F11. I could not even boot with my current profile.
> 
> It still has the Trefi bug that maxes out above 9999.


I have the bug too as you know, and I doubt they'll fix it any time soon.


----------



## Emmanuel

Wirerat said:


> I am on the F12b which is the aorus pro version.
> 
> Memory OC is fixed vs the F11. I could not even boot with my current profile.
> 
> It still has the Trefi bug that maxes out above 9999.


Could you elaborate on memory OC is fixed? And you're saying that despite the tREFI bug correct?


----------



## Wirerat

Emmanuel said:


> Could you elaborate on memory OC is fixed? And you're saying that despite the tREFI bug correct?


Sure, 

F10 - aorus pro 3800mhz CL 15-15-15-32 2t 360 trfc 1.48v dram voltage. 

Boots, stable. 

F11 - aorus pro 3800mhz CL 15-15-15-32 2t 360 trfc 1.48v dram voltage.

Boot loops until bios swaps. Never get to windows with the exact same memory profile.

F12b - aorus pro 3800mhz CL 15-15-15-32 2t 360 trfc 1.48v dram voltage. 

Boots, stable.

Keep in mind Aorus pro is like a bios ahead in name vs the master (no idea why).


----------



## metalspider

strange im running the exact same memory profile on the pro on f11 that i was running on f10 3866mhz 16-17-17-35 2t 400 trfc 1.41v dram.
tested fine.


----------



## Wirerat

metalspider said:


> strange im running the exact same memory profile on the pro on f11 that i was running on f10 3866mhz 16-17-17-35 2t 400 trfc 1.41v dram.
> tested fine.


3800 15-15-15-32 2t is a little bit faster than your profile. /shrug. 

I tried for hours. I could not get in without loosening my timings. 

Is that bdie?

Gigabyte acknowledged a memory issue corrected on the F12b info. Mentions Kingston specifically but it could be a certain IC.


----------



## AndrejB

I think this is good enough for now


F10 Bios
47/43 all c-states and rest disabled
LLC standard
300mhz switching frequency
ac/dc 100/130
4133 17-17-17-37 @ 1.4v (enhanced performance)


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> I think this is good enough for now
> 
> 
> F10 Bios
> 47/43 all c-states and rest disabled
> LLC standard
> 300mhz switching frequency
> ac/dc 100/130
> 4133 17-17-17-37 @ 1.4v (enhanced performance)


Your Gflops are a bit low.
I get 490 at 4.7 / 4.4 at those settings with 3200 mhz CL14 RAM, but with fixed vcore/LLC Turbo and 1.210v bios set.

Try changing tFAW to be 4x TRRD_S and test that.
Then reduce tRRD_S by 1 and tFAW to keep 4x and see if your gflops goes up.


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> Super IO chip is ITE 8688E.
> Other onboard chip (including what handles DDR aux voltage and onboard multimeter read points, and I think VCCIO) is ITE 8792E.
> IR 35201 contains its own voltage, amps and power monitoring so you can't bash Gigabyte for that. IR 35201 is most accurate as long as a deep sleep power state/C-state isn't active.


Super IO chip is ITE 8688E??? ITE 8792E??? IR 35201???? Huh??? Again, with every single other motherboard from every other company, there is 1 vcore we need to monitor. Not 3 different ones depending on this, depending on that, and certainly not different vcores to read depending on if the CPU happens to be in a C-state for a particular moment in time or not. That's ridiculous. I still have no idea what vcore I'm supposed to be looking at as I'm testing my PC. I could be burning up the CPU at 1.42v or I could be in a relatively safe spot at 1.31v, I have no idea with the way Gigabyte uses all sorts of different vcore sensors all giving different results and having no idea which one to read and at which moment in time. This is reminds me of cryptic ***** from the 1990s of overclocking, not the 2010s.




Falkentyne said:


> VR VOUT responds directly to amps via Vdroop. Vdroop formula is Loadline (VRM loadline calibratoin) mOhms * Amps. LLC Turbo is 0.4 mOhms. So 100 amps of current (Current IOUT) will cause a 40mv drop in voltage from BIOS set voltage to load voltage. (based on fixed vcore being used). LLC High is 0.8 mOhms. This is Ohm's law, science and 100% predictable.





Falkentyne said:


> VR VOUT responds directly to amps via Vdroop. Vdroop formula is Loadline (VRM loadline calibratoin) mOhms * Amps. LLC Turbo is 0.4 mOhms. So 100 amps of current (Current IOUT) will cause a 40mv drop in voltage from BIOS set voltage to load voltage. (based on fixed vcore being used). LLC High is 0.8 mOhms. This is Ohm's law, science and 100% predictable.AC Loadline controls the idle and load VRM target voltages when Dynamic Offset (DVID) or Auto vcore is used. Higher AC Loadline (up to 1.6 mOhms, max Intel specification, do not confuse this with "VRM Loadline (loadline calibration)) will cause higher operating voltages. AC Loadline comes from the +12v line, and factored along with CPU default multiplier VID and voltage increase/decrease via Thermal Velocity Boost. TVB is explained here.
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others&highlight=explanations
> 
> AC loadline is the power (VRM target voltage) based on current, on the AC line (PSU +12v line that is duty cycled to an operating voltage, like 1.2v (90% duty cycle) etc.


VR VOUT??? IOUT?? mOhms?? Ohm's law?? VDroop mathmetical formula?? VRM target voltages?? AC loadline different from VRM loadline??? HUH????? Again, with every other motherboard manufactuer, you simply set an LLC setting in the BIOS and check the resulting vcore in Windows. DONE. No calculating or even worrying about stuff like VRM loadline VS AC loadline, VRM targets, VDroop mathemetical formulas, IOUT, Ohm's law, etc. etc. etc. No other motherboard manufacturer requires the "everyday average overclocker" to know or deal with all that.



Falkentyne said:


> Since AC Loadline boosts operating voltages on its own, a high AC loadline must NOT be combined with a low mOhms of VRM loadline. Lower mOhms means less vdroop or more loadline calibration strength. Using a high AC Loadline mOhms value (like 1.6 mOhms) with a high amount of VRM loadline calibration (low mOhms) will give excessive voltages. . Easy memory tool is: High AC Loadline mOhms needs low VRM Loadline mOhms. VRM loadline is the loadline (based on current) on the DC circuit. So: High mOhms AC=use high mOhms loadline calibration (high vdroop=less LLC). Low mOhms AC Loadline= use low mOhms loadline calibration (less vdroop=more LLC)


Again, this is making it wayyy more complicated than need be. With every other motherboard, you don't need to know things like AC loadline mOhms needs low VRM loadline mOhms and VRM loadline is the loadline on the DC circuit based on current. With all other motherboard manufacturers, you simply set the LLC and check resulting vcore. Done. You don't need a background in electricity or physics.



Falkentyne said:


> See above. Asus boards also use this setting, but "SVID Behavior" usually sets this to 0.01 mOhms or 1.2 mOhms or 1.6 mOhms (Best case, Typical, Worst Case / Intel Fail Safe).
> Asus uses who use "offset" mode usually just set AC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms and crank up Loadline calibration to compensate.


OK. I still have no idea what I'm doing with this gigabyte board compared to every other board I've ever had in the past 10+ years. Is it safe for me to simply set AC Loadline to 0.01 and then I can play with the "regular" LLC like on other boards regardless if I set vcore to static, offset, "normal" or whatever? And can you tell me simply which vcore sensor to pay attention to like on every other board? I still have no idea which one I'm supposed to look at and 0.1v is a huge difference in terms of CPU vcore so it's vital I'm looking at the right one....


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Super IO chip is ITE 8688E??? ITE 8792E??? IR 35201???? Huh??? Again, with every single other motherboard from every other company, there is 1 vcore we need to monitor. Not 3 different ones depending on this, depending on that, and certainly not different vcores to read depending on if the CPU happens to be in a C-state for a particular moment in time or not. That's ridiculous. I still have no idea what vcore I'm supposed to be looking at as I'm testing my PC. I could be burning up the CPU at 1.42v or I could be in a relatively safe spot at 1.31v, I have no idea with the way Gigabyte uses all sorts of different vcore sensors all giving different results and having no idea which one to read and at which moment in time. This is reminds me of cryptic ***** from the 1990s of overclocking, not the 2010s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VR VOUT??? IOUT?? mOhms?? Ohm's law?? VDroop mathmetical formula?? VRM target voltages?? AC loadline different from VRM loadline??? HUH????? Again, with every other motherboard manufactuer, you simply set an LLC setting in the BIOS and check the resulting vcore in Windows. DONE. No calculating or even worrying about stuff like VRM loadline VS AC loadline, VRM targets, VDroop mathemetical formulas, IOUT, Ohm's law, etc. etc. etc. No other motherboard manufacturer requires the "everyday average overclocker" to know or deal with all that.
> 
> Again, this is making it wayyy more complicated than need be. With every other motherboard, you don't need to know things like AC loadline mOhms needs low VRM loadline mOhms and VRM loadline is the loadline on the DC circuit based on current. With all other motherboard manufacturers, you simply set the LLC and check resulting vcore. Done. You don't need a background in electricity or physics.
> 
> OK. I still have no idea what I'm doing with this gigabyte board compared to every other board I've ever had in the past 10+ years. Is it safe for me to simply set AC Loadline to 0.01 and then I can play with the "regular" LLC like on other boards regardless if I set vcore to static, offset, "normal" or whatever? And can you tell me simply which vcore sensor to pay attention to like on every other board? I still have no idea which one I'm supposed to look at and 0.1v is a huge difference in terms of CPU vcore so it's vital I'm looking at the right one....


Ok let me explain.

1) the Super I/O chip is the ITE 8688E. That's the chip the BIOS reads and shows bios voltage on, CPU-Z reads, OCCT reads, and so on. This chip has been used for years. But it reads vcore very erratically and will NOT show proper vdroop. If you use strong LLC, it will show over 50-60mv higher than what you set in BIOS!! The vcore you were reading on your old boards was not very accurate and got more inaccurate as core counts went up. Asus finally addressed this on their Z390 boards by putting a diode close to the Super I/O chip, so it reads accurate vcore now.

2) 8792E is the chip controlling other ports on the board and some of the memory controller stuff.

3) The IR 35201 is the voltage controller. It supports its own monitoring of CPU Current and amps and voltage which is dead on accurate. Are you really angry about this?
All the other boards you had in the past

4) Yes you can use fixed vcore like any other board. AC Loadline is not important on fixed vcore. Just set your bios voltage, set your LLC to high or to turbo, and off you go.


----------



## spin5000

reachthesky said:


> ------using ac/dc 1-1 allows you to completely escape the vid limit. Use this with divid offset mode. If you don't want your frequency/voltage dropping, still use dvid offset mode, but enable windows maximum power plan. Because you set ac/dc 1-1 and are using dvid offset mode, it means you require medium llc to ensure the cpu gets exactly the number specified in the bios underload vrout. DVID offset mode by default starts at 1.20v. So with medium llc + dvid offset of zero, you will receive 1.150v VROUT under non-avx load and you will automatically receive proper avx load voltage of +20mv or +25mv higher under load which would be 1.17v or 1.175v. If you want a non-avx load voltage of 1.25v VROUT, You must use a positive offset of +50v. If you want 1.3v under load, use +100mv offset. If you enable windows max power plan with this, you'll see that medium llc with acdc 1/1 with offset mode gives you roughly 50mv of vdroop, it is basically turbo llc when used with dvid offset mode. This is how dvid offset mode works. But since acdc 1-1 escapes the vid limits, it almost means you need to understand the limits of an intel 9th generation 9900k chip since it's very easy to manual exceed intel's safe voltage/amp curve. ]
> 
> Just to reiterate, the formula for ocing with medium llc with acdc 1-1 is: ideal target load voltage for whatever clock you are trying to hit minus(-) 1.20v = the amount of positive offset you need to set. Medium llc + acdc 1-1= 50mv of vdroop, so expect your idle voltage with windows max power plan enabled to be that much higher than your target load voltage that you are tuning for. If you want voltage/frequency to fluctuate based on activity, just enable windows balanced power plan + enable cstates.
> 
> Here is intel's voltage amp curve. To stay within factory specifications and what intel safely guarantees, Keep your load numbers just under these values at any given time during load.
> 
> Again these are the MAXIMUM values to pull while underload at any given point. Use VROUT reading in HWinfo64 for determining your actual vcore voltage under load as it is the most accurate readout. For example, Pulling 1.28v *or less* at 150 amps is fine. Exceeding that limit can and will lead to chip degradation. Again, this is the guideline to STAY WITHIN intel's safe limit.
> 
> Visual chart for Voltage/Amp Curve - intel's recommended default operating spec. Remember, for gigaboards, use VROUT reading on hwinfo64 as it is most accurate vcore sensor.
> 
> VCore and amps pulled under load simultaneously. To stay within intel's recommended spec aka guarantee longevity of your chip, make sure your load values stay under these values at any given time.
> 
> Based on this chart, unless your 9900k chip is a silicon lottery binned 4.9ghz @ 1.287v bios voltage turbo llc chip or higher, 4.8ghz at is the maximum clockspeed you can hit while staying within intel's limit*IF* if you are putting your computer under heavy loads since every 9900k does 4.8ghz at 1.275v bios voltage turbo llc.
> 
> High llc with offset mode + acdc 1-1 is similar to overclocking with static voltage + extreme llc in the aspect of how much vdroop you will get. I verified this by using windows maximum power plan so that the clocks/voltage would remain high during idle and then putting it under load to see the vdroop similar to how i tested medium llc.
> 
> In my opinion, dvid offset mode + ac/dc 1-1 + medium llc is the best of every option for an all core OC because you get the most fine tuned OC and if you don't want your voltage/frequency dropping on idle, all you have to do is enable windows maximum power plan. Medium llc = 50mv of vdroop, so expect your idle voltage to be that much higher than your target load voltage that you are tuning for.


OK. Thanks. I have a 9700K (well, KF actually but samething basically). I've always just looked at Vcore rather than Vcore VS amps, thanks for that extra bit of insight.

OK. Here's what I've done.
AC loadline = 1
DC loadline = 1
LLC = medium
vcore = "normal"
offset = +0.050v
frequency stock/auto 4.9 GHz (just for now).

According to sensor Renesas ISL69138/69269 VR VOUT I'm pulling around 1.28v - 1.305v with all cores loaded using WPrime. The ITE IT8792E Vcore sensor reports 1.331v - 1.342v and is MUCH more stable than than the ISL69138/69269 VR VOUT. The IT8792E sensor reminds me of vcore sensors on every other board where it is very static under load and usually at either 1 of 2 or 3 different voltages. That is in contrast to the ISL69138/69269 VR VOUT which is changing within a bigger range and hitting all sorts of different voltages within that range - never seen a CPU voltage fluctuating so much like that. The ITE IT8688E reports almost identically to the IT8792E. So, are you sure I'm supposed to ignore ITE IT8688E & IT8792E Vcore and instead pay attention to the ISL69138/69269 VR VOUT? Just want to make sure as there's a big difference between 1.280v (ISL69138/69269 VR VOUT) and 1.342v (ITE IT8688E & IT8792E Vcore).

P.S. I thought 9700Ks had uncore (AKA ring) stock at either 4.5 or 4.7 GHz. Why is mine at only 4.3 GHz at stock/"auto"???


----------



## metalspider

Wirerat said:


> 3800 15-15-15-32 2t is a little bit faster than your profile. /shrug.
> 
> I tried for hours. I could not get in without loosening my timings.
> 
> Is that bdie?
> 
> Gigabyte acknowledged a memory issue corrected on the F12b info. Mentions Kingston specifically but it could be a certain IC.


 yeah it is faster,this is the profile i tuned in on f10 and it takes so long to test that i dont try that much anymore.
and yes bdie from 2 gskill kits of 4266mhz 19-19-19-39


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> Ok let me explain.
> 
> 1) the Super I/O chip is the ITE 8688E. That's the chip the BIOS reads and shows bios voltage on, CPU-Z reads, OCCT reads, and so on. This chip has been used for years. But it reads vcore very erratically and will NOT show proper vdroop. If you use strong LLC, it will show over 50-60mv higher than what you set in BIOS!! The vcore you were reading on your old boards was not very accurate and got more inaccurate as core counts went up. Asus finally addressed this on their Z390 boards by putting a diode close to the Super I/O chip, so it reads accurate vcore now.
> 
> 2) 8792E is the chip controlling other ports on the board and some of the memory controller stuff.
> 
> 3) The IR 35201 is the voltage controller. It supports its own monitoring of CPU Current and amps and voltage which is dead on accurate. Are you really angry about this?
> All the other boards you had in the past
> 
> 4) Yes you can use fixed vcore like any other board. AC Loadline is not important on fixed vcore. Just set your bios voltage, set your LLC to high or to turbo, and off you go.


I don't see an IR 35201 sensor in HWiNFO. I see an "ITE IT8688E" Vcore, an "ITE IT8792E" Vcore, and a "Renesas ISL69138/69269" VR VOUT. The 2 ITE's Vcores show almost the same voltage as each other and behave like every other vcore on previous boards where the vcore stays within a very small range under CPU load (eg. 1.331v - 1.342v) whereas the Renesas ISL VR VOUT shows a much larger range (1.280v - 1.305v) under the same load/scenario. Another poster said to ignore the two ITE Vcore sensors and go with the Renesas ISL VR VOUT...Would you agree?

And does it matter wether I have C-states on? I believe you mentioned something previously where one Vcore sensor is read if I have C-States on but to ignore it and pay attention to a different vcore sensor if C-States are off??? I plan to leave C-States on as I do NOT want a fixed CPU voltage nor frequency. I like to use Windows powerplan where I set "Balanced" to 5% - 95% processor speed and "High Performance" to 100%-100% for gaming & other intensive tasks. The 95% on balanced means I'l get a lower CPU frequency & voltage on 100% loads - if I can get the Gigabyte CPU frequency & voltage downscaling to work right (like is so easy on every other board). This means I won't be pumping such high voltages into my CPU the majority of the time, even during 100% loads, thanks to Windows Power Plan limiting my max CPU frequency & voltage when set to the "balanced" power plan (max processor speed = 95%). It's a great, simple, quick way to control min & max frequency & voltage; I've been using this simple yet effective method for many generations of Intel CPUs and motherboards now.


----------



## Emmanuel

metalspider said:


> yeah it is faster,this is the profile i tuned in on f10 and it takes so long to test that i dont try that much anymore.
> and yes bdie from 2 gskill kits of 4266mhz 19-19-19-39


We have the same RAM, give or take the heatspreader. My 9900K (soon to be changed to a KS) is unable to run the RAM at 4266 stable. I dropped it down to 4000 and I've been able to tighten the timings. I'm still running tests, but so far 16-16-16-36 at 4000MHz seems stable, using 1.50v in the BIOS (reported as 1.488v in the PC Health Status).


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> I don't see an IR 35201 sensor in HWiNFO. I see an "ITE IT8688E" Vcore, an "ITE IT8792E" Vcore, and a "Renesas ISL69138/69269" VR VOUT. The 2 ITE's Vcore's show almost the same voltage as each other and behave like every other vcore on previous boards where the vcore stays within a very small range under CPU load (eg. 1.331v - 1.342v) while the Renesas ISL VR VOUT shows a much larger range (1.280v - 1.305v) under the same load/scenario.


Oh. You have the Intersil (Renesas) boards. They also support VRM monitoring. The Master and Xtreme have the IR 35201.

The ITE 8792E that stays between 1.331-1.342v is not reading accurately. When you set your loadline calibration to "Turbo", it will ALWAYS read within +/-12mv of the BIOS voltage, regardless of the load. But that isn't how loadline works. That sensor makes people think that LLC: Turbo is a flat (0 mOhm) loadline and that Extreme and Ultra Extreme give a sustained (RMS) "Voltage rise". There is no VRM controller that gives negative resistance. Note that the sensors, even VR VOUT, is an average reading. It can't show transient spikes/dips (these last for microseconds. Check the oscilloscope graph for these below).

That controller (8792E) vcore is the 'MLCC' socket caps reading. It is the same reading you get when you use a multimeter on the on-board read points. That controller handles other stuff (like I/O chipset stuff).

Look at this chart.
This is *NOT* Gigabyte specific. It's just how modern computers operate (I know this makes you unhappy, sorry).

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

Now look at this. This is how loadline calibration operates. This is the "Averaged" voltage chart, without transient spikes/dips.
Loadline Calibration: Turbo is 0.4 mOhms on our board. LLC: High is 0.8 mOhms.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326

So you can see the Intersil "VR VOUT" is the only one that is dead on accurate.

What is happening under the hood is this.
https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

LLC6 on Elmor's sample is equal to LLC:Turbo on our boards.

BTW Elmor is a former Asus employee and very well respected.

------------

Yes, C-states make things difficult. If you use fixed vcore with c-states enabled, the CPU will downclock at idle, but won't downvolt. If you want downvolting you need to use offset/DVID, and that's when things get messy (With the AC Loadlines and all that crap).


----------



## Wirerat

Emmanuel said:


> We have the same RAM, give or take the heatspreader. My 9900K (soon to be changed to a KS) is unable to run the RAM at 4266 stable. I dropped it down to 4000 and I've been able to tighten the timings. I'm still running tests, but so far 16-16-16-36 at 4000MHz seems stable, using 1.50v in the BIOS (reported as 1.488v in the PC Health Status).


I hate to tell you this but it's most likely the mobo not running the ram a 4266mhz. Aorus master needs all four dimms to hit 4133mhz.

I haven't seen speeds higher than that reported here.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> I am on the F12b which is the aorus pro version.
> 
> Memory OC is fixed vs the F11. I could not even boot with my current profile.
> 
> It still has the Trefi bug that maxes out above 9999.


This bug will be fixed in the next beta.
For some reason their internal build didn't get released. Probably because of the RAM stability issues they are fixing?


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> Oh. You have the Intersil (Renesas) boards. They also support VRM monitoring. The Master and Xtreme have the IR 35201.
> 
> The ITE 8792E that stays between 1.331-1.342v is not reading accurately. When you set your loadline calibration to "Turbo", it will ALWAYS read within +/-12mv of the BIOS voltage, regardless of the load. But that isn't how loadline works. That sensor makes people think that LLC: Turbo is a flat (0 mOhm) loadline and that Extreme and Ultra Extreme give a sustained (RMS) "Voltage rise". There is no VRM controller that gives negative resistance. Note that the sensors, even VR VOUT, is an average reading. It can't show transient spikes/dips (these last for microseconds. Check the oscilloscope graph for these below).
> 
> That controller (8792E) vcore is the 'MLCC' socket caps reading. It is the same reading you get when you use a multimeter on the on-board read points. That controller handles other stuff (like I/O chipset stuff).
> 
> Look at this chart.
> This is *NOT* Gigabyte specific. It's just how modern computers operate (I know this makes you unhappy, sorry).
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html
> 
> Now look at this. This is how loadline calibration operates. This is the "Averaged" voltage chart, without transient spikes/dips.
> Loadline Calibration: Turbo is 0.4 mOhms on our board. LLC: High is 0.8 mOhms.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326
> 
> So you can see the Intersil "VR VOUT" is the only one that is dead on accurate.
> 
> What is happening under the hood is this.
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> LLC6 on Elmor's sample is equal to LLC:Turbo on our boards.
> 
> BTW Elmor is a former Asus employee and very well respected.


Thanks for that info, but that stuff is way over my head. So which sensor should I be reading to monitor CPU voltage?

------------


Falkentyne said:


> Yes, C-states make things difficult. If you use fixed vcore with c-states enabled, the CPU will downclock at idle, but won't downvolt. If you want downvolting you need to use offset/DVID, and that's when things get messy (With the AC Loadlines and all that crap).


But that's what I don't understand. Why does it get messy? It isn't messy with any other motherboard from $300 ASUS ROG Rampage boards to my last motherboard which was literally a bottom-of-the-line, cheap-of-the-cheap Z370 board (MSI Z370-A Pro). In my previous MSI Z370-A Pro mother BIOS, I just set CPU Vcore, CPU frequency, left all C-State stuff to default, raised the LLC to a higher setting (usually 2 or 3 from the most aggressive), and bam, just like that I was running 5.1 GHz on all cores/threads of my 8700K, not to mention with proper frequency & voltage downscaling. From there, I can adjust LLC more aggressive or add a CPU voltage offset if I'm not happy with the vdroop and be done with it. And it's been like that or thereabouts for multiple CPU generations and motherboards now. There should be no reason for so much more complexity on the user's front-end when every other board does it in such a simple manner.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Thanks for that info, but that stuff is way over my head. So which sensor should I be reading to monitor CPU voltage?
> 
> ------------
> But that's what I don't understand. Why does it get messy? It isn't messy with any other motherboard from $300 ASUS ROG Rampage boards to my last motherboard which was literally a bottom-of-the-line, cheap-of-the-cheap Z370 board (MSI Z370-A Pro). In my previous MSI Z370-A Pro mother BIOS, I just set CPU Vcore, CPU frequency, left all C-State stuff to default, raised the LLC to a higher setting (usually 2 or 3 from the most aggressive), and bam, just like that I was running 5.1 GHz on all cores/threads of my 8700K, not to mention with proper frequency & voltage downscaling. From there, I can adjust LLC more aggressive or add a CPU voltage offset if I'm not happy with the vdroop and be done with it. And it's been like that or thereabouts for multiple CPU generations and motherboards now. There should be no reason for so much more complexity on the user's front-end when every other board does it in such a simple manner.


VR VOUT is what you should measure.
Just use HWinfo64 and "hide" the other vcore sensors. You can configure everything to your liking.

Yes you can do the same thing with fixed vcore. Exact same thing. Set your voltage (fixed), set your LLC (High or Turbo, do not exceed turbo--look at the oscilloscope graphs to see why), and off you go. None of this has changed.

But if you want to use downVOLTING with C-states, and downclocking, it gets ugly and everyone here knows that.

Again the only thing complicated is Offset voltage. Asus has an "adaptive+offset voltage" setting, and they set the AC and DC Loadlines to 0.01 for you, when you set SVID Behavior to best case scenario. Then you set your same regular LLC in "adaptive offset" mode, then specify a minimum adaptive voltage floor. (cannot be lower than CPU VID). Then off you go.

On the Gigabyte board, there is no "adaptive voltage" setting. Just offset. There is no voltage floor. So setting a negative offset can cause an idle BSOD if AC Loadline is set too low also. 
The closest thing you can do is set AC Loadline to "1" and DC Loadline to "1", then set Loadline Calibration to High or Turbo, then set your offset. But this isn't as nice or as graceful as Asus' adaptive mode.

The important thing is: If you use DVID mode, if you use a "high" AC Loadline manual value (100 to 160), Vcore LLC MUST be set around Standard/Normal or Low, or you will have excessive voltage.
If you use a "Low" AC loadline value (example, around 1 to 40), then you can set a higher Vcore LLC.

I really hope this helps.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Your Gflops are a bit low.
> I get 490 at 4.7 / 4.4 at those settings with 3200 mhz CL14 RAM, but with fixed vcore/LLC Turbo and 1.210v bios set.
> 
> Try changing tFAW to be 4x TRRD_S and test that.
> Then reduce tRRD_S by 1 and tFAW to keep 4x and see if your gflops goes up.



Getting there. Any other suggestions? 


Btw, I know you have the same h150i, are these temps expected?

Oh and what vccio/vccsa do run?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Getting there. Any other suggestions?
> 
> 
> Btw, I know you have the same h150i, are these temps expected?
> 
> Oh and what vccio/vccsa do run?


I have a NH-D15, with a delidded and re-sealed CPU IHS. LM under the IHS and LM on top of the IHS->heatsink too. Because I'm crazy.
I'm at 1.20v/1.23v because I'm experimenting.

Try setting TRRD_S / TRRD_L to 4 and TFAW to 16 and see if you're stable.
You should gain 10 gflops from that.


----------



## Emmanuel

Wirerat said:


> I hate to tell you this but it's most likely the mobo not running the ram a 4266mhz. Aorus master needs all four dimms to hit 4133mhz.
> 
> I haven't seen speeds higher than that reported here.


I do have four dimms. The motherboard plays a role, but I've seen stability improve as I increased the VCCSA up to 1.35v. Since I won't go any higher than that, I've started downclocking and tightening timings instead. In any case, my goal was to hit 4000MHz on the RAM with respectable timings.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> I have a NH-D15, with a delidded and re-sealed CPU IHS. LM under the IHS and LM on top of the IHS->heatsink too. Because I'm crazy.
> I'm at 1.20v/1.23v because I'm experimenting.
> 
> Try setting TRRD_S / TRRD_L to 4 and TFAW to 16 and see if you're stable.
> You should gain 10 gflops from that.


Oh wow, didn't know you did that (I did isolate around the cpu with the ac foam, but not confident to open the cpu)



Started hitting thermal limit, but interested to see how tight I can take these at 1.4v


Don't want to bother you to much, thinking of asking in the 24/7 stability thread or if you have another suggestion?


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> VR VOUT is what you should measure.
> Just use HWinfo64 and "hide" the other vcore sensors. You can configure everything to your liking.
> 
> 
> 
> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes you can do the same thing with fixed vcore. Exact same thing. Set your voltage (fixed), set your LLC (High or Turbo, do not exceed turbo--look at the oscilloscope graphs to see why), and off you go. None of this has changed.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not the same. That's with a fixed Vcore which is extremely far from optimal and healthy for the CPU. Fixed VCore makes absolutely no sense for a everyday general use.
> 
> 
> 
> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> But if you want to use downVOLTING with C-states, and downclocking, it gets ugly and everyone here knows that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's what I'm asking. What does it get "ugly" with Gigabyte boards when it's so simple with every other board?
> 
> Again the only thing complicated is Offset voltage. Asus has an "adaptive+offset voltage" setting, and they set the AC and DC Loadlines to 0.01 for you, when you set SVID Behavior to best case scenario. Then you set your same regular LLC in "adaptive offset" mode, then specify a minimum adaptive voltage floor. (cannot be lower than CPU VID). Then off you go.
> 
> On the Gigabyte board, there is no "adaptive voltage" setting. Just offset. There is no voltage floor. So setting a negative offset can cause an idle BSOD if AC Loadline is set too low also.
> The closest thing you can do is set AC Loadline to "1" and DC Loadline to "1", then set Loadline Calibration to High or Turbo, then set your offset. But this isn't as nice or as graceful as Asus' adaptive mode.
> 
> The important thing is: If you use DVID mode, if you use a "high" AC Loadline manual value (100 to 160), Vcore LLC MUST be set around Standard/Normal or Low, or you will have excessive voltage.
> If you use a "Low" AC loadline value (example, around 1 to 40), then you can set a higher Vcore LLC.
> 
> I really hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Thanks. OK. There's too many different combinations and things to consider with regards to different combinations of AC loadline values, Vcore LLCs, DVID mode, VCore to a defined value, auto, or "normal," etc. So I'm a little lost at what I should be doing to start. All I'd like to do is the following: specify a max CPU frequency & Vcore (for that frequency) and then have the frequency and voltage drop like normal. This is simple to do regardless wether I have an ASUS, ASRock, or MSI board and regardless of how high- or low-end it is. How do I simply do this with a Gigabyte board?...Should I start by setting AC & DC loadline both to 1 and regular LLC to "medium" then set the VCore and frequency to my desired values (eg. 5.1 GHz and, let's say, 1.38v to start)???


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Oh wow, didn't know you did that (I did isolate around the cpu with the ac foam, but not confident to open the cpu)
> 
> 
> 
> Started hitting thermal limit, but interested to see how tight I can take these at 1.4v
> 
> 
> Don't want to bother you to much, thinking of asking in the 24/7 stability thread or if you have another suggestion?


I do NOT have foam inside the IHS! It's too thick. it would stop contact.
Only OUTSIDE of the IHS between the heatsink and IHS. I have the foam sitting on top of Super 33+ tape that I have covering the entire socket around the IHS edges.

Some of your timings seem very loose.
I know I'm only at 3200 CL14, but you have some high values on your secondaries.

Try copying these. NOT the TRDWR values. You won't be able to boot with those. Mess with lowering some of your tWRRD's and those tWTR's and stuff.
tWCL should be 1 below your CAS, not 1 above it.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Thanks. OK. There's too many different combinations and things to consider with regards to different combinations of AC loadline values, Vcore LLCs, DVID mode, VCore to a defined value, auto, or "normal," etc. So I'm a little lost at what I should be doing to start. All I'd like to do is the following: specify a max CPU frequency & Vcore (for that frequency) and then have the frequency and voltage drop like normal. This is simple to do regardless wether I have an ASUS, ASRock, or MSI board and regardless of how high- or low-end it is. How do I simply do this with a Gigabyte board?...Should I start by setting AC & DC loadline both to 1 and regular LLC to "medium" then set the VCore and frequency to my desired values (eg. 5.1 GHz and, let's say, 1.38v to start)???


I answered this already. I answered it twice in a row actually.

I said, set a fixed vcore. Manual vcore.
Set your Vcore loadline calibration to high or turbo. (high will require slightly higher bios voltage, but will have better transients). Poof. Done. You don't need to change anything else besides your power/current limits. Disable MCE.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> I do NOT have foam inside the IHS! It's too thick. it would stop contact.
> Only OUTSIDE of the IHS between the heatsink and IHS. I have the foam sitting on top of Super 33+ tape that I have covering the entire socket around the IHS edges.
> 
> Some of your timings seem very loose.
> I know I'm only at 3200 CL14, but you have some high values on your secondaries.
> 
> Try copying these. NOT the TRDWR values. You won't be able to boot with those. Mess with lowering some of your tWRRD's and those tWTR's and stuff.
> tWCL should be 1 below your CAS, not 1 above it.


Is there a concise place where the known relationships between timings are all listed together? Like when you say that tWCL should be 1 below the CAS, etc.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Is there a concise place where the known relationships between timings are all listed together? Like when you say that tWCL should be 1 below the CAS, etc.


Nope just by stalking the DDR4 thread and looking at other people's timings.
Try reducing some of those high timings then check your Gflops.
You are using MUCH faster memory than me, so you should be above 490 gflops.

If that is Samsung B-die, you should be able to run 350-400 tRFC and 32768 tREFI also (assuming you aren't on the buggy F10 final or F11 beta branches for the Aorus master).


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow, didn't know you did that (I did isolate around the cpu with the ac foam, but not confident to open the cpu)
> 
> 
> 
> Started hitting thermal limit, but interested to see how tight I can take these at 1.4v
> 
> 
> Don't want to bother you to much, thinking of asking in the 24/7 stability thread or if you have another suggestion?
> 
> 
> 
> I do NOT have foam inside the IHS! It's too thick. it would stop contact.
> Only OUTSIDE of the IHS between the heatsink and IHS. I have the foam sitting on top of Super 33+ tape that I have covering the entire socket around the IHS edges.
> 
> Some of your timings seem very loose.
> I know I'm only at 3200 CL14, but you have some high values on your secondaries.
> 
> Try copying these. NOT the TRDWR values. You won't be able to boot with those. Mess with lowering some of your tWRRD's and those tWTR's and stuff.
> tWCL should be 1 below your CAS, not 1 above it.
Click to expand...

Yep that's what I meant, around the cpu on the outside and squeezed the foam with the bracket, in my case just to reduce pin oxidation.

Interestingly lowering the previous values actually caused lower heaven/superposition scores, which doesn't seem right.

Maybe 1.22 io/sa isn't enough.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Yep that's what I meant, around the cpu on the outside and squeezed the foam with the bracket, in my case just to reduce pin oxidation.
> 
> Interestingly lowering the previous values actually caused lower heaven/superposition scores, which doesn't seem right.
> 
> Maybe 1.22 io/sa isn't enough.


Check your Gflops first.
I'm not really much of a RAM guy at all
I don't 'even know my Heaven/Superposition scores.
I just make sure my gflops are good and I'm done!


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep that's what I meant, around the cpu on the outside and squeezed the foam with the bracket, in my case just to reduce pin oxidation.
> 
> Interestingly lowering the previous values actually caused lower heaven/superposition scores, which doesn't seem right.
> 
> Maybe 1.22 io/sa isn't enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Check your Gflops first.
> I'm not really much of a RAM guy at all
> I don't 'even know my Heaven/Superposition scores.
> I just make sure my gflops are good and I'm done!
Click to expand...

The 44 for cache seems stable, good call.

I asked on the stability thread for suggestions. Would like to break 6k/10k in heaven/superposition. Pretty close


----------



## Lurifaks

Falkentyne said:


> I answered this already. I answered it twice in a row actually.
> 
> I said, set a fixed vcore. Manual vcore.
> Set your Vcore loadline calibration to high or turbo. (high will require slightly higher bios voltage, but will have better transients). Poof. Done. You don't need to change anything else besides your power/current limits. Disable MCE.


Hi  What power/current limits do you change? I have never tried to do this


----------



## Wirerat

Lurifaks said:


> Falkentyne said:
> 
> 
> 
> I answered this already. I answered it twice in a row actually.
> 
> I said, set a fixed vcore. Manual vcore.
> Set your Vcore loadline calibration to high or turbo. (high will require slightly higher bios voltage, but will have better transients). Poof. Done. You don't need to change anything else besides your power/current limits. Disable MCE.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif What power/current limits do you change? I have never tried to do this
Click to expand...

You actually don't have to touch the power limits when manually overclocking. Auto is fine. 

Even with the offset Oc it never power limits the clocks.

This is a gigabyte thing. There were several reviews that took note of the gigabyte boards not even enforcing power limits with optimized defaults.

All my power limits are on auto during this abusive P95 run.


----------



## satinghostrider

Falkentyne said:


> I answered this already. I answered it twice in a row actually.
> 
> I said, set a fixed vcore. Manual vcore.
> Set your Vcore loadline calibration to high or turbo. (high will require slightly higher bios voltage, but will have better transients). Poof. Done. You don't need to change anything else besides your power/current limits. Disable MCE.


Just curious, what power/current limit do you need to set it to? AC/DC Loadline and Switching frequency?
Just seeing if I need to tweak my settings further since I have finalized my stable overclock to be 5.2GHz / 4.8GHz at 1.365V. MCE is disabled but the other 3 settings I asked above namely the Power/Current Limit, AC/DC Loadline and the Switching Frequency is STOCK. I am on fixed vcore.


Thanks very much Fal!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Yuck, I hate run variance. 1% lows fluctuate too much. It's hard for me to know which timing changes are having meaningful impact. I gotta start recording this stuff in a txt file to look at from afar.
> 
> How long does gsat take? Is it intense like p95?


Use aida64 lower the latency + higher the bandwidth = better.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> That's what I usually use but i figured i would start using unigine superposition as well since it is closely related with gaming. Should I not?
> I completed a run at 5.4ghz ht off with 4000 cl15 but the 1% lows went down.


It's the run variance you mentioned. Dial the ram in with aida64. It's more consistent.

Sounds the oc may not be stable if performance drops. 

Did u stress at all?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

Wirerat said:


> You actually don't have to touch the power limits when manually overclocking. Auto is fine.
> 
> Even with the offset Oc it never power limits the clocks.
> 
> This is a gigabyte thing. There were several reviews that took note of the gigabyte boards not even enforcing power limits with optimized defaults.
> 
> All my power limits are on auto during this abusive P95 run.


Ok, thanks


----------



## spin5000

I'm currently testing with Windows Power Plan on High Performance (CPU min: 100%, max: 100%) so all my cores are always at 4.9 GHz regardless of load...During load, my vcore (according to Renesas ISL69138/69269 VR VOUT) is at 1.278v - 1.314v which seems normal and as expected. The strange part is when there's little-to-no load - _even though all cores are still at 4.9 GHz_ - it then drops to 1.209v - 1.228v (and keeps fluctuating in that area).

Why such a big drop when no load? Won't this potentially affect no-load stability???

I've always used C-States and I've therefore always had vcore drop with frequency on all previous Intel CPUs and other brand of motherboards but I've never, EVER had vcore drop according to load even though the frequency didn't change. Regardless of whether the CPU load is low or high, the vcore should always stay within the same range or thereabouts. There shouldn't be such a drastic change (over 0.1v at times!) between little-to-no load vcore and load vcore. This is terrible CPU/motherboard behavior and just begging for little-to-no load instability. How can I eradicate this without reverting to a fixed vcore (never had to use a fixed vcore nor had this sort of behavior with lots of other Intel CPUs and brand of motherboards since a 2500K 9 years ago, if not longer).



Falkentyne said:


> I answered this already. I answered it twice in a row actually.
> 
> I said, set a fixed vcore. Manual vcore.
> Set your Vcore loadline calibration to high or turbo. (high will require slightly higher bios voltage, but will have better transients). Poof. Done. You don't need to change anything else besides your power/current limits. Disable MCE.


Yes and I've said this 2 or 3 times already as well. I am talking about WITHOUT reverting to a fixed Vcore. I have never, EVER used a fixed VCore since at least Sandy Bridge (2500K) all throughout Ivy Bridge-E (4930K), Haswell-E (5930K), 1st-gen Coffee Lake (8700K) and possiby some CPUs in-between. And I've NEVER had such dramatic differences (0.1v at times) between little-to-no load and full-load vcore in a static CPU frequency scenario (ie. no change in CPU frequency, only change in load).


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> Use aida64 lower the latency + higher the bandwidth = better.



That's what I use to benchmark my memory too, but for gaming the bandwidth is more important than latency.


----------



## stasio

New Z390 beta BIOS posted on TweakTown.......my sigy
or
https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1133.html


----------



## spin5000

So I've gone back to fixed vcore just for now. I set 1.375v in the BIOS, that leads to 1.335v in Windows (using the correct VR VOUT sensor) and all the way down to 1.299v under load. This is with LLC on Turbo. How am I getting such a low voltage drop from what I input in the BIOS compared to Windows, not to mention then even a further drop 0.035v drop from idle to load with LLC @ Turbo?

Why are these Z390 Gigabyte boards such a cryptic, unintuitive, vague nightmare to overlclock compared to every other board??????????

And I think I found out why my voltage (non-fixed voltage) was undervolting to 1.21v when still at max frequency (5.0 GHz) whenever there was little-to-no load. It seems like it's got something to do with a setting called "voltage reduction initiated TVB". I disabled it and then voltage at 5.0 GHz remained in a "normal" range rather than massively downvolting 0.1v or more when there was no load. The problem with "voltage reduction initiated TVB" being disabled is now my vcore is way higher (even during load). It's now going all the way up to 1.38v or more even though I didn't touch anything else.

I did a Google search for voltage reduction initiated TVB. Not 1 single webpage comes up specifically for "voltage reduction initiated" TVB, 0 results. Are you kidding me??????????? What an absolute joke.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> was it stable?


You should give f11c a try. I think you will like it.


----------



## Medvediy

Falkentyne said:


> You should give f11c a try. I think you will like it.


Have they fixed RAM issues?


----------



## Lurifaks

I went to F11b, few hours later F11c came out. Flashed again, and used exactly same settings as i had stable with F11b, with F11c wont boot to windows instant BSOD. So back to F11b for now


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> Nope just by stalking the DDR4 thread and looking at other people's timings.
> Try reducing some of those high timings then check your Gflops.
> You are using MUCH faster memory than me, so you should be above 490 gflops.
> 
> If that is Samsung B-die, you should be able to run 350-400 tRFC and 32768 tREFI also (assuming you aren't on the buggy F10 final or F11 beta branches for the Aorus master).


Thanks, this sounds like a good compromise between skirting the limits of data corruption and a performance boost. I was actually thinking of going with my max tREFI/2.


----------



## Falkentyne

Lurifaks said:


> I went to F11b, few hours later F11c came out. Flashed again, and used exactly same settings as i had stable with F11b, with F11c wont boot to windows instant BSOD. So back to F11b for now


Please clear the CMOS after flashing and then try again.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> What did they add or tweak? i'm hooked on F9 right now. Was teetering with 5.3ghz-5.5ghz earlier (ht off of course). Does the new bios have the turbo per core limit control menu? Did they remove anything?
> 
> 
> i'm exhausted, I need some sleep.


All of the old settings are back. And the Internal VR Settings settings work again, not just the AC/DC Loadlines. 
They never worked on any BIOS since first release. Imon slope/offset changes CPU Package Power.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> All of the old settings are back. And the Internal VR Settings settings work again, not just the AC/DC Loadlines.
> They never worked on any BIOS since first release. Imon slope/offset changes CPU Package Power.


Great news!!! Sounds like F11 final will be a good one. It really makes you question their QA process though.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Great news!!! Sounds like F11 final will be a good one. It really makes you question their QA process though.


I'm the only person who even tested those however. Just like the SVID OFFSET option, which I'm sure no one would have touched until I mentioned it. I think only one other user asked what that option does in this entire thread.
The VR settings are usually changed by laptop users with unlocked Bioses, to bypass CPU TDP limitations on locked processors.
So only the AC/DC Loadlines were tested (since Asus also exposes them and they are needed for offset/auto voltage modes).

If the non K chips don't allow package power limit changing, then the Imon tweaks will be very useful for them.

The question is if any of the exposed settings affect overclocking stability or not. People should test their minimum vcore limits again.


----------



## metalspider

Emmanuel said:


> We have the same RAM, give or take the heatspreader. My 9900K (soon to be changed to a KS) is unable to run the RAM at 4266 stable. I dropped it down to 4000 and I've been able to tighten the timings. I'm still running tests, but so far 16-16-16-36 at 4000MHz seems stable, using 1.50v in the BIOS (reported as 1.488v in the PC Health Status).


 ive tried many things with the ram when i got it.i could boot 4133mhz and sometimes even 4266mhz,in f11 even 4000mhz finally worked a little but all those speeds i always got errors in hci memtest eventually no matter how high i tried vccsa vccio dram and training dram.
spent a few weeks tuning and just dont want to do it anymore for now,so im happy with what i got.
i posted my complete profile before on this thread.


----------



## Emmanuel

metalspider said:


> ive tried many things with the ram when i got it.i could boot 4133mhz and sometimes even 4266mhz,in f11 even 4000mhz finally worked a little but all those speeds i always got errors in hci memtest eventually no matter how high i tried vccsa vccio dram and training dram.
> spent a few weeks tuning and just dont want to do it anymore for now,so im happy with what i got.
> i posted my complete profile before on this thread.


What's up with that evil tREFI? 

Ya honestly I XMPed and skipped overclocking RAM altogether on my previous build. Right now, I'm only looking to make slight changes just because I'll be running my 9900KS stock for a while and it'll be easy to isolate stability problems to the RAM vs having everything overclocked. Are you running the RAM at 1.50v?


----------



## Salve1412

BIOS F11c for the Master appears to have C6 Microcodes: wouldn't performance be negatively affected after updating from a F10b BIOS with BE microcodes? I searched through the thread and I found divergent opinions, as, while most of the comments brand them as terrible performance-wise (compared to BA-BE microcodes), a post by Kedarwolf from a while ago regards them as "fast ones", especially compared to the newer CA microcodes.


----------



## metalspider

Emmanuel said:


> What's up with that evil tREFI?
> 
> Ya honestly I XMPed and skipped overclocking RAM altogether on my previous build. Right now, I'm only looking to make slight changes just because I'll be running my 9900KS stock for a while and it'll be easy to isolate stability problems to the RAM vs having everything overclocked. Are you running the RAM at 1.50v?


 im running ram at 1.41v but i tried lots of insane higher voltages when i was chasing the mhz.even 1.55v or 1.6v a little just to test real extremes.
the trefi i left on auto and didnt go too crazy with trfc either since i was tuning this in the summer and my sticks ran a little hotter anyway.even now in the winter when i game the heat from the gpu can get my ram temps over 50c.


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> With that specific profile, during all core load(50x) Vrout is 1.25v in cbr15 and 1.27v-1.275v in cbr20. If i were to oc my chip to just regular 50x all core OC with turbo llc and fixed voltage in bios, I would need to set voltage at 1.32v to be stable for all loads. So with low llc + acdc 1/1 + 140mv offset, I achieve same required avx voltage needed under load + lower the amount of voltage needed under load for non-avx + still have flexible voltage available when needed to still hit the other non-all core frequencies with their respective cache ratios. To add, the lower llc lowers temperatures by a few degrees during all core load compared to just using fixed static voltage with turbo llc at the same all core frequency. If we switch to medium llc here with a lower offset, we can't cover our higher ratios. If we switch to medium llc here with the same offset, we use more voltage under all core load than needed. If we switch to standard llc here, we won't be stable at all core due to too much vdroop unless we increase our offset above 140mv, but then we would also have a higher idle voltage which is no good either. If you trying to raise acdc from 1/1 and lower the voltage to compensate, you still won't have enough to hit maximum 1c-2c core speed/cache speed without crashing. Low llc + acdc 1/1 ends up being the big player here in being able to fine tune the voltages underload in dvid mode specifically for each multiplier for turbo ber core overclocks. People can still choose between downclocking/voltage dropping at idle or maximum boost at all times just by choosing the appropriate windows power plan. If you tried to turbo per core overclock on fixed voltage with turbo llc, you'd have to run at max core multiplier voltage(5.3ghz) at all times, even while under all core multiplier load(5ghz), which is no good either. And because we are using ring to core option, all non-all core loads receive better performance than you would normally get on the same all core fixed overclock(50c/47cache) since you would get up to an additional 300mhz on the cores/cache during all non-all core loads. You will get memory and cache performance improvements in aida64 memory benchmark too. And if your chip is exceptional at lower voltages, you can even squeeze up to 5.5ghz 2c/4t with 5.2ghz cache with ht enabled as long as you have good cooling with the same voltage/llc settings.
> 
> 
> 
> This is why I think dvid turbo per core overclocking with low llc + acdc 1/1 is the most superior method of overclocking on the z390 aorus master, it lets you have your cake and eat it too.
> 
> Here is my top cbr15 score from that specific 5.0-5.3 profile, with a lesser than optimal tuned ram, I never scored this high at 50x all core multiplier with fixed voltage OC,. Single core speed score in cbr15 for the profile is 233 or 234. I recommend everyone try this type of overclock if they want to squeeze the most performance out of their chip when they could normally not support a higher frequency fixed voltage all core OC due to excess temps, instability, or silicon quality.


Dude great post. Can't wait to get home to make some changes to my settings after reading all of this and checking out your settings. Rep+


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> Emmanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I meant 280 which is probably too low but was stable during my very short testing. Right now I'm testing my RAM without touching tRFC and tREFI and once I determine that 16-16-16-36 4000MHz is stable, I'll mess with these two subtimings.
> 
> 
> 
> I found somewhere between 320-360 to be suitable for ddr4 4000 daily use. Your kit is higher quality than mine though, you might actually be able to do 280 trfc for daily use. What kind of testing are you doing?
> 
> I'm currently tweaking a few timings and looking at the minimum fps differences in unigine superposition 1080p medium.
> 
> Lowering twr from 12 to 10 and RRDs_L from 6 to 4 increased my 1% lows by roughly 30 fps in the benchmark(in combination with my other timings). Trying to lower trfc from 360 to 280 caused me to drop back down in fps.
Click to expand...

So in other words, changing TWR and RRDs_L gave you better frame pacing? Did you see an increase in conventional fps?


----------



## Falkentyne

I have the older microcodes (B4, B4, AE, B8), as they were labeled in F10. Managed to find the BIN files on the Intel site.
Trying to attempt to mod them into F11C.

Ok I think it's done.
Going to flash and see what happens.


----------



## scaramonga

Which iteration of microcodes are faster?, I mean, do they get slower as they are updated, and if that's the case, surely one would be better off modding in codes from, say, the F6 BIOS, for example?


----------



## Falkentyne

A2 (A0 is untested, f7a bios came with A2 and I think that continued until F9 betas), AE, and BE all give very similar scores in CB R15/R20.

It was only starting with C6 that the scores became about 100 mhz of points lower, and CA is just as bad.


----------



## GeneO

Salve1412 said:


> BIOS F11c for the Master appears to have C6 Microcodes: wouldn't performance be negatively affected after updating from a F10b BIOS with BE microcodes? I searched through the thread and I found divergent opinions, as, while most of the comments brand them as terrible performance-wise (compared to BA-BE microcodes), a post by Kedarwolf from a while ago regards them as "fast ones", especially compared to the newer CA microcodes.


Yeahm, C6 for 8086k too. Before I had B4  Does seem to perform a bit worse in the encoding portion of realbench. Have to test for stability again too. I did mange to get in a boot loop for no reason for settings which now work fine. No other issue so far, and the interface is certainly much better than F9 IMO. I may build a custom with B4 or Bx.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> A2 (A0 is untested, f7a bios came with A2 and I think that continued until F9 betas), AE, and BE all give very similar scores in CB R15/R20.
> 
> It was only starting with C6 that the scores became about 100 mhz of points lower, and CA is just as bad.


How did it go integrating C6 into the new BIOS?


----------



## GeneO

scaramonga said:


> Which iteration of microcodes are faster?, I mean, do they get slower as they are updated, and if that's the case, surely one would be better off modding in codes from, say, the F6 BIOS, for example?


If they get slower it is because of security patches in the microcode or the microcode enabling security patches in the OS. So it is a matter of security or speed (with Intel) I guess.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Yeahm, C6 for 8086k too. Before I had B4  Does seem to perform a bit worse in the encoding portion of realbench. Have to test for stability again too. I did mange to get in a boot loop for no reason for settings which now work fine. No other issue so far, and the interface is certainly much better than F9 IMO. I may build a custom with B4 or Bx.


I managed (with some difficulty) to insert the F10 version microcodes (B4, B4, B8 and AE) without deleting all of them  My first attempt got the 9900k microcode "AE" working but deleted all the others until I followed @KedarWolf's advice (after I found the original BIN microcodes on github. The raw versions I already had were in .DAT or ucode file format and I couldn't convert them to BIN).

Here you go.
Enjoy your performance back.

Flash with " EFIFLASH z390mast.f11c /x "in a bootable freedos command prompt, or whatever you renamed the bios file too.

Qflash won't flash it since it's modded.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> How did it go integrating C6 into the new BIOS?


I tested C6 (and CA later) months ago with the VMware microcode loader. So whenever someone releases new microcodes, I build a microcode.dat file and load it in windows and see how much my scores drop. Then I just uninstall it.


----------



## Driller au

@Falkentyne Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

I never would have realized it was using the new microcodes until someone mentioned it. I was wondering why my LinX residuals were suddenly stable at a lower than average voltage I had tested yesterday on this one. 
(The 300 khz vs 500 khz thing is still a thing btw).


----------



## Salve1412

Salve1412 said:


> BIOS F11c for the Master appears to have C6 Microcodes: wouldn't performance be negatively affected after updating from a F10b BIOS with BE microcodes? I searched through the thread and I found divergent opinions, as, while most of the comments brand them as terrible performance-wise (compared to BA-BE microcodes), a post by Kedarwolf from a while ago regards them as "fast ones", especially compared to the newer CA microcodes.


I replaced the C6 Microcodes in the F11c BIOS with the BE/BA ones that Kedarwolf integrated in his modded F10b one: after creating a Freedos bootable drive with Rufus I flashed the rom with Efiflash and everything went fine. I'll attach the modded file, in case someone wants to make use of it.


----------



## BradleyW

Falkentyne said:


> Isn't tWR supposed to be tRTP * 2 ? Then *CL + tRCD + tRTP = TRAS?*
> @Jpmboy


Can someone verify this claim, because if it is true, every screenshot of people's timings on this thread are way out to a high degree. 

In my case (and many others on this thread):
(CL 18 + tRCD 19 + tRTP 12) != (TRAS 39). It is way over my specified TRAS 39!


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> I replaced the C6 Microcodes in the F11c BIOS with the BE/BA ones that Kedarwolf integrated in his modded F10b one: after creating a Freedos bootable drive with Rufus I flashed the rom with Efiflash and everything went fine. I'll attach the modded file, in case someone wants to make use of it.


Beat you to it a few posts up  Although mine has AE for the 9900k.
All I know about AE and BE are some sort of TSX-NI thingies used under Linux, with some bugs like AE having extremely long times either crashing or doing something on some game console emulators, while BE "fixed" some issues but still had problems compared to A2, which I don't think supported TSX-NI (if you tried to enable it, nothing happened).

Google it.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> Beat you to it a few posts up  Although mine has AE for the 9900k.
> All I know about AE and BE are some sort of TSX-NI thingies used under Linux, with some bugs like AE having extremely long times either crashing or doing something on some game console emulators, while BE "fixed" some issues but still had problems compared to A2, which I don't think supported TSX-NI (if you tried to enable it, nothing happened).
> 
> Google it.


Sounds like when I get my 9900KS and flash the final F11 version, I'm gonna have to first deal with figuring out which microcode version is optimal... Man this stuff is getting increasingly complex lol.


----------



## Wirerat

Emmanuel said:


> Sounds like when I get my 9900KS and flash the final F11 version, I'm gonna have to first deal with figuring out which microcode version is optimal... Man this stuff is getting increasingly complex lol.


As far as the security vulnerabilities patches I believe insptectre allows disable/enable of some of them on the fly in windows. 

For me, I don't bother with it. A 5/5.1ghz all core 9900k has plenty of overhead. Loosing 3-5fps won't be game breaking.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> As far as the security vulnerabilities patches I believe insptectre allows disable/enable of some of them on the fly in windows.
> 
> For me, I don't bother with it. A 5/5.1ghz all core 9900k has plenty of overhead. Loosing 3-5fps won't be game breaking.


Disabling /enabling security patches through the registry has turned out to be a nightmare. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to the settings and masks for the multitude of patches. It is impossible to figure out how to disable a particular vulnerability patch (if it is at all possible).


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I managed (with some difficulty) to insert the F10 version microcodes (B4, B4, B8 and AE) without deleting all of them  My first attempt got the 9900k microcode "AE" working but deleted all the others until I followed @KedarWolf's advice (after I found the original BIN microcodes on github. The raw versions I already had were in .DAT or ucode file format and I couldn't convert them to BIN).
> 
> Here you go.
> Enjoy your performance back.
> 
> Flash with " EFIFLASH z390mast.f11c /x "in a bootable freedos command prompt, or whatever you renamed the bios file too.
> 
> Qflash won't flash it since it's modded.


Thanks. Was occupied all day - saved me some time


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> Sounds like when I get my 9900KS and flash the final F11 version, I'm gonna have to first deal with figuring out which microcode version is optimal... Man this stuff is getting increasingly complex lol.


I believe that would be one of the "B" microcodes as they were released with "new stepping" support. And the 9900KS is simply a binned R0 stepping.

Anyway I was bored (don't ask) so I single handedly collected every single 9th gen microcode I could find as far back as the archive goes. 
Managed to find something as old as 84 for the 9900k (CPU ID= 906EC, I think this is shared by the 9700k too?). A few of the others go back to 80 for other SKU's.


I take no responsibility if you blow up your motherboard, windows, VRM's or your sanity trying to use them.

You guys have fun trying to increase your scores.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Disabling /enabling security patches through the registry has turned out to be a nightmare. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to the settings and masks for the multitude of patches. It is impossible to figure out how to disable a particular vulnerability patch (if it is at all possible).


As I said, I don't bother with it. It seems like it would make more impact on the older 4/8 cpus. 

I've never used inspectre. I just see it mentioned a lot.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> As I said, I don't bother with it. It seems like it would make more impact on the older 4/8 cpus.
> 
> I've never used inspectre. I just see it mentioned a lot.


Inspectre only works with the first few security patches, not the many that have followed.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> But yeah, anyone who uses the new bios, please let us know if any requirements changed for your overclock or if you were able to gain any memory overclocking headroom etc.
> I'll be staying on F9 for now, not looking to jinx my overclock.


No change here, but I am running an 8086k (5.1/4,8 GHz, AVX 0)


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> As I said, I don't bother with it. It seems like it would make more impact on the older 4/8 cpus.
> 
> I've never used inspectre. I just see it mentioned a lot.


Which BIOS are you currently using on your Pro board?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Same OC settings work? Did you test to see if you can lower voltage?


No test for lowwer voltage. The 300 KHz setting still seems good though.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> As far as the security vulnerabilities patches I believe insptectre allows disable/enable of some of them on the fly in windows.
> 
> For me, I don't bother with it. A 5/5.1ghz all core 9900k has plenty of overhead. Loosing 3-5fps won't be game breaking.


Gigabyte still hasn't updated the Intel Management Engine firmware to address security vulnerabilities that have had an updated ME firmware for quite dome time (e.g. Asus did quite a while ago:


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Gotcha. That's good to hear, 300khz pwm switchrate + high perf pwm phase control has been working really well for me with acdc preset powersaving + medium llc + dvid offset.
> 
> How is benchmark performance compared to last bios? Have you noticed any increases or decreases for scores on average?
> 
> 
> I kind of want to play around with it just to see if memory overclocking improves, would love to be able to get these sticks to cl16/4400 for daily use.


Just ran realbench. A few percent slower with C6 ucode, same with B4 modded BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> I was just checking out the gigabyte beta bios thread on tweaktown. I noticed you mentioned "additional turbo voltage", Do we now have an adaptive voltage setting that we can key in the actual voltage we want like we could do with msi laptops? Or was that buried in the AMI thingy that you are able to peak into?


You mean this?
That entire menu can only be unlocked by some sort of special extraction on win-raid.com forums, after making a UEFI capsule bios dump with FPTW64 -d bios.bin -BIOS
I don't know how to do the special extractions. Using AMIBCP 5.02.0031 on the FPTW64 -bios backup and then flashing it back with FPTW64 won't unlock any options (i've tried several times). Only Lost_N_Bios and a few others know how to relocate menus (it has to be moved to another location and then set to a higher priority in the setup menu).

On laptops, just setting the main menus to "User" or "Supervisor" unlocks them. Laptops use the original AMI GUI, that's why.

Editing the original raw downloaded file and flashing that is an instant brick btw.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> What a minute, if gigabyte didn't update the me, then how are the updated microcodes supposed to do anything? I don't get it. What would be the purpose of the new microcodes, they only seem to keep making performance worse. Am i misinterpreting how all of this works?


Just use the bios I posted 1 or 2 pages ago. It has the older microcodes.

And last page, I posted every single microcode released for 9th gen, in case people want to go WAY WAY back, but no one seemed to care. Only one view


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> I was just checking out the gigabyte beta bios thread on tweaktown. I noticed you mentioned "additional turbo voltage", Do we now have an adaptive voltage setting that we can key in the actual voltage we want like we could do with msi laptops? Or was that buried in the AMI thingy that you are able to peak into?


Oh man, that would be amazing! Leave the stock frequencies and their voltage alone and only tweak the boost clock and voltage. I just overclocked a friend's 3570K on a Z77 Asrock from 3.4GHz to 4.5GHz using only that. It's stupid having to impact the whole range of voltages simply to set one voltage for the max clocks. Then you have to not only test load stability but idle stability, if you care about downclocking etc.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> Which BIOS are you currently using on your Pro board?


F12b


----------



## Emmanuel

After over 28H of Memtest86 hammering the hard tests and 1000% coverage in HCI Memtest, I'm pretty confident that this is a good starting point for tweaking the subtimings.
Aside from tREFI and tRFC, does anything seem off or unoptimal? FYI, this is what the board sets the subtimings to when using the "enhanced performance" preset.

Thanks!


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> Retail Ram kits generally don't follow the formula at all.
> 
> Examples
> gskill cl 17-17-17-37 4000.
> g skill cl 18 19 19 39 4000
> etc etc
> 
> I think it is a general guideline or maximum for tras.


I suspected it was wrong for the vast majority of kits, thank you.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> What a minute, if gigabyte didn't update the me, then how are the updated microcodes supposed to do anything? I don't get it. What would be the purpose of the new microcodes, they only seem to keep making performance worse. Am i misinterpreting how all of this works?


Yes. The ME is basically a micro OS in the chipset responsible for a lot of functions. It can and does have security vulnerabilities independent of the processor chip and its firmware can be updated. Vulnerabilities in the processor are what you usually associate with the Intel processor. The microcode can be updated in the bios or loaded right after boot by windows. Some patches involve both microcode and OS changes where the OS conditionally runs code when detecting the microcode changes.

Management Engine patches are pretty much independent. A scary aspect of that is that an exploit of the ME could go undetected.

I'd like to see performance and up-to-date security patches rather than better organized menus and prettied up UEFI GUI.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Is there any guides on how to edit a UEFI file. I'd like to have MSR CFG disabled by default on my Master board which is apparently a hidden setting. At the moment I can disable it with a modified profile but I rather have it so the UEFI itself has it disabled by default.


----------



## Sheyster

GeneO said:


> I'd like to see performance and up-to-date security patches rather than better organized menus and prettied up UEFI GUI.


This, This, This...

Updating BIOS GUI's a year after the fact with all the various issues in the core BIOS is unacceptable and irresponsible. We've all gotten used to the BIOS GUI and reviewers slammed it a year ago, so why even bother to change it so late in the game?


----------



## Sheyster

wholeeo said:


> Is there any guides on how to edit a UEFI file. I'd like to have MSR CFG disabled by default on my Master board which is apparently a hidden setting. At the moment I can disable it with a modified profile but I rather have it so the UEFI itself has it disabled by default.


Lots of info here:

https://www.win-raid.com/f16-BIOS-Modding-Guides-and-Problems.html

Hope you have some time available!


----------



## wholeeo

Sheyster said:


> Lots of info here:
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/f16-BIOS-Modding-Guides-and-Problems.html
> 
> Hope you have some time available!


Yeah was there this morning. I think I'll just stick to loading my edited profile..lol


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> Yeah was there this morning. I think I'll just stick to loading my edited profile..lol


Do you mean "CFG Lock"= Disabled?


----------



## Emmanuel

Just ran some benchmarks. The 9900K is running at stock and boosting to 4.7GHz under load, the cache is at 4.3GHz.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## metalspider

reachthesky said:


> is this considered stable enough for gaming, can I stop the test?


 usually if you get that far you'll be fine but better to keep running until at least 800% or 1200% imo just to be safe.


----------



## Salve1412

Sorry for the newbie question. Which choice would you consider better for the sake of a 9900k longevity (overclocked to 5Ghz) in terms of Voltage applied, IA AC Loadline of 40 with negative offset (Speedshift Enabled, C-States up to C3 enabled) or IA AC loadline of 1 with positive offset (SpeedShift disabled, C-States up to C3 Enabled), the latter resulting in a higher VR VOUT Average value (so higher voltage at light load) than the former but with less spikes under load (lower voltage at high-maximum load)? The motherboard is a Master.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## kamyk155

I think it is end of my problems with boot BSOD. It was fixed for sure by setting in bios LEGACY boot.
Now still lowering voltages for my whole pc and I'm still impressed because now I set 1,25V Vcore, 1,25V VCCIO, 1,25V SysAgent and 1,36V DDR.
Stable for now but I'm still testing.


----------



## Emmanuel

I did some benchmark comparisons and I made some interesting findings. I attached a spreadsheet that compiles all the information, it shows what made a difference and diminishing returns. Dropping the tRFC made a big difference, doubling the tREFI made a nice difference. However, doubling the tREFI again made no distinguishable difference and greatly increases the chance of corruption.

Let me know if you see other timings that could be adjusted easily.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emmanuel said:


> I did some benchmark comparisons and I made some interesting findings. I attached a spreadsheet that compiles all the information, it shows what made a difference and diminishing returns. Dropping the tRFC made a big difference, doubling the tREFI made a nice difference. However, doubling the tREFI again made no distinguishable difference and greatly increases the chance of corruption.
> 
> Let me know if you see other timings that could be adjusted easily.


Try testing 32768 and 65534 in LinX 0.9.6 with 35000 sample size 
Warning: 0.9.6 puts prime95 FMA3 to complete shame in how hard it is to pass matching residuals.


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> Do you mean "CFG Lock"= Disabled?


Yes, exactly.

Also, can anyone enlighten me on what's the go to quickest way to find unstable overclocks nowadays?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> Yes, exactly.
> 
> Also, can anyone enlighten me on what's the go to quickest way to find unstable overclocks nowadays?


Fastest way is to use LinX 0.9.6 with 35000 sample size and make sure all residuals match on EVERY loop.
Warning: this torture test puts prime95 small FFT FMA3 to shame. But it will find instability faster than anything else.
----------

Download AMIBCP 5.02.0031
Then download FPTW64 from the CSME programming tools (I used v12 r11 which is like a year old you just need the right one for the chipset).
extract the folder with directories intact in winrar, etc
Go to the flash programming tool folder, win64

Open an administrator command prompt
type:
FPTW64 -D BIOS.BIN -BIOS
It should be about 13 MB in size (13,312 KB or something). If it's 16 MB you did something wrong. 

When done, move a copy of that file to where you downloaded amibcp 5.02.0031
Open the file.

Go down to Power and Performance, look for CFG Lock
Set both optimal and fail safe to "disabled"

Save the file.
Copy the file back into the FPTW64 folder. Rename the original file you backed up if you want.

type:
FPTW64 -F BIOS.BIN -BIOS

wait for "FPT operation successful"

Shut down windows and power off (Not reboot).

Power on.
should take longer than normal to boot.
Go into the BIOS.

Now, you must load optimized defaults.
If you load a saved profile, CFG Lock will be enabled again because the status is saved in your bios profiles. That means you should redo your profiles, unfortunately.

Boot to windows.
Check the Cstates button in Throttlestop 8.70. If it does NOT say "Package C-state limit - LOCKED", PROFIT!

Make new profiles as the old ones will have it enabled again.

Warning: I take no responsibility if this bricks your bios.
I just tested this myself before giving you these instructions, including loading optimized defaults and seeing c-state limit unlocked in Throttlestop.

But I'm not redoing my bios profiles so I loaded my old profile


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> Fastest way is to use LinX 0.9.6 with 35000 sample size and make sure all residuals match on EVERY loop.
> Warning: this torture test puts prime95 small FFT FMA3 to shame. But it will find instability faster than anything else.
> ----------
> 
> Download AMIBCP 5.02.0031
> Then download FPTW64 from the CSME programming tools (I used v12 r11 which is like a year old you just need the right one for the chipset).
> extract the folder with directories intact in winrar, etc
> Go to the flash programming tool folder, win64
> 
> Open an administrator command prompt
> type:
> FPTW64 -D BIOS.BIN -BIOS
> It should be about 13 MB in size (13,312 KB or something). If it's 16 MB you did something wrong.
> 
> When done, move a copy of that file to where you downloaded amibcp 5.02.0031
> Open the file.
> 
> Go down to Power and Performance, look for CFG Lock
> Set both optimal and fail safe to "disabled"
> 
> Save the file.
> Copy the file back into the FPTW64 folder. Rename the original file you backed up if you want.
> 
> type:
> FPTW64 -F BIOS.BIN -BIOS
> 
> wait for "FPT operation successful"
> 
> Shut down windows and power off (Not reboot).
> 
> Power on.
> should take longer than normal to boot.
> Go into the BIOS.
> 
> Now, you must load optimized defaults.
> If you load a saved profile, CFG Lock will be enabled again because the status is saved in your bios profiles. That means you should redo your profiles, unfortunately.
> 
> Boot to windows.
> Check the Cstates button in Throttlestop 8.70. If it does NOT say "Package C-state limit - LOCKED", PROFIT!
> 
> Make new profiles as the old ones will have it enabled again.
> 
> Warning: I take no responsibility if this bricks your bios.
> I just tested this myself before giving you these instructions, including loading optimized defaults and seeing c-state limit unlocked in Throttlestop.
> 
> But I'm not redoing my bios profiles so I loaded my old profile


Huge thanks for this. My profile actually has CFG unlocked but if I have to redo profiles I don't mind.


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> Huge thanks for this. My profile actually has CFG unlocked but if I have to redo profiles I don't mind.


What is the purpose of having CFG unlocked anyway?


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> What is the purpose of having CFG unlocked anyway?


Better power management and NVRAM under MacOS. Can I edit your edited z390master bios and flash with FPTW64 or is that a brick?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> Better power management and NVRAM under MacOS. Can I edit your edited z390master bios and flash with FPTW64 or is that a brick?


You need to make your own dump.

The full 16MB file contains more than just the BIOS UEFI menus you're trying to unlock. FPTW64 can flash its own dumps, whether full or -BIOS (UEFI capsule), but if AMIBCP edits the full dump (or the file from the ODM or a modded file from the ODM), it's a brick.

Someone tried doing that on their laptop with the original BIN file from MSI and bricked the bios and had to buy a programmer, or RMA.


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> You need to make your own dump.
> 
> The full 16MB file contains more than just the BIOS UEFI menus you're trying to unlock. FPTW64 can flash its own dumps, whether full or -BIOS (UEFI capsule), but if AMIBCP edits the full dump (or the file from the ODM or a modded file from the ODM), it's a brick.
> 
> Someone tried doing that on their laptop with the original BIN file from MSI and bricked the bios and had to buy a programmer, or RMA.


So if I understand correctly, flash your edited bios with EFIFlash in FreeDos, then make the dump with FPTW64, change CFG lock setting, and flash with FPTW64. Am I correct?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> So if I understand correctly, flash your edited bios with EFIFlash in FreeDos, then make the dump with FPTW64, change CFG lock setting, and flash with FPTW64. Am I correct?


Oh you're referring to the one I posted with the older microcodes, right? Yeah. EFI flash on that, because it's modded. Qflash won't flash that.

Yep to FPT. Don't forget the -BIOS command line switch! That tells FPT to only dump the UEFI capsule, which is what you're trying to edit. You have to specify that switch when you flash it back too.

AMIBCP 5.02.0031 works to make the edit on the 13K UEFI dump.
AMIBCP corrupts dumps that contain other things besides the BIOS UEFI (example, IRST, ME, etc).

There are other tools also, including ways to unhide the menu or other settings and "re-route" it to the MIT menu (by using tools better than AMIBCP which is sorely out of date) but that requires help from the other modders. Some people know how to do it on their own.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## warbucks

GeneO said:


> Gigabyte still hasn't updated the Intel Management Engine firmware to address security vulnerabilities that have had an updated ME firmware for quite dome time (e.g. Asus did quite a while ago:


I provided the latest MEI firmware in this post if you wish to update it yourself. https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-478.html#post28181538


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> Ok its at about 1200%. Is this respectable? In terms of memory corruption, I just need to check for that with sfc scannow daily or weekly for how long? and if I find anything corupt then I have to lower trefi? Or is there a better way?


I usually stop at 1000%, I think you're good. Try to play some BF5 if you have it. It will typically blue screen if memory isn't stable.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> Okay thank you. And what about the timings? Are these respectable timings for cl15 4000? Or are these sub-optimal or bad timings for cl15 4000? I don't know what a good/healthy/respectable cl15 4000 looks like in a 4 dimm configuration and i'd like mine to be worthy of gaining the respect from the pro-ocers/veterans around here.


Looks good to me! These boards aren't the best for memory OC. You might want to consider 32768 for TREFI. You're probably not gaining much bandwidth from the higher value there.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

warbucks said:


> I provided the latest MEI firmware in this post if you wish to update it yourself. https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-478.html#post28181538


Thanks. No issues?


----------



## spin5000

Can anyone help me with settings for my Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro? I've been playing around with this motherboard for a week and probably put literally over 30 hours into it in the past week and I just can't figure out how this board/bios works. Behaviour (especially regarding CPU voltage) just seems to have a mind of it's own and there's no logical consistency to anything. It's literally unlike any MSI, EVGA, ASRock, or ASUS motherboard I've used in the past 10 years.

I have 5.1 GHz stable and I'm pretty sure I can get 5.2 GHz stable according to some previous quick tests but let's stay with 5.1 GHz for now because although it's perfectly stable, I'm not happy with the voltage.

Problem is the vcore underload seems to fluctuate unlike any motherboard/CPU I've ever owned. 1.318v - 1.35v...but it get's worse. I'll sometimes see 1.41v on the "max" column in HWinfo (although I've never witnessed that in realtime).

How can I get the VCore stable? I've never had such wild, uncontrollable vcore before on any other CPU/motherboard.



P.S. I believe someone previously mentioned that it's C-states that downclock & and downvolt the CPU...This is completely wrong, at-least on my motherboard. The only thing that enables/disables CPU frequency & voltage downclocking - at least for me - is EIST. I tested all combinations of C-states & EIST enabled & disabled and confirmed it's EIST that needs to remain enabled regardless of c-states.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Wish I could help you buddy but I don't have the aorus pro ;(. Have you tried listening to falkentyne and trying out a fixed voltage OC with turbo LLC that allows for up to 50mv of vdroop?


I helped him like 5 times now. He doesn't care about anything I say. He just wants to whine.
Not only that he's not reading VR VOUT either. We told him multiple times.
VR VOUT won't spike to 1.41v like that...
He's been complaining about his motherboard in literally every post now. Like, if he hates it so much, return or sell it and buy an Apex XI for that legendary BIOS :/


----------



## Wirerat

@spin5000

I have the aorus pro. I use an offset Oc to reduce the nasty vdroop the aorus pro has with manual Oc. 

Here are my settings for 5ghz.

Ac loadline: powersave

Llc : low

Core voltage : normal

Offset : +.080v

Core freq :50

Uncore: 46

Intel speed shift : enabled


Thats it for the core. Nothing else has to be changed. Obviously the offset will depend on your cpu. Keeping it + results in no crashes at idle or low load. 

Guide came from

https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> wholeeo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, exactly.
> 
> Also, can anyone enlighten me on what's the go to quickest way to find unstable overclocks nowadays?
> 
> 
> 
> Fastest way is to use LinX 0.9.6 with 35000 sample size and make sure all residuals match on EVERY loop.
> Warning: this torture test puts prime95 small FFT FMA3 to shame. But it will find instability faster than anything else.
> ----------
> [/IMG]
Click to expand...

So if residuals don’t match I’m assuming it’s unstable? Guess at stock speeds and settings mine isn’t stable lol. Might be my ram though, 4x16GB @ 3200 is probably stressing the IMC.


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> So if residuals don’t match I’m assuming it’s unstable? Guess at stock speeds and settings mine isn’t stable lol. Might be my ram though, 4x16GB @ 3200 is probably stressing the IMC.


It means you're unstable in *this* test only. Keep in mind Linx 0.9.6 with 35000 sample size is harder to pass than FMA3 small FFT prime95 (!). As long as your RAM timings are configured properly (it is VERY timing sensitive on secondaries), it can draw more amps /watts than small FFT FMA3 !


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> It means you're unstable in *this* test only. Keep in mind Linx 0.9.6 with 35000 sample size is harder to pass than FMA3 small FFT prime95 (!). As long as your RAM timings are configured properly (it is VERY timing sensitive on secondaries), it can draw more amps /watts than small FFT FMA3 !


Ok so I ran your power virus lol. It peaked at 185A and 233W, one core reached 86C. The one thing I love about auto CPU settings and standard LLC is that the whole time the VR OUT was below the safe limit based on the formula.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## spin5000

reachthesky said:


> Wish I could help you buddy but I don't have the aorus pro ;(. Have you tried listening to falkentyne and trying out a fixed voltage OC with turbo LLC that allows for up to 50mv of vdroop?


Thanks, man, but unfortunately fixed voltage is not an option for me. I haven't had to use fixed voltage, ever, in the past 10 years with the following CPUs: 2500K, 4930K, 5930K, 6850K, and 8700K and motherboards from EVGA, MSI, ASUS, and ASRock. Why would I suddenly have to change all that and starting blasting 1.30+ volts into my CPU 24/7? There's no reason/excuse to have to start blasting a 24/7 fixed voltage into any intel CPU & motherboard made in at least the past 10 years especially for your average joe, everyday overclocker.



Falkentyne said:


> I helped him like 5 times now. He doesn't care about anything I say. He just wants to whine.


I really appreciate your help but I'm not sure exactly which steps I should take. Most of your help (which, again, I truly appreciate) is paragraphs full of information regarding things I've never, ever, ever had to deal with overclocking on any other board before. Mathematical equations, explaining how LLC works in 50 different ways with all sorts of maths behind it and other variables, stuff that's way beyond your "everyday overclocker." Every other motherboard doesn't require the everyday overclocker to be an electrician/engineer/scientist. With every other motherboard, you set a voltage, choose 1 of the different levels of LLC, then simply go in windows and check the voltage with no load compared to load (ie. vdroop), then go back in the BIOS to adjust to a lower or higher LLC level depending on low-load VS high-load cpu voltage. That's it. You don't really need to know anything else.



Falkentyne said:


> Not only that he's not reading VR VOUT either. We told him multiple times.
> VR VOUT won't spike to 1.41v like that...


I don't understand why you would assume I'm not reading the VR VOUT....I already mentioned in most of my posts that I'm reading the Renesas ISL69138/69269 VR VOUT....And for you to say the VR VOUT won't spike like that, well, I wish you were correct but you're wrong because, again, the VR VOUT is exactly what I'm using to check vcore thanks to the info provided by you and others. There's no reason for fabrications like a) I'm not using the VR VOUT sensor and B) the VR VOUT sensor won't have those type of spikes to 1.41v...both of those statements of yours are incorrect.



Falkentyne said:


> He's been complaining about his motherboard in literally every post now.


It's one thing to just complain for the hell of it, but I'm still providing meaningful information/data and asking questions in those posts.



Falkentyne said:


> Like, if he hates it so much, return or sell it and buy an Apex XI for that legendary BIOS :/


I've said like 5 times now, I've never had such weird behavior with any other motherboard brand (EVGA, ASUS, MSI, ASRock) from high-end (eg. ASUS Rampage & MSI XPower AC) to mid-end (eg. ASRock Fatality Gaming, MSI X99 Xpower Titanium) to low-end bottom-of-the-line (eg. MSI Z370-A)...So, no, it's not about getting an overpriced ASUS board with a "legendary" BIOS. It's every single board across the range of brands and across the price-range...besides Gigabyte.


----------



## Medvediy

Emmanuel said:


> Ok so I ran your power virus lol. It peaked at 185A and 233W, one core reached 86C. The one thing I love about auto CPU settings and standard LLC is that the whole time the VR OUT was below the safe limit based on the formula.


On your system config it needed to be over 500+ GFlops. I've got 512-515 with 4000cl16 ram and 9700k 4.7ghz...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Medvediy said:


> On your system config it needed to be over 500+ GFlops. I've got 512-515 with 4000cl16 ram and 9700k 4.7ghz...


Yeah his gflops is low.
I get his exact same scores with 3200 CL14 RAM (with tweaked subs) and 4.7 core/4.4 cache. I can't test it at 5 ghz, it just crashes on Auto vcore, standard LLC and ACLL 160. and if I put enough voltage into it to not crash by using a DVID offset or fixed vcore (like, 1.40v+, LLC=High), it gets to 115C trying to get correct residuals at over 200 amps. 

The most I can do is 4.9 ghz with correct residuals (Auto vcore, AC loadline 160, and even that gets PAST 100C!! It was 102C (1.230v VR VOUT load, 195 amps!!!)

At that 4.9 ghz I got 500 gflops average.


----------



## Medvediy

Falkentyne said:


> Yeah his gflops is low.
> I get his exact same scores with 3200 CL14 RAM (with tweaked subs) and 4.7 core/4.4 cache. I can't test it at 5 ghz, it just crashes on Auto vcore, standard LLC and ACLL 160. and if I put enough voltage into it to not crash by using a DVID offset or fixed vcore (like, 1.40v+, LLC=High), it gets to 115C trying to get correct residuals at over 200 amps. The most I can do is 4.9 ghz with correct residuals (Auto vcore, AC loadline 160, and even that gets close to 100C (1.230v VR VOUT, 180 amps+)
> 
> At 4.9 ghz I got 500 gflops average.


For Linx and Gflops a lot of work is done by memory OC. 20-30Gflops you can add just by wright secondary and tertiary timings. I've got 460 Gflops on XMP 3200C14 with 4.7 9700k.


----------



## spin5000

reachthesky said:


> Try Wirerat's suggestion, he has the same board, try his way of oc. I've tried it, it works well and allows voltage/frequency to drop on idle. You can't go wrong using his settings as a baseline to work from and then tweaking the voltage to fit your chip.


Thanks! I somehow missed that post of his.



Wirerat said:


> @spin5000
> 
> I have the aorus pro. I use an offset Oc to reduce the nasty vdroop the aorus pro has with manual Oc.
> 
> Here are my settings for 5ghz.
> 
> Ac loadline: powersave
> 
> Llc : low
> 
> Core voltage : normal
> 
> Offset : +.080v
> 
> Core freq :50
> 
> Uncore: 46
> 
> Intel speed shift : enabled
> 
> 
> Thats it for the core. Nothing else has to be changed. Obviously the offset will depend on your cpu. Keeping it + results in no crashes at idle or low load.
> 
> Guide came from
> 
> https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/


This seems to work good and makes the vcore (VR VOUT sensor, of course) behave much more "normal". At max frequency (5.0 GHz), the vcore is not so low like before (1.21v), it's now around 1.287v. The high-load voltage also acts way more normal, it ranges from 1.305-1.325v. That's much more acceptable and I can definitely live with that. It seems to mostly stay in the 1.313-1.323v range - very acceptable voltage & range. I do wish the idle voltages at low frequency (800 MHz) were lower as they're currently in the 0.727v - 0.863v with lots of constant fluctuations across that range but if I have to live with that then I can live with that. I guess there's no way to keep my current 5.0 GHz vcore while lowering the the rest of the frequency range's vcore (let's say the vcore from 800 MHz to 4.5 GHZ, or at least just the 800 MHz vcore)?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## spin5000

reachthesky said:


> I don't believe there is a way to do that unless gigabyte enables adaptive voltage that only applies additional turbo core voltage during turbo frequencies. That was actually the first type of OC method I used on an msi laptop and I enjoyed it. Gigabyte does not offer this type of voltage, though there appears to be a hidden option for it in the ami thing that falkentyne posted a couple pages back. Maybe gigabyte will enable it in the next bios? maybe not?


Thanks. Ya, I've been able to use dynamic/adaptive vcore while also specifying the max-frequency vcore on many motherboards before including MSI as you mentioned; it's not some ASUS-only feature as some others made it seem.

I just tried 5.1 GHz with your settings. The vcore doesn't change from 5.0 GHz. What decides the vcore? I thought since we're using vcore on auto/"normal", that the vcore is based on whatever the CPU asks for, basically, VID (before LLC and all that come into play). That doesn't seem to be the case though since vcore hasn't changed between 5.0 & 5.1 GHz.

How can I up the vcore further? Keep increasing offset? But that'll unfortunately keep increasing vcore across the whole range including 800 MHz idling (which is already way higher than needed at the moment)...Is there another "magical" combination of AC loadline & CPU loadline settings to use which will increase the 5.1 GHz vcore while keeping the same (or even lowering) the 800 MHz vcore?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Thanks. Ya, I've been able to use dynamic/adaptive vcore while also specifying the max-frequency vcore on many motherboards before including MSI as you mentioned; it's not some ASUS-only feature as some others made it seem.
> 
> I just tried 5.1 GHz with your settings. The vcore doesn't change from 5.0 GHz. What decides the vcore? I thought since we're using vcore on auto/"normal", that the vcore is based on whatever the CPU asks for, basically, VID (before LLC and all that come into play). That doesn't seem to be the case though since vcore hasn't changed between 5.0 & 5.1 GHz.
> 
> How can I up the vcore further? Keep increasing offset? But that'll unfortunately keep increasing vcore across the whole range including 800 MHz idling (which is already way higher than needed at the moment)...Is there another "magical" combination of AC loadline & CPU loadline settings to use which will increase the 5.1 GHz vcore while keeping the same (or even lowering) the 800 MHz vcore?


Hi,
The reason your vcore stops increasing at 5.1 ghz is because the CPU default VID stops increasing at the "maximum" turbo core multiplier, which is x50. x51, x52, x53, x54 etc, use the same base VID as x50. 

Therefore, you can increase the AC Loadline value, if you're starting off at Power Saving, to try to increase the vcore that way, but there are limitations.

AC Loadline determines the vcore (before vdroop is applied), by interacting with the "base" VID and boosting the value upwards, based on current load. It is boosted much higher at heavy load. DVID offsets are applied after. You can raise the AC Loadline value higher than power saving preset. Power Saving is an AC Loadline of 40 (0.4 mOhms). Max intel specification is 160 (1.6 mOhms; it's a /100 divider for these). So you need to raise the ACLL manually.

Manual adjustments of AC loadline (any Non-Zero value) will overrule the "CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline" Presets for that value. DC Loadline is not important for this discussion.
If you're lazy, you can set it to balanced, which is 100 (1.0 mOhms) for AC Loadline. "Turbo" is 160 and Extreme is 210 (2.1 mOhms). Note that 2.1 mOhms is max spec for 6 core processors, not 8 core processors.

AC Loadline cannot send a VRM signal higher than 1.520v If it's reaching that ceiling, load vcore will not increase anymore even if you raise AC Loadline higher. You need to be aware of this, if you increase AC Loadline and your "idle" voltage keeps going up but your load voltage stops increasing.

In my own tests, you reach this "1.520v" ceiling on AC Loadline for extreme heavy LOAD voltages at about ACLL=100. For lighter loads, it can scale much higher.

The only way to bypass this 1.520v wall (THIS IS BEFORE VDROOP!!!!!) is to "Enable" the SVID OFFSET option. This will allow 200mv higher on the VID via serial VID (up to 1.720v before vdroop). Do not confuse this with DVID. It's not even remotely close to the same thing. AC Loadline affects vcore by communicating to the VRM via Serial VID, which is usually limited to 1.520v (before vdroop).

I've found some bugs in this setting however, especially if it's enabled below 5 ghz.

One thing to watch out for: you should absolutely NOT use a high loadline calibration (Vcore loadline calibration) level with a high value for AC Loadline if you are using Auto/DVID voltage modes. Ever.
Using an AC Loadline of 160 and Vcore loadline Calibration of Turbo (without a MASSIVE DVID negative offset) is a fast way to fry your CPU on Auto/DVID voltages.


----------



## spin5000

OK. I just passed 10x passes of Asus RealBench's H.264 Encoding test @ 5.1 GHz. I know there's way more testing needed in order to determine stability but I'm testing more for voltages now to see what sort of voltages I'm hitting.

Unfortunately, I spoke too soon regarding Wirerat's settings. Yes, the high-load voltages are lower and there's a less concerning gap between max-frequency low-load and max-frequency high-load voltages but I still see a spike according to HWinFO. While the cpu's usually in the 1.30-1.325 range under load, there's a spike/s of 1.38v (1.378v to be exact). How do I stop this? I'm stable (so far) at 1.32v, there's no reason - and it's not safe - for the motherboard to suddenly (and seemingly randomly) add 0.06v out of nowhere - that's huge. If I use a vcore of 1.34 or 1.35v, that means that same sort of spike (+0.06v) will bring me back into the 1.40v or 1.41v area - which puts me back to where I started with all LLCs on auto (before I applied Wirerat's). So basically I'm back to where I started   

P.S.
I just read another post of a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus owner, this time with a Master. Although he praised the fantastic VRM and VRM temps, he also said that there's huge variation/fluctuation in terms of of vcore with way too big a gap between highest and lowest vcore (eg. 1.34v - 1.41v)...Perhaps this is a general Gigabyte Z390 motherboard issue? Poor cpu voltage management/"logic"???


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> OK. I just passed 10x passes of Asus RealBench's H.264 Encoding test @ 5.1 GHz. I know there's way more testing needed in order to determine stability but I'm testing more for voltages now to see what sort of voltages I'm hitting.
> 
> Unfortunately, I spoke to soon regarding Wirerat's settings. Yes, the high-load voltages are lower and there's a less concerning gap between max-frequency low-load and max-frequency high-load voltages but I still see a spike according to HWinFO. While it's in the 1.30-1.325 range under load, there's a spoke of 1.38v (1.378v to be exact). How do I stop this? I'm stable (so far) at 1.32v, there's no reason - and it's not safe - for the motherboard to suddenly (and seemingly randomly) at 0.06v out of nowhere. That's huge. If I use a vcore of 1.34 or 1.35v, that means that same sort of spike will bring me back to 1.40v or 1.41v - which puts me back to where I started with all LLCs on auto (before I applied Wirerat's).
> 
> I just read another post of a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus owner, this time with a Master. Although he praised the fantastic VRM and VRM temps, he also said that there's huge variation/fluctuation in terms of of vcore with way too big a gap between highest and lowest vcore (eg. 1.34v - 1.41v)...Perhaps this is a general Gigabyte Z390 motherboard thing? Poor cpu voltage management/"logic"???


You can't and there's no problem with this. A 1.40v spike won't happen at full load. There's no problem with 1.40v if the system is idle or almost idle.

Also, VR VOUT becomes inaccurate at idle when some C-states are enabled. That's where the Super I/O vcore sensor becomes better.

Why? Because the VRM stops transmitting voltage data during some C-state events because that part of the system is put to a "sleep" state. So you can see something like 1.20v VR VOUT at 800 mhz, while the Super I/O (8688E) shows 0.750v, for example. That's because the VRM will keep reporting the last known voltage it was able to read before the data 'stopped'. The Super I/O chip can't be put to sleep except in suspend mode, because it has to monitor certain basic system functions.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## spin5000

delete


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> You can't and there's no problem with this. A 1.40v spike won't happen at full load. There's no problem with 1.40v if the system is idle or almost idle.
> 
> Also, VR VOUT becomes inaccurate at idle when some C-states are enabled. That's where the Super I/O vcore sensor becomes better.
> 
> Why? Because the VRM stops transmitting voltage data during some C-state events because that part of the system is put to a "sleep" state. So you can see something like 1.20v VR VOUT at 800 mhz, while the Super I/O (8688E) shows 0.750v, for example. That's because the VRM will keep reporting the last known voltage it was able to read before the data 'stopped'. The Super I/O chip can't be put to sleep except in suspend mode, because it has to monitor certain basic system functions.


Hmmm. I don't get those high voltages on the VR VOUT during 800 MHz. My VR VOUT definitely reads low voltages at 800 MHz. For me, it's my other vcore sensor (the one generally advised not to use, not VR VOUT) that gives strange readings; it reads the same 800 MHz voltage (0.6xx volts) during max-frequency (eg. 5.1 GHz) _if the load is low_. My VR VOUT always seems to give an appropriate voltage reading regardless of frequency or load.

I'm glad to hear those voltage spikes aren't dangerous if in a low-load situation. I always thought high voltage was dangerous regardless of load. Having said that, I disabled C-States (but kept EIST enabled in order to keep auto frequency and voltage reduction), but am still seeing voltage spikes in HWinfo. Eg. 5.2 GHz @ 1.34v-1.36v but with spikes _on load_ @ 1.425v 



reachthesky said:


> Board definitely has great vrms, understanding the voltage is kind of silly. There is this thermal velocity boost thing that plays a role too. It complicates things. I still don't understand it or why it even exists. It honestly just feels like a bull**** feature designed to force owner's into purchasing more expensive cooling, this feature was not on my skylake unlocked chip and it is the same architecture. LIke, why doesn't the cpu just do 5.3ghz ht off at 1.34v underload at all times like it requests(that's what it idled at when I used wirerat's settings with medium llc/higher offset), why does it want more voltage than that underload? So with his settings, I get zero vdroop and voltage only increases under large load(up to 1.39v). I ended up going back to acdc-1/1 + high llc + 140mv offset for 5.3ghz ht off. I don't even know if the cpu is supposed to operate this way or if it is good. But i'm starting not to care because while everyone likes to poke and prod like i'm doing something wrong, I'm beating everyone else's 8 core chip into the dirt when it comes to aidad64/superposition 720p scores at the same clocks using only an AIO without cold winter air so until someone is frank with me and tells me what i'm doing wrong or specifically shows me better settings that actually work for me, shows me what the performance scores look like with the same cpu/cache/ram clocks when things are done right according to them, I just do what I keep doing since it is working better for me.


I hear ya, man. I got 5.2 GHz at least short-term stable at around 1.340-1.360 but, once again, I have the odd random time when the motherboard decides to pump in way more volts - 1.425v in this case (using the correct sensor: VR VOUT)...And this time, it _was_ under load (around 2 seconds into an H.264 video encoding benchmark). You're right, and I feel the same way; I don't understand the cpu vcore "logic" when it comes to these boards.

If we disable Thermal Velocity Boost, do you think the vcore will remain more stable without those seemingly random spikes? I disabled TVB once but then my cpu voltages totally changed big time - no load as well as high load voltages, so I just turned TVB back on.

By the way, I never, ever, ever get Vdroop with this Gigabyte board. It's the complete opposite actually. No matter what I do, my high-load voltage always goes up compared to my low-load voltage (at same frequency). For example, 5.2 GHz low load =1.25v, 5.2 GHz high load = 1.34-1.36 (with 1.425v spikes). I have the complete opposite of vdroop in every voltage, frequency, and LLC combination I've tried so far. I guess I get "vgain" not vdroop, lol. Yet another strange behavior with this board that I've never encountered in any other motherboard brand before (unless using the most aggressive or two LLC settings but that's to be expected).


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Hmmm. I don't get those high voltages on the VR VOUT during 800 MHz. My VR VOUT definitely reads low voltages at 800 MHz. For me, it's my other vcore sensor (the one generally advised not to use, not VR VOUT) that gives strange readings; it reads the same 800 MHz voltage (0.6xx volts) during max-frequency (eg. 5.1 GHz) if the load is low. My VR VOUT always seems to give an appropriate voltage reading regardless of frequency or load.
> 
> I'm glad to hear those voltage spikes aren't dangerous if in a low-load situation. I always thought high voltage was dangerous regardless of load. Having said that, if I disable C-States (but keep EIST enabled in order to keep auto frequency and voltage reduction), are you saying I may potentially be able to get rid of those high voltage spikes?


Nope. It's current that degrades chips, not voltage. Current+heat degrades faster.
A far too high voltage however will simply destroy the oxide gate layer and instantly kill the chip. That happens probably at around 1.7v or something but its unknown where exactly. Buildzoid mentioned this in his probinator videos. Subzero will prevent current from degrading a chip since heat drops drastically too. But the voltage....

Remember those LN2 chips that are tested at 1.7v+ and then some of them just instantly stop working? Not degrading--not working at all? That's why. 

Oh you were talking about the Super I/O chip reading too high? Ignore that.
The super i/o chip is adversely affected by power plane impedance. This happens on all boards. Only the Asus Maximus XI avoided this. There is a special diode onboard which prevents this from happening and also feeds data directly from the CPU on-die sense to the super I/O on those boards. So they read vcore as accurately as VR VOUT. The X and older boards didn't have this yet.

The Super I/O reading wildly is precisely what led to the rumor quite a long time ago that Loadline Calibration:Turbo was zero vdroop and Extreme and Ultra Extreme added voltage. (Ultra Extreme is the no vdroop one with crazy wild transients).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Hmmm. I don't get those high voltages on the VR VOUT during 800 MHz. My VR VOUT definitely reads low voltages at 800 MHz. For me, it's my other vcore sensor (the one generally advised not to use, not VR VOUT) that gives strange readings; it reads the same 800 MHz voltage (0.6xx volts) during max-frequency (eg. 5.1 GHz) _if the load is low_. My VR VOUT always seems to give an appropriate voltage reading regardless of frequency or load.
> 
> I'm glad to hear those voltage spikes aren't dangerous if in a low-load situation. I always thought high voltage was dangerous regardless of load. Having said that, I disabled C-States (but kept EIST enabled in order to keep auto frequency and voltage reduction), but am still seeing voltage spikes in HWinfo. Eg. 5.2 GHz @ 1.34v-1.36v but with spikes _on load_ @ 1.425v
> 
> I hear ya, man. Ya. I got 5.2 GHz short-term stable at around 1.340-1.360 but, once again, some random times when the motherboard decides to pump in way more volts - 1.425v in this case (using the correct sensor: VR VOUT...And this time, it WAS underload, around 2 seconds into an H.264 video encoding benchmark. You're right, and I feel the same way. I don't know understand the cpu vcopre "logic" when it comes to these boards.
> 
> By the way, I never, ever, ever get Vdroop with this Gigabyte board. It's the complete opposite actually. No matter what I do, my load voltage always goes up compared to my low-load voltage (at same frequency). For example, 5.2 GHz low load =1.25v, 5.2 GHz high load = 1.34-1.36 (with 1.425v spikes). I have the complete opposite of vdroop in every voltage, frequency, and LLC combination I've tried so far. I get "vgain" not vdroop, lol. Yet another strange behaviour that I've literally never encountered in any other motherboard brand before (unless using the most aggressive or two LLC settings then most/all motherboards but that's to be expected).


AC Loadline causes the voltage to the VRM to rise under load. That's its job. It's basically the "Anti-counter" to vdroop, except it happens on the AC side (on the +12v line that is modulated via duty cycle%, to send the VRM a target voltage). The higher the ACLL, the higher the target voltage will be. (Also the higher the multiplier default VID, the higher the target voltage will be). It's based on current and the exact formula is probably some complex engineering physics formula. Vdroop happens on the "DC" side (VRM to CPU, instead of +12v to PWM), and vdroop is simply a MUCH easier Ohm's law formula (Amps * Resistance), where resistance is your Loadline Calibration value in mOhms.

x264/x265 do not use sustained loads. It's not like prime95 small FFT. Most likely the VRM saw a light load and got a 1.4v capture on it which got recorded. This is logical because remember, loadline calibration reduces load voltage also. The more current, the more the voltage is reduced. So if there was a very light initial load, you might have had a 1.41v initial voltage, which would go down to like 1.3v at heavy load. (Keep in mind AC loadline also raises the target voltage as current goes up, but "Vdroop" is going to be more than the boost from AC Loadline, UNLESS you have LLC cranked up too high! (remember what I said about not combining a strong LLC with a high AC Loadline?).

If you really really really want to see why you are getting those 1.41v spikes, go into your BIOS and set "DC Loadline" to 1.
Then in windows, look at the CPU VID. (Yes, VID). That will tell you what's going on.

(If Vcore LLC is set to Intel spec or Low (but no higher), if DC Loadline is set to 1 (0.01 mOhm), the "CPU VID" will tell you what voltage AC Loadline is sending to the VRM on the AC line, before vdroop !! 

VR VOUT will tell you what that voltage is going to the CPU, *after* vdroop.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## spin5000

Falkentyne said:


> AC Loadline causes the voltage to the VRM to rise under load. That's its job. It's basically the "Anti-counter" to vdroop, except it happens on the AC side (on the +12v line that is modulated via duty cycle%, to send the VRM a target voltage). The higher the ACLL, the higher the target voltage will be. (Also the higher the multiplier default VID, the higher the target voltage will be). It's based on current and the exact formula is probably some complex engineering physics formula. Vdroop happens on the "DC" side (VRM to CPU, instead of +12v to PWM), and vdroop is simply a MUCH easier Ohm's law formula (Amps * Resistance), where resistance is your Loadline Calibration value in mOhms.
> 
> x264/x265 do not use sustained loads. It's not like prime95 small FFT. Most likely the VRM saw a light load and got a 1.4v capture on it which got recorded. This is logical because remember, loadline calibration reduces load voltage also. The more current, the more the voltage is reduced. So if there was a very light initial load, you might have had a 1.41v initial voltage, which would go down to like 1.3v at heavy load. (Keep in mind AC loadline also raises the target voltage as current goes up, but "Vdroop" is going to be more than the boost from AC Loadline, UNLESS you have LLC cranked up too high! (remember what I said about not combining a strong LLC with a high AC Loadline?).
> 
> If you really really really want to see why you are getting those 1.41v spikes, go into your BIOS and set "DC Loadline" to 1.
> Then in windows, look at the CPU VID. (Yes, VID). That will tell you what's going on.
> 
> (If Vcore LLC is set to Intel spec or Low (but no higher), if DC Loadline is set to 1 (0.01 mOhm), the "CPU VID" will tell you what voltage AC Loadline is sending to the VRM on the AC line, before vdroop !!
> 
> VR VOUT will tell you what that voltage is going to the CPU, *after* vdroop.


I think I'm understanding more. Thanks so much!!!



reachthesky said:


> If you disable TVB, vcore requirements don't change at all, if you disable TvB and try to match the vid, it still isn't stable. In fact, when I disabled tvb while trying out f10 bios, my idle voltage requirements went up, it makes no sense. screwing around with TvB has not yielded me any positive results, ever. TvB was not on my unlocked skylake laptop chip. But whatever, my chip drinks up 1.39v under heavy load(125-137 amps) at 5.3ghz ht off, **** it. I don't care anymore.


Is 1.39v around your average constant voltage or is that a short-term spike? If that's your average (under load of course), then do you get any spikes?

Can I get your settings so I can try? I'm guessing you have both load lines set to auto and then in the AC & DC loadlines, you set each to "1" I believe? What about vcore, offset, and anything else I should know?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

Emmanuel said:


> Ok so I ran your power virus lol. It peaked at 185A and 233W, one core reached 86C. The one thing I love about auto CPU settings and standard LLC is that the whole time the VR OUT was below the safe limit based on the formula.


Can you share which memories you have, bios, and their settings?


----------



## Emmanuel

Medvediy said:


> On your system config it needed to be over 500+ GFlops. I've got 512-515 with 4000cl16 ram and 9700k 4.7ghz...


Were you running the CPU on auto settings? Could the fact that I'm running this on Windows 7 skew the results?



AndrejB said:


> Can you share which memories you have, bios, and their settings?


Everything you need to know is in my signature and screenshot. Apparently I'm scoring low so I wouldn't be a great reference.


----------



## daniel audanie

Does anyone know what enhanced stability does in the memory section of the BIOS? I selected that option and now I can boot cl14 at 3700mhz, 41ns with high 57gb/s~ for AIDA64. 4000% so far in Karhu Ramtest.


----------



## Emmanuel

daniel audanie said:


> Does anyone know what enhanced stability does in the memory section of the BIOS? I selected that option and now I can boot cl14 at 3700mhz, 41ns with high 57gb/s~ for AIDA64. 4000% so far in Karhu Ramtest.


It tweaks the timings. I use enhanced performance but maybe I'll try enhanced stability and see if I can boot with lower primaries 

If you really want to find out what it does, set your CAS to 15 (if that always boots for you) and cold-boot into Windows one time with each memory setting and compare the timing values.


----------



## AndrejB

Emmanuel said:


> Were you running the CPU on auto settings? Could the fact that I'm running this on Windows 7 skew the results?
> 
> 
> 
> Everything you need to know is in my signature and screenshot. Apparently I'm scoring low so I wouldn't be a great reference.



Still better than me with 47/43 on the cpu and 4133c17 (getting 465-470gflops)


Thanks, but I can't see the voltage of the memory, io/sa and so on


----------



## Emmanuel

My chip doesn't have a strong IMC, I need 1.35v on the VCCSA and also matched my VCCIO to that. The actual voltages reported in the BIOS and Windows are 1.332v VCCSA and 1.342 VCCIO.

I currently run my RAM at 1.50v which reports 1.488v. I haven't tried dropping the voltage yet, it's safe for 24/7 regardless.


----------



## AndrejB

I love how Apex proves my seemingly stable settings wrong. (44 cache in this case)
Back to my 47/43 @ ac/dc 100/130
4133 17-17-17-37 @ 1.4, io/sa 1.2

Time to start learning memory timings, would love to see 490,500 gflops


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> I love how Apex proves my seemingly stable settings wrong. (44 cache in this case)
> Back to my 47/43 @ ac/dc 100/130
> 4133 17-17-17-37 @ 1.4, io/sa 1.2
> 
> Time to start learning memory timings, would love to see 490,500 gflops


Apex generates Internal Parity WHEA errors rather than the typical CPU L0 errors most people are used to (L0's don't seem to happen if HT is disabled, in stuff like prime95, RB 2.56, etc). You would even get some CPU Translation Lookaside Buffer errors too.
If you think that's bad now, you should have seen it before the fix way back last March.
It was crashing--everyone's-- overclocked systems. The developer said it was a bug in Intel CPU's, possibly in a microcode, starting with skylake. It was even crashing some people's *stock* 9900k's.
Even systems that were passing small FFT AVX Prime95 were crashing, and Apex doesn't use AVX he said. He did a new code path which improved things drastically. Now it seems currently, Apex requires just a bit more vcore to pass not getting parity errors, than Realbench 2.56 does to avoid CPU L0 errors (when HT is enabled), even though RB runs far hotter and heavier load than Apex.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Apex generates Internal Parity WHEA errors rather than the typical CPU L0 errors most people are used to (L0's don't seem to happen if HT is disabled, in stuff like prime95, RB 2.56, etc). You would even get some CPU Translation Lookaside Buffer errors too.
> If you think that's bad now, you should have seen it before the fix way back last March.
> It was crashing--everyone's-- overclocked systems. The developer said it was a bug in Intel CPU's, possibly in a microcode, starting with skylake. It was even crashing some people's *stock* 9900k's.
> Even systems that were passing small FFT AVX Prime95 were crashing, and Apex doesn't use AVX he said. He did a new code path which improved things drastically. Now it seems currently, Apex requires just a bit more vcore to pass not getting parity errors, than Realbench 2.56 does to avoid CPU L0 errors (when HT is enabled), even though RB runs far hotter and heavier load than Apex.


Where do you see these errors, the only thing I can find is in event viewer and its that the nv driver crashed and recovered, also the dxgi_device_hung/removed from apex?

Do you think it's a good trade off to run ac at 110 for 44 cache, I didn't notice any improvement anywhere?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Where do you see these errors, the only thing I can find is in event viewer and its that the nv driver crashed and recovered, also the dxgi_device_hung/removed from apex?
> 
> Do you think it's a good trade off to run ac at 110 for 44 cache, I didn't notice any improvement anywhere?


That error usually isn't related to your CPU being unstable.
Usually that's either a video driver bug or your system agent voltage being too low. This isn't the "Apex is unstable because you overclocked too far" bug.
I've seen other people get that video driver crash if system agent VCCSA (or maybe even DMI PCIE, although I don't know about that one) voltage was set too low.

The CPU errors from Apex are WHEA "internal Parity errors" or outright game crashes.

I was active in giving bug reports to the Apex developer back when everyone's CPU's were crashing in the crash megathread. He debugged the crashes and saw what the CPU was doing (basically, trying to access an instruction or a memory address it had no permission to access), but was unable to pinpoint the actual cause of it. I noticed with HWInfo64 open that, if the game didn't crash, it would generate "Internal parity errors" (whether or not hyperthreading was enabled or disabled, but HT disabled at least gave more stability at those same clocks), and if you went even lower on the CPU voltages, you would get CPU TLB errors (an error I never saw before). But I never saw any BSOD's from that. Just WHEA's being reported or the game just crashing. And when some people's stock CPU's (8700k-9900k's) were crashing, he determined it was an actual bug in the CPU, as these crashes didn't happen on pre-skylake CPU's. He even gave me and a few other active people credit for helping with reports in a patch notes.

I don't know if it still works, but the old code path can still be used by the -force_old_gather_props command line parameter.
But ever since the reworked King's Canyon and World's edge maps came out, even using the old code path doesn't generate crashes like it USED to do.


----------



## R3van

Hi guys,

i flashed BIOS F11c for the Master yesterday and, surprise, new design and some new functions.
I didn't spent much time recently on my board and i'm a little lost on these new functions. Also, my settings don't work as expected anymore, so could anybody tell me when the bios was released to get a hint from where on i should read the thread?

Need some infos to catch up here


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

R3van said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> i flashed BIOS F11c for the Master yesterday and, surprise, new design and some new functions.
> I didn't spent much time recently on my board and i'm a little lost on these new functions. Also, my settings don't work as expected anymore, so could anybody tell me when the bios was released to get a hint from where on i should read the thread?
> 
> Need some infos to catch up here


F11c is a bugfix for bugs that appeared in the F10 final bios with the gui rework. It also fixes options in Internal VR settings that were never working.
VR Current Limit was removed from Internal VR control and the missing CPU Current Limit (amps), which is the same setting, was added back to the advanced CPU options (this option was missing in F10 final, and VR Current Limit never worked in internal VR control ever since the board was released). Imon slope and imon offset are finally working for the first time since board release.

What new functions? The menus are rearranged but there are no new functions except a couple.
There is a new RAM Setting that appeared in f11c, but the only new actual function was Thermal Velocity Boost, which previously was only able to be disabled by backing up your UEFI capsule with fptw64, then editing the UEFI capsule with AMIBCP and setting it to disabled, then flashing the aptio capsule back with fptw64, and then loading optimized defaults.

The 300 khz stability improvement is being investigated.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## R3van

- Frequency Clipping TVB
- Voltage reduction initiated TVB
I guess that means Thermal Velocity Boost
The explanation text is a bit cut off so i cannot read what it does at "disabled", i can just read that "Auto" should improve something


- Active Turbo Ratios, i have that at "Auto"

Previuosly i had C1E and C3 enabled alongside with EIST and Speedshift and frequency and vcore was lowered even with Windows Power Plan High.
That doesn't work anymore, i have to go to balanced to get that.

- Intel Turbo Boost Technology
No matter if i set that to enabled or disabled the frequency boosts up when i put load on. Previously on Auto, now i don't know what to do with it.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> What does imon slope and imon offset do? In what scenarios would someone want to adjust these?


Adjusts CPU Package Power slope reporting. Good for people with fully locked CPU's with hardwired power limits. Mostly used on laptops to overcome low 35-45W power limits.


----------



## robertr1

So I switched over to an Apex from the Aorus pro. My findings:

- Bios has a lot of additional things which is a blessing and a curse. It took a couple of days to get used to it. Never used Asus UEFI before so this was very new to me and certainly a learning curve
- The safeboot button is an absolute MUST on any board. I can't begin to tell you how easy this makes it
- RTL and IO's can be manually set!
- 100mhz gain on the CPU vs the pro
- My pro with 2 sticks was limited to 15/3600 CR2. This is my Apex with 1 day of tuning only: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/328891236918493184/657651217333354507/unknown.png 
- The VRM's are way overkill. No way to heat them up 
- Adaptive voltage works better than offset on the Pro. Adaptive doesn't spike up


Yes it costs more you can certainly tell it's a premium product. 

My goals with the apex were:
- Get a daily stable 24/7 system with latency at ~35ns. Easily don't once I tune the timings
- Do it at a low IO/SA voltage. This only took 1.2v on both
- Get 100mhz on core. Done


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

reachthesky said:


> Nice job. Would you mind doing a unigine superposition 720p low run? I'm curious of the minimum FPS with such low latency.


[Imgur](https://imgur.com/9QeTLxG)

52/47 cpu


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Adjusts CPU Package Power slope reporting. Good for people with fully locked CPU's with hardwired power limits. Mostly used on laptops to overcome low 35-45W power limits.


I thought it was the analog reporting of the load current to the CPU converted to a voltage, where the slope etc. are for the conversion. Maybe it can be used for that purpose?


----------



## GeneO

AndrejB said:


> Where do you see these errors, the only thing I can find is in event viewer and its that the nv driver crashed and recovered, also the dxgi_device_hung/removed from apex?
> 
> Do you think it's a good trade off to run ac at 110 for 44 cache, I didn't notice any improvement anywhere?


You should also be able to see the history of these errors in Windows Event Viewer -> Application and Services Logs -> Microsoft -> Windows -> Kernel WHEA -> Errors


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> You can't and there's no problem with this. A 1.40v spike won't happen at full load. There's no problem with 1.40v if the system is idle or almost idle.
> 
> Also, VR VOUT becomes inaccurate at idle when some C-states are enabled. That's where the Super I/O vcore sensor becomes better.
> 
> Why? Because the VRM stops transmitting voltage data during some C-state events because that part of the system is put to a "sleep" state. So you can see something like 1.20v VR VOUT at 800 mhz, while the Super I/O (8688E) shows 0.750v, for example. That's because the VRM will keep reporting the last known voltage it was able to read before the data 'stopped'. The Super I/O chip can't be put to sleep except in suspend mode, because it has to monitor certain basic system functions.


Something may be turning off, but I don't think it has anything to do with C-states. If I have speedshift enabled, Windows will automatically set autonomous mode and tell the processor to manage the processor state transitions itself. When I do this VR VOUT and the Power Out and Current Out remain high at low loads, even though vcore drops as expected. If I disable autonomous mode in Windows power settings, VR VOUT Power Out and Current Out drop at low loads, close to vcore, so behave as expected. C-states are active and the same in both these cases. So something may not be monitored because the management of the Processor p-states has been relegated to the processor rather than Windows.


----------



## robertr1

reachthesky said:


> you are in the top ten with that score lol. Whelp. I give up on tuning. My cl15 4000 is trash. It shouldn't be losing to cl17 4133. 20 fps difference on the low Back to xmp i go.


top 5


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## warbucks

GeneO said:


> Thanks. No issues?


I haven't noticed anything on my rig.


----------



## GeneO

warbucks said:


> I haven't noticed anything on my rig.


Updated. Thanks again.


----------



## robertr1

reachthesky said:


> I challenge you to take my 3rd place spot . That's a fantastic score btw, I'm extremely jealous of your 1% lows, like so jealous I resent my own work on my own ram LOL. If you turn up to 5.3ghz and disable HT, I think you got me.












Got it. I had HT on for all the scores btw. 

53/49


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> you are in the top ten with that score lol. Whelp. I give up on tuning. My cl15 4000 is trash. It shouldn't be losing to cl17 4133. 20 fps difference on the low Back to xmp i go.



The Apex is a memory OC beast. For what it is, the Master is actually a pretty good board. I still like the ASRock Taichi better overall though. The Aorus Pro on the other hand...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BradleyW

I'm very interested in these Superposition 720p bench runs. I'll be sure to run it and post my results. Currently on a 9900K 5GHz HT, RAM 4000MHz CL19.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm very interested in these Superposition 720p bench runs. I'll be sure to run it and post my results. Currently on a 9900K 5GHz HT, RAM 4000MHz CL19.
> 
> 
> 
> Raceeeeeeeee /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif. Definitely, I just found out about this program like, whenever wirerat told me, i guess a week ago? maybe less? I dunno. It's pretty cool.
Click to expand...

I've been using it on and off since is it was released as a way to test GPU overclocks and thermals, but never for CPU and Memory tests. I'll probably run the program tomorrow to see what my min fps is 🙂


----------



## Emmanuel

4.7GHz core, 4.3GHz cache, RAM @ 4000MHz
We already determine my GFLOPs was a little low, but I'm not going to investigate too deep considering I have a 9900KS on the way.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Ok boys, we're in windows at 4533mhz on the ram. All hail Buildzoid for making a video on how to do so.


Whats the trick?


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> Whats the trick?


Probably loose timings and very high voltages.


----------



## GeneO

GeneO said:


> Something may be turning off, but I don't think it has anything to do with C-states. If I have speedshift enabled, Windows will automatically set autonomous mode and tell the processor to manage the processor state transitions itself. When I do this VR VOUT and the Power Out and Current Out remain high at low loads, even though vcore drops as expected. If I disable autonomous mode in Windows power settings, VR VOUT Power Out and Current Out drop at low loads, close to vcore, so behave as expected. C-states are active and the same in both these cases. So something may not be monitored because the management of the Processor p-states has been relegated to the processor rather than Windows.


For offset overclocking, I found the following to be the best performance settings in Windows, while allowing low VR VOUT during idle:

1. disable autonomous mode (or disable speedshift in BIOS).
2. balanced performance plan
3. set the hidden power setting "Processor energy performance preference policy" to 0%. This is the least agressive power setting. 

The latter setting can be made visible in the power plan by setting

Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\36687f9e-e3a5-4dbf-b1dc-15eb381c6863

Set Attributes under this key to "2"

That will make this option visible in the power settings app.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> For offset overclocking, I found the following to be the best performance settings in Windows, while allowing low VR VOUT during idle:
> 
> 1. disable autonomous mode (or disable speedshift in BIOS).
> 2. balanced performance plan
> 3. set the hidden power setting "Processor energy performance preference policy" to 0%. This is the least agressive power setting.
> 
> The latter setting can be made visible in the power plan by setting
> 
> Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\36687f9e-e3a5-4dbf-b1dc-15eb381c6863
> 
> Set Attributes under this key to "2"
> 
> That will make this option visible in the power settings app.


Performance gain? Or just reduced power at idle?


----------



## GeneO

It is more power at idle on avverage - better responsiveness at idle.

Setting the parameter to 100% is most power savings and kills performance. Default is somewhere in-between.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> It is more power at idle on avverage - better responsiveness at idle.
> 
> Setting the parameter to 100% is most power savings and kills performance. Default is somewhere in-between.


I normally just set performance mode before I start to game. I rarely leave it to idle. I just sleep it.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> I normally just set performance mode before I start to game. I rarely leave it to idle. I just sleep it.


I use my pc for more than gaming and enjoy performance all round. With these settings, you can just leave it on balanced. You can take it or leave it.


----------



## Sheyster

GeneO said:


> I use my pc for more than gaming and enjoy performance all round. With these settings, you can just leave it on balanced. You can take it or leave it.



It's a good tip. I assume you could set it at something like 25% to get higher than default performance at idle but not full bore like at the 0% setting.


----------



## Sheyster

BradleyW said:


> Probably loose timings and very high voltages.


Probably, and that TRFC is super high but at least he got it to boot into Windows.  For gaming you really don't need anything higher than 4000.


----------



## GeneO

Sheyster said:


> It's a good tip. I assume you could set it at something like 25% to get higher than default performance at idle but not full bore like at the 0% setting.


Yes, for awhile I had it aset at 33%. That maybe the default.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I normally just set performance mode before I start to game. I rarely leave it to idle. I just sleep it.
> 
> 
> 
> I use my pc for more than gaming and enjoy performance all round. With these settings, you can just leave it on balanced. You can take it or leave it.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the information.


----------



## spin5000

reachthesky said:


> For 5.3ghz all core, 5.0ghz cache, hyperthreading off:
> 
> acdc-1-1
> llc high
> vcore-normal(dvid), +140mv offset
> ENABLE enhanced multicore performance
> DISABLE all c-states except C3
> ENABLE EIST
> DISABLE SPEEDSHIFT
> DISABLE HYPERTHREADING
> DISABLE voltage optimization, ring to core, race to halt, energy efficient turbo
> pwm switchrate 500
> pwm phase control extreme
> vcore current protection extreme
> vcore protection 400mv
> enable turbo, set all ratios to 53
> max out power limits just incase.
> 1.3v sa/io (required for supporting both higher cache + higher speed ram, you might be able to run them at 1.25v for benching or if your chip scales better with voltage.)
> 
> These specific settings allow voltage and frequency to downclock depending on the load. No load= .854v minimum idle voltage and 800mhz frequency when using windows balanced power plan. If you don't want voltage/frequency to drop at idle, just use windows maximum performance power plan.
> 
> Manually setting acdc loadlines to 1 and 1 will automatically override any acdc loadline preset(powersaving/performance/turbo etc).
> Beware, when manually altering acdc loadlines + using dvid offset mode, you will encounter a voltage bug. Don't sweat it, just restart a second time before entering windows.
> 
> These settings are NOT safe by any means and exceed intel's recommended voltage/amp limits. It can be kept cool enough under full load for daily use with a 360mm AIO + liquid metal between IHS and AIO coldplate. You will have to maintenance this on a regular basis if you put liquid metal there. This may require sanding down any corrosion/tin layer or w/e they call it these days on the copper. Also, not even sure whether or not liquid metal voids OC warranty, it might. If you don't have the OC warranty, you aren't covered if your chip fails due to oc. Use at your own risk.
> 
> 
> The other profile for 5.3ghz all core, 5ghz cache:
> medium llc
> powersaving acdc(do not manually edit acdc loadlines, leave them at 0(zero) and use the preset only)
> +95mv offset
> enable c3 only
> enable EIST
> disable the other crap
> 300khz switchrate
> high perf pwm phase control
> disable enhanced multicore performance
> enable turbo, ratios to 53
> max out power limits just in case
> 1.3v sa/io to power the cache/high speed tuned ram
> 
> 
> *^**This profile idles around 1.34v when using windows maximum power plan and when under full load, voltage jumps to 1.39v ish. I'm using medium llc/power saving acdc/+95mv, based off everything i've been taught, i'm supposed to have vdroop here, instead I get 50mv vgain. Is this what "LLCing your CPU to death" looks like? Or is this mode more similar to "additional core turbo voltage" adaptive style voltage that I used with msi laptops before? If so, am I correct to assume the offset is applied after vdroop when it comes to voltage math? Is this mode healthier than using acdc 1-1 llc high with +140mv offset for the same clocks simply because lower llc=better for temps(assuming stability with either settings)? is powersaving + medium llc + 95mv positive offset operating like it is supposed to?
> 
> *
> Again, neither of these profiles are safe by any means, but they give 5.3ghz all core HT OFF on a chip that needs 1.32v manual voltage in bios/turbo llc for 5g all core ht on(to give you an idea of scaling). Use at your own risk!
> 
> In general, the presets are good for all core OCs. Acdc-1-1 + low llc + offset is good for using different turbo ratios + ring to core/scaling cache for different amount of cores active to have the right amount of vdroop for all core load frequency and enough voltage at the top end for all non-all core frequency workloads for when the cpu requests it.
> 
> O and in the event anyone was wondering when it comes to my recent hwinfo64 screenshots posted this past week, I renamed my "VROUT" sensor to "Vcore". I got tired of seeing 3 different vcore readings so I hid the other 2 and renamed the real one. So if you were trying to use it as a reference tool or whatever, know that the "vcore" shown is the real vcore(just vrout relabeled).


Thank you very much for all the information.

I have the same question as you, what difference do different CPU LLC (auto, normal, medium, turbo, etc.), AC/DC LLC (power saving, performance, etc.), and the other 2 individual LLCs for AC & DC (eg. 0, 1, etc.) make _if using the exact same vcore_ (VR VOUT, of course)? The reason I'm asking is because I can't get 5.2 GHz stable on my 9700KF at around the 1.35v-1.37v level. So I'm wondering if experimenting with different LLC settings - while keeping the same final vcore (1.35v-1.37v) - can potentially get me stable or if it's just simply a matter of having to add more final vcore regardless of LLC settings??? I really want to try and get 5.2 GHz stable.

P.S. Temps are not a problem so I'm not limited there.


----------



## asdkj1740

is gigabyte the only vendor that would fcukup the win10 system after memory oc fail?

damn. i got 2 packs of adata d60g 4133 c19-19-19 8g*2. really hard to get it stable on 4500 with xmp enable (turns out to be 21-21-21-43) and auto voltages. it boots up and pass aida memory benchmark, but under some heavy load like decompressing a nvidia driver it gives me blue screen...

any tips for getting it stable for 24/7(

8700k, aorus master z390 f10 bios


----------



## spin5000

Guys, I think there's a bug in the Z390 Gigabyte Aorus BIOS, at least on the Pro model. I cannot set RAM timings for tREFI. I can only enter a number up to 9998, anything higher than that and it automatically goes to 65xxx. If I leave it on auto then it goes to 14xxx but I was told it's safe to set it up to double the default, so that's 28xxx. I read maxing it out at 65xxx can be real dangerous and lead to corrupted files and other issues slowly over time but I'd like to at least double it to 28xxx which most seem to recommend is safe.

Does any one else have issues with entering in tREFI numbers? How could such a simple thing (entering a number) be bugged?


----------



## Wirerat

spin5000 said:


> Guys, I think there's a bug in the Z390 Gigabyte Aorus BIOS, at least on the Pro model. I cannot set RAM timings for tREFI. I can only enter a number up to 9998, anything higher than that and it automatically goes to 65xxx. If I leave it on auto then it goes to 14xxx but I was told it's safe to set it up to double the default, so that's 28xxx. I read maxing it out at 65xxx can be real dangerous and lead to corrupted files and other issues slowly over time.
> 
> How could just a simple thing in the BIOS (entering a number) be bugged-out? LOL.


The trefi bug is not in bios F9 and f10. It is only in f11 and F12b. 

We have discussed it here a good bit. Gigabyte is aware of the issue and working on a fix.

If your trefi is not stable at 65534 then you have to run xmp's trefi setting or roll back to F9 or F10 to fix.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whats the trick?
> 
> 
> 
> changing the RTT timings at the bottom of the memory timings to :
> 60/60/120/120/40/40 and using the memory preset "4500+"
Click to expand...

Have you tried reducing the primarys with any luck?

I noticed you are also running really high sa/io.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> changing the RTT timings at the bottom of the memory timings to :
> 60/60/120/120/40/40 and using the memory preset "4500+"


This is on Auto settings for RTL's / IOL's:

Funny ... I noticed that on my Ultra board whenever I have a training success (if directly the first time, or if it needs 3 runs for example) I always get 60/60/120/120/40/40

If I reboot (quit without saving with memory boot on auto so no training) I always get the second run (and all boots after that, on a 24/7 system (so no cold boots)) 60/60/60/60/40/40

So TLDR:

first boot = 60/60/120/120/40/40
second and later boots = 60/60/60/60/40/40

Funny how these boards work.

This is at least what my board is showing on the right hand side of the "auto" settings.
And this is what I get on "auto" settings (at least for rtl/iol/offsets, the rest is almost all put in manually)


----------



## asdkj1740

60/60/120/120/40/40 is the auto set when xmp applied, seems very relible and should not leave them at auto


----------



## asdkj1740

i lose the link of tweaktwon forum about gigabyte beta bios release and discussion thread, where else can i find the latest beta bios??


----------



## GeneO

asdkj1740 said:


> i lose the link of tweaktwon forum about gigabyte beta bios release and discussion thread, where else can i find the latest beta bios??


Here is the tweaktown link:

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## asdkj1740

GeneO said:


> Here is the tweaktown link:
> 
> https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


thank you so much!
merry christmas


----------



## GeneO

merry christmas!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Is that a good thing or a bad thing?


As I see this when I train succesfully on my board I would say for my situation it is a positive sign that I can go on testing for stability.
If these numbers are off on my board, I probably encounter stability problems when testing with Karhu for example.

I've had situations where I could test karhu with different numbers without errors, but that was not at 4000mhz (lower speeds).


----------



## DarknightOCR

anyone tested the new F11C beta for the Z390 Master?


----------



## GeneO

DarknightOCR said:


> anyone tested the new F11C beta for the Z390 Master?


Yes. Scroll back. in this thread.


----------



## DarknightOCR

ok forget it.
I didn't read the pages all behind.
I'll put the F11C with microcode B and test it.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> What's the point of buying a KS when you already own a K? The max you are going to get is 5.4 ghz no matter what on ambient. All the chips will do it, no matter if its a K or a KS. They will all do 5.4ghz with enough voltage(unless its one of those duds that can't even clock to 5g, not many of those around-they usually get returned quickly). You can keep 5.4ghz cool enough with direct die + liquid metal + 360mm AIO. No custom cooling required unless for some weird reason you bought a gaming-specific CPU to run p95 sessions or Ycruncher sessions or GSAT sessions or whatever other power virus test or if you needed to use your gaming-specific cpu for heavy/intense non-gaming related workloads. In the event you need to use your gaming specific-cpu for other intensive tasks that require you to pass these power virus tests, then you will need custom cooling for 5.4ghz. I bring this up because I don't think it is a topic that is talked about, at all. Specifically being the minimum hardware/system/supply purchase requirements to suck out the most performance from the chip. Also, specifically the idea of using a gaming specific-cpu for activities other than gaming/streaming/browsing/movies/etc such as really heavy & intense workloads for projects or whatever, It brings a much larger cooling cost to the table if you want to get every ounce of performance out of the chip than if you were just gaming/streaming with it. I think it's a piece of information that should be put out there so that users who simply just want the best performance for gaming/streaming/browsing/movies/etc can know what they actually need to buy. Like even after an 8 hour session playing the latest modern warfare on full ultra at 5.4ghz cores/5.1ghz cache @1.475v vrout!!! powering 240hz with a 2080ti WITHOUT direct die or delid but with liquidmetal between the ihs/aio coldplate(360mm), temps are max 84c. Bring direct direct cooling into the picture and you are definitely under 80c, right where we want to be under at all times. But again, if I needed to use my cpu for really heavy and intensive workloads, I'd also need custom watercooling to sustain this. It's interesting to see how if the user wants more flexibility in usage cases outside of gaming/streaming with their gaming-specific cpu AND maximum performance at the same time, Costs go up several hundred dollars(multiple rads/tubing/cooling block/more fans/other oddsNends) unless the user ops for the cheap/risky watercooling solutions from aliexpress which probably wouldn't do the job anyway. There should be a tier list or chart list of requirements available for potential buyers to view so that they can be able to make an easier purchase decision on exactly what they need to buy based on their usage cases & how much performance they want to suck out of the chip. It would make it easier for the buyer to figure out their budget up front or to see the most performance they can get with their budget. Like, maybe intel sells more 9900K/KF/KS chips if people know they can game/stream just fine @5g with just a 240mm? aio(i don't know what the minimum requirement for that specific spec is, it could be 120mm for all i know or even just an air cooler, just wanted to put more of an idea out there). Granted this information could probably not be available right at chip's launch since people have to figure it out how the chips scale/temps etc, I think at some point after every chip launch(overclockable chip) once there is enough compiled data available to draw a reasonably accurate conclusion, a chart like that could be made to help potential buyers simplify their buying journey.
> 
> Like for example, What if someone was building a brand new PC with a 9900K/F/S, they don't know what they need but They want to fully power 240hz 1080p at full ultra on their favorite fps titles. They want that 240 fps locked in at all times on full ultra, on all of their favorite multiplayer fps titles. Do they even know what frequencies they even need to hit on the CPU and ram let alone what other hardware they need to buy in order to obtain this goal? They probably won't and there isn't a resource available out there to inform someone, but there should be. They are going to need to clock at 5.4ghz with a 9900K/f/s with HT off(ht on too slow) and require at the least an extremely well tuned 4400mhz or higher kit + a top of the line 2080 ti partner card that is manually overclocked past 15.2 or past 15.4 on the memory with a good core oc. If they want to do it for all titles(to include the most demanding stuff like latest tomb raider), they need that second gpu and possibly one of those 4800 or higher ram kits. I'd have bought a 4400mhz ram kit or better from the start(meaning the industry would have gotten more money from the customer) if I had known I needed it. I'd get the 4400 or better kit now but then I have 4 extra ram sticks collecting dust. Vendors would sell more high end ram kits if gamers that want the full ultra 240hz experience knew they actually needed it.
> 
> *So i guess I should finally go direct die?*
> 
> 
> 
> When you bring LN2, helium, dice or a chiller into the picture you can get more than 5.4 out of it.
> 
> *BUT* since you already purchased and have the KS on the way. How do you feel about clocking to 5.4 with your K chip?


I returned the CPU yesterday and had no interest in going for an ambitious OC that might degrade the chip right before going to a new owner.

I got a KS because I want 5GHz out of the box. I don't have much time for overclocking and stability testing right now. I actually want a usable computer ASAP that runs fast and doesn't crash. I've wanted to see 5GHz for years, this stock CPU will keep me satisfied for some time until I decide to see how much more it's capable of. I upgraded to a platform that is at the end of its life, I might as well get the top of the line CPU for it and never upgrade until it's time to swap out the motherboard and build a completely new system.


----------



## BradleyW

I've ran SUPERPOSITION (720p low) many times and my min FPS can vary between 147 to 178. Is this normal? I've tried increasing VCCIO/SA to rule out instability, even though my current speeds and voltages have been proven stable via long GSAT sessions. 

Also, what timings can I adjust to increase my min FPS?

Thank you.


----------



## Emmanuel

BradleyW said:


> I've ran SUPERPOSITION (720p low) many times and my min FPS can vary between 147 to 178. Is this normal? I've tried increasing VCCIO/SA to rule out instability, even though my current speeds and voltages have been proven stable via long GSAT sessions.
> 
> Also, what timings can I adjust to increase my min FPS?
> 
> Thank you.


Quick win, halve your tRFC and double your tREFI. That should be stable.
If you want to tweak the primary timings, that'll take more work.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BradleyW

Emmanuel said:


> Quick win, halve your tRFC and double your tREFI. That should be stable.
> If you want to tweak the primary timings, that'll take more work.


Due to a BIOS bug I can't adjust tREFI, and lowest I can set tRFC is 470. Anything lower won't take, for some reason.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## metalspider

BradleyW said:


> I've ran SUPERPOSITION (720p low) many times and my min FPS can vary between 147 to 178. Is this normal? I've tried increasing VCCIO/SA to rule out instability, even though my current speeds and voltages have been proven stable via long GSAT sessions.
> 
> Also, what timings can I adjust to increase my min FPS?
> 
> Thank you.


looks like you didnt tune any of your sub timings or tertiary timings and they are really bad right now.


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> I've asked these very same questions in the ddr4 thread and nobody would help me. I had to figure it out myself. I wish you luck. Hint, you'll have to value superposition results over aida64 results when you test to see how adjusting which timings affect minimum fps the most. Latency might look good in aida64, but it can still perform worse or inconsistent in superposition if the timings aren't optimal.


If you have any information that might help me, I would very much appreciate to hear it.

Thank you.



Emmanuel said:


> Quick win, halve your tRFC and double your tREFI. That should be stable.
> If you want to tweak the primary timings, that'll take more work.


Thank you.


----------



## metalspider

BradleyW said:


> If you have any information that might help me, I would very much appreciate to hear it.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.


this guide is really good.
https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md#intel---lga1151


----------



## BradleyW

metalspider said:


> this guide is really good.
> https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md#intel---lga1151


Thanks. I looked at the guide and I don't understand this:

tRC = tRP + tRAS + X

My tRC is hidden, so how do I set tRP and tRAS accordingly?


----------



## metalspider

BradleyW said:


> Thanks. I looked at the guide and I don't understand this:
> 
> tRC = tRP + tRAS + X
> 
> My tRC is hidden, so how do I set tRP and tRAS accordingly?


on my aorus pro trc is the first setting in advanced timing control and i set it to trp+tras.the X the guide mentions is in case you have stability issues so it suggests trying from trp+tras+8
its one of the few settings you dont see in the asrock timing configurator in windows.


----------



## BradleyW

Thank you for the information!

Here are my old vs new timings at the moment. I think I'm on the right track!

I've stayed true to the formulas whilst setting the timings:


----------



## metalspider

BradleyW said:


> Thank you for the information!
> 
> Here are my old vs new timings at the moment. I think I'm on the right track!
> 
> I've stayed true to the formulas whilst setting the timings:


 your tcwl is much lower then tcl,you can probably lower tcl so its tcl=tcwl like in my timings.
just make sure to test your ram for errors with a memetest each time you tweak stuff.i liked hci memtest the most.


your timings are a little better but you can definitely improve them.


----------



## KedarWolf

Modded Master F11c beta BIOS, latest RST firmware, fastest microcodes, not latest, latest GOP and Ethernet firmwares.

Make a FreeDOS USB with included RUFUS. Put the BIOS and efiflash.exe onto the USB after making it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.11c /x

Use the modded F11c BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## warbucks

Been playing around with my 9900KS. Have it dialed in pretty good. Still a few things to tighten. Welcome any suggestions from folks.


----------



## Deathtech00

Heya, @KedarWolf!

Running an older revision of your F10b bios. I know previously you were saying to stick with that as it was more stable than the newer F11. Has that changed since this release? Is F11 on par with F10 now?

Thanks again for making and sharing these, along with the information. I really appreciate it.


----------



## BradleyW

metalspider said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for the information!
> 
> Here are my old vs new timings at the moment. I think I'm on the right track!
> 
> I've stayed true to the formulas whilst setting the timings:
> 
> 
> 
> your tcwl is much lower then tcl,you can probably lower tcl so its tcl=tcwl like in my timings.
> just make sure to test your ram for errors with a memetest each time you tweak stuff.i liked hci memtest the most.
> 
> 
> your timings are a little better but you can definitely improve them.
Click to expand...

I'll give it a go, thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

Deathtech00 said:


> Heya, @KedarWolf!
> 
> Running an older revision of your F10b bios. I know previously you were saying to stick with that as it was more stable than the newer F11. Has that changed since this release? Is F11 on par with F10 now?
> 
> Thanks again for making and sharing these, along with the information. I really appreciate it.


I've had no problems with f11c. All options are there again and RAM training is also faster as well. So I can recommend it with the older microcodes
(I modded one several pages back with AE. BE is fine too. C6 and CA are garbage).

Gigabyte has confirmed the 300 khz switching frequency stability improvement issue but it will take some time to determine why it's happening.


----------



## BradleyW

What is the performance loss between tRC = tRP + tRAS vs tRC = tRP + tRAS + 8?


----------



## metalspider

BradleyW said:


> What is the performance loss between tRC = tRP + tRAS vs tRC = tRP + tRAS + 8?


no idea,general rule for all timings except for trefi is you want them as low as possible.trefi is the only one you want higher because thats how long the system waits before doing the next charge cycle.
and trfc is the amount of time the charge cycle takes.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deathtech00 said:


> Heya, @KedarWolf!
> 
> Running an older revision of your F10b bios. I know previously you were saying to stick with that as it was more stable than the newer F11. Has that changed since this release? Is F11 on par with F10 now?
> 
> Thanks again for making and sharing these, along with the information. I really appreciate it.


I'm pretty sure they fixed most of the bugs in the new F11c, worth a try.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> I've had no problems with f11c. All options are there again and RAM training is also faster as well. So I can recommend it with the older microcodes
> (I modded one several pages back with AE. BE is fine too. C6 and CA are garbage).
> 
> Gigabyte has confirmed the 300 khz switching frequency stability improvement issue but it will take some time to determine why it's happening.


Yeah, mine has BE.


----------



## BradleyW

metalspider said:


> no idea,general rule for all timings except for trefi is you want them as low as possible.trefi is the only one you want higher because thats how long the system waits before doing the next charge cycle.
> and trfc is the amount of time the charge cycle takes.


Hopefully someone knows, because my timings are not stable so I'll probably need to run the sticks @ 1.4v to support the changes. However, if I use tRC = tRP + tRAS + 8 rather than tRC = tRP + tRAS, I might be able to regain stability without adding voltage, as I'm currently at 1.38v.

Interesting, if I lower tWTR_S/L (via twRRD_sg/dg) to 4/12 as suggested in the guide, I get a loss of 500MB read on aida64.


----------



## Emmanuel

BradleyW said:


> Hopefully someone knows, because my timings are not stable so I'll probably need to run the sticks @ 1.4v to support the changes. However, if I use tRC = tRP + tRAS + 8 rather than tRC = tRP + tRAS, I might be able to regain stability without adding voltage, as I'm currently at 1.38v.
> 
> Interesting, if I lower tWTR_S/L (via twRRD_sg/dg) to 4/12 as suggested in the guide, I get a loss of 500MB read on aida64.


What are the advertised XMP specs of your kit? What's the exact model number?


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> Ohhhh, My apologies. I assumed you were buying the KS hoping to get more than you could get out of the K, not returning/swapping out, sorry about that. But yeah it's easier with the KS, you just plug n play for the most part(sometimes bios update required). To be fair though, you could have fooled me. Most people who claim they don't have time to tune/stress test for stability aren't going around posting on forums that they just ran their memtest for 28 hours like you did a few pages back, just sayin .
> 
> How's it feel to finally get that 5Ghz?


Memtest doesn't require anything from me other than setting up the right tests and letting it run. I'll do what it takes to be confident that my PC won't crash on me or corrupt my data. I determined that dealing with the CPU was going to be too much work for now, and I'd rather pay an extra $20 and get the best CPU that will ever be released on this platform. When I was younger, I'd reinstall my OS almost on a weekly basis due to corruption. I'm scarred for life, and no longer have that kind of time. Plus in the meantime, I gotta use my laptop that outputs 4K at 30Hz only and it's pretty irritating. I'd rather spend my time using the PC than running tests on it


----------



## BradleyW

Emmanuel said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully someone knows, because my timings are not stable so I'll probably need to run the sticks @ 1.4v to support the changes. However, if I use tRC = tRP + tRAS + 8 rather than tRC = tRP + tRAS, I might be able to regain stability without adding voltage, as I'm currently at 1.38v.
> 
> Interesting, if I lower tWTR_S/L (via twRRD_sg/dg) to 4/12 as suggested in the guide, I get a loss of 500MB read on aida64.
> 
> 
> 
> What are the advertised XMP specs of your kit? What's the exact model number?
Click to expand...

https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...-ZDDR4-4000MHz-CL18-19-19-39-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)


----------



## kamyk155

Guys. I have another question.
Days of fighting with my Samsung 950 Pro, Aorus Master and 9900KS.
For now I'm happy. CPU stock 5GHz 1,245V (from 1,3+V suggested by bios) and stable in all games and stressing programs.
Samsung 950- Pro working now fully ok - no more BSODs with bootloader.
Now fighting with my memory - Viper Steel (B-die) 4000MHz CL 19-19-19-39-700.
After two days I can set them to 4000MHz with 17-17-17. VCCSA 1,26V, Agent 1,26V, DDR 1,4V.
Today I tried 4133 CL17 - got BSOD at windows. Tried 4133 18-18-18 and after restart computer it took to long to start (something was not right).
Any advice how to stabilize 4133 or better to stay with 4000 CL17 ?


----------



## Sheyster

BradleyW said:


> Thank you for the information!
> 
> Here are my old vs new timings at the moment. I think I'm on the right track!


If you're not running a BIOS with the TREFI bug then I suggest you bump that up to 32768. You should see some extra performance from that change alone.


----------



## BradleyW

Thank you for all the help guys, I really appreciate it.

Since adjusting my timings to make them tighter, it seems to have almost cured a stuttering issue I had in Ghost Recon Breakpoint, because it is open world, leading assets as you travel down the map. Must be because there's less latency!

I just need to know now if there's a performance loss between tRC = tRP + tRAS vs tRC = tRP + tRAS + 8 but I can't find anything online as of yet.


----------



## Emmanuel

BradleyW said:


> Thank you for all the help guys, I really appreciate it.
> 
> Since adjusting my timings to make them tighter, it seems to have almost cured a stuttering issue I had in Ghost Recon Breakpoint, because it is open world, leading assets as you travel down the map. Must be because there's less latency!
> 
> I just need to know now if there's a performance loss between tRC = tRP + tRAS vs tRC = tRP + tRAS + 8 but I can't find anything online as of yet.


That's good to know, when OCs translate into meaningful performance gains 

I'm interested to see your before and after timings when you're done!


----------



## BradleyW

Emmanuel said:


> That's good to know, when OCs translate into meaningful performance gains
> 
> I'm interested to see your before and after timings when you're done!


Sadly I pushed the timings too far and the BIOS reset, so I loaded my timings back in (all my settings were already entered) and they are no longer stable with the same voltages. Instant GSAT errors.


----------



## Emmanuel

BradleyW said:


> Sadly I pushed the timings too far and the BIOS reset, so I loaded my timings back in (all my settings were already entered) and they are no longer stable with the same voltages. Instant GSAT errors.


I hate inconsistency, my only guess is that the RAM trained some other subtimings left on auto to different values.
Did you try manually setting all the timings to the values found in a previous screenshot you took of the AsRock memory app?


----------



## BradleyW

Emmanuel said:


> I hate inconsistency, my only guess is that the RAM trained some other subtimings left on auto to different values.
> Did you try manually setting all the timings to the values found in a previous screenshot you took of the AsRock memory app?


I hate it too!

I checked the auto timings for differences, but everything was the same.

Some timings are not exposed, so I forced the system to retrain them. Best way to do it was to set all timings to auto, apart from primary timings (which I set to specification). 

Before saving the settings, I set vDIMM to 1.35v, VCCIO 1.3v, VCCSA 1.3v (for some reason it trains perfectly on those exact voltages).

Saved, rebooted, entered my timings again, reduced VCCIO/SA to 1.25v and set vDIMM to 1.4v. Saved, rebooted.

Running GSAT again, no instant errors anymore. I'm back on track it would seem. Thank you.


----------



## Intrud3r

Emmanuel said:


> I hate inconsistency, my only guess is that the RAM trained some other subtimings left on auto to different values.
> Did you try manually setting all the timings to the values found in a previous screenshot you took of the AsRock memory app?


This ... is right on point imho

As soon as I started putting in more settings manually (taken from the ASRock timing app after successful training in windows) I had way less troubles training when trying to push for more.


----------



## BradleyW

Intrud3r said:


> This ... is right on point imho
> 
> As soon as I started putting in more settings manually (taken from the ASRock timing app after successful training in windows) I had way less troubles training when trying to push for more.


I checked this and found it not to be the case as far as I could tell. I could be wrong. But I did what I did and it cured the problem I'm glad to say.


----------



## AndrejB

Something interesting maybe, returned to xmp and found that io/sa 1.22v was unstable in Apex, while io 1.15v sa 1.2v is stable.

Seems io/sa have U curve for stability... Or maybe the gap between the two causes stability improvement...

It's a bit annoying, that intel doesn't provide any info


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## asdkj1740

check the qvl dude...
memory oc is the toppest secret of all mobo vendors. the most difficult thing to solve and improve.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> I will NEVER buy into this technology ever again. NEVER. NEVER AGAIN.


During my studies one professor told us to not expect too much reliability... As this is a young technology and we are just figuring it out.
Cars for instance exist 100 or so years and they're usually plug and play (sit and drive), while computers exist about 30 years (without a world war to propel development).
Now that I work for a software company, I can confirm that it's all trail and error on both sides, software and hardware.. any new feature can break an old one.

The only thing I'm a bit annoyed about is that if we were to enable a high frequency xmp. The io/sa would be set high and could damage the cpu.. 4133 (on the qvl) would set io/sa to 1.37 (one guy killed his cpu with this)..
Some more info from the manufacturers would be nice, but I guess it'd hurt sales or they just don't care to ask their engineers about it...
Regarding the debate on Intel vs Amd, they both have and will continue to have issues.. Intel with it's security flaws, Amd with compatibly with Windows (intentional or not)


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> It's extremely rare for this technology to work properly. You could buy an xmp 4400 kit and it won't work on these boards even though the board advertises 4400 speeds. Anytime you try to bring it up to manufacturers, they pass the buck onto someone else as if it isn't their fault. "o it's your motherboard", "o it's your ram kit not our motherboard" "it's your chip not our motherboard" "it's your ram kit not our chip". An endless circle jerk of passing the buck. Xmp should ALWAYS work no matter what. Overclocking past xmp profile on a motherboard that claims to support higher frequency than your xmp profile should always work. No matter what. no excuses.
> 
> It really seems like one big merry go around of a scam.
> 
> They show videos of people attaining these speeds on youtube, yet I only see 1 out of every 10 people(If that!) who actually buy all the required equipment only actually get it to work at advertised speeds.
> 
> either sell technology that works up to spec entirely or don't sell it at all.
> 
> Today I learned that expensive ram kits and gigabyte motherboards are a rip off because they rarely work as advertised. Plug and play they said, it will be easy they said.
> 
> When I was cheap and tried amd, they said you get what you pay for.
> When I spent the money and bought the good stuff, they make every excuse in the book and play the blame game.
> 
> I will NEVER buy into this technology ever again. NEVER. NEVER AGAIN.


While I might agree that XMP should work out of the biox, OC beyond that, no matter wjat the claims, is a crapshoot. You are pushing the memory and processoer beyond their design limits so nothing can be guaranteed. Gigabyte is known not to be the best at memory overclocking, and it is true.

My annoyance is my io/rtl values can bounce between low reasonable values and double those. I have to shut my computer down, leave it off for some time, then clear cmos and load my profile without memory quick start, and once I get the lower values immediately switch to quick start. That way I can keep them. Even though you can change io/rtl values in the BIOS, your changes are completely ignored.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

Seems like the gap between io/sa plays a role. Over certain voltages...

4133c17 @ 1.4v:
io/sa 1.15v - trains properly but can't handle high gpu power
io 1.17 / sa 1.19v - doesn't train
io 1.18 / sa 1.2v - doesn't train
io 1.15 / sa 1.2v - trains but seems to struggle a bit with high gpu power
io 1.16 / sa 1.2 - trains properly, testing now
Anything over 1.2v on either - throws dxgi_device_hung/removed in Apex

This is fun...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## asdkj1740

after stabling 4533c19 8g*4, my cpu oc is simply broken. i can now run 4533c19 8g*4 all day long and no crashes/bsod during gaming.
i used to oc my cpu with fixed voltage at 1.35v set on bios and turbo llc at 5ghz. now it just crashes in games/bsod etc.
it seems after reaching 4533 8g*4 oc, my old fixed vcore voltage oc method is ruined.

i have serious frametime sipkes on playing battlefield 5, and then i found out for battlefield5 5ghz maybe too high for my cpu at 1.35v set on bios . lower cpu frequency helps alleviate the sipke a lot.
now my goal is to get ~4.7ghz for cpu. 
never tried offset vcore voltages, any tips?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Seems like the gap between io/sa plays a role. Over certain voltages...
> 
> 4133c17 @ 1.4v:
> io/sa 1.15v - trains properly but can't handle high gpu power
> io 1.17 / sa 1.19v - doesn't train
> io 1.18 / sa 1.2v - doesn't train
> io 1.15 / sa 1.2v - trains but seems to struggle a bit with high gpu power
> io 1.16 / sa 1.2 - trains properly, testing now
> Anything over 1.2v on either - throws dxgi_device_hung/removed in Apex
> 
> This is fun...





reachthesky said:


> VccSA controls your system agent voltage. System agent handles the pcie lanes hence why 1.15v SA couldn't handle high gpu power (the lanes were starved).
> 
> Would you mind putting them both at 1.25v or both at 1.3v to see if you get the same result. I'm gonna install apex, this past week is the first time i've heard people mentioning apex in regards to stability, usually its bfiv or w/e it is called. Curious if I have any issues at 1.3v on both, I'll report back after installing/playing a few games.
> 
> btw, how fast does apex throw an error message?


I don't know about the DXGI errors. Might be an Nvidia thing. 

Apex Legends will generate "CPU Internal Parity Errors" or CPU Translation Lookaside Buffer Errors, or just crash, if your overclock is unstable.

I was thanked in one of the patch notes back in Spring, after it was crashing on EVERYONE's overclocked 8700k-9900k CPU's (and that's not exaggeration) and even on some people's STOCK 9900k's, and the game developer determined it was a bug in the Skylake core (7700k-9900k), possibly microcode or low level, that was causing it. There was a gigantic megathread about this on the EA forums. He made a new code path which gave massive improvements to stability, so now instead of crashing if you were 100% stable in every stress test (except power virus FMA3 small FFT prime95 and LinX 0.9.6), it crashes if you're realistically unstable.

I was mentioned in the old patch notes for helping track down the cause of the problem (Intel CPU problem).

https://www.reddit.com/r/apexlegends/comments/bpxh1f/next_patch_coming_early_next_week_here_are_the/


----------



## Falkentyne

asdkj1740 said:


> after stabling 4533c19 8g*4, my cpu oc is simply broken. i can now run 4533c19 8g*4 all day long and no crashes/bsod during gaming.
> i used to oc my cpu with fixed voltage at 1.35v set on bios and turbo llc at 5ghz. now it just crashes in games/bsod etc.
> it seems after reaching 4533 8g*4 oc, my old fixed vcore voltage oc method is ruined.
> 
> i have serious frametime sipkes on playing battlefield 5, and then i found out for battlefield5 5ghz maybe too high for my cpu at 1.35v set on bios . lower cpu frequency helps alleviate the sipke a lot.
> now my goal is to get ~4.7ghz for cpu.
> never tried offset vcore voltages, any tips?


Set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz and try again.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like the gap between io/sa plays a role. Over certain voltages...
> 
> 4133c17 @ 1.4v:
> io/sa 1.15v - trains properly but can't handle high gpu power
> io 1.17 / sa 1.19v - doesn't train
> io 1.18 / sa 1.2v - doesn't train
> io 1.15 / sa 1.2v - trains but seems to struggle a bit with high gpu power
> io 1.16 / sa 1.2 - trains properly, testing now
> Anything over 1.2v on either - throws dxgi_device_hung/removed in Apex
> 
> This is fun...
> 
> 
> 
> VccSA controls your system agent voltage. System agent handles the pcie lanes hence why 1.15v SA couldn't handle high gpu power (the lanes were starved).
> 
> Would you mind putting them both at 1.25v or both at 1.3v to see if you get the same result. I'm gonna install apex, this past week is the first time i've heard people mentioning apex in regards to stability, usually its bfiv or w/e it is called. Curious if I have any issues at 1.3v on both, I'll report back after installing/playing a few games.
> 
> btw, how fast does apex throw an error message?
Click to expand...

On 1.22v I got dxgi_device_hung in about 15min of playing, on 1.23v I got dxgi_device_removed in 5min.

So it seems that my cpu or mb or gpu don't like values in between, 
4133c17
Io/sa 1.15v linx, p95 112k, gsat stable but driver reset after raising pl of gpu
1.2v stable
1.25v stable

Think I'll stick with 1.2v 

All this can be due to different training happening on hidden timings... I have no idea...


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> On 1.22v I got dxgi_device_hung in about 15min of playing, on 1.23v I got dxgi_device_removed in 5min.
> 
> So it seems that my cpu or mb or gpu don't like values in between,
> 4133c17
> Io/sa 1.15v linx, p95 112k, gsat stable but driver reset after raising pl of gpu
> 1.2v stable
> 1.25v stable
> 
> Think I'll stick with 1.2v
> 
> All this can be due to different training happening on hidden timings... I have no idea...


Did you try raising the PCIE DMI voltage?
I've never seen this error in Apex legends even at 1.25v VCCSA.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Did you try raising the PCIE DMI voltage?
> I've never seen this error in Apex legends even at 1.25v VCCSA.


Could you point me in the direction of where I can find that setting and if you have any recommendation on values?

But I think setting io/sa to values in between 0.05 increments (like 1.22 or 1.23) was causing improper mem training


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Could you point me in the direction of where I can find that setting and if you have any recommendation on values?
> 
> But I think setting io/sa to values in between 0.05 increments (like 1.22 or 1.23) was causing improper mem training


I think it's called VCCDMI_PEG or something?


----------



## AndrejB

I found vccdmi_peg and it's defaulted to 1v, @Falkentyne is this the voltage you mentioned?
Edit: just saw your comment, thanks!


Interestingly 1.2v io/sa won't train after a clear cmos, while 1.16v io / 1.2v sa trains properly also after a clear cmos


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> I found vccdmi_peg and it's defaulted to 1v, @Falkentyne is this the voltage you mentioned?
> Edit: just saw your comment, thanks!
> 
> 
> Interestingly 1.2v io/sa won't train after a clear cmos, while 1.16v io / 1.2v sa trains properly also after a clear cmos


Just letting you know I have no idea what that voltage is for.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> I found vccdmi_peg and it's defaulted to 1v, @Falkentyne is this the voltage you mentioned?
> Edit: just saw your comment, thanks!
> 
> 
> Interestingly 1.2v io/sa won't train after a clear cmos, while 1.16v io / 1.2v sa trains properly also after a clear cmos
> 
> 
> 
> Just letting you know I have no idea what that voltage is for.
Click to expand...

Yea, wasn't planning on playing with it.

Still completely stumped, clearing cmos and trying to train 4133 goes through perfectly at io 1.15 / sa 1.2, while trying the same with io/sa 1.2 gives me A6 error and gets stuck...


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Yea, wasn't planning on playing with it.
> 
> Still completely stumped, clearing cmos and trying to train 4133 goes through perfectly at io 1.15 / sa 1.2, while trying the same with io/sa 1.2 gives me A6 error and gets stuck...


I figured "PEG" means PCIE port which means video card so if you were getting DXGI device lost, maybe putting that at 1.05v might help.
I had it at 1.10v before and nothing happened. Nothing blew up.


----------



## asdkj1740

reachthesky said:


> Lets see that completed memtest loading up 28gb minimum + asrock timing configurator slip + cpu-z tabs + hwinfo64 readout . I've tested several kits nothing higher than 4200 can be stabilized on these boards. Look around, you won't find any evidence of stability at speeds 4266 or higher for these boards. All we see are people making claims. People do it all the time on reddit too. These people seemingly at random come out of the woodwork with their ultra high overclocks on cpu and/or ram frequencies are also never to be found on any benchmark boards either. They also never post any concrete proof. Gee. I wonder.
> 
> i'll be the first person to admit i'm jealous if you prove me wrong but there is not a single case of evidence for stability for this motherboard line up when it comes to ram speeds @ 4266 or higher.


i am a simple gamer, i oc for gaming. if it wont crash in game then it is all good to me. but i will try that once i get rid of the cpu oc problem.
btw which memtest is good?


----------



## asdkj1740

Falkentyne said:


> Set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz and try again.


i can run prime95 avx small fft with out problem but i got instant crashes on 3dmark timespy extreme cpu test and bfv.
thanks for you tip i will give it a try.


btw there are three vcore voltages on hwinfo64 that from different sensor, which one should i rely on/keep track on?


----------



## kamyk155

Guys two questions because I have stability problem but don't know it is ram or cpu:
- Battlefield V crash to desktop without any info or bsod
- Red Dead Redemption made a BSOD but it was too fast to read it - after using bsodviewer it was somekind of kernel 41 power and after computer restarts - 4 short beeps from bios (then after a moment system restart normaly)

Now raising voltages - trying now:
CPU - 1,2600V
VCCIO - 1,270V
Agent - 1,2700V
DDR - 1,41V

Any infos about this two problems ?
I saw on one forum that BF5 use AVX and it can need more Vcore and crash to desktop is from ram stability (VCCIO and Agent)


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> Btw, the aorus master seems to not like odd number for tCWL. At cas latency 15, I cannot do tCWL 15 or 13 but I can do tCWL 14 or 12 just fine. Not a complaint, more of a heads up if you think you had the timing as low is it can go, it might actually be able to go further.


Odd numbers do work, but they do seem to work worse. I settled on tCWL 14 for CAS 15 at MT 3500 now.

Overall the already unpleasant experience of memory overclocking is made worse by Gigabyte. The lack of a button to boot with default UEFI settings *without* having to clear everything is a bummer. UEFI version F10 made it even worse, because loading previously saved profiles does not work for me, it loads completely bonkers values into various settings (like increasing GPU voltage when I did not touch that setting). At one point part of and then all favorites broke, now they work again after the board loaded default settings at one point (no Clear CMOS from my side).

What fortunately does seem to work properly is to load the last known to work configuration profile. That is quite helpful.


----------



## Driller au

kamyk155 said:


> Guys two questions because I have stability problem but don't know it is ram or cpu:
> - Battlefield V crash to desktop without any info or bsod
> - Red Dead Redemption made a BSOD but it was too fast to read it - after using bsodviewer it was somekind of kernel 41 power and after computer restarts - 4 short beeps from bios (then after a moment system restart normaly)
> 
> Now raising voltages - trying now:
> CPU - 1,2600V
> VCCIO - 1,270V
> Agent - 1,2700V
> DDR - 1,41V
> 
> Any infos about this two problems ?
> I saw on one forum that BF5 use AVX and it can need more Vcore and crash to desktop is from ram stability (VCCIO and Agent)


Probably have to raise your Vcore that normally fixes it . Like i have said here before BFV is the most fun stress test there is, I have passed realbench and other stress tests only to crash in BFV within a few minutes, that's where i would start if your ram has passed testing


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> "The lack of a button to boot with default UEFI settings *without* having to clear everything is a bummer." - Does this even exist on any board at all?


Asus ROG boards have had "MEMok" button for as long as I can remember.

It only makes changes to memory settings needed to post.

It's really useful when memory overclocking. It saves time.

I can tell by how the memory led flashes if my timings will successfully train in about 30secs on my aorus pro. I am still forced to wait on it to recover though when it fails.

That button can speed things up significantly.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> OC profiles created with a previous bios almost always have trouble working with a different bios version, this isn't native to gigabyte either. It's just normal behavior. Just create a new profile and put your values in.


I did create a new profile and that one created bogus values on loading, too. This is what I meant by my last report here.



> "The lack of a button to boot with default UEFI settings *without* having to clear everything is a bummer." - Does this even exist on any board at all?


Yes, my Asus Crosshair (AMD) boards do offer these.



> Pretty sure the only way to boot with default settings IS to clear the cmos. They've given you a solution, i don't know why you are complaining.


Sometimes the Aorus Master boots with default settings by itself without having to Clear CMOS, this even fixed the broken Favorites list. And using the Clear CMOS button is an inconvenient solution, because it forces you to go through all settings again when a profile cannot be loaded. Asus' solution is to offer a "one-time-default settings" button that only uses said default for booting safely *without* overwriting your setting. You can then enter UEFI and change your settings without going over everything from scratch again. If nothing else, it's a solution that involves less steps and clicking in an already tedious process (memory overclocking that is).



> What difference does it make if you had to clear it, you wanted to switch back to default anyway.


One solution (GB) deletes all settings, one keeps all settings and still boots safely and successfully. Furthermore the Asus Crosshair offers another button that allows to "Retry" booting with the same settings which is different from using the "Reset" button. The latter of which often does not work anymore on the Aorus when it froze due to OC related instabilities.



> To add, you can just reboot loading "last known good" boot config afterwards if you want your previous stuff back.


I know and mentioned this myself. For very trial-and-error heavy overclocking like RAM the current solution still is inconvenient. Even more so since the GB board tends to switch to its second BIOS when it utterly fails to boot some settings. This forces me to switch off the PSU to make the board (maybe/hopefully) try to boot from the primary BIOS again. It's working, but there are better solutions out there.



> I'm wondering if the odd numbers for tCWL is sensitive more to the actual ram itself and not the aorus master. I'll have to try out my other 4000 kit and see. But right now i'm pretty sure its the aorus master because it doesn't make sense as to why tCWL trains at 12 but does not train at 13 when the ram sticks can definitely handle a higher tcwl given that lower tCWL= higher performance/more stress on imc/sticks.


https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md

"Some motherboards don't play nice with odd tCWL. For example, I'm stable at 4000 15-19-19 tCWL 14, yet tCWL 15 doesn't even POST. Another user has had similar experiences."


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> Asus ROG boards have had "MEMok" button for as long as I can remember.
> 
> It only makes changes to memory settings needed to post.
> 
> It's really useful when memory overclocking. It saves time.
> 
> I can tell by how the memory led flashes if my timings will successfully train in about 30secs on my aorus pro. I am still forced to wait on it to recover though when it fails.
> 
> That button can speed things up significantly.


Plus Asus would not fail to boot in my experience. If there was a memory problem, it would boot to sdafe settingas, leaving your settings intact. If it was stuck, you could power it off and it would boot with default settings.


----------



## GeneO

kamyk155 said:


> Guys two questions because I have stability problem but don't know it is ram or cpu:
> - Battlefield V crash to desktop without any info or bsod
> - Red Dead Redemption made a BSOD but it was too fast to read it - after using bsodviewer it was somekind of kernel 41 power and after computer restarts - 4 short beeps from bios (then after a moment system restart normaly)
> 
> Now raising voltages - trying now:
> CPU - 1,2600V
> VCCIO - 1,270V
> Agent - 1,2700V
> DDR - 1,41V
> 
> Any infos about this two problems ?
> I saw on one forum that BF5 use AVX and it can need more Vcore and crash to desktop is from ram stability (VCCIO and Agent)


If you suspect AVX, eaise your AVX offset aand see if that works. If it does, you'll need more vcore if you want to lower AVX.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> If you suspect AVX, eaise your AVX offset aand see if that works. If it does, you'll need more vcore if you want to lower AVX.


This is true.
An AVX offset being triggered at load causes a worst case transient voltage change, because the CPU actually has to go to sleep and wake up at the new frequency, which causes a massive load release/engage cycle, and if you are not stable with AVX at the *original* frequency, an offset won't do a thing.
This is explained here.
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others&highlight=explanations
The cpu cache is very intolerant of transients that bad and you can test this by running a heavy stress test at the original frequency then changing the CPU speed while the test is running. Throttlestop 8.72 or 8.70 b6 can do this quickly in the FIVR window. If you are the least bit unstable, the system will not last long when you change the frequency lower then back to the original frequency.

The only purpose of the AVX offset is to reduce heat by running AVX at a lower frequency. But you have to be stable at the original frequency for this to work well. Intel needs to improve this functionality somehow in the future.


----------



## Timur Born

What do you mean by original frequency? My CPU is stable at x50 non AVX (even x51 when less than 8 cores are tested), but P95 Small-FFT AVX load on all 8 cores only runs stable at x48 using the same VCore. It does not matter whether I use an AVX offset of 2 then or set the whole CPU to x48 with offset 0, both are stable (cache only at x43 in both cases, though).


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> What do you mean by original frequency? My CPU is stable at x50 non AVX (even x51 when less than 8 cores are tested), but P95 Small-FFT AVX load on all 8 cores only runs stable at x48 using the same VCore. It does not matter whether I use an AVX offset of 2 then or set the whole CPU to x48 with offset 0, both are stable (cache only at x43 in both cases, though).


It means you need to be stable at x50 AVX to use a -2 AVX offset.
Please read the link I gave you again and don't rush through it this time.
When something triggers an AVX downclock, the cpu does not remain at the lower clock constantly. It keeps clocking back up to its original frequency sometimes too fast for you to notice. This is why some people get *instability* when using an AVX offset even in non-AVX applications or games. So if you're not stable in games with an AVX offset, try removing the AVX offset completely. Don't rely on prime95 to test if you're AVX stable or not either (the load is a power virus). Use Cinebench R20 or Realbench 2.56. You can also use AIDA64 "Stress FPU only" stress test as well.


----------



## kamyk155

I'm really mad today. Sorry for my english but I think you will understand.
Almost whole day fighting with memory and cpu stability.
Still nothing - really hate this new hardware.
Everything looks fine except that high voltages on cpu.
It's started from stock bios 1,33V. Then with XMP even 1,4V as stock ! CPU VIDs on cores sometimes more than 1,5V.
As you told me guys I started to lower voltages. It looks really fine until 1,225V.
Few BSODs and crash to desktop. Adding voltages to 1,25-26-27-28V on CPU. Still BSODs and freeze but mostly Prime95 AVX (2 times in RDR2 and 2x in BFV).
Why I use Prime95 with killer AVX - because I want to be stable even with AVX applications - I read about AVX in BFV and he is crashing to desktop sometimes.
Today I'm totally devastated. Still raising voltages for Prime95 - 1,28V almost 95*C on hottest core - BSOD after some time but too quick to read his code, then computer restart itself with 4 short beeps from bios and after moment it is fully working fine.
I raised CPU to 1,3V - BSOD and again 4 beeps. Weird is that I can't see bsod code and my minidump in windows shows nothing - folder is empty. Windows in management tells me that that was power kernel 41 - badly turned off computer.
My CPU isn't stable even on stock !!! His temperatures are way too hot (I have 3x360 rads with almost 30 fans in the case !!!! - yes almost 30 fans mostly 120mm).
Tortured my DDR4 today - without problems for few hours in few programs - 4000MHz 19-19-19-39 and 18-18-18-39 with 1,38-1,41V and from 1,26V to 1,30V VCCIO and Agent.
Today I even flash to 11c bios - still nothing better.
I don't want to have half stable computer - I can have lets say 1,25V for most games but even 1,3V isn't stable in some programs and games with avx.
I started to think about sending this weird cpu to intel because it it not normal to have 1,33 or 1,4V as stock on this cpu with 100*C or more with extreme water cooling loop.
Just imagine it - 1,28V gives me 95*C - what will be if I set this cpu to stock 1,33 or more (after XMP 1,4V as default).....120*C ? 130*C ?
PS - yes i checked mount of the water block on cpu - twice.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> It means you need to be stable at x50 AVX to use a -2 AVX offset.


If I was stable at x50 AVX then I would not need an offset to begin with (for stability). I know about the whole downclocking stuff and how it affects transients, but saying that you cannot get offset stability in general seems a bit broad of a statement.

I do use at least C1E and would even use C3 if the board kept its VRM noise down. Similar problem, but not a general black and white one.

Of your you need go be stable at x50 *non* AVX to be stable at a -2 AVX offset, but that is a different thing.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> If I was stable at x50 AVX then I would not need an offset to begin with (for stability). I know about the whole downclocking stuff and how it affects transients, but saying that you cannot get offset stability in general seems a bit broad of a statement.
> 
> I do use at least C1E and would even use C3 if the board kept its VRM noise down. Similar problem, but not a general black and white one.
> 
> Of your you need go be stable at x50 *non* AVX to be stable at a -2 AVX offset, but that is a different thing.


Wait what happened to your eVGA Dark?


----------



## Timur Born

eVGA Dark? I guess that was another forum member.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> eVGA Dark? I guess that was another forum member.


Oh. you were the guy with Asus boards before.


----------



## warbucks

Anyone know how to adjust/tighten RTL/IO-L's at high frequencies? 3600Mhz and below, they train properly and are quite tight but higher than 3600Mhz and it's loooooooooooose.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> If I was stable at x50 AVX then I would not need an offset to begin with (for stability).
> 
> Of your you need go be stable at x50 *non* AVX to be stable at a -2 AVX offset, but that is a different thing.


Avx offset works best when used to keep temperatures in check.

It starts to cause stability issues when it is used as a way to reduce vcore at a certain frequency.


----------



## Timur Born

x49 AVX and x50 AVX introduce big jumps in temperature increase compared to x48 AVX running the same load. x49 does not get P95 small FFT stable at +0.005v or +0.010v Vcore offset, but x48 (offset -2) is stable at +0.000v and maybe even lower.

Non AVX load at x50 seems is stable using the offset, as is Realbench and other stuff. The only indication of transient problems that *may* occur is that starting OCCT 4.5.1 "Small Data Set" sometimes fails right after at the very start. Since the latter test is very sensible to cache instabilities this may rather be due to C1E clocking down the cache clocks during idle, though.

So between having to use all x48 or trying the offset, I try the offset. There still is plenty of non AVX load happening that can benefit from 200 MHz higher frequencies.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> x49 AVX and x50 AVX introduce big jumps in temperature increase compared to x48 AVX running the same load. x49 does not get P95 small FFT stable at +0.005v or +0.010v Vcore offset, but x48 (offset -2) is stable at +0.000v and maybe even lower.
> 
> Non AVX load at x50 seems is stable using the offset, as is Realbench and other stuff. The only indication of transient problems that *may* occur is that starting OCCT 4.5.1 "Small Data Set" sometimes fails right after at the very start. Since the latter test is very sensible to cache instabilities this may rather be due to C1E clocking down the cache clocks during idle, though.
> 
> So between having to use all x48 or trying the offset, I try the offset. There still is plenty of non AVX load happening that can benefit from 200 MHz higher frequencies.


Are you on a Master? I Forgot what board you have.


----------



## Timur Born

Yes, Aorus Master.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Yes, Aorus Master.


Did you set your VRM switching frequency to 300 khz yet?


----------



## Timur Born

Yes, 300 kHz is currently set. I did not try x50/x50 with that yet, though, only x50/49 (unstable AVX) vs. x50/48 (stable AVX). My CPU does not seem to be that great. Cache also needs to stay below x46 to be stable.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> My CPU does not seem to be that great. Cache also needs to stay below x46 to be stable.


Whats the vrout under load? 

50/46 is pretty common. Both my 9900k and 9900kf rigs need a vcore bump to raise uncore above 46.


----------



## asdkj1740

Falkentyne said:


> Did you set your VRM switching frequency to 300 khz yet?


this really helps in stabilizing the whole system, especially the vax one.
thank you


----------



## Falkentyne

asdkj1740 said:


> this really helps in stabilizing the whole system, especially the vax one.
> thank you


Gigabyte was able to reproduce the problem but they aren't sure why it's happening yet because higher switching frequency should be more stable, but it's not.
The VRM might have to be retooled with the i2c programming kit for a BIOS update.


----------



## Hackslash

does ERP work on F11c? (master)
(because it doesnt on F8 F9 F10)


----------------

ERP works on F11c - very nice!


----------



## kaybee

Sorry to jump in to this thread abruptly, however I've gone through 15+ pages on this thread alone looking for what could be wrong with my O/C.
Either I have the world's worst 9600kf or there's something seriously wrong with the Gigabyte board (bios?) I have. 

I have:

- 9600kf
- Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi board running the F12a BIOS (latest one on their page)
- 16GB Gskill Ripjaw 3200 Ram CL-15
- Custom Water cooling

I've been overclocking various CPUs for 14 years, albeit with various other boards, and I can't get the CPU past 4.8Ghz! 
The original bios that came with the board seemed a little buggy (Qflash had issues) so I flashed to the latest BIOS F12a which changed the menu dramatically.

*I disabled -vt
Disabled multi-core enhancements
Set LLC to turbo
Ram is XMP Profile 1
Set the bus to 100.00

Set ring ratio to 45
Set core ratio to 48
*
It's fairly-stable at 4.8Ghz

However, *if I set the core ratio to 49, it crashes no matter what at 4.9Ghz!*

(I tested Vcore from 1.35 to 1.41 and it was unstable. Temps range from 30c to 75c.)

I'm blown away... because the default turbo boost of this CPU is 4.6Ghz, it _should_ be able to do 5.0ghz (hell, I've seen people get lucky and get 5.3ghz with these chips. I think the average is 5ghz to 5.2ghz). I refuse to believe that the CPU I got can't make it over 4800mhz with a 12 phase VRM, high quality ram and watercooling. 

I'm stumped guys. What should I change?

I'm trying to get it stable at least at 4.9Ghz but was really aiming for at least 5Ghz.


_(I also tried a whole bunch of other settings while troubleshooting this but they didn't seem to make a difference or just made things worse so I just included the ones that I currently have active)_


----------



## falcon5

You should take a look at the AVX offset setting. Try a setting of 2 or 3 for the start. It simply takes the multiplier down by the value you dial in when AVX is triggered. I.e. x49 with AVX offset 2 results in x47 when AVX instructions are being processed.


----------



## kaybee

Tried AVX 2-3 already. No change. Plus I'm not running any benchmarks / stress tests that use AVX.


----------



## falcon5

Ok, what are you setting your cache/ring to when upping the core multiplier above x48?


----------



## kaybee

My ring is set to 45, it wasn't stable higher.


----------



## BradleyW

Does anyone know of any software that will tell me what my RAM's TRC? My MB lets me change the value, but it doesn't tell me what its set to when TRC is at auto. 

Z390 ULTRA.


----------



## Gen.

BradleyW said:


> Does anyone know of any software that will tell me what my RAM's TRC? My MB lets me change the value, but it doesn't tell me what its set to when TRC is at auto.
> 
> Z390 ULTRA.


tRC=tRAS+tRP


----------



## Grizzly111

Hello, I've been trying to overclock my RAM but was never able to set the tREFI due to the bug on F10. I've tried the latest F11C modded BIOS that was posted a few pages back and it solved the tREFI issue. BUT I can't recommend using this new version yet.


1. My stable RAM overclock timings (on F10) did not even boot on F11C. Had to soften several secondary timings & increase voltage.
2. Windows takes a lot longer to boot - 4 circles vs 2.5!
3. The BIOS just doesnt appear to be stable if making RAM timing adjustments - I eventually got to the stage where none of my OC profiles worked (corrupted?) even after CMOS reset. Even 'Load optimized defaults' blue-screened on boot. So this necessitated reinstalling the stable F10 BIOS. 



With F10 I can use my best timings again but of course tREFI doesnt set.


NOTE: take care using a tREFI of 65000....it led to instant corruption (after 5mins) of Windows 10 for me. SFC /scannow could not fix until I used the DISM command.


Aorus Master + 9900KF @ 4.9Ghz. CJR Hynix RAM @ 3466Mhz 15-19-19-38.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Mrip541

The master has 2 cpu power connections but I only have 1 cable. Will it work at all with just 1 while I order a second?


----------



## GeneO

Mrip541 said:


> The master has 2 cpu power connections but I only have 1 cable. Will it work at all with just 1 while I order a second?


Yes


----------



## GeneO

Mrip541 said:


> The master has 2 cpu power connections but I only have 1 cable. Will it work at all with just 1 while I order a second?


Yes. But keep the cpu power under 336W. That is what an 8 pin EPS12v connector can handle.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Hello, I've been trying to overclock my RAM but was never able to set the tREFI due to the bug on F10. I've tried the latest F11C modded BIOS that was posted a few pages back and it solved the tREFI issue. BUT I can't recommend using this new version yet.
> 
> 
> 1. My stable RAM overclock timings (on F10) did not even boot on F11C. Had to soften several secondary timings & increase voltage.
> 2. Windows takes a lot longer to boot - 4 circles vs 2.5!
> 3. The BIOS just doesnt appear to be stable if making RAM timing adjustments - I eventually got to the stage where none of my OC profiles worked (corrupted?) even after CMOS reset. Even 'Load optimized defaults' blue-screened on boot. So this necessitated reinstalling the stable F10 BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> With F10 I can use my best timings again but of course tREFI doesnt set.
> 
> 
> NOTE: take care using a tREFI of 65000....it led to instant corruption (after 5mins) of Windows 10 for me. SFC /scannow could not fix until I used the DISM command.
> 
> 
> Aorus Master + 9900KF @ 4.9Ghz. CJR Hynix RAM @ 3466Mhz 15-19-19-38.


I've had no problems with F11c, and the RAM trains faster than in the older bioses also.
BTW to avoid BIOS corruption, if your system starts boot looping or fails to POST or reset itself after a bad RAM Timing fail, don't use the power but flip the power supply switch.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## warbucks

Falkentyne said:


> I've had no problems with F11c, and the RAM trains faster than in the older bioses also.
> BTW to avoid BIOS corruption, if your system starts boot looping or fails to POST or reset itself after a bad RAM Timing fail, don't use the power but flip the power supply switch.


I'm using F11c and have noticed if I change the following settings in the bios, they don't stick after saving:

tRDRD_dr, tRDRD_dd, tWRWR_dr, tWRWR_dd are a few examples.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Speaking of failing to post/bad ram timing fails, What is it called when the mother led debug display codes go dark during memory training? It can't be a good thing. I think too much sa/io causes it to happen.


I've never seen that happen before.
I've only seen it freeze on a post code, or just boot loop over and over.
BTW if it starts freezing like that, don't use the case button to power off. Just flip the PSU switch.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> I've had no problems with F11c, and the RAM trains faster than in the older bioses also.
> BTW to avoid BIOS corruption, if your system starts boot looping or fails to POST or reset itself after a bad RAM Timing fail, don't use the power but flip the power supply switch.


Thank you so much for the reply Falkentyne and Reachthesky for the tip. I have re-installed F11c as the tREFI set at double default makes a good difference to RAM latency.

Booting is as fast as F10 atm so that's strangely improved.

I am in the process of dialling in my RAM timings SLOWLY - but I've come across one hitch - my old stable F11C profile that I loaded made windows crash! Is that because everything is dialled in at once and its too fast for the BIOS or Windows to adapt? Also on my old profile I couldn't get the timings as tight for tRRDs & tFAW as I was able to on F10. What could be an explanation for these anomalies?

Cheers in advance!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Im running Cedarwolf's modded F11C with the 'fastest' microcodes. But have no idea what that actually means.



I have the RAM currently at 3466Mhz 1T. Was able to boot at 3600 1T but not stable.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> Did you try adding any additional voltages to see if 3600 1T can be stabilized? How much voltage did it take to boot?


Yes I tried up to 1.45v and it still wasnt stable. Wasn't game to go higher. VCCIO/SA @ 1.25v. I tried 3733 on 2T @ 1.45v that booted but when I was testing it crashed windows and ended up having to re-install the BIOS!!!

I just tried to boot on F11C with tRRDs @ 6 but no go again...freezes in Aorus loading sequence. F10 was no issue at tRRDs 6. I have definitely confirmed this. I am not too sure that this BIOS is great for overclocking certain RAM.


EDIT: fried the CMOS going from tRFC 537 to 530. (which worked before). Had to hard reset the CMOS. Loaded my last stable profile, some corruption comes up on the BIOS as I am scrolling through it to check settings and it freezes. It's done this before what can I do?


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Yes I tried up to 1.45v and it still wasnt stable. Wasn't game to go higher. VCCIO/SA @ 1.25v. I tried 3733 on 2T @ 1.45v that booted but when I was testing it crashed windows and ended up having to re-install the BIOS!!!
> 
> I just tried to boot on F11C with tRRDs @ 6 but no go again...freezes in Aorus loading sequence. F10 was no issue at tRRDs 6. I have definitely confirmed this. I am not too sure that this BIOS is great for overclocking certain RAM.


Can you post your asrock 4.0.4 timings configurator page at XMP normal settings?
And then post what timings you're trying to change?


----------



## Grizzly111

Just fried the CMOS going from tRFC 537 to 530. (which worked before). Had to hard reset the CMOS. Loaded my last stable profile, some corruption comes up on the BIOS as I am scrolling through it to check settings and it freezes. It's done this before what can I do? The 'corruption' is like a dotted thin line that comes on the screen btw.


----------



## Grizzly111

BIOS keeps freezing as I am scrolling making me have to to off the PSU.....


----------



## BradleyW

Grizzly111 said:


> BIOS keeps freezing as I am scrolling making me have to to off the PSU.....


Reflash your BIOS.


----------



## BradleyW

I've found the cause for my general instability issues. It is the TRC setting. If I loosen it from 58 to 66, I can run my RAM at the rated 4000MHz without issues. This is probably why XMP fails for me, as it forces TRC to 58. If left on auto with XMP off, there's no way to read the current value for that timing. Not in the BIOS or through software.

On AMD boards it can run it as loose as 75 by default, even if the RAM is rated at a 45 TRC. My board must also be using a loose value.

This timing can directly effect minimum FPS in AAA titles on high settings.


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> Can you post your asrock 4.0.4 timings configurator page at XMP normal settings?
> And then post what timings you're trying to change?



Here are my current timings. I watched Buildzoid's RAM OC video - extremely helpful as a similar thing happened to him. I ended up fixing the DIMM termination values so I could boot.


EDIT: TRC is @ 63


----------



## Sheyster

Grizzly111 said:


> Here are my current timings. I watched Buildzoid's RAM OC video - extremely helpful as a similar thing happened to him. I ended up fixing the DIMM termination values so I could boot.
> 
> 
> EDIT: TRC is @ 63


Have you tried 15-15-15-35 2T at 3600? Try it with 1.4v for memory. That's probably gonna produce better results than your current primary timings. You might also be able to dial in trfc under 400. I also suggest trefi at 32768.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Hi Sheyster, I can't even get 15,17,17-38 at 3466 @ 1.4!

For 3600 I need CL 16. I think it maybe because I hused TWO packs of 2x8gb DIMMS. Even though they are the same brand etc they aren't a matched 4x8gb Kit as it were?


I cant do CL14 @ 3200 either...


My kit is CJR Hynix 3200CL16


----------



## Sheyster

Grizzly111 said:


> Hi Sheyster, I can't even get 15,17,17-38 at 3466 @ 1.4!
> 
> For 3600 I need CL 16. I think it maybe because I hused TWO packs of 2x8gb DIMMS. Even though they are the same brand etc they aren't a matched 4x8gb Kit as it were?


Gotcha, you might want to compare 3600 CL16 2T vs. 3466 CL15 1T in Aida64. I think it will be pretty close performance-wise. I would personally opt for the 3600 configuration, just be sure to tighten up trfc under 400 if possible.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Here are my current timings. I watched Buildzoid's RAM OC video - extremely helpful as a similar thing happened to him. I ended up fixing the DIMM termination values so I could boot.
> 
> 
> EDIT: TRC is @ 63


So if you set TRRD_S to 6 and TFAW to 24 (4x TRRD_S) you can't boot?
Those kits seem to use bad timings. I'm not sure if TRRD_S=4 and TFAW=16 would work on that set.
Note TRRD_L can't go lower than 6.


----------



## Lurifaks

Hello and good Christmas holiday !

If someone with 2x8GB B-die on master, could share a complete set (all timings) of tight timings at 15-15-15-3600 , i would really appreciate it


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> So if you set TRRD_S to 6 and TFAW to 24 (4x TRRD_S) you can't boot?
> Those kits seem to use bad timings. I'm not sure if TRRD_S=4 and TFAW=16 would work on that set.
> Note TRRD_L can't go lower than 6.


 I've actually managed to get tRRDs to 6 and tFAW to 24 now! I agree that 4/16 would be too low to be stable. I also got tRP to 10. Just doing some stability testing now.


Any other suggestions would be welcomed.


EDIT: I highly recommend anyone starting out on OC'ing RAM on the Aorus Master to watch Buildzoid's video of it. He really saved me a LOT of time by explaining how to overcome a BSOD and subsequent BIOS freezes by cementing the DIMM values. What a legend.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> I've actually managed to get tRRDs to 6 and tFAW to 24 now! I agree that 4/16 would be too low to be stable. I also got tRP to 10. Just doing some stability testing now.
> 
> 
> Any other suggestions would be welcomed.
> 
> 
> EDIT: I highly recommend anyone starting out on OC'ing RAM on the Aorus Master to watch Buildzoid's video of it. He really saved me a LOT of time by explaining how to overcome a BSOD and subsequent BIOS freezes by cementing the DIMM values. What a legend.


What do you mean "Cementing the DIMM values?"


----------



## Wirerat

Lurifaks said:


> Hello and good Christmas holiday !
> 
> If someone with 2x8GB B-die on master, could share a complete set (all timings) of tight timings at 15-15-15-3600 , i would really appreciate it /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


My bdie is at 3800 15-15-15-32 but these timings may help.


----------



## Lurifaks

Wirerat said:


> My bdie is at 3800 15-15-15-32 but these timings may help.


Thanks , will give it a try


----------



## Lurifaks

Wirerat said:


> My bdie is at 3800 15-15-15-32 but these timings may help.





tREFI 60000 not to high ? , it was down on 12xxx at 3200Mhz-14-14-14 speed


----------



## Wirerat

Lurifaks said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> My bdie is at 3800 15-15-15-32 but these timings may help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tREFI 60000 not to high ? , it was down on 12xxx at 3200Mhz-14-14-14 speed
Click to expand...

Im actually running 65534 right now. Its 800% hci stable. I have had it there for for a couple months now.

I see it suggested to run double the xmp value. So go with that if you want to. 

My latency was reduced with it maxed so since its stable Im leaving it.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Hey guys, been trying to absorb as much info as possible. I tried to set a +1.65 in dvid following kedar wolfs bios pics and when I restarted bck into bios the chip was getting 1.67 volts and was idling at 53. I immediately put it back to manual at 1.325... 

Hope nothing got damaged in that time.... 
But why did that happen?


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> What do you mean "Cementing the DIMM values?"



Watch from here where he locks in the values: https://youtu.be/Jsy04IRIwpI?t=3987


Exactly what happened to me and it really helped. 



I just come across an interesting bug (?). If I set 15-18-18-38 it accepts it but changes it to 15-19-19-38 when i check in windows....BIOS won't let me lock in 15-18-18??


----------



## asdkj1740

any rules to rttnom , rttpark , rttwr?
these three/six parameters affect system stability a lot!


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've found the cause for my general instability issues. It is the TRC setting. If I loosen it from 58 to 66, I can run my RAM at the rated 4000MHz without issues. This is probably why XMP fails for me, as it forces TRC to 58. If left on auto with XMP off, there's no way to read the current value for that timing. Not in the BIOS or through software.
> 
> On AMD boards it can run it as loose as 75 by default, even if the RAM is rated at a 45 TRC. My board must also be using a loose value.
> 
> This timing can directly effect minimum FPS in AAA titles on high settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is lower generally better like it is with most timings?
> but if we need stability we can add up to an additional 8 on top of the tRP + tRAS right?
Click to expand...

Yes sir, lower the better, as long as you stick with the formula. Can add up to 8 on top for stability. On the benchmark I posted earlier it shows that lowering the setting can give very meaningful gains in AAA titles at high settings.

My RAM is rated to run TRC at 58 but it simply can't. Does this mean by a technicality that the RAM could be classed as faulty or is it as long as it runs stable at 2133 @ jedec timings? 

Cheers.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

Lurifaks said:


> tREFI 60000 not to high ? , it was down on 12xxx at 3200Mhz-14-14-14 speed


I run 32768 trefi. It gives a nice boost from XMP and is safe. I also suggest you run trfc below 400. Shoot for 380 or 360.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Can someone please share with me how "CPU flex ratio" in the bios operates? Left at disabled/36, minimum non turbo frequency with speedshift enabled is 3.6ghz. I thought maybe that if I change it to 40, my minimum non-turbo frequency would be 4.0ghz but it is still 3.6ghz minimum. How does this specific feature work and in what usages cases or scenarios would I change it?
> 
> Here is the option in the bios for reference


This setting cannot be changed above maximum base clocks. It also cannot go below LFM.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok Just tried using 8, it works, speedshift will fluctuate as low as 800mhz after changing cpu flex ratio from 36 to 800mhz but speedshift still doesn't allow voltage to drop on idle when EIST & c3 are enabled. Is there another feature I need to enable in addition to EIST + c3 that will allow me to use speedshift while also allowing voltage to drop? Only turning on speedshift through the bios so default epp is 128. Is the voltage behavior specific to the 128 epp default setting?


You can use Throttlestop 8.72 to control speedshift.

I know very little about C-states, and I am not exactly sure what "package C-state limit" does.
C-states can be controlled in TS but setting the "Package C-state Limit" in the C-state option in Throttelstop can only be unlocked if you disable "CFG Lock" in the AMIBCP bios capsule.
This can be easily done by dumping the BIOS capsule (capsule only) with FPTW64 -d bios.bin -BIOS, opening this capsule with AMIBCP 5.02.0031, going to CPU power and performance, and changing CFG Lock for both "Optimal" and "fail safe" to disabled, then saving and then reflashing with FPTW64 -f bios.bin -BIOS. You can absolutely NOT do this with the Gigabyte downloaded BIN file or it's an instant brick.

Unfortunately, you will need to load optimized defaults (or clear the CMOS) and redo all your profiles, because any saved profiles will have CFG Lock enabled in NVRAM.
I already tested this myself and it works.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Tenshi123

*i9900KS - I want to undervolt it - running too hot - need help*



Got an i9900ks and I don't have much experience with overclocks. Z390 Gigabyte aorus master, ddr4 3733mhz.

I want to undervolt it because in auto the vcore reaches 1,36 under load VR VOUT, which is too high in my opinion, plus the temps are in the 80-90c range.

Anyway, I ran into the gigabyte oc guide for i9900k and tried to do the inverse.

BUT I don't want to maintain the C states off for normal use... I thought about trying DVID but apparently I would need to mess with AC loadline as well, so I went with a manual vcore.

LLC Turbo, vcore 1,30, Ring ratio 47, plus C states, Speedshift, enhance multicore on - this was the stable point I got.
with these settings the vcore is constant, even with the C states and other options enabled, which is not good for everyday use, is it?

I was thinking about lowering LLC to Low and vcore to 1,30, but I don't think it will be stable.

I would like to maintain 47 ring ratio, I read its good since my memory runs at 3733mhz.

I am using Corsair AIO H100i pro.






Reposting my topic here.


I want the vcore to go lower while idle/low load, plus it's for everyday use.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Tenshi123

reachthesky said:


> ALso, Please do a cinebench r15 run with hwinfo64 open, screenshot the hwinfo64 window so I can take a look at what i'm working with.





I don't think I will use DVID if I get an answer to this questions:


Using a CPU at vcore 1,30, as an example, is truly much more expensive than using a variable voltage?


Is LLC turbo too taxing for the CPU/VRM?


If the answer is no to both, I can use 1.30 and Turbo, since this was stable for me. I tried turbo/1.29 and I got BSOD.


Is AUTO = DVID ?


EDIT


Why everything on AUTO gives 1.36 vcore on load... so high


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Tenshi123

reachthesky said:


> using llc turbo means you will be forced to use more voltage than required for non-avx loads because you'll also have to account for avx loads since your using fixed voltage. Because of the extra voltage under non-avx loads, you'll generate a little extra heat than you should. Will your specific settings be too taxing for the vrms?, absolutely not, the vrms on these boards are great. Staying with turbo llc + fixed vcore will cost you more money on your electric bill due to constant power draw on idle.
> 
> auto is not dvid. dvid is manually selecting the maximum amount of voltage at any given time for the cpu and the processor only uses what it needs at any given time(when combined with EIST/C3/windows balanced power plan). DVID mode will allow your voltage and clockspeed to fluctuate based on the load resulting in the lowest temperatures possible. We can do a DVID overclock without manually adjusting the loadlines, we can use a preset.
> 
> Try this:
> windows balanced power plan
> all core multiplier-50x
> ring multiplier-47x
> 
> acdc preset-powersaving
> vcore llc-standard
> vcore protection - 400mv
> vcore current protection - extreme
> pwm switchrate - 300khz
> pwm phase control - high perf
> 
> vcore- select "normal", then in the DVID mode use a +50mv offset(we can try lowering the offset after some testing).
> 
> Turn off all c-states except C3
> Turn off speedshift
> Turn on EIST
> Turn on ring to core
> turn off voltage optimization, race to halt, energy efficient turbo
> turn off the IGPU if you don't use it
> Turn off virtualization if you don't use it
> 
> If you want my help here, Do a cinebench run with these settings and post the hwinfo64 screenshot so I can see what i'm working with.



I would like to avoid doing so many changes since I don't know many of them.


I am using F10, since it's a KS cpu. I didn't find the Current Protection option, I was looking for it earlier.



What do you think of using two profiles I can change between, one for gaming and one for normal use?
The gaming one I can use a constant vcore, I am not worried about energy saving when gaming.

The normal/everyday use I would use Auto since it lowers the vcore, to save energy.



What settings would you recommend for gaming?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Tenshi123

reachthesky said:


> You can save the profile you are currently using and go back to it at any point. If you aren't going to try the settings out, I have nothing else to offer you. You asked for a direct solution, i gave you a direct solution, either take it or leave it. I'm not going to waste my time if you aren't willing to do what needs to be done to reach your goal in your original post. Have a good night.





I also said I didn't want to use DVID if it meant messing with too many settings.


The CPU is already running at 5ghz stable.


I did some research during the weekend and found that a constant vcore is easier to maintain than DVID.
If using two profiles is an option, why not make use of it?


I am open to all options, but I am not familiar with overclocking and I tend to avoid things I don't understand, unless I can study and learn. However, it seems there are no consensus in the overclocking community regarding many settings and manufacturers seem to do whatever they want regarding what settings do and offer no documentation!


I am just trying to preserve my investment, the parts I bought are very expensive I want to have them working in good conditions which is the reason I am doing this "undervolting" in the first place.


I am thankful for the help and I am willing to the the settings you posted, however, if a constant vcore and two profiles is easier, I am willing to try it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Tenshi123 said:


> I also said I didn't want to use DVID if it meant messing with too many settings.
> 
> 
> The CPU is already running at 5ghz stable.
> 
> 
> I did some research during the weekend and found that a constant vcore is easier to maintain than DVID.
> If using two profiles is an option, why not make use of it?
> 
> 
> I am open to all options, but I am not familiar with overclocking and I tend to avoid things I don't understand, unless I can study and learn. However, it seems there are no consensus in the overclocking community regarding many settings and manufacturers seem to do whatever they want regarding what settings do and offer no documentation!
> 
> 
> I am just trying to preserve my investment, the parts I bought are very expensive I want to have them working in good conditions which is the reason I am doing this "undervolting" in the first place.
> 
> 
> I am thankful for the help and I am willing to the the settings you posted, however, if a constant vcore and two profiles is easier, I am willing to try it.


The problem with using two different profiles is because of the DVID bug.
Gigabyte knows about it but they haven't come up with a way to fix it yet.

Basically when switching from a DVID voltage to a fixed voltage, the DVID offset is still applied (and possibly some other things related to the AC/DC loadlines) until you either reboot a second time (when suddenly everything is fine) or you do a hard power off first. This can cause VERY high voltage.

I suspect the cause of this bug is being able to set an offset voltage on TOP of a fixed voltage in a hidden bios option called "CPU Overclocking Menu", which is used to change the VID via "override mode" on laptops, where offset and fixed mode can be used at the same time (this seems to be an AMI issue).

This bug doesn't seem to affect the "Auto" vcore setting at 5 ghz and over, but I've also encountered the "Auto" setting working strangely at 4.7 ghz (sometimes it sets a too low voltage), but I haven't seen any bugs (yet) when switching from a saved profile at 5+ ghz with "Auto" vcore, to a saved profile (at any mhz) with fixed vcore.

SVID Offset option also only works at 5 ghz and higher (this is only for auto vcore, or DVID) when you need AC Loadline to set a higher base voltage (before vdroop!) than 1.520v. If you don't know what this option is, keep it disabled.


----------



## Tenshi123

reachthesky said:


> 1.3v turbo llc manual voltage is not undervolting, it is overvolting because you are using more voltage under load than required for the same clockspeed.
> 
> If you want to use the least amount of voltage possible under load, Turbo llc + manual voltage is NOT your solution.
> 
> The settings I gave you are guaranteed to work with EVERY KS chip on aorus master boards unless the chip is RMA worthy. It's that simple. Easier or Harder no longer exists once someone has figured out how all the chips scale. Every KS that silicon lottery tested did 5ghz at 1.25v manual voltage in bios+ turbo llc on gigabyte boards with avx offset of 2. Manual voltage + turbo llc = 50mv of vdroop. This means during non-avx loads, user is pulling 1.2v under 100% load on VROUT depending on the load. For avx loads, it goes down the 4.8ghz at the same voltage draw. If they wanted it to be avx stable at 5ghz(no offset), they would need to add roughly 20mv or 25mv, depending on the board and bios version.
> 
> The settings I gave you will give you 1.236v-1.246v under 100% non avx loads and 1.26v-1.73v under 100% avx loads. If your chip needs less than this to be stable under those loads, just lower the offset. You should more than likely be able to do it without any offset at all by selecting +0 under dvid offset but try the +50mv suggestion first.



I understand, thank you.


Why in auto does gigabyte make the vcore go so high anyway?



I will test your settings, but in F10 I am unable to find vcore current protection and vcore protection.


"Turn off speedshift" I thought speedshift was a good feature to have on?


EDIT


I will be doing everything you asked tomorrow.
It's 12pm here and I need to work in the morning.


----------



## Tenshi123

Falkentyne said:


> The problem with using two different profiles is because of the DVID bug.
> Gigabyte knows about it but they haven't come up with a way to fix it yet.
> 
> Basically when switching from a DVID voltage to a fixed voltage, the DVID offset is still applied (and possibly some other things related to the AC/DC loadlines) until you either reboot a second time (when suddenly everything is fine) or you do a hard power off first. This can cause VERY high voltage.
> 
> I suspect the cause of this bug is being able to set an offset voltage on TOP of a fixed voltage in a hidden bios option called "CPU Overclocking Menu", which is used to change the VID via "override mode" on laptops, where offset and fixed mode can be used at the same time (this seems to be an AMI issue).
> 
> This bug doesn't seem to affect the "Auto" vcore setting at 5 ghz and over, but I've also encountered the "Auto" setting working strangely at 4.7 ghz (sometimes it sets a too low voltage), but I haven't seen any bugs (yet) when switching from a saved profile at 5+ ghz with "Auto" vcore, to a saved profile (at any mhz) with fixed vcore.
> 
> SVID Offset option also only works at 5 ghz and higher (this is only for auto vcore, or DVID) when you need AC Loadline to set a higher base voltage (before vdroop!) than 1.520v. If you don't know what this option is, keep it disabled.



I see thank you.


I will use reachthesky's DVID option then.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Auto voltage is solely based on ac/dc presets that's why it can go as high as it does.
> 
> Don't worry about vcore current protection/vcore protection if they aren't present.
> 
> Speedshift can be good, but it keeps voltage bouncing around even if EIST + C3 is enabled when it shouldn't(even if clocks are at 800mhz) ever since an older bios version update if I recall correctly. If your goal is to have your voltage fluctuating depending on the load, having the lowest voltage possible needed and having your voltage drop to .770 or less on idle, then turn off speedshift. My personal opinion on speedshift is that it is only worth using if you use throttlestop to control the EPP setting because EPP 0(max clock at all times + voltage required to support that clock) + windows maximum power plan always gives a few more points in benchmarks compared to not using speedshift at all regardless of the type of overclock.
> 
> Gigabyte should give users the ability to tune the Speedshift EPP setting in the bios instead of only being able to do it in throttlestop.


I think this is the same as the Windows PerfEnergyPreference setting, which I mucked around with when investigating speedhift aand why it pinned voltage, 

"PerfEnergyPreference specifies the value to program in the energy performance preference register on systems that implement version 2 of the CPPC interface.

When set to 0, the energy performance preference register is programmed to 0 to favor performance. When set to 100, the energy performance preference register is set to 255 to favor energy savings. When set to an intermediate value, the energy performance preference register is programmed to the value: (setting * 255) / 100."

You can make it visible in your Windows power plan settings by seting the "Attributes" value to 2 in the registry setting key:
Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\36687f9e-e3a5-4dbf-b1dc-15eb381c6863

There it is described as: 

"Specify how much processors should favor energy savings over performance when operating in autonomous mode" Autonomous mode is speedshift.


----------



## LordGurciullo

I really would appreciate if someone could tell me why my chip went to 1.67 volts when I used DVID instead of manual voltage when I used the settings that another user posted... It was adding +165 to the 1.5... My chip was at 1.67 volts and 53 idle for about 15 seconds.... before I caught it... Did damage occur? And why did that happen? Ive stuck to 1.33 manual for now...


----------



## Falkentyne

LordGurciullo said:


> I really would appreciate if someone could tell me why my chip went to 1.67 volts when I used DVID instead of manual voltage when I used the settings that another user posted... It was adding +165 to the 1.5... My chip was at 1.67 volts and 53 idle for about 15 seconds.... before I caught it... Did damage occur? And why did that happen? Ive stuck to 1.33 manual for now...


What were your exact BIOS settings when you did this? And I do mean exact bios settings. Because a +155mv (0.155v) offset is HUGE just by itself.

What was AC/DC Internal Load Line set to? If AC Loadline and DC Loadline in internal VR Settings are set to 0 (auto), this preset greatly influences the CPU's voltage supply on Auto/DVID modes.

What was CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration set to?
What was AC Loadline and DC Loadline set to in Internal VR Settings (if set to a non-zero value, it will overrule what is set in "AC/DC Internal Load Line")?

All of this matters here.

If you were using a +165mv offset at 5 ghz, with Internal AC/DC Load Line set to Turbo (This sets AC Loadline and DC Loadline to 160, or 1.6 mOhms--this value can be read in HWINFO64 if you uncheck sensors only and go to the CPU section), that BY ITSELF would put your CPU at 1.55v, as "base VID" with Internal AC/DC Loadline at set to the "Turbo" (1.6 / 1.6 mOhm) presets, and a +0.00mv offset (which is also equal to Vcore mode=Auto Vcore) is about 1.40v. With **STANDARD** (standard is equal to "Normal") Vcore Loadline Calibration (maximum vdroop possible).

At about 4.7 ghz, this would be about 1.43v (estimated).

Then if Vcore Loadline Calibration were set to anything higher than Intel spec (Intel spec is Standard/Normal, which is 1.6 mOhms), that would reduce the vdroop at both idle and load, and could easily put you at 1.65v if you had LLC on something like Turbo.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Mr. Falkentyne himself! Thanks for responding!

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...78-gigabyte-z390-aorus-owners-thread-362.html 

scroll down to Kedar wolfs settings (his post has pics his bios settings) I copied them all except for any ram timings and the ram termination stuff..
Im 99 percent sure I copied everything else. I was trying to get 5.1 which proved impossible basically...

I restarted... went into bios... saw the 1.67 volts and 53 idle.. had a panic attack.. went to change it to manual and back to 1.25 as fast as possible. Save and exit... Computer didn't load back to bios... Powered down manually then powered up again and it was back to normal... Never went into windows and was at 1.67 53 idle for less than 30 seconds...

Almost **** my pants...


----------



## GeneO

LordGurciullo said:


> I really would appreciate if someone could tell me why my chip went to 1.67 volts when I used DVID instead of manual voltage when I used the settings that another user posted... It was adding +165 to the 1.5... My chip was at 1.67 volts and 53 idle for about 15 seconds.... before I caught it... Did damage occur? And why did that happen? Ive stuck to 1.33 manual for now...


You need to change IA AC and DC load line values from 0 (auto) to 1 (lowest value) in the Internal VR settings section of the BIOS. Otherwise you will get too high of voltage. You can play around with some lower values but the 0=auto value will shoot the voltage on up under load.


----------



## Falkentyne

LordGurciullo said:


> Mr. Falkentyne himself! Thanks for responding!
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...78-gigabyte-z390-aorus-owners-thread-362.html
> 
> scroll down to Kedar wolfs settings (his post has pics his bios settings) I copied them all except for any ram timings and the ram termination stuff..
> Im 99 percent sure I copied everything else. I was trying to get 5.1 which proved impossible basically...
> 
> I restarted... went into bios... saw the 1.67 volts and 53 idle.. had a panic attack.. went to change it to manual and back to 1.25 as fast as possible. Save and exit... Computer didn't load back to bios... Powered down manually then powered up again and it was back to normal... Never went into windows and was at 1.67 53 idle for less than 30 seconds...
> 
> Almost **** my pants...


His settings are not correct, and I mentioned this to him a few times, although if you followed EVERY setting he did, you would have had about 1.35-1.40v.
But the way he did things, combining two settings which conflict with each other, is asking for trouble fast.

Did you happen to have AC/DC Loadline at "1" in Internal VR Settings, or at "0"?

If you had it at "1", it would overrule the "CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline" preset, as those presets are for the "Internal VR settings" version and your voltages would have been much lower. 1 is the lowest value that can be set.
1 is equal to 0.01 mOhms.

He has it set to Turbo, which is equal to AC and DC being set to "160" manually, which is equal to 1.6 mOhms. That value is used if AC/DC is set to 0 in Internal VR Settings. Him listing "Turbo" here for this is a HUGE oversight. And believe me, I didn't let him off the hook for mentioning that. It's best to leave this setting at "Power Saving" (this is equal to 0.4 mOhms AC, 1.3 mOhms DC, which is safe) until you know what these settings actually do.

160 on AC Loadline + 155mv DVID offset + Vcore Loadline Calibration=Medium.....1.65v looks about right.

Just to explain something here:

Intel "max electrical specification" (which is a guideline only) is , when using Auto Vcore, meaning a +0.0mv offset, is 1.6 mOhms AC Loadline and STANDARD VCORE Loadline Calibration (most vdroop).
If a more aggressive LLC is used, the AC loadline must be reduced lower. e.g. 1.0 mOhms ACLL works well on "Low" Vcore LLC, 0.4 mOhms AC Loadline works well on "Medium" LLC, and 0.01 mOhms AC Loadline works well on High and Turbo LLC.

Due to VRM limitations, using Ultra Extreme with 0.01 mOhms AC Loadline will power trip the entire system and it will shutoff in stress tests (long story) even at very low vcore with all current protection settings maxed out. While using something like 1.150v manual fixed vcore with Ultra Extreme LLC with protection settings maxed out will not shutoff the system. The VRM is simply not designed to use an aggressive LLC setting like Ultra Extreme (a 0 mOhm VRM loadline calibration mode) on DVID/Auto voltage modes. It is capable of doing this, but this requires some internal registers to be recalibrated, which Gigabyte didn't do. The IR 35201 datasheet mentions this rule specifically.

You probably forgot to to set AC and DC loadline to "1". If you had it on "0", then it would have set it to 160/160 (1.6 mOhms) which is what you NOT WANT with a 155mv offset!
He should have left CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline on "Power Saving" in that example for best results, which would have given you a much lower vcore, probably about 1.40v. Even it being at "Auto" in the preset and "0" in Internal VR Settings (meaning you forgot to change it to 1 like he listed it as), would have given you about 1.5v instead of 1.65v---because the "Auto" setting would have set 100 for AC Loadline (1.0 mOhms) at 5 ghz. "Power Saving" would set it at 0.4 mOhms for AC, which I already mentioned. (the DC value is not important for this discussion--it's the AC loadline which controls the CPU voltage supply). Auto is still too high but wouldn't damage your CPU if you caught it fast enough. But still, Vcore loadline Calibration at Medium is still too high for this value (should be no higher than "low" at 1.0 mOhms). At 0.4 mOhms, Medium Vcore LLC is fine. At 0.01 mOhms, you can use High or Turbo Vcore LLC without a problem.

If AC/DC is set to Turbo (1.6 mOhms), Vcore Loadline Calibration MUST NOT be set any higher than "Standard/Normal" And DVID offset should be 0.00 under these conditions (this is maximum Intel spec).


I don't know if you suffered CPU degradation. Considering I am 95% sure you did NOT set AC/DC Loadline to "1", had that Internal AC/DC preset at 'Turbo'and you had +155mv + Vcore LLC at "Medium", it's possible there MIGHT have been some. 

You're just very lucky you didn't enter windows.


----------



## Grizzly111

Could I ask what is the best RAM (total 32GB) that is compatible with the Aorus Master Z390? A model# that can be used to search online and order with would be appreciated.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Thanks reachthesky! I was actually looking at that set but couldn't see it on the QVL list for the Aorus Master. This sort of advice is invaluable!


----------



## Nammi

reachthesky said:


> Using the same primaries/tRC as xmp profile + lowering tRFC a bit, rest auto timings. tREFI wouldn't train at 32768 or higher, didn't bother going lower. Just a quickie. Much better bandwidth than my cl15 4000mhz profile and latency is very very close.


Nice to see that you're getting somewhere with the master. Have you managed to get 4200+ stable enough for something like a 200% run of memtest or is benching as far as it goes? I wish I could run 5ghz cache, my chip can only handle 4.7 and 4.9 for benching.

Took my daily settings to cl15 for a quick run.


----------



## Tenshi123

reachthesky said:


> The settings I gave you will give you 1.236v-1.246v under 100% non avx loads and 1.26v-1.73v under 100% avx loads. If your chip needs less than this to be stable under those loads, just lower the offset. You should more than likely be able to do it without any offset at all by selecting +0 under dvid offset but try the +50mv suggestion first.


1.26v-1.73v? 

Did mean 1.37 or 1.27?
@reachthesky I will have to travel today and I will be back 1st. I am a veterinary, have to go visit a horse that is dying. When I come back I will test the DVID preset you posted.


----------



## TAGTRAUM

Hi guys, i'm currently running 9900KS and Trident z Royal 3200CL16, and want overclock memory to some reasonable state (i.e 4000), and all what i can - is overclock to 3600CL18 (18-20-20-40) and 1.40V DIMM Voltage, further settings just won't work, it refuse to start. What recomendations to archieve 4000 or thats memory kit is garbage, thanks!)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## kamyk155

I am tired of this 9900KS and this AORUS MASTER.
I don't want to fight for stability for 3 weeks now without luck.

Sending back 9900KS for RMA and will try to change mobo too.
Here are two cool screens of bios defaults......and last one after trying to stabilize this crap.


----------



## kamyk155

PS one of my friend have 9900ks too with 1,120V on auto but he is loosing 5GHz to 4,7GHz or even 4,3GHz and he don't know why


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I've gotten cl18/4200 hci memtest stable but it wasn't as good as cl15 4000. Oddly, I cannot train cl 17 or under for 4200. It's weird, some frequencies won't train at all unless I leave dram voltage on auto. Like if I tried to train 4200 with 1.5v vdimm, it won't train ever. But if i try to train say cl17 4666 at 1.55v or 1.57v, it will train. 4400 also rarely trains. It seems that the 4500+ preset works extremely well for training/booting anything 4500 and up. I feel like i am making progress though I won't be satisfied until I get 4400-4533 daily stable with performance better than cl15/4000.


Did you set the termination values as shown in buildzoid's video to 60/60/120/120/40/40 ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## kamyk155

First of all - I'm fighting with this setup for almost three weeks now.
It isn't stable AT ANY SETTINGS.

On the first picture you can see - load bios defaults. Vcore is going from 1,332V to 1,380V - this is AUTO.
Second picture - directly from bios load defaults - 1,332V - this is AUTO.
Third picture - after falkentyne help - I tried to stabilize this crap with lower voltages, llc and other his advices.

Summarizing:
- on all bios defaults - too hot, bsod or freeze after some time
- with falkentyne settings - 1,28V ALMOST stable and still really hot but I can forget about turning on AVX.

I know about VID core - you still tell me abut ignore this but I know that this is single core voltage and up to 1,55V is way to high.
My friend on his 9900ks + asrock have 1,12V on stock in bios and VIDs about 1,2V but his cpu is not stable too. His CPU clocks dropping to most often 4,7GHz with avx.

Why I buy this setup - I could buy normal 9900K or KF and OC it to 5GHz but I wanted OUT OF BOX stable 5GHz without overclocking...........
I don't have more time to test settings everyday - they should work on stock not after weeks of fight with them.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Thank you so much for your time and detailed response. 
I've analyzed it 100 times in my memory. I was tired and I had been testing settings for 6 hours.. 
I know for sure I left ac/dc load on turbo as his pic shows and LLC on medium
I'm 99 percent sure I change the ac / dc values to 1... SO I don't honestly know what happened. But I might have not... 

I guess bottom line is computer was in bios for about 15-20 seconds before being set back to manual . save and exit. then it wouldn't boot ... so maybe 20 seconds.. (dvid bug (reboot twice). Which I rememebred after 20 seconds and then hit power off and power on and I was back..

30 seconds tops.. never in windows... I pray I didn't do any damage dude... 

I Guess if i did theres nothing I can do? I read that it takes an hour at 1.65 to degrade and I was less than 30 seconds...

Long story short I've been put off of DVID... And from what I understand it doesn't really matter except allowing the chip to pull less volts when idle which everyone seems to say doesn't even matter.

I've since got a stable 5.0 with 1.335 high llc manual. I will post all the info on that and get your opinions in a bit.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> I am tired of this 9900KS and this AORUS MASTER.
> I don't want to fight for stability for 3 weeks now without luck.
> 
> Sending back 9900KS for RMA and will try to change mobo too.
> Here are two cool screens of bios defaults......and last one after trying to stabilize this crap.


I read your posts but you seem to be ranting about everything and I don't know where to start to help you.
First you say you're stable then you say you're unstable. Then you're complaining about VID (VID is NOT Vcore. Ignore VID), then you're circling the two vcore sensors then ignoring VR VOUT. Then you're talking about memory problems.

I also saw in one of your screenshots, one of your cores (first core) was 64C, core #0 and all the others were 70-81C. That means bad cooling mount or paste application. The very first core (#0) should never have been that cool compared to the others. What stress test were you running there? Unless thread #0/1 crashed or something instantly.

By the way, for anyone (not just you) testing prime95, make sure you re-size the windows in two 8x8 rows so the DATA is visible. There are some bugs where AVX threads get instantly stuck when starting prime95 and you can't even close the program properly--you have to "end task" on it on the task manager, then run it again. It's a rare bug, usually happens right after you load windows. 

you also have c-states enabled. Disable c-states. It's impossible to see what your idle and load settings are when I'm seeing 800 mhz and 0.700v as your lowest values. Disable EIST, C-states, speedstep. Use fixed vcore only. Note that in the f11c bios, to disable c-states, read what I say below because its a bit confusing to disable them now--you have to actually "enable" control to disable them manually.

And don't use small FFT avx prime95 to determine how stable your CPU is. That's absurd. If you really want to run a power virus, you can run something that will give results much faster than avx prime95 (but may run a bit hotter, but at least you will see results in a few minutes).

Ok. Now, Power off your computer. Unplug power supply. Press the clear CMOS button. Replug PSU. Power on and wait.
Enter BIOS. Set advanced mode. Do not enable XMP. Disable MCE. Disable c-states (you need to "enable" c-state control in f11c, then disable the c-states manually, that's how you do it). Disable voltage optimization, speedstep (EIST), speedshift.

Disable multi core enhancement. Set cpu multiplier to 50. Cache (ring) ratio to 47. Set voltage vcore to 1.275v (edit. not 1.250v). Set vcore loadline calibration to turbo. Set "CPU overtemperature protection" to 105C. You may need it there for now. Set it to 100C after we're finished).

Set vcore current protection to extreme. Vaxg protection to extreme. Set cpu pwm phase control to High. VAXG to high. Set CPU PWM switching frequency to 300 khz. (DO NOT FORGET THIS). VAXG switching frequency to 300 khz.

Leave CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line at Auto.

Save, exit, boot into windows.

Now, search for LinX 0.9.6 (it's in Korean page but you can translate it with chrome into English). 
https://hwtips.tistory.com/1611
Download that. Don't get scared of the Korean. It's a simple program.
Unzip it to your own folder. Run LinX.

On the top left side, set the value to 35000. On the top right side, set the number of loops to 10.
Then start the testing with the button below the 35000. 
If the korean scares you, get the 0.9.5 (English) one on the same page right below it.

Watch the residuals. Each loop must have the SAME exact residual and residual (norm). (the residual and the norm will be different however)
Each loop from 1 to 10 must show the same values for each iteration. If the residuals are wrong, RMA the CPU.

If the residuals are correct, it means your CPU is stable at stock. You can celebrate. For now. (take a screenshot for us of the LinX 0.9.6 or 0.9.5 test).

Ok, now. Go back in the BIOS.
Go to "Internal VR Control".
Set AC Loadline to 1. Set DC Loadline to 1.

Save, go back to windows. Go to HWinfo64. Tell me what the "CPU VID" shows at idle. Yes. VID. I want to know this.

Ok, now, enable XMP. Save, Exit, go back to BIOS.
Set your VCCIO to 1.250v.
Set your VCCSA to 1.30v.
Set your DDR memory voltage to 1.40v.

Save, exit, go to windows.
Run LinX 0.9.6 again for 10 loops.
Report the residuals. (easier to take a screenshot for us).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> First of all - I'm fighting with this setup for almost three weeks now.
> It isn't stable AT ANY SETTINGS.
> 
> On the first picture you can see - load bios defaults. Vcore is going from 1,332V to 1,380V - this is AUTO.
> Second picture - directly from bios load defaults - 1,332V - this is AUTO.
> Third picture - after falkentyne help - I tried to stabilize this crap with lower voltages, llc and other his advices.
> 
> Summarizing:
> - on all bios defaults - too hot, bsod or freeze after some time
> - with falkentyne settings - 1,28V ALMOST stable and still really hot but I can forget about turning on AVX.
> 
> I know about VID core - you still tell me abut ignore this but I know that this is single core voltage and up to 1,55V is way to high.
> My friend on his 9900ks + asrock have 1,12V on stock in bios and VIDs about 1,2V but his cpu is not stable too. His CPU clocks dropping to most often 4,7GHz with avx.
> 
> Why I buy this setup - I could buy normal 9900K or KF and OC it to 5GHz but I wanted OUT OF BOX stable 5GHz without overclocking...........
> I don't have more time to test settings everyday - they should work on stock not after weeks of fight with them.


Please read my long reply to you above and do exactly what I said step by step. We need to determine if the CPU is good or bad or if it's a memory problem. My steps will determine this. Read that post.
*edit* use 1.275v bios voltage not 1.250v. 1.250v is a bit too generous for LinX.



LordGurciullo said:


> Thank you so much for your time and detailed response.
> I've analyzed it 100 times in my memory. I was tired and I had been testing settings for 6 hours..
> I know for sure I left ac/dc load on turbo as his pic shows and LLC on medium
> I'm 99 percent sure I change the ac / dc values to 1... SO I don't honestly know what happened. But I might have not...
> 
> I guess bottom line is computer was in bios for about 15-20 seconds before being set back to manual . save and exit. then it wouldn't boot ... so maybe 20 seconds.. (dvid bug (reboot twice). Which I rememebred after 20 seconds and then hit power off and power on and I was back..
> 
> 30 seconds tops.. never in windows... I pray I didn't do any damage dude...
> 
> I Guess if i did theres nothing I can do? I read that it takes an hour at 1.65 to degrade and I was less than 30 seconds...
> 
> Long story short I've been put off of DVID... And from what I understand it doesn't really matter except allowing the chip to pull less volts when idle which everyone seems to say doesn't even matter.
> 
> I've since got a stable 5.0 with 1.335 high llc manual. I will post all the info on that and get your opinions in a bit.


I am 99% sure you forgot to change AC / DC from 0 to 1. That's the most common thing people forget--the Internal VR Settings. I calculated what the voltages would be based on what I know the default settings are for that processor and what "Internal AC/DC Loadline" sets at Turbo. That's because I keep AC/DC loadline at 160/160 all the time so I know what it sets.

1.65v set in BIOS is pretty much exactly what AC=160, Loadline Calibration: Medium + 0.155v DVID would put you at.
AC=1 would put you at about 1.35v.

And I know all about the DVID bugs. I refuse to touch DVID because of them. Instead I just use "Auto" vcore and "Standard" Loadline Calibration and change the AC Loadline to help control the voltages better on Auto vcore. I haven't had problems switching from an 'Auto' vcore saved preset to a fixed vcore saved preset.

BTW one extra thing I did for all my profiles was this, before saving them:
I enabled "DVID" mode. Set the DVID offset to 0.00v. Then I switched back to fixed or auto mode, set the manual voltage (or the auto mode) and saved. Then I re-entered BIOS to see if the voltage was correct. If it was I saved the profile. By setting DVID to 0.00 then switching modes, so 0.00 is 'greyed out' but shown as 0.00, it avoided some of these bugs by "locking" DVID at 0.00 so it wouldn't change weirdly on me.
If you don't do this, the offset is "locked" at 'Auto' (and greyed out). And we all know what happens when something is at "Auto", right, boys??

@reachthesky


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> Grizzly111 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks reachthesky! I was actually looking at that set but couldn't see it on the QVL list for the Aorus Master. This sort of advice is invaluable!
> 
> 
> 
> Just remember, there is no guarantee for kits to work if it is not on the qvl. I could have gotten lucky or something or the kit could have been released by gskill after gigabyte did their initial qvl testing for the aorus master. Who knows. It's a great kit, great dimms but just be ready to return it for a different kit just in case since it isn't on the qvl list. If you want to be on the safe side and still want a great 4x8GB(32) kit, the qvl list has some g.skill 4133/4266 kits on it. Pretty sure Iunlock is using one of those kits, they are damn good kits. They will cost you a little extra though.
Click to expand...

+1 on this kit, xmp works without a hitch, io/sa 1.2v for me + 360w 2080ti

Trains np 4133 17-17-17-37 @ 1.4v, 1.25 io/sa and is completely stable


----------



## kamyk155

Ok here are test with all those settings:

Now going to check - Go to "Internal VR Control".


----------



## kamyk155

VR controls - ac load 1, dc load 1 screen:


Now let those settinga and enable xmp ?


----------



## Nammi

reachthesky said:


> I've gotten cl18/4200 hci memtest stable but it wasn't as good as cl15 4000. Oddly, I cannot train cl 17 or under for 4200. It's weird, some frequencies won't train at all unless I leave dram voltage on auto. Like if I tried to train 4200 with 1.5v vdimm, it won't train ever. But if i try to train say cl17 4666 at 1.55v or 1.57v, it will train. 4400 also rarely trains. It seems that the 4500+ preset works extremely well for training/booting anything 4500 and up. I feel like i am making progress though I won't be satisfied until I get 4400-4533 daily stable with performance better than cl15/4000.
> 
> Higher cache requires a lot more voltage and vccio and vccsa btw.


Decided to also mess around with ram, 4533 was the highest i tried. I did eventually get it to boot although with rather abysmal timings, having the same weirdness as you above 4133 where it seems to turn all the normal rules upside down. Though I'm still keeping within sane voltages so that's probably my limiting factor. Just for comparison the daily 4133cl16 that I run is with 1.47vdimm and 1.20 vccio/vccsa.

From all that I've gathered cache shares the vcore rail, do you happen to have any source about the other voltages affecting cache?


----------



## kamyk155

Died on last step - enabling XMP


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Ok here are test with all those settings:
> 
> Now going to check - Go to "Internal VR Control".





kamyk155 said:


> VR controls - ac load 1, dc load 1 screen:
> 
> 
> Now let those settinga and enable xmp ?


Excellent.
That's a good chip sample. Better than some of the trash 9900KS's I've seen that have a 1.210v default VID that are no better than "average" 9900K chips.
Your chip passed all LinX residuals. That's good. It means your chip is not defective.

Now enable XMP, set DDR4 voltage to 1.40v, VCCIO to 1.20v and VCCIO to 1.25v.
(NOTE: sometimes for higher speed RAM you may need VCCIO 1.25v and VCCSA 1.30v).


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Died on last step - enabling XMP


Ok I missed this.
Looks like you're getting instability with RAM here.
I am very bad with memory. So I cannot fix such a thing easily. I only know the basics. Please keep in mind I have 3200 mhz CL14 memory. I don't know much about higher speed dimms.

Let's try this now.
Set your RAM base frequency (down) to 3600 mhz, keep VCCIO at 1.25v and VCCSA at 1.30v. Keep DDR voltage at 1.40v.

Try a LinX run now and see if it passes all residuals.


----------



## kamyk155

Another test with my old memory set with XMP 4x8gb 2400 15-15-15 hyperX

Going back to Viper Steel memory.......


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Another test with my old memory set with XMP 4x8gb 2400 15-15-15 hyperX


Can you set VCCIO @ 1.15v and VCCSA @ 1.20v and re-do this test?
You have XMP enabled on your HyperX, but IO and SA are still at Intel defaults (0.95v and 1.05v).

Alternatively, you can try raising Vcore from 1.275v to 1.30v.

Also, don't be too upset about not getting all correct residuals on LinX at low volts. LinX stress testing puts Prime95 to shame as far as temps and power draw are concerned. It's much harder to pass. Intel uses Linpack binaries for their own CPU testing. If you ran FMA3 prime95 at those settings, you would probably pass with flying colors. The difference is that Prime95 small FFT doesn't even touch RAM. It just hits the CPU caches hard, but unstable RAM can crash anything (even programs that don't access RAM much). LinX is heavily RAM and CPU core dependent, that's why your Gflops is so low when XMP is disabled and much higher when XMP is enabled. RAM timings can also affect this greatly.

You do have CPU VRM Switching Frequency at 300 khz, right?


----------



## kamyk155

Too late. I'm with Viper Steels again.
Those HyperX were great - XMP didn't change agent and vccio at all and they are on stock ddr4 voltage 1,20V. Yes I have - 300Hz.

Now will test 1,275V and 1,42V ram plus vccio and agent at 1,30V both.
Died after 2 pass....91*C max core. Going to manual 3600MHz.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Too late. I'm with Viper Steels again.
> Those HyperX were great - XMP didn't change agent and vccio at all and they are on stock ddr4 voltage 1,20V. Yes I have - 300Hz.
> 
> Now will test 1,275V and 1,42V ram plus vccio and agent at 1,30V both.


Remember, if you get wrong residuals, there are two things you can try.
Either reduce the RAM frequency from 4000 to 3600 mhz and test again, and raise I/O and SA (do not have them at the same value),
example, 1.270v for VCCIO and 1.30v for VCCSA is fine, but not 1.30 VCCIO and 1.30v VCCSA. I've seen some people have problems with that.

Or raise Vcore 1.275v to 1.30v.
One of the two should get your residuals stable.

Remember: this is platinum level stability if your LinX residuals all match. But it's very hard to get LinX stable when you are overclocked and when you are past 5 ghz, it's virtually impossible without direct-die + Water cooling. The current draw is going to exceed 193 amps and temps will get out of control. Linpack wasn't designed for testing overclocked processors. It was designed for QA testing under worst case load scenarios. Actually Linpack goes back much much more than this. Intel just happened to pick it up since it's so good for validating CPU's.

P.S.
Before you give up, there is one more thing you can do.

Try 1.350v Bios voltage, Loadline Calibration=High (not Turbo). This is fully safe and some people on the Maximus XI thread were using a similar setting for their 9900KS (using LLC5 instead of LLC6 on their boards).

With 1.270v VCCIO and 1.30v VCCSA, this should have a 100% chance of getting stable residuals.

If this works, then we can try backing down a bit. I would like to see the screenshot of this test if it passes.



> Now will test 1,275V and 1,42V ram plus vccio and agent at 1,30V both.
> Died after 2 pass....91*C max core. Going to manual 3600MHz.


IO and SA should never be set to the same values.
I edited the above post a few times. You may have missed a couple of things I changed.

I'm doing my best to help you. Just remember I do not have high speed memory. I can't even get LinX stable past 4.9 ghz on my 9900k. It gets too hot and uses too much voltage, and if I try using max Intel "Spec" settings to minimize "Transient voltage changes" ---> Vcore: "Auto", AC Loadline: 160 (1.6 mOhms), Vcore Loadline Calibration=Standard (Intel spec) @ 5 ghz, LinX actually crashes XD if it doesn't reach 110C first. (VR VOUT is 1.220 volts, Current IOUT is 195 amps!!!)

But at 4.9 ghz it passes under those same settings.

However none of my games or applications crash at 5 ghz under those settings. I am simply not "LinX Stable" but I am otherwise fully stable.



> Too late. I'm with Viper Steels again.
> Those HyperX were great - XMP didn't change agent and vccio at all and they are on stock ddr4 voltage 1,20V. Yes I have - 300Hz.


Chips at 5 ghz and 4.7 ghz cache will usually require IO and SA be raised above default when Hyperthreading is enabled. VCCIO controls the IMC and the shared L3 cache, and the L3 cache is used in hyperthreading to deal with 'virtualized' CPU instruction registers. That's one of the reasons for a WHEA "CPU Cache L0 error". Both L3 instability and core instability can cause L0 errors (hyperthreaded or physical cores crashing).


----------



## kamyk155

3600MHz 1,3 vccio 1,25 agent 1,4v ram - died.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> 3600MHz 1,3 vccio 1,25 agent 1,4v ram - died.


Ok. Raise the CPU voltage up to 1.350v but lower the Loadline Calibration to "high" instead of Turbo.
Set your RAM Back to 4000 mhz.

First set VCCIO back down to 1.20v and VCCSA down to 1.25v.
Try that first, then try IO 1.25 and SA 1.30v.

This should work.

Waiting for some good news.

*last resort*.
Set VCORE @ 1.375v, Keep LLC @ High.

This MUST pass as this will put VR VOUT at maximum Intel specification for safe voltage at full load.


----------



## bastian

CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM RGB 16GB (B-DIE) 3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V STOCK @ 4000MHZ 18-18-18-40 1.45V

Push higher frequency or lower timings?


----------



## kamyk155

Core 1,3V - DDR 1,4V 3600 - VCCIO 1,27V - Agent 1,30V pass.
But look at temps, package power and current - almost 208 Amps !!!! ***
It is not normal !


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> Core 1,3V - DDR 1,4V 3600 - VCCIO 1,27V - Agent 1,30V pass.
> But look at temps, package power and current - almost 208 Amps !!!! ***
> It is not normal !


Remember what I told you?
LinX is platinum level stability. It's not designed for overclocked processors because it is too hard to keep temps/power draw under control.
But running LinX for 10 minutes is much better than running Prime95 for 1 hour, right?

Now, try the following please.

CPU Vcore: 1.350v.
Loadline Calibration: High. (NOT Turbo).

This should reduce the load voltages AND current slightly but you may get better stability.
Also the reason why I think the issue is the IMC/RAM at first is because you said that BF5 was crashing to desktop.
BF5 usually only crashes if it's RAM or cache instability. CPU Core instability causes WHEA errors in HWInfo64 (at the bottom) or BSOD.


----------



## Falkentyne

I assume these stats or timings are garbage for 3600 mhz?


----------



## kamyk155

I will check it tomorrow. It is middle of the night in Poland. I'm tired like hell.
But summarizing.....we are closing to bios default 1,332V.
There is something wrong with cpu/ram - I can play BFV or any other games without problems on 1,26-1,28V with ram even on 4000MHz 18-18-18.

I just can't understood one most important thing - why I can't buy mobo, cpu and ram, go to bios - press "load bios defaults" and thats it.
Three weeks of testing and MAYBE it can be stable on stock settings ?
I want to have plug and play - non OC computer working from moment of assembly.
Now we are still fighting with stability.


----------



## Falkentyne

kamyk155 said:


> I will check it tomorrow. It is middle of the night in Poland. I'm tired like hell.
> But summarizing.....we are closing to bios default 1,332V.
> There is something wrong with cpu/ram - I can play BFV or any other games without problems on 1,26-1,28V with ram even on 4000MHz 18-18-18.
> 
> I just can't understood one most important thing - why I can't buy mobo, cpu and ram, go to bios - press "load bios defaults" and thats it.
> Three weeks of testing and MAYBE it can be stable on stock settings ?
> I want to have plug and play - non OC computer working from moment of assembly.
> Now we are still fighting with stability.


I thought you said that you were crashing in BF5?
Crashing in BF5 is almost always RAM or CPU IMC/Cache related, not core.
If the core is unstable, you will BSOD or get "CPU L0 Error" in WHEA section in HWinfo64 sensors.

What was the original problem? What test were you failing at 5 ghz? BF5? Realbench 2.56? Cinebench? or just prime95?

When you wake up tomorrow, please try my settings for LinX:
1.350v BIOS set, loadline calibration: High (NOT Turbo), IO: 1.20v, SA:1.25v.

Reducing LLC and raising bios voltage slightly will improve transient voltage stability (cannot be seen without an oscilloscope).


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> I assume these stats or timings are garbage for 3600 mhz?



I think those AIDA64 stats aren't particularly good...I am getting similar transfer (1gb/sec less) and latency with mine at 3466Ghz, 15-19-19-38 1T and much higher tRFC (520)! Note that I would not set tREFI so high - I set it to 63k due to the f10 bug and I immediately got windows corruption (mine is currently 2xAuto ~ 27k).



*Falkentyne*: A question about CPU overclocking now. I currently have Vcore voltage at 'Normal' and offset at -0.030v for a stable all-core 4.9Ghz. But I notice that my Vcore overshoots 1.2v but is fine under load. Are you saying that to improve this, I should: 



1. Set Vcore back to Auto

2. LLC to Normal (I have this at normal currently)
3. Internal VR settings ---->AC loadline 1 or something to stop the overshoot?


I've attached my current readout with the -0.030v offset and LLC at normal.


What is the best way to get the lowest voltage at load and still allowing it to drop to 0.6v etc at idle 800Mhz?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> I think those AIDA64 stats aren't particularly good...I am getting similar transfer (1gb/sec less) and latency with mine at 3466Ghz, 15-19-19-38 1T and much higher tRFC (520)! Note that I would not set tREFI so high - I set it to 63k due to the f10 bug and I immediately got windows corruption (mine is currently 2xAuto ~ 27k).
> 
> 
> 
> *Falkentyne*: A question about CPU overclocking now. I currently have Vcore voltage at 'Normal' and offset at -0.030v for a stable all-core 4.9Ghz. But I notice that my Vcore overshoots 1.2v but is fine under load. Are you saying that to improve this, I should:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Set Vcore back to Auto
> 
> 2. LLC to Normal (I have this at normal currently)
> 3. Internal VR settings ---->AC loadline 1 or something to stop the overshoot?
> 
> 
> I've attached my current readout with the -0.030v offset and LLC at normal.
> 
> 
> What is the best way to get the lowest voltage at load and still allowing it to drop to 0.6v etc at idle 800Mhz?


Please remember I have said many times I do not use offset voltages and I will never use offset voltages. @Wirerat is the guy to ask about that.

Anyway, are these timings better now?


----------



## LordGurciullo

You are awesome dude thanks!

So I actually remember switching it to 1 but when I hit save and exit it didn't show it as a change.... I remember.. It was weird.. So i went back and did it again... but maybe it didn't change... I don't know because when I saw the 1.67 volts I went into panic... idle was 54 degrees... and then I tried to switch it back as fast as possible... My fear is after save and exit it wouldn't load back to bios (maybe trying to load at 1.67 due to bug)? but I manually powered off and on and it was working... again... total time including trying to load was less than 1 min. . 

Did we decide if I should NEVER SLEEP AGAIN because I degraded my chip? lol... 

On another note every time I save and exit bios now my ram says 4133 changed to 4133 even though I'm never touching it at this point.


----------



## Grizzly111

Yes that looks better - amazing what those subtimings can do! I'll have to try that too.


----------



## kamyk155

I'm totally tired of fighting for stability of stock settings.......it is not even OC.
2nd january I'm sending back this cpu and will try to change it for normal 9900KF.
If 9900KF or new KS will do the same - next step change motherboard.
Last step - memory.

My most problems with current platform:
- high temps
- high voltages
- problems with Samsung 950Pro -BSODS (solved with legacy support)
- one day cpu is stable everywhere - other day not or crash to desktop in BF5 mostly

Stability test passed even on 1,235V on CPU - all 3DMarks, cinebench 11,5 - 15 - 20, IntelBurnTest, LinX 0.65, Prime95 without AVX, OCCT, CPU-Z, Super PI mod 1.5, memory 4000MHz OC to even CL17-17-17 tested in - USB memtest, windows memtest64 and prime95 or LinX with max memory limit.
Another day - going back to instability don't know why in one of the burners or crash to desktop in BF5. Sometimes giving higher voltages on CPU or RAM gives me faster instability.

And thats why I don't want to fight anymore.


----------



## Driller au

Edit : double post


----------



## kamyk155

Ok @Falkentyne.
I made my decision about sending him back and I'm 99% positive to try swap him for normal K or KF.
Today I did last and most amazing test of this platform.

1- load bios defaults
2- load xmp 4000
3- set samsung 950pro in legacy to boot up into windows without problem with bsod
4- save and exit

Totally stock - no llc, no 300hz - everything totally auto in bios
Good thing - he pass the LinX, bad - I knew about - look at Vcore, temperatures, VCCIO and Agent voltages.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

@Falkentyne what memory you using ? samsung hynix
That second set of results is better than my 3600 O/C


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> @Falkentyne what memory you using ? samsung hynix
> That second set of results is better than my 3600 O/C


Gskill 3200 mhz C14 RGB, samsung B-die 2x16 GB dual rank. It won't post with 1T any higher than 3333 mhz.
And the last screenshot was at 1.45v. I had a red LinX error (test aborted) at 1.42v after 6 loops.


----------



## Sheyster

kamyk155 said:


> Ok @Falkentyne.
> I made my decision about sending him back and I'm 99% positive to try swap him for normal K or KF.
> Today I did last and most amazing test of this platform.
> 
> 1- load bios defaults
> 2- load xmp 4000
> 3- set samsung 950pro in legacy to boot up into windows without problem with bsod
> 4- save and exit
> 
> Totally stock - no llc, no 300hz - everything totally auto in bios
> Good thing - he pass the LinX, bad - I knew about - look at Vcore, temperatures, VCCIO and Agent voltages.



So if it's stable and you don't want to OC higher than stock, why not just simply do 2 things:

1. Lower vcore as much as possible without crashing, start with 1.3v and adjust up/down as needed.
2. Set memory frequency to 3866, everything else XMP settings

Call it a day and don't send back anything.


----------



## kamyk155

Sheyster - I fought with this setup for stability for three weeks and you telling me to do it again ?
No thanks - I want working "out of box" computer not experimenting whole days.


----------



## Timur Born

I decided to decrease my overclock from 5 Ghz non AVX to 4.8 Ghz. One reason is that 4.9 and 5.0 Ghz don't seem fully stable running non AVX Prime95 Small FFT load for hours.

But the bigger reason is that going from 4.8 to 4.9 and 4.9 to 5.0 increases power by around 20 watts each. This is a 10% wattage (and temp) increase for a mere 2% performance increase, using the same voltage and LLC settings. At 4.8 GHz non AVX P95 Small FFTs pulls around 160 watts, at 5.0 GHz it pulls over 200 watts, that seems too much to me.

Once I get a new silent case to fight VRM noise I will try using C3 + per core multipliers again. Currently the noise made by the Aorus Master's VRM section is too unnerving to bear.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Gskill 3200 mhz C14 RGB, samsung B-die 2x16 GB dual rank. It won't post with 1T any higher than 3333 mhz.
> And the last screenshot was at 1.45v. I had a red LinX error (test aborted) at 1.42v after 6 loops.


I successfully used by TridentZ 3200-C14 at 3300-1T for a while both on the Aorus Master and my Asus AMD Ryzen board, but now I get errors during long-time HCI test runs on the Master. This is why I decided to give 2T at higher frequencies a chance. Currently I settled at 3500-C15 at tight enough sub-timings, staying stable over night even at 55°C memory temperature (silent build). That results in around 53 gb/s read/write and close to 40 ns latency. Once I get 2 more dimms I will see what is possible at 4 x 8 gb.


----------



## reflex75

Falkentyne said:


> Anyway, are these timings better now?


I have the exact same memory (G.Skill 2x16GB 3200 CL14) but my results are better even at 3200 Mhz vs your 3600 Mhz! 
I see you have better skills for CPU overclocking rather than memory 🙂
I will give you my 'secret' secondary timings to try 😉


----------



## GeneO

reflex75 said:


> I have the exact same memory (G.Skill 2x16GB 3200 CL14) but my results are better even at 3200 Mhz vs your 3600 Mhz!
> I see you have better skills for CPU overclocking rather than memory 🙂
> I will give you my 'secret' secondary timings to try 😉


OK, I'll bite. Lets see the secret sauce


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reflex75 said:


> I have the exact same memory (G.Skill 2x16GB 3200 CL14) but my results are better even at 3200 Mhz vs your 3600 Mhz!
> I see you have better skills for CPU overclocking rather than memory 🙂
> I will give you my 'secret' secondary timings to try 😉


Okay thank you.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

I noticed you been toying with memory a lot. Your last post mentions you are using the cpu oc method I been using. 


Powersave + low llc + offset

Anyways, a while back I discovered my ram profile (3800mhz cl 15-15-15-32 800% hci stable) will not boot at my old fixed vcore settings - turbo llc + 1.31v fixed vcore.

I didn't spend too much time figuring out what the issue was as I prefer the offset anyway.

Im just curious if your fixed oc profiles can do the same memory oc wise vs auto or offset profiles on your aorus master?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I have not tried a lot of fixed voltage. I used it in the beginning when I first validated 5ghz and 5.1ghz and to validate my original cl15 4000/4100/4133 memory ocs. I also try it whenever I test trying to boot higher ram frequencies to avoid having to figure out whether or not I'm not getting into windows because of lack of vcore or lack of dram voltage. I moved onto dvid overclocks after that because i wanted more control over the voltage/clocks and then I stumbled on the turbo per core oc which i really like. I am really not a fan of fixed voltage oc because it forces me to pull more voltage than required on non-avx loads at any given clock frequency unless I use an avx offset. I also like how dvid + ring to core operates together. And now that i'm mixing bclk ocing into it with adaptive bclk voltage, i'm able to squeeze out a little extra. I'm gonna have to see what I can do utilizing these features when it comes to the 5.3ghz ht off profile. A full 5.4ghz requires so much voltage so I think i'm going to see how much the adaptive bclk voltage features pulls at around 5.35ghz cores 5.05cache.
> 
> Your preset is very good. I can do 5ghz all core with your preset with zero offset just the low llc + powersaving, gives me the perfect voltage. The +100mv is to cover the turbo per core speeds + fluctuating cache and I still get only the required amount of load voltage needed for any given clockspeed due to how dvid mode + ring to core works. It's better than using acdc-1/1 imo. THanks for sharing that awhile back ^^
> 
> I have not tested my memory OCs with higher fixed voltage overclocks such as 5.3ghz ht off or 5.2 ht on because the voltage + llc required for those clocks was too much to be stable at a fixed voltage. I tested them with all my dvid mode ocs.
> 
> As per your old profile not working, did you go through a bios update or microcode update? Did that profile include a bus clock overclock?


If you set a per core overclock, with Core #1 and core #8 at x49, core #6 at x54, core #5 and #3 at x53, Core #2 at x55, etc etc, 
and you set turbo boost ratios for 1 core multiplier of x55, 2 core multiplier of x54, 3 and 4 core multiplier of x53, and 5, 6, 7 and 8 core multipliers of x49,
if you run a full maximum load 8 core stress test, do all the cores still run at x49, even though you specified only core #1 and core #8 to run at x49 ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Also, what makes you want to link the master core and core #8 to the same frequency? Is that because those 2 cores are right next to eachother and it would keep the master core cooler during non-all core workloads?


Random example.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky the same old fixed vcore profile works perfectly.

It just doesnt work with my best ram OC profile. It will boot 3600mhz 15-15-15-32.

Powersave + low LLC +.08v can boot and is stable 3800mhz 15-15-15-32.

So it is obviously limiting ram tunning or training in some way. I tried it on multiple bios. 

It really just makes me wonder what is happening differently at post/boot. I suspect the adaptive is actually giving it more voltage but thats purely speculation.

This may be limited to the Aorus Pro. Its known to have worse memory oc anyway.


----------



## BradleyW

Hey,

I've been suffering with game applications crashing to desktop very frequently. 

I decided to flash the BIOS to the latest version, reinstall Windows and install all the latest chipset drivers (offline, so Windows doesn't download drivers). I left the BIOS at stock / auto values to ensure stability. I still get CTD's.

Prime95 (custom - NOT FFT's in-place - 90% RAM used), the system crashed after 30 mins. 

Looks like something might be faulty, or suffering degradation (the latter is less likely as I use low voltage and ECO mode for everything).

What should I suspect? It's either the RAM, CPU or the CPU's IMC in my option. Not temperature related. Everything is closely monitored. CPU @ 70c, DIMM's 35c, VRM 1 and 2 sensors under 70c.

Using AUROS ULTRA Z390, F9 BIOS, 9900K x47 / x43, Vcore Auto (1.35 under AVX), RAM 2x8GB DDR4 4000 @ JEDEC 2133. Everything Auto basically.

Thank you.


----------



## Wirerat

BradleyW said:


> Hey,
> 
> I've been suffering with game applications crashing to desktop very frequently.
> 
> I decided to flash the BIOS to the latest version, reinstall Windows and install all the latest chipset drivers (offline, so Windows doesn't download drivers). I left the BIOS at stock / auto values to ensure stability. I still get CTD's.
> 
> Prime95 (custom - NOT FFT's in-place - 90% RAM used), the system crashed after 30 mins.
> 
> Looks like something might be faulty, or suffering degradation (the latter is less likely as I use low voltage and ECO mode for everything).
> 
> What should I suspect? It's either the RAM, CPU or the CPU's IMC in my option. Not temperature related. Everything is closely monitored. CPU @ 70c, DIMM's 35c, VRM 1 and 2 sensors under 70c.
> 
> Using AUROS ULTRA Z390, F9 BIOS, 9900K x47 / x43, Vcore Auto (1.35 under AVX), RAM 2x8GB DDR4 4000 @ JEDEC 2133. Everything Auto basically.
> 
> Thank you.


I would start with one ram stick. If its good try the other. I had a bad ram stick act very similar.

Next I would check and reseat the cpu 8pin and the 24 pin.

Can you post a full scteenshot of hwinfo64? Mainly the 12v readings. If they are showing dips below 11.5v it can cause instability.

Sometimes its the cable seating or cables themselves. Other times its the psu itself.


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey,
> 
> I've been suffering with game applications crashing to desktop very frequently.
> 
> I decided to flash the BIOS to the latest version, reinstall Windows and install all the latest chipset drivers (offline, so Windows doesn't download drivers). I left the BIOS at stock / auto values to ensure stability. I still get CTD's.
> 
> Prime95 (custom - NOT FFT's in-place - 90% RAM used), the system crashed after 30 mins.
> 
> Looks like something might be faulty, or suffering degradation (the latter is less likely as I use low voltage and ECO mode for everything).
> 
> What should I suspect? It's either the RAM, CPU or the CPU's IMC in my option. Not temperature related. Everything is closely monitored. CPU @ 70c, DIMM's 35c, VRM 1 and 2 sensors under 70c.
> 
> Using AUROS ULTRA Z390, F9 BIOS, 9900K x47 / x43, Vcore Auto (1.35 under AVX), RAM 2x8GB DDR4 4000 @ JEDEC 2133. Everything Auto basically.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> I would start with one ram stick. If its good try the other. I had a bad ram stick act very similar.
> 
> Next I would check and reseat the cpu 8pin and the 24 pin.
> 
> Can you post a full scteenshot of hwinfo64? Mainly the 12v readings. If they are showing dips below 11.5v it can cause instability.
> 
> Sometimes its the cable seating or cables themselves. Other times its the psu itself.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the reply. 

I will try testing each RAM stick and go from there. I'll grab an SS tomorrow. Can a faulty nvme drive cause games to CTD? 

Can you tell me more about your situation with the faulty RAM? 

Cheers.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

What are the correct mobo settings to overclock the 9900k so that as to minimise heat (and voltages) and drops power usage at idle? Is there a way that yields superior results than using the offset method and normal LLC?


----------



## Wirerat

Grizzly111 said:


> What are the correct mobo settings to overclock the 9900k so that as to minimise heat (and voltages) and drops power usage at idle? Is there a way that yields superior results than using the offset method and normal LLC?


I use this guide. 

https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

My settings are 

Ac loadline : powersave
Llc : low
Vcore: normal
Offset : +.08v
Core : 50
Uncore : 46
Intel speed shift : enabled 

Leave all other settings auto.

Im not listing manual ram settings here. This only relates to core oc.

The offset needs to be +. Negative offsets result in idle crashes. You can go up to medium llc but low gives tighter voltages with less over shoot.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Wirerat said:


> I use this guide.
> 
> https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> My settings are
> 
> Ac loadline : powersave
> Llc : low
> Vcore: normal
> Offset : +.08v
> Core : 50
> Uncore : 46
> Intel speed shift : enabled
> 
> Leave all other settings auto.
> 
> Im not listing manual ram settings here. This only relates to core oc.
> 
> The offset needs to be +. Negative offsets result in idle crashes. You can go up to medium llc but low gives tighter voltages with less over shoot.



Thanks Wirerat. I tried that method @4.9Ghz/4.4uncore with a negative -0.030 offset (I know you said use +ve for 5.0). I currently use a -0.030 offset + LLC at Normal and its stable. My idle was fine but I got crashes when doing Cinebench. I tried without the negative offset but that puts vcore slightly higher than what I already have and defeats the purpose of it. 

I guess there is no way of improving?


----------



## Wirerat

Grizzly111 said:


> Thanks Wirerat. I tried that method @4.9Ghz/4.4uncore with a negative -0.030 offset (I know you said use +ve for 5.0). I currently use a -0.030 offset + LLC at Normal and its stable. My idle was fine but I got crashes when doing Cinebench. I tried without the negative offset but that puts vcore slightly higher than what I already have and defeats the purpose of it.
> 
> I guess there is no way of improving?


Ac loadline : powersave
Llc : low or medium

Standard llc is why you are crashing. The negative offset isnt helping.

Your are not stable if cinebench crashes. 

VRvout is the only voltage that matters. If you want vid or vcore in hwinfo64 to look different then this method wont help. 

If you follow the guide or my settings VRvout will idle lower than fixed vcore oc.


----------



## BradleyW

A quick question, do you need to increase the VCCIO voltage when increasing the ring/uncore ratio? (9900K).


----------



## Wirerat

BradleyW said:


> A quick question, do you need to increase the VCCIO voltage when increasing the ring/uncore ratio? (9900K).


Vcore provides the uncore/cache voltage. I've only had to mess with vccsio and vccsa when ram overclocking.

Xmp profiles sometimes set those values too high. 

You can safely set vccio to 1.225v and see if it helps.


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> Vcore provides the uncore/cache voltage. I've only had to mess with vccsio and vccsa when ram overclocking.
> 
> Xmp profiles sometimes set those values too high.
> 
> You can safely set vccio to 1.225v and see if it helps.


Is 1.25v too high?


----------



## Wirerat

BradleyW said:


> Is 1.25v too high?


Thats still fine. 

Normally it doesnt need to be that high unless you have 4000mhz+ ram.

A lot of people find they can run it much lower like 1.150v.


----------



## reflex75

Falkentyne said:


> Okay thank you.


Here my secret timings for G.Skill 3200Mhz CL14 2x16GB (Samsung B-Die) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Let me know if it increases your results, especially lowering latency, because bandwidth depends almost only on frequency.

Primary timings for 3200 Mhz in my case: 14-14-32-1
Be careful, it's hard to keep Command rate at 1 above 3300Mhz, so you will sacrifice latency at CR 2 if you want to go higher.

Secondary timings (most interesting):
tRRDL 6 (lowest Long for good B-Die)
tRRDS 4 (lowest Short for good B-Die)
tRFC 350 (Cell recharge duration: lower is better because while recharging cell is not available, but be careful of data loss/corruption with higher temperature)
tRFC2 260 (Shorter value based on tRFC)
tRFC4 160 (Shorter value based on tRFC2)
tREFI 24960 (Period before recharging cell: higher is better but again be careful of data loss/corruption with higher temperature)
tWR 12 (lowest for good B-Die)
tRTP 6 (lowest for good B-Die)
tFAW 16 (lowest Window, best if 4 times tRRDS, try to use even numbers)
tWTR 6 (Lowest middle for good B-Die)
tWTRL 8 (Lowest Long for good B-Die)
tWTRS 4 (Lowest Short for good B-Die)
tCKE4 
tWCL13 (best with 13 in my case, 14 refuse to train at boot)



And tertiary timings on auto with Asus mode 2 (set most tight timings and give best results)


Finally, with my 9900ks, my VCCIO is at 1.05v and my SA at 1.10v.
It should be enough for 3200mhz with good IMC.
Lower is better because the IMC voltage can increase a little bit the CPU package temperature (it's why people don't understand why CPU becomes hotter when just enabling XMP, with auto settings crazy voltages for both VCCIO and SA around 1.35


----------



## Wirerat

@reflex75

Can you share aida64 latency and bandwidth results? 

With my bdie kit limiting it to 1t is big handicap. 

As frequency goes up latency also goes down at the same timings.

Im not the best at ram overclocking. I just wanted to get the best bandwidth possible below 40ns latency.


----------



## Grizzly111

Wow Wirerat, I just tried those settings and it appears that VR-VOUT is lower not only at idle but also at full power. Thanks!


I'm getting VR-VOUT @ 1.15v @ 4.9Ghz on Cinebench15. CPU package Watts has also improved.


----------



## Wirerat

Grizzly111 said:


> Wow Wirerat, I just tried those settings and it appears that VR-VOUT is lower not only at idle but also at full power. Thanks!
> 
> 
> I'm getting VR-VOUT @ 1.15v @ 4.9Ghz on Cinebench15. CPU package Watts has also improved.


 No probs. 

It works well for both my builds using aorus pro's.


----------



## Falkentyne

reflex75 said:


> Here my secret timings for G.Skill 3200Mhz CL14 2x16GB (Samsung B-Die) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> Let me know if it increases your results, especially lowering latency, because bandwidth depends almost only on frequency.
> 
> Primary timings for 3200 Mhz in my case: 14-14-32-1
> Be careful, it's hard to keep Command rate at 1 above 3300Mhz, so you will sacrifice latency at CR 2 if you want to go higher.
> 
> Secondary timings (most interesting):
> tRRDL 6 (lowest Long for good B-Die)
> tRRDS 4 (lowest Short for good B-Die)
> tRFC 350 (Cell recharge duration: lower is better because while recharging cell is not available, but be careful of data loss/corruption with higher temperature)
> tRFC2 260 (Shorter value based on tRFC)
> tRFC4 160 (Shorter value based on tRFC2)
> tREFI 24960 (Period before recharging cell: higher is better but again be careful of data loss/corruption with higher temperature)
> tWR 12 (lowest for good B-Die)
> tRTP 6 (lowest for good B-Die)
> tFAW 16 (lowest Window, best if 4 times tRRDS, try to use even numbers)
> tWTR 6 (Lowest middle for good B-Die)
> tWTRL 8 (Lowest Long for good B-Die)
> tWTRS 4 (Lowest Short for good B-Die)
> tCKE4
> tWCL13 (best with 13 in my case, 14 refuse to train at boot)
> 
> 
> 
> And tertiary timings on auto with Asus mode 2 (set most tight timings and give best results)
> 
> 
> Finally, with my 9900ks, my VCCIO is at 1.05v and my SA at 1.10v.
> It should be enough for 3200mhz with good IMC.
> Lower is better because the IMC voltage can increase a little bit the CPU package temperature (it's why people don't understand why CPU becomes hotter when just enabling XMP, with auto settings crazy voltages for both VCCIO and SA around 1.35


These are from an Asus bios?
Some of these timings you listed are not in the Gigabyte Bios. TRFC2 and TRFC4...we don't have those for example, although I can look again through the list of weird ones left on auto.
I can try tcke (if I can find it), and twtr_s at 4 instead of 5. Most of the timings you set I already have also, like trtp and twr and tfaw/trrd_s. My tRFC is 280. I don't have the other two.


----------



## Wirerat

@Falkentyne which kit do you have? Its 3200mhz bdie right?

Its very possible it can run 3600mhz cl14 or 3800mhz cl 15 without too much work.

Not the absolute best but here is my 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 2t timings. 1.48v dram voltage.

I know the trefi is high. The mobo bug forces that for now.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> @Falkentyne which kit do you have? Its 3200mhz bdie right?
> 
> Its very possible it can run 3600mhz cl14 or 3800mhz cl 15 without too much work.
> 
> Not the absolute best but here is my 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 2t timings. 1.48v dram voltage.
> 
> I know the trefi is high. The mobo bug forces that for now.


This one:

F4-3200C14D-32GTZR

Your tRRD_L is too low.
6 is the lowest the chipset allows (S can go to 4, but not L).
Setting it at 4 causes the value to be corrected.
I gained 1ms lower latency by changing it from 4 to 6 when I had it at 4 (42.6ns ->41.4 ns).


----------



## Wirerat

Falkentyne said:


> Wirerat said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Falkentyne which kit do you have? Its 3200mhz bdie right?
> 
> Its very possible it can run 3600mhz cl14 or 3800mhz cl 15 without too much work.
> 
> Not the absolute best but here is my 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 2t timings. 1.48v dram voltage.
> 
> I know the trefi is high. The mobo bug forces that for now.
> 
> 
> 
> This one:
> 
> F4-3200C14D-32GTZR
> 
> Your tRRD_L is too low.
> 6 is the lowest the chipset allows (S can go to 4, but not L).
> Setting it at 4 causes the value to be corrected.
> I gained 1ms lower latency by changing it from 4 to 6 when I had it at 4 (42.6ns ->41.4 ns).
Click to expand...

Cool thanks.

This is being read inside windows. Wouldn't it show the corrected value?


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> Thats still fine.
> Normally it doesnt need to be that high unless you have 4000mhz+ ram.
> A lot of people find they can run it much lower like 1.150v.


OK, I've tested each DIMM, and various DIMM slots to rule out bad memory and/or bad slots. I still got CTD's in every situation, so I guess the RAM and slots are OK. (Either that or both sticks are bad....not likely).

I checked the PSU cables. Everything is in good condition and perfectly seated. HWINFO shows strong voltage on the 3.3, 5 and 12v rails. I've uploaded a shot of HW when P95 was running.

I then set CPU ring/uncore down to x33 to rule out cache instability. Still got a CTD. Can't really think of anything else to try. 

Can a faulty NVMe drive cause this?


----------



## Falkentyne

Wirerat said:


> Cool thanks.
> 
> This is being read inside windows. Wouldn't it show the corrected value?


No. It reads what has been set in the BIOS.
For example 15-15-15-28 is an illegal value for tRAS. (it can't be below tCAS+tRCD (+2 clocks minimum)). The chipset will correct this value at a penalty, but it will be read as the set value (28).


----------



## Wirerat

BradleyW said:


> OK, I've tested each DIMM, and various DIMM slots to rule out bad memory and/or bad slots. I still got CTD's in every situation, so I guess the RAM and slots are OK. (Either that or both sticks are bad....not likely).
> 
> I checked the PSU cables. Everything is in good condition and perfectly seated. HWINFO shows strong voltage on the 3.3, 5 and 12v rails. I've uploaded a shot of HW when P95 was running.
> 
> I then set CPU ring/uncore down to x33 to rule out cache instability. Still got a CTD. Can't really think of anything else to try.
> 
> Can a faulty NVMe drive cause this?


Try this. 

Open cmd prompt. 

Type : sfc /scannow

Let that complete. If there are errors it cannot repair you will likely need to reinstall windows. 


If that passes you can try disconnecting all drives except the boot drive. 



Falkentyne said:


> No. It reads what has been set in the BIOS.
> For example 15-15-15-28 is an illegal value for tRAS. (it can't be below tCAS+tRCD (+2 clocks minimum)). The chipset will correct this value at a penalty, but it will be read as the set value (28).


Got it. Thanks.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> Powersave + low LLC +.08v can boot and is stable 3800mhz 15-15-15-32.


It's worth mentioning that at these settings Prime 95 *non* AVX Small FFTs pull 230 watts and hit 100°C, depending on your specific CPU. Compared to 160 watts at 4.8 GHz that is over 40% more power consumption for only 4% more performance. Of course your calculations are finished earlier, but that's only 4% earlier, so still a lot more power consumption.


----------



## raggazam

Happy New Year!

I'm trying to get the best out of these 4 sticks, any recommendations? for 3600 mhz and 3800 mhz?


----------



## reflex75

Falkentyne said:


> These are from an Asus bios?
> Some of these timings you listed are not in the Gigabyte Bios. TRFC2 and TRFC4...we don't have those for example, although I can look again through the list of weird ones left on auto.
> I can try tcke (if I can find it), and twtr_s at 4 instead of 5. Most of the timings you set I already have also, like trtp and twr and tfaw/trrd_s. My tRFC is 280. I don't have the other two.


Happy New Year from France!
Yes Asus bios.
Your tRFC at 280 is very agressive!
Be careful because you have no safety room, in case of your RAM temperature increases during summer you can have silent data corruption and kill your Windows and loose your files!
About TRFC2 and TRFC4, ma values are based on the DDR4 spec sheet recommendation for 8GB modules but I use it for 16GB module (350-260-160)
About results with my values, I reach 99% of my theoretical maximum bandwidth, which is very good (usually around 90-95%)
And my latency 40.6ns is also very good for 3200mhz!


----------



## Timur Born

@reflex75 You might mix some things up there. As far as I understand the "8Gb" in that table means 8 gBIT memory modules, not 8 gBYTE dimms. Each dimm consists of several of those modules. For example, a single-rank 8 gBYTE dimm organized as "1R x 16" (1 Rank x 16 modules) could would of (1 gBIT x 4) x 16 modules then.

Futhermore, the "350" listed for TRFC under 8 Gb is not the same 350 you set up in UEFI. The table means 350 ns (nanoseconds), your UEFI usually means "number of clock-ticks". According to the table 2 Gb B-die modules can handle down to 160 ns TRFC, at 3200 MT that corresponds to a UEFI value of 160 x 3200 / 2000 = 256. Your UEFI value of 350 corresponds to 218 ns instead.

In practice your 350 are still good, because Auto would set well over 500 instead. The big jump is what makes a difference in some applications (7Z being one of them), not the smaller rest.


----------



## BradleyW

Wirerat said:


> Try this.
> 
> Open cmd prompt.
> 
> Type : sfc /scannow
> 
> Let that complete. If there are errors it cannot repair you will likely need to reinstall windows.
> 
> 
> If that passes you can try disconnecting all drives except the boot drive.
> 
> 
> 
> Got it. Thanks.


Thank you,

I did the scan and no errors, but my Windows install is only a few days old. I reinstalled it to rule out an OS issue.

Interestingly, if I use DIMM 1 in SLOT 4, the system won't boot. If I use DIMM 2 in SLOT 4, it'll boot. You'd think DIMM 1 is faulty, but it works fine in any other slot. So SLOT 4 is bad right? Well, DIMM 2 works in SLOT 4 just fine.


----------



## uplink

Hey there *guys*

Did any of You manage to run *EZ Raid* on *Z390 Xtreme?* I have three *GA NVMe SSD* drives, one with LED, two plain without anything and I just get two restarts from BiOS and that's that, end of story. Am using F8 BiOS.

Please advise

With kind regards

uplink


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reflex75

reachthesky said:


> Extremely good results!


Thank you!



reachthesky said:


> For anyone reading this that may be questioning their tuning skills, The low latency and high bandwidth is made possible via 2 dimm motherboards. You won't get that type of scaling on a 4dimm t-top board, you could possibly get better bandwidth due to interleaving but latency will always be at least 2 nanoseconds behind 2dimm boards at the same exact timings with the same exact kit. If you are doing cl14 3200 on an aorus board with 4 dimms, expect to top out around 42ns-42.5ns.


But I also have a 4 dimm T-Topology motherboard (ASUS XI Hero), and my kit is made of 2 dimms double side modules (2 x 16 = 32GB), which is harder to OC than a simple 2x8GB.

RAM OC can be very tweaky but more rewarding compared to CPU which is straight forward...


----------



## reflex75

Timur Born said:


> @reflex75 You might mix some things up there. As far as I understand the "8Gb" in that table means 8 gBIT memory modules, not 8 gBYTE dimms. Each dimm consists of several of those modules. For example, a single-rank 8 gBYTE dimm organized as "1R x 16" (1 Rank x 16 modules) could would of (1 gBIT x 4) x 16 modules then.
> 
> Futhermore, the "350" listed for TRFC under 8 Gb is not the same 350 you set up in UEFI. The table means 350 ns (nanoseconds), your UEFI usually means "number of clock-ticks". According to the table 2 Gb B-die modules can handle down to 160 ns TRFC, at 3200 MT that corresponds to a UEFI value of 160 x 3200 / 2000 = 256. Your UEFI value of 350 corresponds to 218 ns instead.
> 
> In practice your 350 are still good, because Auto would set well over 500 instead. The big jump is what makes a difference in some applications (7Z being one of them), not the smaller rest.


You are right, thank you for the clarification


----------



## uplink

reachthesky said:


> You have to use ezraid(in the bios) before installing your OS. ezraid changes your boot mode from ahci to raid, if you had your OS installed on a drive running in ahci mode, it's not going to boot to windows since you are in raid mode which is why the motherboard restarts back into ahci mode to go into windows. If you want your current OS to stay intact on whatever drive you are using it on and still boot via the same mode but also want to raid other drives, use disk management in windows to create your striped(raid) drives instead. If you want your OS raided, then you need to start from scratch and use ezraid in the bios and reinstall windows via usb stick onto the new striped drives. If you are raiding drives to be used as an OS boot drive, Make sure those drives are are identical model/spec.


 thank You for Your fast reaction. Well, in general, I just wanted to use the mobo's bios/uefi sw to manage raid. I'm not using it as OS drive, atm. I'm running it as SW raid0 [striped] and it works fine. I tried what You suggested, though, it only keeps restarting and showing nothing nowhere [in bios/uefi].

And as for second, my first drive is 512 GB SSD with LED [from GA] and second and third are identical 1TB NVMe SSD drives, their most NVMe basic model I reckon. They're literally invisible.

And last but not least, I only see EZ Raid viable within SATA portion of the bios/uefi, where I can choose either AHCi or iRST. There's no "pure raid" function available for me


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reflex75

reachthesky said:


> oops, sorry, I read your board as being an apex, my mistake. Ok so 40.x ns lantecy would be the target range, i stand corrected


Just try for fun with lower tRFC (260) and max tREFI (65535): latency 39.8 ns 
(RAM at 3232mhz with CPU block 101)


----------



## Grizzly111

What could the cause of random shutdowns (zero power) without warning when just browsing the internet on Windows 10 desktop? Playing games and benchmarking etc are fine. F11c BIOS.



Anyone else have random power-offs happen intermittently whilst browsing?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> What could the cause of random shutdowns (zero power) without warning when just browsing the internet on Windows 10 desktop? Playing games and benchmarking etc are fine. F11c BIOS.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone else have random power-offs happen intermittently whilst browsing?


Shutoffs (power trip--system powers off for 5 seconds, then powers back on) or random reboots (e.g. a BSOD then an automatic reboot?)
There is a HUGE difference.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> It's worth mentioning that at these settings Prime 95 *non* AVX Small FFTs pull 230 watts and hit 100Â°C, depending on your specific CPU. Compared to 160 watts at 4.8 GHz that is over 40% more power consumption for only 4% more performance. Of course your calculations are finished earlier, but that's only 4% earlier, so still a lot more power consumption.


I dont run the offset profile to reduce power usage.

I actually leave the performance mode in windows enabled when Im gaming.

The Aorus pro does not have great voltage regulation at fixed vcore w/turbo llc. This method helps correct that.


----------



## Deathtech00

*Entitlement*



kamyk155 said:


> Sheyster - I fought with this setup for stability for three weeks and you telling me to do it again?
> No thanks - I want working "out of box" computer not experimenting whole days.


I'm not sure if you are aware of this or not, But the Intel Z390 chipset is considered an "*enthusiast*" platform, and specifically, the Gigabyte Aorus Master Z390 is an upper-tier "*enthusiast*" motherboard. If you want a "*working out of box*" computer that doesn't require tweaking, then the Intel Z390 chipset is not the platform for you, and you spent way too much money on your motherboard. You should return most of your hardware, and just buy a prebuilt from Dell. They work out of the box, usually.

Also, being rude to the people trying to help you is not excused by your frustration. These screen names are not paid employees, they are hobbyists on an "Overclocking" forum. Just regular people who enjoy "experimenting for days" on their hardware, and sharing that info with strangers on the interwebs. For which I am grateful.

Returning your CPU is not going to magically fix your problem, you will be just as frustrated as soon as you receive a different one. 

You really only have two options.

Start learning, or get to selling.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Speaking of start learning.......
> I completely abandoned cl18 4200 and went back to cl15 4000, performance just isn't there for 4200.
> 
> I was testing out 15-15-15-32 vs 15-15-15-30 in superposition 720p low. After several runs, on average 15-15-15-32 performed about 10 fps behind 15-15-15-30. I feel like while 15-15-15-30 violates the tras formula rules, it flat out performs better so i'm going to roll with it anyway. I think utilizing superposition 720p low in addition to looking at aida 64 benchmark results is a good gauge for seeing how slight differences in memory timings can affect performance for gaming, aida64 does not show the whole picture.
> 
> I don't think 1% lows can get any better than this for cl15 4000 on an aorus master motherboard. Here are the timings.


Can you do me a favor and test 15/15/15/36 ?
Your tRTP is 6 and tWR is 12, and since tWR is 2*tRTP, and 15+15+tRTP would equal TRAS.
Pay more attention to the latency rather than bandwidth. See if the latency goes down with tRAS at 36 rather than 30. Ignore the 32 you did before.

Thank you.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> The Aorus pro does not have great voltage regulation at fixed vcore w/turbo llc. This method helps correct that.


I don't say that the method is wrong, especially if you don't want to use a negative offset due to fear of idle errors.I am currently using it myself (at +-0.0 v offset).

But adding +0.08 v (over 40 watts/percent, +15 degree celcius) to achieve 200 MHz more (4 percent) is something to better know and think about.


----------



## LordGurciullo

*Final Overclock Settings : Opinions Wanted*

Happy new year! 

So a month ago when buying stuff on black Friday I never knew what I was getting into... But a month later after building and learning everything from knowing nothing and with the help of all you fine gents I've finally come to a final settings after a couple weeks of learning/trying.
My 9900k and my team T Force Dark Pro 3200 14 samsung b die. 

under load is 1.209 - 1.211 
small ffts prime 95 non avx 89 degrees C
and 88-93 max temp real bench stress test for an hour
passed ramtest for 20 mins.

Noctua 15, coolermaster h500m, 


So.. This is about as good as I can get. I tried my little heart out for 5.1 for hours and it was a no go... 
The one time it made it through to prime stable it was up to 96 degrees..
I figured I could possibly run 5.1 because I ONLY game and it would only need to pass stress for 30 mins at under 96 but everything kept crashing.


Thoughts? Opinions? Did I do something wrong? Could I go to 5.1 stable?
Can I optimize anything anywhere including ram?


What do you guys think??! Boss Falkentyne?


----------



## Falkentyne

LordGurciullo said:


> Happy new year!
> 
> So a month ago when buying stuff on black Friday I never knew what I was getting into... But a month later after building and learning everything from knowing nothing and with the help of all you fine gents I've finally come to a final settings after a couple weeks of learning/trying.
> My 9900k and my team T Force Dark Pro 3200 14 samsung b die.
> 
> under load is 1.209 - 1.211
> small ffts prime 95 non avx 89 degrees C
> and 88-93 max temp real bench stress test for an hour
> passed ramtest for 20 mins.
> 
> Noctua 15, coolermaster h500m,
> 
> 
> So.. This is about as good as I can get. I tried my little heart out for 5.1 for hours and it was a no go...
> The one time it made it through to prime stable it was up to 96 degrees..
> I figured I could possibly run 5.1 because I ONLY game and it would only need to pass stress for 30 mins at under 96 but everything kept crashing.
> 
> 
> Thoughts? Opinions? Did I do something wrong? Could I go to 5.1 stable?
> Can I optimize anything anywhere including ram?
> 
> 
> What do you guys think??! Boss Falkentyne?


Set your Vcore to 1.375v.
Keep Vcore LLC on High (don't set it on turbo).
Set VRM switching frequency to 300 khz.

Do not use AVX prime95. Disable AVX in the stress options (prime 29.8 build 6)

And please use beta 11c, not F10. F10 has alot of bugs that were fixed in F11c. The DVID offset -->fixed voltage bug is still present, but that is a complicated problem to fix.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/7nzjctdsp6kxgk6/Z390AORUSMASTER.F11c/file


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> I don't say that the method is wrong, especially if you don't want to use a negative offset due to fear of idle errors.I am currently using it myself (at +-0.0 v offset).
> 
> But adding +0.08 v (over 40 watts/percent, +15 degree celcius) to achieve 200 MHz more (4 percent) is something to better know and think about.


I use the rig purely for gaming. That 40w delta in prime 95 small means very little at a 100-125w load.

It becomes 20w at 1/2 the load. 

Full custom loop with 840mm total rad space. Temps are very good for a non- delided 9900k. Gaming temps max below 70c. 

I see your point. Overclocking performance gained often isnt worth efficiency loss.

If I used the rig for real work I would just run stock. I run games on a 240hz monitor for a couple hours a day. The higher frequency helps reduce the bottleneck of my 1080ti.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I think you should take a look at your secondary ram timings/tighten up.


Did you see my question?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Did 4 superposition 720p runs with 15-15-15-36 + tRC 50, here are the 1% lows from each run
> 
> 185.2
> 188.6
> 140.8
> 188.7
> one of the runs had a maximum of 461 fps but 1% lows were not as good as 15-15-15-30.


Thank you for testing that.


----------



## LordGurciullo

So overall looks good? 

Please explain why going higher in voltage and lower on the frequency would help? Do I really need to download the new bios? Is there any noticeable upgrade for me? 

Also is there any chance of getting to 5.1? I went all the way up to 1.395 with the current settings and it still freaking crashed. Is it worth playing with this to get that extra frame or two in games? 

I'm a high fps 1080p resolution player.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Validated with an hour of real bench and 20 minutes of ram test??

Please post again which exact timings so i can try it. (will this increase fps)?
last time I pushed ram harder got a boot cycle and I had to use an ice pick to hit the connectors to reset the cmos.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

No i didn't do all that... are those the timings you want me to try?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Is that safe long term? Will it net noticeable FPS differences?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne: No BSOD, warning etc. Just total power-loss. I dont think it even re-booted automatically (cant remember). Only happened twice just whilst browsing forums etc on Firefox. Event Viewer just says the standard kernel power loss critical error.


Games, benchmarking etc are fine (I HCI memtested my 32gb RAM last night to 700% fine overnight).


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Falkentyne: No BSOD, warning etc. Just total power-loss. I dont think it even re-booted automatically (cant remember). Only happened twice just whilst browsing forums etc on Firefox. Event Viewer just says the standard kernel power loss critical error.
> 
> 
> Games, benchmarking etc are fine (I HCI memtested my 32gb RAM last night to 700% fine overnight).


Check the power supply. While it is possible a motherboard can cause this, a PSU issue or a video card issue can both cause this to happen as well. I cannot help with a problem like this. Were the fans still spinning? Or was all powers, LED's, RGB's, everything just off as if the PSU power cord were yanked out?


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> Check the power supply. While it is possible a motherboard can cause this, a PSU issue or a video card issue can both cause this to happen as well. I cannot help with a problem like this. Were the fans still spinning? Or was all powers, LED's, RGB's, everything just off as if the PSU power cord were yanked out?



Just switches off - no fans or anything I am pretty sure.



I've replaced the PSU power cord (was using one from a printer that I thought looked sturdy). Also refreshed Firefox and removed the ad-blocker extension from it. We shall see. So far so good.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> one of the runs had a maximum of 461 fps but 1% lows were not as good as 15-15-15-30.


Read through the next 10-15 posts after this one:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-memory-stability-thread-94.html#post25801780

The diagram mentioned in this post and displayed in the next post shows that tRAS = tRCD + tCAS + 2. This is a formula often found in overclocking guides. The diagram also shows that during those 2 extra clock-ticks nothing is happening at all, so some memory modules may well be able to just forfeit the extra +2 and other may need more.

Looking further into the discussion Asus' @[email protected] lists tRAS = tRCD + tCAS + tRP as the correct formula, unfortunately without explaining how this fits into his own "+2" post earlier. He then explains that going 2 below the formula may be beneficial in some applications, but not in others.

Raja goes on to explain that the chipset will substitute any too low tRAS value with its own liking, with values that we have no control nor knowledge of. This is because tRAS absolutely has to be kept active until all data is transferred, regardless of what value you set up in BIOS.

Furthermore he speculates that those applications that measure increased performance with lower than formula tRAS may see tRAS eating into tRC. Again, unfortunately he does not explain exactly what he means, but I assume that he means that tRC is kept static and thus can get lower than tRC = tRAS + tRP (+x) when tRAS is increased by the mainboard. If this is what he means that lowering tRC should have the same effect for your 1% lows measurement as lowering tRAS. Other timings my play into this as well, though.

In any case you need to do extensive stability and performance tests when going below those formulas, simply because you don't know what's really happening under the hood of your memory controller then.

Only judging by Aida memory bandwidth and latency tests there does not seem to be a benefit for me going from +tRP to +2. Because I am using F10 I cannot simply switch tREFI to see how much it affects those very small nuances of tRAS, though.


----------



## Emmanuel

Falkentyne said:


> I managed (with some difficulty) to insert the F10 version microcodes (B4, B4, B8 and AE) without deleting all of them  My first attempt got the 9900k microcode "AE" working but deleted all the others until I followed @KedarWolf's advice (after I found the original BIN microcodes on github. The raw versions I already had were in .DAT or ucode file format and I couldn't convert them to BIN).
> 
> Here you go.
> Enjoy your performance back.
> 
> Flash with " EFIFLASH z390mast.f11c /x "in a bootable freedos command prompt, or whatever you renamed the bios file too.
> 
> Qflash won't flash it since it's modded.


I'm about to receive my new 9900KS and flash this BIOS. Can you confirm this is still the latest and greatest version?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> I have a question.
> 
> Read this article. https://www.tomshardware.com/features/inside-intels-secret-overclocking-lab/7
> 
> Intel engineers stated they feel comfortable running their personal coffee lake chips at 1.4v, does this mean before vdroop or after? THey didn't specify. i'm looking at my bios right now, vcore set to "normal" it shows 1.2v next to it. Am i right to assume that when you use a dvid offset, you are just adding the specified offset amount to a base 1.2v vcore and the total after math = vcore before vdroop without factoring in llc?


Yes, as far as I've seen ... Vcore = normal results in 1.200V. Offset + or - adds or lowers it from 1.200V with the value you entered ... this is before vdroop. As far as I understand it, LLC handles vdroop, so no need talking about LLC here.
So yeah, 1.200 vcore normal + DVID offset = +120 results in 1.320V idle (at least it did on my system)


----------



## Timur Born

At 4.8 GHz and +-0 volt with standard LLC my CPU runs close to 1.4 volts before droop, at 5.0 GHz it hits over 1.4 volts. So Auto settings already hit that high (and away from 1.2 V) when you just increase clock-rate.

At 4.8 GHz under non AVX P95 Small FFTs it droops down to 1.24 V and around 1.217 V under AVX Small FFT. Additionally I can use an offset of -0.020 V and remain stable, or switch to Power Saver + Low LLC to droop down below 1.2 V. I just currently switched back to standard 0 V to test higher uncore/cache clocks.

Seeing how Power Saver + Low +0.08 V hits 100°C I suspect that them Intel folks mean before droop.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> Ok so the formula is more of a guideline and every user would have to do extensive testing for all of their usage cases to make sure performance isn't suffering in one area due to too low of tras.


I append two screenshot of AIDA testing at +tRP (tRC 51) and +2 (tRC 47). Both are equal within measuring errors.



> I guess I need to bust out msi afterburner and record the 1% low chart during gaming...


I tried that today, but could not get Afterburner to start benchmarking 1% lows, it just seems to ignore the shortcut key regardless of what I set there. Shortcuts to switch OSD and fps limiter do work, though. Will try a reinstallation.

Btw, my TridentZ F4-3200C14D-16GTZKW are listed as 14-14-14-34, which corresponds to +tRP (6).


----------



## Timur Born

Grizzly111 said:


> Just switches off - no fans or anything I am pretty sure.


Try CPU Current Protection all the way up to Extreme (defaults to Auto, whatever that means).


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> I have a question.
> 
> Read this article. https://www.tomshardware.com/features/inside-intels-secret-overclocking-lab/7
> 
> Intel engineers stated they feel comfortable running their personal coffee lake chips at 1.4v, does this mean before vdroop or after? THey didn't specify. i'm looking at my bios right now, vcore set to "normal" it shows 1.2v next to it. Am i right to assume that when you use a dvid offset, you are just adding the specified offset amount to a base 1.2v vcore and the total after math = vcore before vdroop without factoring in llc?


If you watch the VID vs VRvout the voltage difference is very close to the offset that you set.

So you are adding the Offset to the preset Vid table programed into your specific cpu. 

My 9900k and 9900kf have different vrvouts both at +.08v offset.

The 9900kf 1.28v 5ghz and 9900k 1.31v 5ghz. Exact same bios settings. Both are stable at +.08v but with different voltages due to different VID tables.


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> I changed trfc from 280 to 320. memtest failed. I changed trfc from 320 to 360, memtest passed with full trefi.


I like the 360 trfc value a lot. I'm currently using it with 32768 trefi and it's 100% stable. I wish I could push 4000 frequency but that's just a no-go with the Pro boards unfortunately.


----------



## Wirerat

Sheyster said:


> reachthesky said:
> 
> 
> 
> I changed trfc from 280 to 320. memtest failed. I changed trfc from 320 to 360, memtest passed with full trefi.
> 
> 
> 
> I like the 360 tfrc value a lot. I'm currently using it with 32768 trefi and it's 100% stable. I wish I could push 4000 frequency but that's just a no-go with the Pro boards unfortunately. /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
Click to expand...

3800mhz @ 15-15-15-32 is the best I can do on my pro. I have two systems with this board.

These boards dont do much better with 4 dimns populated like the master.

Fortunately, tuned 3800mhz is not gonna be a limitation in any games. Running ram faster than that is really only gonna show a difference in benchmarks.


----------



## BigMack70

Just got my Aorus Master and 9900ks after deciding to upgrade from Haswell-E... this board is one of the easiest I've ever worked with. Really impressive stuff... up and running with offset voltage for 5.2 GHz at a maximum of 1.345V under load and it only took a couple hours of tweaking to get it there. Two big thumbs up for me. 

Any point tweaking RAM above 3600 c17 when all I do is play games at 4k? I'm guessing no.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

He uses Power Saver + Low + 0.08 V.


----------



## Sheyster

Wirerat said:


> 3800mhz @ 15-15-15-32 is the best I can do on my pro. I have two systems with this board.
> 
> These boards dont do much better with 4 dimns populated like the master.
> 
> Fortunately, tuned 3800mhz is not gonna be a limitation in any games. Running ram faster than that is really only gonna show a difference in benchmarks.



I've been able to get 3866 stable (not at CL15 though). I'm okay with the settings I have now for gaming. This rig is a gaming beast especially considering there is zero water cooling being used.


----------



## Sheyster

BigMack70 said:


> Any point tweaking RAM above 3600 c17 when all I do is play games at 4k? I'm guessing no.



Try to add some voltage (I suggest 1.4v for the RAM), and tweak it down to 15-15-15-35 if you can. Also tighten up trfc under 400 and trefi to 32768.


----------



## Timur Born

And then run HCI Memtest over-night to see if it's really stable.


----------



## Sheyster

Timur Born said:


> And then run HCI Memtest over-night to see if it's really stable.


Overnight is good, or at least 400% as HCI recommends. I typically run it at least 800%.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> What acdc preset is the +.08 offset with? right now I used standard llc + acdc 1/1 + offset of +125mv for 5G all core ht on. Gives me load voltage of 1.24v in aida 64 fpu avx on.


I dont touch the Advanced VR settings. 

Power Save is just a canned profile of those "advanced VR" ac loadline settings.




Timur Born said:


> He uses Power Saver + Low + 0.08 V.


Exactly. 






Sheyster said:


> I've been able to get 3866 stable (not at CL15 though). I'm okay with the settings I have now for gaming. This rig is a gaming beast especially considering there is zero water cooling being used. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif



Nice, sounds like you have it running really good.


----------



## Timur Born

Sheyster said:


> Overnight is good, or at least 400% as HCI recommends. I typically run it at least 800%.


400% may be useful for finding hardware defects in your memory modules. For stability testing this is not enough.

Percentage does not mean much for stability testing anyway, only time/hours matter. You need to give your memory and controller enough time to fail, a chance to detect that once in a million error. It can happen after seconds, but it may also take hours.

I saw HCI fail at well over 100% on my rig, this is *not* stable just because the number seems big, it just means that it took so long to catch a single error.

That being said, I did not mean HCI in my last post, but Karhu, which I found to catch errors faster than HCI. And I even let that run over-night to make sure. Because, again, it's about running time, not about percentage.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Try enabling benchmark mode in rtss. worked for me..

And please tell me if you're actually seeing any fps differences with all your ram tweaks. If you are.. I may try to do your settings.


----------



## LordGurciullo

I haven't had a chance to test this But I'd like to know the reasoning... temps?
Also does anyone think 5.1 stable is possible here?


----------



## Grizzly111

Guys, I'm looking for the best (available to buy) B-die RAM kit for the Aorus Master with tight timings. The QVL is limited. Do you have any suggestions that work...price is not an issue?


I'd be very grateful if anyone can point me in the right direction!


----------



## LordGurciullo

I don't know about the best but the T - Force I got is great... 
https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820313712?Item=N82E16820313712
cheap overclocked it to 4133


----------



## Sheyster

Timur Born said:


> 400% may be useful for finding hardware defects in your memory modules. For stability testing this is not enough.
> 
> Percentage does not mean much for stability testing anyway, only time/hours matter. You need to give your memory and controller enough time to fail, a chance to detect that once in a million error. It can happen after seconds, but it may also take hours.
> 
> I saw HCI fail at well over 100% on my rig, this is *not* stable just because the number seems big, it just means that it took so long to catch a single error.
> 
> That being said, I did not mean HCI in my last post, but Karhu, which I found to catch errors faster than HCI. And I even let that run over-night to make sure. Because, again, it's about running time, not about percentage.


I've heard GSAT is the best/fastest tool for testing memory. Most people probably won't use it since some work is involved with creating the needed Linux USB stick. I'm happy with HCI but like you said, you gotta let it run a bit. Most people say 1200% is more than enough.


----------



## Sheyster

LordGurciullo said:


> I don't know about the best but the T - Force I got is great...
> https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820313712?Item=N82E16820313712
> cheap overclocked it to 4133


I've owned Team Group memory before. I would not hesitate to buy it again. It holds its own against anything from G.skill, at least in my experience with it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Sheyster said:


> I've heard GSAT is the best/fastest tool for testing memory. Most people probably won't use it since some work is involved with creating the needed Linux USB stick. I'm happy with HCI but like you said, you gotta let it run a bit. Most people say 1200% is more than enough.


Never used GSAT, but is sure is said to be good. Karhu lists the following:



> Q: How long should I test?
> 
> A: Error detection rates by test duration*:
> 
> Duration ≤ 1 min: 47,44 %
> Duration ≤ 5 min: 74,41 %
> Duration ≤ 10 min: 83,66 %
> Duration ≤ 30 min: 95,67 %
> Duration ≤ 60 min: 98,43 %
> 
> * RAM Test 1.1.0.0, stop on error
> Q: How much coverage is enough?
> 
> A: Error detection rates by test coverage*:
> 
> Coverage ≤ 100 %: 64,57 %
> Coverage ≤ 200 %: 75,79 %
> Coverage ≤ 400 %: 82,68 %
> Coverage ≤ 800 %: 91,34 %
> Coverage ≤ 1600 %: 96,06 %
> Coverage ≤ 3200 %: 98,03 %
> Coverage ≤ 6400 %: 99,41 %


98,43% is not that much and I had errors at over 15000%. So Karhu is good for quick testing (finds errors faster than HCI) and then when you settle on final settings leave it running at least over night.


----------



## BradleyW

Sheyster said:


> I've heard GSAT is the best/fastest tool for testing memory. Most people probably won't use it since some work is involved with creating the needed Linux USB stick. I'm happy with HCI but like you said, you gotta let it run a bit. Most people say 1200% is more than enough.


Easier to run GSAT via the Linux App for Windows (available through the MS store). Before downloading, turn Linux subsystem ON in Windows. Just search "Turn Windows features on or off" in the start menu to find the option.

Once enabled, and Linux is downloaded, run the Linux App and create a user and pass, then run the following commands in order:

sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get upgrade

sudo apt-get install stressapptest 

Once done, here is the command to run GSAT:
stressapptest -W -M 13000 -s 3600 --pause_delay 3700.

That will test 13GB RAM for 1 hour. 

Change the -M value in accordance to the amount of RAM you have.
Change the -s value to increase/decrease test duration.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BradleyW

What are you all running your DDR VVT and training voltages at?

My research shows conflicting results.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## cathammer

Hi all - thought I'd decloak and share some of my experiences with the Z390 Master & 9900KS overclocking, particularly with respect to dialing in the voltages.

First - a hearty thank you to Falkentyne, who provided enough detailed write-ups on voltages and LLCs that even I began to understand it, and that information proved to be the key to getting this CPU & VRM behavior where I wanted it to be. Seriously Falkentyne, I'm sure you're helping many, many more people than you realize.

Ok, so for some context, coming into this I set 4 goals for my overclock:

1. 9900KS 5.1 GHz all core
2. 0 AVX offset
3. 48x uncore
4. b-die 3600 RAM to 4000 with tight timings

That's it, really. Not trying to set world records, just wanted to find out if I could run stable 24x7 under these conditions while managing reasonable temps.

I started out by setting the Master's LLC to Turbo and setting a manual core voltage of 1.275, and kept testing with Cinebench, Realbench, OCCT and Intel Burn Test, etc. until I passed. I stayed away from Prime 95 and any other tools that generated 190-plus amp workloads, because honestly - I just don't care. I never see anything above 175 amps for any work or gaming I'd ever actually do on this rig, so 195 amps would just be a purely academic exercise for me, and testing already takes up too much time as it is.

In any event, I wound up at 1.335v BIOS voltage with Turbo LLC, while meeting my performance and stability goals, and I thought I was done. That is, until I started reading Falkentyne's discussions about LLC-driven voltage slopes. Hmmm... intriguing!

To avoid a huge write-up here, I'll just say that I've completely changed my way of thinking around voltages and LLCs. To me, Turbo LLC - despite it's popularity with Gigabyte board overclockers - is probably best used as a temporary discovery and testing tool, not a full-time set-it-and-forget-it motherboard configuration.

See the attached chart. The blue line is the do-not-exceed spec from Intel - 1.52v at 1.6 Ohm loadline. I know that I misunderstood this spec quite a bit in the past. Talking about 1.5v as a "max safe voltage" without mentioning LLC sloping is a dangerous shortcut that many take, and can lead to CPU degradation and premature failure. It's like defining a safe towing capacity without mentioning whether or not you might be driving up a mountain.

Take a look at my original 1.335v setup (yellow line). Surely, 1.335v is safely under the Intel spec, right? Nope, not after 155 amps it's probably not. And 155 amps isn't all that far fetched for a 9900k at 5.1 GHz - you can easily hit this load in Assassin's Creed Origins, for example. And stress-testing at that voltage/LLC combo is even worse.

I tried 1.365v at High LLC, and was pretty close. I passed all of the 150-plus amp stability tests, but when I'd see an AVX workload under moderate load, like say 120 amps, correctable WHEA errors would start to appear. So I knew I needed a little additional voltage in the middle section of this chart, and I eventually dialed in 1.410v at Medium LLC. This profile very slightly exceeds the Intel spec, but only at amps I never see.

And sure, it's higher voltage at idle and low-amp workloads, but at 125 amps it swaps places with my 1.335 Turbo profile and completely outperforms it. All voltages confirmed by HWInfo64 VOUT, and the gaming/testing temps are better under load. 

Thanks again to Falkentyne and others for helping me get this new rig performing the way I wanted it to, and although I didn't really go into it in this post, I'd be glad to provide more detail on the RAM timings & VCCIO/SA voltages.


----------



## Emmanuel

cathammer said:


> Hi all - thought I'd decloak and share some of my experiences with the Z390 Master & 9900KS overclocking, particularly with respect to dialing in the voltages.
> 
> First - a hearty thank you to Falkentyne, who provided enough detailed write-ups on voltages and LLCs that even I began to understand it, and that information proved to be the key to getting this CPU & VRM behavior where I wanted it to be. Seriously Falkentyne, I'm sure you're helping many, many more people than you realize.
> 
> Ok, so for some context, coming into this I set 4 goals for my overclock:
> 
> 1. 9900KS 5.1 GHz all core
> 2. 0 AVX offset
> 3. 48x uncore
> 4. b-die 3600 RAM to 4000 with tight timings
> 
> That's it, really. Not trying to set world records, just wanted to find out if I could run stable 24x7 under these conditions while managing reasonable temps.
> 
> I started out by setting the Master's LLC to Turbo and setting a manual core voltage of 1.275, and kept testing with Cinebench, Realbench, OCCT and Intel Burn Test, etc. until I passed. I stayed away from Prime 95 and any other tools that generated 190-plus amp workloads, because honestly - I just don't care. I never see anything above 175 amps for any work or gaming I'd ever actually do on this rig, so 195 amps would just be a purely academic exercise for me, and testing already takes up too much time as it is.
> 
> In any event, I wound up at 1.335v BIOS voltage with Turbo LLC, while meeting my performance and stability goals, and I thought I was done. That is, until I started reading Falkentyne's discussions about LLC-driven voltage slopes. Hmmm... intriguing!
> 
> To avoid a huge write-up here, I'll just say that I've completely changed my way of thinking around voltages and LLCs. To me, Turbo LLC - despite it's popularity with Gigabyte board overclockers - is probably best used as a temporary discovery and testing tool, not a full-time set-it-and-forget-it motherboard configuration.
> 
> See the attached chart. The blue line is the do-not-exceed spec from Intel - 1.52v at 1.6 Ohm loadline. I know that I misunderstood this spec quite a bit in the past. Talking about 1.5v as a "max safe voltage" without mentioning LLC sloping is a dangerous shortcut that many take, and can lead to CPU degradation and premature failure. It's like defining a safe towing capacity without mentioning whether or not you might be driving up a mountain.
> 
> Take a look at my original 1.335v setup (yellow line). Surely, 1.335v is safely under the Intel spec, right? Nope, not after 155 amps it's probably not. And 155 amps isn't all that far fetched for a 9900k at 5.1 GHz - you can easily hit this load in Assassin's Creed Origins, for example. And stress-testing at that voltage/LLC combo is even worse.
> 
> I tried 1.365v at High LLC, and was pretty close. I passed all of the 150-plus amp stability tests, but when I'd see an AVX workload under moderate load, like say 120 amps, correctable WHEA errors would start to appear. So I knew I needed a little additional voltage in the middle section of this chart, and I eventually dialed in 1.410v at Medium LLC. This profile very slightly exceeds the Intel spec, but only at amps I never see.
> 
> And sure, it's higher voltage at idle and low-amp workloads, but at 125 amps it swaps places with my 1.335 Turbo profile and completely outperforms it. All voltages confirmed by HWInfo64 VOUT, and the gaming/testing temps are better under load.
> 
> Thanks again to Falkentyne and others for helping me get this new rig performing the way I wanted it to, and although I didn't really go into it in this post, I'd be glad to provide more detail on the RAM timings & VCCIO/SA voltages.


Very nice, I plotted the same curves numerically in Excel! I also look at voltages from a different point of view now. For now I'm running my 9900KS stock and playing with the memory. I'd be interested to hear what you have to say about your RAM timings etc.


----------



## Falkentyne

cathammer said:


> Hi all - thought I'd decloak and share some of my experiences with the Z390 Master & 9900KS overclocking, particularly with respect to dialing in the voltages.
> 
> First - a hearty thank you to Falkentyne, who provided enough detailed write-ups on voltages and LLCs that even I began to understand it, and that information proved to be the key to getting this CPU & VRM behavior where I wanted it to be. Seriously Falkentyne, I'm sure you're helping many, many more people than you realize.
> 
> Ok, so for some context, coming into this I set 4 goals for my overclock:
> 
> 1. 9900KS 5.1 GHz all core
> 2. 0 AVX offset
> 3. 48x uncore
> 4. b-die 3600 RAM to 4000 with tight timings
> 
> That's it, really. Not trying to set world records, just wanted to find out if I could run stable 24x7 under these conditions while managing reasonable temps.
> 
> I started out by setting the Master's LLC to Turbo and setting a manual core voltage of 1.275, and kept testing with Cinebench, Realbench, OCCT and Intel Burn Test, etc. until I passed. I stayed away from Prime 95 and any other tools that generated 190-plus amp workloads, because honestly - I just don't care. I never see anything above 175 amps for any work or gaming I'd ever actually do on this rig, so 195 amps would just be a purely academic exercise for me, and testing already takes up too much time as it is.
> 
> In any event, I wound up at 1.335v BIOS voltage with Turbo LLC, while meeting my performance and stability goals, and I thought I was done. That is, until I started reading Falkentyne's discussions about LLC-driven voltage slopes. Hmmm... intriguing!
> 
> To avoid a huge write-up here, I'll just say that I've completely changed my way of thinking around voltages and LLCs. To me, Turbo LLC - despite it's popularity with Gigabyte board overclockers - is probably best used as a temporary discovery and testing tool, not a full-time set-it-and-forget-it motherboard configuration.
> 
> See the attached chart. The blue line is the do-not-exceed spec from Intel - 1.52v at 1.6 Ohm loadline. I know that I misunderstood this spec quite a bit in the past. Talking about 1.5v as a "max safe voltage" without mentioning LLC sloping is a dangerous shortcut that many take, and can lead to CPU degradation and premature failure. It's like defining a safe towing capacity without mentioning whether or not you might be driving up a mountain.
> 
> Take a look at my original 1.335v setup (yellow line). Surely, 1.335v is safely under the Intel spec, right? Nope, not after 155 amps it's probably not. And 155 amps isn't all that far fetched for a 9900k at 5.1 GHz - you can easily hit this load in Assassin's Creed Origins, for example. And stress-testing at that voltage/LLC combo is even worse.
> 
> I tried 1.365v at High LLC, and was pretty close. I passed all of the 150-plus amp stability tests, but when I'd see an AVX workload under moderate load, like say 120 amps, correctable WHEA errors would start to appear. So I knew I needed a little additional voltage in the middle section of this chart, and I eventually dialed in 1.410v at Medium LLC. This profile very slightly exceeds the Intel spec, but only at amps I never see.
> 
> And sure, it's higher voltage at idle and low-amp workloads, but at 125 amps it swaps places with my 1.335 Turbo profile and completely outperforms it. All voltages confirmed by HWInfo64 VOUT, and the gaming/testing temps are better under load.
> 
> Thanks again to Falkentyne and others for helping me get this new rig performing the way I wanted it to, and although I didn't really go into it in this post, I'd be glad to provide more detail on the RAM timings & VCCIO/SA voltages.


Don't forget to set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz.
You may find that the High setting that you said gave you WHEA's might suddenly start passing, if you want to re-test that. Assuming you didn't already do that.
Gigabyte has already confirmed there is a stability variance issue at Auto (400) and 500 khz VRM Switching frequency.


I really liked that analogy of towing capacity when forgetting you may be driving up a mountain (even though I don't have a car, it smacks me in the face as extremely logical and simple).


----------



## LordGurciullo

I'm going to try the 300khz thing tonight. In your previous post you mentioned for me to stay on high and go up to 1.375 volts for 5.0.
Do I leave internal ac/dc load line on turbo?

Should I try 1.41 med 5.1? 

Also - I haven't done a graph like this... I wonder if I'm safe long term myself... 

a little confused...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> is this good voltage draw under load for 5ghz all core in aida64 FPU only selected with avx enabled?


Looks normal. 

X264 stressor is a better stress test for axv enabled real word type load.


----------



## Sheyster

BradleyW said:


> Easier to run GSAT via the Linux App for Windows (available through the MS store). Before downloading, turn Linux subsystem ON in Windows. Just search "Turn Windows features on or off" in the start menu to find the option.
> 
> Once enabled, and Linux is downloaded, run the Linux App and create a user and pass, then run the following commands in order:
> 
> sudo apt-get update
> 
> sudo apt-get upgrade
> 
> sudo apt-get install stressapptest
> 
> Once done, here is the command to run GSAT:
> stressapptest -W -M 13000 -s 3600 --pause_delay 3700.
> 
> That will test 13GB RAM for 1 hour.
> 
> Change the -M value in accordance to the amount of RAM you have.
> Change the -s value to increase/decrease test duration.




I honestly think creating a bootable USB stick with Rufus is easier! There are several pre-made ISO's you can download and directly create the USB stick.


----------



## Falkentyne

LordGurciullo said:


> I'm going to try the 300khz thing tonight. In your previous post you mentioned for me to stay on high and go up to 1.375 volts for 5.0.
> Do I leave internal ac/dc load line on turbo?
> 
> Should I try 1.41 med 5.1?
> 
> Also - I haven't done a graph like this... I wonder if I'm safe long term myself...
> 
> a little confused...


AC/DC Loadline (Internal AC LoadLine or the manual internal VR Presets) are irrelevant on manual vcore except for VID reporting and CPU Package Power reporting.
AC Loadline only affects CPU voltage supply on Auto and Offset modes.


----------



## cathammer

Emmanuel said:


> I'd be interested to hear what you have to say about your RAM timings etc.


KIT:	32GB - G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZN
XMP:	3600 16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v
OVR:	4000 16-16-16-34 @ 1.45v

VCCIO:	1.20v
VCCSA:	1.23v
BCLK:	100.25

I'd have to guess that your G.Skill Royal 4266 kit is nicer than my 3600 Neo kit, but I'm pretty happy with where I wound up. This particular 32GB kit just lol'd at anything less than 1.4v for training at 4000MHz, so my resulting 1.45 was really just a combination of (a) me not wanting to test every single decimal between 1.4 and 1.5, and (b) adding a dollop of safety/stability margin. I could maybe reduce it a bit, but I can't really find a compelling reason to do so. 

And the odd BLCK is just a weird OCD tick of mine. I just really, really hate seeing my 5.1GHz overclock being reported as 5.09, so I nudge it. 

For secondary and tertiary timings, I followed the semi-famous and nicely done guide over at GitHub: https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4%20OC%20Guide.md

Didn't take long - I didn't feel like this was some random hunt in the dark for a working set of timings, but rather a pretty steady march forward until I called it good enough for me.

The only timing I'd like to adjust is the silly tREFI, but alas... the F10 BIOS bug.


----------



## cathammer

Falkentyne said:


> Don't forget to set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz.
> You may find that the High setting that you said gave you WHEA's might suddenly start passing, if you want to re-test that. Assuming you didn't already do that.
> Gigabyte has already confirmed there is a stability variance issue at Auto (400) and 500 khz VRM Switching frequency.


Nope, thanks (again) to you, I didn't miss that setting - I saw and was immediately convinced by your post. However, I definitely *did* miss an opportunity to add my contribution to the testing pool. I saw your discussion about the switching frequencies and made the change before I starting dialing in my voltages slopes, so all of the high/med LLC testing that was done was at 300Khz. The Turbo line in my graph was at Auto switching.

If I get time though, I'd like to go back and test again, finding a voltage/LLC combo where I can change nothing but the switching freq to produce a measurable difference. It would be interesting for me to see it, even if Gigabyte comes out and acknowledges/corrects the issue.


----------



## Falkentyne

cathammer said:


> Nope, thanks (again) to you, I didn't miss that setting - I saw and was immediately convinced by your post. However, I definitely *did* miss an opportunity to add my contribution to the testing pool. I saw your discussion about the switching frequencies and made the change before I starting dialing in my voltages slopes, so all of the high/med LLC testing that was done was at 300Khz. The Turbo line in my graph was at Auto switching.
> 
> If I get time though, I'd like to go back and test again, finding a voltage/LLC combo where I can change nothing but the switching freq to produce a measurable difference. It would be interesting for me to see it, even if Gigabyte comes out and acknowledges/corrects the issue.


Auto/Normal seem to both be 400 khz (I have no idea if MCE being enabled changes this setting or not).
Going from 400 to 300 khz seems to have more of an impact than going from 500 to 400 khz.

Gigabyte has already reproduced the issue in-house using LinX. They saw stable residuals at 300 khz and unstable residuals at 500 khz.
They just don't know why it's happening and I don't know if their BIOS team has the information yet or if anything will be done to retool the VRM.
It wasn't their BIOS department that did the testing.

It seems loosely (repeated testing without an oscilloscope at marginal voltages is very hard, long, boring and time consuming, since you can get different results every boot!) that higher LLC levels are improved more than lower LLC levels with this setting (which is rather logical if it's a problem with transient response or feedbacks, since stronger LLC levels have worse transient response). I used LinX 0.9.6, 35000 residual sample size testing to test residual stability, then confirmed that switching to 300 khz also lowers the voltage point where CPU Internal Parity errors happen in Apex Legends (and WHEA' L0's in Realbench 2.56).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

LordGurciullo said:


> I don't know about the best but the T - Force I got is great...
> https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820313712?Item=N82E16820313712
> cheap overclocked it to 4133



Thanks Lord Gurciullo! What timings you running? Are you on 2 or 4 sticks?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## cathammer

reachthesky said:


> So i did a thing. I traded 33mhz of cache clock for an extra 400mhz of base frequency by overclocking the bus clock to 111.11 with lower multipliers. It's a wannabe 9900KS.


Good trade in my opinion. :thumb: 

I set a cache overclocking goal of 48x, and ultimately achieved it, but along the way I had the uncore running anywhere from 43x to 48x. At no point did I actually ever notice a performance increase, even in benchmarks, nevermind FPS. Maaaaabye Cinebench, but the "improvement" was probably just within margin of error from run-to-run anyway.

If it had turned out that for some reason my KS wouldn't have been stable beyond 45x, it wouldn't have bothered me one bit.

Core clock, on the other hand... well, that's at least something you can at least reasonably imagine is making your life better, even if it probably isn't.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## cathammer

reachthesky said:


> I might go all the way up to 4.2ghz on the base core/cache/ram just for funsies. that reminds me, i could mix in the turbo per core OC with this LOL. It's like the full package overclock.


Dude, you've got the case of the cantleave****alones - lol, I live it so I know it when I see it. You may want to call the hotline and see if they can talk you down.


----------



## robertr1

Did some P95 small avx testing between the Pro and the Apex at 5ghz to see what the lowest vcore I could be stable with is.

The difference is around 30mv improvement on the apex with mem performance being relatively equal. I used an open window to control ambient temps however the temps were still about 7c cooler when I was testing the pro board. I can't control the weather!

Pro: 
vr vout: min: 1.174v Maximum: 1.192v Average: 1.181v

Asus:
vcore: mins: 1.146v Maximum: 1.154v Average: 1.151v


----------



## Lurifaks

Anyone have Samsung E-die 8x4gb kit on Aorus Master? 

I have this kit for testing: F4-3200C16Q-32GTZB (16-18-18-38)

Looking for some guide/examples/result to clock them


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

4133 17 17 17 34

I haven't tested anything else yet


----------



## LordGurciullo

So youre saying I can try again for 5.1? Or you're saying switching to 300 and upping voltage would be better long term ??


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

I am not sure about all those high memory overclocks listed here. I tried various overclocks higher than my current 3500-C15 and they all produced errors in Karhu runs (using TridentZ 3200-C14). No problem to bench, but long term stability (Karhu) was not there.


----------



## Timur Born

cathammer said:


> If it had turned out that for some reason my KS wouldn't have been stable beyond 45x, it wouldn't have bothered me one bit.


I am back to x43 (yet again) on my 9900K, stability just isn't there if tested via OCCT "Small Data Set". This test finds cache instabilities (much) faster than other tests I tried.


----------



## Wirerat

robertr1 said:


> Did some P95 small avx testing between the Pro and the Apex at 5ghz to see what the lowest vcore I could be stable with is.
> 
> The difference is around 30mv improvement on the apex with mem performance being relatively equal. I used an open window to control ambient temps however the temps were still about 7c cooler when I was testing the pro board. I can't control the weather!
> 
> Pro:
> vr vout: min: 1.174v Maximum: 1.192v Average: 1.181v
> 
> Asus:
> vcore: mins: 1.146v Maximum: 1.154v Average: 1.151v


Thanks for this. 30mv is possibly another 100mhz. For the price difference thats good to see.



Timur Born said:


> I am not sure about all those high memory overclocks listed here. I tried various overclocks higher than my current 3500-C15 and they all produced errors in Karhu runs (using TridentZ 3200-C14). No problem to bench, but long term stability (Karhu) was not there.


My kit is 4000mhz cl 19-19-19-39 1.35v XMP. I actually have it underclocked to 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 1.48v. 

Kits starting at 3200mhz cl14 are likely to have less consistent results at high frequency. That said I dont use Karu. I use hci to 800% then run p95 large fft. Then make sure all my games work. 

There are a lot of posts by @reachthesky where hes just turning knobs and running benchmarks. I dont think he was ever claiming some of those ram profiles are actually 100% stable.


----------



## cathammer

Timur Born said:


> I am back to x43 (yet again) on my 9900K, stability just isn't there if tested via OCCT "Small Data Set". This test finds cache instabilities (much) faster than other tests I tried.


Yeah I hear you, but OCCT's Small Data Set test is another one of those 200 amp furnace sessions like P95 AVX. I could very well be unstable at those levels, but since they're so far removed from any of my real world workloads, I'm just not running them. No thanks.

I do run the 150-ish amp OCCT Large Data Set test, though, and it's been pretty helpful. Additional tests for me include the quick Cinebench R15/20 as a smoke test, followed by some Realbench, AIDA64, Intel Burn Test, Memtest and the occasional gaming benchmark. Maybe a Blender or Geekbench run if I feel like mixing things up. 

Also, the Intel XTU benchmark has been another pretty reliable and fast way to check whether I'm in the ballpark of stability.


----------



## Wirerat

cathammer said:


> Yeah I hear you, but OCCT's Small Data Set test is another one of those 200 amp furnace sessions like P95 AVX. I could very well be unstable at those levels, but since they're so far removed from any of my real world workloads, I'm just not running them. No thanks.
> 
> I do run the 150-ish amp OCCT Large Data Set test, though, and it's been pretty helpful. Additional tests for me include the quick Cinebench R15/20 as a smoke test, followed by some Realbench, AIDA64, Intel Burn Test, Memtest and the occasional gaming benchmark. Maybe a Blender or Geekbench run if I feel like mixing things up.
> 
> Also, the Intel XTU benchmark has been another pretty reliable and fast way to check whether I'm in the ballpark of stability.


I like x264 stressor. It finds core and cache instability fast in my experience.


----------



## cathammer

Wirerat said:


> I like x264 stressor. It finds core and cache instability fast in my experience.


Is that the same x264 stability test (version 2.something) that launches from a batch file? If so, I've run that a few times as well. Can't remember whether it helped me find any errors, but that probably has more to do with the fact that I probably just ran other tests first.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> My kit is 4000mhz cl 19-19-19-39 1.35v XMP. I actually have it underclocked to 3800mhz 15-15-15-32 1.48v.


3800-C15 is dramatically tighter than 4000-C19, though, so it's not exactly an "underclock".


----------



## robertr1

Wirerat said:


> Thanks for this. 30mv is possibly another 100mhz. For the price difference thats good to see.


Yes it's good for another 100mhz and unlike offset the voltage is more stable and doesn't spike around. 

Importantly on the memory side it shines. I have a meh bdie bin of 18-19-19/4000 1.35v which was limited to 15/3600 2T on the pro.

On the Apex that kit is doing 17-18-18/4200 1T which everything tight. Good for 7k on read/write/copy and 5.5ns of latency. 

3600 C15 kits do about 16-16-16/4400 2T tight for daily with safe voltages. That's latency in the 34's!


----------



## Intrud3r

Lurifaks said:


> Anyone have Samsung E-die 8x4gb kit on Aorus Master?
> 
> I have this kit for testing: F4-3200C16Q-32GTZB (16-18-18-38)
> 
> Looking for some guide/examples/result to clock them


Just a quick note, I have about the same DIMMs ... 3200 C16-18-18-38 XMP

Got them running at 4000 C16-22-22-40-520-31200 @ 1.480V

Good luck.

P.S. My chips are Hynix AFR/CFR die's.


----------



## Timur Born

cathammer said:


> Yeah I hear you, but OCCT's Small Data Set test is another one of those 200 amp furnace sessions like P95 AVX. I could very well be unstable at those levels, but since they're so far removed from any of my real world workloads, I'm just not running them. No thanks.


I does find cache instabilities within minutes, though, so it does not stress for too long.

That being said, *welcome to my real world*: This is Topaz Gigapixel AI upscaling an image at Wirerat's CPU settings (5.0 Ghz, Power Saver, Low, +0.08 V). It's not even running the CPU load at 100% (80% ave), likely because it is bottle-necked by memory bandwidth (or just badly implemented multi-threading).


----------



## Lurifaks

Intrud3r said:


> Just a quick note, I have about the same DIMMs ... 3200 C16-18-18-38 XMP
> 
> Got them running at 4000 C16-22-22-40-520-31200 @ 1.480V
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> P.S. My chips are Hynix AFR/CFR die's.


Thanks for your note!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Oh yeah i'm definitely not claiming that ALL of these ram timings are stable because they aren't. I've been doing a lot of fooling around with the higher frequencies to see what kind of room the master has. 4200/4266 seems to be the ceiling for stability, and that's pretty much at base xmp timings. My cl15 4000 timings are stable. I like to do a lot of experimentation and share things here, don't mind me


Much appreciated, at least from my point of view


----------



## Sheyster

cathammer said:


> Also, the Intel XTU benchmark has been another pretty reliable and fast way to check whether I'm in the ballpark of stability.


Intel XTU *Benchmark* (not the stress test) is a very good initial check for CPU OC stability. I've used it a lot in the past. 10 runs of the benchmark (takes maybe 10 minutes) followed by 2 hours of RealBench is a good sign that you'll be 100% gaming stable.

For extra memory testing beyond HCI 800%-1200% I suggest Prime95 (AVX turned off) range of 800-800 with the "run in-place" box checked off.


----------



## Emmanuel

cathammer said:


> KIT:	32GB - G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZN
> XMP:	3600 16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v
> OVR:	4000 16-16-16-34 @ 1.45v
> 
> VCCIO:	1.20v
> VCCSA:	1.23v
> BCLK:	100.25
> 
> I'd have to guess that your G.Skill Royal 4266 kit is nicer than my 3600 Neo kit, but I'm pretty happy with where I wound up. This particular 32GB kit just lol'd at anything less than 1.4v for training at 4000MHz, so my resulting 1.45 was really just a combination of (a) me not wanting to test every single decimal between 1.4 and 1.5, and (b) adding a dollop of safety/stability margin. I could maybe reduce it a bit, but I can't really find a compelling reason to do so.
> 
> And the odd BLCK is just a weird OCD tick of mine. I just really, really hate seeing my 5.1GHz overclock being reported as 5.09, so I nudge it.
> 
> For secondary and tertiary timings, I followed the semi-famous and nicely done guide over at GitHub: https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4%20OC%20Guide.md
> 
> Didn't take long - I didn't feel like this was some random hunt in the dark for a working set of timings, but rather a pretty steady march forward until I called it good enough for me.
> 
> The only timing I'd like to adjust is the silly tREFI, but alas... the F10 BIOS bug.


My memory kit seems to be ok, what really seems to shine is my new 9900KS IMC. I used to require 1.35v System Agent (previous 9900K) to run my RAM at 4000MHz 16-16-16-36. I did some short testing at 1.050v System Agent and I couldn't get an error. However, I raised it to 1.150v as a safety buffer considering it's still a really low voltage.

As for the BIOS, I recommend you try the modded F11C posted a couple dozen pages back. It seems to be working great!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> hey i just want to make sure, if i'm overclocking the BLCK, Am I supposed to always enable BLCK adaptive voltage?


I don't know for sure, but I would if not using a static vcore.


----------



## cathammer

Timur Born said:


> I does find cache instabilities within minutes, though, so it does not stress for too long.
> 
> That being said, *welcome to my real world*: This is Topaz Gigapixel AI upscaling an image at Wirerat's CPU settings (5.0 Ghz, Power Saver, Low, +0.08 V). It's not even running the CPU load at 100% (80% ave), likely because it is bottle-necked by memory bandwidth (or just badly implemented multi-threading).


Crikey! Lol - my real world doesn't usually require much more than Visio, Word and an occasional VM. If I had to, I could probably get by on a dual core. Any overclocking I do is totally unnecessary, but I enjoy doing it.

Welp, I'll just grab a bag of popcorn then and watch you battle that 200a dragon. Good luck! :medieval:


----------



## Timur Born

No dragon, I just demonstrated that realworld can also get spicey, not just benchmarks and stress tests. Every 100 MHz on all cores increases wattage by 15 - 20 watts *without* Vcore increases, that's about 10% for a 2% performance increase. So I decided to notch it back down, using only 48 on all cores and pushing lower core number usage a bit higher.

Unfortunately the Aorus Master suffers very badly from VRM noise, which doesn't make per core clocks so much fun. It also happens in other situations, though, so noise dampening is a good thing, but it also increases temperatures. My system is tuned for silence for daily usage and only allowed to get louder when performance in mandatory.

As you saw I do need all the performance I can get sometimes, for work and gaming. But I also do need full stability, which is more important than performance for my usage cases. This also is the reason why I don't consider any memory overclock stable that does not work at least half 6 to 8 hours.


----------



## reflex75

Emmanuel said:


> My memory kit seems to be ok, what really seems to shine is my new 9900KS IMC. I used to require 1.35v System Agent (previous 9900K) to run my RAM at 4000MHz 16-16-16-36. I did some short testing at 1.050v System Agent and I couldn't get an error. However, I raised it to 1.150v as a safety buffer considering it's still a really low voltage.


I have undervolted mine at VCCIO 0.90v and SA 0.95v!
I have tested with Aida64 stress test and no errors after 37 minutes.
The same duration with MemTest and no error yet.
My Ram is Samsung B-Die 3200 CL14 but double side 2x16Gb (32Gb) with tightest secondary timings.
IMC on the 9900ks is crazy efficient!


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> 3800-C15 is dramatically tighter than 4000-C19, though, so it's not exactly an "underclock". /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif


Reduced frequency with optimized timings - semantics. 

What dram voltage did you try when hitting the wall at 3500mhz?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reflex75

reflex75 said:


> I have undervolted mine at VCCIO 0.90v and SA 0.95v!
> I have tested with Aida64 stress test and no errors after 37 minutes.
> The same duration with MemTest and no error yet.
> My Ram is Samsung B-Die 3200 CL14 but double side 2x16Gb (32Gb) with tightest secondary timings.
> IMC on the 9900ks is crazy efficient!


Even Run Prime95 29.8 (AVX/AVX2 off) 112K in place fixed FFT, and not a single error after one hour with VCCIO 0.90v and SA 0.95v!
The CPU is at 5.1Ghz all cores (no avx offset) load voltage 1.20v and 4.8Ghz for the Ring.


----------



## reflex75

reachthesky said:


> Can someone please tell me what the idle 9900KS 4.0ghz base clock idle voltage is?


About 0.70v


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reflex75 said:


> I have undervolted mine at VCCIO 0.90v and SA 0.95v!
> I have tested with Aida64 stress test and no errors after 37 minutes.
> The same duration with MemTest and no error yet.
> My Ram is Samsung B-Die 3200 CL14 but double side 2x16Gb (32Gb) with tightest secondary timings.
> IMC on the 9900ks is crazy efficient!


Merci! That's great to know. Unfortunately I'm more than halfway into my 40H RAM stability testing so I think I'll just keep my SA at 1.15v and VCCIO at 1.10v 
I already determined that in order to push my memory faster, what I need is to increase the RAM voltage but I don't want to go beyond 1.50v in the BIOS (1.488v in reality).


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> hmmmm. I wonder how much higher the minimum requirement would be for that base clock for a non-KS. I assume I'd have to disable turbo to stress test the baseclock at 4g and 4.2g?


Yep, but why would you bother with that?


----------



## wholeeo

So with all this memory overclocking talk the last few pages I've decided to mess with mine a bit though I know it's probably useless since I have 4x16GB modules (J-Die). However, I was wondering if anyone could give me some tips to squeeze some extra performance out of these things.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Because a base clock of 4g or 4.2g is faster than the base clock of 3.6g. I also think using a higher baseclock would be more responsive for browsing than idling at 800mhz


There is a simple toggle in windows for this. Use the power profile. 

Performance mode.

Using eist, cstates and intel speeds shift with an offset and this can be toggled anytime in windows to disable the frequency drop. 

Easier than dialing in a turbo boost style oc. 

But I know your just "turning knobs" again. lol. Eventually there will be no setting untested by @reachthesky. 🙂 

You have turned the bios of a 9900k + 2080ti rig into a fidget spinner. 🙂 I joke. I like seeing these results.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> What dram voltage did you try when hitting the wall at 3500mhz?


Between 1.4 - 1.45 V BIOS, with VCCSA and VCCIO up to 1.25 V. At 3500-C15 I am currently down to 1.36 V BIOS, which reads as 1.38 V in HWinfo. Stock VCCSA 1.05 V and VCCIO 0.95 V failed, 1.1 on both succeeds. So I will try to find some in-between values for those.

Memory overclocking is limited by my silent case build and current air-flow, as memory temperatures reach 55°C during prolonged Karhu runs. I will get a different case and combine it with different air-flow in the future, that may help. On the other hand I will also add two more dimms for a total of 4x 8 GB, which may not help.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky

You should invest in a kill-a-watt if really want to see power usage at the wall where it actually matters. 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B000RGF29Q/ref=dp_ob_neva_mobile

I have one. I think you will be shocked to see how small the difference is between the idle power usage at fixed frequency performance mode vs power save. 

Its less than 10w difference. I just checked mine at locked 5ghz vs power save.

I also threw in photo with real bench running. 1080ti + 9900k at 100% for whopping 470w.. 

Wait what? Over size our power supplys much. Lol.


----------



## Timur Born

Measuring at the wall also reveals how VOUT reports nonsense during idle when Speedshift is enabled.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I'm not just worried about power draw. It's high idle voltage 24.7 that is a problem. This came directly from the mouths of intel engineers. THey specifically stated that the people who set 24/7 static voltage overclocks are the people who will usually get degradation the fastest or are usually at the most risk.
> 
> I actually thought about getting a multimeter(i think that's what it is called?) so I can read the voltage on the back of the socket?


The one thing I don't like is how Intel never mentioned loadline calibration or what LLC they use or recommend. Or if they all use spec loadline only + c-states. Or maybe that's under NDA.

The intel spec sheets mention the VRM loadline for a reason (2.1 mOhm on Core 2 Quad up to Sandy Bridge all the way up to 8th generation quad cores (any quad core actually) then 1.6 mOhm for 8 cores.

I mean they're even nice enough to tell you exactly what loadline is.
Decrease in volts (mv) per amp.
They don't even tell you that anymore. They just slap a mOhm level and say "HAVE AT THEE."


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> I'm not just worried about power draw. It's high idle voltage 24.7 that is a problem. This came directly from the mouths of intel engineers. THey specifically stated that the people who set 24/7 static voltage overclocks are the people who will usually get degradation the fastest or are usually at the most risk.
> 
> 
> I actually thought about getting a multimeter(i think that's what it is called?) so I can read the voltage on the back of the socket? or is the device you are showing me also capable of doing that?


You leave your gaming rig on 27/7? No sleep state?

I wake mine. Play games. Sleep again or shutdown. The 24/7 quote does not apply.

You need a fluke multi meter for checking socket voltage. 

My device shows power usage at the wall plus averages. Peak use ect.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> I don't use sleep mode, had issues with it in the past. I usually shut my pc off usually when i'm done with it for the day and I turn the power supply off immediately after shutdown though sometimes I forget to shutdown at all or forget to switch power plans.


Damn, Sleep with wake on lan is great. I can wake my machine up remotely and start downloads ect. away from home.



Timur Born said:


> Measuring at the wall also reveals how VOUT reports nonsense during idle when Speedshift is enabled.


My kill a watt shows less wattage usage constantly at balanced/power save profiles. Its just not a big delta at 10w.

I suppose that would add up if it was actually on 24/7.

My previous intel rigs with asus mobos showed very similar results. Haswell idle'd a bit lower at both power settings though being 4/8.


----------



## BradleyW

Interesting. My RAM kit (4000MHz) is stable with less VCCIO/SA voltage when the internal load line is set to power saving mode. LLC is also reduced from Turbo to Low and IA AC/DC are at default values. Vcore is set via offset.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> @reachthesky
> 
> You should invest in a kill-a-watt if really want to see power usage at the wall where it actually matters.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B000RGF29Q/ref=dp_ob_neva_mobile
> 
> I have one. I think you will be shocked to see how small the difference is between the idle power usage at fixed frequency performance mode vs power save.
> 
> Its less than 10w difference. I just checked mine at locked 5ghz vs power save.
> 
> I also threw in photo with real bench running. 1080ti + 9900k at 100% for whopping 470w..
> 
> Wait what? Over size our power supplys much. Lol.



Why does power at the wall matter? POUT is relevant to overclocking. Just sayin, I have a kilowatt but haven't used it for a long time.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Why does power at the wall matter? POUT is relevant to overclocking. Just sayin, I have a kilowatt but haven't used it for a long time.


I was making a point that if you use the rig then sleep or shutdown each day it doesnt matter if it idles down. 

But @reachthesky wasnt trying to save power. He is configuring based on that quote by the intel overclocker engineers.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I'm not just worried about power draw. It's high idle voltage 24.7 that is a problem. This came directly from the mouths of intel engineers. THey specifically stated that the people who set 24/7 static voltage overclocks are the people who will usually get degradation the fastest or are usually at the most risk.
> 
> 
> I actually thought about getting a multimeter(i think that's what it is called?) so I can read the voltage on the back of the socket? or is the device you are showing me also capable of doing that?


It's current and heat that degrades processors over time through electromigration. You can have a high voltage as long as your current and temperatures are not high without accelerating degradation. There are however, mechanisms that can that can result in damage from high voltage, but the voltages are fairly high for that.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> Sort of. I just want to get an exact idea how far they push their own personal chips. Not just "we are ok around 1.4v" because that could mean so many different things ya know? 1.4v under full load? or 1.4v manual voltage set in bios/1.4v before-vdroop? what llc are they using? which style of oc? what clockspeeds are they pushing? what about the ram frequency and sa/io levels? etc etc. I assume they are on adaptive or dvid style voltage since they mentioned it in the article.
> 
> The article just leaves everything so open to interpretation ya know?
> 
> The current overclocks i'm working on are just so I can see exactly how many different areas of performance I can improve through manual tweaking. Like, I want to make "the full package" overclock that my set up can handle for daily use. I want to pound every last megahert out of the chip.


To me that arcticle was just marketing BS. 

They didnt give us anything solid based on intel engineering data. 

I thought you were doing all that 5.4ghz stuff just for fun and benchmarking. 

Just dial in a 5ghz/5.1ghz OC fixed or offset for the 24/7 profile. 


You do not have to reinvent wheel just because an article went up with some dribbles of information. 

You would never notice the difference in games.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Reinventing the wheel! Something I don't want to do either. 

Falkentyne why do I drop to 300khz and switch to 1.375 for my 5giga oc? 
Reach the sky do you still think I would benefit from trying your Ram OC settings (about ten pages back)? You said you were getting 180 fps min in superposition? I'm geting 170... at 720p...

Can i Try for 5.1 with 1.375 ?

I leave my comp on 90 percent of the time. I want a stable game playing machine with absolute maximum fps for 1080 (competitive gaming)
but I want safe long term voltages (safe - 4 years).

Thoughts?


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> To me that arcticle was just marketing BS.
> 
> They didnt give us anything solid based on intel engineering data.
> 
> I thought you were doing all that 5.4ghz stuff just for fun and benchmarking.
> 
> Just dial in a 5ghz/5.1ghz OC fixed or offset for the 24/7 profile.
> 
> 
> You do not have to reinvent wheel just because an article went up with some dribbles of information.
> 
> You would never notice the difference in games.


The article was lacking a lot in technical comprehension by the authors. i wouldn't read too much into it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

LordGurciullo said:


> Reinventing the wheel! Something I don't want to do either.
> 
> Falkentyne why do I drop to 300khz and switch to 1.375 for my 5giga oc?
> Reach the sky do you still think I would benefit from trying your Ram OC settings (about ten pages back)? You said you were getting 180 fps min in superposition? I'm geting 170... at 720p...
> 
> Can i Try for 5.1 with 1.375 ?
> 
> I leave my comp on 90 percent of the time. I want a stable game playing machine with absolute maximum fps for 1080 (competitive gaming)
> but I want safe long term voltages (safe - 4 years).
> 
> Thoughts?


400 and 500 khz cause instability and require higher load voltages (10-25mv) depending on your LLC. It seems like at turbo LLC, going from 400 to 300 khz is a bigger improvement than 500 to 400 khz. I can't be bothered testing every LLC but Turbo seems to be affected more than High LLC, but high is also improved. @GeneO what LLC did you test this with?

Even Standard/Normal is improved slightly. Using Ultra Extreme with 500 khz is asking for a BSOD the instant you touch prime95 for more than a few minutes of running it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> 5.3ghz ht off definitely makes a difference in gaming compared to 5ghz ht on. I'm playing on a 1080p 240hz monitor so I need those frames. But 1.39v ;(.
> 
> the 5.1-5.4 was real oc, the 5.4 ht off was a bench. I think i'm gonna dial in 5.25ghz ht off at like 1.35v or 1.37v load voltage or just see how much I can get for 1.35v under load or something.
> 
> I know i don't have to reinvent the wheel, this is fun /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif.
> 
> I think I might top off this 4200K with some turbo per core, it feels like the right thing to do /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif


I also play at 240hz. 

I keep my 1% and .01% lows visable on the msi afterburner graph on my side monitor. Tuning ram and cache improves these the most. 

The only game I play that stays above 240hz is Overwatch. A lot of other games get capped at 144-180fps to help with aim since it cant stay over 240 anyway. 

You have to decide if running the cpu at the ragged edge of safe voltage is worth it or not.



reachthesky said:


> AY someone was talking about wirerats settings not getting full powerdraw or 100% load during h264 encoding in realbench. How does one improve that?


I missed that comment. Not an issue for me. I am on the pro not the master though.

x264 needs to be configured correctly. It has to be set to 32 threads for 100% load during the test. 16 threads will run at 85% often.


----------



## Grizzly111

I'd love to see a list of all the optimum settings for a stable 5.0Ghz overclock with max powersaving on this board. Like should Voltage Optimization be off or on? Or MCE etc?


----------



## Wirerat

Grizzly111 said:


> I'd love to see a list of all the optimum settings for a stable 5.0Ghz overclock with max powersaving on this board. Like should Voltage Optimization be off or on? Or MCE etc?


https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

Thats the guide I followed. 

I dont know if it is the absolute most efficient but its close. 

I assume dialing in advanced VR and using auto voltage could save a couple more watts at the wall. But it takes a lot longer to dial in. 

For the Aorus pro that guide simply gives the tightest voltage regulation at vrvout. It doesnt have the high spikes at idle.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> hmmmmmm man I really like 5.3 lol. I still want more. maybe like 5.35 or 5.335 depending on whatever another 50mv will buy me lol.
> 
> Ahh ok gotcha. Is realbench good enough in addition to aida64?


X264 is better for the cpu testing imo.

What realbench is good at as loading up the gpu and cpu at the same time. It doesnt throttle the gpu like runing furmark in the background with another cpu test.

Aida64 can do this too but its not as stressful. 

Loading both cpu and gpu to 100% is purely synthetic. It's very rarely ever gonna happen.

But this will find any potential heat related issues. Real bench is the only test that can get my water temp to 39c.


----------



## LordGurciullo

So you're saying 5.1 might be possible with 300khz? 
Keep it on high and go to 1.375 and try 5.1 with 300khz? 

Also... 5.3 without hyperthreading is better for games? "TechDeals" on youtube said hyperthreading is great for games.....


----------



## LordGurciullo

Heres mine. Yours is much more impressive. These are my ram timings... on 5.0 oc... Please explain


----------



## LordGurciullo

Should I try yours?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

I'm a little lost... I wasn't talking about messing with Bus Clock... 
I just meant 5.1 all cores HT on instead of 5.0 if I change to 300khz..
Currently on 500khz and 1.35 LLC HIGH 5.0 all cores HT ON

But I'm also confused as to how you're getting much better fps with your setup?


----------



## Falkentyne

LordGurciullo said:


> I'm a little lost... I wasn't talking about messing with Bus Clock...
> I just meant 5.1 all cores HT on instead of 5.0 if I change to 300khz..
> Currently on 500khz and 1.35 LLC HIGH 5.0 all cores HT ON
> 
> But I'm also confused as to how you're getting much better fps with your setup?


Why are you so afraid to use 300 khz? And you keep asking "should i?"
Just *do* it, man.

I already TOLD you that Gigabyte CONFIRMED there is a stability issue with 400 khz (Auto/Normal) and 500 khz.
They verified it with LinX testing.

I have verified stability improvement in Apex Legends and LinX at 300 khz on High and Turbo LLC.
Turbo LLC seems to be improved more than high. Seems like the more vdroop there is (lower LLC levels), the less the improvement.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

@reachthesky regarding your high idle voltage just check the minimum cpu state in your windows power plans, when i have been playing with my ram timings and had a fail to boot this would change from 5% to 100% had it happen a few times just something to check


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Driller au said:


> @reachthesky regarding your high idle voltage just check the minimum cpu state in your windows power plans, when i have been playing with my ram timings and had a fail to boot this would change from 5% to 100% had it happen a few times just something to check


Seems to happen a lot, randomly, with me too.


----------



## Grizzly111

Wirerat said:


> https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> Thats the guide I followed.
> 
> I dont know if it is the absolute most efficient but its close.
> 
> I assume dialing in advanced VR and using auto voltage could save a couple more watts at the wall. But it takes a lot longer to dial in.
> 
> For the Aorus pro that guide simply gives the tightest voltage regulation at vrvout. It doesnt have the high spikes at idle.



I have managed to get 5.0Ghz @ 1.21V (according to VR VRout reading doing Cinebench15) using Power Save + LLC @ Low. Also the 300Khz switch rate. So basically +0.04v offset


Cache is +100Hz too. But core temps are peaking at 90oC during Cinebench15.


----------



## Grizzly111

5.0Ghz/4.4cache @ 1.2v with some very average Hynix CJR memory running at 3466Mhz.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

Grizzly111 said:


> 5.0Ghz/4.4cache @ 1.2v with some very average Hynix CJR memory running at 3466Mhz.












My Hynix CJR 3200mhz @ 3600mhz,I enable xmp and everything after tREFI is on auto ,enable enhanced performance, DDR voltage 1.400 training Voltage 1.410 and VCCIO and SA at 1.200 to trian after i can drop VCCIO back down

If i change anything i cannot boot so best i can do. I have trained and booted at 3800mhz using the M/B settings but lose performance over these settings


----------



## Wirerat

Grizzly111 said:


> I have managed to get 5.0Ghz @ 1.21V (according to VR VRout reading doing Cinebench15) using Power Save + LLC @ Low. Also the 300Khz switch rate. So basically +0.04v offset
> 
> 
> Cache is +100Hz too. But core temps are peaking at 90oC during Cinebench15.


Thats getting warm. Thats just up to your cooler. Cinebench is not a very good stress test. 

Can you run a stress test like x264 stressor for 10 loops or so?

https://mega.nz/#!ywAFDQQQ!hEQCeRXDKpHoeRYEaspux3ZA9Smx6tp8h0leb7ZHdJo

Settings for x264 stressor are:

Name : 5ghz 

Threads : 32 

Loops : 10

Priorty : low

Be sure to choose 32 threads so it stays at 100% load each loop. 

I like low priority so hwinfo64 doesnt hang. It doesn't affect the load. 

After you can pass 10 loops do a longer overnight run at 25 loops.


----------



## DerGrizzly

Heya!

Aorus Pro Wifi and 9700k here.

I have dialed in a stable overclock to 5 GHz (1.31 VCore in BIOS, LLC Turbo, shows ~1.3V VCore and ~1.240V VR VOUT in HWiNFO64 during Prime95 Small FFTs without AVX).

My question is: How do I go about setting something like an adaptive voltage, instead of the fixed voltage I've used thus far to dial in the overclock (i.e.: letting the voltage drop at idle and ramp up to the stable voltage at load)?

I have searched and read quite a bit, but can't find a conclusive answer on how to do this. I have used ASUS boards before, using the adaptive voltage mode instead of manual.

I understand I need to set VCore to "Normal" in the BIOS and figure out the DVID Offset. However, if I do that and put a say -0.1V Offset (as at +0.00V it will go way beyond 1.4/1.5V/1.6V), I will bluescreen and crash at idle or even upon booting into Windows.

Setting the IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline values to 1 (instead of 0 by default with fixed voltage, LLC still on Turbo) seems to solve this problem, requiring me to input a DVID Offset of +0.1V / +0.110V to reach my stable voltage at load.

Is that all there is to it and is it safe? I'm sure such has been asked before, but I read so much conflicting information on this and have no idea what impact it has.

I'd very much appreciate if someone could simply tell me how to go from a fixed voltage to an adaptive one or, if such exists, link an explanation.

Thank you all in advance, there's already a lot of useful information to be found here!


----------



## Timur Born

If you want to save power during idle then keep C1E enabled. It's the single most relevant power-saving setting.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## DerGrizzly

Timur Born said:


> If you want to save power during idle then keep C1E enabled. It's the single most relevant power-saving setting.



I am aware, but isn't it possible to use an adaptive voltage? I have done so on Z97 without any issues and would simply prefer it that way over a fixed voltage.


----------



## Wirerat

DerGrizzly said:


> I am aware, but isn't it possible to use an adaptive voltage? I have done so on Z97 without any issues and would simply prefer it that way over a fixed voltage.


This guide. 

https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

I shared my settings futher up the page.


----------



## Grizzly111

Wirerat said:


> Thats getting warm. Thats just up to your cooler. Cinebench is not a very good stress test.
> 
> Can you run a stress test like x264 stressor for 10 loops or so?
> 
> https://mega.nz/#!ywAFDQQQ!hEQCeRXDKpHoeRYEaspux3ZA9Smx6tp8h0leb7ZHdJo
> 
> Settings for x264 stressor are:
> 
> Name : 5ghz
> 
> Threads : 32
> 
> Loops : 10
> 
> Priorty : low
> 
> Be sure to choose 32 threads so it stays at 100% load each loop.
> 
> I like low priority so hwinfo64 doesnt hang. It doesn't affect the load.
> 
> After you can pass 10 loops do a longer overnight run at 25 loops.



All done and passed @ 1.14V VRvout - I'm happy!


Time to make a decision on some RAM:


Should I go for 4x matched sticks of 8Gb Gskill 3600 16-16-16



or 2x sets of 2x8Gb Gskill 4000 17-17-17?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> Get 4x matched sticks of gskill. Always get matching sticks when possible. If you wait a little longer, you can get a hold of their 4x8gb cl15 4000 kit coming out soon.



Wow, thanks for the info. I expect that they will be popular (and overpriced!). I know that matched sticks would overclock better. But for an extra $100 I can get superior b-die (i am assuming).


----------



## LordGurciullo

Alright Guys @Falkentyne @reachthesky

I went to 300khz, I'm now stable at 1.325 volts for 5.0 GHZ
TEMPS WENT DOWN 4 Degrees on 300khz.
I did all the timings you suggested before which now look like this.
This was my best run however I had a lot of inconsistencies.
Min fps on 6 runs was 
167.93
167.72
181.84
179.19
171.38
173.64
Weird no?
My VC is 1.19 and SA is 1.23 Ram is 1.46

Also - I tried 5.1 and it didn't work. I went up to 1.385 and it drooped 1.27 and still didn't pass luxmark on real bench and temps were at 95.

1. Should I give up on 5.1 or try 1.39 volts?
2. What do i set TRC TCCD_S and TCCD_L ?
3. Why the inconsistencies ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Johaho

For now i stay at 3900Mhz. Seems to be the Limit where the Board trains reasonable Io-Ls. I believe the Io-L Offset(hidden) is fixed at 21 in Bios. Thats why it trains those high Io-Ls at 4000 and above.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Johaho

Here you go


----------



## Timur Born

DerGrizzly said:


> I am aware, but isn't it possible to use an adaptive voltage? I have done so on Z97 without any issues and would simply prefer it that way over a fixed voltage.


Absolutely and personally I do use adaptive voltage. But using C1E and/or using a lower minimum CPU frequency (Windows power plan) will net you more power-saving over prolonged idle periods than just using adaptive voltage.

And with adaptive voltage things become a bit more complicated, because not only may your overclock be susceptible to voltage changes, but you also have to make sure voltages are stable all the way from maximum CPU clock to minimum CPU clock (if you a minimum below 100%). Additionally voltages change depending on temperature (BIOS F10 allows to change that), which adds another variable.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> mind showing aida64 benchmark? Your 1% lows are fantastic.


Superposition lists the "FPS Min", it does not say "1% lows" there. This is a big difference and I would just ignore the Min listing in SP.

Furthermore I doubt that SP is the proper benchmark to use for all the different CPU + RAM overclocks here, because it is affected by too many variable. At 720p it seems to prefer low (processing) latencies and fast cache access over memory bandwidth. So much so that even enabling core parking can improve results, likely because it keeps cache content coherent. Windows tends to throw single threads all over the place (move between CPU cores), every time a thread moves to a different core it needs to fill the corresponding L1/L2 caches again.


----------



## Johaho

I agree with you. Superposition is useful to valitate Gpu Oc. But not for such things


----------



## DerGrizzly

Timur Born said:


> Absolutely and personally I do use adaptive voltage. But using C1E and/or using a lower minimum CPU frequency (Windows power plan) will net you more power-saving over prolonged idle periods than just using adaptive voltage.
> 
> And with adaptive voltage things become a bit more complicated, because not only may your overclock be susceptible to voltage changes, but you also have to make sure voltages are stable all the way from maximum CPU clock to minimum CPU clock (if you a minimum below 100%). Additionally voltages change depending on temperature (BIOS F10 allows to change that), which adds another variable.


Sorry, I think I've not expressed myself quite clearly. I already use all those (C-States, Balanced power plan, EIST, Speedstep, what have you...). I'm also aware that a fixed voltage is the "easier" route to go, making things less complicated to get properly stable, but, like you, I like having things dialed in with adaptive voltage, even if it means I'll be tweaking for a long while still. 

So far, the hint about lowering LLC has helped a great deal though! Indeed, it was the LLC setting at Turbo (which works perfectly for fixed voltage) that completely overshot on adaptive. Lowering it to the "Low" setting and applying a ~ -0.02V offset did the trick for me so far (getting virtually the same VCore and VR VOUT voltages as I did with fixed voltage, while also allowing voltage to drop in idle down to ~0.68V). I shall test further to see if this is stable or not under all circumstances. 

Thank you nonetheless and thanks also for the LLC hint!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Johaho

The 1 are only Placeholder. These Timings are not in Use with single-Rank modules.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> What is core parking?


A power profile setting that tells Windows to keep a percentage of cores unused when possible. With 100% core parking and only a single regular load thread Windows will keep said thread to cores 1-2 out of 16 (logical cores of a 9900K), the other cores are allowed to go to (deep) sleep. With 50% core parking it will keep said thread on cores 1-8, but the single thread will keep bouncing around different cores. At 0% core parking (default) said thread will bounce around all 16 logical cores. More aggressive core parking settings can lead to multiple threads being shared on single CPU cores even when other cores are free.

The advantage of bouncing around even a single thread is that load/temperature is switched/shared between different cores. The disadvantages are that L1/L2 caches have to be refilled and that the CPU's default dynamic per core clocks are somewhat hindered from reaching higher clock-rates (for lower thread load). This may have a more dramatic effect on Ryzen CPUs with their cores being spread between different CCX.

Superposition seems to like core parking, likely because its few threads are kept on certain cores with their cache content intact. Fixing its CPU affinity should lead to the same results then, but I did not check that (yet).

Here is a comparison of my 50/50/50/49/49/48/48/48 CPU using x43 uncore and 3500-C15 memory. Lower score is no core parking, higher score is core parking 50% (core parking 100% lost about 1k points again).

What this all means is *not* that you should be using core parking, but that you should not be using Superposition to compare various CPU + memory overclocks around here.


----------



## Timur Born

And here is a run at fixed x50 all-core, same 3500-C15 memory, 50% core parking, all C-states disabled. I think I used x47 uncore for this run, even though I named it x43 in the file-name.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Short answer: No, don't bother.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

You can use Superposition all day to compare your own settings, just don't expect your results to be comparable to other people memory overclocking results.
@Grizzly111 posted the same scores at loose 3466-C15 that you posted at loose 4200-C18. My last score was only 1.5% lower at tight 3500-C15. What does that tell us about memory overclocking in regard to Superposition 720p? Not much.

Turning half the CPU cores *off* results in a bigger SP score difference than any of the three very different memory settings. So is SP suitable to compare memory OCs in this thread? I don't think so, but no one has to agree with that assessment.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Padinn

I'm trying out the modded F11C bios. I seem to get notably higher CPU temperatures than Kedars F10B mod from a few months back at the same settings. My X264 stress test is running at around 100c compared to around 94c previously. Going to double check my settings to make sure they are a match, but my VR Vout voltage is about the same so I think so. One of my cores (4) is breaking 100c with it.

*EDIT* One change is I did switch to 300Khz. Going to try lowering voltage now since apparently I can do that (I use offset mode) and see if I can remain stable.


----------



## Emmanuel

Just a little update with my new 9900KS.

I've been testing my RAM at 4133MHz 16-16-16-36 and tight subtimings. The PC fails to post/boot when using stock VCCIO and VCCSA. For now, everything seems ok at 1.1v VCCIO and 1.15v VCCSA, we'll see if this holds up until HCI Memtest reaches 1600%.

Quick question: I know the general rule of keeping the VCCIO and VCCSA within about 0.05v of each other, but does the VCCIO actually have anything to do with RAM stability? For me, the VCCIO is mainly the cache voltage and VCCSA the IMC voltage. Is the 0.05v recommendation simply intended for keeping the voltage differential tight within the CPU?


----------



## Sheyster

reachthesky said:


> SP720p is comparable to see how your cpu is handling the bottleneck. This is EXCLUSIVELY tuning for gaming. Again you offer no solutions, just nonsense. "it utilizes a normal cpu feature, you shouldn't use that!". How about you get back to the drawing board and beat my superposition score with a 9900K or 9900KS or 9900KF and then show me how you did it, that is if your intentions are to actually help.
> 
> And of course they were going to beat that score, it was a BASIC MOTHERBOARD AUTO XMP TIMING for a frequency my sticks aren't rated to clock to. None of the timings were optimal. What does superposition tell us here? It tells us that a tuned cl15 3466 performs the same or a little better as basic cl18 4200 in gaming. Superposition shows us this.
> 
> But yeah, either beat my high score, give actual solutions or just piss off. I won't respect you unless you can beat me .


I see your point here @reachthesky. The problem is every now and then we see this toxic side of you. You can get your point across in a nicer way. JMHO, take it or leave it.


----------



## robertr1

Timespy CPU test scales with both mem and core and it's a lot faster to run.


----------



## Padinn

Padinn said:


> I'm trying out the modded F11C bios. I seem to get notably higher CPU temperatures than Kedars F10B mod from a few months back at the same settings. My X264 stress test is running at around 100c compared to around 94c previously. Going to double check my settings to make sure they are a match, but my VR Vout voltage is about the same so I think so. One of my cores (4) is breaking 100c with it.
> 
> *EDIT* One change is I did switch to 300Khz. Going to try lowering voltage now since apparently I can do that (I use offset mode) and see if I can remain stable.


Yeah it doesn't seem like I can get Falk's modded F11 bios stable with my old settings using DVID Offset mode and low llc. My temperatures are hitting 100c almost instantly in x264 blend test (32 threads) and I use power limits (190w) - looks like those are being hitting pretty readily (verified with my killawatt). Temperatures seem on average 5-7c hotter than F10B Bios that KedarWolf posted some months ago, which seems very high to me, I think I've got everything matched exactly though. If anyone has any additional ideas I'm open to them.

*EDIT*** FIXED The error. For some reason, even though my h150i was set to extreme mode, my pump was only at 1200 RPM. Fixed that (back up to 2800rpm) and my temperatures instantly dropped to 92c. Sorry for the scare. Testing again now, but this should work.

EDIT 2* - Yup, everything is good. Woot!


----------



## cathammer

Grizzly111 said:


> Should I go for 4x matched sticks of 8Gb Gskill 3600 16-16-16
> 
> or 2x sets of 2x8Gb Gskill 4000 17-17-17?


For what it may be worth, I'm running a G.Skill 4x8Gb 3600 16-16-16 kit (Trident Z Neo) in my 9900KS rig: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/326/1562839388/F4-3600C16Q-32GTZN-Overview. 

So far, it's been really nice to work with, and is running 4000 16-16-16 at 1.45v with pretty tight subtimings no problem.


----------



## warbucks

cathammer said:


> For what it may be worth, I'm running a G.Skill 4x8Gb 3600 16-16-16 kit (Trident Z Neo) in my 9900KS rig: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/326/1562839388/F4-3600C16Q-32GTZN-Overview.
> 
> So far, it's been really nice to work with, and is running 4000 16-16-16 at 1.45v with pretty tight subtimings no problem.


What's your VCCSA, VCCIO and VCore?


----------



## Grizzly111

cathammer said:


> For what it may be worth, I'm running a G.Skill 4x8Gb 3600 16-16-16 kit (Trident Z Neo) in my 9900KS rig: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/326/1562839388/F4-3600C16Q-32GTZN-Overview.
> 
> So far, it's been really nice to work with, and is running 4000 16-16-16 at 1.45v with pretty tight subtimings no problem.



Terrific, thanks Cathammer! Can I ask if you have tried to push it beyond 4000Mhz yet? Also, what sort of temps do the DIMMS get to at that voltage?


----------



## cathammer

warbucks said:


> What's your VCCSA, VCCIO and VCore?


VCCSA: 1.25
VCCIO: 1.22

my VCORE setup at the moment is for a 5.0Ghz 0AVX profile with uncore at 4.8, and is 1.340v at High LLC. 

I've also had these same RAM timings in my 5.1Ghz 0AVX profile, which is 1.410v at Medium LLC.


----------



## Wirerat

Grizzly111 said:


> Terrific, thanks Cathammer! Can I ask if you have tried to push it beyond 4000Mhz yet? Also, what sort of temps do the DIMMS get to at that voltage?


 hes only running 1.45. B-die is safe at 1.5v for 24/7 use.


----------



## cathammer

Grizzly111 said:


> Terrific, thanks Cathammer! Can I ask if you have tried to push it beyond 4000Mhz yet? Also, what sort of temps do the DIMMS get to at that voltage?


I haven't tried beyond 4000 yet, but I have tried 15-15-15, which posts & tests fine, but requires around 1.57v or so, and I'd rather keep these under 1.5v for daily use in the interest of lifespan.

For your temp question, it occurred to me that I actually didn't have a good answer for you, so I took them out for a spin and watched hwinfo (screenshot). 

Seems pretty chilly to me - but keep in mind that I have low ambient in this room, and 9 fans inside my O11 Dynamic case (6 intake, 3 exhaust).


----------



## LordGurciullo

Did not set TRC. I had it prior at 41. What should I set it to?

Also. 1.41 llc medium works for 5.1??

I've tried up to 1.39 high and it still crashed... and temps were at 97 in real bench... 
I'd like to try for a 5.1 stable but is that safe... That voltage curve thing someone posted a while back comes into play then I think.


----------



## Grizzly111

cathammer said:


> I haven't tried beyond 4000 yet, but I have tried 15-15-15, which posts & tests fine, but requires around 1.57v or so, and I'd rather keep these under 1.5v for daily use in the interest of lifespan.
> 
> For your temp question, it occurred to me that I actually didn't have a good answer for you, so I took them out for a spin and watched hwinfo (screenshot).
> 
> Seems pretty chilly to me - but keep in mind that I have low ambient in this room, and 9 fans inside my O11 Dynamic case (6 intake, 3 exhaust).


Wow, I have the same case - O11 Dynamic and fan setup! However my current Aorus 4x8gb DIMMS get to 50oC+ at 1.38v when testing! I'd like to get a kit that I can push to 4000Mhz with 1.45V max at maybe CL16 on this board so these looks like they could work well.


----------



## cathammer

LordGurciullo said:


> Did not set TRC. I had it prior at 41. What should I set it to?
> 
> Also. 1.41 llc medium works for 5.1??
> 
> I've tried up to 1.39 high and it still crashed... and temps were at 97 in real bench...
> I'd like to try for a 5.1 stable but is that safe... That voltage curve thing someone posted a while back comes into play then I think.


1.41 Medium LLC works for my particular 9900KS at 5.1 0AVX. However, a couple of things to keep in mind:

1. I bought this chip from Silicon Lottery, so they'd already binned it at 5.1 (although with an AVX offset of 2). So I'm playing with a loaded deck, so to speak.

2. My chip has been delidded and has liquid metal between the die and IHS, and a 360mm AIO cooler sitting on top of it, and so temps may be easier for me to keep under control during stress testing.

I plotted my 1.41 Medium LLC curve against your 1.39 High LLC curve so you could see it. To be fair, neither yours nor mine fall within the Intel spec, but your 1.39 High profile runs past it 20 amps sooner (at around 165a).

YMMV, and good luck!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting. My RAM kit (4000MHz) is stable with less VCCIO/SA voltage when the internal load line is set to power saving mode. LLC is also reduced from Turbo to Low and IA AC/DC are at default values. Vcore is set via offset.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you run a memtest to be sure?
Click to expand...

GSAT overnight.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> But yeah, either beat my high score, give actual solutions or just piss off. I won't respect you unless you can beat me .


Quite a strong and somewhat rude reaction to me basically telling the thread that posting Superposition results from different systems may not be the best way of comparison memory overclocking results.

The following four results were all done using the very same hardware settings of 5 Ghz core, 4.7 Ghz uncore, 3500-C15. I did not touch those settings in between runs. Instead Superposition was affected by other variables of my Windows system that affect all users around here to varying and often uncontrollable degrees (core affinity, process priority, background processes). Someone asked why minimum fps vary so wildly, here is your answer!

As you can see the impact of those soft variables can be bigger than the impact of changing hardware settings (like memory OC). So I stand to my assessment that SP may be useful on your specific system, but not so much for comparison of CPU/memory bottlenecks between different systems of different users.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

You can use Superposition successfully all day long and it even makes sense on your own system. But don't expect it to be all too useful for comparison with other users.

Nope, I can reproduce these results within a much smaller margin of error (and I did). This is the result of soft (Windows) variables changing, they produce this margin and they are active to varying degrees on different users' system.

Even if these were "normal" margin of errors (which they are not), that would be a 6.2% margin of error then. How is software with such a high margin of error useful when we are talking about less than 5% gains from various overclocks to begin with? 6% is the difference between 4.7 and 5.0 GHz core clock.

The margin is too large, that's what I am trying to convey. SP is of too little use for comparison between different users.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

Is superposition 720p alone the best way for measuring ram and cache performance? 

No. Not at all..

Aida64 is should be used while making the small ram tweaks to the ensure it is gaining bandwidth and reducing latency.

Superposition 720p is good to get an idea how the gained ram performance can affect gaming in those cpu bottlenecked scenarios.

Aida64 and Superposition 720p are both are heavily affected by background processes. So a fresh reboot helps with consistancy. 

I think both are useful tools to help optimize performance.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

All of these benchmark tools lack options to automatically set CPU affinity to non hyperthreading cores, to set CPU priority to high, realtime or MMCSS and to disable various Windows services that may or may not be active during a benchmark run. They also should offer an automated way to run several loops and then average the result (some may offer this in their paid version).

Anyway, here are 5 consecutive runs of Aida64 on a controlled system. Read and latency margin is around 0.5%, Write about 1.2% and Copy about 1.6% (both because of single outliers). That being out of the way: Yes, I do think that using Aida for comparison of different users' system is of limited use unless several runs are averaged out or the users have good control over their system. Background processes and the software's lack of proper automation gets in the way of better comparable results.

That does not mean that you should not use these programs for your own benchmarks and tests. But be aware that throwing around screenshots of single runs for comparison with other users is of limited use (as in not very reliable).


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> No one is saying it is the best way for measuring ram and cache performance. But it's one of the best ways to test your cpu for gaming outside of regular stability tests. That guy just rubs me the wrong way. It's like he is trying to take away something that is delivering me success and isn't even replacing it with a better alternative. Like what are his true intentions here? gotta wonder /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif.


Dont worry about it. You have have to option to not reply to it. 

I do my best to never argue on these forums. Its pointless. 

The only time I would come of as "you better change your method" is if I see someone unknowingly about to damage thier components via too much voltage. 

We are all just sharing information here. If Someone enjoys a certain benchmark its not hurting anything at all. Definitely not worth getting bent outta shape over.

@Timur Born

Also different versions of aida64 are not compareble directly to others. I am on a slightly older version becuase its the full paid version that I loose if I update.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

So what you are saying is that Aida64 only "5%-7%" margin of errors on write and copy, but not on read and latency? I gave you screenshots of read and latency and reported write and copy (without providing screenshots). I did what you asked me to do and provided data, it took time and effort and all I get in return is a snarky remark.

Anyway, 5-7% margin of error is quite much, it's about the difference between 38 ns and 41 ns latency. I guess in the end a screenshot of the best or average result out of many measurements is the most comparable number.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> I have no problem with changing my method if people show me a better alternative and show me why the alternative is better.


I never told you to change your method, instead I underlined the limitations of said method for comparison with other users. It was you who started a childish game about "Beat my score" right after I tried to convey that this score is mostly relevant for yourself rather than others.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Wirerat said:


> Also different versions of aida64 are not compareble directly to others. I am on a slightly older version becuase its the full paid version that I loose if I update.


Indeed, it's underlined by the software with every test-run. But if one user measures with a margin of error around 1% and another user measures with a margin of 5-7% then these results are even less comparable. And with overclocking performance changes mostly being within 5% such a large margin becomes quite a problem when results are shared.

When one user reports 37k for Superposition and another user reports 35k, is the former user's system really faster? Mostly we don't really know. So thanks for sharing your results, but everyone is advised to take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> We have to have the full picture, we don't know the deal with your bandwidth. You are providing only half the information.


No, I provided you with the calculated margin of errors. Of course you are free to not believe my results unless I spam the thread with even more screenshots. But demonstrating that read and latency are within 0.5% instead of your claimed 5-7% should provide enough proof that Aida64 can very well operate within a smaller margin of error if the user's control/system allows it to. The thing is, most users don't have that kind of control over their systems, so why ask anyone to compare their results to your own?!



> Gee, do you think you'd get snark from me if we didn't have that exchange earlier? I'm still waiting for you to suggest a better alternative for testing cpu bottlenecking during gaming. All you've given me is "you are doing it wrong" but fail to provide a better solution.


Again, I did not tell you to use an alternative, I told you that comparing results posted on this thread is of limited use. You should also consider that not everyone is using English as a native around here, so maybe don't expect everyone to write in a style that suits you.

If anything I would suggest you try to wrestle better control over your system to get lesser margin of errors. I can get less than 1% on consecutive runs of SP by disabling various background services/processes, setting CPU affinity to non hyperthreading cores and optionally increase CPU priority of the benchmarking.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Erm, no, I don't care about the top of the list. I only care about having to wait less for my system to finish tasks. What was your "top" result again? That is immature. 

My "better solution" is to gain better control over your Windows system before using benchmark tools. 5-7% margin of error is not good enough to measure less than 6% hardware performance changes. You can save time by not having to do so many runs to average out the larger margin.

I still would not expect results of different forum members being fully comparable. Too many uncontrolled variables are active on most peoples' systems.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> https://benchmark.unigine.com/leaderboards/superposition/1.x/720p-low/single-gpu/page-1
> 
> 3rd place. I don't think its immature, i'm sorry you feel that way. Again, if you think there is a better alternative for testing and measuring the cpu for gaming exclusively, please I am all ears, This is the only thing I have to go by. I tune specifically towards gaming, it's what I use my machine for. Show me a better test where i'm able to measure the results and be able to tune based off what i'm seeing.



Wow! Nice score....Aorus Master representing!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

So this was entirely a waste of time.
Worthless without a dongle. Welp fun for a waste of 5 minutes.

Well...

https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/infineon-technologies/USB005/USB005-ND/5244633

Does this connect on the motherboard or something else?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Hmmm... And is this something we should be worrying about during gaming? If I go for 5.1 on 1.41 medium its still putting that much voltage at idle right? 

I'm starting to think I should leave well enough alone and just play damn games with my comp. 

also TRC value? 41?? Thats what I had it at before.. thoughts?


----------



## cathammer

LordGurciullo said:


> Hmmm... And is this something we should be worrying about during gaming? If I go for 5.1 on 1.41 medium its still putting that much voltage at idle right?
> 
> I'm starting to think I should leave well enough alone and just play damn games with my comp.
> 
> also TRC value? 41?? Thats what I had it at before.. thoughts?


tRC follows tRAS and tRP, and I don't see a full timings screenshot so I can't say what your tRC should be. The formula to calculate it is tRC = tRP + tRAS + x, where *x* can be anything from 0 to about 12, depending on what your mobo/RAM can manage. This guide suggests starting with 8.

https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4%20OC%20Guide.md

The guide may seem intimidatingly long, but really you can just skip down towards the bottom searching for the heading: "*Tightening Timings*."

Once you get there, just follow *steps 1-5*. That'll guide you through setting your primary & secondary timings, and you can just skip dialing in the tertiary timings if you don't want to get too deep into this stuff. 

You can use AIDA64 benchmark to quickly confirm if you're moving in the right direction.


----------



## cathammer

LordGurciullo said:


> If I go for 5.1 on 1.41 medium its still putting that much voltage at idle right?


1.41v at Medium LLC is safely within the Intel spec for max safe voltage, right up until about 185 amps. It would idle (20-30 amps) right in the 1.37-1.39 range - totally fine. *However*, at amp loads of 190+, you'd be slightly exceeding the spec by around .005v.

Is that actually unsafe? Would it actually cause premature failure/degradation to go .005- .015v over spec at 200+ amps? 

I really doubt it, but I'm not an Intel engineer, and I have no idea how much safety margin might be built into their specifications.

I'll say this though: If you're going to play around with performance overclocking, you probably need to be a bit of a gambler, and be willing to accept that there are no guarantees of longevity (even without overclocking!). By pushing these chips to the limit you might be inviting the Storm Clouds of Doom. If that makes you uneasy, then don't do it. Seriously, these things perform pretty nicely at stock - just get back to having fun!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

I checked Superposition at high CPU, cache and memory settings. Turns out that my overclocked 2070 Super runs close to GPU bottlenecking then. At around 39.3k points I hit 97% GPU utilization. So this is something to keep an eye on if you don't own a TI equivalent GPU.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> I checked Superposition at high CPU, cache and memory settings. Turns out that my overclocked 2070 Super runs close to GPU bottlenecking then. At around 39.3k points I hit 97% GPU utilization. So this is something to keep an eye on if you don't own a TI equivalent GPU.


One 720p low? 

My 1080ti barely hits 65%. Thats crazy. I know a 2070 super can even beat a 1080ti in a lot of games.


----------



## Timur Born

I did my tests at 720p low, of course, this is why I hit over 39k points. But the maximum GPU utilization of an overclocked 2070 Super hit 97% maximum then. So if you won the silicon lottery with your CPU then watch out for possible GPU bottlenecking at 720P, that's all I am saying.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> I did my tests at 720p low, of course, this is why I hit over 39k points. But the maximum GPU utilization of an overclocked 2070 Super hit 97% maximum then. So if you won the silicon lottery with your CPU then watch out for possible GPU bottlenecking at 720P, that's all I am saying.


720p low at 39k points my 1080ti hits 72%. See for yourself. 

https://benchmark.unigine.com/results/rid_ad2919e12ff84c4babd03f3d06684ac6


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> 39.3k is good score! congrats.


2070s is faster in many new games than a 1080ti. 

The 1080ti has more bandwidth though. The unigine benchmarks have always loved gpu bandwidth.

The 780ti used to beat gtx 980's in valley.


----------



## cathammer

Timur Born said:


> I checked Superposition at high CPU, cache and memory settings. Turns out that my overclocked 2070 Super runs close to GPU bottlenecking then. At around 39.3k points I hit 97% GPU utilization. So this is something to keep an eye on if you don't own a TI equivalent GPU.


I'm currently running my 5.0/0avx/4.8 cache profile (still tweaking ram) so my score probably doesn't mean much, but since I have a similar GPU (mine's also an overclocked 2070 Super) I thought I'd do a 720p Superposition run for comparison.

Results say the max GPU utilization during the benchmark was 93%, but almost every time I looked at the value during the run it was in the 60's or 70's. 93% must have been a very momentary blip.


----------



## Timur Born

I also watched and going over 85% was not just a short blip, albeit only certain parts reliably produce higher GPU load (depending on CPU limitation). I could push for a slightly higher score, but this is all just benchmark stable, so it means nothing in practice.

You need to watch out for GPU bottlenecks once you reach this high CPU/memory OC territory. Most people don't push their systems that far anyway, but some may use slower GPUs and hit that roadblock earlier.


----------



## Wirerat

@reachthesky 

39k is still a top 10 score . The highest 2070 Super score on the leader board is 34k.

Definitely a good score @Timur Born


----------



## Timur Born

But it needed two runs, because the first run stopped with an error. So it really is just e-peen territory without any substance. My CPU is neither golden nor silber, no lottery win here and no real success to bench a borderline stable system.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> But it needed two runs, because the first run stopped with an error. So it really is just e-peen territory without any substance. My CPU is neither golden nor silber, no lottery win here and no real success to bench a borderline stable system.


The #1 score is very likely on DICE, Phase change or LN2 for the cpu. Not something thats normally ran for a 24/7 profile. 

It is not a very good stress test. I agree. 

Epeen or not. Whatever, It's just a fun benchmark.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

reachthesky said:


> so i finally managed to get cl16 4200 up. couldn't just train 4200 cl16 regularly. Had to train cl16 4133 and then bclk the rest of the way there.
> 
> is this worth pursuing? most tertiaries untouched.


I'd say no, unless you can bump up bclk to the point where you don't sacrifice core and cache speed.

Might aswell join in on the sp fun.


----------



## Wirerat

reachthesky said:


> #2 score is clocked @ 5.6ghz


Definitely exotic sub ambient cooling territory.

I dont think the performance gained beyond your 4000mhz cl 15 profile is worth the time invested. 

You are well past the point of diminishing returns already, chasing less than 1% performance gains. 

That said, if your just tuning for fun then go for it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Emmanuel

reachthesky said:


> ok I believe we have a contender for cl15/4000


That looks good. What voltage are you running through them?


----------



## Timur Born

Ok, let's clarify this. Superposition is clearly GPU bottlenecked on my overclocked 2070 Super. To be more specific the highs are GPU bottlenecked, while I suspect the lows to be memory bandwidth bottlenecked.

Here are five screenshots. The lowest score of 39.1k was done at x51 core, x47 uncore, 4000-C15.

The second lowest score of 40.3k was done at x52/x47. No increase in CPU or cache clocks would increase the score. I even tightened the memory settings further, but to no avail. This is where I hit the GPU bottleneck of my already OCed 2070 Super.

Only once I increased my GPU overclock could I get the next score of 40.7k, which was then done at x52/x48, same memory. Again, no increase in core or uncore would get me higher results.

The second highest score of 41.0 was done after another GPU increase, at x52/x49.

The highest score of 41.3k only was achieved by overclocking my GPU even further. It was then done at at x53/x49.

Some things worth mentioning:

- Since the scores did not increase without increasing GPU overclock I conclude that the lows are neither affected by GPU nor CPU clocks, else the score should have increased despite the highs not increasing. I suspect that memory bandwidth would affect the lows, but someone else has to check that with memory clocks higher than 4000(-C15).

- I did these benchmarks at +-0V Vcore offset and Medium LLC. The CPU was benchmark stable in SP, but not in Cinebench. Furthermore my CPU does not like x50 uncore at all, it quickly BSODs or even powers off the PC (at a maximum of 330 W on the wall, so the PSU is fine).

- There was at least one run where SP listed 97% GPU utilization in its results, but I am very sure that I saw 98% pop up during the benchmark run. I guess this is down to different rounding.

- Overclocking the GPU memory without overclocking the GPU did not seem to have any measurable impact.


----------



## Falkentyne

Timur Born said:


> Ok, let's clarify this. Superposition is clearly GPU bottlenecked on my overclocked 2070 Super. To be more specific the highs are GPU bottlenecked, while I suspect the lows to be memory bandwidth bottlenecked.
> 
> Here are five screenshots. The lowest score of 39.1k was done at x51 core, x47 uncore, 4000-C15.
> 
> The second lowest score of 40.3k was done at x52/x47 uncore. No increase in CPU or cache clocks would increase the score. I even tightened the memory settings further, but to no avail. This is where I hit the GPU bottleneck of my already OCed 2070 Super.
> 
> Only once I increased my GPU overclock could I get the next score of 40.7k, which was then done at x52/x48, same memory. Again, no increase in core or uncore would get me higher results.
> 
> The second highest score of 41.0 was done after another GPU increase, at x52/x49.
> 
> The highest score of 41.3k only was achieved by overclocking my GPU even further. It was then done at at x53/x49.
> 
> Some things worth mentioning:
> 
> - Since the scores did not increase without increasing GPU overclock I conclude that the lows are neither affected by GPU nor CPU clocks, else the score should have increased despite the highs not increasing. I suspect that memory bandwidth would affect the lows, but someone else has to check that with memory clocks higher than 4000(-C15).
> 
> - I did these benchmarks at +-0V Vcore offset and Medium LLC. The CPU was benchmark stable in SP, but not in Cinebench. Furthermore my CPU does not like x50 uncore at all, it quickly BSODs or even powers off the PC (at a maximum of 330 W on the wall, so the PSU is fine).
> 
> - There was at least one run where SP listed 97% GPU utilization in its results, but I am very sure that I saw 98% pop up during the benchmark run. I guess this is down to different rounding.
> 
> - Overclocking the GPU memory without overclocking the GPU did not seem to have any measurable impact.


I assume you mean cache when you said "Uncore", right?
Because uncore is the system agent (FCLK) or system agent voltage (VCCSA).
Ring is the cache. I am fully aware Asus called this uncore in one of their guides. AMI themselves calls the system agent "Uncore".
"technically" the entire uncore is the part of the CPU not on the cores themselves. The L1 and L2 caches are on the cores. The L3 cache is shared and off the cores. VCCIO controls the L3 cache voltage.

Anyway, you're having problems with x50 cache?
Try increasing VCCVTT (CPU Termination) to 1.2v-1.3v and see if that gets x50 to work.


----------



## Timur Born

Yes, I mean cache clocks. There is no need for me to try x50, I demonstrated that my setup is GPU bottlenecked and that I can reach a maximum of roughly 41000 points. Higher cache will do little without more GPU power, more memory bandwidth might or might not help.

By the way, CPU load is below 30% during SP runs, so it does not seem to be very multi-threaded. This also fits my earlier observation about the impact of core parking on my setup.

Anyway, I am not trying to get SP points, I was just analyzing it to get better insight into its limitations and interpretation of its results. I am now back to my stable x40-50 / x43 /3500-C15 settings. Once I get my new case, CPU cooler and two additional dimms I will see what changes can be made.

I could try to get more stable x45 - x47 to decrease memory latency by another 1 ns or so. Not sure if that's worth the time being spent, though.


----------



## Timur Born

Here is a demonstration how "soft" variables can affect Cinebench, comparing my system before and after turning off background processes and changing Cinebench' CPU priority. Both measurements were done using the same hardware setting of core x48 (when all cores are used), cache x43, 3500-C15. The difference is about 1.8%, which is good enough margin, albeit close to increasing CPU clock by 100 MHz.


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> Here is a demonstration how "soft" variables can affect Cinebench, comparing my system before and after turning off background processes and changing Cinebench' CPU priority. Both measurements were done using the same hardware setting of core x48 (when all cores are used), cache x43, 3500-C15. The difference is about 1.8%, which is good enough margin, albeit close to increasing CPU clock by 100 MHz.


Giving it real-time priority yields consistent results.


----------



## Wirerat

GeneO said:


> Timur Born said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a demonstration how "soft" variables can affect Cinebench, comparing my system before and after turning off background processes and changing Cinebench' CPU priority. Both measurements were done using the same hardware setting of core x48 (when all cores are used), cache x43, 3500-C15. The difference is about 1.8%, which is good enough margin, albeit close to increasing CPU clock by 100 MHz.
> 
> 
> 
> Giving it real-time priority yields consistent results.
Click to expand...

Always run cinebench in real time priorty. Scores are higher and more consistent. 

Just ignore the system hang and wait. 

The alternative that gives the same results minus the hang is booting into safe mode prior to the run.


----------



## Timur Born

I know, the higher score was done using realtime priority, as were my high scoring runs of Superposition.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> I know, the higher score was done using realtime priority, as were my high scoring runs of Superposition.


For superposition my scores were no different. My top score was done without touching priorty. 

It launches a 2nd exe when it starts. 

You have to start benchmark and tab out, change priorty and tab back in.

Without doing that you are just changing prioty of the launcher.


----------



## Timur Born

Again, I know, but thanks again. And priorities only matter if there other processes fight for it, so the results may differ on each system. I just posted a 41.3k SP result, so whatever I did, I did it right.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> Always run cinebench in real time priorty. Scores are higher and more consistent.
> 
> Just ignore the system hang and wait.
> 
> The alternative that gives the same results minus the hang is booting into safe mode prior to the run.


I think that is what I said 
Anyhow it is a lot easier and more consistent than disabling programs.

You can also elevate priority for Superposition, you just have the launcher launch the superposition.exe first, control out of it then set the priority of superpsoition.exe, then open the superposition downwind again. I haven't tried it with real-time, only high.


----------



## Timur Born

Which is what Wirerat just wrote in his last post. You folks around here really need to do more reading before writing.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> Again, I know, but thanks again. And priorities only matter if there other processes fight for it, so the results may differ on each system. I just posted a 41.3k SP result, so whatever I did, I did it right. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif


Not denying that. We all have different background processes running. 

I only have rgb fusion as an rgb client. 

Gamersnexus did a video showing how icue and other rgb clients combined have a significant impact. Just as an example.


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> Which is what Wirerat just wrote in his last post. You folks around here really need to do more reading before writing.


Oh I read it, was a lbit of tongue-in-cheek


----------



## memery.uag

*How are you all controling you fans?*

I want to eliminate all the toxic Gigabyte utilities (App Center and friends...) but would like to have some more control over my fans. I have always used SpeedFan in the past but haven't tried it yet on these newer boards. The Smart Fan 5 (BIOS version, F10) works great, but would be nicer to have more control in the OS. Any thoughts on the SpeedFan.exe vs. Gigabytes options?

Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi i9-9900k with Corsair Dominators 3200 8x4 16-18-18-36 @1.35V


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## warbucks

I decided to drop from 4000CL16 to 3900CL15. This allows me to keep the RTL/IO-L's tight because Gigabyte still hasn't fixed their bios to give us the ability to control these correctly.

Aida64/GSAT/ASrock attached. 

I'll keep tweaking to see how much more I can squeeze out of this.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> interesting, didn't know that about superpostion with realtime priority. thanks wirerat .


Try higher priority combined with disabled services and background processes. Then you should be able to beat my 41.3k result, especially since you are not GPU limited compared to my system and you can go x50 cache instead of x49.


----------



## Timur Born

warbucks said:


> I decided to drop from 4000CL16 to 3900CL15.


Yes, I also noticed that 4000-C15 used IO-L values of 13 instead of 6.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

memery.uag said:


> I want to eliminate all the toxic Gigabyte utilities (App Center and friends...) but would like to have some more control over my fans. I have always used SpeedFan in the past but haven't tried it yet on these newer boards. The Smart Fan 5 (BIOS version, F10) works great, but would be nicer to have more control in the OS. Any thoughts on the SpeedFan.exe vs. Gigabytes options?
> 
> Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi i9-9900k with Corsair Dominators 3200 8x4 16-18-18-36 @1.35V


You can set fan curves in the bios. You can still base the curve off of whichever sensor you want too. 

Its not as convenient as a in windows solution.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> What is your exact score?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/28267574-post6558.html


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Pay $20 to put a single number on a website? I can use that money to buy my kids some toys or comics instead.


----------



## Grizzly111

I've noticed something too in gaming...overclocking the GPU and CPU now does not make a difference to my FPS lows when playing Battlefield. I cap at 200fps solid. But if I cap at 220fps I do notice dips down to 200 etc no matter the CPU/Uncore or GPU speed.
Since I have a 9900KF + 2080ti @ 1080p the only bottleneck I can think of now is my rather average CJR RAM.

Lows are important when playing at 240Hz/high FPS as you want to maintain a solid FPS cap to ensure smoothness. I actually got a lot of gain when I overclocked my RAM from 3200 to 3466Mhz and tightening the timings. So despite what people say - RAM on Intel must make significant difference. 



Faster RAM, better timings = GOOD.


----------



## Wirerat

Timur Born said:


> Pay $20 to put a single number on a website? I can use that money to buy my kids some toys or comics instead. /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif


Not worth it.

I bought back when it was on steam greenlight for $5. I don't even think you can buy it through steam anymore at all though.


----------



## Timur Born

Does Battlefield offer an option to use more GPU memory? Some games and applications offer that option (Total War: Warhammer and Topaz AI). This means that your GPU memory is (pre)filled with textures instead of having to load them from mainboard memory just-in-time.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Well. I'm mightily confused again. Seriously...

Any help here? 
How are you guys getting such high Superpositions? 

Heres mine... my absolute best was 37000 - again - extreme fluctuations. Same exact everything... now its giving me this.
Cr20 is 5265 but super is 34771 (with a high of 37000) same exact settings.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> getting pretty good latency. I think I should just throw this in a memtest to see if it is stable and if it is i'll just call it a day.


Report back your voltages if it's stable (preferably overnight = 6-8 hours). This looks like you did not use BCLK this time, but 100 x 42?

My read speed at 4000-C15 was 60 gb/s and latencies down to about 38.x, so pretty close to your 4200-C16 measurement. Don't know about write and copy, though. And I disabled background service/processes and used realtime priority for Aida64 for consistent measurement.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

@LordGurciullo & Reachthesky - what RAM kits are you guys using - are you using a matched 4x8gb kit or 2 sets of 2x8gb?


----------



## Timur Born

LordGurciullo said:


> Heres mine... my absolute best was 37000 - again - extreme fluctuations. Same exact everything... now its giving me this.
> Cr20 is 5265 but super is 34771 (with a high of 37000) same exact settings.


Disable Hyperthreading or at least set CPU affinity of the benchmarking process to only use uneven cores (1/3/5/7/...). Do you use an all-clock OC on your CPU?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## EarlZ

I am looking at getting an Adata SX8200 1TB Pro NVME SSD and I have a dedicated GPU installed on the first 16x slot and a sound card at the very bottom slot. Which M.2 Slot should be used for optimal performance, this will become my new boot drive. I also have two SSD's conneted to SATA0 and 1 ports and 1 HDD on SATA2 i believe.


----------



## GeneO

memery.uag said:


> I want to eliminate all the toxic Gigabyte utilities (App Center and friends...) but would like to have some more control over my fans. I have always used SpeedFan in the past but haven't tried it yet on these newer boards. The Smart Fan 5 (BIOS version, F10) works great, but would be nicer to have more control in the OS. Any thoughts on the SpeedFan.exe vs. Gigabytes options?
> 
> Aorus Z390 Pro Wifi i9-9900k with Corsair Dominators 3200 8x4 16-18-18-36 @1.35V


I wish the same. I use the BIOS control because Gigabyte SIV wasn't reliable. There are times I wish I could turn fans full on though from Windows, like when benchmarking. Even though the BIOS gives you lots of control, iI wish it at least had the ability to save as a profile. I do miss the Asus windows fan control.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Alemancio

Any idea why LinX some times works great, and other times I get shutdowns? I did notice that I get power usage up to 210W.

9900KF @ 1.325v Bios (1.28v VROUT) 
F11c Bios.
Temps <95c (H150i Push-Pull)


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> i'm using this exact kit, it's a matched set of 4 sticks, they were pre tested to work together. I'd recommend using a matched kit whenever possible since they've been pretested/programmed to work together. QVL for the aorus master motherboard also shows success with higher frequencies with matched kits, though this kit is not on the motherboard qvl list, gskill did validate it on the aorus master motherboard themselves.
> 
> F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR
> Trident Z RGB
> DDR4-4000MHz CL17-17-17-37 1.35V
> 32GB (4x8GB)



That's basically one of the highest bins available I think. https://notkyon.moe/ram-latency.htm
Nice!


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> Any idea why LinX some times works great, and other times I get shutdowns? I did notice that I get power usage up to 210W.
> 
> 9900KF @ 1.325v Bios (1.28v VROUT)
> F11c Bios.
> Temps <95c (H150i Push-Pull)


Current protection limits need to be increased.


----------



## Alemancio

Falkentyne said:


> Current protection limits need to be increased.


They were already at 4090 Watts, 127seconds & 255 Amps in Bios, mhhh...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Alemancio

reachthesky said:


> can i stop the test?


I've had errors with HCI at 2000%. I rather test 500% with Karhu.


----------



## LordGurciullo

I'm using 2 8x2 kits. I got lucky I guess.
200 bucks total with tax


----------



## LordGurciullo

Yes I do all cores all the time. I've heard its the best for gaming as well... otherwise I woulda got a i7.

But why is my score one time 37000 then another 34000?
and are you saying that anyone over 37000 is not using hyper threading and going to 5.3??


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

EarlZ said:


> I am looking at getting an Adata SX8200 1TB Pro NVME SSD and I have a dedicated GPU installed on the first 16x slot and a sound card at the very bottom slot. Which M.2 Slot should be used for optimal performance, this will become my new boot drive. I also have two SSD's conneted to SATA0 and 1 ports and 1 HDD on SATA2 i believe.


This depends on whether you are using the bottom PCIe slot or not. If you are using it then use the M.2 slot above the GPU, else use the bottom M.2 slot.


----------



## Timur Born

Alemancio said:


> I've had errors with HCI at 2000%. I rather test 500% with Karhu.


It's a matter of time, not of percentage. Leave it running for hours and hours, at least overnight. I had error over 15000% with Karhu and over 1500% with HCI. Memory errors also depend on your dimms' temperature, mine reach up to 55°C, which is hot for memory, so I cannot overclock too high for 24/7.


----------



## Timur Born

Superposition does not like Hyperthreading. They should have automatically set CPU affinity to only use non hyperthreading cores. Windows process scheduler is to blame, too.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

It's literally written in detail in the post with the screenshots. One could say that the whole post was about hitting a GPU bottleneck, which is why I wrote down CPU, cache and memory speeds so meticulously.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

SP does not seem to list 1% lows, but only that *one* minimum frame-rate during the whole run. So ignore it. Your highs and especially average should be higher than mine.

Stop background services, try to set SP to realtime (hit alt-tab the moment you hit start).

Could be that my sub-timings were tighter as I used the same timings as for 3500-C15 except for TRDWR and TWRRD.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Don’t forget that my OC was only Superposition stable. In Cinebench it froze within 2 seconds. Furthermore I set all fans to 100%, with the GPU fans also keeping the mainboard memory cooler (GPU VRM heat).


----------



## robertr1

@reachthesky 3D Mark goes on sale often for $5. It's worth it. You skip the demo and can pick n choose which particular test you want to run. Like just the CPU test. There's even stress tests built in for GPU testing.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

LordGurciullo said:


> Yes I do all cores all the time. I've heard its the best for gaming as well... otherwise I woulda got a i7.
> 
> But why is my score one time 37000 then another 34000?
> and are you saying that anyone over 37000 is not using hyper threading and going to 5.3??


My best runs tend to be the first one right after a reboot. Though I've not encountered such score differences as you without clockspeed changes, I'd assume it's background apps.

Same ram settings during both runs. 1st is my daily 5.1 core, 4.8 cache and ht on. 2nd is 5.4 core, 5.0 cache and ht off. I've not really noticed a difference with ht on or off, the only reason I turn it off is so I can run less vcore.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

reachthesky said:


> Looking at your timings, doesn't the chipset correct itself if tWTR_L is lower than 8?


No idea, what would be the best way to see that? I thought the timing configurator shows the timings after a possible chipset correction...



reachthesky said:


> I don't get how people get higher scores when i'm clocked higher. what the **** is wrong with this hardware. stupid ******* bull**** 9900k R0 stepping chips i swear to god i hate intel for this ****.


I managed to squeeze out more points by changing to real time priority.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Any apps available that we can use to change timings in Windows on these boards?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Turn off anti-virus software (not so easy with Defender). Turn off the Windows Audio Endpoint service, this will run the benchmark without sound and said service can cause quite noticeable CPU load for no particular reason. Turn off indexing and updates. Make sure that you use the alt-tab method to change priority of the "Superposition" process, not the "Launcher" process.

Boot at lower CPU clock for memory training and Windows boot, then change multipliers from within Windows via Intel Extreme Tuning utility.

Tighten your tertiaries.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Did you not write earlier that 5-7% margin of error was normal and good enough for Superposition. His scores are less than 6% higher than yours, so all is good.

Use SP for your own system to compare different settings, don't use it to compare different systems. Maybe you two are even using different BIOS versions?! Anyway, SP is no precise enough tool for such things. That's were we began our discussion.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

Boards have differences. Traces, distance, pcb layers, topology type all matter for ram. You also need to make sure you're not regressing performance with any of your timings. If all your care about is scores, then do a bench os, uninstall or disable any W10 background processes and learn to tweak the benchmark itself with realtime and other tricks. 

If benchmarking is your goal, the hwbot set of benchmarks are tried and true and use with a very specific criteria.

SuperPosition that you're using isn't even heavily used so we don't know how relatable it as a benchmark tool. Regardless, once you're within a good working range, use the benchmark as a reference point for yourself to see if the changes you're making have a position impact.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Well, talk about being emotionally attached... Personally I knew that I was getting a board with a supposedly weaker memory section. My main grief is the VRM noise. But then, I limit Total War: Warhammer 2 to 30 fps to keep the noise down/nonpresent during gaming. So my goals are different.


----------



## asdkj1740

robertr1 said:


> Boards have differences. Traces, distance, pcb layers, topology type all matter for ram. You also need to make sure you're not regressing performance with any of your timings. If all your care about is scores, then do a bench os, uninstall or disable any W10 background processes and learn to tweak the benchmark itself with realtime and other tricks.
> 
> If benchmarking is your goal, the hwbot set of benchmarks are tried and true and use with a very specific criteria.
> 
> SuperPosition that you're using isn't even heavily used so we don't know how relatable it as a benchmark tool. Regardless, once you're within a good working range, use the benchmark as a reference point for yourself to see if the changes you're making have a position impact.


stability is my goad but after spending many hours i am still far from that.
the benchmarks are already way below than other t-topology mobo like m11e, i just want to be no errors at all, am i asking too much?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

My 3500-C15 memory settings run Karhu memtester errors free overnight (over 25000%) at up to 55°C memory temps. I had to increase DDR voltage to 1.37 V (BIOS) again, this worked. Currently I am using VCCA 1.0 V, VCCIO 1.05 V, have to test lower values next night.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

asdkj1740 said:


> stability is my goad but after spending many hours i am still far from that.
> the benchmarks are already way below than other t-topology mobo like m11e, i just want to be no errors at all, am i asking too much?


I'd start off with xmp and make sure that's stable. That's the first step I personally do. 

This guide is quite good for DDR4 training so read it a couple of times and take notes on how you want to go about it. https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md 

Then read some threads (like this) specific to your board and its quirks. Going back from GB Pro to Asus Apex was a learning curve in terms of bios changes and unique board quirks but the ram oc process was the same.

Make small changes and test in between. Takes time but it's possible, however frustrating it may seem at times.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

I'm very happy with my Apex. 

Also I was replying to the other guy on how can get his system towards stability.


----------



## Timur Born

3500-C15 does not suck at 55 degrees Celsius in a silent system and more demanding stability tests than most are willing to do. 

My two dimms train at 4400 XMP settings, but do not boot into Windows. I never expected this anyway with 3200-C14 dimms and mediocre overclocking skills.


----------



## Timur Born

Oh, disable Cam and Aorus Engine for a test. Especially the latter sounds like it could interfere when it comes down to the very last bit of a percent.


----------



## asdkj1740

robertr1 said:


> I'd start off with xmp and make sure that's stable. That's the first step I personally do.
> 
> This guide is quite good for DDR4 training so read it a couple of times and take notes on how you want to go about it. https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md
> 
> Then read some threads (like this) specific to your board and its quirks. Going back from GB Pro to Asus Apex was a learning curve in terms of bios changes and unique board quirks but the ram oc process was the same.
> 
> Make small changes and test in between. Takes time but it's possible, however frustrating it may seem at times.


i think what i / and few of us need is gigabyte r&d spending times on fine tuning our ddr4 kit.


----------



## robertr1

asdkj1740 said:


> i think what i / and few of us need is gigabyte r&d spending times on fine tuning our ddr4 kit.


On my pro I had 15-15-15/3600 2T dialed in on 2 sticks for 24/7 running. Can share those settings tonight if it helps? bdie ram.

I did post them here so a search for my name should bring them up in this thread.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Possible, it's noteworthy that GB's website only lists XMP up to 4200 and then lists 4400 extra on top of that.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

PR material on product website:










I assume they knew why they presented it that way.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

You should not need a GPU OC for 720p unless you are GPU bottlenecked with as I am with my 2070 Super (which you should not be). Bad luck with the fans, it's software that controls hardware, always a source of interference.

There are several "Gigabyte" services and processes, that may or may not play a part as well (I disabled/killed these). Also disable/kill all remote desktop and cloud processes. Be aware that some of these will restart if you just kill them via Task-Manager. Also be aware that Windows Search may restart once, so wait a minute and check again if you need to stop it again (twice should work then).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Timur Born said:


> You should not need a GPU OC for 720p unless you are GPU bottlenecked with as I am with my 2070 Super (which you should not be). Bad luck with the fans, it's software that controls hardware, always a source of interference.
> 
> There are several "Gigabyte" services and processes, that may or may not play a part as well (I disabled/killed these). Also disable/kill all remote desktop and cloud processes. Be aware that some of these will restart if you just kill them via Task-Manager. Also be aware that Windows Search may restart once, so wait a minute and check again if you need to stop it again (twice should work then).


Back when I was into benchmarking and scores I always did so with a separate clean install of Windows meant just for that.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Check through your "Running" services. Also use Resource Monitor's CPU tab to see which processes and services produce intermittent load.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I don't know why there is an xtu service. I don't even have xtu installed.


Did you ever have Asus AI suite at any time? It installs xtu to provide a benchmark. Perhaps other third party software does as well.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Both CAM processed create regular CPU load according to your screenshots, there's one thing to begin with. 

What can we say, it's your system, you need to have control over it if you are so hellbend on squeezing out the last 5% of a single benchmark result. Personally I don't even care for those points, I just tested for GPU bottlenecks and served my own curiosity for edge result cases.

- I wish those turn times in Total War were shorter, but the last update sped them up so many-fold that it is clearly a question of software optimizations and not so much of throwing hardware/money at the problem.

- Same thing with everything JPG/TIF/PDF related, these all run as single threads, often badly optimized. All the cores in the world wouldn't help with that.

- Topaz AI software offers GPU calculations many times faster than CPU calculations, but the results differ from CPU calculations and can be worse, so not there yet.

- Searching text in PDF files is a chore on anything but maybe OS X. Often too slow, with badly implemented result presentation. PDF Expert v7 on iOS slowed down its search considerably compared to v6, no solution after several months of waiting and no way of returning back to v6 on iOS.

- Applications that are meant to run stable in real-time (audio, video) still don't offer watch-dog processes, something already implemented in Novell networking servers several decades ago.

So overall I find software much more "frustrating" than hardware. We work with what we get.


----------



## Timur Born

You can also check for IRQ/DPC latencies of your hardware-drivers via LatencyMon. Maybe something is making the CPU wait for too long (I disabled Bluetooth and WIFI networking for example).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Nammi said:


> No idea, what would be the best way to see that? I thought the timing configurator shows the timings after a possible chipset correction...
> 
> 
> 
> I managed to squeeze out more points by changing to real time priority.


The configurator shows what is entered in BIOS, regardless if its corrected or not.
The BIOS shows what you entered, and that's what the configurator shows also.

TRRD_L of 4 is illegal. I improved my latency by more 1ns by changing it to 6. 6 is minimum for DDR4. Even having this at 7 is better latency than 4. The board can be substituting any random atrocious value if it corrects one thats too low. No way to know what it corrects it to except by testing.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Also, what makes this board behave like this: I loaded optimized defaults. left dram voltage on auto, sa/io auto, selected xmp then selected 4500 ratio then selected 4500+ preset. then booted. Then bsoded expectedly as i tried to go into windows. went back into bios, set dram voltage to 1.4v just for ****s to see if it would work, left training voltage on auto. sa/io on auto. in windows at only 1.4v xmp base timings with training voltage on auto(1.35v i assume). I needed like 1.55 to get into windows before without bsoding and half the time when i did get in, as soon as I try launch modern warfare it crashes. but this time, no crash and at least dram voltage. but sa/io are 1.4v lol(auto). and it crashes anyway nevermind, thought it would be different this time.


Maybe an auto timing rule that gets changed after the first reboot.
Try setting each and every auto voltage to a manual value, and every memory timing with a known value to a manual value, if you can determine what is being set after the first boot and key it in. Then see if that still happens.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> What is latencymon?


A tool to monitor DPC latencies. DPC are deferred procedure calls. Instead of handling everything in kernel mode interrupt level, work that can be offloaded from an interrupt procedure are scheduled to be performed out of interrupt procedure, reducing the time spent in the interrupt procedure. This tool measures the latency associated with this.


----------



## robertr1

Falkentyne said:


> Maybe an auto timing rule that gets changed after the first reboot.
> Try setting each and every auto voltage to a manual value, and every memory timing with a known value to a manual value, if you can determine what is being set after the first boot and key it in. Then see if that still happens.


4x8 @ 4400 is a lot to ask of the IMC also. Maybe Rev. E would have an easier time as put a lot less strain on the IMC vs bdie.

Even on the Apex that takes a bit of work if you wanted tuned settings. If you want to run them loose and slow, that's another story. 

I'd also personally not go past 1.3 io/sa but it's not my chip!


----------



## Sheyster

robertr1 said:


> Boards have differences. Traces, distance, pcb layers, topology type all matter for ram. You also need to make sure you're not regressing performance with any of your timings. If all your care about is scores, then do a bench os, uninstall or disable any W10 background processes and learn to tweak the benchmark itself with realtime and other tricks.


This is noteworthy advice. One piece of installed software can significantly affect scores, and certain video driver versions are just plain bad for GPU benchmarks. Personally I don't give a damn about benchmarks anymore. Despite this my Windows 10 is highly optimized for gaming. If anyone has any interest in Windows 10 internals check out www.blackviper.com and the tools here:

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/

Autoruns is my personal favorite. Process Monitor can also be very useful.


----------



## Nammi

Falkentyne said:


> The configurator shows what is entered in BIOS, regardless if its corrected or not.
> The BIOS shows what you entered, and that's what the configurator shows also.
> 
> TRRD_L of 4 is illegal. I improved my latency by more 1ns by changing it to 6. 6 is minimum for DDR4. Even having this at 7 is better latency than 4. The board can be substituting any random atrocious value if it corrects one thats too low. No way to know what it corrects it to except by testing.


I see, good to know. Already running it at 6 though...


----------



## Wirerat

Regarding memory overclocking. 

Marketing teams get stuff wrong all the time. Its not just Gigabyte.

I knew exactly what the limitations of my aorus pro was before purchasing. 

You have to always read/watch multiple 3rd party reviews. Take manufacturer's claims with a grain of salt prior to 3rd party benchmarks.

There is good reasons why the "wait for benchmarks" is such a meme.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Question - Is the lowest form of llc on the aorus master board acdc 1/1 + standard llc + offset? I get lower voltages under load using that setting than powersaving + standard (30-40mv difference improvement sometimes). Has anyone else tested this out yet?


Yes this is the lowest form of LLC. AC Loadline has absolutely nothing to do with LLC--it just deals with the CPU (VRM) supply voltage on the +12v line (before or after duty cycle turns this into an actual before vdroop vcore; I know nothing about duty cycle, I think only Asus boards allow you to even configure that).

Please note carefully that setting an AC loadline of 0.01 mOhms and an offset voltage with a "X" amount of loadline calibration, with offset voltage set to the same value as a certain "fixed" vcore (arbitrary example here: AC/DC LL: 0.01 mOhms, Vcore: Normal DVID +0.00v, Vcore Loadline Calibration: Ultra Extreme (giving a idle and load VR VOUT of 1.145v at 4.7 ghz FOR EXAMPLE) is absolutely NOT the same thing as setting fixed Vcore 1.145v + Ultra Extreme LLC, despite what VR VOUT says.

Doing the DVID method will cause the VRM's to shut off, because a 0 mOhm loadline was not designed for offset mode, even with current limits maxed out. I haven't tested Extreme or Turbo LLC under such conditions.
Note I had VCore/VAXG protection at auto so I have no idea if that affected anything. The shutoff happened after about 45 seconds and it was in Prime95 small FFT FMA3. Because I like to watch the world burn.


----------



## LordGurciullo

I tried these settings on ram. Computer wouldn't start. 1.45 Ram 1.20 VC 1.24 SA... Had to clear CMOS with an icepick...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Yes this is the lowest form of LLC. AC Loadline has absolutely nothing to do with LLC--it just deals with the CPU (VRM) supply voltage on the +12v line (before or after duty cycle turns this into an actual before vdroop vcore; I know nothing about duty cycle, I think only Asus boards allow you to even configure that).
> 
> Please note carefully that setting an AC loadline of 0.01 mOhms and an offset voltage with a "X" amount of loadline calibration, with offset voltage set to the same value as a certain "fixed" vcore (arbitrary example here: AC/DC LL: 0.01 mOhms, Vcore: Normal DVID +0.00v, Vcore Loadline Calibration: Ultra Extreme (giving a idle and load VR VOUT of 1.145v at 4.7 ghz FOR EXAMPLE) is absolutely NOT the same thing as setting fixed Vcore 1.145v + Ultra Extreme LLC, despite what VR VOUT says.
> 
> Doing the DVID method will cause the VRM's to shut off, because a 0 mOhm loadline was not designed for offset mode, even with current limits maxed out. I haven't tested Extreme or Turbo LLC under such conditions.
> Note I had VCore/VAXG protection at auto so I have no idea if that affected anything. The shutoff happened after about 45 seconds and it was in Prime95 small FFT FMA3. Because I like to watch the world burn.


How do you get a 0 mohm loadline?


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> How do you get a 0 mohm loadline?


Ultra Extreme LLC. Something you should never use even if your life depended on it.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326

Level 8 LLC (Ultra Extreme) looks like this:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-413.html#post28022572


----------



## hickelpickle

LordGurciullo said:


> I tried these settings on ram. Computer wouldn't start. 1.45 Ram 1.20 VC 1.24 SA... Had to clear CMOS with an icepick...



Your tcke is pretty low, trfc is kidna low try 380-400ish. Both those could cause boot issues. Twtr/trrd could need a little tweaking, but they should just cause errors if there are any issues,might need to back of the _l ones a little by around 2.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Thought it might be voltage... Think thats what it is? going from 17 - 16 would need more voltage? I'm trying the settings someone else posted. 

Anyone use geekbench 3? Free version is 32 bit, but I use it to get an idea on my ram speed after tweaking.


----------



## Nammi

LordGurciullo said:


> Thought it might be voltage... Think thats what it is? going from 17 - 16 would need more voltage? I'm trying the settings someone else posted.
> 
> Anyone use geekbench 3? Free version is 32 bit, but I use it to get an idea on my ram speed after tweaking.


I assume the settings you're trying are mine. On my end they're memtest stable at 1.47v dram and 1.20 vccio/sa.

You could try 1.5v dram if it's b-die you're running, usually you just need more dram voltage for tighter timings. Raise tRFC to 360, tCWL to 16, tCKE to 6 and lower tREFI to ~32k, this should make it quite abit easier on your ram.
And if it's still a no go, start with just primaries and work your way down the list.


----------



## Timur Born

Falkentyne said:


> Anyway, you're having problems with x50 cache?
> Try increasing VCCVTT (CPU Termination) to 1.2v-1.3v and see if that gets x50 to work.


I tried 1.2 V at x48/x48, instant restart after 1 second of OCCT Small. But I will try to increase VCCIO for increases L3 cache stability to see if this affects the interaction between higher clocked L1/L2 cache and L3.


----------



## Nammi

Timur Born said:


> I tried 1.2 V at x48/x48, instant restart after 1 second of OCCT Small. But I will try to increase VCCIO for increases L3 cache stability to see if this affects the interaction between higher clocked L1/L2 cache and L3.


I thought I couldn't run 5.0 cache for a long time, untill I tried giving a proper bump to vcore. Incase you haven't tried that already...


----------



## wholeeo

Does anyone happen to know how the Master fairs against the Asus Maximus XI Formula? Have a chance to get one at a really good price.


----------



## Wirerat

wholeeo said:


> Does anyone happen to know how the Master fairs against the Asus Maximus XI Formula? Have a chance to get one at a really good price.


Formula is basically a Hero with a vrm waterblock + backplate + a little gimicky lcd. 

Master vs Formula - Both will OC simularly. The master has a substantially stronger VRM but from all reports the Asus vrm is very capable without limiting the core clocks on a 9900k.

Bottum line = Silicon lottery of the CPU plays a bigger role in the OC than which one of those boards you choose.


As for memory overclocking the Formula is a bit better. Not a huge difference as both wont get much higher than 4200mhz.

If you have plans for a custom loop and you are getting the formula at a heavy discount, then why not?

At the retail prices I think the Master is by far the better choice.


----------



## wholeeo

Wirerat said:


> Formula is basically a Hero with a vrm waterblock + backplate + a little gimicky lcd.
> 
> Master vs Formula - Both will OC simularly. The master has a substantially stronger VRM but from all reports the Asus vrm is very capable without limiting the core clocks on a 9900k.
> 
> Bottum line = Silicon lottery of the CPU plays a bigger role in the OC than which one of those boards you choose.
> 
> 
> As for memory overclocking the Formula is a bit better. Not a huge difference as both wont get much higher than 4200mhz.
> 
> If you have plans for a custom loop and you are getting the formula at a heavy discount, then why not?
> 
> At the retail prices I think the Master is by far the better board especially at over $100 less.


Thanks for the input. I can get it for near $300 at the moment. I was thinking of making the switch since over the years I've only had Asus mobo's and have grown comfortable with their UEFI (Adaptive Vcore) but if there's not much improvement I'll just stick to the Master. Besides, not really wanting to undo my loop, etc for no noticeable benefits. I also have all the m2 slots filled up on the Master where I believe the Formula only has 2 M2 slots.

edit: I guess I'll be splurging on that sexy EK Monoblock for this board instead. :drool:


----------



## Wirerat

wholeeo said:


> Thanks for the input. I can get it for near $300 at the moment. I was thinking of making the switch since over the years I've only had Asus mobo's and have grown comfortable with their UEFI (Adaptive Vcore) but if there's not much improvement I'll just stick to the Master. Besides, not really wanting to undo my loop, etc for no noticeable benefits. I also have all the m2 slots filled up on the Master where I believe the Formula only has 2 M2 slots.
> 
> edit: I guess I'll be splurging on that sexy EK Monoblock for this board instead. /forum/images/smilies/drool.gif


Its definitely nice. I was disappointed it doesnt fit my aorus pro.

You already have the Master? That changes things. 
I don't consider the formula an upgrade.

You have to go to the extreme, gene or apex to see any gains vs master.


----------



## TwinTurbo

In your opinion then, the Master is the best board in the $300 range, eclipsing the Maximus XI Hero? And this is because of the VRMs on this board.

Sorry, I have a 9900ks on the way and have similar questions.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Ultra Extreme LLC. Something you should never use even if your life depended on it.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-398.html#post27860326
> 
> Level 8 LLC (Ultra Extreme) looks like this:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-413.html#post28022572


Ah, OK. I didn't see Ultra Extreme in your previous post (was reading it on my phone), and was confused as to why you were saying this (this tidbit had nothing to do with the question you were answering).


----------



## Wirerat

TwinTurbo said:


> In your opinion then, the Master is the best board in the $300 range, eclipsing the Maximus XI Hero? And this is because of the VRMs on this board.
> 
> Sorry, I have a 9900ks on the way and have similar questions.


Imo yes.

Hero, formula, code are all over priced for what you get compared to the Aorus Pro, Ultra and Master.

Those are still quality boards. Dont get me wrong. Im not a gigabyte fan boy. 

I just dont see the price being justified this go around.


----------



## GeneO

Wirerat said:


> Imo yes.
> 
> Hero, formula, code are all over priced for what you get compared to the Aorus Pro, Ultra and Master.
> 
> Those are still quality boards. Dont get me wrong. Im not a gigabyte fan boy.
> 
> I just dont see the price being justified this go around.


Count me in on that opinion. I went from a Code X to an Aorus master for the same reason. I am not running a 9900k yet, but my 8086k and memory clock higher than they diid on my Code X.


----------



## wholeeo

Wirerat said:


> Its definitely nice. I was disappointed it doesnt fit my aorus pro.
> 
> You already have the Master? That changes things.
> I don't consider the formula an upgrade.
> 
> You have to go to the extreme, gene or apex to see any gains vs master.


Yup, bought it mainly because it was one of the best boards I could get for hackintoshing.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Ah, OK. I didn't see Ultra Extreme in your previous post (was reading it on my phone), and was confused as to why you were saying this (this tidbit had nothing to do with the question you were answering).


Oh, I was saying that there is a difference between using AC/DC Loadine 1, with offset voltage and a certain LLC (High, Turbo, Extreme, etc) to get a certain load voltage, compared to a fixed vcore with the same LLC to get the same load voltage (besides the obvious downclocking/downvolting). Assuming Thermal Velocity Boost is disabled (stops VID from rising at higher heat), the VRM treats it completely different even if the idle and load voltages are exactly the same. The VRM seems to respond differently.

Still haven't figured out why. I was bored and tried seeing what would happen.
The IR 35201 docs mention something about a "0 mOhm loadline" but says certain other flags must be set. 
You are free to look at page 30 and see if you understand what they're talking about.

https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infin...N.pdf?fileId=5546d462576f347501579c95d19772b5

Example: AC/DC LL 1, 4.7 ghz, Thermal Velocity Boost disabled, Offset -50mv (estimated VR VOUT 1.175v), Ultra Extreme LLC, no c-states
compared to fixed vcore, 1.175v, Ultra Extreme LLC

CPU Current Protection: Extreme in both.

for some reason, the one with using offset mode will cause the VRM's to shut off when you run prime95 XD
(I had vcore/vaxg protection set to auto)


----------



## LordGurciullo

Yes it is yours. I can't set TREFI to 32 as the master bug only lets me do auto which is 16 or 65k.
Also is it normal for your entire comp to not even load bios if you dont do it properly and have to ice pick the cmos??

ALSO - Would raising ring to x50 make a difference in frames? Over 5.1 all cores oc?


----------



## Emmanuel

After a battery of memory stability tests for 40 hours, here's what I'm settling down on.


----------



## Wirerat

LordGurciullo said:


> Yes it is yours. I can't set TREFI to 32 as the master bug only lets me do auto which is 16 or 65k.
> Also is it normal for your entire comp to not even load bios if you dont do it properly and have to ice pick the cmos??
> 
> ALSO - Would raising ring to x50 make a difference in frames? Over 5.1 all cores oc?


Another 100mhz cache will show bandwidth increase and latency reduction in aida64. 


How much it transfers to min fps in a game depends on many factors. 

You will have to be cpu limited for it make a difference at all. 

If it requires higher vcore then I think its not worth it. Even another 100mhz of core clock is debatable if you are needing a big step in voltage.


----------



## LordGurciullo

What are your voltages please? and how did you get to 32k Trefi?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

What doesn't it do that it says in that sheet? Whether a memory OC is achievable depends on a lot of things, among the the lottery in the quality of processor IMC. Really the hint is anything over 2666 MHz is labeled an OC. 

What board for $200 would you suggest that can do all of this sans the memory. What $289 board can do all of this?

The available tools to OC memory on the board leave a lot to be desired, I would agree.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Bravoexo

Anyone tried the new 11c bios from Aorus.com yet?


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> You do realize that NO ONE has gotten 4400 stable on 4 dimms on the aorus master, even those with 4400 ram kits and a golden imc? You cannot shift the blame onto the IMC, it's clearly not a factor here. It's the board.
> 
> It's not okay to advertise a highspeed and then not deliver on that promise.


Well it is well know Gigabyte's strength is in CPU power delivery and not memory OC, and I knew that going in, but I didn't plan on overclocking my memory much. I have a modest memory clock of 3600CL16 (not anything considering two 32GB 3200CL14 kits) with some minor timing tightening. Same memory I couldn't OC stably at all on my Asus Code X FWIW. 

Do you know that sub $200-$289 MB with a strong VRM can deliver on CPU and 4400+ memory too? IDK. Frankly my priority had been high memory OC, I would have gone for an Apex, but they are around $400 and in short supply.

Also, If I look on the QVL list of the master, I do not see any memory above 4333 MHz listed. That should tell you something. The Apex lists 4700 MHz on their QVL.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Ehhh i dunno what else to say, i just don't think its worth the price tag since it doesn't do what it is supposed to do. Hinting around that o you should have known based off qvl and not trusted gigabyte by their own word is alarming. Integrity in the marketplace is important.


How can you say that? It does everything it says, which is a lot compared to same functionality for Asus prices. I don't know where you get this integrity or it doesn't so what it says stuff.. They only officially support RAM up to 4133 MHz as per their QVL, anything over is uncertain, though they will support clocking to it, it may not work. You need to do your homework. If you want a guaranteed memory OC in the 4400+ range, you need to look at the board's memory QVL, which puts you in the $400 price range I believe.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BradleyW

Where are the correct contact points on the Z390 ULTRA to read the following voltages with a multi-meter?:
1) CPU Vcore
2) VCCSA
3) VCCIO

Thank you.


----------



## warbucks

reachthesky said:


> I did my homework. Did you not see me post the screenshot earlier? It advertised 4400. I didn't get my 4400. It's that simple. Stop trying to shift the blame onto the customer when gigabyte fails to deliver what they advertised.


You really are oversimplifying this. Overclocks(CPU or RAM) are never guaranteed by any motherboard manufacturer. There are a number of factors involved outside their control. One such factor is precisely what GeneO has mentioned. No one is trying to shift anything. This isn't a binary outcome or as black and white as you tend to believe it is.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I did my homework. Did you not see me post the screenshot earlier? It advertised 4400. I didn't get my 4400. It's that simple. Stop trying to shift the blame onto the customer when gigabyte fails to deliver what they advertised.


Yes it says they *Have support for* 4400+ memory, which they do. That is not saying they guarantee it. What they guarantee is what is on the QVL - that is the homework.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> This calculates to a 3.45% performance decrease between bios versions. I assume this is due to the difference in microcodes between f9 and f11c since f11c uses f10's microcodes.
> 
> On a side note and completely unrelated, Under the bios notes for F11c on the aorus website for the Aorus z390 master it states Enhance RAID AIC compatibility Fix CPU Vcore and power behavior. Does anyone know which specific area they improved cpu vcore and power behavior?


Yes, from the microcode. 

I don't see the f11c on the official Aorus master website, still only F10. Got a lkink? pages must be different somehow.

EDIT: Hmm, bookmark I have is different. I see it now. not a clue.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

falkentyne mentioned there was some changes to the internal loadline settings. 

Weird my bookmarked link to the support page for the Aorus master brings me to a different web page and layout. All items are identical except the f11c bios is not there.


----------



## Emmanuel

LordGurciullo said:


> What are your voltages please? and how did you get to 32k Trefi?


If your question was directed to me, I set the vDIMM to 1.50v in the BIOS which results in 1.488v actual.
For the tREFI, I simply set that manually in the BIOS. I use the F11c BIOS posted in this thread by Falkentyne. He integrated some older CPU microcodes that have better performance. It seems to work great with my 9900KS and non-QVL, unmatched memory kits


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I'm only willing to flash beta/official bioses acquired/modified from the manufacturer. I think it's great that falkentyne offers this, but if something were to go wrong with the motherboard using an unofficial bios that was modded by someone else than someone at gigabyte, gigabyte isn't gonna cover that under warranty are they? i'm not looking to void my warranty.
> 
> I'm curious, would you mind posting your cbr15 results at 47 all core and 44 cache as close to 4000mhz on the ram as you can?


It is just replacing the microcode in the BIOS. The motherboard has dual BIOS. Set it up in single BIOS mode to protect it. You will generally have a long, if not forever, wait if you wait for the manufactuirer.

EDIT: and in this case you are stuck at F9 if you don't want a performance hit.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

The f11c on the Aorus site is identical to the beta f11c on tweaktown. They are the same file, just renamed.

The fixes are the missing BIOS options (Turbo per core limit control, Vcore/VAXG protection, CPU Current Limit, CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv, etc) re-added, making it as stable as F9, at least, with a few more options (Thermal velocity Boost, RAM settings, etc). If you already have the tweaktown f11c, you have the latest.

You still need to use 300khz for best vcore stability (Lowest vcore) however, with 500 khz being the worst for minimum vcore. The lower the loadline calibration however, the less the improvement using 300 khz vs 500 khz. The reason for this is still unknown. It's also unknown if transient high spikes are reduced also.



reachthesky said:


> I'm only willing to flash beta/official bioses acquired/modified from the manufacturer. I think it's great that falkentyne offers this, but if something were to go wrong with the motherboard using an unofficial bios that was modded by someone else than someone at gigabyte, gigabyte isn't gonna cover that under warranty are they? i'm not looking to void my warranty.
> 
> I'm curious, would you mind posting your cbr15 results at 47 all core and 44 cache as close to 4000mhz on the ram as you can?


The only change in the mod are the older microcodes which match what was in F8-F10. I made no other changes. You just have to use Efiflash /X to flash the bios file.
Qflash won't flash a modded BIOS.

I did another that has a hexadecimal hex edit to allow Q-flash flashing (From the instructions on win-raid.com) but I did NOT test it so I won't distribute it unless someone asks or I test it first.
And if people want the faster microcodes, they are either going to have to use others' modded Bioses, or mod it themselves. Intel forces the ODM's to use newer microcodes.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Damn homies were getting serious now with Microdes. Often times I feel outta my league. 

Ok so you are able to set trefi because you are on f11c. cant do that on f10. 
ok... I'm thinking maybe I should just ******* chill out at my 17 17 17 34 4133... 

Run a geekbench 3 32 bit (free versino) and tell me your ram score please.. 

Falkenytyne thank you so much. I'm in woodland hills if you ever want lunch man we can make it happen.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

LordGurciullo said:


> Damn homies were getting serious now with Microdes. Often times I feel outta my league.
> 
> Ok so you are able to set trefi because you are on f11c. cant do that on f10.
> ok... I'm thinking maybe I should just ******* chill out at my 17 17 17 34 4133...
> 
> Run a geekbench 3 32 bit (free versino) and tell me your ram score please..
> 
> Falkenytyne thank you so much. I'm in woodland hills if you ever want lunch man we can make it happen.


I'm stuck in Riverside. Not a single chess club anywhere around here. The sooner I can leave this city, the better, but I'm on section 8 so I need a section 8 apartment in LA, Pomona or Orange county, to ever be able to play chess clubs to train for major tournaments again 

I do appreciate the offer. Where is woodland hills, anyway?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

Those are excellent timings for 4200. If you can get those stable with good voltages, go for it!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

If this is mainly a gaming rig, I'd shoot for latency over absolute bandwidth.


----------



## Grizzly111

@reachthesky: Wow, what DRAM & VCCSIO, VCCSA volts did you need to get 3900Mhz @ cl15?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wirerat

What adjustments were made to vcore power delivery in latest bios? 

I just seen 12d up for the Aorus Pro. I am on 12c.

Edit : Nevermind, I just seen @Falkentyne explain further up.


----------



## LordGurciullo

reach the sky I think im gonna try that... what are the voltages you need? And also what settings do you actually change from auto. Please give me a little breakdown.

Also - when ram overclock fails is it normal that it wont even go into bios and I have to ice pick the cmos??


----------



## LordGurciullo

Los Angeles area. A chess master I see. Makes sense


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

I will give Turbo per core limit control a try. My cores 2 and 4 are always first to be temperature limited, so I assume them to be weakest. I tried using 50/50/50/49/49/48/48/48, but Total War: Warhammer 2 crashed to desktop and there was one BSOD. Now I changes back to stock with the exception of 7/8 core x47 being increased to x48, 50/50/49/48/48/48/48/48 that is.

One problem is that core parking usually prefers to park the latter cores, so this might not work out. And without core parking the CPU rarely ever reaches above x48 with Windows' tendency to shift single threads all over the place.

All that being said: Today I ran PCMARK10 using my heavily downclocked GPU profile and my overclocked GPU profile. The first is within the top 2% of systems and the latter within the top 1%, on a silent system that is hardly audible during the benchmark run. So in practice all is good, except that there should be faster systems out there, but CPUs and software are stagnating for years already.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> How can you tell which cores are temperature limited? What do you look for? I tried to per core each individual core to different speeds while reducing voltage, I didn't have any luck, but then again I was using ring to core at the time which required more voltage to power the higher fluctuating cache during non-all core workloads.
> 
> One thing I can tell you about turbo per core limit control, the first core is your master core. take care of that core because windows uses that core to boot up so i recommend setting it lower than the rest if you are maxing out the other cores so that it doesn't take a beating from the higher frequencies/higher voltages. If you end up using ring to core, the cache will trail 300mhz behind what the master core is set at, never higher. Ring to core is best used with turbo ratio limits with all the cores having the same maximum frequency in turbo per core limit control while following the same spacing for the turbo ratios
> 
> Someone had mentioned parking the cores was bad or something and that it was just better to not park them and let turbo do its thing. I still don't quite understand what parking cores means, does that mean like, locking in a frequency? Like, if I were to set my windows power plan to maximum performance, would that be considered parking cores since it will put all my cores at 5.1ghz at all times with my current profile?


tl;dr: prime95.

You need to look for CPU Cache L0 errors or Internal Parity Errors (these are rare; usually only Apex Legends and one other game triggers these and this is usually not a temp issue).
For CPU Cache L0 errors, look in event viewer for the APIC ID. Core #0 will have ID's 0 and 1 (this is the first core and two threads) and Core #7 (the last core) will have APIC 14 and 15. But these are 'physical' cores 1 and 8. But they go 0-7 in windows.

For example, APIC ID's 6 and 7 are linked to Windows core #3 (which would be core 4 in the BIOS).

If you can determine which core always gets the L0's (remember there are two threads to one core), or which two cores fail the first (meaning any of four consistent threads), those are the weakest cores.
Then you can set those for a lower multiplier in per core limit control.

If Per Core in the BIOS starts on "core 1" instead of "Core 0" you need to adjust for that, since windows event viewer and HWinfo64 start the very first core on core 0, not core 1.

I've never seen L0 errors if Hyperthreading is disabled.

Also, prime95 windows go in physical order of cores also. Prime95 is probably the most useful program for determining which core is weak if you disable AVX because prime95 does independent. LinX 0.9.6 35000 sample size testing won't show you which thread/core is unstable. Prime95 is one of the few programs that will let you find weak cores easily since it actually runs a separate instance on each thread!

The best way to do this and keep heat under control is to use FMA3 small FFT prime95, 29.8 build 6, at a LOW clock speed and low voltage, like 4.7 ghz and 1.20v+LLC High, and then look for which threads crash first consistently.
And if no threads crash reduce vcore 10mv at a time until they start crashing. But it may take up to 15 minutes for a borderline voltage to fail.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> When using turbo per core, During gaming(stuff like apex legends/modern warfare) all cores boosts to the 8-core workload frequency. I wouldn't be able to test turbo per core for internal parity/ lvl 0 cache errors using games since they demand all cores active. I'm really against p95. With my current oc 5.1/4.8 I know it won't even be p95 stable due to excess heat. Is there anything like, less power hungry that I can still test individual threads/cores with? Like, I used to us TSBench in the past to put them under load but it's not exactly a thorough stability test. I'm not comfortable using stuff like p95/gsat/linpack due to how much heat they generate. Is there anything geared more towards gaming that can still test individual cores/threads that isn't a "power virus"?


I edited my post to include more information.
Sorry. I didn't mean to suggest using FMA3 prime95 at anything close to your main overclocks. You just want to use it to find the weakest cores. In my own testing, I found that the weak cores tend to scale in the same weak-strong scale as the good cores, so testing at a low speed/very low vcore will yield consistent results. 

Use prime95 FMA3 at a MUCH lower voltage and clockspeed and use fixed vcore, not offset.
I use 4.7 ghz/4.4 cache and 1.20v LLC Turbo/High as my baseline for this.

If you need extra instability, increase PWM switching frequency to 500 khz 
You did ask how to find the weakest cores, right?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> gotcha. So say I clock to 4.7/4.4 and find the weakest cores. Do I then set the weakest cores to 5.1ghz (that's the 8c/16c OC i'm thinking of settling on) and then raise the strongest cores to 5.4ghz and increase voltage/lower llc?


Yes that's what I was thinking although I never tested that.
If you don't want to wait 30 minutes+ for a prime95 thread to fail, there is a way to get the weakest cores to fail instantly, but you may BSOD in the process.

Download Throttlestop 8.72 and run it. Disable ALL C-states, speedshift, all power saving. Make sure it's uncheck in throttlestop also.
Set throttestop to the core/cache ratio you are using (47/44, etc). You can do that in the FIVR window.

Run prime95 at your marginally stable fixed vcore and keep it running

Use TS to downclock all cores by 1. (clicking core #1 first will lower all cores if they are synched) and apply.
Use TS to set the cores back to the original speed (Click the core #8 multiplier, this should cause all the cores to rise together) and apply.

Continue doing this repeatedly. The stress test (or the entire system) won't last long 
When a thread crashes, stop the stress test and start it again. 

If you are BSODing, increase vcore. If three or more threads stop at the same time, increase vcore.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok so the end goal is to not have any threads crash or have less than 3 threads/cores crash is that correct and then adjust the main oc accordingly?


Well, yes, but the point of that prime95 test and downclocking/upclocking during the stress test is to make the threads crash, so you can see which ones crash consistently.
Clock speeds changing during prime95 causes worst case transients to happen.


----------



## BradleyW

Sorry but I must ask again if anyone knows the read out locations for the Vcore, VCCIO and VCCSA using a multimeter on the Z390 Ultra. No information online. Thank you.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

On the mater they are in the upper right corner and clearly labeled. 

https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php...rus-master-intel-motherboard-preview_full.jpg


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Buildzoid would probably know this. He did a video on vcore readouts for all the gigabyte motherboards, not sure if he mentioned the location of the readouts on the boards in the video or not though.


Did you do the testing?
It only takes a few minutes if you do the clock switching thing in TS 8.72.


----------



## warbucks

reachthesky said:


> https://aorus.com/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10


Fix vcore and cpu power in the changelog. Interesting...


----------



## warbucks

reachthesky said:


> Thank you . Unfortunately voltages required are 1.35v sa/io and 1.5v dram voltage ><.
> 
> I tried cl15 3900. Insanely good latency. THe best i've ever had. iols/rtls train properly for cl15 3900. This is only with 5ghz all core 4.7cache with HT. If i was doing cl15 4000, I would need 5.3ghz all core 5ghz cache no HT for 37.8ns. cl15/3900 is sweet spot until gigabyte fixes iol/rtl


This right here. I'm still running 3900CL15.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Fair enough. I'll respect your decision. Just remember my test won't cause any windows corruption and it's not an overclock test. It's an underclock test to determine which cores are the ones that will fail first. The trick is to not have anything running at windows startup and to wait about 60 seconds before running Prime95. The crashes aren't caused by trying to boot windows at unstable voltages. The 'multiplier switching' causes transients to be at worst case. The reason is because when the clock PLL's go to sleep and re-awaken at a new clock frequency, you get a FULL load release/load activate, which is something you usually never get (even idle doesn't do full load release).


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but I must ask again if anyone knows the read out locations for the Vcore, VCCIO and VCCSA using a multimeter on the Z390 Ultra. No information online. Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> Buildzoid would probably know this. He did a video on vcore readouts for all the gigabyte motherboards, not sure if he mentioned the location of the readouts on the boards in the video or not though.
Click to expand...

I'll see if I can find the video. 



GeneO said:


> On the mater they are in the upper right corner and clearly labeled.
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php...rus-master-intel-motherboard-preview_full.jpg


That's not my board. Those read out points are useless. They read from the same chip which provides software readouts. I need the direct on-die readout pin locations.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

Modded Xtreme F9c, latest RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware, fastest microcodes.


----------



## warbucks

reachthesky said:


> Mind if i see your timings?


Attached. I think I can squeeze a few more things just need to find some time to do it.


----------



## GeneO

BradleyW said:


> I'll see if I can find the video.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not my board. Those read out points are useless. They read from the same chip which provides software readouts. I need the direct on-die readout pin locations.


I know that, but I thought that was what you were looking for. I saw the mentioned video by Builzoid for an Aorus board's vcpu , but I expect it could be a different location per board. Here it is for the Xtreme/Master/ITX Pro Wifi. It is also only the voltage supplied to the CPU core.


----------



## Timur Born

The last thing I did yesterday was to update to F11c. Today I found my Windows installation having returned to some old restore point from December, while deleting all restore points older than today. Even my Firefox tabs are changed back to that time, no OC.net tab open. And Intel Extreme Tuning utility is uninstalled again. The good part is that I can now run the trial of DXO Photolab 3 for 31 days again. 

I do have daily backups, but I don't think that it is worth the effort.

Concerning per core clock. I always noticed that my HWinfo cores 2 and 4 (out of 0-7) run into temperature limits first, then core 5. Core 4 produced lots of APIC cache incoherence errors according to Windows logs, the rest is not so clear cut with 5 being listed more often than 2 (again out of 0-7). I don't want to spend too much time on this, but I will at least do some quick tests.

I will also try 3900-C15 as per this thread, but knowing that 3600-C16 was not even Karhu overnight stable, I doubt that it will work.


----------



## Salve1412

GeneO said:


> Yes it says they *Have support for* 4400+ memory, which they do. That is not saying they guarantee it. What they guarantee is what is on the QVL - that is the homework.


But not even when you've done the homework you are in guaranteed territory, since I have one of the highest rated kits listed in the Master QVL and it's impossible to run it at the bloody XMP frequency (4266MHz), no matter what timings/voltages I try. Of course my 9900k's IMC is a factor (by the way Gigabyte Technical support already set aside my "issue" pointing to that), but I'd REALLY love to try my CPU and RAM combo, even just out of curiosity, on a let's say Maximus XI Hero Wi-Fi, which in my country costs about the same as the Master and, at least as far as mere specifications are concerned (I'm leaving VRM strength out), seems to be only slightly inferior.


----------



## Timur Born

Ha, I am stupid. My system was not rolled back to some old restore point. The new BIOS booted from the old SATA SSD instead of the new M.2. And the old SSD still holds the old system from before I copied all data over.

So watch out for boot device changes when you update to a new BIOS version.


----------



## TAGTRAUM

Hi guys, can you share some recommendations, i've managed to reach this results, but my main question is are the voltages ok, i mean all voltages, VID Vcore showing 1.22-1.28 range, but other right Vcore voltages seems pretty ok, thanks for advance!
Memory just can't go anywhere higher (it's 3200CL16 trident Z royal Samsung B-Die, on 4000 timings are trash and pretty unstable), i tryed many different combinations of timings and voltages from guys who shared their results here)
Modified F11c BIOS


----------



## Timur Born

I connected an second SATA drive, booted, shut down, removed the drive and rebootet. F11c reset my boot configuration again, putting the old SATA drive before the M.2 drive again.


----------



## wholeeo

I believe I ran into some weird behavior with my board but it can just be user error as I admit I'm new to really digging in on ram timings. When lowering TRFC values my ram doesn't stick to the bios set 3600 speed. Also, my CPU speed also overclocks itself a bit over the set 5 Ghz. Is this normal behavior?

Also I have a question, should I be touching AC/DC values if using LLC Low + CPU Internal AC/DC Loadline to Power Saving?

PS. What is the go to stress test for every day stability nowadays? I no longer want to fry my CPU with LinX...lol Is the x264 stress test from years ago still a good one? I personally been using Asus's RealBench which is terrible at just finding CPU instability being that it's pretty much a full system test.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> Manually adjusting acdc loadlines will automatically void any acdc preset and it will go by the manually adjusted value. Basically, if you change any value from 0, the preset will no longer be used and whatever value entered will be used instead.


Thank you sir, just the answer I was looking for. Which method would you say is better?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Are these any good?


----------



## metalspider

wholeeo said:


> Are these any good?


thats not good for bdie,good bdie can do cl14 at 3200mhz,but you have plenty of room on voltage and you have a temp sensors so you can try pushing it.
also most xmp timings on bdie are you usually more even like 14-14-14-34 or 19-19-19-39 or 16-16-16-36 etc at various mhz.


----------



## wholeeo

metalspider said:


> thats not good for bdie,good bdie can do cl14 at 3200mhz,but you have plenty of room on voltage and you have temp sensors so you can try pushing it.
> also most xmp timings on bdie are you usually more even like 14-14-14-34 or 19-19-19-39 or 16-16-16-36 etc at various mhz.


Thanks for the input. These are dual rank and 64 GB worth so I really wasn't expecting much out of them. Just surprised me that they were B-Die. I read a buyer review that mentioned they were Hynix C-Die.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I've opened up realbench and dropped to 5ghz all core, 4.7ghz cache. acdc 1-1, llc set to standard, +120mv offset. I'm looking at hwinfo here, vid is calling for 1.36v max before droop. Should I just match the vid with my target vcore pre-droop automatically make the offsetset +160mv instead of +120v and call it a day?


Something's wrong with your settings.
Your VID is WAY too high for AC/DC 1
Your VR VOUT is way too high.
Are you sure AC/DC is set to 1 (0.01 mOhms?)

I tried your settings and got this.


----------



## Timur Born

Probably not set to "Auto" in the other menu.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## marik123

Have anyone here with a Aorus Pro Z390 board able to reach 4000mhz stable on 4 sticks of b-die RAM? I have tried my best and seems like best I can do is 3866 16-16-16-36 @ 1.45v set in bios. 

Setting in BIOS

CPU = 50x
Cache = 46x

CPU vcore = 1.320v in BIOS
CPU Vccio = 1.2
CPU Vccsa = 1.2

Ram voltage = 1.45v
Timing = 16/16/16/36/311/65534 2T
Speed = 3866


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> i'm using:
> acdc- 1/1 (preset was left on auto)
> llc standard
> dvid offset +120mv
> vcore current protection extreme
> vcore protection 400mv
> pwm switchrate 300khz
> pwm phase control high perf
> eist/c3 enabled, all other cstates disabled
> speedshift disabled
> voltage optimization, energy efficient turbo, race to halt, ring to core all disabled.
> 50x cpu multiplier
> 47x cache multiplier
> [email protected] cl15
> 1.3v sa/io
> 1.5v vdimm/training
> 
> 
> Those are all the settings i'm using in the realbench screenshot right now.
> 
> Is it possible the ram overclock is increasing the vid?


I've never seen such a thing before. But it's possible?
I black screen if I try to exceed 3600 mhz on my RAM with POST failure. But I saw no difference in VID at 3600 mhz.

But your "base" VID should definitely not be that high. If it were, that would be the worst 9900k ever in existence and would probably not even do 4.9 ghz stable.

At least I got to determine the DVID bug. Since I had no choice but to run flat into it.

When changing from DVID mode to fixed mode, it takes TWO boots (or a hard power off) for fixed vcore to activate. On the first reboot, DVID mode is still active (but with whatever offset is saved in the profile loaded; if the profile has a fixed vcore of 1.20v and DVID offset is greyed out with +0.00v (instead of auto), the system will reboot with a +0.00 DVID offset, using the AC/DC loadlines AND The loadline calibration from the newly loaded profile (which can cause big overvoltage if LLC is higher than "Standard"). Rebooting a second time caused fixed vcore to initialize properly.

This doesn't happen if you were in "Auto" Vcore mode instead of DVID mode.

Of course you could easily find out by simply reverting back to basic XMP, but I doubt you want to bother with that.
But this is a problem because your VID and VR VOUT are 80mv higher than they should be.

Do you have Thermal Velocity Boost voltage optimizations disabled? (even if this were disabled I can't see VID being that high!)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

reach the sky. What do you think are the real world frame rate differences from my 5.0 All core HT ON 4133 17 17 17 34 320trfc

vs your ram situation?


I'm not sure about going over 1.25. I 'm at 1.22 now and everything is stable... 

I'm seriously 99 percent about to just be done touching a goddamn thing.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Sheyster

marik123 said:


> Have anyone here with a Aorus Pro Z390 board able to reach 4000mhz stable on 4 sticks of b-die RAM? I have tried my best and seems like best I can do is 3866 16-16-16-36 @ 1.45v set in bios.
> 
> Setting in BIOS
> 
> CPU = 50x
> Cache = 46x
> 
> CPU vcore = 1.320v in BIOS
> CPU Vccio = 1.2
> CPU Vccsa = 1.2
> 
> Ram voltage = 1.45v
> Timing = 16/16/16/36/311/65534 2T
> Speed = 3866


I'm not aware of anyone who has hit 4000 with a Pro board. My best was also 3866 with 2 different sets of RAM (both B-die).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Medvediy

Falkentyne said:


> ...
> Ok. Now, Power off your computer. Unplug power supply. Press the clear CMOS button. Replug PSU. Power on and wait.
> Enter BIOS. Set advanced mode. Do not enable XMP. Disable MCE. Disable c-states (you need to "enable" c-state control in f11c, then disable the c-states manually, that's how you do it). Disable voltage optimization, speedstep (EIST), speedshift.
> ...
> Disable multi core enhancement. Set cpu multiplier to 50. Cache (ring) ratio to 47. Set voltage vcore to 1.275v. Set vcore loadline calibration to turbo. Set "CPU overtemperature protection" to 105C. You may need it there for now. Set it to 100C after we're finished).
> ...
> Set vcore current protection to extreme. Vaxg protection to extreme. Set cpu pwm phase control to High. VAXG to high. Set CPU PWM switching frequency to 300 khz. (DO NOT FORGET THIS). VAXG switching frequency to 300 khz.
> ...
> Leave CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line at Auto.
> ...
> Save, exit, boot into windows.
> ...
> Now, search for LinX 0.9.6
> Run LinX.
> ...
> If the residuals are correct, it means your CPU is stable at stock. You can celebrate. For now. (take a screenshot for us of the LinX 0.9.6 or 0.9.5 test).
> ...
> Ok, now. Go back in the BIOS.
> Go to "Internal VR Control".
> Set AC Loadline to 1. Set DC Loadline to 1.
> 
> Save, go back to windows. Go to HWinfo64. Tell me what the "CPU VID" shows at idle. Yes. VID. I want to know this.
> 
> Ok, now, enable XMP. Save, Exit, go back to BIOS.
> Set your VCCIO to 1.250v.
> Set your VCCSA to 1.30v.
> Set your DDR memory voltage to 1.40v.
> ...
> Save, exit, go to windows.
> Run LinX 0.9.6 again for 10 loops.
> Report the residuals. (easier to take a screenshot for us).


*Falkentyne*, please reply to me, just to be clear! In posts before this as I remember you said, that AC|DC loadline setting to 1 will work only for NOT FIXED voltage? Or I'm wrong?
All other settings from this awesome post is clear for me. 
And thx to you for this helpful info! Really appreciate your job!


----------



## Falkentyne

Medvediy said:


> *Falkentyne*, please reply to me, just to be clear! In posts before this as I remember you said, that AC|DC loadline setting to 1 will work only for NOT FIXED voltage? Or I'm wrong?
> All other settings from this awesome post is clear for me.
> And thx to you for this helpful info! Really appreciate your job!


The AC/DC Loadline settings will not affect *VCORE* (VR VOUT) on fixed voltage. AC Loadline affects operating voltage of DVID/Auto modes. DC Loadline affects power measurements and final VID reporting.

It will affect the VID that is shown in HWinfo64, etc.
Setting AC/DC Loadline (Both of them) to 1 (0.01 mOhms) will give you an idea of the CPU quality (at 5 ghz, where the VID stops scaling higher) if you tell us what the VID is at idle.


----------



## Medvediy

Falkentyne said:


> The AC/DC Loadline settings will not affect *VCORE* (VR VOUT) on fixed voltage. AC Loadline affects operating voltage of DVID/Auto modes. DC Loadline affects power measurements and final VID reporting.
> It will affect the VID that is shown in HWinfo64, etc.
> Setting AC/DC Loadline (Both of them) to 1 (0.01 mOhms) will give you an idea of the CPU quality (at 5 ghz, where the VID stops scaling higher) if you tell us what the VID is at idle.


Ok, thx again! Now it's clear!
I'll try your options on my weekend. Now I'm using my 9900k on 1.27+Medium LLC (Temps on high load better than on 1.26+High), but still with 4.7GHz on all cores. Because have no time to try 5GHz and find good voltages and LLC levels. Testing stability with Linx 0.9.6 and Prime, so temps under load is no the same as in cinebench and so on. :h34r-smi


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> not sure about his but my idle vid is 1.230v


How did your VID go from 1.360v to 1.230v?
What was wrong with it before?

Your idle VID at 30C is about 20mv higher than mine so your CPU is slightly worse silicon quality than mine, (I believe mine is average).


----------



## BradleyW

Any room for improvement on this?

FMA3 AVX Blend with Max RAM usage.

9900K 5GHz HT. 
Ring x46.
Vcore Offset +.020.
LLC Low
IA AC/DC LLC Power Saving.
IA AC/DC 1 (default).

Windows:
Vcore 1.3v
VR VOUT 1.2v
Power Draw 174A.

Would I be better off using IA AC/DC @ 0? Would this be safe with a higher LLC of say....medium or high? 
If IA AC/DC are set to 0, should IA AC/DC LLC be set to Auto from Power Saving?

Thank you.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> 1.36v vid was vid requested under full load during realbench stress test with dvid mode overclock +120 offset acdc 1/1 standard llc 5g all core.


In your last screenshot, you seem to be using no c-states or power saving. What happens in a realbench load in those exact settings?
Your VID should not go from 1.230v to 1.360v at full load. The highest it should go is about 20mv higher than mine, which is about 1.295v.
Your idle vid (1.230v) makes sense and I agree with that. But when AC/DC Loadline are both set to 1, the VID should only differ by EXACTLY this formula:

1.5mv / 1C. 
So if your idle VID is 1.230v and idle temp is 30C, and your load temp is 80C, then your VID will increase by 50C * 1.5=75mv.
(This is Thermal Velocity Boost affecting the VID).

1.230v to 1.360v is like an 85C temp difference range which is impossible.
A rise like that is only possible if AC Loadline was not equal to "1".


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Quick question: Are you supposed to disable XMP when overclocking RAM on this board? Does it make any difference? I've always just left it on and manually changed what i need to....


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Quick question: Are you supposed to disable XMP when overclocking RAM on this board? Does it make any difference? I've always just left it on and manually changed what i need to....


When I disabled XMP I couldn't even get the RAM to run at stock XMP speeds. It would just repeatedly fail to train and ran at 2800 mhz. I assume you need to know the exact sub and tertiary timings and terminations and manually enter them for that to work.


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any room for improvement on this?
> 
> FMA3 AVX Blend with Max RAM usage.
> 
> 9900K 5GHz HT.
> Ring x46.
> Vcore Offset +.020.
> LLC Low
> IA AC/DC LLC Power Saving.
> IA AC/DC 0 (default).
> 
> Windows:
> Vcore 1.3v
> VR VOUT 1.2v
> Power Draw 174A.
> 
> Would I be better off using IA AC/DC @ 1? Would this be safe with a higher LLC of say....medium or high?
> If IA AC/DC are set to 1, should IA AC/DC LLC be set to Auto from Power Saving?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is how I perceive it:
> IA ACDC 1/1 + medium llc + dvid offset mode is similar to using fixed manual voltage with turbo llc in the way of strength of llc. When I turn on windows maximum power plan, 5ghz idles around 1.3v and droops to 1.25v under non-avx full load just like turbo llc + 1.3v fixed manual voltage in bios would.
> 
> IA ACDC 1/1 + high llc + dvid offset mode is similar to using fixed manual voltage in bios with extreme llc in the way of strength of llc.
> 
> In regards to whether powersaving or if acdc 1/1 is better? I'm not sure. It is probably situational.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply, you say in the way of strength of the LLC.... Does this mean that if I use acdc 1, it is more harmful to use a high LLC?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> Here is how I perceive it:
> IA ACDC 1/1 + medium llc + dvid offset mode is similar to using fixed manual voltage with turbo llc in the way of strength of llc. When I turn on windows maximum power plan, 5ghz idles around 1.3v and droops to 1.25v under non-avx full load just like turbo llc + 1.3v fixed manual voltage in bios would.
> 
> IA ACDC 1/1 + high llc + dvid offset mode is similar to using fixed manual voltage in bios with extreme llc in the way of strength of llc.
> 
> In regards to whether powersaving or if acdc 1/1 is better? I'm not sure. It is probably situational.


So at IA AC/DC 1 would you consider preferable to use Medium LLC even if with High LLC I can reduce the DVID Offset of about 25mV (9900k at 5GHz), resulting in lower VRVOUT average and maximum readings in HWInfo? What's at stake, voltage spikes?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> Ask falkentyne, he will be more than happy to give you the full run down. I'm not well versed like he is in llc and I don't want to give you any bad information.


Yeah, he always gives plenty of useful information and I've already profited from some of it in this thread: maybe rereading some posts I'll find something related to this question. Anyway, thanks!


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> So at IA AC/DC 1 would you consider preferable to use Medium LLC even if with High LLC I can reduce the DVID Offset of about 25mV (9900k at 5GHz), resulting in lower VRVOUT average and maximum readings in HWInfo? What's at stake, voltage spikes?


Voltage spikes or dips are not a big problem if you don't go past high LLC, but using lower LLC for more vdroop will always increase transient response.

Contrary to buildzoid's testing where he said it doesn't, going lower than high LLC *does* improve transient response. It's just like Elmor tested on his XI Gene, which doesn't have the switching frequency bug. As I said many times, buildzoid only tested 400 and 500 khz and transients get worse with those. That's why he didn't show any improvements when he lowered LLC. You have to use 300 khz, but that only works on the IR 35201 boards.

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

Also I can't answer 'marginal' questions like the ones you asked. You need to do your own testing and determine what you like. While there is a big difference going from Turbo LLC to High LLC (note: 300khz improves Turbo LLC more than it does high LLC--the lower the LLC, the less the improvement from 300 khz), asking a question like: "Is 1.20v Bios set + high LLC, or 1.23v Bios set + Medium LLC better?" gets into the unrealistic perfectionist part, which is basically no point in answering because you are so far under the max safe voltage curve anyway. And please remember I don't use offset modes.


----------



## memery.uag

Falkentyne said:


> When I disabled XMP I couldn't even get the RAM to run at stock XMP speeds. It would just repeatedly fail to train and ran at 2800 mhz. I assume you need to know the exact sub and tertiary timings and terminations and manually enter them for that to work.


Hey man what exactly do you mean by 'train'. I have all but given up on trying to OC my chip, maybe this is something that would help?


----------



## Salve1412

Falkentyne said:


> Voltage spikes or dips are not a big problem if you don't go past high LLC, but using lower LLC for more vdroop will always increase transient response.
> 
> Contrary to buildzoid's testing where he said it doesn't, going lower than high LLC *does* improve transient response. It's just like Elmor tested on his XI Gene, which doesn't have the switching frequency bug. As I said many times, buildzoid only tested 400 and 500 khz and transients get worse with those. That's why he didn't show any improvements when he lowered LLC. You have to use 300 khz, but that only works on the IR 35201 boards.
> 
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> Also I can't answer 'marginal' questions like the ones you asked. You need to do your own testing and determine what you like. While there is a big difference going from Turbo LLC to High LLC (note: 300khz improves Turbo LLC more than it does high LLC--the lower the LLC, the less the improvement from 300 khz), asking a question like: "Is 1.20v Bios set + high LLC, or 1.23v Bios set + Medium LLC better?" gets into the unrealistic perfectionist part, which is basically no point in answering because you are so far under the max safe voltage curve anyway. And please remember I don't use offset modes.


Very interesting, I'll do my own testing, then. Thanks a lot!


----------



## Gen.

Good afternoon! Prompt, whether it is possible to force memory to work faster 4133 stably? How do you like the overall result?
BIOS: vDRAM 1.47V, vTraining 1.46V, vTT 0.742V, IO 1.16V, SA 1.20V (CPU: stock)
BIOS F11c (Link - https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html )


----------



## pXuis

So I might just have bricked my board trying to flash the modified f11c bios.

I used EFIflash in DOS with the /x command. NOT /db
So now when turning on, fans spin up for a second and immediately switches off. 

Here's the part that baffles me, the backup bios doesn't work. Flicked the switch to backup and it does the exact same thing. (tried sb and dB). So I'm thinking something else might be damaged? 

Any tips before I rma?


----------



## kamyk155

Simply question - what is the difference between:
Z390 AORUS MASTER(rev 1.0)
Z390 AORUS MASTER G2 Edition(rev 1.0)

Why I'm asking - because there is bios 11c for normal master and no new bios for G2 on the aorus site.


----------



## Gen.

kamyk155 said:


> Simply question - what is the difference between:
> Z390 AORUS MASTER(rev 1.0)
> Z390 AORUS MASTER G2 Edition(rev 1.0)
> 
> Why I'm asking - because there is bios 11c for normal master and no new bios for G2 on the aorus site.


Download them both using sha1 and sha256 (F10 bios). It seems to me that there is no difference, IMHO


----------



## TifxAlex

Hey team..
New to all this and I'm sure theres a post similar to mine somewhere in the Thread. (new to forums in general)


Z390 Aorus Master
9900k NHD15 Cooler
32gb 2x16 3600mhz CL17.. Looking for 4x8 due to T-Typology (any benifit?)
Seasonic Focus 850w Platinum
2080Ti


Where do I start?
Currently im running:
vt-D off
Integerated Graphics off
0.3+ USB DAC Up (for my audio interface)
1.2 System Agent
1.2 VCCIO
and Gaming Profile preset (?)

I used the advanced preset and saw spikes of 1.43+ under vCore in HWInfo with Turbo LLC, did not record VROut
Currently seeing 1.35 max VROUT under IR35201 under "gaming profile" @ 4.8ghz seeing 50c at the highest 

Would like to get to 5ghz

Actually hardcore OC youtube channel had 5.0ghz at 1.32 volts, and this was stable for my system as well, but the 1.44+ volt spikes caused for concern, this was at Turbo LLC


----------



## Dante007

After a lot of tests here i share my stable 5.1 Bios settings for 24/7 usage "Gaming-Render" If any question tell me

Using the following : 
Aorus Z390 Master F11C Mod Bios
Intel Core i9 9900K 5.1/4.7 Non-AVX 4.9/4.6 AVX
Aorus GTX 1080 Ti Xtreme 2088/1654 v1.093 375W TDP F3 Bios
Gskill Trident Z 3200 C14 4x8GB 4133 CL17 v1.48 SA 1.3/1.3
Gamerstorm Quadstellar
Gamerstorm Castle 360EX
Alphacool Eiswolf GPX-Pro 360
Deepcool 15x CF120 ARGB
Noctua 2x NF-A8 Chormax
Thermaltake Toughpower XT 1275W
Kingston KC2000 2TB NVME M.2
Kingston DC450R 3.84TB SSD
Avermedia Live Gamer 4K


----------



## Falkentyne

Dante007 said:


> After a lot of tests here i share my stable 5.1 Bios settings for 24/7 usage "Gaming-Render" If any question tell me
> 
> Using the following :
> Aorus Z390 Master F11C Mod Bios
> Intel Core i9 9900K 5.1/4.7 Non-AVX 4.9/4.6 AVX
> Aorus GTX 1080 Ti Xtreme 2088/1654 v1.093 375W TDP F3 Bios
> Gskill Trident Z 3200 C14 4x8GB 4133 CL17 v1.48 SA 1.3/1.3
> Gamerstorm Quadstellar
> Gamerstorm Castle 360EX
> Alphacool Eiswolf GPX-Pro 360
> Deepcool 15x CF120 ARGB
> Noctua 2x NF-A8 Chormax
> Thermaltake Toughpower XT 1275W
> Kingston KC2000 2TB NVME M.2
> Kingston DC450R 3.84TB SSD
> Avermedia Live Gamer 4K


Your "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" of power saving is discarded because you have Internal VR: AC/DC Loadlines set to a non-zero value.
And your VRM protection settings will shut off the entire computer if you exceed somewhere between 100 to 138 amps, far below spec.


----------



## Dante007

Falkentyne said:


> Your "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" of power saving is discarded because you have Internal VR: AC/DC Loadlines set to a non-zero value.
> And your VRM protection settings will shut off the entire computer if you exceed somewhere between 100 to 138 amps, far below spec.


If i set it to Auto sometimes i run the system and get higher than normal voltage so setting to powersaving and AC/DC 1/1 do the trick
For VRM Protaction i pass 250W zero problem
This settings stable for Prime 95 AVX 6 Hours / AIDA all tests for 5 hours / TM5 for 3 hours / Asus Realbench for 3 hours / Render 4K videos with handbreak / Inter Xtreme Test 20 runs / LinX 2 hours
Gaming / Gears 5 - NFS Heat/Payback also some computing tests zero problem or WHEA errors


----------



## TifxAlex

So im getting 1.3 VR VOUT reading for IR3501, yet my VID im seeing requesting upwards of 1.45

Can someone explain this?
VID is a request to the regulator, VOUT is actual voltage.. 
Do I worry about seeing such High spikes in VID?

EDIT: LLC set to medium
z390 Arous Master


----------



## LordGurciullo

Awesome stuff going on in this thread. Personally I'm satisfied with what I've done. I just got a 39ns on my ram and I don't feel the need to push it to get to 37ns. 

I'm running 1.335 fixed at 5.0 and 1.45 vram and 1.18 and 1.25 SA.

Question though. 


I see a lot of benefit from doing the dvid thing (especially at idle) but am I ok to run at vrout of 1.309 indefintely? 

and also Why don't I see ram temps on my hw info??


----------



## Falkentyne

Dante007 said:


> If i set it to Auto sometimes i run the system and get higher than normal voltage so setting to powersaving and AC/DC 1/1 do the trick
> For VRM Protaction i pass 250W zero problem
> This settings stable for Prime 95 AVX 6 Hours / AIDA all tests for 5 hours / TM5 for 3 hours / Asus Realbench for 3 hours / Render 4K videos with handbreak / Inter Xtreme Test 20 runs / LinX 2 hours
> Gaming / Gears 5 - NFS Heat/Payback also some computing tests zero problem or WHEA errors


I tested "Normal" for CPU VRM current protection yesterday and the system shut off during a small FFT FMA3 prime95 test (quickly).
It did not shut off on "high" or "Extreme". I did not test "Normal" on offset voltage. I still have no idea what the difference between "Normal" and "Standard" are here either, except on fixed vcore, it's less than 138 amps.

And you are wrong about the AC settings.
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear last time, but "Power Saving" and the "0.01 Internal VR Settings" conflict with each other.
They are the same settings register and you set them to two values at once.

Internal VR settings has higher priority over "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line".
If you set ANY value in Internal VR Settings that is not 0, which is auto, it overwrites anything set in "CPU Internal Load Line". So the "Power Saving" preset is ignored.

If you don't believe me, open up HWinfo, go to the main CPU information window, scroll down a few pages and you will see the AC and DC Settings there. It will show 0.01 mOhms. Because 1 (divided by 100) is 0.01.
Go look for yourself.

The presets for "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" are:

Auto: Whatever the board wants to set.
Power Saving: 0.4 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms
Balanced: 1.0 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms
Turbo: 1.6 mOhms / 1.6 mOhms (max Intel spec for 8 core processors)
Extreme: 2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms (max intel spec for 4 and 6 core processors).

Therefore you are NOT using power saving at all (0.4 mOhms ACLL / 1.3 mOhms DCLL).
You are using 0.01 mOhms AC Loadline.


----------



## Alemancio

LordGurciullo said:


> Awesome stuff going on in this thread. Personally I'm satisfied with what I've done. I just got a 39ns on my ram and I don't feel the need to push it to get to 37ns.
> 
> I'm running 1.335 fixed at 5.0 and 1.45 vram and 1.18 and 1.25 SA.
> 
> Question though.
> 
> 
> I see a lot of benefit from doing the dvid thing (especially at idle) but am I ok to run at vrout of 1.309 indefintely?
> 
> and also Why don't I see ram temps on my hw info??


Hi, can you share your settings? I've been struggling to get my Ram stable at 3900 @ 15-15-15-32-32k-280-2T


----------



## TifxAlex

thanks dudes


3733 Ram at Cl 17 17 17 37
3600 at Cl 16 16 16 36


I'd bet these are the same chips.. 
Thoughts?

and if you have to buy, the 3733 kit or 3600 kit


----------



## Gen.

*TifxAlex*
I bought it F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK for Z390 Master and got it 4133 16-16-36


----------



## TifxAlex

Gen. said:


> *TifxAlex*
> I bought it F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK for Z390 Master and got it 4133 16-16-36


:thumb:

Out of stock -_-


waiting !
I dont need RGB but, F4-3600C16Q-32GTZN
I may just go with F4-3733C17Q-32GTZSW


----------



## Grizzly111

Gen. said:


> *TifxAlex*
> I bought it F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK for Z390 Master and got it 4133 16-16-36



Is it stable? What voltage? That result is awesome!


----------



## BigMack70

Memory noob question here: If I am not overclocking memory beyond XMP, and I do not need the capacity, is there any performance based reason to upgrade from two 16 gig sticks of 3600 CL16 memory up to four 16 gig sticks?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> 4 sticks 8GB each for 32gb total vs 2 sticks of 16GB each for 32gb total will produce more frames at the same exact frequency and timings in most games by anywhere from 2%-5% on average. This is due to interleaving between the channels. It is not cost effective to upgrade from a 2x16gb 3600 kit to a 4x8gb 3600 kit. I would however recommend upgrading from your 2x16gb 3600 kit to a 4x8GB CL17/4000 or higher kit if you want some serious gains in FPS provided you are willing to spend the time manually tuning the kit. In otherwords, don't waste money upgrading to the same kit at 4 sticks, just go for a substantially better 4 stick kit if you want serious gains and are playing 240hz 1080p with a 2080 ti. If you are playing at 1440p or 4k, don't even bother since ram barely impacts gaming at those resolutions. This advice is for those who only use their pc for gaming/browsing.


Thanks. I'm at a mix of 1440p 120 or 4k60 right now depending on the game/genre, and eventually 4k120 once the GPUs are there to power it. Sounds like I'm good where I'm at. I think I didn't do enough homework before making my purchase; saw a bunch of things about dual rank modules being preferable to single rank and so bought this kit to make sure the dimms were dual rank when, after more research, I think I should have gone with a 4x8 kit as you say. This upgrade was the closest thing to an impulse upgrade I've ever done and I'm remembering why I ordinarily spend a few months researching everything before buying.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

I'm on 4133 17 17 17 34. I didn't want to increase the voltage to push 3900 15 15 15


----------



## LordGurciullo

Agreed. The only reason I am going so hard is I want 240fps with my 240hz benq xl2546. 

If you're on 1440 it matters so much less and it means nothing at 4k.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> Yeah you are fine where you are. Right now the only thing that can properly power 4k 120hz at full ultra settings across the board is two overclocked + watercooled 2080 ti partner cards. But nvidia's sli support is garbage, they are inconsistent in supporting it and always has been so I honestly wouldn't recommend a dual card set up at all. Best to wait till there is a single gpu available capable of powering it.


Titan X Maxwell was the last pair of cards I used in SLI. The support just isn't there anymore for it. Which is a shame... I miss running dual GPU.


----------



## sygnus21

KedarWolf said:


> Modded Xtreme F9c, latest RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware, fastest microcodes.


I know this says "Xtreme" but I just want to double check that this is for the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme? Just checking before I download and install.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Dante007

Falkentyne said:


> I tested "Normal" for CPU VRM current protection yesterday and the system shut off during a small FFT FMA3 prime95 test (quickly).
> It did not shut off on "high" or "Extreme". I did not test "Normal" on offset voltage. I still have no idea what the difference between "Normal" and "Standard" are here either, except on fixed vcore, it's less than 138 amps.
> 
> And you are wrong about the AC settings.
> I'm sorry if I wasn't clear last time, but "Power Saving" and the "0.01 Internal VR Settings" conflict with each other.
> They are the same settings register and you set them to two values at once.
> 
> Internal VR settings has higher priority over "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line".
> If you set ANY value in Internal VR Settings that is not 0, which is auto, it overwrites anything set in "CPU Internal Load Line". So the "Power Saving" preset is ignored.
> 
> If you don't believe me, open up HWinfo, go to the main CPU information window, scroll down a few pages and you will see the AC and DC Settings there. It will show 0.01 mOhms. Because 1 (divided by 100) is 0.01.
> Go look for yourself.
> 
> The presets for "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" are:
> 
> Auto: Whatever the board wants to set.
> Power Saving: 0.4 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms
> Balanced: 1.0 mOhms / 1.3 mOhms
> Turbo: 1.6 mOhms / 1.6 mOhms (max Intel spec for 8 core processors)
> Extreme: 2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms (max intel spec for 4 and 6 core processors).
> 
> Therefore you are NOT using power saving at all (0.4 mOhms ACLL / 1.3 mOhms DCLL).
> You are using 0.01 mOhms AC Loadline.


I attached to you small FFT FMA3 prime95 "AVX load" test and no shut down by anytime i test
I want 0.1 mOhms for AC/DC that prove it's way better for stability in my Z370 Formula and 8700K and the same for master and 9900K "higher voltage in idle but i'm okay with it"
for me if i leave CPU internal AC/DC at auto it will set it close to Balanced profile even set ac/dc at 1 after power cycle it will ignore ac/dc at 1
I restart many time and do power cycle to make sure the same settings applied and yep it's fully stable for whatever you throw at it
Why i share this setting because i was going crazy after test cpu alone and cache than overclock memory everything will be stable after a full power cycle nothing will be stable for unknown reasons it takes near a month of tests to reach this results that magically works perfect


----------



## Falkentyne

Dante007 said:


> I attached to you small FFT FMA3 prime95 "AVX load" test and no shut down by anytime i test
> I want 0.1 mOhms for AC/DC that prove it's way better for stability in my Z370 Formula and 8700K and the same for master and 9900K "higher voltage in idle but i'm okay with it"
> for me if i leave CPU internal AC/DC at auto it will set it close to Balanced profile even set ac/dc at 1 after power cycle it will ignore ac/dc at 1
> I restart many time and do power cycle to make sure the same settings applied and yep it's fully stable for whatever you throw at it
> Why i share this setting because i was going crazy after test cpu alone and cache than overclock memory everything will be stable after a full power cycle nothing will be stable for unknown reasons it takes near a month of tests to reach this results that magically works perfect


Thank you for sharing this.
Ok, so "Normal" Current protection acts differently depending on whether you are using offset or fixed voltages.


----------



## Gen.

BigMack70 said:


> Titan X Maxwell was the last pair of cards I used in SLI. The support just isn't there anymore for it. *Which is a shame*... I miss running dual GPU.


Please! Russian Test [email protected]+RAM 4000 17-17-34 + down secondary timings.


----------



## KedarWolf

sygnus21 said:


> I know this says "Xtreme" but I just want to double check that this is for the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme? Just checking before I download and install.


Yes, Z390 XTreme.


----------



## robertr1

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, Z390 XTreme.


Did you not keep the Apex? I'm quite happy with mine but that's going from a Pro to an Apex, not a Master.


----------



## BradleyW

Hi, just a quick one here..., which slot out of the three is best to install an NVMe drive for the best performance without taking bandwidth from anything important such as the GPU, CPU and RAM? I have no other storage devices connected. Z390 ULTRA.


----------



## TifxAlex

Dante007 said:


> After a lot of tests here i share my stable 5.1 Bios settings for 24/7 usage "Gaming-Render" If any question tell me
> 
> Using the following :
> Aorus Z390 Master F11C Mod Bios
> Intel Core i9 9900K 5.1/4.7 Non-AVX 4.9/4.6 AVX
> Aorus GTX 1080 Ti Xtreme 2088/1654 v1.093 375W TDP F3 Bios
> Gskill Trident Z 3200 C14 4x8GB 4133 CL17 v1.48 SA 1.3/1.3
> Gamerstorm Quadstellar
> Gamerstorm Castle 360EX
> Alphacool Eiswolf GPX-Pro 360
> Deepcool 15x CF120 ARGB
> Noctua 2x NF-A8 Chormax
> Thermaltake Toughpower XT 1275W
> Kingston KC2000 2TB NVME M.2
> Kingston DC450R 3.84TB SSD
> Avermedia Live Gamer 4K



Thanks for this!
Question where would I find the modded bios? Is the critical to using these settings?
Also I’m air cooled and 1.4v seems high. Do you think the NHD15 can cool 9900k at this voltage?


----------



## TifxAlex

BradleyW said:


> Hi, just a quick one here..., which slot out of the three is best to install an NVMe drive for the best performance without taking bandwidth from anything important such as the GPU, CPU and RAM? I have no other storage devices connected. Z390 ULTRA.


I’m a newb. 
Had the same questions and ultimately installed 2 nvme into M2M and M2A. 
The drives run through the chipset regardless of what slot. 

Now someone correct me if I’m wrong but the specific slots only effect what Sata ports it will
Share bandwidth with if you decide to use those Sata ports. 
I chose M2M and M2A is that I can have SATA 0 2 4 and PCIEx4 available. 

Doubt there would be a difference in performance between the slots but what do I know

Hope this helps


----------



## Dante007

TifxAlex said:


> Thanks for this!
> Question where would I find the modded bios? Is the critical to using these settings?
> Also I’m air cooled and 1.4v seems high. Do you think the NHD15 can cool 9900k at this voltage?


You will find it here : https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-605.html#post28249904 By @KedarWolf

I test Noctua NH-D15 Chromax Black vs my castle 360ex almost 18c so i suggest 1.32v and 5.0 for non-avx and 3 offset avx for 4.7 for avx load start with same settings for CPU and only xmp loaded with 0.010 mv


----------



## TifxAlex

Dante007 said:


> You will find it here : https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-605.html#post28249904 By @KedarWolf
> 
> I test Noctua NH-D15 Chromax Black vs my castle 360ex almost 18c so i suggest 1.32v and 5.0 for non-avx and 3 offset avx for 4.7 for avx load start with same settings for CPU and only xmp loaded with 0.010 mv


When you say same settings for CPU, you're talking the advanced voltages right? Like Powersaver, LLC, VCCIO, System Agent etc.. along with the IA VR config and GT VR Config?


----------



## wholeeo

What would typically be the cause of getting hard freezes at idle? Just ran Real Bench for about 4 hours and when I stopped it a few minutes later I got a hard freeze where reset button doesn't even work. I'm assuming my idle voltage may be dropping too low.


----------



## TwinTurbo

I upgraded to a 9900KS coupled with the Aorus Master. I installed a 1TB WD Black SN750 m.2 drive in the M2M slot. However, it was not recognized in the BIOS or when I attempted to install Windows. I moved the drive to M2A thinking M2M might be bad. However, I have the same result with M2A.

Any ideas why the drive is not being recognized in the BIOS or by Windows?


----------



## cathammer

TwinTurbo said:


> I upgraded to a 9900KS coupled with the Aorus Master. I installed a 1TB WD Black SN750 m.2 drive in the M2M slot. However, it was not recognized in the BIOS or when I attempted to install Windows. I moved the drive to M2A thinking M2M might be bad. However, I have the same result with M2A.
> 
> Any ideas why the drive is not being recognized in the BIOS or by Windows?


If it's a brand new build without any custom BIOS settings you may have entered, and the drive isn't being recognized in any of the m2 slots on the Master, then my guess is a DOA drive. 

I've ordered a lot of NVME drives lately from Amazon & Newegg, and although it doesn't happen often, a few of them just no-worky. Just RMA and move on - the next 99 you order will be just fine. 

Do you have a laptop or another PC laying around that could help you confirm it's a bad drive?


----------



## TwinTurbo

cathammer said:


> If it's a brand new build without any custom BIOS settings you may have entered, and the drive isn't being recognized in any of the m2 slots on the Master, then my guess is a DOA drive.
> 
> I've ordered a lot of NVME drives lately from Amazon & Newegg, and although it doesn't happen often, a few of them just no-worky. Just RMA and move on - the next 99 you order will be just fine.
> 
> Do you have a laptop or another PC laying around that could help you confirm it's a bad drive?


I re-seated the drive and it was recognized. It took more force to get it to seat correctly than I realized.

Thanks for the quick response though! Feel free to mock me mercilessly


----------



## Dante007

TifxAlex said:


> When you say same settings for CPU, you're talking the advanced voltages right? Like Powersaver, LLC, VCCIO, System Agent etc.. along with the IA VR config and GT VR Config?


Edit the CPU Volt as your cooler can hold the temps


----------



## Dante007

TifxAlex said:


> When you say same settings for CPU, you're talking the advanced voltages right? Like Powersaver, LLC, VCCIO, System Agent etc.. along with the IA VR config and GT VR Config?


Yes same settings but for SA/IO you could start 1.2 or 1.3 as baseline


----------



## sygnus21

@KedarWolf

Thanks. I'll give it a try after I backup everything to include my current BIOS.


----------



## sygnus21

BradleyW said:


> Hi, just a quick one here..., which slot out of the three is best to install an NVMe drive for the best performance without taking bandwidth from anything important such as the GPU, CPU and RAM? I have no other storage devices connected. Z390 ULTRA.


Hi, I have the Xtreme, and the best m.2 slot there is the bottom one which costs no SATA or PCEI slots. With that I can't speak on your board, but I do know Gigabyte includes a matrix in the owner's manual telling you which m.2 slots depending on drive (PCEI vs. SATA) will determine which SATA and PCI slots are affected. That said, try not to put the drive under the GPU, if possible.

Let me know if you have further questions.

Oh, and in case you hadn't noticed... if you aren't talking about overclocking, non-overclock questions tend to get lost or ignored. I personally think there should have been a sub-forum for anything overclock since non-overclock questions get lost here.

My two cents.


----------



## Driller au

wholeeo said:


> What would typically be the cause of getting hard freezes at idle? Just ran Real Bench for about 4 hours and when I stopped it a few minutes later I got a hard freeze where reset button doesn't even work. I'm assuming my idle voltage may be dropping too low.


If you have the C-states disabled try just enabling C3 this often fixes this,did for me and other users here


----------



## Alemancio

*Is there a bug on F11c & 4000MHz?*

I've spent the whole weekend trying to stabilize 16-16-16-34 B-Die at so many different VCCSA & IO & vDIMMs and always got so many random errors in KarHu (many times even at 7%). 

Now I was able to tweak all 2nd & 3rd timings (stock main ones are 17-17-17 at 4000MHz) and as soon as I dropped to 16-16-16 its just impossible to stabilize. I also noticed weird and high RTL & IOLs timings.

*HOWEVER, as soon as I dropped to 3900MHz, my RAM trains at this and it's rock stable:*

RAM: 2x F4-4000C17D-16GTZR
Settings: Aorus Master F11C & 9900KF
Frequencies: Core: 5.0GHz | Cache 4.7GHz
Voltages: SA: 1.24v | IO: 1.2v IO | Core: 1.325v | RAM: 1.47v

Doing 4000MHz CL16, regardless of voltage, is impossible.


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> *Is there a bug on F11c & 4000MHz?*
> 
> I've spent the whole weekend trying to stabilize 16-16-16-34 B-Die at so many different VCCSA & IO & vDIMMs and always got so many random errors in KarHu (many times even at 7%).
> 
> Now I was able to tweak all 2nd & 3rd timings (stock main ones are 17-17-17 at 4000MHz) and as soon as I dropped to 16-16-16 its just impossible to stabilize. I also noticed weird and high RTL & IOLs timings.
> 
> *HOWEVER, as soon as I dropped to 3900MHz, my RAM trains at this and it's rock stable:*
> 
> RAM: 2x F4-4000C17D-16GTZR
> Settings: Aorus Master F11C & 9900KF
> Frequencies: Core: 5.0GHz | Cache 4.7GHz
> Voltages: SA: 1.24v | IO: 1.2v IO | Core: 1.325v | RAM: 1.47v
> 
> Doing 4000MHz CL16, regardless of voltage, is impossible.


Easiest answer to this.
skip 4000 and go directly to 4133.


----------



## Alemancio

Falkentyne said:


> Easiest answer to this.
> skip 4000 and go directly to 4133.


Thanks Falkentyne, honor to read you again.

Any improvements on the timings you see? I followed this guide.


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> Thanks Falkentyne, honor to read you again.
> 
> Any improvements on the timings you see? I followed this guide.


I know nothing about memory except what is written on the DDR4 thread. I can't help with that, sorry.


----------



## wholeeo

Driller au said:


> If you have the C-states disabled try just enabling C3 this often fixes this,did for me and other users here


I had them all enabled. Just enabled up to C3 and disabled the rest. Seems to have fixed things. Looks like it started happening recently though as I've been trying to figure out my minimum stable voltage. Guess I got to a point where if C-States are enabled low end voltage may not be right.


----------



## Sheyster

TwinTurbo said:


> I re-seated the drive and it was recognized. It took more force to get it to seat correctly than I realized.
> 
> Thanks for the quick response though! Feel free to mock me mercilessly


----------



## Driller au

wholeeo said:


> I had them all enabled. Just enabled up to C3 and disabled the rest. Seems to have fixed things. Looks like it started happening recently though as I've been trying to figure out my minimum stable voltage. Guess I got to a point where if C-States are enabled low end voltage may not be right.


Talk about hexing yourself just after i replied i had a low load freeze but i am trying a different way to OC than my usual way, using auto DVID and AC/DC loadline


----------



## GeneO

wholeeo said:


> I had them all enabled. Just enabled up to C3 and disabled the rest. Seems to have fixed things. Looks like it started happening recently though as I've been trying to figure out my minimum stable voltage. Guess I got to a point where if C-States are enabled low end voltage may not be right.


Package C-states do not play well at all with sleep. Setting package C-states to Auto basically disables them (except for the "running" c-state of course). I had this issue. I am able to enable all core c-states with auto package with no issues.


----------



## Dante007

Alemancio said:


> *Is there a bug on F11c & 4000MHz?*
> 
> I've spent the whole weekend trying to stabilize 16-16-16-34 B-Die at so many different VCCSA & IO & vDIMMs and always got so many random errors in KarHu (many times even at 7%).
> 
> Now I was able to tweak all 2nd & 3rd timings (stock main ones are 17-17-17 at 4000MHz) and as soon as I dropped to 16-16-16 its just impossible to stabilize. I also noticed weird and high RTL & IOLs timings.
> 
> *HOWEVER, as soon as I dropped to 3900MHz, my RAM trains at this and it's rock stable:*
> 
> RAM: 2x F4-4000C17D-16GTZR
> Settings: Aorus Master F11C & 9900KF
> Frequencies: Core: 5.0GHz | Cache 4.7GHz
> Voltages: SA: 1.24v | IO: 1.2v IO | Core: 1.325v | RAM: 1.47v
> 
> Doing 4000MHz CL16, regardless of voltage, is impossible.



Increase tRTP to 12 and tRAS to 38 and make ref clock 133 and RTT 60/60/20/20/40/40 or 60/60/120/120/40/40 "depend on your memory" or try 4133 CL17 with tRas 40 this my settings for 3200CL14 Memory
I notice that your memory is 4000CL17 already so i guess the problem with tRAS increase it to 38 or 40 that will help stability


----------



## Medvediy

Dante007 said:


> Increase tRTP to 12 and tRAS to 38 and make ref clock 133 and RTT 60/60/20/20/40/40 or 60/60/120/120/40/40 "depend on your memory" or try 4133 CL17 with tRas 40 this my settings for 3200CL14 Memory
> I notice that your memory is 4000CL17 already so i guess the problem with tRAS increase it to 38 or 40 that will help stability


You've got bad training, but it's regular thing for GB mobos, they train bad for frequency higher than 3900.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

So... anyone overclock any ladies this weekend ?

Also.

My WD Black drive makes a ******* noise every 5 seconds and I want to throw it against the wall... apparently its normal for this drive.. I may end up getting a ssd drive 2 terabytes to replace this 6 terabyte dude... any suggestions? Cheap .... 

Also... Any other antivirus that doesn't use 150 ******* mb? Anyone ever heard of Cylance? Thoughts?


----------



## Medvediy

LordGurciullo said:


> So... anyone overclock any ladies this weekend ?
> 
> Also.
> 
> My WD Black drive makes a ******* noise every 5 seconds and I want to throw it against the wall... apparently its normal for this drive.. I may end up getting a ssd drive 2 terabytes to replace this 6 terabyte dude... any suggestions? Cheap ....
> 
> Also... Any other antivirus that doesn't use 150 ******* mb? Anyone ever heard of Cylance? Thoughts?


That's why I changed all my HDDs from my old PC to SSDs in my new build. Those noises from 2 HDDs was no so irritating when my old PC was under table. But new one I placed on table and HDD noises was so annoying that I've bought 2x1tb ssds and forgot about HDDs parking sounds.


----------



## wholeeo

Seriously, I have an 8 TB external that's louder than my entire rig I'm about to decommission. Also have a laptop HDD and a 3TB in my system I may also get rid of. Ideally I no longer want to see any sata cables in my rig.


----------



## Medvediy

Delete


----------



## sygnus21

Medvediy said:


> Just to clear out one thing. F11c bios from gigabyte.com for z390 aorus master could be updated on MOBO via Qflash from BIOS? Or I only need to use efiflash?


I use Qflash to flash my BIOS as I find it extremely simple. I'm running the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme.


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> I use Qflash to flash my BIOS as I find it extremely simple. I'm running the Gigabyte Z390 Xtreme.


Qflash can not flash a modded BIOS. You can hex edit a modded BIOS to allow flashing, instructions are on win-raid.
Efiflash can flash a modded Bios.

There is an efiflash 0.80 modded by Dsanke which will allow dual bios flashing of both bios chips (the unmodded version allows this with /DB) and the modded version disables the OEM ID check and compatibility checks so you can crossflash (example: flashing the Xtreme 5G Waterforce Bios onto the Xtreme for the adaptive voltage / ring voltage / VID voltage settings).


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Qflash can not flash a modded BIOS. You can hex edit a modded BIOS to allow flashing, instructions are on win-raid.
> Efiflash can flash a modded Bios.
> 
> There is an efiflash 0.80 modded by Dsanke which will allow dual bios flashing of both bios chips (the unmodded version allows this with /DB) and the modded version disables the OEM ID check and compatibility checks so you can crossflash (example: flashing the Xtreme 5G Waterforce Bios onto the Xtreme for the adaptive voltage / ring voltage / VID voltage settings).


"F11c bios from gigabyte.com" is not modded.


----------



## Alemancio

*Alemancio*

Same here, I get different RTLs / IOLs every time I clear BIOS and some times my saved BIOS settings are unstable and others rock stable.

What is a good way to re-train?

How can we ID good/bad RTLs/IOLs?



reachthesky said:


> This is as high as ram frequency I can get with good rtls/iols. Have to train cl15 3900 and then use 102.3 bclk overclock. anything higher and it trains crappy rtls/iols.


----------



## wholeeo

On the Master which setting is Write to Read Delay (Non L / S)?

Also, do we have access to tWRPRE or is it not necessary since we have access to TWR?


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> BradleyW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any room for improvement on this?
> 
> FMA3 AVX Blend with Max RAM usage.
> 
> 9900K 5GHz HT.
> Ring x46.
> Vcore Offset +.020.
> LLC Low
> IA AC/DC LLC Power Saving.
> IA AC/DC 0 (default).
> 
> Windows:
> Vcore 1.3v
> VR VOUT 1.2v
> Power Draw 174A.
> 
> Would I be better off using IA AC/DC @ 1? Would this be safe with a higher LLC of say....medium or high?
> If IA AC/DC are set to 1, should IA AC/DC LLC be set to Auto from Power Saving?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is how I perceive it:
> IA ACDC 1/1 + medium llc + dvid offset mode is similar to using fixed manual voltage with turbo llc in the way of strength of llc. When I turn on windows maximum power plan, 5ghz idles around 1.3v and droops to 1.25v under non-avx full load just like turbo llc + 1.3v fixed manual voltage in bios would.
> 
> IA ACDC 1/1 + high llc + dvid offset mode is similar to using fixed manual voltage in bios with extreme llc in the way of strength of llc.
> 
> In regards to whether powersaving or if acdc 1/1 is better? I'm not sure. It is probably situational.
Click to expand...

In terms of LLC strength, as you put it, does this have any link to transient voltage strengh?

I'm trying to figure out if it is a good thing to use low AI AC DC values, and how much LLC is safe with said values.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Alemancio

reachthesky said:


> I'm not sure what is considered good/bad for rtls/iols, just generally want them as low as possible. There seems to be no way to lower rtls/iols for 4000mhz and 4133mhz, we are stuck with whatever the motherboard gives us.


Its just weird that when they're all over the place (say 81/86/84/82 & 12/14/4/12) my ram is very unstable. But when I get more stable values, my system is very stable (say 85/85/85/85 and 6/6/6/6)

For example, this trained beautifully:


----------



## LordGurciullo

Hey guys! So I'm thinking of returning the WD BLack and getting the intel p660 2 tb nvme.

HOWEVER. When unscrewing the 3rd slot nvme drive on the master the screw and the thing it screws into came out... I'm not sure if that slot is still useable? Any ideas guys?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

LordGurciullo said:


> Hey guys! So I'm thinking of returning the WD BLack and getting the intel p660 2 tb nvme.
> 
> HOWEVER. When unscrewing the 3rd slot nvme drive on the master the screw and the thing it screws into came out... I'm not sure if that slot is still useable? Any ideas guys?


I didn't even use it the first three months, just pushed it into the pci slot and put the metal with thermal pad over it


----------



## LordGurciullo

Yes. The entire thing came out so theres nothing to screw it into now (the metal heatsink) (this is the one under the vid card)

Looking at inland premium tlc 2tb

Also. Which slot should I use. I'm already using the first slot nearest the cpu... second one seems to be under the video card... should I use third? Are there any issues there like sharing bandwidth with vid card?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BradleyW

From reading the manual on the Ultra, populating NVMe slots can only take bandwidth from SATAIII and the PCI-E x4 slot. 

However, "all but one" NVMe slots support non-PCI-E NVMe drives. If you have an NMVe drive which isn't PCI-E based, make sure you use either of the two correct NVMe slots for your drive out of the potential 3 slots.


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> Qflash can not flash a modded BIOS.


I know that. I can only go by what's posted. The OP asked about the F11C BIOS for the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master board. That BIOS is NOT modded or else it wouldn't be on Gigabytes site for download. 

Thanks.


----------



## wholeeo

LordGurciullo said:


> Yes. The entire thing came out so theres nothing to screw it into now (the metal heatsink) (this is the one under the vid card)
> 
> Looking at inland premium tlc 2tb
> 
> Also. Which slot should I use. I'm already using the first slot nearest the cpu... second one seems to be under the video card... should I use third? Are there any issues there like sharing bandwidth with vid card?


I have the 1TB version, thinking about getting the 2TB one too :thumb:



reachthesky said:


> *I have all the nvme slots populated and the 4 usable sata ports populated, no issues with gpu bandwidth. *
> 
> Screw the stand off back into the motherboard that way you have something to screw the screw into.


Same here. :thumb: Though I want to get rid of all HDD's and anything SATA.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> If i could only get good rtls/iols for this profile ><


What are your rtt and memory improver settings? Can I take a screenshot? I am almost close to You and have 4133 16-16. By the way, your tWR=16, tRTP=8, tRDWR=12


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## sygnus21

BradleyW said:


> From reading the manual on the Ultra, populating NVMe slots can only take bandwidth from SATAIII and the PCI-E x4 slot.
> 
> However, "all but one" NVMe slots support non-PCI-E NVMe drives. If you have an NMVe drive which isn't PCI-E based, make sure you use either of the two correct NVMe slots for your drive out of the potential 3 slots.


A bit of clarification...

An m.2 "port" is simply an interface for an m.2 drive with is simply a form factor (m.2 slim stick drive vs. the 2.5 inch SATA rectangular drive). M.2 drives come in two flavors - SATA or NVMe (Non-Volatile Memory Express) drives. Thus when talking about m.2's you need to specify SATA or NVMe.

All modern day boards like those discussed here support both SATA and NVMe m.2 drives, and the only thing you need to worry about is what SATA or PCI-E ports may be disabled depending on what m.2 drive is used in which m.2 port. This is why it helps to review the m.2 matrix chart in the owner's manual. There will be a matrix for each m.2 slot on the board with an X stating what will happen with what SATA or PCI-E port if either a SATA or NVMe drive is installed in that m.2 port.

Just FYI.


----------



## GeneO

sygnus21 said:


> A bit of clarification...
> 
> An m.2 "port" is simply an interface for an m.2 drive with is simply a form factor (m.2 slim stick drive vs. the 2.5 inch SATA rectangular drive). M.2 drives come in two flavors - SATA or NVMe (Non-Volatile Memory Express) drives. Thus when talking about m.2's you need to specify SATA or NVMe.
> 
> All modern day boards like those discussed here will support either SATA or NVMe m.2 drives in any of the m.2 ports, and the only thing you need to worry about is what SATA or PCI-E ports may be disabled depending on what m.2 drive is used in which m.2 port. This is why it helps to review the m.2 matrix chart in the owner's manual. There will be a matrix for each m.2 slot on the board with an X stating what will happen with what SATA or PCI-E port if either a SATA or NVMe drive is installed in that m.2 port.
> 
> Just FYI.


Just to be precise, not all m.2 ports support both SATA and NVME SSD. E.g. one m.2 port on the master only supports NVME SSD.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> If i could only get good rtls/iols for this profile ><


May I ask you which values of DRAM Voltage, VCCIO, VCCSA are you using for this profile? Thanks!


----------



## Gen.

On an estimation. How do I get a stable 4200?

Settings: https://yadi.sk/d/eIBy_VCxF4e8-A


----------



## sygnus21

GeneO said:


> Just to be precise, not all m.2 ports support both SATA and NVME SSD. E.g. one m.2 port on the master only supports NVME SSD.


I stand corrected. I looked this up, then looked at my Z390 Aorus Xtreme (also 3 m.2 ports) and both the Master and Xtreme are the same... the last m.2 port only supports NVMe (PCIE) drives! 

BTW, I checked both my Gigabyte GA-Z270X Gaming 8 and GA-Z170X GT boards (both featuring two m.2 ports) and no such limitation exists there so it may be a limitation with boards with three m.2 ports (guess?).

Thanks for the correction.


----------



## Alemancio

Gen. said:


> On an estimation. How do I get a stable 4200?
> 
> Settings: https://yadi.sk/d/eIBy_VCxF4e8-A


tRDWR's seem low specially the '1'.

Check this guide.


----------



## Johaho

Alemancio said:


> tRDWR's seem low specially the '1'.
> 
> The 1 are not in use.
> 
> dr=Different Rank Timing: only in use when running dual rank rams.
> dd=Different Dimm Timing: only in use when 4 slots populatet


----------



## LordGurciullo

the third port which is the one I'm looking at says it will only support PCIe SSds and will affect the bandwidth of the pciex4 connector... 

I only have one vid card so I dont care and am looking at the inland Premium NVME SSD - this will work without issue right?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Just ordered the NVME drive. I'm excited... I read something about it increasing fps? either way it will be ******* quiet. 

Thinking of trying for 5.1.

Whats the highest I Can go with Voltage 1.395??? With High or medium LLC to try for stable 5.1?


----------



## Sheyster

LordGurciullo said:


> Just ordered the NVME drive. I'm excited... I read something about it increasing fps? either way it will be ******* quiet.
> 
> Thinking of trying for 5.1.
> 
> Whats the highest I Can go with Voltage 1.395??? With High or medium LLC to try for stable 5.1?


If you're only gaming and not benching why even bother?


----------



## sygnus21

LordGurciullo said:


> the third port which is the one I'm looking at says it will only support PCIe SSds and will affect the bandwidth of the pciex4 connector...
> 
> I only have one vid card so I dont care and am looking at the inland Premium NVME SSD - this will work without issue right?


If you don't use or care about that port, no problem.


----------



## sygnus21

LordGurciullo said:


> Just ordered the NVME drive. I'm excited... I read something about it increasing fps? either way it will be ******* quiet.
> 
> Thinking of trying for 5.1.
> 
> Whats the highest I Can go with Voltage 1.395??? With High or medium LLC to try for stable 5.1?


Some of the questions you're asking leaves me a little concerned. Do understand an NVMe drive isn't going to massively increase frame rates or do jack for your overclocks, right? 

All an NVMe drive is going to do is speed up your read and writes to programs. Allow programs to open faster, games to load quicker. However, it's not going add much to FPS over a standard HDD - may a frame or two. 

I've five SSD drives in total in my system (no HDDs) - two NVME, and three SATA. My games are installed on the slowest SSD drive in my system because putting them on the NVMe is a waste of time and storage. Again, nothing to gain by doing so. 

Anyway other than being faster and quieter than a traditional HDD drive you're not gaining much on FPS, and nothing on overclocking. 

Enjoy.


----------



## sygnus21

Sheyster said:


> If you're only gaming and not benching why even bother?


Because an SSD whether NVMe or SATA is still a better performer than a HDD drive. Thus all things being equal, an system with an SSD drive will quicker than one with an HDD drive. And an NVMe drive would be faster than a SATA SSD drive. Would you notice the difference between those two? Depends on what you're doing? Gaming? NO!!!


----------



## Driller au

@Falkentyne 
Have i got this right doing a doing a IA AC/DC OC
Vcore auto
LLC low
IA AC whatever for stability in my case 45 for 50/46 OC and 70 for 51/47 OC
IA DC 130 because of low LLC <- VID should be as close as possible to VR Vout
If i changed to MED LLC i would use 100 IA DC ?

In testing this VR VOUT is about +0.040 to VID at idle, max VR VOUT is spot on 
Read through a lot of your posts today so no need to go into full detail


----------



## coolkwc

Guys, here is my story.

My Aorus Master was malfunctioned last month, it won't post, nothing at all. So i just RMA and the replacement just returned yesterday.

The board is new, at least from the serial no and its appearance (dust free) So i hook up everything back but the system failed to start. Instead it give a 5 long beep and continue in bootloop.

The manual is useless, as it never mentioned the error beep. The LED debug shown 55 which refer to RAM initialise issue. To further verify whether is RAM, i removed the RAM and it sound 5 long beep as well, just that the long beep occur much faster without RAM installed.

I try to just put the RAM one stick at a time, still no success. So i rule out is the RAM damage as i don't believe both can malfunction together.

I start to speculate whether my replacement board is come with outdated BIOS and my RAM isn't compatible with it. But without boot up i can't really check and update the BIOS if thats the case.

My RAM is Kingston HyperX Predator RGB 3200MHz 16GB x 2, CPU i9-9900K.

What i did yesterday was ordered a stick of Corsair Value Select 2666MHz 4GB for testing purpose, still waiting the arrival of it. This RAM model no. Is inside the memory support list as found in Gigabtye website, so i think it will not have any compatibility issue.

Before that just would like to know is my speculation possible?


----------



## wholeeo

coolkwc said:


> Guys, here is my story.
> 
> My Aorus Master was malfunctioned last month, it won't post, nothing at all. So i just RMA and the replacement just returned yesterday.
> 
> The board is new, at least from the serial no and its appearance (dust free) So i hook up everything back but the system failed to start. Instead it give a 5 long beep and continue in bootloop.
> 
> The manual is useless, as it never mentioned the error beep. The LED debug shown 55 which refer to RAM initialise issue. To further verify whether is RAM, i removed the RAM and it sound 5 long beep as well, just that the long beep occur much faster without RAM installed.
> 
> I try to just put the RAM one stick at a time, still no success. So i rule out is the RAM damage as i don't believe both can malfunction together.
> 
> I start to speculate whether my replacement board is come with outdated BIOS and my RAM isn't compatible with it. But without boot up i can't really check and update the BIOS if thats the case.
> 
> My RAM is Kingston HyperX Predator RGB 3200MHz 16GB x 2, CPU i9-9900K.
> 
> What i did yesterday was ordered a stick of Corsair Value Select 2666MHz 4GB for testing purpose, still waiting the arrival of it. This RAM model no. Is inside the memory support list as found in Gigabtye website, so i think it will not have any compatibility issue.
> 
> Before that just would like to know is my speculation possible?


Did you try clearing the bios?


----------



## coolkwc

Of course yes, countless time. Even toggle to backup BIOS outcome still the same


----------



## Falkentyne

coolkwc said:


> Guys, here is my story.
> 
> My Aorus Master was malfunctioned last month, it won't post, nothing at all. So i just RMA and the replacement just returned yesterday.
> 
> The board is new, at least from the serial no and its appearance (dust free) So i hook up everything back but the system failed to start. Instead it give a 5 long beep and continue in bootloop.
> 
> The manual is useless, as it never mentioned the error beep. The LED debug shown 55 which refer to RAM initialise issue. To further verify whether is RAM, i removed the RAM and it sound 5 long beep as well, just that the long beep occur much faster without RAM installed.
> 
> I try to just put the RAM one stick at a time, still no success. So i rule out is the RAM damage as i don't believe both can malfunction together.
> 
> I start to speculate whether my replacement board is come with outdated BIOS and my RAM isn't compatible with it. But without boot up i can't really check and update the BIOS if thats the case.
> 
> My RAM is Kingston HyperX Predator RGB 3200MHz 16GB x 2, CPU i9-9900K.
> 
> What i did yesterday was ordered a stick of Corsair Value Select 2666MHz 4GB for testing purpose, still waiting the arrival of it. This RAM model no. Is inside the memory support list as found in Gigabtye website, so i think it will not have any compatibility issue.
> 
> Before that just would like to know is my speculation possible?


Switch to single bios mode and activate the backup bios with the dip switches. If this fails, something is dead or bad. Could be the board, RAM, or CPU. The 5 beeps means RAM training failed.


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> *The 5 beeps means RAM training failed*.


Where did you get that information from?
@coolkwc, any possibility of a power supply issue? Have check that all power connections are connected to include the both CPU EPS connectors


----------



## desi_1990

Guys i am having serious difficulties with my new setup.
my i9 9900k climbs to 100C within minutes because my motherboard aorus z390 master is setting the vcore to ~1.7!!

i tried to manually adjust vcore to 1.2, 1.3 but it doesnt matter. the vcore climbs back to 1.7 when the OS boots. Am i missing something else? please help me guide in right direction as i cant even use my new build without possibly frying it.
https://imgur.com/a/HhVQIMS



P.S FANPWM is zero becuse fans are connected to commander pro rgb

My BIOS setting

https://imgur.com/a/bJigfVi

So far i have tried clearing the CMOS, updating the BIOS.
Is the motherboard faulty that it wont take my inputted values for vcore? or do i need to adjust something else with it.


----------



## GeneO

sygnus21 said:


> Where did you get that information from?
> 
> @coolkwc, any possibility of a power supply issue? Have check that all power connections are connected to include the both CPU EPS connectors


Only thing I could find for AMI BIOS beeps is 5 short means Real time clock failure. Maybe check your CMOS battery.

But it has been my experience too that a series of long beeps, and a boot loop, is an indication of memory training failure. Maybe some bad ram? Try booting with one stick and if it fails, try with another..


----------



## GeneO

desi_1990 said:


> Guys i am having serious difficulties with my new setup.
> my i9 9900k climbs to 100C within minutes because my motherboard aorus z390 master is setting the vcore to ~1.7!!
> 
> i tried to manually adjust vcore to 1.2, 1.3 but it doesnt matter. the vcore climbs back to 1.7 when the OS boots. Am i missing something else? please help me guide in right direction as i cant even use my new build without possibly frying it.
> https://imgur.com/a/HhVQIMS
> 
> 
> 
> P.S FANPWM is zero becuse fans are connected to commander pro rgb
> 
> My BIOS setting
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/bJigfVi
> 
> So far i have tried clearing the CMOS, updating the BIOS.
> Is the motherboard faulty that it wont take my inputted values for vcore? or do i need to adjust something else with it.



EDIT: Uh, nevermind. I thought you had vcore set to "normal". with the image you posted (with the value names cut off). So I don's know.


----------



## sygnus21

GeneO said:


> Only thing I could find for AMI BIOS beeps is 5 short means Real time clock failure. Maybe check your CMOS battery.


I found this AMIBIOS (most boards including Gigabyte use AMIBIOS) article claiming the 5 beeps to be a PCI expansion issue or CPU issue.

AMIBIOS Beep Code Troubleshooting

Anyway I'm somewhat inclined to believe it's a memory issue as well considering the OP got a 55 code. That said, my suggestion is the double check the RAM is fully seated and also using the correct slots per instructions on page 17 of the owner's manual (that's assuming the kit they say they have has only two RAM modules).


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> Where did you get that information from?
> 
> @coolkwc, any possibility of a power supply issue? Have check that all power connections are connected to include the both CPU EPS connectors


From trying to run my 3200 mhz 32 GB dual rank Gskills at anything higher than 3733 mhz 
I can get 3600 mhz 15/15/15/36 1.45v stable with 2T but anything faster is either 5 beeps and "Bios has been reset" or "overclock failed" or it boots at 2800 mhz 8^
5 long beeps is always followed by a power off and the RAM back at non XMP speeds. If I get an "overclock failed", the CPU is sent back to default land also. Then I just have to load a saved profile.

Oh wait you weren't the person with the board problem.
@coolkwc
You said your old board didn't POST. Now your new one does 5 long beeps, but won't even boot?
Did you clear the CMOS and try switching to single bios mode and the backup BIOS?

If that RAM dimm you ordered doesn't work, it means the CPU is bad or you got VERY unlucky and the new board is bad.


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> Guys i am having serious difficulties with my new setup.
> my i9 9900k climbs to 100C within minutes because my motherboard aorus z390 master is setting the vcore to ~1.7!!
> 
> i tried to manually adjust vcore to 1.2, 1.3 but it doesnt matter. the vcore climbs back to 1.7 when the OS boots. Am i missing something else? please help me guide in right direction as i cant even use my new build without possibly frying it.
> https://imgur.com/a/HhVQIMS
> 
> 
> 
> P.S FANPWM is zero becuse fans are connected to commander pro rgb
> 
> My BIOS setting
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/bJigfVi
> 
> So far i have tried clearing the CMOS, updating the BIOS.
> Is the motherboard faulty that it wont take my inputted values for vcore? or do i need to adjust something else with it.





GeneO said:


> EDIT: Uh, nevermind. I thought you had vcore set to "normal". with the image you posted (with the value names cut off). So I don's know.


What the hell ?!

What Bios version level is this? This isn't F11c, is it ?

Something's not right here.
How do you have manual vcore + DVID offset enabled at the exact same time?
That's supposed to be greyed out. The offset is set to Normal at the same time you have fixed vcore set. I am fully aware of the DVID bugs when switching from DVID to fixed vcore (I am testing a bios fix for this already right now), but I've never seen a DVID offset actually available when fixed vcore was also available. Offset mode should only become available to be selected when vcore mode is set to "Normal." instead of the 1.20v you entered. But somehow it's still available.

Your high vcore is because your board is somehow using offset mode with Vcore Loadline Calibration combined with AC Load Line. That's an instant 1.7v since AC Load Line is boosting the VRM target voltage to 1.520v, and Loadline Calibration is preventing this from dropping down. I'm taking a guess that if LLC were set to Standard (I am assuming you have it at Turbo), your vcore would be around 1.3v.

Please do the following.
Power off the computer.
Unplug the PSU power cord.

Press the clear CMOS button.
Plug the power cord back in.

Turn on and wait for the boot loops and enter BIOS.
Clear the favorites list completely.

Enter 4.7 ghz for Core, 4.3 for Ring ratio.
Enter 1.230v for CPU Vcore. Loadline Calibration: Turbo
Set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz (if it's in your BIOS).

Is the DVID "offset" mode greyed out completely now?
(The DVID offset should be shown as "Auto" and greyed out and not changeable).

Can you also take a windows screenshot of HWINFO64's full sensors window, including CPU VID and "VR VOUT" (IR 35201)?
And please do not use HWmonitor. Program is garbage.


----------



## memery.uag

*XMP Profile 1*



desi_1990 said:


> Guys i am having serious difficulties with my new setup.
> my i9 9900k climbs to 100C within minutes because my motherboard aorus z390 master is setting the vcore to ~1.7!!
> 
> i tried to manually adjust vcore to 1.2, 1.3 but it doesnt matter. the vcore climbs back to 1.7 when the OS boots. Am i missing something else? please help me guide in right direction as i cant even use my new build without possibly frying it.
> https://imgur.com/a/HhVQIMS
> 
> 
> 
> P.S FANPWM is zero becuse fans are connected to commander pro rgb
> 
> My BIOS setting
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/bJigfVi
> 
> So far i have tried clearing the CMOS, updating the BIOS.
> Is the motherboard faulty that it wont take my inputted values for vcore? or do i need to adjust something else with it.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't an XMP Profile of 3200MHz @16-18-18-36 be running @1.35V?? You have it set to 1.20V That seems a bit of a stretch too me but I'm no expert.


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> What the hell ?!
> 
> What Bios version level is this? This isn't F11c, is it ?
> 
> Something's not right here.
> How do you have manual vcore + DVID offset enabled at the exact same time?
> That's supposed to be greyed out. The offset is set to Normal at the same time you have fixed vcore set. I am fully aware of the DVID bugs when switching from DVID to fixed vcore (I am testing a bios fix for this already right now), but I've never seen a DVID offset actually available when fixed vcore was also available. Offset mode should only become available to be selected when vcore mode is set to "Normal." instead of the 1.20v you entered. But somehow it's still available.
> 
> Your high vcore is because your board is somehow using offset mode with Vcore Loadline Calibration combined with AC Load Line. That's an instant 1.7v since AC Load Line is boosting the VRM target voltage to 1.520v, and Loadline Calibration is preventing this from dropping down. I'm taking a guess that if LLC were set to Standard (I am assuming you have it at Turbo), your vcore would be around 1.3v.
> 
> Please do the following.
> Power off the computer.
> Unplug the PSU power cord.
> 
> Press the clear CMOS button.
> Plug the power cord back in.
> 
> Turn on and wait for the boot loops and enter BIOS.
> Clear the favorites list completely.
> 
> Enter 4.7 ghz for Core, 4.3 for Ring ratio.
> Enter 1.230v for CPU Vcore. Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> Set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz (if it's in your BIOS).
> 
> Is the DVID "offset" mode greyed out completely now?
> (The DVID offset should be shown as "Auto" and greyed out and not changeable).
> 
> Can you also take a windows screenshot of HWINFO64's full sensors window, including CPU VID and "VR VOUT" (IR 35201)?
> And please do not use HWmonitor. Program is garbage.


IT IS F11c. I made sure to update BIOS to see if it fixes it. this is such a dissappointment building my dream machine only to findout it may burn anytime coz of motherboard

I will do your suggested steps and report back

Also i tried to set Vcore Loadline Calibration combined and AC Load Line tp LOW or Standard or POWER SAVING but i had no luck. it still boost right upto 1.7 under slight load

Also i have 2 x 8pins connected to motherboard for CPU. You think that could cause such issue? Could motherboard also be just faulty?


----------



## desi_1990

memery.uag said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't an XMP Profile of 3200MHz @16-18-18-36 be running @1.35V?? You have it set to 1.20V That seems a bit of a stretch too me but I'm no expert.


this is done by motherboard automatically


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> IT IS F11c. I made sure to update BIOS to see if it fixes it. this is such a dissappointment building my dream machine only to findout it may burn anytime coz of motherboard
> 
> I will do your suggested steps and report back
> 
> Also i tried to set Vcore Loadline Calibration combined and AC Load Line tp LOW or Standard or POWER SAVING but i had no luck. it still boost right upto 1.7 under slight load
> 
> Also i have 2 x 8pins connected to motherboard for CPU. You think that could cause such issue? Could motherboard also be just faulty?


It could be. But I've never seen such a thing before.
And I've tried.

DVID mode should be greyed out the instant a manual voltage is entered.
All I can think of is an actual corrupt BIOS. This is easy to test however.

Can you please switch to the backup BIOS (Set the bios dip switch to single bios mode first, then set the second switch to backup BIOS), and then boot from the backup BIOS without flashing it.
Set the same things I mentioned. CPU Vcore to 1.230v. Check the DVID offset as soon as you do this. It should be *greyed out* and showing "Auto" inside it.
Set Vcore loadline calibration to Turbo, set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz, Core ratio to x47, ring(cache) ratio to x44. Disable multi-core enhancement.

Note that if your backup BIOS is old, (I think pre F8) and you have an R0 stepping CPU, you won't be able to load windows. Then you will have to skip the next step and flash the backup BIOS to F11c via Qflash (or at least flash Bios level F9)

Boot to windows and test.
If this test works out we will proceed.

I do have a question.
If you clear CMOS, (after powering off and unplugging and clearing CMOS while it's unplugged), and then plug in, boot directly to windows without changing anything, is it at 1.5v+ ?(the original bios you tested).


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> It could be. But I've never seen such a thing before.
> And I've tried.
> 
> DVID mode should be greyed out the instant a manual voltage is entered.
> All I can think of is an actual corrupt BIOS. This is easy to test however.
> 
> Can you please switch to the backup BIOS (Set the bios dip switch to single bios mode first, then set the second switch to backup BIOS), and then boot from the backup BIOS without flashing it.
> Set the same things I mentioned. CPU Vcore to 1.230v. Check the DVID offset as soon as you do this. It should be *greyed out* and showing "Auto" inside it.
> Set Vcore loadline calibration to Turbo, set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz, Core ratio to x47, ring(cache) ratio to x44. Disable multi-core enhancement.
> 
> Note that if your backup BIOS is old, (I think pre F8) and you have an R0 stepping CPU, you won't be able to load windows. Then you will have to skip the next step and flash the backup BIOS to F11c via Qflash (or at least flash Bios level F9)
> 
> Boot to windows and test.
> If this test works out we will proceed.
> 
> I do have a question.
> If you clear CMOS, (after powering off and unplugging and clearing CMOS while it's unplugged), and then plug in, boot directly to windows without changing anything, is it at 1.5v+ ?(the original bios you tested).


i will test and let you know in few hrs.

However one thing to NOTE. My Motherboard came with f9 bios and vCore problems were showing from get go. So i dont know if reseting bios will help but i will try

at this point i am a bit scared as those volts could destroy my 700$ CPU


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> i will test and let you know in few hrs.
> 
> However one thing to NOTE. My Motherboard came with f9 bios and vCore problems were showing from get go. So i dont know if reseting bios will help but i will try
> 
> at this point i am a bit scared as those volts could destroy my 700$ CPU


Intel will warranty the CPU as long as you tell them:
1) you did NOT overclock it.
2) you did *NOT* use XMP.

If you want to be 100% certain of a painless chip RMA, buy the $30 intel tuning plan. That's an instant replacement "no questions asked" even if you used XMP.

Anyway:

Your board has two BIOS chips.
You never said if you tested the backup BIOS.
So that's what you need to do. There are two dip switches. One for single/dual BIOS mode, one for Main / Backup BIOS. Set the single/dual mode to single (SB) mode. Set the second jumper to the position it was NOT on before. Then do a CMOS reset before you even power on. 

Then all you have to do is just let it boot loop and just load windows. Remember to post your HWInfo64 sensors window along with the VID and "VR OUT" settings. VR VOUT is your accurate voltage vcore. You can extend the size of the HWINFO64 window at the bottom left corner.


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> Intel will warranty the CPU as long as you tell them:
> 1) you did NOT overclock it.
> 2) you did *NOT* use XMP.
> 
> If you want to be 100% certain of a painless chip RMA, buy the $30 intel tuning plan. That's an instant replacement "no questions asked" even if you used XMP.
> 
> Anyway:
> 
> Your board has two BIOS chips.
> You never said if you tested the backup BIOS.
> So that's what you need to do. There are two dip switches. One for single/dual BIOS mode, one for Main / Backup BIOS. Set the single/dual mode to single (SB) mode. Set the second jumper to the position it was NOT on before. Then do a CMOS reset before you even power on.
> 
> Then all you have to do is just let it boot loop and just load windows. Remember to post your HWInfo64 sensors window along with the VID and "VR OUT" settings. VR VOUT is your accurate voltage vcore. You can extend the size of the HWINFO64 window at the bottom left corner.


Sure will try this, also should i keep both 8 pin connected to board or should i just disconnect one (cpu power)


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> Sure will try this, also should i keep both 8 pin connected to board or should i just disconnect one (cpu power)


The 8 pins have nothing to do with this.

I have both my 8 pins connected because it helps stabilize the CPU +12v. But it won't make a difference in overclocking; the VRM will compensate. Only if the CPU +12v drops below 11.6v do things start getting bad. (the IR 35201 monitoring in HWInfo64 will show the CPU +12v value).

I am 80% sure the problem is a corrupt BIOS. We will find out for sure when you switch to the backup BIOS and do as I asked.


----------



## Falkentyne

DVID offset mode, then changing to --> Auto (or fixed) Vcore bug not applying the new mode (but applying Loadline Calibration and other settings while remaining in DVID mode for one reboot, causing overvoltage) seems to be fixed and fully working. This is still being tested to confirm. Bios update will be published in the future.


----------



## Alemancio

Falkentyne said:


> DVID offset mode, then changing to --> Auto (or fixed) Vcore bug not applying the new mode (but applying Loadline Calibration and other settings while remaining in DVID mode for one reboot, causing overvoltage) seems to be fixed and fully working. This is still being tested to confirm. Bios update will be published in the future.


Falkentyne, I remember you pushed towards us using Switching Freq of 300kHz due to transistor voltage overshoot (given BuildZoid's testing as well). What about new findings regarding LCC? I remember a recommendation of using High instead of Turbo?


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> From trying to run my 3200 mhz 32 GB dual rank Gskills at anything higher than 3733 mhz
> I can get 3600 mhz 15/15/15/36 1.45v stable with 2T but anything faster is either 5 beeps and "Bios has been reset" or "overclock failed" or it boots at 2800 mhz 8^
> 5 long beeps is always followed by a power off and the RAM back at non XMP speeds. If I get an "overclock failed", the CPU is sent back to default land also. Then I just have to load a saved profile.


I know you're the king of overclocking, but nowhere did coolkwc mention anything about overclocking. Not one word, so you can hardly know if this is truly the issue. And I asked because the reply didn't make sense


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> I know you're the king of overclocking, but nowhere did coolkwc mention anything about overclocking. Not one word, so you can hardly know if this is truly the issue. And I asked because the reply didn't make sense


I know that but you asked how I know about those beeps.
Those 5 "long" beeps happen ONLY when overclocking the RAM too far. It means the system was so unstable it had to reset the BIOS completely. Those beeps never happen any other time. I did not test to see if it happens if you forgot to install RAM. He got those beeps at pure stock, so it's "something" appearing to be RAM related. A dead completely destroyed IMC on the CPU does affect RAM, after all. Or a dead motherboard...



Alemancio said:


> Falkentyne, I remember you pushed towards us using Switching Freq of 300kHz due to transistor voltage overshoot (given BuildZoid's testing as well). What about new findings regarding LCC? I remember a recommendation of using High instead of Turbo?


Lower LLC's are always recommended. That's nothing "new" and that is not a BIOS bug. Every motherboard in existence gains transient response from lower LLC. This was discussed even in the 9900KS Maximus XI thread in the CPU section on people's Apex and Extreme boards also. The 300 khz issue I have no news about, sorry. Just use 300 khz until it's addressed (if it ever is).

I was able to test the DVID voltage bug when switching to fixed or auto vcore. It's fixed in an internal build and will be released eventually.

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

There's nothing new here.


----------



## Alemancio

Falkentyne said:


> Lower LLC's are always recommended. That's nothing "new" and that is not a BIOS bug. Every motherboard in existence gains transient response from lower LLC. This was discussed even in the 9900KS Maximus XI thread in the CPU section on people's Apex and Extreme boards also. The 300 khz issue I have no news about, sorry. Just use 300 khz until it's addressed (if it ever is).
> There's nothing new here.


So why nobody actually recommends using Low LLC on Gigabyte Motherboards and we get to see High or Turbo being used almost all the time? Sorry if I'm confused (I use 1.325vCore on Turbo = 1.27v VrOut)


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> So why nobody actually recommends using Low LLC on Gigabyte Motherboards and we get to see High or Turbo being used almost all the time? Sorry if I'm confused (I use 1.325vCore on Turbo = 1.27v VrOut)


Because people don't like high idle voltages. It scares them.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Because people don't like high idle voltages. It scares them.


It is not just idle, it is low loads. A single core can be running at full frequency and higher current and with a higher voltage than necessary, the core can be can degraded over time.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> It is not just idle, it is low loads. A single core can be running at full frequency and higher current and with a higher voltage than necessary, the core can be can degraded over time.


Do we know for sure that's exactly how it works, though?
How come each core has its own "VID" if its completely irrelevant what core has what VID anyway?
I know what you're getting at. If 193 amps is maximum for 8 cores, then any single core should not exceed 24 amps. But is that really what's going on? I don't think it's that simple.
If a single core is limited to 24 amps at 1.213v...that's like beginner tier electronics design here.

On HEDT for example, you can not only set a separate multiplier for a core, but even a separate voltage can be set for a core.
Has anyone looked at a HEDT datasheet to verify that each core actually gets its own loadline slope?


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Do we know for sure that's exactly how it works, though?
> How come each core has its own "VID" if its completely irrelevant what core has what VID anyway?
> I know what you're getting at. If 193 amps is maximum for 8 cores, then any single core should not exceed 24 amps. But is that really what's going on? I don't think it's that simple.
> If a single core is limited to 24 amps at 1.213v...that's like beginner tier electronics design here.
> 
> On HEDT for example, you can not only set a separate multiplier for a core, but even a separate voltage can be set for a core.
> Has anyone looked at a HEDT datasheet to verify that each core actually gets its own loadline slope?


Well cores degrade at that aggregate current so individual cores degrade at 1/8 that. I think were are talking > 1.213V for an overclock? Say 1.35+ v. IDK. I would rather run my processor at the lowest voltage possible at any load all other things considered.

I am aware of the per-core HEDT, but haven't looked at the datasheet to see if it has that level of detail (kind of doubt it).


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Well cores degrade at that aggregate current so individual cores degrade at 1/8 that. I think were are talking > 1.213V for an overclock? Say 1.35+ v. IDK. I would rather run my processor at the lowest voltage possible at any load all other things considered.


I was referring to the 1.6 mOhms Intel VRM loadline slope.
If all 8 cores loaded should be no higher than 1.213v at 193 amps, then a single core running at 24 amps should be no higher than 1.213v also. 
I just want to know if single core can be doing something like 15 amps at 1.40v just because the other 7 cores are sitting idle.

Maybe I'll go ask this question in the X299 thread, since those boards can set per core voltages. Of course if I email intel and ask them this, they will go "sorry, this is under NDA."


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> What the hell ?!
> 
> What Bios version level is this? This isn't F11c, is it ?
> 
> Something's not right here.
> How do you have manual vcore + DVID offset enabled at the exact same time?
> That's supposed to be greyed out. The offset is set to Normal at the same time you have fixed vcore set. I am fully aware of the DVID bugs when switching from DVID to fixed vcore (I am testing a bios fix for this already right now), but I've never seen a DVID offset actually available when fixed vcore was also available. Offset mode should only become available to be selected when vcore mode is set to "Normal." instead of the 1.20v you entered. But somehow it's still available.
> 
> Your high vcore is because your board is somehow using offset mode with Vcore Loadline Calibration combined with AC Load Line. That's an instant 1.7v since AC Load Line is boosting the VRM target voltage to 1.520v, and Loadline Calibration is preventing this from dropping down. I'm taking a guess that if LLC were set to Standard (I am assuming you have it at Turbo), your vcore would be around 1.3v.
> 
> Please do the following.
> Power off the computer.
> Unplug the PSU power cord.
> 
> Press the clear CMOS button.
> Plug the power cord back in.
> 
> Turn on and wait for the boot loops and enter BIOS.
> Clear the favorites list completely.
> 
> Enter 4.7 ghz for Core, 4.3 for Ring ratio.
> Enter 1.230v for CPU Vcore. Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> Set CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz (if it's in your BIOS).
> 
> Is the DVID "offset" mode greyed out completely now?
> (The DVID offset should be shown as "Auto" and greyed out and not changeable).
> 
> Can you also take a windows screenshot of HWINFO64's full sensors window, including CPU VID and "VR VOUT" (IR 35201)?
> And please do not use HWmonitor. Program is garbage.


HI,
so i followed all the steps and reset to backup bios plus CMOS as well..
From get go i was still seeing HWMonitor reporting 1.6 vcore without touching anything in bios, so went bios and chance vcore to 1.35 and set multicore enchancement to disable. I logged back in and HWmonitor was still showing as 1.6 vcore absolutely no changes. THis time i downloaded HWinfo and i think its reporting the correct vcore (1.35 to what i set). attaching the screenshots. 

So does that mean my vcores are fine? why the heck is my cpu temps jumping to 100 within seconds.

HWmonitor still reporting high vcore 
https://imgur.com/a/nokb9eH
HWINFO reportings:
https://imgur.com/a/rc0SBOD
https://imgur.com/a/Tp5xgLM
https://imgur.com/a/59FSYDP


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> HI,
> so i followed all the steps and reset to backup bios plus CMOS as well..
> From get go i was still seeing HWMonitor reporting 1.6 vcore without touching anything in bios, so went bios and chance vcore to 1.35 and set multicore enchancement to disable. I logged back in and HWmonitor was still showing as 1.6 vcore absolutely no changes. THis time i downloaded HWinfo and i think its reporting the correct vcore (1.35 to what i set). attaching the screenshots.
> 
> So does that mean my vcores are fine? why the heck is my cpu temps jumping to 100 within seconds.
> 
> HWmonitor still reporting high vcore
> https://imgur.com/a/nokb9eH
> HWINFO reportings:
> https://imgur.com/a/rc0SBOD
> https://imgur.com/a/Tp5xgLM
> https://imgur.com/a/59FSYDP


Remember I told you do NOT use HWmonitor! It is complete, utter GARBAGE.
Thank you very much for the screenshots, by the way.

Only use HWinfo64.
If HWinfo64 reports a voltage, it's correct.

But let's double check.

Can you please run HWinfo64 AND hwmonitor at the exact same time and tell me if HWmonitor is still reporting 1.7v for vcore when HWinfo64 is reporting 1.2 something?

Also what exact stress test were you running? 
How long did it take your CPU to reach 100C?

If you were really at 1.7v, it would have reached 100C in about 2 seconds.


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> Remember I told you do NOT use HWmonitor! It is complete, utter GARBAGE.
> Thank you very much for the screenshots, by the way.
> 
> Only use HWinfo64.
> If HWinfo64 reports a voltage, it's correct.
> 
> But let's double check.
> 
> Can you please run HWinfo64 AND hwmonitor at the exact same time and tell me if HWmonitor is still reporting 1.7v for vcore when HWinfo64 is reporting 1.2 something?
> 
> Also what exact stress test were you running?
> How long did it take your CPU to reach 100C?
> 
> If you were really at 1.7v, it would have reached 100C in about 2 seconds.


HWmonitor still reporting 1.68 while HWinfo and CPUID reports ~1.23V and BTW i set everything to DEFAULT BEST settings now from BIOS. except for XMP overclock

I have never run any stress tests! CPU hits 100 while under any minimal load such as startups within a second!!!. Im starting to think i dont have voltage issues but may be messed up with my thermal paste? thoughts???


----------



## GeneO

desi_1990 said:


> HI,
> so i followed all the steps and reset to backup bios plus CMOS as well..
> From get go i was still seeing HWMonitor reporting 1.6 vcore without touching anything in bios, so went bios and chance vcore to 1.35 and set multicore enchancement to disable. I logged back in and HWmonitor was still showing as 1.6 vcore absolutely no changes. THis time i downloaded HWinfo and i think its reporting the correct vcore (1.35 to what i set). attaching the screenshots.
> 
> So does that mean my vcores are fine? why the heck is my cpu temps jumping to 100 within seconds.
> 
> HWmonitor still reporting high vcore
> https://imgur.com/a/nokb9eH
> HWINFO reportings:
> https://imgur.com/a/rc0SBOD
> https://imgur.com/a/Tp5xgLM
> https://imgur.com/a/59FSYDP


There is a page in the BIOS that shows you the health/status, including the core voltage. What does that say.

+1 on HWINFO64. Don;t use HWmonitor, it is not reliable.


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> HWmonitor still reporting 1.68 while HWinfo and CPUID reports ~1.23V and BTW i set everything to DEFAULT BEST settings now from BIOS. except for XMP overclock
> 
> I have never run any stress tests! CPU hits 100 while under any minimal load such as startups within a second!!!. Im starting to think i dont have voltage issues but may be messed up with my thermal paste? thoughts???


HWmonitor may be reading this voltage "VIN3" shown in HWinfo as VIN3.
Anyway don't use HWmonitor anymore. It's garbage.

Was your BIOS ever showing 1.5-1.70v ?

Anyway check your thermal paste and cooling mount also.
Those are some really high idle temps. Never seen the VRM loops 1 and 2 reading 40C at idle.

There is a CHANCE this could be a bad board, but I think it's your HWmonitor that's busted here.
I mean it's reporting 2.7v for the 3.3v line and 4.5v for the +5v line. The board shouldn't even be booting with voltages that out of spec.
HWinfo64 is reporting sane values. (3.34v for +3.3v and 5.070v for +5v. You do the math here. Which one do you trust? 

It's reporting a ton of incorrect voltages. Which is one reason why you don't use it. Check your cooling mount/paste for proper contact.
Also do what @GeneO says.


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> HWmonitor may be reading this voltage "VIN3" shown in HWinfo as VIN3.
> Anyway don't use HWmonitor anymore. It's garbage.
> 
> Was your BIOS ever showing 1.5-1.70v ?
> 
> Anyway check your thermal paste and cooling mount also.
> Those are some really high idle temps. Never seen the VRM loops 1 and 2 reading 40C at idle.
> 
> There is a CHANCE this could be a bad board, but I think it's your HWmonitor that's busted here.
> I mean it's reporting 2.7v for the 3.3v line and 4.5v for the +5v line. The board shouldn't even be booting with voltages that out of spec.
> HWinfo64 is reporting sane values. (3.34v for +3.3v and 5.070v for +5v. You do the math here. Which one do you trust?
> 
> It's reporting a ton of incorrect voltages. Which is one reason why you don't use it. Check your cooling mount/paste for proper contact.
> Also do what @GeneO says.


dont ever remember seeing that voltage on the bios

i just booted into bio to take a look and bios is reporting very close to 1.35 (1.32~)

attached screenshot

https://imgur.com/a/8awgfXv

highly inclined to some issue with watercooler/ or thermal paste application on cpu. will remount and do reapplication of thermal paste and report back. Until now thank u guys so much!


----------



## Alemancio

What would be the difference between this settings? What are the benefits? (Lets consider that VR OUT remains the same)

vCore | LLC
1.35v | Low
1.33v | Medium
1.30v | High
1.23v | Turbo
1.25v | Ultra

Nevermind, I found this Reply from Falkentyne heh


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> I know that but you asked how I know about those beeps.
> Those 5 "long" beeps happen *ONLY when overclocking the RAM too far[/I]*. It means the system was so unstable it had to reset the BIOS completely. Those beeps never happen any other time. I did not test to see if it happens if you forgot to install RAM. He got those beeps at pure stock, so it's "something" appearing to be RAM related. A dead completely destroyed IMC on the CPU does affect RAM, after all. Or a dead motherboard...
> 
> There's nothing new here.




As a system builder for 22+ years I'll have to wholeheartedly disagree that "_Those 5 "long" beeps happen ONLY when overclocking the RAM too far_". Those beeps "if" RAM related don't "have" to be from overclocking. They could be be caused from faulty sticks, dead stick, or being improperly seated stick. And those beep codes could be a CPU, PCI, GPU or any other hardware issue. 

Not trying to be argumentative here, but instead of looking at things from an overclock only perspective, you might stop to think not everyone here posting an issue is overclocking. I certainly don't. And yes, "technically" using XMP is "overclocking" the RAM, but even that situation, "if" applicable to the OP, doesn't apply to the issue at hand.

Anyway, I'm not here to quibble with you but you can't just assume stuff and push it as fact. With that hopefully the OP will post back what they found once they install the new memory they ordered.

Peace


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> What would be the difference between this settings? What are the benefits? (Lets consider that VR OUT remains the same)
> 
> vCore | LCC
> 1.35v | Low
> 1.33v | Medium
> 1.30v | High
> 1.23v | Turbo
> 1.25v | Ultra


Assuming these are bios set voltage targets:

The difference is:
1.25v Set in BIOS + LLC Ultra Extreme--the voltage will transient dip as low as 1.15v (100mv transient loss!!) repeatedly at heavy load, making you crash and can spike to 1.35v+.
1.35v + LLC Low will spike up to about 1.32v maximum (idle voltage will be considerably lower than 1.35v) and a 100 amp load voltage will be about 1.20v with transient dips down to about 1.16v (40mv transient loss, could be lower, like 30 or 20mv)

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

If you want a prime95 example, here is an example of LLC1 (Asus) = Gigabyte "Standard LLC" vs LLC8 Asus (Ultra Extreme), at 100 amps.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-413.html#post28022572


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> As a system builder for 22+ years I'll have to wholeheartedly disagree that "_Those 5 "long" beeps happen ONLY when overclocking the RAM too far_". Those beeps "if" RAM related don't "have" to be from overclocking. They could be be caused from faulty sticks, dead stick, or being improperly seated stick. And those beep codes could be a CPU, PCI, GPU or any other hardware issue.
> 
> Not trying to be argumentative here, but instead of looking at things from an overclock only perspective, you might stop to think not everyone here posting an issue is overclocking. I certainly don't. And yes, "technically" using XMP is "overclocking" the RAM, but even that situation, "if" applicable to the OP, doesn't apply to the issue at hand.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not here to quibble with you but you can't just assume stuff and push it as fact. With that hopefully the OP will post back what they found once they install the new memory they ordered.
> 
> Peace


I never once said it had anything to do with overclocking anywhere in my post.
I said I encountered it when overclocking and I only ran into it when overclocking RAM too far, and I said that code is a RAM Related error (that can happen for OTHER reasons also, like a busted IMC).
I'm not going to pull my RAM out of my computer and see if it happens there too.

I also said it can be bad motherboard or CPU or RAM. I said all those things you did.


----------



## AndrejB

desi_1990 said:


> dont ever remember seeing that voltage on the bios
> 
> i just booted into bio to take a look and bios is reporting very close to 1.35 (1.32~)
> 
> attached screenshot
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/8awgfXv
> 
> highly inclined to some issue with watercooler/ or thermal paste application on cpu. will remount and do reapplication of thermal paste and report back. Until now thank u guys so much!


58c in the bios means you messed up the mounting pretty bad. I wouldn't even boot windows after seeing that...

Which cooler do you have?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> 58c in the bios means you messed up the mounting pretty bad. I wouldn't even boot windows after seeing that...
> 
> Which cooler do you have?


He showed me a picture of his paste spread when using the "dot" application.
It's really bad XD He has a mount issue but I can't help with those. 

All I can say is make sure the backplate is installed STRAIGHT and level and not crooked, and make sure proper insulated standoffs are used (for example, NH-D15 comes with THREE Sets of standoffs, only ONE set is for the LGA 1151).


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> I never once said it had anything to do with overclocking anywhere in my post.
> I said I encountered it when overclocking and I only ran into it when overclocking RAM too far, and I said that code is a RAM Related error (that can happen for OTHER reasons also, like a busted IMC).
> I'm not going to pull my RAM out of my computer and see if it happens there too.
> 
> I also said it can be bad motherboard or CPU or RAM. I said all those things you did.


Lest not play word games here. This is exactly what you said when I asked how you determined those beeps were from a RAM training failure…



> From trying to run my 3200 mhz 32 GB dual rank Gskills at anything higher than 3733 mhz
> I can get 3600 mhz 15/15/15/36 1.45v stable with 2T but anything faster is either 5 beeps and "Bios has been reset" or "overclock failed" or it boots at 2800 mhz 8^
> 5 long beeps is always followed by a power off and the RAM back at non XMP speeds. If I get an "overclock failed", the CPU is sent back to default land also. Then I just have to load a saved profile.


From your posted reply to my question

No... you didn't "explicitly" uses the world "overclock" but what is this???... "_From trying to run my 3200 mhz 32 GB dual rank Gskills at anything higher than 3733 MHz_"

I'm not trying to beef with you (and I actually have some overclock questions for you down the road), but c'mon man.

Anyway we'll agree to disagree agreeably on this and move on. I await the OP response.

Peace


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> Lest not play word games here. This is exactly what you said when I asked how you determined those beeps were from a RAM training failure…
> 
> 
> 
> From your posted reply to my question
> 
> No... you didn't "explicitly" uses the world "overclock" but what is this???... "_From trying to run my 3200 mhz 32 GB dual rank Gskills at anything higher than 3733 MHz_"
> 
> I'm not trying to beef with you (and I actually have some overclock questions for you down the road), but c'mon man.
> 
> Anyway we'll agree to disagree agreeably on this and move on. I await the OP response.
> 
> Peace


Sorry.


----------



## Alemancio

Falkentyne said:


> Assuming these are bios set voltage targets:
> 
> The difference is:
> 1.25v Set in BIOS + LLC Ultra Extreme--the voltage will transient dip as low as 1.15v (100mv transient loss!!) repeatedly at heavy load, making you crash and can spike to 1.35v+.
> 1.35v + LLC Low will spike up to about 1.32v maximum (idle voltage will be considerably lower than 1.35v) and a 100 amp load voltage will be about 1.20v with transient dips down to about 1.16v (40mv transient loss, could be lower, like 30 or 20mv)
> 
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> If you want a prime95 example, here is an example of LLC1 (Asus) = Gigabyte "Standard LLC" vs LLC8 Asus (Ultra Extreme), at 100 amps.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...0-vrm-discussion-thread-413.html#post28022572


Thanks, in theory we'd want to avoid any setting that overshoots and manage the vdroop accordingly.


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> Thanks, in theory we'd want to avoid any setting that overshoots and manage the vdroop accordingly.


LLC High is the best balance of a not too high idle voltage and not too much vdroop.
Turbo is completely unusable at 500 khz switching frequency. It's passable at 300 khz.

LLC Standard/Normal can be used with Auto vcore if "Thermal Velocity Boost" voltage optimizations are enabled and it won't degrade your CPU, but it works best with C-states enabled, or with DVID modes, so you can downvolt and downclock at idle without dealing with a 1.404v idle VR VOUT in windows.

The DVID bug has been fixed, at least I haven't been able to make it happen anymore, but I do need to do more testing at 5 ghz to make sure it is fixed. It's completely fixed at 4.7 ghz and when using DVID at 5 ghz and loading a "fixed vcore" 4.7 ghz profile, everything loaded with piroper voltages. The fix should be released soon if no bugs reappear somewhere.


----------



## Iarwa1N

I could not find the F11C modded bios, where can I find it? And what are the mods, is it spectre and meltdown microcode removed F11c?


----------



## Falkentyne

Iarwa1N said:


> I could not find the F11C modded bios, where can I find it? And what are the mods, is it spectre and meltdown microcode removed F11c?


Microcode is older microcodes that give faster fps/scores in cinebench, etc, used in F8-F9-F10.

I attached Kedarwolf's mod (He modded it with extra firmwares) and my mod (Microcode only). Both of these require EFIFLASH boot from a USB flash drive to flash it. 
The "QF" version was the microcode only version that I hex edited to allow Qflash to flash it BUT I DID NOT TEST THIS VERSION. I take NO responsibility if that one doesn't work.


----------



## TifxAlex

Hey guys

Is there a good beginner resource for defining what all these voltages are and what they mean? System Agent VCCIO etc 

Built my first system about a year ago
Not really familiar with all the terminology etc 

Just curious if anyone had any resources that define specific voltages and what they do etc

Aorus z390 master
9900k NHD15
32gb 3600 CL17 2x16gb 
2080ti 
Samsung 970 evo plus 1tb (2 of them)
Seasonic Focus + 850w platinum


----------



## desi_1990

AndrejB said:


> 58c in the bios means you messed up the mounting pretty bad. I wouldn't even boot windows after seeing that...
> 
> Which cooler do you have?


i have h100i gtx. i have tried mounting few times with multiple application of paste. with no luck

Im still nervous if its cooler issue or still high vcore. when look at corsair link its reporting VCPU as 1.7~  HWINFO is still showing 1.221 and CPUID show 1.238 while my vcore is set to 1.25

I have never been so nervous about my built before where i have built over 5+ pcs throughout my life


----------



## BradleyW

TifxAlex said:


> Hey guys
> 
> Is there a good beginner resource for defining what all these voltages are and what they mean? System Agent VCCIO etc
> 
> Built my first system about a year ago
> Not really familiar with all the terminology etc
> 
> Just curious if anyone had any resources that define specific voltages and what they do etc
> 
> Aorus z390 master
> 9900k NHD15
> 32gb 3600 CL17 2x16gb
> 2080ti
> Samsung 970 evo plus 1tb (2 of them)
> Seasonic Focus + 850w platinum


This might help you. Not fully watched it myself, and follow at your own risk:


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> i have h100i gtx. i have tried mounting few times with multiple application of paste. with no luck
> 
> Im still nervous if its cooler issue or still high vcore. when look at corsair link its reporting VCPU as 1.7~  HWINFO is still showing 1.221 and CPUID show 1.238 while my vcore is set to 1.25
> 
> I have never been so nervous about my built before where i have built over 5+ pcs throughout my life


Corsair link is yet another garbage program. It sucks that people have to use such shovelware that's literally 1 GB download.
Link is probably reading the exact same thing that HWmonitor is reading.

There are only three vcore sensors. The IR 35201 reading (VR VOUT, which is most accurate), the Socket MLCC reading (ITE 8792E) and the Super I/O chip (ITE 8688E).
If HWinfo is reading those and reading correct voltages, it is completely, utterly impossible to be getting 1.7v somewhere. There's no other sensor available (besides Vin3), and I don't even know what that is reading. The one time I tried to look it up, I think SIV (Not the Gigabyte utility, but this one: http://rh-software.com/ ) at least gave me enough information (or maybe I forgot), to determine that Vin3 is some sort of voltage rail related to RAM, almost like DDR VPP, which is reading 1.7v.

Try downloading SIV, run SIV64 and see what that reads for your voltages.

I"m 200% sure you have a warped mounting block, IHS or mounting bracket.
You can tell clearly by how the paste is pushed all to one side. There's good contact on one side and literally no contact on the other.

From what I remember about how the retention bracket for the IHS slides on, the CPU die is literally parallel to the "thick" and "thin" lines of thermal paste, like right down the middle. 

Do you remember the video I linked to you in PM?
Do you have a flat piece of glass you can use to do a thermal paste spread test on the IHS, like shown in the video?
I could be talking out of my butt here, but I would think a pressure test with transparent 100% flat glass would show if the IHS were warped or not. 

Then you can do something similar on the water block. Maybe you can post the pictures you sent me on the water cooling section of this forum? I am unable to help you here since I know nothing about water cooling.
But please post the pictures you sent to me about your spread test and original paste removal. Everyone here will tell you you have a very bad mount.

If the spread were proper, then we would start panicking. But I see no issues with your HWInfo64 voltages anywhere.


----------



## Alemancio

Falkentyne said:


> LLC High is the best balance of a not too high idle voltage and not too much vdroop.
> Turbo is completely unusable at 500 khz switching frequency. It's passable at 300 khz.
> 
> LLC Standard/Normal can be used with Auto vcore if "Thermal Velocity Boost" voltage optimizations are enabled and it won't degrade your CPU, but it works best with C-states enabled, or with DVID modes, so you can downvolt and downclock at idle without dealing with a 1.404v idle VR VOUT in windows.
> 
> The DVID bug has been fixed, at least I haven't been able to make it happen anymore, but I do need to do more testing at 5 ghz to make sure it is fixed. It's completely fixed at 4.7 ghz and when using DVID at 5 ghz and loading a "fixed vcore" 4.7 ghz profile, everything loaded with piroper voltages. The fix should be released soon if no bugs reappear somewhere.


As always, a thorough and great response, thanks!


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> Corsair link is yet another garbage program. It sucks that people have to use such shovelware that's literally 1 GB download.
> Link is probably reading the exact same thing that HWmonitor is reading.
> 
> There are only three vcore sensors. The IR 35201 reading (VR VOUT, which is most accurate), the Socket MLCC reading (ITE 8792E) and the Super I/O chip (ITE 8688E).
> If HWinfo is reading those and reading correct voltages, it is completely, utterly impossible to be getting 1.7v somewhere. There's no other sensor available (besides Vin3), and I don't even know what that is reading. The one time I tried to look it up, I think SIV (Not the Gigabyte utility, but this one: http://rh-software.com/ ) at least gave me enough information (or maybe I forgot), to determine that Vin3 is some sort of voltage rail related to RAM, almost like DDR VPP, which is reading 1.7v.
> 
> Try downloading SIV, run SIV64 and see what that reads for your voltages.
> 
> I"m 200% sure you have a warped mounting block, IHS or mounting bracket.
> You can tell clearly by how the paste is pushed all to one side. There's good contact on one side and literally no contact on the other.
> 
> From what I remember about how the retention bracket for the IHS slides on, the CPU die is literally parallel to the "thick" and "thin" lines of thermal paste, like right down the middle.
> 
> Do you remember the video I linked to you in PM?
> Do you have a flat piece of glass you can use to do a thermal paste spread test on the IHS, like shown in the video?
> I could be talking out of my butt here, but I would think a pressure test with transparent 100% flat glass would show if the IHS were warped or not.
> 
> Then you can do something similar on the water block. Maybe you can post the pictures you sent me on the water cooling section of this forum? I am unable to help you here since I know nothing about water cooling.
> But please post the pictures you sent to me about your spread test and original paste removal. Everyone here will tell you you have a very bad mount.
> 
> If the spread were proper, then we would start panicking. But I see no issues with your HWInfo64 voltages anywhere.


what should i do if i have a warped IHS?

here are the pictures of my thermal paste on cpu and waterblock. THis is the result of DOT method. however when i did X method it spread fine.

1) when i first initially took it out
CPU:https://imgur.com/a/AcznKsR
Cooler:https://imgur.com/a/1MhwLgo

2) repasted it
https://imgur.com/a/iHDjMx2

3)mounted it and un screwed it. Still looked like this
https://imgur.com/a/GknInBA


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> what should i do if i have a warped IHS?
> 
> here are the pictures of my thermal paste on cpu and waterblock. THis is the result of DOT method. however when i did X method it spread fine.
> 
> 1) when i first initially took it out
> CPU:https://imgur.com/a/AcznKsR
> Cooler:https://imgur.com/a/1MhwLgo
> 
> 2) repasted it
> https://imgur.com/a/iHDjMx2
> 
> 3)mounted it and un screwed it. Still looked like this
> https://imgur.com/a/GknInBA


Try the glass test that I gave you in the PM. Hopefully that will give you a visual idea of what is warped. If the IHS is that deformed that's an instant RMA. but I've never seen an IHS --that-- bad before.
If it's the block, then well that's a RMA too. If both test flat, then it's the mount.

Please don't forget to test this program.
http://rh-software.com/


----------



## coolkwc

sygnus21 said:


> As a system builder for 22+ years I'll have to wholeheartedly disagree that "_Those 5 "long" beeps happen ONLY when overclocking the RAM too far_". Those beeps "if" RAM related don't "have" to be from overclocking. They could be be caused from faulty sticks, dead stick, or being improperly seated stick. And those beep codes could be a CPU, PCI, GPU or any other hardware issue.
> 
> Not trying to be argumentative here, but instead of looking at things from an overclock only perspective, you might stop to think not everyone here posting an issue is overclocking. I certainly don't. And yes, "technically" using XMP is "overclocking" the RAM, but even that situation, "if" applicable to the OP, doesn't apply to the issue at hand.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not here to quibble with you but you can't just assume stuff and push it as fact. With that hopefully the OP will post back what they found once they install the new memory they ordered.
> 
> Peace


I ordered a 4GB Adata 2666Mhz for testing, the model is in the memory support list. Unfortunately it didn't solve my problem.

1. Tested on A1 and A2 slot separately
2. Tested with boot from backup BIOS + single BIOS switch position
3. Tested with boot from backup BIOS + dual BIOS switch position

The system stop at either C4 (useless unknown 'reserve' as stated in manual) or '55' (RAM initialization error)

Each time i turn on the rig, the power go on -> off -> on -> off -> on -> bootloop as seen with the recycling error code -> sometimes it stuck at C4, sometimes 55 -> 5 long beep -> off.

This is my 1st board with proper debug LED and all kind of 'high end stuff' and now only i know how useless and money sucking this features were, in the past i will never bought a board >$200 and yet it can overclock my CPU very well.

I noticed alot of forumers here do not read the post carefully, and keep asking me 'do you clear the BIOS', 'did you overclock'. 

1. Oh god, the clear BIOS button is so damn easy to access at the back and why i can forget about it.
2. Oh god, the board is fresh from RMA and i don't even able to POST, how do i going to OC and how the god damn failure is caused by OC?
3. The PSU just powered by 'temporary rig' as in my siggy during the RMA period, how could it malfunction when i just swap to new mobo? all the fan/water cooling and graphics card fan is turn ON during that boot process!!!
4. The whole components in my god damn rig is remained the same except mobo + RAM + CPU.

This is the reason i did not reply most of the questions here, it make me even frustrated when saw those questions.


----------



## desi_1990

Falkentyne said:


> Try the glass test that I gave you in the PM. Hopefully that will give you a visual idea of what is warped. If the IHS is that deformed that's an instant RMA. but I've never seen an IHS --that-- bad before.
> If it's the block, then well that's a RMA too. If both test flat, then it's the mount.
> 
> Please don't forget to test this program.
> http://rh-software.com/


i dont know if i have a flat glass like that.

i ran SIV64 and my voltage is showing as 1.31. its set for 1.275
VR VOUT IR35201 show 1.238

https://imgur.com/a/kkrhFg5

is the fluctuation like that in reads normal =\


----------



## Falkentyne

desi_1990 said:


> i dont know if i have a flat glass like that.
> 
> i ran SIV64 and my voltage is showing as 1.31. its set for 1.275
> VR VOUT IR35201 show 1.238
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/kkrhFg5
> 
> is the fluctuation like that in reads normal =\


Yes. All your voltages are 100% in spec.

So the problem is purely HWmonitor and Corsair Link. So I'm sure you will never touch those programs again. (unless you really...really need to sync the RGB Vomit).
You can get a piece of glass from any thrift store. Do you have a goodwill or salvation army anywhere around you? Just go there and grab some old picture frame that has a glass backing for like $1 dollar, then remove the glass and any paper attached to it and off you go. I did that to get a sandpaper flat surface on the cheap.

An alternative is to buy Fujifilm Ultra Low Prescale pressure paper.
An OEM for it is Innovation cooling:

https://www.amazon.com/Innovation-Cooling-Contact-Analysis-Heatsink/dp/B07CKHRKHQ/

Or you can politely beg sensorprod (fujifilm's main supplier in USA) for a free sample.
https://www.sensorprod.com/index.php

I got 2 free samples from them in 1 year.. And they didn't want to send the second sample but I'm not paying $500 for a roll. No thanks, I'm not rich.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

You guys are going to like the next BIOS.
All known DVID bugs are fixed. Board is slower to reboot flush between reboots to POST now since the voltage mode has to be cleared (this was my suggestion). About 2 seconds slower. DVID voltage offset setting changes back to "Auto" when either a fixed vcore or Auto vcore mode is set, instead of just greying out the last offset mode. Maybe I missed something but I think I checked everything.


----------



## pXuis

Falkentyne said:


> You guys are going to like the next BIOS.
> All known DVID bugs are fixed. Board is slower to reboot flush between reboots to POST now since the voltage mode has to be cleared (this was my suggestion). About 2 seconds slower. DVID voltage offset setting changes back to "Auto" when either a fixed vcore or Auto vcore mode is set, instead of just greying out the last offset mode. Maybe I missed something but I think I checked everything.


Nice! Do we have an Eta on Beta/release?


----------



## Falkentyne

pXuis said:


> Nice! Do we have an Eta on Beta/release?


No. It's an internal test version. I can't release it. You wouldn't be able to flash the actual beta release if the OEM ID is different without a modified EFIflash, and I have no idea if this build will become f11d or not if it doesn't have a different OEM ID (e.g. identical bytes).


----------



## pXuis

Falkentyne said:


> No. It's an internal test version. I can't release it. You wouldn't be able to flash the actual beta release if the OEM ID is different without a modified EFIflash, and I have no idea if this build will become f11d or not if it doesn't have a different OEM ID (e.g. identical bytes).


Ah ok, I understand. 
Thnx for the update though!


----------



## falcon5

Falkentyne, since you seem to have a good connection to Gigabyte BIOS Developers or at least a person who passes information to the Gigaybte BIOS development team - is it possible to reach out to get the RTL/IOL setting to work? Would be great.

Thanks for your effort!


----------



## sygnus21

coolkwc said:


> I ordered a 4GB Adata 2666Mhz for testing, the model is in the memory support list. Unfortunately it didn't solve my problem.
> 
> 1. Tested on A1 and A2 slot separately
> 2. Tested with boot from backup BIOS + single BIOS switch position
> 3. Tested with boot from backup BIOS + dual BIOS switch position
> 
> The system stop at either C4 (useless unknown 'reserve' as stated in manual) or '55' (RAM initialization error)
> 
> Each time i turn on the rig, the power go on -> off -> on -> off -> on -> bootloop as seen with the recycling error code -> sometimes it stuck at C4, sometimes 55 -> 5 long beep -> off.
> 
> This is my 1st board with proper debug LED and all kind of 'high end stuff' and now only i know how useless and money sucking this features were, in the past i will never bought a board >$200 and yet it can overclock my CPU very well.
> 
> I noticed alot of forumers here do not read the post carefully, and keep asking me 'do you clear the BIOS', 'did you overclock'.
> 
> 1. Oh god, the clear BIOS button is so damn easy to access at the back and why i can forget about it.
> 2. Oh god, the board is fresh from RMA and i don't even able to POST, how do i going to OC and how the god damn failure is caused by OC?
> 3. The PSU just powered by 'temporary rig' as in my siggy during the RMA period, how could it malfunction when i just swap to new mobo? all the fan/water cooling and graphics card fan is turn ON during that boot process!!!
> 4. The whole components in my god damn rig is remained the same except mobo + RAM + CPU.
> 
> This is the reason i did not reply most of the questions here, it make me even frustrated when saw those questions.


Take a breath. Calm down.

While I understand your frustrations on some of the questions, and the fact that some don't fully read posts before answering, please realize we don't know what you know or don't know; did or didn't do. Additionally, you did not mention these things we question (or in some cases... assume). We've no idea what your skill level is so we have to ask questions! And if you've been around tech forums long, you'd understand people make mistakes. As "veteran and skilled" as I think I am, sometimes I overlook the simple. It happens. We're not robots!!!

That said, I note you said _the board is fresh from RMA and I don't even able to POST, how do I going to OC_; however; what of the previous board? - did you ever overclock on that board? I'm not talking about enabling XMP, I'm talking CPU overclocks, RAM overclock beyond XMP settings? I ask this because I want to try to eliminate a burnt or damaged component from a bad overclock. 

With that, lets tart with the minimum... remove everything off the board except the CPU and one stick of RAM. Did the board beep? If no, add something else until it beeps. If the item added causes the beep, that's a pretty good indicator that item is the issue. 

At the end of the day, we're here to help you. Help us help you.


----------



## Falkentyne

falcon5 said:


> Falkentyne, since you seem to have a good connection to Gigabyte BIOS Developers or at least a person who passes information to the Gigaybte BIOS development team - is it possible to reach out to get the RTL/IOL setting to work? Would be great.
> 
> Thanks for your effort!


That's impossible. They already know about it, and the only thing I was testing were the outstanding bugs that were present in the GUI rework, not extra features. They were not allowing IOL's to be changed for a reason (another person here contacted the BIOS department and got an answer awhile ago) and I have no idea why. I'm just an end user who submitted bugs. I mean I want Adaptive Transient Algorithm setting toggle to allow it to be enabled (IR 35201) but I'm not getting it. The DVID bug is something that has been there since release and is a rather big priority compared to feature requests. Then there's the 300 khz vs 500 khz setting issue, especially at stronger loadline calibration levels...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> Corsair link is yet another garbage program. It sucks that people have to use such shovelware that's literally 1 GB download.


Good lawd!!! - What Corsair Link software you download that's 1 GB is size!!! Heck even Link's replacement (iCUE) which is *9 times in size* doesn't come close to that 1 gig mark. For math sake - *Link is 40.4meg* (hardly 1 GB), and iCue is 367 meg.

I also don't find them to be the boogie man you claim, and I've use both. Currently using iCUE for both Corsair RAM and H115i AIO cooler. But, that's me


----------



## coolkwc

sygnus21 said:


> Take a breath. Calm down.
> 
> While I understand your frustrations on some of the questions, and the fact that some don't fully read posts before answering, please realize we don't know what you know or don't know; did or didn't do. Additionally, you did not mention these things we question (or in some cases... assume). We've no idea what your skill level is so we have to ask questions! And if you've been around tech forums long, you'd understand people make mistakes. As "veteran and skilled" as I think I am, sometimes I overlook the simple. It happens. We're not robots!!!
> 
> That said, I note you said _the board is fresh from RMA and I don't even able to POST, how do I going to OC_; however; what of the previous board? - did you ever overclock on that board? I'm not talking about enabling XMP, I'm talking CPU overclocks, RAM overclock beyond XMP settings? I ask this because I want to try to eliminate a burnt or damaged component from a bad overclock.
> 
> With that, lets tart with the minimum... remove everything off the board except the CPU and one stick of RAM. Did the board beep? If no, add something else until it beeps. If the item added causes the beep, that's a pretty good indicator that item is the issue.
> 
> At the end of the day, we're here to help you. Help us help you.


Thanks bro, please forgive my rude post previously.

Yes, i did overclock on the previous board on CPU and RAM. CPU OC'ed to 5Ghz with max 1.28V during load, RAM OC'ed to 3600Mhz with 1.45V

The failure of previous board was, it can't be turn ON anymore right after 1 turn OFF a minute ago, not even switch OFF the outlet yet.
When i try to switch OFF and turn ON the power again, what i got was a flashing faint amber light at the VRM/PCH, with the fan barely turn ON and OFF non stop, no POST, no noise

What i did was remove everything and just left the mobo itself, as long as i turn ON the main, the flashing light happen. So i conclude that was mobo failure, but of course i don't know whether it brought down my proc and RAM altogether or not in the event since i never test those components to verify separately.

I will give the bare minimum component test is a try by tonight, i never try it yet as i hesitate to dismantle including GPU and sound card that was work before i reassemble the new mobo + proc.

Anyway, i started my 1st rig build since 2003, that was Pentium 4 socket 478, follow by Pentium 4 LGA775, Pentium E2160, Core2 QUAD QX6800, i7 4770k and now i9-9900k, OC in every rig that i built, experience mobo failure twice and numerous troubleshooting previously, and i consider myself is experience enough in this regards. The main problem now is i don't have spare to swap and do factor isolation, and the debug code plus Giagabyte debug definition is hopeless. I bought a RAM because it is cheap now, so RAM i will say definitely is not the issue now. Just left Procs and Mobo. I would consider myself extremely bad luck if the RMA mobo is a bad one.


----------



## TifxAlex

Dante007 said:


> TifxAlex said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for this!
> Question where would I find the modded bios? Is the critical to using these settings?
> Also Iâ€™️m air cooled and 1.4v seems high. Do you think the NHD15 can cool 9900k at this voltage?
> 
> 
> 
> You will find it here : https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-605.html#post28249904 By @KedarWolf
> 
> I test Noctua NH-D15 Chromax Black vs my castle 360ex almost 18c so i suggest 1.32v and 5.0 for non-avx and 3 offset avx for 4.7 for avx load start with same settings for CPU and only xmp loaded with 0.010 mv
Click to expand...


So set all settings to your original
Post and manually enter 1.32 for Vcore XMP loaded. 
Where do I set the .010mv?


----------



## GeneO

falcon5 said:


> Falkentyne, since you seem to have a good connection to Gigabyte BIOS Developers or at least a person who passes information to the Gigaybte BIOS development team - is it possible to reach out to get the RTL/IOL setting to work? Would be great.
> 
> Thanks for your effort!


You'll notice with the F10x and F11x they went from Channel A and B RTL/IOL settings to one for both (even though setting them doesn't do anything). That's a step backwards as you would need them separate. Unfortunately, that indicates me they have not intention of ever fixing them.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> @Falkentyne Which one of these profiles is better or which would you use?
> 
> ]


Hi, are this stable mem profiles ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> The profile on the left was memtested for 6 hours in HCI memtest, no errors. The profile on the right is going into hci memtest today. 4x8GB configuration


Nice  i`m testing out 4x8GB today, got a second set.

I have never tried "Memory Enhancement Settings" have u or any other any recommendation for using this.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## TifxAlex

So got 5ghz Stable.. (i think) Played Witcher 3 for about an hour with no crash, stutter, etc.. cpu temp averaged 45c (not bad?) VROUT 1.295v through HWInfo 35201; 1.32v in Bios.
At this point I could just leave it as is correct? 
or is this the point where I should tweak to lower voltages until unstability? Lower voltages are "better" right?

also, I got 2x16 32gb kit of Hynix Dual rank 3600 CL 17,19,19,39 -- I know
Is it "easier" to start increasing frequency? or should I try to tighten those timings a bit

any thoughts?


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> I left that on auto.
> 
> Here are the options that I understand, If an option isn't listed here than I don't understand how it works or what it does or what it specifically effects.
> 
> high density - for dual ranked dimms (16GB sticks)
> 4500+ - for booting/benching 4500 and up
> relax timings - extremely loose/bad timings
> 
> I don't know what the other options have an affect on or what they do.
> 
> What set of sticks are you working with?


Ok, thanks. Many different settings in that tab

https://www.newegg.com/patriot-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820225144


----------



## TifxAlex

Can someone review these and let me know if they see anything out of the ordinary or that is cause for concern?
thanks! Any help is much appreciated

This is at Idle with Chrome open


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Iarwa1N

Falkentyne said:


> Microcode is older microcodes that give faster fps/scores in cinebench, etc, used in F8-F9-F10.
> 
> I attached Kedarwolf's mod (He modded it with extra firmwares) and my mod (Microcode only). Both of these require EFIFLASH boot from a USB flash drive to flash it.
> The "QF" version was the microcode only version that I hex edited to allow Qflash to flash it BUT I DID NOT TEST THIS VERSION. I take NO responsibility if that one doesn't work.


Thank you.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> CL15 4133 200% in hci memtest. yay


Amazing  i would love to get all your settings and volts. Struggling hard with my 4x8GB clocking


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

All this discussion on here about memory overclocking has made me want to try it for once with my 2x16GB 3600 MHz g.skill kit... seems like everything works fine at 1.4V at 4000 MHz 17-19-19-39 - what do you guys do to test memory stability? I don't really want to purchase Aida64 unless absolutely necessary. 

Do you push frequency to the max and then mess with timings, or incrementally try to improve them at the same time?

I've OC'd plenty of CPUs but never bothered with memory before. I'm sure that, like with CPUs, this is more of a learnedart form than an exact science, but I'd appreciate any tips.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

BigMack70 said:


> All this discussion on here about memory overclocking has made me want to try it for once with my 2x16GB 3600 MHz g.skill kit... seems like everything works fine at 1.4V at 4000 MHz 17-19-19-39 - what do you guys do to test memory stability? I don't really want to purchase Aida64 unless absolutely necessary.
> 
> Do you push frequency to the max and then mess with timings, or incrementally try to improve them at the same time?
> 
> I've OC'd plenty of CPUs but never bothered with memory before. I'm sure that, like with CPUs, this is more of a learnedart form than an exact science, but I'd appreciate any tips.


Start here sir,

https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md

This thread actually got me into overclocking ram as well. Got my 4 x 16GB set from it's crappy starting point of 3200 to 3600 with tighter timings. At about 96% to 97% of the theoretical maximum bandwidth for the speed now.

For stability testing I use a combination of Karhu's Ram Test and GSAT in Windows.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Here is what I used for each profile:
> 
> bios volts for CL15 4133 ram w/ 5.3ghz HT OFF 5.0 cache:
> 1.55v vdimm/training
> 1.35v sa/io
> 
> bios volts for CL15 3900 ram w/ 5.3ghz HT OFF 5.0 cache:
> 1.50v vdimm/training
> 1.30v sa/io
> 
> vdimm/training/sa/io volts are same for 5.1ghz/4.8 cache ht on profile.
> 
> Timings are posted above and are identical for both profiles, only difference is TRFC testing(280/331) and that the motherboard trains better rtls/iols for 3900 than for 4000+. tRFC ends up being adjustable depending on how high the cache ratio is, the higher the cache, the less flexibility for tRFC unless i'm willing to use more vcore than normally needed for the cpu/cache overclock. I can run the CL15 4133 profile with 5.3ghz ht off 5.0 cache with 331 trfc or I can run the cl15 4133 profile with 5.1ghz ht on 4.8 cache with 280 trfc without needing to raise vcore above the minimum requirements for the all core overclock.
> 
> cl15 3900 280 trfc + 5.3ghz/5.0 cache ht off = 36.5ns latency
> 
> cl15 4133 280 trfc + 5.3ghz/5.0 cache ht off = 36.9ns latency + about an extra 3k bandwidth across the board reads/writes/copy compared to cl15 3900. 280 trfc requires extra vcore to be stable here. In order to not have to add any extra vcore, I would have to raise tRFC to 331 causing latency to take a small hit. Not ideal here. I didn't bother running a new benchmark for the 331 trfc variation as I don't think that trading cl15 3900 280 trfc for cl15 4133 331 trfc is worth it given I don't want to raise vcore at all, latency gap would be more than .5ns between the two once the trfc adjustment is factored in, not a good trade.
> 
> cl15 3900 280 trfc + 5.1ghz/4.8 cache ht on = 37.0ns latency
> 
> cl15 4133 280 trfc + 5.1ghz/4.8 cache ht on = 37.4ns latency + about an extra 3k bandwidth across the board reads/writes/copy compared to cl15 3900 + 5.1ghz/4.8 cache ht on. No extra vcore needed for 280 trfc here. only .4ns behind cl15 3900 in exchange for about 5% more bandwidth. Less than a 1% decrease in latency for 5% more bandwidth, i feel like i have to take that deal.
> 
> I think i'm going to use CL15 4133 + 5.1GHz/4.8 cache ht on for my daily driver since I don't need any additional vcore and won't have to adjust trfc.


tRFC should be on a /8 divider only.
Not using the correct value will cause a latency hit.

The same thing with TRRD_L. Using a TRRD_L of 4 instead of 6 costs you like 1ns. (TRRD_S at 4 is fine).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

Is it possible that I'm stable at 1.18 sa and 1.16 io, but not on 1.2 io/sa?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Is it possible that I'm stable at 1.18 sa and 1.16 io, but not on 1.2 io/sa?


Every CPU and CPU/RAM (with frequency) combination is going to be different. No one can answer this question for your hardware except you.

For example, at 4.7 ghz core/4.4 ghz cache, with my 3200 C14 RAM at 3600 15-15-15-36, 2T, tRFC=308, tREFI=65520 (etc), DDRV: 1.45v, I got a red LinX crash error (test stopped) with VCCIO 1.20v, VCCSA 1.25v.
But with VCCIO 1.23v, SA 1.25v, there was no more crash error.

Every CPU will respond differently based on core/cache settings, RAM settings and timings, especially hyperthreaded chips, since the IMC/L3 cache is heavily involved in virtualized cores.


----------



## wholeeo

Had to share that I installed the monoblock this past weekend. Should have done direct die mount when I had the chance since now I'll have to remove everything to get to it CPU again.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Every CPU and CPU/RAM (with frequency) combination is going to be different. No one can answer this question for your hardware except you.
> 
> For example, at 4.7 ghz core/4.4 ghz cache, with my 3200 C14 RAM at 3600 15-15-15-36, 2T, tRFC=308, tREFI=65520 (etc), DDRV: 1.45v, I got a red LinX crash error (test stopped) with VCCIO 1.20v, VCCSA 1.25v.
> But with VCCIO 1.23v, SA 1.25v, there was no more crash error.
> 
> Every CPU will respond differently based on core/cache settings, RAM settings and timings, especially hyperthreaded chips, since the IMC/L3 cache is heavily involved in virtualized cores.


Thanks, I'm trying to form a working theory about these at least for this board.

Would you mind trying 1.18sa and 1.16io on those settings? (Linx is a more reliable test than Apex, but I don't have the cooling capacity for it)


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Thanks, I'm trying to form a working theory about these at least for this board.
> 
> Would you mind trying 1.18sa and 1.16io on those settings? (Linx is a more reliable test than Apex, but I don't have the cooling capacity for it)


I can't answer this question for you.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Here is what I used for each profile:


Thanks for this post  will test some this weekend


----------



## LordGurciullo

reach the sky you're a monster!
I think you need ram overclockers anonymous dude. 

I'm sitting at 4133 17 17 17 34 and getting 38.6 .. 
I tried 4133 16 16 16 34 and it didn't fly but I didn't raise my voltages too much more...
The system wouldn't even boot back into bios and I had to ice pick the cmos and Id rather not have to do that again but I am envious of your

5.1 and 3900 15 15 15 32

What are your voltages for this (I wont go up to 1.35 or 1.55 dram ) so I think this might be worth a shot... 
What is your vcore / llc? 

Can you run real bench stress for an hour? What are your temps? 

My scores in superposition have been infuriating me going from 32k to 36k ...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## coolkwc

Just done the processor swap test today and confirmed my i9-9900K is gone.
Will go for warranty claim.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Jeezus, and here I am trying to get my crappy ram slightly less crappy. I might have to purchase me some fun ram but then I'd have to give up - 32GBs.


----------



## Johaho

Meanwhile on F11C manually set RTLs- iols seems to work somehow. But its only work up to 3900Mhz.

For example. The board trains RTL 59 or 60 on at 3900Mhz you can type in 59-59-6-6 or 60-60-7-7 and it works.
On pre bios you always get the 66-68-13-13 if you do this.

The only benefit. You can type in 59 RTL and it doesn´t train higer than that.
This is more like an RTL INT Value.


----------



## sygnus21

coolkwc said:


> Just done the processor swap test today and confirmed my i9-9900K is gone.
> Will go for warranty claim.


Sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, I had a feeling something got fried which is why I asked about a previous overclock on the old system. 

Good luck on the warranty replacement. Do keep us informed.

Peace


----------



## wholeeo

So what's the best way to isolate and stress test cache nowadays? Still AIDA64 Cache Test for several hours?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> So what's the best way to isolate and stress test cache nowadays? Still AIDA64 Cache Test for several hours?


Prime95 29.8 build 6, 112k-112K in-place FFT with AVX disabled, with HWinfo64 WHEA sensor log open. This will show L3 cache/IMC related stability with hyperthreading enabled.
Several people here have been successful with that test.

If that passes without any CPU L0 errors logged, try 256-512K FFT and make sure that also passes. (I'm not sure if that is in-place or not checkboxed).

AIDA64 stress FPU only possibly works but temps heat up between prime95 small FFT AVX disabled and AVX enabled levels so that might not be the best way if you are temperature limited.
I haven't tested stress cache option only.


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> Prime95 29.8 build 6, 112k-112K in-place FFT with AVX disabled, with HWinfo64 WHEA sensor log open. This will show L3 cache/IMC related stability with hyperthreading enabled.
> Several people here have been successful with that test.
> 
> If that passes without any CPU L0 errors logged, try 256-512K FFT and make sure that also passes. (I'm not sure if that is in-place or not checkboxed).
> 
> AIDA64 stress FPU only possibly works but temps heat up between prime95 small FFT AVX disabled and AVX enabled levels so that might not be the best way if you are temperature limited.
> I haven't tested stress cache option only.


Thanks, I'll try me some Prime95 then per your suggestions.


----------



## Iarwa1N

I just installed modded F11c but now I could not boot into Windows if I dont select CSM mode and legacy RST mode. I am using RST as SATA mode since I have raid 0 setup. Is this about installed Windows 10 RST drivers in my system? I tried installing v17.8.0.1065 for Intel RST into my Windows but still no boot drive is detected if I select RST in BIOS (with CSM disabled and legacy RST ROM disabled).


----------



## Alemancio

Falkentyne said:


> Prime95 29.8 build 6, 112k-112K in-place FFT with AVX disabled, with HWinfo64 WHEA sensor log open. This will show L3 cache/IMC related stability with hyperthreading enabled.
> Several people here have been successful with that test.
> 
> If that passes without any CPU L0 errors logged, try 256-512K FFT and make sure that also passes. (I'm not sure if that is in-place or not checkboxed).
> 
> AIDA64 stress FPU only possibly works but temps heat up between prime95 small FFT AVX disabled and AVX enabled levels so that might not be the best way if you are temperature limited.
> I haven't tested stress cache option only.


Thanks Falkentyne, what other Prime95 ranges&uses do you know?

Would this still hold true for Coffee Lake?


----------



## desi_1990

Guys i would like to thank you for helping me out with 9900k temperature issues. Specially Falkentyne

So the problem was my pump i believe. after re applying thermal paste dozen time and re mounting my unit, I replaced my water cooler all together and bam! problem solved. 30C idle temps and 65 underload of stress test. cant believe where i thought the actual problem was and where it ended up being. oh well cant blame myself either as the Pump was showing reading of 3000RPM *shrugs*


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> Thanks Falkentyne, what other Prime95 ranges&uses do you know?
> 
> Would this still hold true for Coffee Lake?


Any hyperthreaded CFL chips.
The IMC/L3 cache is responsible for dealing with hyperthreaded cores as they are virtualized registers that are duplicated to appear as physical cores to the operating system. They require L3 memory. And what controls L3 cache voltage? VCCIO (IMC).

I only found out the 112K AVX disabled test by accident when stress testing stuff myself.
112k FMA3 is the hardest FMA3 test to pass (for testing cores) and 36K AVX is the hardest AVX test to pass.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Someone said they wanted every 9900k microcode known to man for modding to check performance.

Whoever does will have to use UBU (UEFI Bios Updater) tool to mod them into a BIOS and then flash with EFIFlash.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Reach the sky will you ever be satisfied . My ram was 210 dollars with tax... 3200 14 kit.. Got lucky!
I will raise tras to 36 and see!

Falkentyne why would you want to test just cache?

Reach the sky. I have never played with the variable voltage... I'm on 1.35 5.0 1.219 underload...
I guess I could try variable...


----------



## Lurifaks

Just for fun to see if it would boot @ 4533 MHz

1.5 vdimm
1.35 vccsa
1.35 vccio


----------



## LordGurciullo

Crazy yo! I just want max frames with my 1080p. Ideally 240 minimum ..... 
Is that latency I want?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

reach the sky. I changed my **** to 17 17 17 36, 300 and 65k.
Still higher latency... but I'm starting to think margin of error.
Lowest I had was 38.6 and now I'm getting a 39.1 - 39.4

But When I first tried computer wouldn't boot... had to icepick the cmos again. went up to 1.47 and 1.25 each and it works...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

well I'm getting 38-39.5 and I think im good at 4133 17 17 17 36 at 1.47/training and 1.25 each..

I feel less inclined to continue

However... Are you ready to really use your ******* mind? 

Latencymon and this video 




prepare to lose your mind. This guy somehow has a 2 latency... even though he ran it for only 20 seconds or so..

I'm at 230.. and my highest spikes are worse..

Prepare to lose your mind bro... Cause I have been researching for 2 days trying to figure out how in the world he has less than 10 and I can't even get less than 200.
It definitely has something to do with the the new windows locking us at 10 Frequency... but I still think I can get lower.

Have fun!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

get latency mon and run it for 30 minutes.. play something.. and screenshot the screen I screenshotted. 
Were all stuck at 10 for that now with current windows. but the latency thing...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## bastian

I've decided on 3466 @ CAS 14. 3466/14 = 247. My B-Die can go higher in frequency, but I have to be in the CAS 17 or 18 area, so even at the best case 4000/17=235. Better off with lower frequency, tighter timings.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

It tells you the latency between windows and drivers and I'm reading it should be a lot lot less. My spikes are up to 400 (bottom green).
look at yours and let me know what you get.


----------



## AndrejB

This doesn't seem too good


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> How is this?


Can you run superposition or something, just want to see if I should reinstall this windows, or maybe try to find standard nv driver instead of dch


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> Sure, which superposition benchmark should I run? 720p? Do you have a 2080ti? Were you able to find a standard nvidia driver that works with it? I had to use dch with my 2080ti, standard wouldn't work.



Any, just want to see if your nvidia hits like on my windows. Yep, Strix Oc


If you want the standard driver, download DDU and the driver below then go offline (if windows installs the driver for you before, it goes straight to dch). Remove with DDU then install.


https://www.nvidia.com/Download/Find.aspx


----------



## Falkentyne

I'm not sure if it's windows 1909 or Bios F11C or T1D, but on both bios versions, whenever i BSOD for some reason, I notice the motherboard makes a VERY STRANGE 3 beep sound (not like the normal sound from errors, but a totally weird pitch) then I'm back in BIOS automatically, almost like it knows something's unstable. The system actually powers off and back on when this happens. I've only seen it happen from a clock watchdog timeout so far, but it's only happened twice.

Is that the BIOS or some new thing in 1909? Does it happen after any BSOD?


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> I'm not sure if it's windows 1909 or Bios F11C or T1D, but on both bios versions, whenever i BSOD for some reason, I notice the motherboard makes a VERY STRANGE 3 beep sound (not like the normal sound from errors, but a totally weird pitch) then I'm back in BIOS automatically, almost like it knows something's unstable. The system actually powers off and back on when this happens. I've only seen it happen from a clock watchdog timeout so far, but it's only happened twice.
> 
> Is that the BIOS or some new thing in 1909? Does it happen after any BSOD?



I'm on F11c Kedarwolf modded. I've never heard the board make any beep sound at all?


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> I'm on F11c Kedarwolf modded. I've never heard the board make any beep sound at all?


Only after a BSOD. Got one in Apex Legends today (Clock Watchdog Timeout) because my VCCIO and VCCSA were too low.
Got the BSOD, system powered off, powered back on and did three VERY VERY Strange beep sounds, and I was back in BIOS !

I know F11c puts you in BIOS after a BSOD, but I only had one (during a realbench 2.56 run when I was sleeping) and I was back in BIOS when I woke up, wondering why and I saw in windows event log there was a BSOD  So I have no idea if it did the strange tone 3 beep sound or not.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Its kinda my mission in life to figure this out. Been following this guy Fr33thy and he has his under 100. and its important..

Reachthesky yours are quite good... 

However I'm really trying to figure out how to make them better... 
This **** is real complicated...

apparently there is away to tell the video card to run in msi mode instead of regular mode... I haven't tried it yet.

https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/w...ge-signaled-based-interrupts-msi-tool.378044/

I'm really trying to figure this out.
All help appreciated and thanks for showing me your numbers guys..

I left mine on for 9 hours and came home to an 1140 nvidia spike... !!!!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

reachthesky said:


> Sure, which superposition benchmark should I run? 720p? Do you have a 2080ti? Were you able to find a standard nvidia driver that works with it? I had to use dch with my 2080ti, standard wouldn't work.


Use DDU to wipe nvidia driver and make sure that windows doesn't reinstall the driver, as it uses the DCH one.



LordGurciullo said:


> Its kinda my mission in life to figure this out. Been following this guy Fr33thy and he has his under 100. and its important..
> 
> Reachthesky yours are quite good...
> 
> However I'm really trying to figure out how to make them better...
> This **** is real complicated...
> 
> apparently there is away to tell the video card to run in msi mode instead of regular mode... I haven't tried it yet.
> 
> https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/w...ge-signaled-based-interrupts-msi-tool.378044/
> 
> I'm really trying to figure this out.
> All help appreciated and thanks for showing me your numbers guys..
> 
> I left mine on for 9 hours and came home to an 1140 nvidia spike... !!!!


The hunt for lower latency is endless. If you run your applications on exclusive fullscreen, just alt tabbing will throw a 300-500 nvidia driver spike. Unless you have regular spikes that you notice while gaming or other intensive tasks, it's not really anything to worry about.
Though as you seem to already have set your mind to it, tools like ProcessExplorer: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/process-explorer and WPT: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/wpt/ can be helpful to narrow things down.

MSI does lower the latencies abit on my end but nothing significant, though I do run all my drivers in MSI mode.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

Either use DDU or msconfig to boot into safe mode and run DDU with the no reboot option, then try installing the normal driver while still in safe mode. Maybe then it'll budge ... =p


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

reachthesky said:


> was just checking out your cpu-z validation. cl17-4133, great kit. What are the dram/training/sa/io voltage requirements for cl16 4133? What is bandwidth/latency like? Did you test out a fully tightened cl17-4133? If so, did the voltage requirements go up from xmp requirements?
> 
> So far i've validated the following with my cl17 4000 gskill kit:
> cl15 3900
> cl15 4000
> cl16 4000
> cl17 4000
> cl15 4100
> cl16 4100
> cl17 4100
> cl15 4133
> cl16 4133
> cl17 4133
> cl18 4200
> 
> 4200 is stubborn. It won't stabilize on anything other than values between 18-20-20-42 and 18-18-18-38. I fooled around with 1T a little bit, 3333mhz being the highest 1T will boot. Have you had any luck going above 4133 with your kit? Have you tried cl15/4133?


I have posted my settings some pages back, though I've worked on them a little. 1.47v dram/training and 1.2 io/sa for the cl16 profile, could possibly lower sa/io further but I haven't tried. Didn't bother much with XMP, and well 4200+ is possible but only with really loose timings.
1T limit is somewhere around 3500-3600. I can do 4133cl15 at 1.58v, but I aim for 1.5v max as daily.


----------



## GeneO

Grizzly111 said:


> I'm on F11c Kedarwolf modded. I've never heard the board make any beep sound at all?


You need a small speaker attached to it. The board does not come with a speaker:

https://www.amazon.com/PC-Internal-Mini-Onboard-Speaker/dp/B002W4M0DW


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> MSI mode? Is that something exclusive to MSI video cards?


PCI-E Message Signal Interrupts. Instead of using a shared interrupt line to signal interrupts, a device can send messages over PCI-E to signal an interrupt. This has numerous advantages the most major being they are unlimited in quantity unlike the old interrupt lines, which were limited and susceptible to collisions (devices using the same interrupt number). Almost all PCI-E devices , except Nvidia, use MSI by default now. You can add a Windows registry entry (and reboot) to enable them on Nvidia. I have been using them on Nvidia cards for years and they work perfectly well.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> MSI mode? Is that something exclusive to MSI video cards?


PCI-E Message Signal Interrupts. Instead of using a shared interrupt line to signal interrupts, a device can send messages over PCI-E to signal an interrupt. This has numerous advantages the most major being they are unlimited in quantity unlike the old interrupt lines, which were limited and sustainable to collisions (devices using the same interrupt number). Almost all PCI-E devices , except NVIDIA, use MSI by default now. You can add a Windows registry entry (and reboot) to enable them on NVIDIA. 

I have been using them on NVIDIA cards for years now and they work perfectly well. My point in posting is that you should not be afraid to enable these on NVIDIA cards.

I would give you a registry file to enable them, but it needs to create an entry under your specific NVIDIA device ID in the registry, which can be different for different cards. You can google info on how to do this. 

Negative value interrupts in the attachment are MSI. I have only enabled the NVIDIA graphics card and NVIDIA HD audio.


----------



## AndrejB

GeneO said:


> I have been using them on Nvidia cards for years and they work perfectly well.


Can you please share the registry entry?


----------



## GeneO

AndrejB said:


> Can you please share the registry entry?


Yes, but INCORRECTLY EDITING THE REGISTRY CAN CAUSE YOUR SYSTEM NOT TO BOOT. I am not responsible for any issues you may incur. I maintain backups of my system.

This is for my Super. It will be different for your graphics card but I attached some images for guidance

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Enum\PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_1E84&SUBSYS_87061043&REV_A1\4&2db3ecda&0&0008\Device Parameters\Interrupt Management\MessageSignaledInterruptProperties]
"MSISupported"=dword:00000001

This part will be different: 

VEN_10DE&DEV_1E84&SUBSYS_87061043&REV_A1\4&2db3ecda&0&0008

You have to go under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE -> SYSTEM -> CurrentControlSet -> enum -> PCI in the registry.

Find the VENxxxx entry that contains the DeviceDesc for your graphics card (see attachments). Then under the Interrupt Management Key, you will need to create a new Key, and name it MessageSignaledInterruptProperties. Then create a DWORD MSISupported under that and set it to "1".

You pretty much have to do this every time you install a new NVIDIA driver, so once you have it, it is best to save the entry as a registry file that you can reapply.


----------



## Nammi

Could also just grab the MSI utility from: https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/w...ge-signaled-based-interrupts-msi-tool.378044/ to skip the registry editing hassle.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Oh I love you guys.... Seriously!!!

Ok so When I did fresh install of my drivers I didn't uplug ethernet cable. 
So you're saying windows downloaded something and then I did a driver over it? 

How do I fix that???

Also Nammi you think this utility is totally safe? He mentions Msi-x Mode... si that what this puts us in?
Also what about nvidia powermizer?? Ive heard about that too... 

Also does Phyx cause any latency? I want to play both metros so I installed it ..


----------



## LordGurciullo

Ok Used ddu to get rid of all drivers gpu .. intel and nvidia... unplugged network and told windows not to install drivers.

Reboot in normal mode... It didn't seem to install the auto driver ( that makes your resolution go to full)..

Installed nvidia and phyx.... Running tests... things seem lower but i still had a 500 spike on the driver..

Is MSI safe for hardware? The disclaimers are quite serious about how it could blue screen you. 
Guess ill try...


----------



## GeneO

LordGurciullo said:


> Ok Used ddu to get rid of all drivers gpu .. intel and nvidia... unplugged network and told windows not to install drivers.
> 
> Reboot in normal mode... It didn't seem to install the auto driver ( that makes your resolution go to full)..
> 
> Installed nvidia and phyx.... Running tests... things seem lower but i still had a 500 spike on the driver..
> 
> Is MSI safe for hardware? The disclaimers are quite serious about how it could blue screen you.
> Guess ill try...


Yes, it is safe for the hardware./ I have been using MSI for years on different Nvidia cards.


----------



## Driller au

Been using MSI mode via the utility for ages never had a problem, in fact i run everything listed in MSI mode


----------



## satinghostrider

@KedarWolf

Aorus Master BIOS : F11C Official from Gigabyte

Thank you so much for your settings in the other threads I got very good gains using your settings despite it being just 2 x 8GB sticks of the G.Skill 3600 CL16. I have since ordered another pair to run 4 x 8gb sticks.

I used your settings but for some reason I cannot seem to change the RTL and IOL. Everytime I change, it defaults back to 87 for example. This is on 2 x 8gb sticks currently.

I have attached the screenshots below and hope you could guide me somewhat on changing the remaining settings.

Anyone can give me any tips to improve my current settings?

Thanks man!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> rtls and iols don't train well for frequencies over 3900 on these motherboards. CL15 3900 is the fastest frequency when it comes to latency for these boards. If you want the best latency you can get, aim for cl15 3900. In regards to your timings, you can start with tWR and see if it can come down to 12.


Hey thanks man! No wonder it did not work out and keeps going back to the auto values.
I will try to tweak the twr to 12 and do you happen to have the full settings including the accompanying voltages of the CL15 @ 3900? 

Thank you so much.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> It is somewhere in this thread within the last 20 pages. I'd reboot with the timings and screenshot them for you but i'm in the middle of testing with OCCT at the moment.
> 
> Voltages I used for cl15 3900 were 1.3v sa/io and 1.5v vdimm, no extra vcore.


Hey it is okay I managed to find it. Thanks for the headsup! Keep pushing!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> Hopefully I can be stable by tomorrow evening


May the RAM gods be with you.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Yes but what about this latency crisis. 

I will say this ! I reinstalled driver without windows driver and switched to MSI and it is quite better. 

My highest reported ISR dropped to almost nothing.

However. I'm getting spikes (highest reported dpc) that jump from 400-900 on nvidia when I do certain things ( like open steam)..

Whats up with that?


----------



## LordGurciullo

I really want to try your ram settings Nammi.

I can see the settings you've changed... 
but what about 
1. TRC
2. TCCD_S
3. TCCD_L
?
and you said 1.47 training/volt and 1.25 io/sa?

I can give it a shot... might just have to ice pick the cmos ..


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

On the subject of latency - has anyone tried assigning different processor core affinities to the GPU? It appears it's currently set at Core0....would assigning it to another core improve fps performance?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> When on acdc- 1/1 + standard llc, Do I need to match vrout with vid?



I don't use such a configuration.
VR VOUT can match VID if DC Loadline is equal to VRM Loadline (LLC). Standard LLC is 1.6 mOhms, so DC Loadline should be 1.6 mOhms also (160 in this BIOS, 1.6 in Asus bios).



reachthesky said:


> Is it possible to change DMI voltage in bios?


Isn't that VCCDMI_PEG ?
I know nothing about DMI voltage so you're on your own.



reachthesky said:


> It's crazy how much overclocked ram + high amounts of io/sa can add to heat. Last night I couldn't do OCCT large with avx enabled @ 5ghz with cl15 4133 ram without hitting 95c. Today, no memory oc, 5ghz, occt large with avx and i'm under 60c. Maybe it has to do with some of those tertiary timings being so tight, i heard some can add heavy amounts of heat to avx loads.


Linpack binaries are VERY heavily affected by RAM timings.

At base RAM speeds (2133 mhz with crap timings) you may get like 350 Gflops, and at XMP+ speeds with tweaked timings that goes up to 500+ Gflops at 5 ghz (if you can cool the chip that is, since you'll be far past 190 amps on 35000 sample size (LinX 0.9.6) or Linpack Extreme 1.1.2. I don't use OCCT.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Almog Dahan

*I need help to improve my OC (which is unstable)*

settings are as in the pictures except for LLC which is set to turbo currently. https://imgur.com/a/QKCIwAk

i9 9900KS @5GHZ 1.3 Vcore
Corsair H150i pro 360mm AIO
32gb trident royal Z 3200mhz 16-18-18-38 1.35v
Aorus master F11c bios
Corsair RM850x gold PSU 
RTX 2080 super gaming x trio by MSI

VR VOUT in HWinfo : 1.244 underload, 1.291 idle
Vcore in HWinfo : 1.3 under load and, 1.32 idle

I'm extremely frustrated at this point. I passed cinebench so i jumped into realbench, which passed another 30min at 16GB (out of 32gb) and then, i jumped into intelburntest which freezes after 5 seconds. Also played Apex legends after it was suggested by a person on reddit to draw errors quickly in HWinfo and i got a single internal cpu error after an hour.

I tried with and without XMP and tried manually setting ram, no success there too. Please I'm open to suggestions!


----------



## satinghostrider

Almog Dahan said:


> settings are as in the pictures except for LLC which is set to turbo currently. https://imgur.com/a/QKCIwAk
> 
> i9 9900KS @5GHZ 1.3 Vcore
> Corsair H150i pro 360mm AIO
> 32gb trident royal Z 3200mhz 16-18-18-38 1.35v
> Aorus master F11c bios
> Corsair RM850x gold PSU
> RTX 2080 super gaming x trio by MSI
> 
> VR VOUT in HWinfo : 1.244 underload, 1.291 idle
> Vcore in HWinfo : 1.3 under load and, 1.32 idle
> 
> I'm extremely frustrated at this point. I passed cinebench so i jumped into realbench, which passed another 30min at 16GB (out of 32gb) and then, i jumped into intelburntest which freezes after 5 seconds. Also played Apex legends after it was suggested by a person on reddit to draw errors quickly in HWinfo and i got a single internal cpu error after an hour.
> 
> I tried with and without XMP and tried manually setting ram, no success there too. Please I'm open to suggestions!


I'd do a complete bios reset and clear and start over again. Maybe the toggling on and off XMP had some settings that didn't completely register or de-register. Start from a previously working baseline.


----------



## Almog Dahan

satinghostrider said:


> I'd do a complete bios reset and clear and start over again. Maybe the toggling on and off XMP had some settings that didn't completely register or de-register. Start from a previously working baseline.


I did a CMOS reset about 2 hours ago and that was after i messed with XMP. I just re-enabled it after the reset.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Not having any issues... I just want to have the lowest possible latency and highest possible min frame rate cause I wanna shoot people in the head with zero input lag... and no spikes..

So far I'm pretty pleased but may try to reduce timings in ram... but I think im really happy... other than these spikes... which according to our friend is quite normal??


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

LordGurciullo said:


> Not having any issues... I just want to have the lowest possible latency and highest possible min frame rate cause I wanna shoot people in the head with zero input lag... and no spikes..
> 
> So far I'm pretty pleased but may try to reduce timings in ram... but I think im really happy... other than these spikes... which according to our friend is quite normal??
> 
> /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


For some reason, I imagined John Wick.


----------



## satinghostrider

Almog Dahan said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd do a complete bios reset and clear and start over again. Maybe the toggling on and off XMP had some settings that didn't completely register or de-register. Start from a previously working baseline.
> 
> 
> 
> I did a CMOS reset about 2 hours ago and that was after i messed with XMP. I just re-enabled it after the reset.
Click to expand...

Perhaps run memtest and see if your RAM is working fine at stock clocks. Might be your RAM being faulty. Usually I do this if I my working baseline suddenly starts throwing crashes and BSODs.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Almog Dahan

satinghostrider said:


> Perhaps run memtest and see if your RAM is working fine at stock clocks. Might be your RAM being faulty. Usually I do this if I my working baseline suddenly starts throwing crashes and BSODs.


Did test my RAM in memtest about 2 weeks ago when i got the rig. It reported 0 errors, i seriously don't know what to do any more.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Almog Dahan said:


> settings are as in the pictures except for LLC which is set to turbo currently. https://imgur.com/a/QKCIwAk
> 
> i9 9900KS @5GHZ 1.3 Vcore
> Corsair H150i pro 360mm AIO
> 32gb trident royal Z 3200mhz 16-18-18-38 1.35v
> Aorus master F11c bios
> Corsair RM850x gold PSU
> RTX 2080 super gaming x trio by MSI
> 
> VR VOUT in HWinfo : 1.244 underload, 1.291 idle
> Vcore in HWinfo : 1.3 under load and, 1.32 idle
> 
> I'm extremely frustrated at this point. I passed cinebench so i jumped into realbench, which passed another 30min at 16GB (out of 32gb) and then, i jumped into intelburntest which freezes after 5 seconds. Also played Apex legends after it was suggested by a person on reddit to draw errors quickly in HWinfo and i got a single internal cpu error after an hour.
> 
> I tried with and without XMP and tried manually setting ram, no success there too. Please I'm open to suggestions!


I told you what to do already.
Increase vcore. Period.
Or reduce loadline calibration and raise bios vcore to compensate. 1.30v in BIOS with LLC Turbo is less stable than 1.350v in BIOS + LLC High, even if the full load "VR VOUT" is exactly the same in each one.

Also set VRM switching frequency to 300 khz. This helps a lot.

VCCIO and VCCSA also may help. Try 1.15v/1.120v, or 1.120v/1.125v.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> So my chip needs an extra 60mv vcore to be OCCT large avx stable at 5ghz with xmp cl17 4000 enabled compared to 5ghz at base 2133. Max temp was 87c with xmp enabled with temps averaging around 73c.
> 
> I booted up cl15 4133 again but added the extra 60mv vcore this time. Testing OCCT large avx disabled. Temps are toasty compared to 5g xmp temps with avx enabled with the same voltage. 80c-90c average, peak at 94 so far. Sa/io are only at 1.3v, dram voltage at 1.55v. Do ram overclocks really increase heat that much? Like, this isn't even an avx load. What specifically is increasing the temp by 20c? Is it the extra dram voltage? Is it the extra sa/io? Is it the low timings? A combination of all 3? Crazy how temps are 30c higher when testing OCCT large avx disabled with the same cpu speed/voltage with only a difference in ram speed/timings/voltage.


I answered this already.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

LordGurciullo said:


> I really want to try your ram settings Nammi.
> 
> I can see the settings you've changed...
> but what about
> 1. TRC
> 2. TCCD_S
> 3. TCCD_L
> ?
> and you said 1.47 training/volt and 1.25 io/sa?
> 
> I can give it a shot... might just have to ice pick the cmos ..


tRC 52, tCCD_S 4 and tCCD_L 7, although you could leave tCCD on auto and use tRC = tRP + tRAS +X where X is anywhere between 0-10 as per guide.
Voltage wise, it's the same as overclocking any component. I'm on 1.47 dram, 1.20 sa/io, but that doesn't mean you need as much or maybe you need more. Personally I'd start with 1.5v dram/training and 1.3v sa/io, these being my daily max settings. And then work your way down from there.



LordGurciullo said:


> Not having any issues... I just want to have the lowest possible latency and highest possible min frame rate cause I wanna shoot people in the head with zero input lag... and no spikes..
> 
> So far I'm pretty pleased but may try to reduce timings in ram... but I think im really happy... other than these spikes... which according to our friend is quite normal??


If the spikes don't occur while you're just on desktop then I'd say you've got windows setup good enough. I did a small test in another thread to find some quick settings to lower DPC, if you're still being plagued by spikes while on desktop. https://www.overclock.net/forum/69-nvidia/1736362-nvidia-rtx-dpc-latency-fixed-6.html#post28235896


----------



## Almog Dahan

reachthesky said:


> Someone on reddit kept telling you to increase your vcore because you got internal parity error in hwinfo64 1 hour into apex legends. Did you listen to that person and add a tick of vcore or not?


Yes, I have up to 1.3v which is getting out of what i feel comfortable with.



Falkentyne said:


> I told you what to do already.
> Increase vcore. Period.
> Or reduce loadline calibration and raise bios vcore to compensate. 1.30v in BIOS with LLC Turbo is less stable than 1.350v in BIOS + LLC High, even if the full load "VR VOUT" is exactly the same in each one.
> 
> Also set VRM switching frequency to 300 khz. This helps a lot.
> 
> VCCIO and VCCSA also may help. Try 1.15v/1.120v, or 1.120v/1.125v.


VRM switching frequency is 300khz
I just refuse to go that high with the vcore and settle down with a below average CPU that i rather return than use. I'm sorry if i sound bad or anything but i paid a little over 700$ to be able to OC at a lower voltage than a normal i9 9900k can. I'm not really hoping for any crazy values either like 5.2 or 5.3. Also don't get me wrong I do appreciate every single person who helped me so far.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Almog Dahan

reachthesky said:


> Return it while you still can. I'd do the same with my 9900K but i'm outside the return window. I pretty much can only complain on every public forum now, I have no other options. Maybe intel will get sick of the bad PR and offer to swap out my ****ty chip for something better.


I'm sorry to hear that no body should have to deal with this kind of crap especially when you're dealing with such expensive CPUs.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Yah I'm getting the nvidia spikes and even without them I'm not as low as you... 

I'm bout ready to give up.. 

also. right now im on 4133 17 17 17 36 and my trp is 41.. I Guess I Should make it 53?? 

I'll try your ram settings tomorrow. Might get me another frame?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Almog Dahan

reachthesky said:


> Almog Dahan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry to hear that no body should have to deal with this kind of crap especially when you're dealing with such expensive CPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah its funny how it works.
> 
> I buy AMD, it doesn't work as advertised, they say don't buy the cheap stuff.
> I buy Intel, spend three thousand dollars of my life savings cash on a full build, I receive a second rate chip.
> 
> "but its the silicon lottery"
> 
> I come to find out intel was stashing all the good R0 chips to be sold as 9900KS chips.
> 
> 2+2 tells me that the silicon lottery was fixed for the 9900 R0 chips.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't ******* win. And then they want me to spend more for a KS. Like, I got ripped off, why would I even want to give you any more money ever lol.
> 
> But yeah, You should return that thing right away. That's a piss poor excuse for "top quality silicon". Consider returning everything if possible and go AMD instead.
Click to expand...

In my case I would rather have the higher core speeds rather than more multithreaded performance, so AMD doesn't really appeal to me. I will try contacting Intel tomorrow to see what can be done since the place I bought my KS from is out of stock. :^)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

@reachthesky what is your default voltage? For instance, after psu off, clear cmos, then when go back into the bios, what's your cpu voltage?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> @reachthesky what is your default voltage? For instance, after psu off, clear cmos, then when go back into the bios, what's your cpu voltage?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios shows cpu voltage at 1.260v with the cpu @ 4.7ghz after clearing the cmos. That's literally with everything left on auto and not touching anything after a cmos clear.
Click to expand...

Wow that's a lot... That's like my first p0 chip, was getting 1.254 or something. Currently mine p0 is at 1.212v 

Wanna trade gpus for cpus 😛
Got a crap strix with micron mem


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## AndrejB

reachthesky said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow that's a lot... That's like my first p0 chip, was getting 1.254 or something. Currently mine p0 is at 1.212v
> 
> Wanna trade gpus for cpus 😛
> Got a crap strix with micron mem
> 
> 
> 
> Don't let my GPU fool you, sure I can get 2145 on the core and 8000 on the memory, but the card never maintains the full boost. Apparently a 240 aio isn't good enough to keep the card cool enough to maintain max boost, Why is gigabyte pairing a 240mm aio with this card if it doesn't do the job properly? Should have been a 360mm aio. There is so much wrong with this industry it ******* angers me to no end. I think i'm just going to spend my free time calling out vendors for their bull**** on their own public outlets.
Click to expand...

Still a bit jealous... I can barely get 2050 and 7500 on my piece of crap (and that's with a high tdp bios...)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Almog Dahan said:


> Yes, I have up to 1.3v which is getting out of what i feel comfortable with.
> 
> 
> 
> VRM switching frequency is 300khz
> I just refuse to go that high with the vcore and settle down with a below average CPU that i rather return than use. I'm sorry if i sound bad or anything but i paid a little over 700$ to be able to OC at a lower voltage than a normal i9 9900k can. I'm not really hoping for any crazy values either like 5.2 or 5.3. Also don't get me wrong I do appreciate every single person who helped me so far.


Oh I just looked at your BIOS.
No wonder your games are crashing.
You have your cache ratio too high.

You also have your protections set to a very low level. Something like Cinebench R20 could easily cause your system to shutoff. Your VRM protection is below 138 amps.
No idea if this is affecting transients either, but I did test these settings once at 4.7 ghz. Instant power off during a prime95 stress test.

Set your cache ratio to x43. Set VRM current protection to extreme (not normal). Set VAXG protection to extreme.
Set VAXG switching frequency to 300 khz (doesn't hurt). Try Apex Legends now.

If no Internal Parity Errors, reduce bios voltage to 1.280v and test again.
If still no errors in Apex Legends, raise your cache multiplier to 47. Not higher. If 1.280v with x47 multiplier causes issues, then try 1.30v and x47.
If this fails, RMA the CPU as **DEFECTIVE**.

x48 cache requires enough vcore to run x51 core multiplier, which is going to be up to 1.32-1.350v bios.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Yeah its funny how it works.
> 
> I buy AMD, it doesn't work as advertised, they say don't buy the cheap stuff.
> I buy Intel, spend three thousand dollars of my life savings cash on a full build, I receive a second rate chip.
> 
> "but its the silicon lottery"
> 
> I come to find out intel was stashing all the good R0 chips to be sold as 9900KS chips.
> 
> 2+2 tells me that the silicon lottery was fixed for the 9900 R0 chips.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't ******* win. And then they want me to spend more for a KS. Like, I got ripped off, why would I even want to give you any more money ever lol.
> 
> But yeah, You should return that thing right away. That's a piss poor excuse for "top quality silicon". Consider returning everything if possible and go AMD instead.



IMO all the K chips should be cherry picked to a high level leaving the mediocre ones for non-K duty. These special runs are just BS more $$$. But people pay it so it goes on. Not to mention having a different socket and hence motherboard pretty much every generation. If a motherboard dies, then you are stuck buying new everything. I think next round I will have to give AMD a shot.


----------



## Almog Dahan

Falkentyne said:


> Almog Dahan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I have up to 1.3v which is getting out of what i feel comfortable with.
> 
> 
> 
> VRM switching frequency is 300khz
> I just refuse to go that high with the vcore and settle down with a below average CPU that i rather return than use. I'm sorry if i sound bad or anything but i paid a little over 700$ to be able to OC at a lower voltage than a normal i9 9900k can. I'm not really hoping for any crazy values either like 5.2 or 5.3. Also don't get me wrong I do appreciate every single person who helped me so far.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I just looked at your BIOS.
> No wonder your games are crashing.
> You have your cache ratio too high.
> 
> You also have your protections set to a very low level. Something like Cinebench R20 could easily cause your system to shutoff. Your VRM protection is below 138 amps.
> No idea if this is affecting transients either, but I did test these settings once at 4.7 ghz. Instant power off during a prime95 stress test.
> 
> Set your cache ratio to x43. Set VRM current protection to extreme (not normal). Set VAXG protection to extreme.
> Set VAXG switching frequency to 300 khz (doesn't hurt). Try Apex Legends now.
> 
> If no Internal Parity Errors, reduce bios voltage to 1.280v and test again.
> If still no errors in Apex Legends, raise your cache multiplier to 47. Not higher. If 1.280v with x47 multiplier causes issues, then try 1.30v and x47.
> If this fails, RMA the CPU as **DEFECTIVE**.
> 
> x48 cache requires enough vcore to run x51 core multiplier, which is going to be up to 1.32-1.350v bios.
Click to expand...

Is it accurate? Vr vout reports 1.201 average after 30min in realbench with 0 errors in hwinfo 1.225v in bios LLC extreme https://imgur.com/a/WHWcISY


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> System just turned off and on randomly while typing here with the 5ghz profile on 2133 ram. Do I need to turn on power loading? This can't possibly be vcore related right? Like I just did multiple occt runs with no errors.



Mine has powered off randomly whilst surfing the net also. Gaming is fine.


----------



## Falkentyne

Almog Dahan said:


> Is it accurate? Vr vout reports 1.201 average after 30min in realbench with 0 errors in hwinfo 1.225v in bios LLC extreme https://imgur.com/a/WHWcISY


What is accurate? What are you talking about?

LLC Extreme just hurts stability. Although it's better than using LLC Extreme @ 500 khz, which would just probably BSOD you instead.
You would be more stable with LLC: High, Bios voltage 1.30v, than LLC Extreme, Bios voltage 1.225v (I've tested this).
You're also hiding a bunch of information. Did you reduce your cache ratio like I asked you to? You had it at 48 (too high) before. Cache being closer than -3 requires a substantial vcore increase.

Also, running realbench 2.56 has absolutely NOTHING to do with Apex legends. Apex is one of those games that will cause CPU Parity Errors if you are the least bit unstable, even though the load (current) and temps are half that of Realbench. I was doing a lot of testing for Oriostorm (the Apex programmer; he even gave me credit in one of the patch notes). You can pass realbench 2.56 at a much lower load voltage than what would crash Apex Legends.


----------



## Almog Dahan

Falkentyne said:


> Almog Dahan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it accurate? Vr vout reports 1.201 average after 30min in realbench with 0 errors in hwinfo 1.225v in bios LLC extreme https://imgur.com/a/WHWcISY
> 
> 
> 
> What is accurate? What are you talking about?
> 
> LLC Extreme just hurts stability. Although it's better than using LLC Extreme @ 500 khz, which would just probably BSOD you instead.
> You would be more stable with LLC: High, Bios voltage 1.30v, than LLC Extreme, Bios voltage 1.225v (I've tested this).
> You're also hiding a bunch of information. Did you reduce your cache ratio like I asked you to? You had it at 48 (too high) before. Cache being closer than -3 requires a substantial vcore increase.
> 
> Also, running realbench 2.56 has absolutely NOTHING to do with Apex legends. Apex is one of those games that will cause CPU Parity Errors if you are the least bit unstable, even though the load (current) and temps are half that of Realbench. I was doing a lot of testing for Oriostorm (the Apex programmer; he even gave me credit in one of the patch notes). You can pass realbench 2.56 at a much lower load voltage than what would crash Apex Legends.
Click to expand...

Sorry I wasn't trying to hide anything. I just reduced ring to x44 and tried from 1.3 to 1.225 turbo and extreme in realbench occt and apex legends and so far there's no error. I don't want to open my mouth about it too ... but is it nothing to run home about? https://imgur.com/a/MJHhEP7


----------



## LordGurciullo

John Wick Here. Yup. I'm serious af and my aim is no joke. Can't have no latency issue when that pistol fires to the brain.

OK I tried 4133 16 16 16 as per Nammi's settings.

No go. Blue screen memory management. Threw up errors instant on ram test. Geekbench crashed it... and latency showed 38.9. Which is exactly what I was getting at 17 17 17.

I'm thinking that this is it for me folks.. I had voltage up to 1.49 and 1.29 for both and while it may be ok at 1.51 or 1.31 i don't wanna run that. I even upped vcore to 1.3.

Thoughts??


ALSO! Apparently disaabling meltdown and spectre protection can get us more performance... How do we feel about that?
ALSO! MY nvidia latency seems to stay stable unless I open steam. Immediately jumps to 471 everytime.
How do we find out what is causing that? 

Need the pros here.


----------



## Almog Dahan

LordGurciullo said:


> John Wick Here. Yup. I'm serious af and my aim is no joke. Can't have no latency issue when that pistol fires to the brain.
> 
> OK I tried 4133 16 16 16 as per Nammi's settings.
> 
> No go. Blue screen memory management. Threw up errors instant on ram test. Geekbench crashed it... and latency showed 38.9. Which is exactly what I was getting at 17 17 17.
> 
> I'm thinking that this is it for me folks.. I had voltage up to 1.49 and 1.29 for both and while it may be ok at 1.51 or 1.31 i don't wanna run that. I even upped vcore to 1.3.
> 
> Thoughts??
> 
> 
> ALSO! Apparently disaabling meltdown and spectre protection can get us more performance... How do we feel about that?
> ALSO! MY nvidia latency seems to stay stable unless I open steam. Immediately jumps to 471 everytime.
> How do we find out what is causing that?
> 
> Need the pros here.


Where did you find the Spectre protection? Is it under a different name in the BIOS? also what's meltdown?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

its two security loopholes that intel and windows and mother board patched. You can disable them in registry.. 
I Guess you get a 3 percent chance of having all your passwords taken??? but you get 4 percent more cpu on some applications...

I'm not sure if its worth it. 

Also I dont see ram temps anywhere in hwinfo.

and my latency basically is fine 140 to 184 highest dpc either dxgkrnl.sys or nktol or network driver = UNTIL i open a youtube video. Open steam. Screen saver... Then nvidia driver jumps to 471..

KBOOST? Force Constant Voltage? 

Any thoughts? 
Should reachthesky and I start a overclockers anonymous meeting after we get owned by a 15 year old on a wireless controller with his 30fps on a console? 

Lol.


----------



## Salve1412

LordGurciullo said:


> John Wick Here. Yup. I'm serious af and my aim is no joke. Can't have no latency issue when that pistol fires to the brain.
> 
> OK I tried 4133 16 16 16 as per Nammi's settings.
> 
> No go. Blue screen memory management. Threw up errors instant on ram test. Geekbench crashed it... and latency showed 38.9. Which is exactly what I was getting at 17 17 17.
> 
> I'm thinking that this is it for me folks.. I had voltage up to 1.49 and 1.29 for both and while it may be ok at 1.51 or 1.31 i don't wanna run that. I even upped vcore to 1.3.
> 
> Thoughts??
> 
> 
> ALSO! Apparently disaabling meltdown and spectre protection can get us more performance... How do we feel about that?
> ALSO! MY nvidia latency seems to stay stable unless I open steam. Immediately jumps to 471 everytime.
> How do we find out what is causing that?
> 
> Need the pros here.


Maybe you can try these settings for 4133 CL16 (I think Gen. was the one who posted them in the first place in this thread). In my case they stabilized my previously unstable RAM at this very frequency, making it pass Karhu and HCI.


----------



## Falkentyne

Almog Dahan said:


> Sorry I wasn't trying to hide anything. I just reduced ring to x44 and tried from 1.3 to 1.225 turbo and extreme in realbench occt and apex legends and so far there's no error. I don't want to open my mouth about it too ... but is it nothing to run home about? https://imgur.com/a/MJHhEP7


Was probably the too high cache ratio making you unstable.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

LordGurciullo said:


> John Wick Here. Yup. I'm serious af and my aim is no joke. Can't have no latency issue when that pistol fires to the brain.
> 
> OK I tried 4133 16 16 16 as per Nammi's settings.
> 
> No go. Blue screen memory management. Threw up errors instant on ram test. Geekbench crashed it... and latency showed 38.9. Which is exactly what I was getting at 17 17 17.
> 
> I'm thinking that this is it for me folks.. I had voltage up to 1.49 and 1.29 for both and while it may be ok at 1.51 or 1.31 i don't wanna run that. I even upped vcore to 1.3.
> 
> Thoughts??
> 
> 
> ALSO! Apparently disaabling meltdown and spectre protection can get us more performance... How do we feel about that?
> ALSO! MY nvidia latency seems to stay stable unless I open steam. Immediately jumps to 471 everytime.
> How do we find out what is causing that?
> 
> Need the pros here.


Make sure hardware decoding and GPU accelerated rendering is disabled in Steam settings.


----------



## BigMack70

OK so I'm trying to figure out what the F just happened...

I had everything up and running at 5.2 GHz stable, been overclocking memory and got to 4133 in what appeared to be a stable config. Thought it would be fun to downclock the memory and then do some gaming benchmarks and see what the impact was of 4133 vs 3600 vs 3000. 

So, went into the BIOS, changed frequency from 4133 to 3600, saved and exited, and the entire thing died. PC wouldn't POST, restarted itself maybe 10 times, and then when it finally came back to life it had wiped out my F10 BIOS and reverted back to F9 and lost all my settings and profiles. 

W. T. F.

Gotta try and re-do everything from memory now... and re-flash the BIOS... sheesh


----------



## wholeeo

BigMack70 said:


> OK so I'm trying to figure out what the F just happened...
> 
> I had everything up and running at 5.2 GHz stable, been overclocking memory and got to 4133 in what appeared to be a stable config. Thought it would be fun to downclock the memory and then do some gaming benchmarks and see what the impact was of 4133 vs 3600 vs 3000.
> 
> So, went into the BIOS, changed frequency from 4133 to 3600, saved and exited, and the entire thing died. PC wouldn't POST, restarted itself maybe 10 times, and then when it finally came back to life it had wiped out my F10 BIOS and reverted back to F9 and lost all my settings and profiles.
> 
> W. T. F.
> 
> Gotta try and re-do everything from memory now... and re-flash the BIOS... sheesh


Use the bios switch to revert to chip that has F10 with your profiles.


----------



## LordGurciullo

I could try that. its super close to what I tried though. a couple differences.. Voltages? What were your ram latency benchmarks with this?

Yes it is disabled KEDAR. 

It seems to happen on steam launch... and on other things... and it seems to usually be 471... 
Id really like to know.


----------



## BigMack70

wholeeo said:


> Use the bios switch to revert to chip that has F10 with your profiles.


Thanks. I didn't realize this is a dual bios board. I still dunno why down clocking the memory has caused this to fall apart, though. Struggling to apply old settings and POST at the moment


Edit
..... annnnnd it crashed on boot and killed my windows install for the OG bios (checksum error). So I guess I'm using a new BIOS after all. Well this'll teach me to bother ever trying this again... Wowww


----------



## satinghostrider

satinghostrider said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Aorus Master BIOS : F11C Official from Gigabyte
> 
> Thank you so much for your settings in the other threads I got very good gains using your settings despite it being just 2 x 8GB sticks of the G.Skill 3600 CL16. I have since ordered another pair to run 4 x 8gb sticks.
> 
> I used your settings but for some reason I cannot seem to change the RTL and IOL. Everytime I change, it defaults back to 87 for example. This is on 2 x 8gb sticks currently.
> 
> I have attached the screenshots below and hope you could guide me somewhat on changing the remaining settings.
> 
> Anyone can give me any tips to improve my current settings?
> 
> Thanks man!


 @KedarWolf

Original Post : https://www.overclock.net/forum/28292506-post7063.html

Anyone able to improve the above settings?
Someone mentioned Gen's settings but do you know what VDIMM, VSA and VCCIO is run?

Thanks Guys!


----------



## Almog Dahan

Falkentyne said:


> Almog Dahan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I wasn't trying to hide anything. I just reduced ring to x44 and tried from 1.3 to 1.225 turbo and extreme in realbench occt and apex legends and so far there's no error. I don't want to open my mouth about it too ... but is it nothing to run home about? https://imgur.com/a/MJHhEP7
> 
> 
> 
> Was probably the too high cache ratio making you unstable.
Click to expand...

Sadly I got down to turbo and 1.23v and I got an error after an hour and half in realbench and about an hour too in apex. But seems much more stable with lower cache ratio. I'll try bumping vcore a little and keep testing in hope to find a sweet spot in the low voltage side.


----------



## AndrejB

Salve1412 said:


> LordGurciullo said:
> 
> 
> 
> John Wick Here. Yup. I'm serious af and my aim is no joke. Can't have no latency issue when that pistol fires to the brain.
> 
> OK I tried 4133 16 16 16 as per Nammi's settings.
> 
> No go. Blue screen memory management. Threw up errors instant on ram test. Geekbench crashed it... and latency showed 38.9. Which is exactly what I was getting at 17 17 17.
> 
> I'm thinking that this is it for me folks.. I had voltage up to 1.49 and 1.29 for both and while it may be ok at 1.51 or 1.31 i don't wanna run that. I even upped vcore to 1.3.
> 
> Thoughts??
> 
> 
> ALSO! Apparently disaabling meltdown and spectre protection can get us more performance... How do we feel about that?
> ALSO! MY nvidia latency seems to stay stable unless I open steam. Immediately jumps to 471 everytime.
> How do we find out what is causing that?
> 
> Need the pros here.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you can try these settings for 4133 CL16 (I think Gen. was the one who posted them in the first place in this thread). In my case they stabilized my previously unstable RAM at this very frequency, making it pass Karhu and HCI.
Click to expand...

What dram voltage is this?


----------



## LordGurciullo

OK Nammi! I downloaded the windows performance recorder and I cant lie. I'm a bit confused. Not sure what to be looking for or what I'm looking at. 

Any help on this?


----------



## Salve1412

LordGurciullo said:


> I could try that. its super close to what I tried though. a couple differences.. Voltages? What were your ram latency benchmarks with this?





AndrejB said:


> What dram voltage is this?


Yeah, at first sight these timings don't look so different from Nammi's (which I had tried myself before unsuccesfully), but in my case raising tWR, tRTP and tCKE lowering tRDWRs at the same time proved to be much more stable and even better performance-wise. Latency wasn't actually significantly lower than yours, LordGurciullo (38.3ns minimum in AIDA). Voltages are 1.46V DRAM, 1.22V VCCIO and 1.2V System Agent, but to be fair the kit is XMP rated for 4266 17-18-18-38 1.45V, so that may account for the not so high DRAM Voltage required.


----------



## Sigmus380

Looking for some OC setting advice, coming from a 4690k and Hyper 212 Evo… controlling my 9700K temps with this board was a mission. Fun fact, airflow is a factor… I had to do all my synthetic stress tests with the case open and an external fan blasting. 










Extreme synthetic tests such as Prime95 with AVX2 will push some cores over 100°C (but under my TjMax of 110°C), while not ideal I’m okay with it as temps rarely go past 80 with normal loads (games or other stress tests). I’ll take the risk if it means I can scrap out one extra 0.1Ghz.

Specifications:


Z390 AORUS ELITE – Firmware F10c
9700K
Cryorig R1 Universal (with thermal grizzly kryonaut)
2x 8G G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4 3600Mhz C16
Corsair HX750W
 Another weird thing I found with my chip/board was using adaptive voltage (normal) was drastically more stable and cooler than using static. With LLC Turbo static voltages made the chip run 10-20°C hotter than adaptive (LLC Auto) at the same voltage under load (going by VR VOUT). 

My VOUT peaks at 1.230 (Prime95 small AVX), 1.219 (Prime95 small non-AVX) and 1.262 (windows boot).

I see a lot of people using static 1.3V+, in my experience this is way *way* too hot (110°C+). I re-seated/re-pasted my cooler several times to make sure I did it right once I saw those temps. *Can anyone explain to me why static voltages are so much hotter for me? Or is that just what you get with LLC Turbo? *

Anyway, here are my current settings:









5.1Ghz -2 AVX Offset
Uncore: 43
XMP Profile: Enabled
CPU Vcore: Normal
Dynamic Vcore (DVID): -0.040v
DRAM Voltage: Auto
CPU VCCIO: 1.200V
CPU System Agent Voltage: 1.200V
Speed shift: Enabled
VT-d: Enabled (occasional Android virtualisation)
C-states: All disabled
Vcore LLC: Auto

AC/DC LLC: Auto
IA AC: Auto
IA DC: Auto

*Does anyone have some advice as to what I could change to reduce temps further? I have no clue how to navigate IA AC or IA DC but I assume the auto AC/DC LLC profile is optimal?*

Any advice is greatly appreciated!


----------



## wholeeo

CEC 2019 Ready, Enable or Disable? What does this setting even do?


----------



## GeneO

wholeeo said:


> CEC 2019 Ready, Enable or Disable? What does this setting even do?


CEC is a California Energy efficiency spec. I expect it adds some power savings (perhaps at the cost of performance).


----------



## wholeeo

GeneO said:


> CEC is a California Energy efficiency spec. I expect it adds some power savings (perhaps at the cost of performance).


So disable, got it. :thumb:


----------



## LordGurciullo

my kit was 1.35 rated 3200 14 14 14 ?
TCKE? 
TRDWRS?

What is your TRC
tccd_S and TCCD_L?


Left latency mon all night woke up to 1100 spike driver


----------



## Salve1412

LordGurciullo said:


> my kit was 1.35 rated 3200 14 14 14 ?
> TCKE?
> TRDWRS?
> 
> What is your TRC
> tccd_S and TCCD_L?


I left TRC, TCCD_S and TCCD_L at Auto: BIOS shows a dash (no number) for TRC, 4 for TCCD_S and 6 for TCCD_L. When I say "TRDWRs" I'm referring to TRDWR_sg, TRDWR_dg, TRDWR_dr, TRDWR_dd, all of which are set to 10, as shown in my Timing Configurator screenshot.


----------



## LordGurciullo

OMG I feel like a super newb. I never touched any of those timings ever.... 

Also what is IOAPIC 24-119

Reading disabling that can improve latency?


----------



## Mrip541

My new Aorus master is intermittently dropping wifi connection, particularly during sustained data transfer like gaming or a large download. Not only will it drop connection, wifi will look like it's disabled with no networks showing. I've poked around and it looks like at least a few other people have had this issue. Is this an issue that should be fixed with a replacement board? Trying to decide whether to get a different model.


----------



## GeneO

LordGurciullo said:


> OMG I feel like a super newb. I never touched any of those timings ever....
> 
> Also what is IOAPIC 24-119
> 
> Reading disabling that can improve latency?


This is what I vaguely know. Those are non-sharable interrupts that the APIC interrupt controller provides (many of the APIC < 23 are sharable). It is a better interrupt controller than the PIC (A=advanced) in that it extends the number of interrupts available. It is intended to provide a source of programmable interrupts (for things like the gpio chip, etc.). It can also be used for non-MSI PCI-E interrupts. 

I just leave it enabled. All of my PCI-E interrupts are MSI, so it doesn't matter for them. I think it does reduce interrupt latency.


----------



## AndrejB

Mrip541 said:


> My new Aorus master is intermittently dropping wifi connection, particularly during sustained data transfer like gaming or a large download. Not only will it drop connection, wifi will look like it's disabled with no networks showing. I've poked around and it looks like at least a few other people have had this issue. Is this an issue that should be fixed with a replacement board? Trying to decide whether to get a different model.


Had the same issue with driver from the gigabyte app, just updated it with the intel util:

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/detect.html


----------



## Mrip541

AndrejB said:


> Had the same issue with driver from the gigabyte app, just updated it with the intel util:
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/detect.html


Thanks! I'll give this a try when I get home from work.


----------



## Morkai

Mrip541 said:


> My new Aorus master is intermittently dropping wifi connection, particularly during sustained data transfer like gaming or a large download. Not only will it drop connection, wifi will look like it's disabled with no networks showing. I've poked around and it looks like at least a few other people have had this issue. Is this an issue that should be fixed with a replacement board? Trying to decide whether to get a different model.


I had a brief internet downtime last week so i tried to connect mine (also auros master) to my phone as wifi hotspot.. found it, authenticated, worked for 2 sec ,then didn't work. Was unsure if it was the phones fault or the auros master wifi, but didn't care as i normally use cable..
Turning hotspot on/off, wifi on/off, rebooting etc did not help! I couldn't very well reinstall drivers or anything without internet, so... roughest 30 minutes this year so far. Rough.. Grade 1 first world problem, and I need gigabytes top men on it!! top men!!


----------



## Mrip541

Morkai said:


> I had a brief internet downtime last week so i tried to connect mine (also auros master) to my phone as wifi hotspot.. found it, authenticated, worked for 2 sec ,then didn't work. Was unsure if it was the phones fault or the auros master wifi, but didn't care as i normally use cable..
> Turning hotspot on/off, wifi on/off, rebooting etc did not help! I couldn't very well reinstall drivers or anything without internet, so... roughest 30 minutes this year so far. Rough.. Grade 1 first world problem, and I need gigabytes top men on it!! top men!!


First world problems, indeed! Wifi is my only option as I'd have to run a cable down the hall, down the stairs, and across the living room.

Edit - I updated the drivers with no improvement. It's gotten to the point where I can't connect to the 5g band at all. Attempting to connect effectively resets or disables the wifi connection. 2 laptops, 1 tablet, 2 phones, and another desktop say my router is just fine. I just can't be bothered and won't be buying an Aorus again.


----------



## Driller au

Talking of first world connection problems, is anyone having problems with bluetooth mine doesn't work at all


----------



## LordGurciullo

Wait it improves latency? Or should I disable it to get better latency? I'm running everything IN MSI mode now... 

is it safe to try?


----------



## d0nwulff

Hi guys, I'm newbie to oc, just bought this z390 mobo with i7 9700K. I knew there is a guide step by step from GB about oc this board, but it was confusing because of the old BIOS Ui (Old one have M.I.T, and some of the setting are not in the latest bios, different name). I just join this forum today, and still searching for the step by step guide. Any help will much be appreciate. TQ in advance.


----------



## GeneO

LordGurciullo said:


> Wait it improves latency? Or should I disable it to get better latency? I'm running everything IN MSI mode now...
> 
> is it safe to try?


You talking to me? ioapic on/off? Well, let me re4state that. No, it shouldn't improve latency either way. That range of interrupts is specific to the ioapic. The ioapic will still handle the lower range of shared interrupts. I turned it off on my system to see. My system doesn't use any of those interrupts. I expect your system doesn't either.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Thanks!


----------



## BigMack70

Is 1.35V too high for normal use for vccsa and vccio? Read a few comments suggesting it's OK, but the board highlights in yellow beginning at that level. Definitely notice a lot more heat in stress testing (real bench).


----------



## bastian

BigMack70 said:


> Is 1.35V too high for normal use for vccsa and vccio? Read a few comments suggesting it's OK, but the board highlights in yellow beginning at that level. Definitely notice a lot more heat in stress testing (real bench).


Buildzoid says one shouldn't really go over 1.3V


----------



## BigMack70

bastian said:


> Buildzoid says one shouldn't really go over 1.3V


Thanks... Guess I'll limit myself to that and see what I can get on RAM speed stable there


----------



## Gen.

Salve1412 said:


> Maybe you can try these settings for 4133 CL16 (I think Gen. was the one who posted them in the first place in this thread). In my case they stabilized my previously unstable RAM at this very frequency, making it pass Karhu and HCI.


Я использую сейчас вот эти настройки (скрин 1). DRAM Voltage: 1.46V, Training Voltage: 1.46, IO: 1.20V, SA: 1.25V, Rtt (all) - auto, Memory enhancement settings - auto.

Я также могу пройти 4200, но почему-то получаю BSOD (скрин 2)... @KedarWolf, не подскажешь почему?

Также, я могу сделать вот так: :specool: (скрин 3)

И так: (скрин 4)


----------



## Almog Dahan

Falkentyne said:


> Was probably the too high cache ratio making you unstable.


After a lot of testing, the cache didn't even matter. Unless i go Vcore 1.315v LLC at high which in apex legends is about 1.29~1.3 VR VOUT my game keeps crashing. (without errors)

I've been stable like that in realbench too for hours and my pc was running the whole day like that.

I guess the best i'll get out of this chip is around 1.3v under load pretty disappointing to me honestly.


----------



## Falkentyne

Almog Dahan said:


> After a lot of testing, the cache didn't even matter. Unless i go Vcore 1.315v LLC at high which in apex legends is about 1.29~1.3 VR VOUT my game keeps crashing. (without errors)
> 
> I've been stable like that in realbench too for hours and my pc was running the whole day like that.
> 
> I guess the best i'll get out of this chip is around 1.3v under load pretty disappointing to me honestly.


Apex will always require higher voltage than what would otherwise be stable in Realbench 2.56 and Cinebench R20. But be lucky you weren't playing this game a year ago!!

Early last year, when the game first came out, it was MUCH MUCH worse. It was actually crashing on ALL overclocked systems unless voltage was set extremely high, and even on some completely stock systems (which would pass everything else, including AVX prime95). The bug crash thread was just overflowing with constant reports from everyone. This was determined to be a bug in the Skylake core CPU's and was worked around with a new code path. Now it's much better, but still seems to need more vcore than what Battlefield 5 needs. And BF5 uses some AVX instructions. Apex Legends does NOT use AVX instructions (the programmer said so himself, and the buck stops with him).


----------



## Anzial

a little help guys, has anyone encountered any issues with mobo suddenly losing sata devices? I have a SATA SSD (Samsung 850 evo) which consistently disappears from the system after sleep (not every sleep either, just after two or three of prolonged sleeps, hours long). Reboot doesn't help, only HARD reboot (i.e. complete shutdown and start after a bit) does, otherwise the system doesn't appear to see the drive connected. I also have two regular HDDs and also another ssd in top SATA ports with no issues. I'm on z390 pro with F8 bios and Win 10 1809 if that makes any difference, drivers are up to date.

EDIT: I might have figured it out: the SSD's firmware was out of date. Still, if you have any other ideas, I'd love to hear them as I won't know if firmware update worked for a while.


----------



## Almog Dahan

Falkentyne said:


> Apex will always require higher voltage than what would otherwise be stable in Realbench 2.56 and Cinebench R20. But be lucky you weren't playing this game a year ago!!
> 
> Early last year, when the game first came out, it was MUCH MUCH worse. It was actually crashing on ALL overclocked systems unless voltage was set extremely high, and even on some completely stock systems (which would pass everything else, including AVX prime95). The bug crash thread was just overflowing with constant reports from everyone. This was determined to be a bug in the Skylake core CPU's and was worked around with a new code path. Now it's much better, but still seems to need more vcore than what Battlefield 5 needs. And BF5 uses some AVX instructions. Apex Legends does NOT use AVX instructions (the programmer said so himself, and the buck stops with him).


The funny thing is that i'm not even playing the game! I thought i was supposed to test stability in it, and that's why I've been playing it. I still don't know if i can be truly happy with these results, might just yolo the 5.1ghz one off of silicon lottery and call it a day.


----------



## Mrip541

Quick update: I spent hours trying to fix my wifi issues and nothing worked so I went to Microcenter and picked up a Z390 Designare. Wifi works flawlessly and is faster. Aorus Master headed back to Amazon and I wonder if they'll resell it even though I said it's defective.


----------



## Timur Born

LordGurciullo said:


> ALSO! MY nvidia latency seems to stay stable unless I open steam. Immediately jumps to 471 everytime.
> How do we find out what is causing that?
> 
> Need the pros here.


I am a pro and you already posted what is causing it, the NVidia driver. Does it even matter? No, because a single driver is keeping a single CPU core from answering other DPCs for 471 us. It does so, because it needs the CPU core for its own work, which is happening while you measure.

Should the NVidia driver lock a core for such a long time? No it should not. But it often happens because of its power-saving features. Turn those off and you get lower DPC latency numbers in return for higher temps and electricity bills. At other times NVidia just messes up its driver regardless of power-saving settings, bad luck then. Still usually no real-world practical problem and of course the whole DPC latency thing has little to nothing to do with gaming latencies.


----------



## GeneO

" No, because a single driver is keeping a single CPU core from answering other DPCs for 471 ns"

Depends on whether the DPC is threaded or ordinary Threaded DPC can be preempted by ordinary DPC, so it depends on the device, interrupt, and how it is coded.

But yeah, nothing you can do about it.


----------



## Timur Born

?!


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> ?!


edited my post.


----------



## Timur Born

As far as I know, a single device driver is using a single main thread that then can be served by any CPU core. Even when you are using professional audio drivers with DAW software that handles hundreds of tracks on all logical CPU cores the main audio driver (usually ASIO) still is running in a single thread.

LatencyMon usually lists "Interrupt to process latency" lower than "highest execution time" of any single driver. That being said, LatencyMon cannot fully be trusted in latest versions of Windows, it keeps reporting ridiculous single big spikes that don't happen in practice.

Then again, Windows process scheduler cannot be trusted since Windows "Creators". Astoundingly a single thread overloading a single CPU core can still drag the whole video output (and partly processing) system down to a halt. Folks around here usually only (may) see it when they do stress tests with the likes of Linpack, seeing their mouse-movement stop for one or more seconds. It's been improved since Creators first came out, but still worse than anything before Creators.


----------



## TifxAlex

Hey guys
Got a kit of F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR. looking to see where to start for OC?
Somewhere earlier in the thread someone posted with nearly the same kit said they reached 4GHz

care to chime in?

Aorus Master
9900k OC 5ghz @ 1.32 volts, VROUT 1.29 at stress test
4x8 3600MHz CL 16-16-16-36 2T
EVGA 2080TI FTW3 Ultra air cooled
Seasonic Focus Plus 850W Platinum
couple of samsung m.2 nvme


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> As far as I know, a single device driver is using a single main thread that then can be served by any CPU core. Even when you are using professional audio drivers with DAW software that handles hundreds of tracks on all logical CPU cores the main audio driver (usually ASIO) still is running in a single thread.
> 
> LatencyMon usually lists "Interrupt to process latency" lower than "highest execution time" of any single driver. That being said, LatencyMon cannot fully be trusted in latest versions of Windows, it keeps reporting ridiculous single big spikes that don't happen in practice.
> 
> Then again, Windows process scheduler cannot be trusted since Windows "Creators". Astoundingly a single thread overloading a single CPU core can still drag the whole video output (and partly processing) system down to a halt. Folks around here usually only (may) see it when they do stress tests with the likes of Linpack, seeing their mouse-movement stop for one or more seconds. It's been improved since Creators first came out, but still worse than anything before Creators.


Well that's not nice on how the video is scheduled, I have noticed this kind of behavior but not so much so since I increased the size of RAM. Now I don't know if NVIDIA DPC are threaded or not. Sorry for the edit, had to refresh myself on whether DPC were preemptable or not


----------



## Timur Born

If I am not entirely brain-dead then every time you read "processor" in context of DPCs you can exchange that for "core". To get a better picture of this you can start Windows' "Performance Monitor" and add "All instances" or either "Processor" or "Processor Information". This includes the "DPC Rate", "DPC Queued/sec" and "Interrupts/sec" counters for each CPU core. Also take a look at the "CPUs" tab of LatencyMon.



> An ordinary DPC preempts the execution of all threads, and cannot be preempted by a thread or by another DPC. If the system has a large number of ordinary DPCs queued, or if one of those DPCs runs for a long time, every thread will remain paused for an arbitrarily long time. Thus, each ordinary DPC increases system latency, which can hurt the performance of time-sensitive applications, such as audio or video playback.


I interpret this as: If two threads queue their DPCs in the same DPC queue then one can indeed hinder the other. But unless specifically being targeted at a processor/core Windows seems to spread DPCs over several queues on different processors/cores. Others may know more about this, or I would have to ask one of the device driver programmers I am working with to get better insight.



> DPC routines that are waiting to execute are stored in kernel-managed queues, *one per processor*, called DPC queues. To request a DPC, system code calls the kernel to initialize a DPC object and then places it in a DPC queue.
> 
> By default, the kernel places DPC objects at the end of the DPC queue of the processor on which the DPC was requested (typically the processor on which the ISR executed). A device driver can override this behavior, however, by specifying a DPC priority (low, medium, medium-high, or high, where medium is the default) and by targeting the DPC at a particular processor. A DPC aimed at a specific CPU is known as a targeted DPC. If the DPC has a high priority, the kernel inserts the DPC object at the front of the queue; otherwise, it is placed at the end of the queue for all other priorities.


----------



## Timur Born

GeneO said:


> Well that's not nice on how the video is scheduled, I have noticed this kind of behavior but not so much so since I increased the size of RAM.


It's not only screen output, though, it can also include processing. I would have to find my old postings about this. Some video players would stop entirely during the freeze (no context switches) while others would keep processing (context switches keep happening). In one case the video would then jump straight to the point where output unfreezes while the other would rapidly fast forward (fast playback) to the new point. I compared Youtube (Firefox), VLC, Media Player Classic and maybe some more. I also tested various different PCs going from Anniversary to Creators. Anyway, I did not test the latest version of Windows yet, so just take this extra bit of information as a "bonus". 

I also tested this for audio processing, overloading a single CPU core using Reaper while all other 15 logical cores (7 physical) has little to nothing to do. Same system (output) freezes happening. Quite shameful for a modern OS to hang by the thread of a single core, even more so if you consider how much time has passed since the release of "Creators". My guess always was that this "bug" was introduced with Game Mode in Creators.


----------



## Timur Born

And one last bit. I once saw NVidia driver version 416.34 cause full load on a single CPU core when you limited the maximum GPU temperature via MSI Afterburner or Gigabyte OC Guru (and the like). Nvddmkm.sys was responsible for this, but it would only be listed as "System" load in Task-Manager and Resource Monitor. So some specific NVidia driver versions really cause troubles that others do not and then sometimes under the most peculiar circumstances.


----------



## GeneO

Timur Born said:


> I interpret this as: If two threads queue their DPCs in the same DPC queue then one can indeed hinder the other. But unless specifically being targeted at a processor/core Windows seems to spread DPCs over several queues on different processors/cores. Others may know more about this, or I would have to ask one of the device driver programmers I am working with to get better insight.


I think it means a threaded DPC can be preempted by a non-threaded DPC, but non-threaded, ordinary DPC cannot be interrupted. I assume this is within the same queue/core.

In practice though, I haven't run into any actual usage issues with the Windows scheduling.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Wow. you guys are elite. 
Heres something crazy... I turned off IOAPIC - 24 and then when I start afterburner it doesn't spike.. Still does with Steam or Epic..
What other power savings can I turn off? Thought I had turned em off.. maybe I missed one.
Its a very curious thing... I respect your guys knowledge. I normally would drop it But I've seen other people have it not happen to them so it makes me think it is something fixable. Feels fixable... Maybe it isn't..
this guy F33thy (check out his channel) was down to some insanely low number...
Maybe cause I installed and downloaded PhyX? 
I have windows performance monitor but don't know how to read it.. I'm not as savvy as you guys . 
Here is a pic of my drivers/main page.


----------



## Driller au

LordGurciullo said:


> Wow. you guys are elite.
> Heres something crazy... I turned off IOAPIC - 24 and then when I start afterburner it doesn't spike.. Still does with Steam or Epic..
> What other power savings can I turn off? Thought I had turned em off.. maybe I missed one.
> Its a very curious thing... I respect your guys knowledge. I normally would drop it But I've seen other people have it not happen to them so it makes me think it is something fixable. Feels fixable... Maybe it isn't..
> this guy F33thy (check out his channel) was down to some insanely low number...
> Maybe cause I installed and downloaded PhyX?
> I have windows performance monitor but don't know how to read it.. I'm not as savvy as you guys .
> Here is a pic of my drivers/main page.


Don't forget F33thy is on a optimized win 7 OS


----------



## Falkentyne

So how's my DPC latency?


----------



## Timur Born

GeneO said:


> I think it means a threaded DPC can be preempted by a non-threaded DPC, but non-threaded, ordinary DPC cannot be interrupted. I assume this is within the same queue/core.


Yes, within the same queue. It's worth mentioning that most DPCs and interrupt happen on core 0 even when C-states are disabled, so there might be quite some congestion on that core. The quote also specifically says that the DPC is issues on the core/queue that corresponds to the core the DPC was issued from (aka where the thread is running).


----------



## Timur Born

LordGurciullo said:


> Its a very curious thing... I respect your guys knowledge. I normally would drop it But I've seen other people have it not happen to them so it makes me think it is something fixable. Feels fixable... Maybe it isn't..


Try a different NVidia driver version. They can all behave different in regards to DPC latencies.

In the past I had to specifically download an older driver from Windows Update Catalog that worked miles better than anything downloadable from NVidia directly. I then had to meticulously analyze the differences to hack together a working current driver version or just keep using the old catalog one.

In 2009 I wrote the following to help with high DPC latencies on bootcamped Macbooks when certain GUI animations happened in digital audio workstation software:



> Open RIVATUNER and switch to the "Power User" tab.
> Expand the "RivaTuner\NVIDIA\Overclocking" Tree.
> Set "EnablePerfLevelForcing" to 1.
> Switch to the "Main" tab.
> Under "Driver settings" click on the small arrow left to "Customize..." and chose the first icon "System settings".
> Set "Force constant performance level" to either "low power 3d" (suffient for 2d audio work) or "performance 3d" (used for 3d gaming).
> Click OK and let the computer restart.


I don't even know if the extinction between "low power 3d" and "performance 3d" still exists. The NVidia control panel allows to disable power-saving all together only. I might have to take a look at this again.


----------



## dekimori

kaybee said:


> Sorry to jump in to this thread abruptly, however I've gone through 15+ pages on this thread alone looking for what could be wrong with my O/C.
> Either I have the world's worst 9600kf or there's something seriously wrong with the Gigabyte board (bios?) I have.
> 
> I have:
> 
> - 9600kf
> - Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi board running the F12a BIOS (latest one on their page)
> - 16GB Gskill Ripjaw 3200 Ram CL-15
> - Custom Water cooling
> 
> I've been overclocking various CPUs for 14 years, albeit with various other boards, and I can't get the CPU past 4.8Ghz!
> The original bios that came with the board seemed a little buggy (Qflash had issues) so I flashed to the latest BIOS F12a which changed the menu dramatically.
> 
> *I disabled -vt
> Disabled multi-core enhancements
> Set LLC to turbo
> Ram is XMP Profile 1
> Set the bus to 100.00
> 
> Set ring ratio to 45
> Set core ratio to 48
> *
> It's fairly-stable at 4.8Ghz
> 
> However, *if I set the core ratio to 49, it crashes no matter what at 4.9Ghz!*
> 
> (I tested Vcore from 1.35 to 1.41 and it was unstable. Temps range from 30c to 75c.)
> 
> I'm blown away... because the default turbo boost of this CPU is 4.6Ghz, it _should_ be able to do 5.0ghz (hell, I've seen people get lucky and get 5.3ghz with these chips. I think the average is 5ghz to 5.2ghz). I refuse to believe that the CPU I got can't make it over 4800mhz with a 12 phase VRM, high quality ram and watercooling.
> 
> I'm stumped guys. What should I change?
> 
> I'm trying to get it stable at least at 4.9Ghz but was really aiming for at least 5Ghz.
> 
> 
> _(I also tried a whole bunch of other settings while troubleshooting this but they didn't seem to make a difference or just made things worse so I just included the ones that I currently have active)_


Hi, kaybee. I have almost the same config, 9600k not kf. Did you manged to fix that?
I can't get more than 48 either, even that not stable too much. Also noticed whatever i change with vcore setting bios not showing more than 1,38v. Even if i set it 1,4 or more. I guess why... could it be 8 pins of my seasonic 650px not enough?

-
Also need advise with ram. Is there any profit raising 3200 corsair dominator platinum (hynix) 2x8 to 3446 or anything for intel?


----------



## Nammi

LordGurciullo said:


> OK Nammi! I downloaded the windows performance recorder and I cant lie. I'm a bit confused. Not sure what to be looking for or what I'm looking at.
> 
> Any help on this?


Run the performance recorder with only CPU usage ticked in. After you've recorded for the desired duration, save the trace and open it in WPA.
Once you're in WPA, on the left side: Computation - CPU Usage (Sampled) - DPC and ISR Usage, add it to the analysis view. 

Here's an example creating spiky cpu load and DPC using mpc with SVP and jumping around in a video file. These spikes will only show up as nvlddmkm.sys in LatencyMon, with WPA most of the time you can get a clearer picture of the culprit.
Though as mentioned before if you're only spiking while alt tabbing, starting/stopping programs and other things similar then there's not much to worry about. Maybe it's possible to get rid of the spikes during initialization but not worth the effort imo.

Just to note, my advice doesn't have much weight behind it as I'm not a developer.


----------



## Falkentyne

Did anyone see my post? o.o


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Did anyone see my post? o.o


We all probably did, but can't compete 🙂

Nice latency, but does it spike in games?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> We all probably did, but can't compete 🙂
> 
> Nice latency, but does it spike in games?


Never checked in games.
I'm using an AMD Vega though.

Aren't all of you using Nvidia? I haven't seen a single AMD user in this entire thread, frankly.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Falkentyne! I can recreate your latencies if I leave it on for 1-2 mins. However when I leave it on 11 hours and let it run i come back to a 200 highest interrupt and an 600 or 1100 Nvidia!
So it does happen in just desktop nammi with nothing running but RTSS and afterburner.

can I use riva turner with afterburner? Or Should I uninstall afterburner? 

I'll look into reading the performance recorder a bit more..


----------



## AndrejB

I thought the whole use of latencymon was to see the latency in everyday tasks.


----------



## Timur Born

DPC Latency mostly only matters for audio drivers. Anything below 1 ms is usually fine even for lowest possible audio buffer settings. Other devices (and software processes) don't need synchronized processing, thus it does not really matter unless a driver runs havoc with DPC latencies (as in several ms).

NVidia drivers and DirectX have always been regular offenders, WIFI is another common source, also Ethernet/TCPIP and some USB devices (like card-readers). On laptops there used to be a spike every 15 seconds when the battery load status was polled.

Here is another quote from 2009:



> Like this one there are device drivers that perform alot better on XP than on Vista DPC wise, especially NVidia graphic drivers for Geforce 8 (and 9 mobile, 7 based cards run perfectly good DPC wise) based card. But still that's a problem of improperly written drivers and will likely happen on W7 just the same, albeit I have to admit that the drop in Idle DPC spikes for the Broadcom WLAN adapter are very nice and hopefully happen with other devices as well (not NVidia graphic drivers though, I already tried that!).


----------



## Grizzly111

Guys I've discovered something strange about this board during memory overclocking. And its not good.


I was wondering why my AIDA64 latency was worse at 4000CL16 vs the lower 3933CL16. Didnt make sense. Then I took a closer look....



Basically any overclocks over 4000Mhz the board seems to get all conservative and sets RTL's and IOL's way high (especially IOL's which are double). You cant set them manually as the board simply overrides them. I am using 1.45v training voltage too.


I am now wondering where the sweetspot is in relation to frequency of a RAM overclock on this board relative to voltages.


Would F9 BIOS be any better at RAM overclocking stability than F11c modded (which I am currently using)?


EDIT: check out Salve's post - has found the same thing almost a year ago! https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...78-gigabyte-z390-aorus-owners-thread-458.html


----------



## Nammi

The RTL/IOL issue even reached gigabyte at some point, and the answer that was given is that they could set them on their end. This was on the beta bios thread on tweaktown, if I remember correctly. Maybe the part about it being an issue at 4000+ didn't get through or not reported.
As you've already mentioned, below 4000 is the way to go for RTL/IOL's. 4133 is the sweet spot for frequency on the master. Voltage wise, scaling with timings still continues after 1.50v dram.

I gave a final go on tightening timings and now only thing left would be RTL/IOL's...

*edit* Somewhere around F8-F9 bios was where most of the memory issues got solved, after that I haven't noticed any improvements.


----------



## Grizzly111

Nammi said:


> The RTL/IOL issue even reached gigabyte at some point, and the answer that was given is that they could set them on their end. This was on the beta bios thread on tweaktown, if I remember correctly. Maybe the part about it being an issue at 4000+ didn't get through or not reported.
> As you've already mentioned, below 4000 is the way to go for RTL/IOL's. 4133 is the sweet spot for frequency on the master. Voltage wise, scaling with timings still continues after 1.50v dram.
> 
> I gave a final go on tightening timings and now only thing left would be RTL/IOL's...



What RAM are you using Nammi?


This is the best I could do on the Aorus Master with GSkill 3600CL16-16-16 but I am no expert. 1.45v, 1.18/1.20v IO/SA. Would love to know how to get to 4133Mhz @ CL16 stable!!!!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

A question for you guys going for the high memory frequency, do you use the "high frequency" or "4500+" option in bios ? just wondering what they do. My memory will never go there so i cannot test to see and was curious


----------



## Nammi

Grizzly111 said:


> What RAM are you using Nammi?
> 
> 
> This is the best I could do on the Aorus Master with GSkill 3600CL16-16-16 but I am no expert. 1.45v, 1.18/1.20v IO/SA. Would love to know how to get to 4133Mhz @ CL16 stable!!!!


2x F4-4133C17D-16GTZR is what I'm running.

All you probably need is more dram voltage, can you boot with just primaries set?



reachthesky said:


> is f10B modded bios or is it official? What are the 1s in the timing configurator? I feel like i've seen that before and someone had said it was a place holder or something since they weren't using dual ranked dimms or something of that matter.


The F10b I'm running is modded, taken from this thread. Yeah the dr is the dual rank timing.



Driller au said:


> A question for you guys going for the high memory frequency, do you use the "high frequency" or "4500+" option in bios ? just wondering what they do. My memory will never go there so i cannot test to see and was curious


As far as I've noticed, it only affects timings if you've got them on auto.


----------



## robertr1

reachthesky said:


> is f10B modded bios or is it official? What are the 1s in the timing configurator? I feel like i've seen that before and someone had said it was a place holder or something since they weren't using dual ranked dimms or something of that matter.


dr = different rank

He's got 4 single rank 8gb sticks meaning he can put any number in the _dr fields as they're not used.

If you're using a 16gb kit then the _dr would be important


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Nammi said:


> 2x F4-4133C17D-16GTZR is what I'm running.
> 
> All you probably need is more dram voltage, can you boot with just primaries set?



Yes I can boot @ 4133 CL17 and even CL16 but I seem to error quickly on TM5. This is with everything on Auto (apart from RTT values & primaries). Also [email protected] 16-16-16 errors me quickly. I have tried up to 1.47v and 1.3v IO/SA. Really strange. I feel like I'm missing a setting? RAM termination volts? Not sure if I should go higher?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

Yeah voltage is likely the issue, 1.46-1.5v is what I need depending on how tight the timings are.

What you could try is, tCCDL 8, loosen tRAS abit and then follow tRC = tRP + tRAS + x where x is 0-8+. According to https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md those settings might help.


----------



## wholeeo

Well, I wish I had done my homework before delidding my 9900K. I didn't know the monoblock would not make any contact at all with direct die mounting. Tried turning the system on after I installed everything and it would just constantly shut off. Removed everything to find the thermal paste not even touched by the block. 

Think I fried my ethernet port in the process as I can see it in device manager but I can't enable it. Doesn't work in Windows or MacOS.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> Try reinstalling the drivers.



Tried that, tried clearing CMOS, tried bios switch, removing battery, different cable, etc. I think it's done. To Micro Center I go later for this expensive mistake. :doh:


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> Have you tried a fresh windows install?


I haven't but I dual boot MacOS and it doesn't work there either.


----------



## KedarWolf

Nammi said:


> 2x F4-4133C17D-16GTZR is what I'm running.
> 
> All you probably need is more dram voltage, can you boot with just primaries set?
> 
> 
> 
> The F10b I'm running is modded, taken from this thread. Yeah the dr is the dual rank timing.
> 
> 
> 
> As far as I've noticed, it only affects timings if you've got them on auto.


This was me at 4133MHz with the 3600 CL16 kit.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-474.html#post28175590


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> I read your posts but you seem to be ranting about everything and I don't know where to start to help you.
> First you say you're stable then you say you're unstable. Then you're complaining about VID (VID is NOT Vcore. Ignore VID), then you're circling the two vcore sensors then ignoring VR VOUT. Then you're talking about memory problems.
> 
> I also saw in one of your screenshots, one of your cores (first core) was 64C, core #0 and all the others were 70-81C. That means bad cooling mount or paste application. The very first core (#0) should never have been that cool compared to the others. What stress test were you running there? Unless thread #0/1 crashed or something instantly.
> 
> By the way, for anyone (not just you) testing prime95, make sure you re-size the windows in two 8x8 rows so the DATA is visible. There are some bugs where AVX threads get instantly stuck when starting prime95 and you can't even close the program properly--you have to "end task" on it on the task manager, then run it again. It's a rare bug, usually happens right after you load windows.
> 
> you also have c-states enabled. Disable c-states. It's impossible to see what your idle and load settings are when I'm seeing 800 mhz and 0.700v as your lowest values. Disable EIST, C-states, speedstep. Use fixed vcore only. Note that in the f11c bios, to disable c-states, read what I say below because its a bit confusing to disable them now--you have to actually "enable" control to disable them manually.
> 
> And don't use small FFT avx prime95 to determine how stable your CPU is. That's absurd. If you really want to run a power virus, you can run something that will give results much faster than avx prime95 (but may run a bit hotter, but at least you will see results in a few minutes).
> 
> Ok. Now, Power off your computer. Unplug power supply. Press the clear CMOS button. Replug PSU. Power on and wait.
> Enter BIOS. Set advanced mode. Do not enable XMP. Disable MCE. Disable c-states (you need to "enable" c-state control in f11c, then disable the c-states manually, that's how you do it). Disable voltage optimization, speedstep (EIST), speedshift.
> 
> Disable multi core enhancement. Set cpu multiplier to 50. Cache (ring) ratio to 47. Set voltage vcore to 1.275v (edit. not 1.250v). Set vcore loadline calibration to turbo. Set "CPU overtemperature protection" to 105C. You may need it there for now. Set it to 100C after we're finished).
> 
> Set vcore current protection to extreme. Vaxg protection to extreme. Set cpu pwm phase control to High. VAXG to high. Set CPU PWM switching frequency to 300 khz. (DO NOT FORGET THIS). VAXG switching frequency to 300 khz.
> 
> Leave CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line at Auto.
> 
> Save, exit, boot into windows.
> 
> Now, search for LinX 0.9.6 (it's in Korean page but you can translate it with chrome into English).
> https://hwtips.tistory.com/1611
> Download that. Don't get scared of the Korean. It's a simple program.
> Unzip it to your own folder. Run LinX.
> 
> On the top left side, set the value to 35000. On the top right side, set the number of loops to 10.
> Then start the testing with the button below the 35000.
> If the korean scares you, get the 0.9.5 (English) one on the same page right below it.
> 
> Watch the residuals. Each loop must have the SAME exact residual and residual (norm). (the residual and the norm will be different however)
> Each loop from 1 to 10 must show the same values for each iteration. If the residuals are wrong, RMA the CPU.
> 
> If the residuals are correct, it means your CPU is stable at stock. You can celebrate. For now. (take a screenshot for us of the LinX 0.9.6 or 0.9.5 test).
> 
> Ok, now. Go back in the BIOS.
> Go to "Internal VR Control".
> Set AC Loadline to 1. Set DC Loadline to 1.
> 
> Save, go back to windows. Go to HWinfo64. Tell me what the "CPU VID" shows at idle. Yes. VID. I want to know this.
> 
> Ok, now, enable XMP. Save, Exit, go back to BIOS.
> Set your VCCIO to 1.250v.
> Set your VCCSA to 1.30v.
> Set your DDR memory voltage to 1.40v.
> 
> Save, exit, go to windows.
> Run LinX 0.9.6 again for 10 loops.
> Report the residuals. (easier to take a screenshot for us).


How’s 1.175 vid after this?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> How’s 1.175 vid after this?


If that is at 5 ghz, that is a pretty high quality sample CPU. Should do 5.2 ghz without a problem at something conservative like 1.35v Bios set + LLC Turbo (or 1.375v Bios set + LLC High), at worst, and 5.3 ghz should be attainable at less than 1.4v.


----------



## AndrejB

About the max I can achieve at conservative settings


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

Just flashed to the F11c bios. 9900KS, XMP still won't work.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Just replaced my board. Ethernet works again.


----------



## Nammi

Man those auto io/sa voltages sure don't hold back, gl with those new sticks. =p



KedarWolf said:


> This was me at 4133MHz with the 3600 CL16 kit.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-474.html#post28175590


I've been using RttPark at 120 only, huh... Didn't know 80 was viable aswell.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> About the max I can achieve at conservative settings


What are your bios vcore voltages and loadline calibration?
Pulling 176 amps at 1.113v load VR VOUT in LinX at 4.7 ghz is a bit high...

At 4.7 / 4.3, I pull 169 amps at 1.135v VR VOUT load in that test (some wrong residuals), so I was just wondering.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> AndrejB said:
> 
> 
> 
> About the max I can achieve at conservative settings
> 
> 
> 
> What are your bios vcore voltages and loadline calibration?
> Pulling 176 amps at 1.113v load VR VOUT in LinX at 4.7 ghz is a bit high...
> 
> At 4.7 / 4.3, I pull 169 amps at 1.135v VR VOUT load in that test (some wrong residuals), so I was just wondering.
Click to expand...

Llc standard, switching freq 300, ac/dc 100/130, all advanced stuff in the cpu section disabled, except thermal monitor and hyperthreading

On ac/dc 100/160 I get unequal residuals infequently


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Llc standard, switching freq 300, ac/dc 100/130, all advanced stuff in the cpu section disabled, except thermal monitor and hyperthreading
> 
> On ac/dc 100/160 I get unequal residuals infequently


Can you verify this?
I believe it was you who mentioned something like this before, but I tried to reproduce it and couldn't 

DC Loadline is not supposed to affect transients whatsoever. It only affects VID and CPU Package Power, however I have noticed VR VOUT about 15mv higher with DC Loadline=160, versus DC Loadline=1, when using Auto vcore +Standard LLC. So a slightly higher VR VOUT should not give wrong residuals more often. I would think it would make things more stable with DC=160 vs DC=130. (let's say VR VOUT is 5mv higher at DC 160).

The big problem with testing "Borderline stability" (like in your case, wrong residuals occasionally), is that results can change on the exact same settings, reboot to reboot. So it makes it very very, VERY difficult to test this scientifically, if, for example, same settings, same ambients: Reboot 1: 12 wrong residuals out of 17 (5 correct). Reboot 2: two wrong residuals out of 17 (15 correct). 

If you have time, can you re-verify this? I know it made no difference on "Fixed" Vcore (DC 130 vs 160), but the one time I tested 4.7 ghz, Auto Vcore, Standard LLC + AC 100 + DC 130, then AC 100 + DC 160, I saw no differences in stability. I know it will take time to test this, and you have other things to do besides test, but if you do have time, please let me know.

Try a 20 run test, so that it does enough loops each time. AC 100 / DC 130, and AC 100 / DC 160.

Thank you!

Glad to see 300 khz is helping you


----------



## Grizzly111

Guys, how do I get this board to consistently set RAM RTL's and IOL's? It keeps setting them all over the place for stable RAM clocks completely at random? Sometimes they are good like 7,7,7,7 for IOLs then suddenly they will jump to 13,13,14,13 etc. Should I do a complete reflash of the BIOS or is there a setting I can try?


----------



## GeneO

Grizzly111 said:


> Guys, how do I get this board to consistently set RAM RTL's and IOL's? It keeps setting them all over the place for stable RAM clocks completely at random? Sometimes they are good like 7,7,7,7 for IOLs then suddenly they will jump to 13,13,14,13 etc. Should I do a complete reflash of the BIOS or is there a setting I can try?


Same damn problem. Best luck I have had is to shut down the system for a while so it starts cool, reset CMOS, boot and apply settings, reboot and let it train, then if you get good RTL/IOL, turn on fast memory boot so it doesn't retrain, else try again.


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Llc standard, switching freq 300, ac/dc 100/130, all advanced stuff in the cpu section disabled, except thermal monitor and hyperthreading
> 
> On ac/dc 100/160 I get unequal residuals infequently


Ok so inbetween chess studies I ran a few loops at 4.7 ghz / 4.4 ghz core/cache, AC Loadline=90, DC Loadline=1, Vcore: Auto, Loadline calibration=Standard, PWM 300 khz, and got this...usually this would fail 1 or 2 residuals when I had DC Loadline at 160 (VR VOUT would be 1.104v)...hmm...?

BTW I may get executed for distributing this, but here's F11d test T1 bios. Modded with fast microcodes (use EFIflash).

(Changelog: Fixes DVID overvoltage / improper excessive vcore mode from switching from DVID to Auto or Fixed vcore modes).
You will notice when changing from DVID to another mode, the DVID offset switches to Auto instantly. Also warm boots are 1 second slower.

There's a "T0" version (whatever) with the fix done "a different way" but I don't know the difference. Something like "done a more proper way?". May have been a translation description issue from chinese.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Ok so inbetween chess studies I ran a few loops at 4.7 ghz / 4.4 ghz core/cache, AC Loadline=90, DC Loadline=1, Vcore: Auto, Loadline calibration=Standard, PWM 300 khz, and got this...usually this would fail 1 or 2 residuals when I had DC Loadline at 160 (VR VOUT would be 1.104v)...hmm...?


That's exactly what I noticed, not really sure why lower dc would help residuals


----------



## Grizzly111

GeneO said:


> Same damn problem. Best luck I have had is to shut down the system for a while so it starts cool, reset CMOS, boot and apply settings, reboot and let it train, then if you get good RTL/IOL, turn on fast memory boot so it doesn't retrain, else try again.



Thanks for the fast reply Gene - I just tried that method but it didnt work - my RTLs and IOLs indicate that I have massive instability (68&64, 15,10 etc) but I tested this configuration (attached) to 500% HCI overnight no problem. I'm not sure whats going on atm.


----------



## TifxAlex

GeneO said:


> Same damn problem. Best luck I have had is to shut down the system for a while so it starts cool, reset CMOS, boot and apply settings, reboot and let it train, then if you get good RTL/IOL, turn on fast memory boot so it doesn't retrain, else try again.




THIS

locked in 6,4,6,4


----------



## Grizzly111

TifxAlex said:


> THIS
> 
> locked in 6,4,6,4



So I finally got the RTLS etc I wanted, turned on fast memory boot. So OK good.


Then when I wanted to change my settings...I turned it back to automatic...and IT WOULDNT CHANGE THEM!


Tried on normal too - then weird things started happening. Must be a bug of some sort. So I just decided to reset the CMOS ...AGAIN...


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> So I finally got the RTLS etc I wanted, turned on fast memory boot. So OK good.
> 
> 
> Then when I wanted to change my settings...I turned it back to automatic...and IT WOULDNT CHANGE THEM!
> 
> 
> Tried on normal too - then weird things started happening. Must be a bug of some sort. So I just decided to reset the CMOS ...AGAIN...


Did you try the new BIOS I posted?


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> Did you try the new BIOS I posted?



Not yet, I currently using F11c modded by Kedarwolf. Does the F11d make any improvements to RAM overclocking stability?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

Master T1D with updated SATA/RST, Ethernet and On-board Video firmware.

Fastest microcodes, newer versions.

1 - Disk Controller
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507

2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1102
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015

3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.27
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16

══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝


Make a FreeDOS USB l like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.t1d /x

Use the modded MasterT1D BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> 1.5v vdimm/training, 1.3v sa/io. Haven't tried to work those values down yet. will be testing shortly. 4400/4300/4266 were no-gos, 4200 at c16 was a nogo so i didn't bother with cl17 since it isn't as good as cl16 4133. cl15 4133 was acting kinda shoddy so i bumped it down to 4100. will revisit 4133 maybe later.


Wow not bad at all for the price of those DIMMS. Do you find the F9 BIOS good for overclocking compared to the new F11c?


----------



## EarlZ

I just updated to the latest F11 bios and I cant seem to get the "classic" BIOS back, switching to advanced mode still gives me the laggy UI.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Master T1D with updated SATA/RST, Ethernet and On-board Video firmware.
> 
> Fastest microcodes, newer versions.
> 
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507
> 
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1102
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.27
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB l like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.t1d /x
> 
> Use the modded MasterT1D BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Hey what happened to your XI Apex ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## desi_1990

I am trying to install USB turbo charger but everytime i get this error https://imgur.com/a/N1my1uB

I cant seem to find any previous install of USB turbocharger so dont know what the problem is. When i plug my devices in they charge slow as hell


----------



## Johaho

Grizzly111 said:


> Wow not bad at all for the price of those DIMMS. Do you find the F9 BIOS good for overclocking compared to the new F11c?


For me F10b seems the best for memory overclocking. 

For Example my results at 3900Mhz C16 
F10B Dram Voltage 1.38V; Vccio 1.12V; System Agent 1.15V
F11C Dram Voltage 1.39V;Vccio 1.14V; System Agent 1.17V


----------



## Grizzly111

Johaho said:


> For me F10b seems the best for memory overclocking.
> 
> For Example my results at 3900Mhz C16
> F10B Dram Voltage 1.38V; Vccio 1.12V; System Agent 1.15V
> F11C Dram Voltage 1.39V;Vccio 1.14V; System Agent 1.17V



I actually had a similar experience with F10...my previous RAM which was Hynix CJR could overclock with tighter timings and less voltage on F10. I noticed that immediately. Now my B-die cant seem to reach stable overclocks without errors on F11c. Something is different definitely.


I might try F9 once experienced people like Reachthesky try the new F11d so they can make an accurate comparison.


----------



## Falkentyne

You guys realize T1D is a test bios and is not final beta of F11d, right? It was released internally to me, and it was only released as a DVID->Auto/Fixed vcore voltage fix, to fix an overvoltage bug when changing from DVID mode (a rather serious bug; one person experienced 1.6v from it) that has existed since initial BIOS release. I don't do RAM overclocking (besides some 3200 to 3600 testing) so I have no idea what any other changes are, unfortunately. I was hoping you guys could see if there were any other changes. There's a "T1D" which I released and a T0D, which is two days newer. That one was a different method of the DVID fix (i have no idea what method is being referred to). 

The DVID fix allows me to switch back to fixed vcore from DVID mode, without putting >1.5v+ into the chip on the first reboot. If anyone finds any bugs with this, let me know please so I can submit them. If anyone finds an overvoltage bug with DVID switching, I can upload T0D to see if it's fixed or not.

I'll tell you one thing though. Don't try enabling SVID offset on fixed vcore, unless you want no POST code and 100% fan speeds and a Clear CMOS exercise workout  (No idea if T0D fixes that and I'm too scared to try to find out because no post code is rather scary)


----------



## Driller au

@Falkentyne giving the T1d bios a go on my system, was able to change from DVID to fix Vcore and back again with no over volting
no bugs yet


----------



## pXuis

reachthesky said:


> 1.5v vdimm/training, 1.3v sa/io. Haven't tried to work those values down yet. will be testing shortly. 4400/4300/4266 were no-gos, 4200 at c16 was a nogo so i didn't bother with cl17 since it isn't as good as cl16 4133. cl15 4133 was acting kinda shoddy so i bumped it down to 4100. will revisit 4133 maybe later.


Can you pass memtest with those settings? I haven't tried C15 on anything above 3866 yet, my IO'Ls train horribly on anything over that. 

Best I've been able to do is 4133 17-17-17-38
VCCIO 1.2 / VCCSA 1.3 DRAM 1.5

I absolutely NEED to keep my modules under 45C or I get errors.


----------



## Grizzly111

Alemancio said:


> *Is there a bug on F11c & 4000MHz?*
> 
> I've spent the whole weekend trying to stabilize 16-16-16-34 B-Die at so many different VCCSA & IO & vDIMMs and always got so many random errors in KarHu (many times even at 7%).
> 
> Now I was able to tweak all 2nd & 3rd timings (stock main ones are 17-17-17 at 4000MHz) and as soon as I dropped to 16-16-16 its just impossible to stabilize. I also noticed weird and high RTL & IOLs timings.
> 
> *HOWEVER, as soon as I dropped to 3900MHz, my RAM trains at this and it's rock stable:*
> 
> RAM: 2x F4-4000C17D-16GTZR
> Settings: Aorus Master F11C & 9900KF
> Frequencies: Core: 5.0GHz | Cache 4.7GHz
> Voltages: SA: 1.24v | IO: 1.2v IO | Core: 1.325v | RAM: 1.47v
> 
> Doing 4000MHz CL16, regardless of voltage, is impossible.



Yes! This is the problem I have...I also have a 9900KF. My RAM is the Gskill 3600cl16 RAM 8x4GB kit. Using F11C


My modules are usually around 48-52oC when testing for errors. So I am wondering if this is a factor why I cant get stable at high freq? But then again I've had this RAM at 53oC and it's passed testing for hours.


----------



## pXuis

Grizzly111 said:


> Yes! This is the problem I have...I also have a 9900KF. My RAM is the Gskill 3600cl16 RAM 8x4GB kit. Using F11C
> 
> 
> My modules are usually around 48-52oC when testing for errors. So I am wondering if this is a factor why I cant get stable at high freq? But then again I've had this RAM at 53oC and it's passed testing for hours.


It's your temps! Or it's definitely a factor. I've got a 4x8 GSkill Trident Z 3600Mhz (Stock: 16-16-16-36) kit. Anything over 45C I start getting occasional errors. At 50C, they're very frequent. I strapped on a fan to bring them down to 40C and the errors are gone.

I'm seriously considering adding a ram block to my cooling loop.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> Hey what happened to your XI Apex ?[/QUOT
> 
> I still have it. But I need to buy 99% isopropyl alcohol and a soft toothbrush and clean some gunk off the bottom of my 9900k CPU I got on it. I'm so burnt out from troubleshooting and figure out that was the issue I've just been using my X99 motherboard with my 5960x I never got rid of.
> 
> Maybe I'll go buy some isopropyl tomorrow and see if I can find a soft toothbrush.


----------



## LordGurciullo

We all need overclockers anonymous .

So why am I not seeing my ram temps on hwinfo..? What can i do?

on a side note... my computer front fans just started making a ******* noise on an otherwise silent computer... any ideas?


----------



## Grizzly111

pXuis said:


> It's your temps! Or it's definitely a factor. I've got a 4x8 GSkill Trident Z 3600Mhz (Stock: 16-16-16-36) kit. Anything over 45C I start getting occasional errors. At 50C, they're very frequent. I strapped on a fan to bring them down to 40C and the errors are gone.
> 
> I'm seriously considering adding a ram block to my cooling loop.



How do you strap a fan to your RAM???


----------



## Driller au

Grizzly111 said:


> How do you strap a fan to your RAM???


Something like this

https://www.corsair.com/uk/en/Categ...y/DOMINATOR®-Airflow-PLATINUM-LED-Fan/p/CMDAF


----------



## Grizzly111

Driller au said:


> Something like this
> 
> https://www.corsair.com/uk/en/Categ...y/DOMINATOR®-Airflow-PLATINUM-LED-Fan/p/CMDAF



Not sure if that will fit as our board has a connector right underneath the RAM DIMMS between the GPU


----------



## Grizzly111

Well I've tried @ 4133Mhz again. Just cant go error-free - even with 1.5v! Somethings not right. Could be DIMM temps Im not sure. Same with 4000CL16-16-16 but 4000CL-16-17-17 passes overnight HCI and TM5. I've tried DRAM Termination voltages too and SA/IO up to 1.3v. Errors after a few minutes on TM5. Temps >50oC.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

reachthesky said:


> Could not pass memtest last night with any cl15 4133 or cl15 4100 timings on the patriot viper sticks. sad face. Also tried 15-14-14-X for 4000-4133, no go. [email protected] was a no go, 14-[email protected] was a no go. Testing out 15-14-14-28 @ 3900 now.


Is your F9 bios modified with faster Microcodes? Or is F9 before all the microcode updates?


----------



## pXuis

Grizzly111 said:


> How do you strap a fan to your RAM???


Zip-ties attached to my loop's piping.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

reachthesky said:


> I'm on the official F9 bios. I have a 9900K R0 stepping chip. Only F8 bios till current is compatible with R0 stepping 9900K. Microcodes older than F8 bios won't work with R0 chip. The official F9 bios has older microcode than F10/F11c bioses but newer than F4-F7 bioses.
> 
> @Falkentyne When is gigabyte going to release a bios that enhances performance and fixes memory overclocking? I have these two patriot 4400 kits that I want to keep but my gut is just telling me to send them back for a refund.


9900KS only got support in F10 I believe, So I might be screwed there.

EDIT: nvm, see F10 was just an optimization bios for KS.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Master T1D with updated SATA/RST, Ethernet and On-board Video firmware.
> 
> Fastest microcodes, newer versions.
> 
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507
> 
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1102
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.27
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB l like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.t1d /x
> 
> Use the modded MasterT1D BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


 @KedarWolf - Any chance you can mod the new Pro and Pro Wi-Fi BIOS for us in a similar fashion? (Fast microcodes, SATA, LAN, etc.)


----------



## Falkentyne

Both T1D and T0D (as well as every single bios release ever) still have a bug I just reproduced exactly, where going from 1.20v fixed vcore to Auto or DVID sets a 1.164v base vcore (based on Loadline Calibration=Intel spec only) that doesn't scale on CPU VID at all (AC Loadline is set to 160). Example: setting CPU to x36 will show 1.164v, and anything else. Setting CPU to x47 will show 1.164v. x50 will cause the BIOS to hang on post code 9E or something since 1.164v is too low to boot. (Powering off and on at this point and it boots correctly at 1.380v). This seems limited to only 1.20v fixed. Probably something to do with the BIOS showing 1.20v as a "default" voltage on the right side, triggering a bug. 1.205, 1.195, 1.210, 1.215, etc, all work correctly when changing from one of those to "Auto" or DVID +0.00v without issues. It's only 1.20v that causes this.

Seems like the bug is: Setting fixed 1.20v and changing to Auto or DVID keeps the voltage at 1.20v before vdroop. (thus: LLC Standard= 1.164v in BIOS).


----------



## wholeeo

I noticed that they've added the option to disable Serial Port again on new bios. (Super IO Configuration)

For Per Core Overclocking is C3 needed? Seems like if I don't enable this my set ratios do not kick in.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> You are pretty much always guaranteed to error above 50c with b-die. Try to keep them 40c and below, 20c-30c preferably.


Depends on the overclock, of course. I am using tight 3500-C15 for that reason, because my RAM hits 55C and any higher clock-rate produces errors at some point.


----------



## Timur Born

wholeeo said:


> For Per Core Overclocking is C3 needed? Seems like if I don't enable this my set ratios do not kick in.


Yes, at least C3 is needed.


----------



## pXuis

Testing T1D with my settings so far:
9900KS @5,1Ghz/4700Mhz Ring
Some Core offset with LLC low and Internal on Auto, can't remember the figure but it's a negative value in the range of -0.125

4x8G.skill @ 17-17-17-38 - 4133Mhz.
VCCSA 1.3 / VCCIO 1.25

I'm 40.2ns on T1D versus 38.5 on the modded F11c. Pretty sure my settings are Identical unless I missed something big, but I doubt it.
Going to run memtest HCI through the night to check errors.


----------



## GeneO

I tried T1D briefly. Couldn't get my RTL/IOL to dial in correctly (the infamous doubled IOL and higher RTL).


----------



## Grizzly111

Ok so now i've added an old i5 3570k heatsink fan I had lying around to cool my RAM. I've just got it sitting on its side ontop of my GPU atm. Seems to be working....RAM is cooler...by about 5 degrees C. I live in Australia and I have no A/C in the room that my PC is in. So in summer with ambients around 30oC there is absolutely no way its going to stay under 40oC! 



Also I reseated my RAM just in case.


I am tempted to try F9 BIOS myself as I have a feeling it could be superior.


EDIT: 1.44v, 1.15/1.20 IO/SA. This is for anyone that has this board and has can only get to 4000Mhz, hopefully it helps someone:


----------



## pXuis

Grizzly111 said:


> Ok so now i've added an old i5 3570k heatsink fan I had lying around to cool my RAM. I've just got it sitting on its side ontop of my GPU atm. Seems to be working....RAM is cooler...by about 5 degrees C. I live in Australia and I have no A/C in the room that my PC is in. So in summer with ambients around 30oC there is absolutely no way its going to stay under 40oC!
> 
> 
> 
> Also I reseated my RAM just in case.
> 
> 
> I am tempted to try F9 BIOS myself as I have a feeling it could be superior.
> 
> 
> EDIT: This is for anyone that has this board and has can only get to 4000Mhz, hopefully it helps someone:


I've found that at higher temps, tREFI can cause quite a bit of instability at higher values. If you get a ton of errors at 45C+ try dropping it down to like 30k. If it's winter time, max it out. xD


----------



## Grizzly111

pXuis said:


> I've found that at higher temps, tREFI can cause quite a bit of instability at higher values. If you get a ton of errors at 45C+ try dropping it down to like 30k. If it's winter time, max it out. xD



Thanks for the tip pXuis - I read that TREFI and RFC are temp sensitive. However I was able to drop the volts down to 1.44v and only 1.15/1.20 IO/SA to achieve that overclock. This shows that the RAM can perform well. 

BUT I cant seem to get straight 16's or push to higher frequencies no matter the volts - like my RAM suddenly hits a massive wall. But my RAM is a matched non-RGB Gskill 3600CL16-16-16 kit. I checked the serial numbers and they are all consecutive.


----------



## pXuis

Grizzly111 said:


> Thanks for the tip pXuis - I read that TREFI and RFC are temp sensitive. However I was able to drop the volts down to 1.44v and only 1.15/1.20 IO/SA to achieve that overclock. This shows that the RAM can perform well.
> 
> BUT I cant seem to get straight 16's or push to higher frequencies no matter the volts - like my RAM suddenly hits a massive wall. But my RAM is a matched non-RGB Gskill 3600CL16-16-16 kit. I checked the serial numbers and they are all consecutive.


Might very well be a limitation of the memory controller on your CPU. Just like cores, their quality varies.


----------



## KedarWolf

Grizzly111 said:


> Thanks for the tip pXuis - I read that TREFI and RFC are temp sensitive. However I was able to drop the volts down to 1.44v and only 1.15/1.20 IO/SA to achieve that overclock. This shows that the RAM can perform well.
> 
> BUT I cant seem to get straight 16's or push to higher frequencies no matter the volts - like my RAM suddenly hits a massive wall. But my RAM is a matched non-RGB Gskill 3600CL16-16-16 kit. I checked the serial numbers and they are all consecutive.


It's not likely the RAM that is the issue, but the IMC (memory controller) of the CPU, some perform better than others. 

Just read the comment above mine. :/


----------



## Grizzly111

KedarWolf said:


> It's not likely the RAM that is the issue, but the IMC (memory controller) of the CPU, some perform better than others.
> 
> Just read the comment above mine. :/



Mmmm I am just reading this thread here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1722480-memory-controller-sucks-new-i9-9900k.html


My i9 is a 9900KF which is interesting because another forum member has exactly the same issue as me and he also has a 9900KF.

I thought I was lucky only needing 1.2v+0.01v offset to do 4.9Ghz and +0.04v to do 5.0Ghz. I think I'd better concentrate on overclocking the CPU and raising the uncore to achieve better memory throughput then...until better chips for the z390 are released in the future!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

reachthesky said:


> Just gave the thread a good read. Ok so the 8086k memory controller is better than 9900K and is typical able to reach the higher speeds. I wonder if I could get 4400 stable if I put a 8086K into the aorus master.


For what it's worth, my 9900K couldn't boot anything over 4000, or even 3866 on certain sticks. Regardless of settings. My 9900KS on the other hand can boot and bench (NOT stable) my G.skills at 4400 with decent'ish timings on the Master. But it's not even gaming stable. 
Can post screens.


----------



## BigMack70

pXuis said:


> For what it's worth, my 9900K couldn't boot anything over 4000, or even 3866 on certain sticks. Regardless of settings. My 9900KS on the other hand can boot and bench (NOT stable) my G.skills at 4400 with decent'ish timings on the Master. But it's not even gaming stable.
> Can post screens.


I got frustrated with trying to OC my 3600 G.skill so I just threw money at the problem and picked up 4x8GB of Patriot Viper 4400 C19 memory. Haven't had much success tightening up the timings (either primary or secondary) in a stable fashion, but 4400c19 is stable @ 1.3 vccio / 1.35 vccsa with my 9900KS @ 5.2 on the Aorus Master.


----------



## Salve1412

BigMack70 said:


> I got frustrated with trying to OC my 3600 G.skill so I just threw money at the problem and picked up 4x8GB of Patriot Viper 4400 C19 memory. Haven't had much success tightening up the timings (either primary or secondary) in a stable fashion, but 4400c19 is stable @ 1.3 vccio / 1.35 vccsa with my 9900KS @ 5.2 on the Aorus Master.


Wow, that seems unique for the Master, and your kit is not even in its QVL...nice! When you say stable what do you mean in term of passed tests? My 4266 G.Skill 4x8GB kit won't work at its XMP rated speed no matter what voltage or timings I choose and it is in the Mastes QVL. Probably my 9900k's IMC is the limiting factor... I could only reach a perfectly stable (20000%Karhu, 1000%HCI) 4133 CL16 and in general I thought that anything above 4133 was really difficult to stabilize on the Master.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> You'd be the only one to achieve this, which is certainly miraculous and a great achievement. Please post completed memtest photos. Can your cpu oc + ram oc pass an hour of OCCT large AVX2? The furthest I got with 2 of those 4400 kits is playing a few rounds of modern warfare before instability kicked in @ XMP 4400/4266.
> 
> Also, I have not returned these kits yet and I would love to get them stable at cl19 4400 with tight subtimings, would you mind posting screenshots of all of your bios settings from start to finish? Also, which bios are you on? What other voltages did you adjust? This would be extremely helpful. Would love to get these stabilized.


Did a 100% hci pass and been gaming for about a week without issues... Will run some longer memtest runs and double check

Didn't realize that was so rare and so didn't do long stability because I just assumed it works


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> Please use the screenshot feature while in the bios and screenshot each bios screen and save them to a usb stick, post here please.


Well now I'm worried I missed something in stability testing... Gonna run more thorough tests and confirm that it's stable since apparently nobody else is having success

Suspect it's more likely that I'm unstable than that I'm the only one who has this working


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> There have been a handful to claim they got [email protected] stable on a 9900k/aorus master(randoms on reddit) but none of them would provide any validation and always ghosted shortly after being asked for full settings/screenshots etc etc or just kept beating around the bush and never posted anything to support the claim.
> 
> Would you mind taking bios screenshots of each screen so I can see your entire configuration?


Looks like the answer is that my assumption I was stable based on a single hci run and some gaming was incorrect. 

I cannot get a 200% hci test. Crashes between 20 and 150% every time; seems really random... Every time I think it's gonna pass, it eventually dies. Looks like about 1/4 runs can make it to 75-100% coverage but this is definitely not 100 stable. 

Large data set OCCT AVX2 runs fine for a couple minutes but always starts showing errors before the 5 minute mark. 

Guess I gotta go back to the drawing board... 4266 is *far* less stable than 4400 for me on these sticks... I can't even get to 5% hci pass at that frequency no matter what I've tried, and I've not managed to get these sticks even to post at 4000. Maybe I'll just return them and suck it up and go back to the 3600 g skill. Boo. Really thought I had it... Played like 10 hours of modern warfare this past week and zero crashes.

Voltages don't seem to have any effect above the 1.35 sa / 1.3 io I've been running. Tried loosening timings to 20-20-20-42 and that had no effect either.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

reachthesky said:


> You'd be the only one to achieve this, which is certainly miraculous and a great achievement. Please post completed memtest photos. Can your cpu oc + ram oc pass an hour of OCCT large AVX2? The furthest I got with 2 of those 4400 kits is playing a few rounds of modern warfare before instability kicked in @ XMP 4400/4266.
> 
> Also, I have not returned these kits yet and I would love to get them stable at cl19 4400 with tight subtimings, would you mind posting screenshots of all of your bios settings from start to finish? Also, which bios are you on? What other voltages did you adjust? This would be extremely helpful. Would love to get these stabilized.


I was planning on 2 of those exact kits to watercool but they're sold out out on Amazon.de. Seems it might have been a blessing.
What temps are your dimms at?


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> Enter in 20-19-19-39. The spd info in cpu-z shows XMP profile 1 4400 at 20-19-19-39 but when you select xmp1 and train it, it will train at 19-19-19-39. Try selecting xmp and manually putting in 20-19-19-39 and see if you find any stability, try 20-19-19-39 with profile 2 as well if profile 1 is still unstable.
> 
> Also, you mentioned that you can't make it far in HCI memtest. HCI stresses the cache heavily, You can also try adding some more vccio, maybe try bumping it up to 1.35v to match your vccsa and see if it helps with stability.


Thanks... I'll give it a go tomorrow and see if I can get it... It feels soooo close. Part of me is tempted to just keep the kit as stable as possible at 4400 if it's not going to throw errors or crashes in games. 

Any idea why lower frequency is less stable? Seems really bizarre I can't even figure out how to post at 4000...ive gotta be doing something wrong

And my intuition is that if it's almost stable @ 4400, I should be able to keep everything the same and drop to 4266 and it will be fine but 4266 is a hot mess


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Thanks for the reassurances guys - makes me feel better than Im not the only one here that cant get huge OC's with the Master. I am beginning to think its got a lot to do with the board.


So it could be one or a combination of things:


1. Hardware: Aorus Master itself or the 9900k or the RAM sticks

2. BIOS (BIG factor in my opinion)

3. Possible CPU cooler over-tightened? (not sure if this would throw errors at all frequencies though)
4. Timings/Voltage
5. HEAT.

My symptoms are: 



1. PC boots and will bench 4000MhzC16 4133Mhz C16, 4200Mhz etc . However not stable on TM5 testing - finds errors within 10mins

2. Higher voltages (1.5v) make no difference but 4000Mhz 16-17-17 is stable at lowish IO/SA (1.15/1.2...could go lower but havent tested) and 1.44v DIMM (could go lower too)
*The lowish values for IO/SA tell me that the IMC is fine?*


3. Relaxed timings (eg 4133CL17-19-19) dont make much difference. BUT increasing RFC to max 700+ does allow it TM5 to go to 20-30 mins before finding an error.


CPU overclocks fine at low voltage and is stable.

I've added a Noctua 80mm over-RAM fan...now temps are about 12 degrees C above ambient during TM5 testing (which is quite aggressive on the RAM). This means they are getting to 44 degrees C. Before they were about 20 degrees C over ambient! Ambient here is approx 32oC atm. Idle is 37oC. 



So basically I've eliminated 3 & 4 and maybe 5....


I could potentially eliminate 2 by trying out another BIOS version like F9 or wait for new releases.


How do we elimiate 1. that the internal IMC on the i9 is not good?


----------



## Johaho

Have you tested 4133.4200 with the same Vcore?
High ram clock 4133 and above can also mean that you need more Vcore, as far as I know.


----------



## Grizzly111

Johaho said:


> Have you tested 4133.4200 with the same Vcore?
> High ram clock 4133 and above can also mean that you need more Vcore, as far as I know.



Interesting. More Vcore even though the CPU overclock is stable? I wonder how that works.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Interesting. More Vcore even though the CPU overclock is stable? I wonder how that works.


This may be related in some complex way to hyperthreading.
Have you first of all, tried disabling hyperthreading and then tested to see if suddenly the system is stable?

IMC controls hyperthreading as well as RAM. Raising Vcore raises both CPU and cache voltage, but not L3 cache. The L3 cache is important for hyperthreading but VCCIO controls L3 cache voltage. Could be some strange interactions going on here.


----------



## Grizzly111

I did briefly test Vcore +0.010v for a total offset of +0.020v @ 4.9Ghz but it didnt make any difference. Didn't bother to give it anymore as but can try again. I do know already that my chip needs +0.020v offset to remove all L3 cache errors when doing the new P95 runs. However from day-to-day use I see no reason to run +.020v unless I want to run 4.6Ghz cache (4.5 atm). I run zero AVX offset with this too.

I haven't tested with HT off yet but I see your point.

However, I am in the process of testing some LOWER values of 1.12v VCCIO and 1.18v VCCSA PLUS even tighter secondary timings for my 4000Mhz 16-17-17 overclock. VDIMM is set at 1.44v. Tried lower but that's the lowest it will go without errors. Now, If I pass testing with that low IO/SA I think I can say the already reasonable IMC is actually very healthy!


EDIT: Test passed TM5 6x loops and 300% HCI...I think that's a reasonable result...on to the next test.....


----------



## Grizzly111

Right ...I am in the process of testing Falkentyne's suggestion of switching off HT. 



And guess what - you could be on to something! 



For starters I passed 4 loops of TM5 @ 1.45v on 4000Mhz 16-16-16 with tight timings....something that ALWAYS threw errors on TM5 by loop 2-3 even with super loose timings, 700 RFC etc @ 1.46v.


This could of course be due to my RAM being cooler with the addition of a fan (still gets to 45 degrees though) BUT...


I've turned HT back on and am re-testing the same settings....


Stay tuned....


----------



## Grizzly111

Ok with HT ON ....I got an error on the 2nd loop as per usual. I decided to shut down for a few mins and re-test.


Went 5 loops TM5 with zero errors. Again that's something Ive not seen before on 16-16-16. 



Inconclusive.



Need further testing....could be temperature-induced errors cropping up. I am definitely seeing some improved stability @ 16-16-16 which is good news and the only significant change I've made today is the extra cooling to the RAM.


EDIT: Currently doing HCI MEMtest overnight on 400016-16-16 @ 1.45v, 1.21/1.16 SA/IO. At 300% coverage and going strong!!


----------



## robertr1

Faster ram speeds up your AVX/AVX2 instructions. trrd_s/_l and tfaw being main contributors.

Easy test. Max tune your ram and run something like x264 stress test for 5 loops. Watch your encode performance (fps) and then record your peak temps.

Now loosen up the timings while keeping the same frequency and re run the tests. You'll lose performance but also drop temps because the CPU isn't working as hard. 

You can do a x265 encode in handbrake also:
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/benchmark-your-computer-4k-with-handbrake-1-1-and-h265.2544492/

When I was on my Pro but limited to 16/3600 2T, this wasn't noticeable.
On my Apex, running 17/4200 1T, you can really tell the performance lift and heat build up.


----------



## pXuis

Grizzly111 said:


> Ok with HT ON ....I got an error on the 2nd loop as per usual. I decided to shut down for a few mins and re-test.
> 
> 
> Went 5 loops TM5 with zero errors. Again that's something Ive not seen before on 16-16-16.
> 
> 
> 
> Inconclusive.
> 
> 
> 
> Need further testing....could be temperature-induced errors cropping up. I am definitely seeing some improved stability @ 16-16-16 which is good news and the only significant change I've made today is the extra cooling to the RAM.
> 
> 
> EDIT: Currently doing HCI MEMtest overnight on 400016-16-16 @ 1.45v, 1.21/1.16 SA/IO. At 300% coverage and going strong!!


I'd really consider testing with SA/1.3 OP/1.2~1.25 just to rule out voltage. 1.16 is rather low for 4000 C16 imo.


----------



## BigMack70

I'm going with the ignorance is bliss option for now, I think... I can't get a reliable >100% hci pass, and I can't pass occt avx2 large without errors, but I'm not getting crashes in games or real bench stress testing... I'm gonna just leave this at 4400c19 until I start getting problems in normal use... Maybe then I'll get forced back to g skill 3600. But I upgraded the speed to help not dip below 120fps in Path of Exile, and it's doing that just fine


----------



## Lurifaks

BigMack70 said:


> I got frustrated with trying to OC my 3600 G.skill so I just threw money at the problem and picked up 4x8GB of Patriot Viper 4400 C19 memory. Haven't had much success tightening up the timings (either primary or secondary) in a stable fashion, but 4400c19 is stable @ 1.3 vccio / 1.35 vccsa with my 9900KS @ 5.2 on the Aorus Master.



Hi, is this with XMP1 profile loaded, 1.45vdimm and all memtimings auto. Only vccio and vccsa manual ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Just a friendly heads up, You are better off downclocking to *15-15-15-32-280-65534-2T @ 3900MHz.* Latency @ 5.0ghz/4.7cache HT on is about 37.3NS. read/writes are about 60k, copy is about 58k.
> This will increase your minimum FPS. You'll get better performance in games with cl15-3900 with tuned sub-timings than [email protected]/4400 with loose/basic timings and it will more than likely require less voltage than xmp. You'll also be able to pass memtests/stability tests with cl15-3900.


Is this possible with your 4x8gb viper 4400c19 and if so at what vdimm,vccio and vccsa
Asking because i have the same mem, but struggle with 3900-15-15-15


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> Just a friendly heads up, You are better off downclocking to 15-15-15-32-280-65534-2T @ 3900MHz. Latency @ 5.0ghz/4.7cache HT on is about 37.3NS. read/writes are about 60k, copy is about 58k.
> This will increase your minimum FPS. You'll get better performance in games with cl15-3900 with tuned sub-timings than [email protected]/4400 with loose/basic timings and it will more than likely require less voltage than xmp. You'll also be able to pass memtests/stability tests with cl15-3900.


Downclocking is a no-go on these sticks. 4266 is highly unstable and I've not been able to successfully post below 4133. 

I have noticeably more stable framerates in PoE at 4400cl19 than I did at 3600c15, so I think I'm going to just stick with this for now.


----------



## Lurifaks

@BigMack70

Did u see my post to you on previous page?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

Lurifaks said:


> Hi, is this with XMP1 profile loaded, 1.45vdimm and all memtimings auto. Only vccio and vccsa manual ?


Currently running this but with 1.5vdimm/vtraining instead of 1.45 since it seems more stable @ 1.5, as well as manual io/sa. 

Spent a little while over the past weekend messing around with primary and secondary timings but doing so always increased instability to the point where I was seeing realbench and/or game crashes, so I gave up and left it on auto.

When testing 4266, I've kept my almost-stable 4400 settings and just dropped frequency, as well as just loading profile 2 and leaving everything auto - both yield *highly* unstable results.

This is all on the F11c BIOS.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> Assuming you are on a 9900K and not a 9900KS, Have you tried F9 BIOS?


On the KS, sadly. Had better performance on the F10 with my cpu but kept having weird issues with boot stability, so I've settled on the F11c for now.


----------



## Wam7

What is the best way to flash from backup bios to fix the main bios on the Master?

I was trying to flash a modded 11c bios using Freedos and EFiflash but I suspect made the error of booting the USB normally and not from the UEFI USB. This resulted in a continuous boot loop. I managed to get the Backup bios to load and would like to repair the main bios.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wam7 said:


> What is the best way to flash from backup bios to fix the main bios on the Master?
> 
> I was trying to flash a modded 11c bios using Freedos and EFiflash but I suspect made the error of booting the USB normally and not from the UEFI USB. This resulted in a continuous boot loop. I managed to get the Backup bios to load and would like to repair the main bios.


Use EFIflash 0.80 and use the /DB (dual bios) flash option. At least I think that's the command line switch.
Link is on win-raid.com. There's a modded version by Dsanke also without OEM checks (useful if you were on a Gigabyte test bios and you get an OEM error trying to go back to a non-test BIOS), but be careful with that one as that flasher has all protection checks disabled.


----------



## Falkentyne

You guys can try Test bios T0D to see if it fixes the "system shuts off immediately and reboots to 3 low pitched beeps (PC speaker) then goes directly to BIOS" on a BSOD (with nothing changed...seems like a debugging tool).

I saw that happening on T1D and I swore it happened on F11c also (after a system service exception BSOD). I have no idea. Changelog was "DVID fix done a different (better) way"?

Note: the bug when switching from 1.20v fixed vcore to ANY auto or DVID vcore is still there. (Yes I reported it just a few days ago)--this bug only happens at 1.20v fixed vcore.


----------



## Schmuckley

skummm said:


> Hi
> 
> I bought the AORUS MASTER Z390 which runs beautifully and cool with the F5 bios *but* I cannot yet get USB working with W7 (I would prefer to dual-boot as opposed to VM for running Pro-Tools).
> 
> Already started a seperate thread about it, but it is not the board's fault
> 
> Apart from this issue I am very happy with my purchase.


You have to hack the drivers.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...pport-matisse-ryzen-3000-zen-2-x370-x470.html


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> You guys can try Test bios T0D to see if it fixes the "system shuts off immediately and reboots to 3 low pitched beeps (PC speaker) then goes directly to BIOS" on a BSOD (with nothing changed...seems like a debugging tool).
> 
> I saw that happening on T1D and I swore it happened on F11c also (after a system service exception BSOD). I have no idea. Changelog was "DVID fix done a different (better) way"?
> 
> Note: the bug when switching from 1.20v fixed vcore to ANY auto or DVID vcore is still there. (Yes I reported it just a few days ago)--this bug only happens at 1.20v fixed vcore.


What's the difference between the two attached bios?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> What's the difference between the two attached bios?


Original one was directly from Gigabyte with the new slower microcodes. Just rename it or something and Qflash it if you want slower more secure microcodes.

The modded one is the same as in my modded f11c and f1d --faster microcodes (AE for 9900k/R0, B4 for other 9th gen) but without the updated GOP/IRST/whatever firmware.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Both the cl19 4400 patriot vipers and the cl17 4000 gskills both did [email protected] on 4 dimms for daily use. SA/IO was 1.3v each(my chip is thirsty). Vdimm/training was 1.5v though the gskills could do it at 1.48v. With all the secondary/tertiary timings tightened, reads/writes were just over 60k, copyyy about 58k and 37.3NS latency with 5ghz all core, 4.7ghz cache on F9 bios. Each 100mhz extra on the cache will deduct .3 from latency if you wanted to take it further, for example 4.8ghz cache with that profile will give 37.0 ns latency. * rtls were 57/57/59/59 and iols were 6/6/6/6, setting these in the bios will cause them to train consistently. Be sure to start from a fresh cmos clear or the rtls/iols may not train properly*.


Thanks, i might give up overclokcing memory on this master. The problem is the RTLS and IOLS, if i have got them where i want them and save a profile, every reboot they change. And if i clear cmos and load the profile the have changed from the numbers they where saved in that profile.


----------



## Grizzly111

That's a good result @reachthesky. I would love to hear your thoughts on gaming performance 3900CL15 vs higher freq - some games like BF prefer higher freq. for example.


----------



## Grizzly111

Lurifaks said:


> Thanks, i might give up overclokcing memory on this master. The problem is the RTLS and IOLS, if i have got them where i want them and save a profile, every reboot they change. And if i clear cmos and load the profile the have changed from the numbers they where saved in that profile.



Once you get the IOLS an RTLS you want and all the associated timings - you then need to ENABLE memory FAST BOOT under the advanced memory options (on F11C anyway). This prevents the BIOS from training each reset. Then you save your profile.


HOWEVER, you need to ensure those are timings you want as if you change any, they will not reflect until you disable memory fast boot.


Also I've found this method isn't foolproof - changing profiles will tend to confuse the BIOS on occassion.


----------



## Grizzly111

GOOD NEWS guys - I have been able to stablise 4000CL16-16-16 on my system for the first time! All at lower IO/SA and much tighter timings than I expected. 



It passed 700% HCI overnight plus 10 loops TM5 Usmus V3 (initial 5 loops + 5 + HCI) and also 10 loops of X264. I think my previous issues were to do with temps.


The second TM5 Run shows that I increased IO/SA by +0.01v as I lowered RFC and wanted to do the overnight HCI run. Interesting that the lower RFC run took 21secs less....



I am so happy!


----------



## Lurifaks

Grizzly111 said:


> Once you get the IOLS an RTLS you want and all the associated timings - you then need to ENABLE memory FAST BOOT under the advanced memory options (on F11C anyway). This prevents the BIOS from training each reset. Then you save your profile.
> 
> 
> HOWEVER, you need to ensure those are timings you want as if you change any, they will not reflect until you disable memory fast boot.
> 
> 
> Also I've found this method isn't foolproof - changing profiles will tend to confuse the BIOS on occassion.


Hi, yes have tried FAST BOOT enabled. I can`t lock in the IOLS and RTLS at all , if i set anything manual, the are all over the place. And i cant change timings idividually for channel A and B on this F11c bios im on ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

Grizzly111 said:


> GOOD NEWS guys - I have been able to stablise 4000CL16-16-16 on my system for the first time! All at lower IO/SA and much tighter timings than I expected.
> 
> 
> 
> It passed 700% HCI overnight plus 10 loops TM5 Usmus V3 (initial 5 loops + 5 + HCI) and also 10 loops of X264. I think my previous issues were to do with temps.
> 
> 
> The second TM5 Run shows that I increased IO/SA by +0.01v as I lowered RFC and wanted to do the overnight HCI run. Interesting that the lower RFC run took 21secs less....
> 
> 
> 
> I am so happy!


Run a Aida bench please, would like to see what latency is like.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Dan848

tek_01 said:


> Hey guys im running the master with an 9900k, have set xmp to profile 1 (3000mhz) and everything else is left stock.
> My cpu i have noticed runs at4.7-4.8ghz but hits 1.452v on cvore, to my understanding that is way too much for daily use (not to mention the temps get close to the 100 degree mark)
> Is this normal? I tried running 1.35v max at 47 multi but it just crashed and corrupted the bios



If you never found a fix for this, download and install the latest BIOS and set AVX offset: 0


----------



## Dan848

tek_01 said:


> Hey guys im running the master with an 9900k, have set xmp to profile 1 (3000mhz) and everything else is left stock.
> My cpu i have noticed runs at4.7-4.8ghz but hits 1.452v on cvore, to my understanding that is way too much for daily use (not to mention the temps get close to the 100 degree mark)
> Is this normal? I tried running 1.35v max at 47 multi but it just crashed and corrupted the bios





reachthesky said:


> thank you  Any idea the best way to track/analyze FPS so I can compare cl15-3900 vs cl18 4200? I use to use afterburner but minimum fps no longer shows up. I need to be able to track minimum, average and maximum fps etc.


Do not use minimum frame rates, they often cannot be relied upon. Use average and 1% lows [FPS]. You can also use .1% lows, just be aware that loading screens, porting to different maps, getting your toon killed and like game functions will drastically lower the .1% lows.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

pXuis said:


> Run a Aida bench please, would like to see what latency is like.



Should get sub 39ns. I think one run I did was 38.7ns. Here is a couple of runs I took earlier with different timings (I cant do a current one ATM as I am testing 4133MhzCL16):


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> That's the thing, msi afterburner no longer tracks all the stats, only some.



I think you need to use Rivatuner with it and enable in-game overlay?


BTW, yes if you want to lock your RTLs you need to keep re-training until you get a set you like then enable memory fast boot. Be aware though, that as soon as you switch profile and try to switch back to your profile with the fast boot enabled it wont have the same best trained settings and you will need to do them again.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> Ok, what if I lock in the rtls/iols that I want, enable fast boot and then attempt to send it into windows with a higher frequency than I originally trained for? Will it just toss it into windows at the higher frequency or will it try to retrain the higher frequency? Curious if it works like that and if it would be a way to circumvent the high rtls/iols that the motherboard trains for 4000 and up.



I tried that but as soon as you change any variable it will retrain the IOLs/RTLs.


----------



## Grizzly111

I managed to get a TM5 'initial testing' stable 4133Mhz 16-17-17 overclock fairly quickly. However 16-16-16 is presenting a MASSIVE challenge....errors quickly...even on all AUTO and only primaries set. Tried even with HT off. Termination voltages set really low (haven't tried about 50% yet though). Not sure where to head at present.


I may work on improving the 4133Mhz 16-17-17.


----------



## Salve1412

Grizzly111 said:


> I tried that but as soon as you change any variable it will retrain the IOLs/RTLs.





reachthesky said:


> Ok, what if I lock in the rtls/iols that I want, enable fast boot and then attempt to send it into windows with a higher frequency than I originally trained for? Will it just toss it into windows at the higher frequency or will it try to retrain the higher frequency? Curious if it works like that and if it would be a way to circumvent the high rtls/iols that the motherboard trains for 4000 and up.


Actually I tried that a while ago when I first discovered the fast boot trick: from my experience when you enable fast boot (after reaching desired values for RTLs and IOLs) and set a higher frequency a retrain doesn't occur unless you go further than a single step in frequency. For example when I tried to change only the frequency from 3900 with low RTLs/IOLs to 4000, the low values stayed locked (but Windows was highly unstable and BSODed almost immediately), while if I tried to skip directly from 3900 to 4100 or 4133 the retrain happened. If I remember correctly, once I got the low RTLs/IOLs at 4000, if I tried to level up to 4100 once again the board retrained. But I should double-check this since it's been a while.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> yep had it enabled. afterburner no longer tracks 1% lows or minimum or average fps. It only tracks active fps and records it on the graph. I'm on the latest version of afterburner(non-beta) and whatever version riva tuner came with.


I have no such problems.
Did you enable the benchmark hotkeys?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I did not enable those. I enabled the OSD/monitoring in rivatuner and monitoring in afterburner


1% lows is a benchmark mode. You need to enable the two hotkeys and then use them.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> I experienced the same exact scenario for 3900-4133 heh. I guess that explains why I can slip into windows with a busclock at 3989 with lower rtls/iols after training 3900 initially but then couldn't pass a memtest. Latency was hella nice though, 36.0NS with 5.0 cache for cl15/3900. What would I have to do to get the busclock/ram stable in that scenario? I haven't been able to get any bus overclocks stable. I'd like to do a 101 busclock off of 5.0 for 5.05ghz as a daily driver with CL15/4133 up to 4174mhz, or even a 101.63 busclock to get an even 4200 at cl15.


Yeah, I'd really like it too, but unfortunately I don't know a thing about how many and which voltage settings have to be adjusted, apart from Vcore, (and VCCSA, VCCIO, I guess?) in order to stabilize higher BCLKs.


----------



## Gen.

Hey. Can I get on the master above 4133 MHz? I am stable at 4133 16-16-36 and stable at 4200 16-16-36, but I Bsod at 4200 16-16-36...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Lurifaks said:


> Hi, yes have tried FAST BOOT enabled. I can`t lock in the IOLS and RTLS at all , if i set anything manual, the are all over the place. And i cant change timings idividually for channel A and B on this F11c bios im on ?


Well, all you are doing is telling the BIOS not to train. This only works if your overclock is stable and you do not change any timings or frequency - otherwise the BIOS recognizes this and trains anyway. 
I sure wish Gigabyte would not completely ignore the IOL/RTL set in the BIOS, it is a pretty lame.


----------



## Gen.

Maybe it’s better to stay at 4133 with normal voltages and settings? 4133 15-15 or 16-16 will be better than 4200 17-17!


----------



## BigMack70

OK, so my intuition about something being wrong on my setup since the RAM was less stable at slightly lower speeds (4000-4266)vs 4400 was correct. I knew that had to be a sign I had done something wrong, and it was. 

My CPU doesn't like any of this at 5.2 GHz. I had tested that OC fairly thoroughly on the old memory kit @ 3600 MHz, but I cannot find any combination of settings that will pass OCCT large set AVX2 on this Patriot memory kit @ 5.2 GHz.

I backed my CPU down to 5.1 GHz and am re-testing. 4266 @ 17-17-17-37 with tightened secondary timings passed the initial testing I did this morning, but was short on time (only had time to check it vs 20 minutes OCCT large set AVX2)... will do some more thorough testing as soon as I get a chance and see if it's solidly stable.

What voltages help a CPU overclock in this kind of situation? Vcore doesn't seem to do anything. It had been stable @ 5.2 @ 1.3V with the old slower memory, but I pushed that all the way up to 1.36V and couldn't notice any increase in stability; don't want to be running volts that high anyway.

Currently have vcore @ 1.3v (offset), 1.35 vccsa / 1.3 vccio / 1.5 vdimm & training 

Any other voltages or settings help with CPU stability? I don't really want to go any higher on any of those. If I have to settle for 5.1, I guess that's still fine... but was hoping for 5.2 since it's the KS. 

4400 doesn't appear to be able to get 100% stable on my board but once I have something I know is rock-solid at 4266, I might try again and see if I can get it... I'm still hopeful


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

BigMack70 said:


> OK, so my intuition about something being wrong on my setup since the RAM was less stable at slightly lower speeds (4000-4266)vs 4400 was correct. I knew that had to be a sign I had done something wrong, and it was.
> 
> My CPU doesn't like any of this at 5.2 GHz. I had tested that OC fairly thoroughly on the old memory kit @ 3600 MHz, but I cannot find any combination of settings that will pass OCCT large set AVX2 on this Patriot memory kit @ 5.2 GHz.
> 
> I backed my CPU down to 5.1 GHz and am re-testing. 4266 @ 17-17-17-37 with tightened secondary timings passed the initial testing I did this morning, but was short on time (only had time to check it vs 20 minutes OCCT large set AVX2)... will do some more thorough testing as soon as I get a chance and see if it's solidly stable.
> 
> What voltages help a CPU overclock in this kind of situation? Vcore doesn't seem to do anything. It had been stable @ 5.2 @ 1.3V with the old slower memory, but I pushed that all the way up to 1.36V and couldn't notice any increase in stability; don't want to be running volts that high anyway.
> 
> Currently have vcore @ 1.3v (offset), 1.35 vccsa / 1.3 vccio / 1.5 vdimm & training
> 
> Any other voltages or settings help with CPU stability? I don't really want to go any higher on any of those. If I have to settle for 5.1, I guess that's still fine... but was hoping for 5.2 since it's the KS.
> 
> 4400 doesn't appear to be able to get 100% stable on my board but once I have something I know is rock-solid at 4266, I might try again and see if I can get it... I'm still hopeful


What is unstable though? The CPU Cores, IMC, or the CPU Cache? You did say that disabling hyperthreading didn't help.....?

You need to see what passes or fails. Can you pass Prime95 29.8 build 6+ with AVX disabled with small FFT's?
If yes, can you pass 112K-112k in-place fixed FFT with AVX disabled?
If yes, can you pass 256k-512K FFT with AVX disabled?

Test those and find out.


----------



## BigMack70

Falkentyne said:


> What is unstable though? The CPU Cores, IMC, or the CPU Cache? You did say that disabling hyperthreading didn't help.....?
> 
> You need to see what passes or fails. Can you pass Prime95 29.8 build 6+ with AVX disabled with small FFT's?
> If yes, can you pass 112K-112k in-place fixed FFT with AVX disabled?
> If yes, can you pass 256k-512K FFT with AVX disabled?
> 
> Test those and find out.


Will do some of those later tonight or tomorrow when I get the chance. It was failing hci memtest and avx2 occt at 5.2. Don't know if it would also fail other tests. I didn't realize changing memory kit could affect cpu stability, and all my cpu overclock testing had been done on the old memory. I'm guessing I more or less need to re-validate the CPU, but out of tweaking time today.

Didn't test with HT off because I have no intention of running the PC without HT on.


----------



## BradleyW

reachthesky said:


> *higher ram frequencies can require much more vcore.* When I was benching cl19-4533, I had to use high llc, +170mv offset + acdc-1/1 regardless of cpu frequency to complete a geekbench. Any less voltage and it wouldn't complete.


Your ring ratio / uncore speed must have been unstable.


----------



## BigMack70

BradleyW said:


> Your ring ratio / uncore speed must have been unstable.



Dropping from 48 to 43 then down to 40 didn't help anything for me earlier today trying to stabilize 5.2


----------



## Salve1412

Gen. said:


> Maybe it’s better to stay at 4133 with normal voltages and settings? 4133 15-15 or 16-16 will be better than 4200 17-17!


Have you had any success with 4133 CL15? And if so which timings and voltages did you apply? Currently I'm at 4133 CL16 DRAM Voltage 1.46V, VCCIO 1.22V, VCCSA 1.21V (my RAM is a 4266 17-18-18-38 4x8GB G.Skill kit), so I suppose somehow I could get CL15 to work, but I don't want to squeeze my voltages too much. 4200 won't post for me with the timings you use.


----------



## MontesJr

Ok, Just updated to F12 BIOS version on Z390 Aorus Pro model and the fans are not revving up at all....they are just on idle even when the cpu goes over 80 deg C. I tried to modify the settings in BIOS and nothing helps. Changed from Auto to Manual...changed the threshold of the temps...nothing...changed to PWM, to voltage...Nothing. Anyone with this problem here. On the old F8 bios was ok. Fans are Noctua with PWM control....


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## MontesJr

MontesJr said:


> Ok, Just updated to F12 BIOS version on Z390 Aorus Pro model and the fans are not revving up at all....they are just on idle even when the cpu goes over 80 deg C. I tried to modify the settings in BIOS and nothing helps. Changed from Auto to Manual...changed the threshold of the temps...nothing...changed to PWM, to voltage...Nothing. Anyone with this problem here. On the old F8 bios was ok. Fans are Noctua with PWM control....


Solved it...it was the SIV software interfering with the bios settings. Uninstall SIV...problem solved


----------



## GeneO

MontesJr said:


> Solved it...it was the SIV software interfering with the bios settings. Uninstall SIV...problem solved


good riddance


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> Here is cl15 4133, still working on tuning it further. voltages are in the image.


Thanks a lot! Maybe I'll try it, though if required voltages are so high I'll probably settle at CL16 which seems a sweet spot for my system. Have you tested it only with Karhu?


----------



## wholeeo

I noticed that the fans on the Master board when set to CPU don't actually rely on CPU Core Temp but some other sensor which is like 10c off the mark. Anyone know what sensor Smart(Dumb) Fan uses when set to CPU temp?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> For those who are curious, Here is modern warfare FPS stats from one map of gameplay. Full ultra settings, RTX/motion blur disabled. 5.2ghz core 4.9ghz cache ht off cl15 3900 ram, gsync on, 1080p.


Are there any games that you lose performance in because you disabled HT?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

Falkentyne said:


> What is unstable though? The CPU Cores, IMC, or the CPU Cache? You did say that disabling hyperthreading didn't help.....?
> 
> You need to see what passes or fails. Can you pass Prime95 29.8 build 6+ with AVX disabled with small FFT's?
> If yes, can you pass 112K-112k in-place fixed FFT with AVX disabled?
> If yes, can you pass 256k-512K FFT with AVX disabled?
> 
> Test those and find out.


OK, got home earlier today than I thought and had some more time to tweak.

So... @ 5.1 GHz, passed an hour of 112k in-place no AVX prime95, an hour of 256k-512k, 30 minutes OCCT large AVX2, 200% HCI test. This is with the memory @ 4266 c17 with somewhat tight secondary timings; 1.5 vdimm & training, 1.3 vcore, 1.35 sa, 1.3 io. At this point, I'm figuring it's good to go.

5.2 seems to be another matter with this kit. The first test I am running is OCCT large avx2 since it seems the most reliable to quickly find problems in my setup. 5.2 GHz has errors between 5-10 minutes in even if I bump the vcore up to 1.37... I don't really want to bother testing higher than that. I don't see any point testing 5.2 on other tests when it can't pass this one.

Am I missing anything, or are my options on this OC the following:
1) Change the memory back to the 3600 g.skill with previously tested stable 5.2 OC
2) Disable HT and re-test 5.2 for stability
3) Continue to crank vcore above 1.37 and re-test
4) Be content with 5.1 GHz and 4266 c17 and move on


----------



## Falkentyne

BigMack70 said:


> OK, got home earlier today than I thought and had some more time to tweak.
> 
> So... @ 5.1 GHz, passed an hour of 112k in-place no AVX prime95, an hour of 256k-512k, 30 minutes OCCT large AVX2, 200% HCI test. This is with the memory @ 4266 c17 with somewhat tight secondary timings; 1.5 vdimm & training, 1.3 vcore, 1.35 sa, 1.3 io. At this point, I'm figuring it's good to go.
> 
> 5.2 seems to be another matter with this kit. The first test I am running is OCCT large avx2 since it seems the most reliable to quickly find problems in my setup. 5.2 GHz has errors between 5-10 minutes in even if I bump the vcore up to 1.37... I don't really want to bother testing higher than that. I don't see any point testing 5.2 on other tests when it can't pass this one.
> 
> Am I missing anything, or are my options on this OC the following:
> 1) Change the memory back to the 3600 g.skill with previously tested stable 5.2 OC
> 2) Disable HT and re-test 5.2 for stability
> 3) Continue to crank vcore above 1.37 and re-test
> 4) Be content with 5.1 GHz and 4266 c17 and move on


If I were you, I would check #1 (the other kit) as long as it's not a pain to remove your RAM, but first, before doing that, disable hyperthreading and THEN check 5.2 with the current kit, since that's faster and nothing has to re-train. Then remove the RAM and enable HT and check with the old RAM.

The thing about hyperthreading is that the L3 cache and IMC is heavily involved in HT because it has a duplicated register store (also known as the L0 cache). That's why with hyperthreading enabled you will see CPU Cache L0 WHEA corrected errors, but with HT disabled, you will almost never see those WHEA Errors. Instead you will just BSOD with a normal clock watchdog or WHEA uncorrectable error or the program will crash.


----------



## BigMack70

Falkentyne said:


> If I were you, I would check #1 (the other kit) as long as it's not a pain to remove your RAM, but first, before doing that, disable hyperthreading and THEN check 5.2 with the current kit, since that's faster and nothing has to re-train. Then remove the RAM and enable HT and check with the old RAM.
> 
> The thing about hyperthreading is that the L3 cache and IMC is heavily involved in HT because it has a duplicated register store (also known as the L0 cache). That's why with hyperthreading enabled you will see CPU Cache L0 WHEA corrected errors, but with HT disabled, you will almost never see those WHEA Errors. Instead you will just BSOD with a normal clock watchdog or WHEA uncorrectable error or the program will crash.


Thanks for the help. I just spent the evening continuing to play with things at 5.2 GHz trying to get it stable and no luck. I'm starting to get more stable (will survive 15-20 minutes of occt or small FFT prime95 of benching before it throws an error or crashes) at 1.385V... but I really don't want to be running >1.35V as a daily driver anyway... might just settle in at 5.1 with 4266c17 for now. Really tempting to reach for 5.2 or for 4400 or for c16 but it's starting to look like each one of those is going to be its own form of headache... and likely a headache that also comes with at least one voltage above what I'm comfortable with.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## ezveedub

MontesJr said:


> Solved it...it was the SIV software interfering with the bios settings. Uninstall SIV...problem solved


BIOS settings for fans work when booting until you get into the OS. SIV will run only when its in Windows and takes over from the bios settings. You usually run the calibration setup first so it learns the fans/pump RPMs and then you can adjust it as needed in SIV. If you have the settings you need in bios, then don't run SIV. I use SIV to run different profile fan/pump speeds when I need to in Windows. I've seen where the a PWM fans don't change to the correct speed also in bios and switching it from PWM to voltage and back will correct that issue generally.


----------



## asdkj1740

reachthesky said:


> Here is cl15 4133, still working on tuning it further. voltages are in the image.


awesome! would you mind sharing your bios settings about timmings?
yours 4133c15 beats my 4500c17 lol.

for 1.55v vdimm and 8g*4 setup, getting no error caused by overheat is amazing.
what a shame about adata d60g, probably the most stupid design ever on the market chasing highest rgb coverge making it full of plastic...


----------



## satinghostrider

asdkj1740 said:


> awesome! would you mind sharing your bios settings about timmings?
> yours 4133c15 beats my 4500c17 lol.
> 
> for 1.55v vdimm and 8g*4 setup, getting no error caused by overheat is amazing.
> what a shame about adata d60g, probably the most stupid design ever on the market chasing highest rgb coverge making it full of plastic...


Yeah would be swell if you could share your full BIOS settings page for the memory section.
Wonder if my F4-3600C16D would be able to use these settings. I am currently at 4133Mhz 17-17-17-38 using Kedarwolf's latest BIOS settings.

Thanks!


----------



## asdkj1740

satinghostrider said:


> Yeah would be swell if you could share your full BIOS settings page for the memory section.
> Wonder if my F4-3600C16D would be able to use these settings. I am currently at 4133Mhz 17-17-17-38 using Kedarwolf's latest BIOS settings.
> 
> Thanks!


i am still messing around with the bios settings, cant really get it 100% stable.
i just found out 1.56v vdimm seems to be a sweet pot for gigabyte. and i wonder it is safe for 24/7 although i dont care about longevity.

make sure you get the resistane settings right, then you are good to post even on 4533c17 or c16. just copy your xmp profile ones and set them manually.


----------



## LordGurciullo

So the reason I can't see my ram temps on HWINFO is cause the ram sticks dont have that capability?

Also I'm at 1.35 voltage Fixed permanent... is that ok long term?


----------



## asdkj1740

LordGurciullo said:


> So the reason I can't see my ram temps on HWINFO is cause the ram sticks dont have that capability?
> 
> Also I'm at 1.35 voltage Fixed permanent... is that ok long term?


yes and yes


----------



## MontesJr

wholeeo said:


> I noticed that the fans on the Master board when set to CPU don't actually rely on CPU Core Temp but some other sensor which is like 10c off the mark. Anyone know what sensor Smart(Dumb) Fan uses when set to CPU temp?


More likely is the CPU sensor from the motherboard. It's not using the CPU package temp like it should. This MB is using some other CPU temp reading on the board and I now have to factor in a 8-10 C offset on my fan curve. It's a bit weird but...what to do? It's a very easy fix IMO, it's so easy that Gigabyte cant waste time on this...let's just instead change the way the bios looks....that sounds useful.


----------



## Lurifaks

asdkj1740 said:


> i am still messing around with the bios settings, cant really get it 100% stable.
> i just found out 1.56v vdimm seems to be a sweet pot for gigabyte. and i wonder it is safe for 24/7 although i dont care about longevity.
> 
> make sure you get the *resistane settings* right, then you are good to post even on 4533c17 or c16. just copy your xmp profile ones and set them manually.


What is this , is it a setting i dont know about in Master`s bios? Thanks


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

How do you manipulate IOL/RTLS for channel B on the Master?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

MontesJr said:


> More likely is the CPU sensor from the motherboard. It's not using the CPU package temp like it should. This MB is using some other CPU temp reading on the board and I now have to factor in a 8-10 C offset on my fan curve. It's a bit weird but...what to do? It's a very easy fix IMO, it's so easy that Gigabyte cant waste time on this...let's just instead change the way the bios looks....that sounds useful.


I've tried to tie the fans to my VRM temps now but their temp range is so small since I have a monoblock. 



reachthesky said:


> Screenshotted bios memory section 4133mhz as per request. Pay no mind to the RTLs/IOLs, those are actually left over from an older 3900 profile, the correct rtls/iols for cl15 4133 on this board are 66/66/68/68 and 14/14/14/14. Pay no mind to voltage shown in the first photo, that information is taken from the cl17-4000 xmp profile on the sticks. cl15 4133 volts = 1.55v vdimm/training and 1.3v sa/io depending on cache speed.


This is an older bios correct or is there a way to enable per Channel Sub Timings on more recent UEFI's?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

MontesJr said:


> More likely is the CPU sensor from the motherboard. It's not using the CPU package temp like it should. This MB is using some other CPU temp reading on the board and I now have to factor in a 8-10 C offset on my fan curve. It's a bit weird but...what to do? It's a very easy fix IMO, it's so easy that Gigabyte cant waste time on this...let's just instead change the way the bios looks....that sounds useful.


Motherboards do not have access to the on-die CPU sensors so there is no "like it should" - unfortunately it can't. They all rely on a CPU temperature probe located on the board socket underneath the CPU.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> They are located in the memory timings section of the bios at the bottom. The 6 "RTT" settings = resistances


? RTT = Round Trip Time. Not resistance.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

wholeeo said:


> I've tried to tie the fans to my VRM temps now but their temp range is so small since I have a monoblock.


Just an FYI. That VRM temperature for fan control is also a temperature probe located on the motherboard near the VRM, not the actual temperature measured by the VRM controller chip.


----------



## wholeeo

GeneO said:


> Just an FYI. That VRM temperature for fan control is also a temperature probe located on the motherboard near the VRM, not the actual temperature measured by the VRM controller chip.


Thanks for clarifying. What do you recommend we set fan speeds to react to on watercooling? I'd do water temp but that doesn't vary much.


----------



## GeneO

Now for something completely different. I have been looking at Photoshop performance (primary functionality for me). I know most won't be interested in Photoshop or 8086 results, so FWIW...

There is a benchmark from Puget Systems that you run as a script within Photoshop. It takes about 1/2 hour to run. They have benched a lot of systems at stock clocks. The benchmark scores are sensitive to smallish changes (tells you something right there): https://www.pugetsystems.com/pic_disp.php?id=52198

So I thought I would see how my OC 8086 compared to their stock 9900k, which scored 989/98.2/100.4/101 on the Overall/General/Filter/GPU score below for

1. 5.1 GHz, all Spectre Meltdown patches enabled(registry entry 408/403 for featuresettings Overide/mask)
2. 5.1 GHz with Spectre Meltdown disabled ( settings/mas = 3/3)
3. 5.2 GHz, hyperthreading off, Spectre/meltdown patches disabled

For 3, I can run 5.2 GHz with hyperthreading disabled with an offset that is .02v lower than with hyperthreading enabled. My VRVOUT is in the range of 1.295v - 1.32v under stress tests.

Conclusions are Photoshop isn't really threaded. My 5.2 GHz bests a stock 9900k in practically all the subtests. Also the Spectre/Meltdown patches are a significant hit - around 8%. I don't know how Puget systems test systems were configured as far as these patches, windows version, and microcode.

I may just do 5.2 GHz HT=off for an everyday instead of 5.1 HT on.


----------



## GeneO

wholeeo said:


> Thanks for clarifying. What do you recommend we set fan speeds to react to on watercooling? I'd do water temp but that doesn't vary much.


I am not the one to ask, I am air cooling. You can place your own probe and use it, maybe on exhaust air temp? IDK.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I thought he was referring to the RTT settings, is he referring to termination resistances? DDRVTT?


Ah, I see. IDK.


----------



## asdkj1740

reachthesky said:


> Screenshotted bios memory section 4133mhz as per request. Pay no mind to the RTLs/IOLs, those are actually left over from an older 3900 profile, the correct rtls/iols for cl15 4133 on this board are 66/66/68/68 and 14/14/14/14. Pay no mind to voltage shown in the first photo, that information is taken from the cl17-4000 xmp profile on the sticks. cl15 4133 volts = 1.55v vdimm/training and 1.3v sa/io depending on cache speed. Bios version F9


thanks for sharing.
how high of stable frequency can you reach? let say c17 or even c19


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

You are obsessed like captain Ahab on the great white whale. You know the white whale is the Apex, go for it. ;-)


----------



## robertr1

reachthesky said:


> Does anyone know if the Aorus Xtreme is any better at memory overclocking than the aorus master?


If you want max memory oc, get a Gene or Dark and get a 15-15-15/3600 kit.


----------



## Falkentyne

I found another bug fix in T0D. Now i know what the engineer meant when he said he "Fixed DVID bug in a better way."
(T1D bugfix was changing from DVID mode to Auto/Fixed vcore no longer causes abnormal CPU voltage from the original DVID offset (and possibly with AC loadline boost boosting past the fixed vcore you set even if DVID was 0.00) being improperly applied on top of fixed vcore).

Enabling "SVID Offset" no longer disables all voltage control anymore. It only disables DVID offset from being changed. It no longer prevents fixed vcore from being changed or going to auto vcore.
One thing to note is that enabling SVID offset resets the VRM and will reset the switching frequency back to default, even if it were set to 300 khz. So you need to set it to 500/400 then back to 300 khz to get it to be active again.

SVID Offset allows CPU VID to exceed 1.520v (before vdroop), instead of being limited to 1.520v via Intel specs. Asus boards have this automatically enabled.
I am not sure why DVID offset is disabled however. But if you actually need a HIGHER load VR VOUT than 1.330v at 220 amps of current, with AC Loadline=160, complain all you want (Just raise AC Loadline to 210 and fry your CPU with 250 amps at 1.40v).

You're free to test this yourself. I take no responsibility if you get shenanigans if you try T0D and enable SVID Offset and run into a bug. Just report it and I'll submit it to the engineer.

WARNING: DO NOT ENABLE SVID OFFSET AT 1.20V FIXED VCORE. This is the same (still unfixed) bug as trying to enable DVID or Auto vcore when you were at 1.20v fixed vcore--the vcore mode doesn't change and refuses to use the CPU VID. Since enabling SVID offset allows VID to exceed 1.520v, and the VID isn't being used (even though fixed vcore programs the VRM directly), you wind up with fans at 100% and no post code shown and must clear CMOS. So don't enable DVID or Auto vcore if you were on 1.20v fixed either (on ANY Bios version)--it will prevent it from working.

Suggest you guys try T0D to see if there's anything else interesting (do not ask me to test memory ANYTHING --i don't do memory overclocking).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I heard the z390 apex is out of production and it is sold out anywhere.


Well that is sad - they make only two good boards and one is not available. Then Gene or Dark then. You know you want it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Those boards aren't going to hit 4800 are they?


Well that is why I said Apex. The Gene has QVL memory up to 4600 & 4700, the dark up to 4600.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## asdkj1740

reachthesky said:


> Does anyone know if the Aorus Xtreme is any better at memory overclocking than the aorus master?


should be better because of more pcb layers, 8 vs 6


----------



## Grizzly111

@reachthesky - have you tried adjusting DRAM termination voltage? It's usually set to half VDIMM but some say that decreasing or increasing can improve stability. A guy from AMD said increasing it to no more than 0.9v can assist. Not sure if that applies to Intel too.


Adding a fan to cool my sticks really helped me to stabilise.


----------



## asdkj1740

reachthesky said:


> The highest frequency i've been able to stabilize is 4200 @ 18-18-18-38. Motherboard auto trains it at 18-20-20-42 and I adjust from there. These sticks won't train cl16 or cl17 4200 at all from scratch, but it will fully train cl15/16/17 4133 + 101.63 busclock = 4200. Just haven't been able to stabilize the cl15/cl16/cl17/4200 busclock variation yet, may have to mess with dmi/pll voltages or something like that.
> 
> I once magically had cl16/cl17/cl18 4200 + enough busclock OC to hit 4266 and passed 6 or 8 hours of HCI memtest but then it couldn't survive a coldboot, tried to retrain itself and then failed to retrain so I abandoned that quickly. Lesson learned, test your ram ocs to see if they can boot after a full shutdown before putting it in a memtest . It also could have been because I was skipping to the next frequency step. 4266 won't work at all without the busclock, 4266 traditional multiplier don't train on these sticks. 4300 won't train on these sticks at all. 4400 trains once in a blue moon on these sticks. 4500/4533 train just fine using the memory preset. Would love to get cl19/4533 with manual timings stable. I did an aida64 and geekbench benchmark for cl19/4533 a few pages back. dug it up incase you want a looksy. If I knew how to stabilize it, this is what I would run daily if I could even though latency isn't as good as other profiles but i'd run it daily because it exceeds the board maximum(KEWL) and I want all the megahertz I can get .


your sub timmings are great.
yeah i would rather run 4533c19 instead of 4133c15 on gigabyte z390, irrepesctive of the performance. its all about gigabyte lol.


----------



## Lurifaks

@reachthesky 

Have you come to any conclusion about the 4x8gb viper memory vs the 4x8gb gskill of yours, are the clocking identical or is one in favor


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

This looks like my new setup, since i can`t get 16-16-16 to work

Bios values:

Vcore=1.375 with High LLC
Vdimm= 1.500
VccIO= 1.250
VccSA= 1.250


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Have you tried adding another 50mv of sa/io just to see if it would pass a memtest just to see if it could indeed be stabilized at 16-16-16?


Have tried both up to 1.350v


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Which kit are you working with? mobo/bios? 9900k or ks?


Same viper u are returning , mb is Master bios is F11c and 9900ks


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> Gotcha. No luck on stabilizing 4266 or 4400 @ xmp right?


Not 4400 , maby i give xmp2 a try. But same story i guess 

Have fun with your testing today!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I was looking at the maximus gene's qvl list. The patriot viper 4400 kit is on the list but it requires a special bios version.
> 
> This is probably why the kit isn't working optimally/properly on our boards. Gigabyte needs to actually do something behind the scenes to make it work. If Asus can do this for their customers, Gigabyte can do the same and should do the same. When are we getting better memory support?


Realistically I think it is what it is.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> I was looking at the maximus gene's qvl list. The patriot viper 4400 kit is on the list but it requires a special bios version.
> 
> This is probably why the kit isn't working optimally/properly on our boards. Gigabyte needs to actually do something behind the scenes to make it work. If Asus can do this for their customers, Gigabyte can do the same and should do the same. When are we getting better memory support?


The not so encouraging fact is that I own a kit which is in the Master QVL (F4-4266C17Q-32GTZR) and there's no way I can make it work at its rated speed, no matter what voltages/timings I apply. Weak IMC? If I manage to upgrade to a 9900KS selling my delidded 9900K I'll see if that's the case, or if the board has to be wholly condemned.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> When are you planning on upgrading to a KS?


Hopefully in the next days! I've put my delidded 9900k on sale...just waiting for someone to come forward


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

Lurifaks said:


> This looks like my new setup, since i can`t get 16-16-16 to work
> 
> Bios values:
> 
> Vcore=1.375 with High LLC
> Vdimm= 1.500
> VccIO= 1.250
> VccSA= 1.250


 @Lurifaks - you need to be using TM5 with 1Usmus V3 config. Anta's config is no where near as good at detecting errors in a given time. I have compared both - I passed Anta's at over an hour and 1Usmus detected errors within 10 mins! I repeated this several times too.


Need to run 1Usmus v3 for at least 10 loops. Then HCI memtest overnight.


----------



## Grizzly111

@reachthesky - have you tried setting XMP mode to 'disabled' in the BIOS and set everything manually? I am glad you were able to lower your DIMM temps with the fan significantly!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> @Lurifaks - you need to be using TM5 with 1Usmus V3 config. Anta's config is no where near as good at detecting errors in a given time. I have compared both - I passed Anta's at over an hour and 1Usmus detected errors within 10 mins! I repeated this several times too.
> 
> 
> Need to run 1Usmus v3 for at least 10 loops. Then HCI memtest overnight.


Is it ok if you can link me where I get this program and this configuration for it ?


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> Is it ok if you can link me where I get this program and this configuration for it ?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/27937684-post4314.html


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27937684-post4314.html


Thank you


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

I would not raise trefi at the moment so that you can establish a baseline stability. Go ahead and run overnight then raise it if it passes.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

I’d run occt large avx2 to ensure that your cpu is stable. High frequency and tight timings speed up AVX so there will be more heat and power required. An hour should be good.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> memory management bsod about an hour into hci at 280 trfc. Temps were around 38c on the sticks before the bsod occurred. i'm at 1.3v sa/io and 1.55v vdimm already. Unsure which to increase at this point to see if stability can be found at 280 trfc, I really like that latency.



You can try but probably not worth it - if only 1 hour into HCI that's not a good sign. I would go to 320 tRFC and try that. There won't be any noticeable different in speeds at the end of the day.


----------



## Lurifaks

Grizzly111 said:


> @Lurifaks - you need to be using TM5 with 1Usmus V3 config. Anta's config is no where near as good at detecting errors in a given time. I have compared both - I passed Anta's at over an hour and 1Usmus detected errors within 10 mins! I repeated this several times too.
> 
> 
> Need to run 1Usmus v3 for at least 10 loops. Then HCI memtest overnight.


Thanks , will try his config next time


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> memory management bsod about an hour into hci at 280 trfc. Temps were around 38c on the sticks before the bsod occurred. i'm at 1.3v sa/io and 1.55v vdimm already. Unsure which to increase at this point to see if stability can be found at 280 trfc, I really like that latency.


Try dropping your cache ratio down 1 multiplier before re-adjusting timings. Sometimes could also be a cache ratio set high while tightening and insufficient voltage. So you could increase vcore to see if it stabilises the current cache overclock or drop 1 multiplier down without touching vcore and see if you pass the test. You can drop the Vcore slightly by 0.005 if you pass and try again the memory test.


----------



## ezveedub

wholeeo said:


> Thanks for clarifying. What do you recommend we set fan speeds to react to on watercooling? I'd do water temp but that doesn't vary much.




Water cooled setups almost always use CPU temp as the sensor for fan/pump speeds. You usually adjusts the temp/RPM curve as needed, as some times the base setting in bios/SIV s can be too slow or adjust too much speed for temp fluctuations. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## raggazam

I'm tuning tridentz royal 3600 4x8 gb cl18, but I think I have a pretty high latency.
What values can I improve?


----------



## Lurifaks

raggazam said:


> I'm tuning tridentz royal 3600 4x8 gb cl18, but I think I have a pretty high latency.
> What values can I improve?


U are running your ram speed at 2600Mhz it says in the pricture, try setting it to 3600


----------



## raggazam

Lurifaks said:


> U are running your ram speed at 2600Mhz it says in the pricture, try setting it to 3600



I don't understand why it doesn't apply to me 3600mhz
Something's wrong, I've rebooted and disabled xmp but the same problem, any ideas?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> ok so last night I just decided to throw another 50mv of sa/io at it and toss it back in HCI memtest while hoping for the best.
> 
> Success yay. For real, having a fan pointed at the ram makes a world of difference. I was never able to run cl15/4133 with 280 trfc before till I brought the extra fan into the mix. Latency is now just as good as the cl15/3900 profile. I feel accomplished but I am always striving for improvements. Is there any other way to lower latency further without raising the cache? I'm pretty sure raising tREFI is off limits since I was so close to hitting 40c during HCI. I'm at 5.2ghz 4.8ghz cache HT off. Do I now move forward and see how high I can push the busclock while retaining stability without having to add any additional voltage?


GJ  

So, mem clock easier with HT off ? I haven`t tried with any other than 5.2 ht on (not going to run cpu any other way 24/7) when clocking my ram


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> TY . Mem clock for sure easier with ht off since the cache isn't working as hard. I choose 5.2/4.8 ht off because it runs at the same voltage as 5.1/4.8 ht on, pulls less power/amps and generates less heat under load. The 120mm fan pointed over the dimms was a big player in keeping the dimms at a low enough temperature to maintain stability while under stress. You might be able to do 5.3ghz HT off with the same voltage required for 5.2ghz ht on.



Well done! I think raising tREFI up is fine at 40oC - mine is at over 60k and my ambient here in Australia is over 30oC at present. My sticks get to 45oC during testing with a 80mm fan. Without the fan was over 50oC and that was not as stable.


Time to save my 4000CL16 overclock....I just completed 800% HCI successfully!


----------



## Grizzly111

Guys, what is the setting on the Aorus Master to make per core overclocking work - I've already set my cores to 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 and turned off MCE. But it only goes up to 4.9 under load? I've set CPU multiplier to Auto.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> Thank you . Maybe I will try to raise it just to see whether or not it increases voltage requirements and if i can keep the sticks cool enough. Gratz on the OC mate .



Cheers mate!


----------



## GeneO

Grizzly111 said:


> Guys, what is the setting on the Aorus Master to make per core overclocking work - I've already set my cores to 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 and turned off MCE. But it only goes up to 4.9 under load? I've set CPU multiplier to Auto.


Those settings don't mean what you think. They mean: 1 active core will run at 5.0, 2 active at 5.0, 3 at 5.0, 4 at 5.0, 5 at 4.9... 8 active at 4.9. When you are testing at full load, all 8 cores are active, so it will run at 4.9

If you want to run all cores at 5 GHz, disable turbo mode and set the multiplier to 50.


----------



## Grizzly111

GeneO said:


> Those settings don't mean what you think. They mean: 1 active core will run at 5.0, 2 active at 5.0, 3 at 5.0, 4 at 5.0, 5 at 4.9... 8 active at 4.9. When you are testing at full load, all 8 cores are active, so it will run at 4.9
> 
> If you want to run all cores at 5 GHz, disable turbo mode and set the multiplier to 50.



I see now thanks. I just changed them all to 5.0 so now it drops to 800Mhz up to 5.0Ghz. 



However.... 1 .What are the usual temps in Aida64 and P95 26.6 no AVX? 



I'm getting into the 90's (!) now with 1.2v +0.040 offset and 4.6Ghz cache and low 70's whilst 1080P gaming. Im using the new top of the line Deepcool 360EX Castle + Kryonaut paste. Ambient is around 30oC atm.


And.... 2. Im using Power saving in the voltage section and LLC low....apart from disabling HT is there anything else that can be done in the BIOS to help reduce temps?


----------



## Alemancio

I'm having an issue out of the blue.

Aorus Master (F11C) + 9900KF

I had the CPU at 5GHz @ 1.325V & LLC on Turbo. I noticed some reboots while gaming, checked OCCT & Prime95 26.6 and it crashes immediately (WHEA Watchdog BSODs).

I've tried upping the voltage up to 1.375v no luck, it crashes immediately...

*Any idea why my OC is not stable suddenly?*


Solution: My AIO's pump reset to silent and the master was triggering temp protection hitting 105C... BRUH


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

I am on bios F11c with 9900ks , if i flash F9 bios, u think it will work ? Or do you need F10 and newer for 9900ks to work/boot


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

Lurifaks said:


> I am on bios F11c with 9900ks , if i flash F9 bios, u think it will work ? Or do you need F10 and newer for 9900ks to work/boot


F9 will work, I've used it a few times. F10 just had optimizations for the KS.


----------



## Lurifaks

pXuis said:


> F9 will work, I've used it a few times. F10 just had optimizations for the KS.


Thanks, maby i give it a go then. U noticed any difference in mem oc F9 vs newer ?


----------



## jeejax

Hey all. I've been a long time lurker on this thread trying to soak up all the important information, but I am still finding myself confused about a few things and can't quite nail down a stable OC. Any help would be appreciated.

Currently tweaking settings around something like this:
9900K 5GHz
AVX offset 1
Ring x45.
Vcore Offset +.050
LLC Low
IA AC/DC LLC Power Saving.
IA AC/DC 1
CPU Switchrate 300khz (I know this mainly seems to help higher LLCs, but it doesn't seem to hurt)

Questions:
1. Based on what I have read so far, this should theoretically not impact longterm CPU health. Did I miss something?
2. Moving IA AC/DC from 0 to 1 drops my temps like crazy despite similar Vcore/VR OUT. Why is this? The moment I go back to AC/DC 0/0 the temps start to overwhelm my h150i.

I have been trying to find a way to keep lower power states + Vcore offset for lower idle power usage, but I may move to manual Vcore testing next if I can't get something I am happy with.

HWinfo Screenshot attached from a few prime95 runs with+without AVX. Thanks!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

jeejax said:


> Hey all. I've been a long time lurker on this thread trying to soak up all the important information, but I am still finding myself confused about a few things and can't quite nail down a stable OC. Any help would be appreciated.
> 
> Currently tweaking settings around something like this:
> 9900K 5GHz
> AVX offset 1
> Ring x45.
> Vcore Offset +.050
> LLC Low
> IA AC/DC LLC Power Saving.
> IA AC/DC 1
> CPU Switchrate 300khz (I know this mainly seems to help higher LLCs, but it doesn't seem to hurt)
> 
> Questions:
> 1. Based on what I have read so far, this should theoretically not impact longterm CPU health. Did I miss something?
> 2. Moving IA AC/DC from 0 to 1 drops my temps like crazy despite similar Vcore/VR OUT. Why is this? The moment I go back to AC/DC 0/0 the temps start to overwhelm my h150i.
> 
> I have been trying to find a way to keep lower power states + Vcore offset for lower idle power usage, but I may move to manual Vcore testing next if I can't get something I am happy with.
> 
> HWinfo Screenshot attached from a few prime95 runs with+without AVX. Thanks!


Internal AC/DC Load Line and IA AC/DC loadline conflict with each other.
Power saving sets AC to 40 and DC to 130. 
But AC/DC =1 will overrule this.

Looks like you're using Kedarwolf's old settings, where he didn't realize he was mixing up two conflicting settings?
If you want to use the Internal VR Settings IA AC/DC version, just set CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line to Auto, although that isn't necessary if you know what you're doing. But it confuses a LOT of people if you have "Power saving" set, and AC/DC=1 and no one understands that "Power Saving" is then ignored.

The IA AC/DC values in internal VR Settings have higher priority over the Internal AC/DC Load Line presets. So IA AC/DC=0 are auto, so then the internal AC/DC presets get used (Power Saving) which sets AC to 40 and DC to 130. The "Presets" get used only if IA AC/DC are set to 0.

If you're actually overheating with AC Loadline 40, I suggest you improve your cooling. You can also lower the DVID offset to reduce temps also. If you're stable with AC/DC Loadline =1 and DVID offset=0.050v, why are you not reducing the offset if you set AC Loadline to 40 (if IA/AC=0, "Power Saving" preset sets AC to 40. Note that Balanced sets AC to 100 and Turbo to 160, etc).

The DC Loadline value is not important.

Yes it gets hotter. AC Load Line is what helps set an initial "VID" target voltage (depending on current) when using Auto or DVID mode. The higher the AC value, the higher the initial voltage (before vdroop or loadline calibration level) will be.

AC Load Line can go up to 1.6 mOhms (160), but at this max Intel spec value, Vcore Loadline Calibration should be left on Standard/Normal.


----------



## jeejax

reachthesky said:


> Heads up, You can't mix acdc loadline presets with manual IA AC/DC values. You have to choose one or the other. If you are going to use a preset, leave IA AC/DC values both at zero. If you are going to manually tweak the IA AC/DC loadlines, then leave the IA AC/DC preset at auto.
> 
> ia ac/dc loadlines 1/1 + standard llc + offset= lowest temps the board can possibly offer.





Falkentyne said:


> Internal AC/DC Load Line and IA AC/DC loadline conflict with each other.
> Power saving sets AC to 40 and DC to 130.
> But AC/DC =1 will overrule this.
> 
> Looks like you're using Kedarwolf's old settings, where he didn't realize he was mixing up two conflicting settings?
> If you want to use the Internal VR Settings IA AC/DC version, just set CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line to Auto, although that isn't necessary if you know what you're doing. But it confuses a LOT of people if you have "Power saving" set, and AC/DC=1 and no one understands that "Power Saving" is then ignored.
> 
> The IA AC/DC values in internal VR Settings have higher priority over the Internal AC/DC Load Line presets. So IA AC/DC=0 are auto, so then the internal AC/DC presets get used (Power Saving) which sets AC to 40 and DC to 130. The "Presets" get used only if IA AC/DC are set to 0.


Ugh, this makes so much more sense now. Yeah, I totally didn't know that despite skimming through dozens of pages on this thread.

I am going to try some new settings with this in mind. Thank you.



> If you're actually overheating with AC Loadline 40, I suggest you improve your cooling. You can also lower the DVID offset to reduce temps also. If you're stable with AC/DC Loadline =1 and DVID offset=0.050v, why are you not reducing the offset if you set AC Loadline to 40 (if IA/AC=0, "Power Saving" preset sets AC to 40. Note that Balanced sets AC to 100 and Turbo to 160, etc).
> 
> The DC Loadline value is not important.
> 
> Yes it gets hotter. AC Load Line is what helps set an initial "VID" target voltage (depending on current) when using Auto or DVID mode. The higher the AC value, the higher the initial voltage (before vdroop or loadline calibration level) will be.
> 
> AC Load Line can go up to 1.6 mOhms (160), but at this max Intel spec value, Vcore Loadline Calibration should be left on Standard/Normal.


With the settings I mentioned above, that offset was the lowest I could go before WHEA errors started showing up.

The temperature part of this has been particularly confusing to me with this build. As I mentioned this is a 9900K cooled by a Corsair H150i pro. I get mid 20s at idle and 50/60s in games. It's only prime95 that gets above 75 really.

Falkentyne, I believe you have mentioned different tests and many prime95 settings being unrealistic/unreasonable. If that is the case, can someone give me a some prime95 settings or another good test to run and expected temps?

I have also been considering reseating the cooler with new paste, but my non-prime tests keep me thinking that it's probably fine.


----------



## Falkentyne

jeejax said:


> Ugh, this makes so much more sense now. Yeah, I totally didn't know that despite skimming through dozens of pages on this thread.
> 
> I am going to try some new settings with this in mind. Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> With the settings I mentioned above, that offset was the lowest I could go before WHEA errors started showing up.
> 
> The temperature part of this has been particularly confusing to me with this build. As I mentioned this is a 9900K cooled by a Corsair H150i pro. I get mid 20s at idle and 50/60s in games. It's only prime95 that gets above 75 really.
> 
> Falkentyne, I believe you have mentioned different tests and many prime95 settings being unrealistic/unreasonable. If that is the case, can someone give me a some prime95 settings or another good test to run and expected temps?
> 
> I have also been considering reseating the cooler with new paste, but my non-prime tests keep me thinking that it's probably fine.


Prime95, LinX 0.9.6, Linpack Extreme 1.1.2, OCCT small data set, Y-cruncher AVX2 are all power viruses. They will show instability because they pour far more current and heat (more current, more heat AND more vdroop--voltage drops more--this is sort of compounded by higher levels of Loadline Calibration (which make transients worse). You need to set realistic limits on what you're using your computer for.

What are you trying to make stable? Video games? Work? Or Power Virus stress testing?
I only run power viruses at stock speeds (e.g. 4.7 ghz).

For "average" overclocks (like 5 ghz), I like to get "AIDA64 Stress FPU Only" stress test to not show CPU Cache L0 errors. If I can do that, Battlefield 5 will be rock stable (the only strange program that will cause issues is Apex Legends, with its strange tendency to generate "CPU Internal Parity Errors" (Not L0 cache errors--parity errors) or just randomly CTD. Apex Legends *DOES NOT* use AVX! The game programmer said it himself.
Realbench 2.56 has less power draw than AIDA64 stress FPU. Some users use some of the OCCT non power virus tests (OCCT small data set/linpack 2019 I believe are front ends for Prime95 small FFT and Intel Linpack respectively, but with unknown sample sizes). Passing 7200 seconds of Cinebench R20, 4 hours of Realbench 2.56, and an hour or two of AIDA64 Stress FPU only, without any CPU L0 errors logged in HWInfo64, is a reasonable criteria for real world CPU stability.

Prime95 29.8 build 6, AVX disabled 112K in-place FFT is a good test to see if your VCCIO/L3 cache voltage is too low on hyperthreaded chips (IMC helps control both hyperthreaded virtualized cores and RAM). A 2 hour run without CPU Cache L0 errors appearing means you are alright.

For larger overclocks (like 5.2 ghz), I want Cinebench R20 to not show CPU Cache L0 errors during a few repeated runs (like, 3) and Battlefield 5 to not crash. Stress testing just gets temps out of control at higher voltages.
Cinebench R20 puts a higher load on the system than Battlefield 5, so if I can get through a few without errors, I should be ok for Battlefield 5. 5.2 ghz is simply too high voltage to stress test for something like 1 hour CB20 runs--temps are too high and degradation risk is WAY too high. Now if I had a 10900K in my hands....

AIDA64 stress FPU has zero chance of passing on air cooling at 5.2 ghz.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> whelp cl15 4133 acts funky. Once in awhile i'll get a d4 in between restarts lol. what is this nonsense. Pass multiple stress tests but still weirdness. o well. Shelved it last night and i'm working on a boring standard cl16/4174. off to a good start so far.


I passed 4100 15-16-16-35 at 1.54V. What rtt do you use?


----------



## Falkentyne

I'll post it again since no one really cared the first time.

T0D (F11d test beta #2):

Changelog compared to T1D:

DVID fix done a better way.
SVID Offset can now be used without disabling voltage control.
(in previous versions, SVID offset would disable all voltage modes. I am not 100% sure if this happened in T1D or not. Don't remember or maybe I didn't care to check).

(DVID offset mode becomes disabled instead. That is because SVID Offset allows CPU Input VID to exceed 1.520v (before VRM Vdroop (Loadline calibration) or DC Loadline VID droop (power reporting measurements)--set DC Loadline to "1" to see for yourself). So there is no need to have offset control if you need that much voltage. Just change the AC Loadline instead.

Note: Do not enable SVID offset if FIXED VCORE is at 1.20v--you will get no post code, no voltage and be forced to clear CMOS. You can use 1.20v fixed vcore AFTER SVID offset is enabled however.

Bugs:
Using fixed vcore of 1.20v then switching to either Auto or DVID will prevent Auto or DVID from working correctly due to a bug. It will use 1.20v base voltage instead of looking at CPU VID table. This bug has existed since original BIOS. It was just reported so do not expect a fix anytime soon.

300 khz is still more stable than 500 khz when using higher levels of Loadline calibration (no real difference if Loadline Calibration is Standard or Normal).

Again I know absolutely nothing about RAM overclocking / RTL/IOL issues.

Fast microcode and normal version.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I'll post it again since no one really cared the first time.
> 
> T0D (F11d test beta #2):
> 
> Changelog compared to T1D:
> 
> DVID fix done a better way.
> SVID Offset can now be used without disabling voltage control.
> (in previous versions, SVID offset would disable all voltage modes. I am not 100% sure if this happened in T1D or not. Don't remember or maybe I didn't care to check).
> 
> (DVID offset mode becomes disabled instead. That is because SVID Offset allows CPU Input VID to exceed 1.520v (before VRM Vdroop (Loadline calibration) or DC Loadline VID droop (power reporting measurements)--set DC Loadline to "1" to see for yourself). So there is no need to have offset control if you need that much voltage. Just change the AC Loadline instead.
> 
> Note: Do not enable SVID offset if FIXED VCORE is at 1.20v--you will get no post code, no voltage and be forced to clear CMOS. You can use 1.20v fixed vcore AFTER SVID offset is enabled however.
> 
> Bugs:
> Using fixed vcore of 1.20v then switching to either Auto or DVID will prevent Auto or DVID from working correctly due to a bug. It will use 1.20v base voltage instead of looking at CPU VID table. This bug has existed since original BIOS. It was just reported so do not expect a fix anytime soon.
> 
> 300 khz is still more stable than 500 khz when using higher levels of Loadline calibration (no real difference if Loadline Calibration is Standard or Normal).
> 
> Again I know absolutely nothing about RAM overclocking / RTL/IOL issues.
> 
> Fast microcode and normal version.


Since there is so much activity in this forum, I loose track of modded BIOS and information like what the internal loadline presets translate to. I wonder if these merit a dedicated thread.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Since there is so much activity in this forum, I loose track of modded BIOS and information like what the internal loadline presets translate to. I wonder if these merit a dedicated thread.


AC/DC Values (mOhms. Values in Internal VR Settings are multiplied by 100, e.g. 1=0.01 mOhms, 100=1 mOhm)

Auto: Get Rekt (whatever Gigabyte wants it to be)
Power Saving: 0.4 / 1.3
Balanced: 1.0 / 1.3
Turbo: 1.6 / 1.6
Extreme: 2.1 / 2.1


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> rtt nom/park etc are on auto. Nice work btw, CL15 4100 is very nice


Are you fully stable now? Or are you still having problems with it being stable one boot and acting weird the next boot?
If you still have issues, try increasing one (and ONLY ONE) of the PLL Overvoltage settings by 75mv and see if that helps improve anything or not. 
Try the memory controller one. I take no responsibility if it destroys your system or something, be warned.

And please try the f11d T0D bios I posted with the modded microcodes. You do have dual bios so if you don't like it you can get rid of it. Though I highly doubt there was any changes besides SVID offset working properly now.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## danakin

hello everyone,

just curious, what is the best Bios to use at the moment ? is it F10 or F11c for normal use ? i am using a 9900k with gskill 3600 cl 16 black 32GB

best regards,

pete


----------



## Nammi

Falkentyne said:


> Again I know absolutely nothing about RAM overclocking / RTL/IOL issues.


Gave T0D a quick try, no change RTL/IOL wise and no per channel configuration available.


----------



## Lurifaks

Nammi said:


> Gave T0D a quick try, no change RTL/IOL wise and no per channel configuration available.


Thanks for the heads up


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is the Master T0d with the latest RST firmware, ethernet firmware and GOP firmware.

It also has the fastest microcodes, but not the slower latest ones.

List of updated firmwares.

1 - Disk Controller
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.0.4507
EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1102
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.27
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16

Microcodes

Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝

Make a FreeDOS USB l like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.t0d /x

Use the modded MasterT0D BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.

*Note: I'm not currently using my Z390 Master. Please let me know if there are any issues with the BIOS after flashing it, I can't test it.*


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

KedarWolf said:


> Here is the Master T0d with the latest RST firmware, ethernet firmware and GOP firmware.


Can you edit this with CFG unlocked


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> AC/DC Values (mOhms. Values in Internal VR Settings are multiplied by 100, e.g. 1=0.01 mOhms, 100=1 mOhm)
> 
> Auto: Get Rekt (whatever Gigabyte wants it to be)
> Power Saving: 0.4 / 1.3
> Balanced: 1.0 / 1.3
> Turbo: 1.6 / 1.6
> Extreme: 2.1 / 2.1


That was an example.  I don't need them now.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> That was an example.  I don't need them now.


Have you tried setting CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv to 75 along with your 300 khz and see if that improves stability even slightly?


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Have you tried setting CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv to 75 along with your 300 khz and see if that improves stability even slightly?


Umm, I think you lost track of who and what you are replying to.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Umm, I think you lost track of who and what you are replying to.


No. I asked you on purpose because I wanted you to try it.

I "seem" to have gained a slight bit of stability (more stable residuals). Over 42 loops (20 loops, then 12 loops, then 10 loops) of LinX 0.9.6, only one failed (1.20v, LLC Turbo, 4.7 ghz, PWM 300 khz, only change was CPU PLL Overvoltage=+75), but this board is so erratic (as you well know), you can do one test and pass 9 of 10 residuals, then run the same test again and half the residuals fail. How do you think @reachthesky feels when his RAM tests fine for 6 hours in one attempt then on the next attempt he gets an error in 20 minutes?


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> No. I asked you on purpose because I wanted you to try it.
> 
> I "seem" to have gained a slight bit of stability (more stable residuals). Over 42 loops (20 loops, then 12 loops, then 10 loops) of LinX 0.9.6, only one failed (1.20v, LLC Turbo, 4.7 ghz, PWM 300 khz), but this board is so erratic (as you well know), you can do one test and pass 9 of 10 residuals, then run the same test again and half the residuals fail. How do you think @reachthesky feels when his RAM tests fine for 6 hours in one attempt then on the next attempt he gets an error in 20 minutes?


I think I will burn this CPU out  I don't run LinX, but can try some others when I get a chance.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Btw, just did some restarts/cold starts. It's much smoother looking on the motherboard LED debug display when it starts up. Before it would get there but look rocky if you know what I mean. Looks like the 75 MC overvoltage is making a difference so far. is 75 considered a large amount?


Seems like a lot to me. But percentage-wise it is around 6%


----------



## GeneO

GeneO said:


> Seems like a lot to me. But percentage-wise it is around 6%


Ah, he MC PLL. Well what is that voltage normally? Can't find the monitored value of MC PLL anywhere.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Btw, just did some restarts/cold starts. It's much smoother looking on the motherboard LED debug display when it starts up. Before it would get there but look rocky if you know what I mean. Looks like the 75 MC overvoltage is making a difference so far. is 75 considered a large amount?


No. There is very little documentation on what the "overvoltage" settings do.
You know how the board acts funny on EVERY SINGLE REBOOT, so you should verify those findings for sure.

From what @elmor posted, he said something about the overvoltage settings allowing for less "clipping" of the PLL voltage. Something about each "power rail" (CPU, System Agent, Ring, etc) all clipping parts of the PLL voltage down to whatever they need, and the overvoltage settings allowing for "less" clipping of the PLL voltage.

I'm not an expert but I assume it's ONE Of the following:

1) CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv adds to the CPU PLL Voltage "x" mv from some other source(?), without clipping from the PLL voltage.
2) CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv clips X mv less from the PLL Voltage, and adds the amount you specified from another source or something, leaving the CPU PLL Voltage the same (this is probably wrong however).

I assume Memory Controller and other overvoltage rails do exactly the same thing since you did MC version.

I seem to have gained a small LinX residual stability improvement at my "intentionally" borderline test settings of 4.7 ghz, 1.20v, LLC Turbo, 300 khz, by setting CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv to 75, over three tests done so far.
Buildzoid tested System Agent +mv and found massive instability by touching it.

One thing I know is that CPU PLL Voltage and CPU PLL OC Voltage must be at least 150mv apart. If they are closer, you run a risk of getting a clock watchdog timeout BSOD. So if you add CPU PLL Overvoltage +150 and get a BSOD, well...there you go ...


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> One thing I know is that CPU PLL Voltage and CPU PLL OC Voltage must be at least 150mv apart. If they are closer, you run a risk of getting a clock watchdog timeout BSOD. So if you add CPU PLL Overvoltage +150 and get a BSOD, well...there you go ...


My CPU PLL and CPU PLL OC are exactly 150 mv apart on auto. Funny that.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> My CPU PLL and CPU PLL OC are exactly 150 mv apart on auto. Funny that.


Wait how did you find that out?
I thought it defaulted to 1020mv for CPU and 1250mv for CPU PLL OC Voltage (also known as "PLL Bandwidth").


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Wait how did you find that out?
> I thought it defaulted to 1020mv for CPU and 1250mv for CPU PLL OC Voltage (also known as "PLL Bandwidth").


From the OC app.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> From the OC app.


That's interesting. I thought it set it to the values on the far right in the BIOS (1.02 and 1.25). Since that's (1.02v) what it set PCH Voltage to on Auto (the only one of those voltages over there that even has a sensor in HWinfo64). Or ....well...that's what i **thought** it sets PCH voltage to on Auto. (1.0v instead of 1.02v...ummm)


----------



## wholeeo

Time to tighten these bad boys up.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Medvediy

wholeeo said:


> Time to tighten these bad boys up.


3900 is the best frequency you could do for 4x16 modules? Or it can be 4000+ with cl higher than 15?


----------



## wholeeo

Medvediy said:


> 3900 is the best frequency you could do for 4x16 modules? Or it can be 4000+ with cl higher than 15?


I think 3866 is the highest I can get out of them. 3900 booted up once for me and never again. I've tried different VCCIO/SA & VDIMM voltages, looser timings, etc, they just don't want to budge past 3900. Maybe there are other things I could try which I will once I recharge my brain cells. Ram OC wears me the hell out. :wha-smile


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

My system (9900K on GB Aorus Master) becomes more or less unusable when the HPET is enforced. This should not happen, but still does. Windows desktop experience feels as if I downclocked the CPU permanently and when Stardock Fences is running that experienced slows down even further as if I was running on a downclocked Atom CPU.

Disabling various processes and services, as well as the NVidia driver and Intel LAN + WIFI driver made no difference. HPET on my system is broken. Whom do I blame, though, GB or Intel? No idea.

Fortunately the invariant TSC on my 9900K runs at 10 MHz, which should be sufficient for most tasks.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

hpet is broken? 

We are all at 10 MHZ with the new windows unfortunately


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> How can you tell its HPET? There is no option to disable/enable HPET in these bioses. Blame them both? Ever consider just moving to AMD?


You can enforce its usage and it can be measured (24 MHz using HPET).


----------



## Timur Born

I added 2x 8gb dimms. Had to increase all _dd tertiaries except rRDWR_dd in order to boot/train. That alone is not Karhu stable, though.


----------



## Wam7

Falkentyne said:


> Use EFIflash 0.80 and use the /DB (dual bios) flash option. At least I think that's the command line switch.
> Link is on win-raid.com. There's a modded version by Dsanke also without OEM checks (useful if you were on a Gigabyte test bios and you get an OEM error trying to go back to a non-test BIOS), but be careful with that one as that flasher has all protection checks disabled.


Many thanks for the assistance.
In the end I didn't have to use EFIFlash, which was good as I was a bit tentative to use it again on the one good bios I had working!
Just in case anybody corrupts their main bios this is what you need to know/do to fix it with QFlash:

*NB. This only worked with bios F10 it did not work with F9 or previous for me.*
Follow the instructions below but at point 6. You must also tick the box below shown in the last picture that says "Also Update Backup Bios".
This will actually make sure that the Main bios is also flashed as you will be in the Backup Bios. If it is not ticked then it will just flash over the current bios that you are in, which is already the Backup bios.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Could someone clarify whether or not flashing an unofficial bios voids the motherboard warranty?


How about you don't tell them you flashed an unofficial BIOS? 
They wouldn't know anyway unless you told them. If the BIOS was bricked they would simply take a programmer to it anyway.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I think i'm just going to say screw it and deal with the d4 hangups. If they happen once in a while, so be it. I just used cl15-4133 here with 5.3ghz 4.9ghz cache ht off in modern warfare at full ultra rtx/motion blur disabled. The performance is insane. This was on the map called Azhir Cave, full game from start to finish team deathmatch.
> 
> For a not so equal comparison but more typical scenario, 5ghz 4.7 cache HT on with [email protected] 17-17-17-37 on the same map/settings consistently yielded around 125-130 1% lows and 202-208 average fps.


Is Modern Warfare a game worth buying ? (None of the other COD's since COD4 were worth buying) or is that money better spent on Escape from Tarkov ?
Also did you try adjusting CPU PLL Overvoltage to +75mv to see if that gives you any extra vcore (NOT RAM) stability?
@reachthesky @GeneO


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Modern warfare is pretty good. Better than black ops 4. I haven't tried or looked at escape from tarkov so can't really make that comparison for ya. The CPU PLL Overvoltage did increase vcore though no stability improvements.


Where did you measure that it increased vcore?
I saw no difference in "VR VOUT"


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

Falkentyne said:


> Is Modern Warfare a game worth buying ? (None of the other COD's since COD4 were worth buying) or is that money better spent on Escape from Tarkov ?
> Also did you try adjusting CPU PLL Overvoltage to +75mv to see if that gives you any extra vcore (NOT RAM) stability?
> 
> @reachthesky @GeneO


As a BF fan myself, I'm really enjoying MW Ground-war mode (essentially BF Conquest mode). It's the closest thing you'll get to BF4. Like many others I'm tired of the WW1/2 BF line-up and going back to BF4 is a bit meh.


----------



## BigMack70

Falkentyne said:


> Is Modern Warfare a game worth buying ? (None of the other COD's since COD4 were worth buying)[/MENTION]


This new Modern Warfare is the first CoD I have played that I am really loving. Didn't care even for the original CoD 4. I really enjoyed the campaign, and I'm also loving the multiplayer. I love being able to switch it up between normal CoD, Ground War, and Realism modes... keeps everything fresh. Most of the maps are between decent and good, with only a couple bad ones. The fact that it has crossplay means there's good population for us PC players and you don't get stuck playing TDM with the same 100 people... which is all that other CoD games have been after a few months on PC.

My only complaints with the game are that I still think kill streaks are terrible game design, and I will never understand putting garish paint skins on weapons in a military FPS going for pseudo-realism.


----------



## ggp759

I just installed the latest F10b BIOS for my Aorus Ultra. Can someone please help me with all the options in the BIOS and what their setting should be? Especially CPU ones? The layout was changed and i cant find how to change the CPU power to not be the 95W ones and amp? Any help? Greatly appreciated.


----------



## sygnus21

reachthesky said:


> Could someone clarify whether or not flashing an unofficial bios voids the motherboard warranty?





Falkentyne said:


> How about you don't tell them you flashed an unofficial BIOS?
> They wouldn't know anyway unless you told them. If the BIOS was bricked they would simply take a programmer to it anyway.


How about just answering the question - yes, it voids the warranty. And they can check to see what BIOS is loaded and if it's official or not.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Howdy, long time lurker, just started trying to OC 2x8 Team Dark Pro 3200 CL14 on my Aorus z390 Ultra [9700k].

Was asking around reddit and heard that Gigabyte boards have their own idiosyncrasies with OCing ram.

A few general questions:

1) aside from VCCIO and VCCSA, are there any core voltage or frequency settings which can impact the stability of a memory overclock? 

2) related, I’m running a not completely tested adaptive voltage overclock for my core (thanks falkentyne for helpful comments on my reddit post on this topic a few months ago). Was wondering if doing a manual core overclock might provide more stability for a memory overclock.

3) do 2 sticks dual channel have less overclocking stability than 4 sticks quad channel on a z390 aorus ultra? It’s my understanding that it has T topology as opposed to daisy chain. If so, what are the limitations?

4) I’ve heard that Gigabyte boards’ ram training can be weird. And I’ve definitely had some weird behavior at getting my memory to CL14 at anywhere above 3200. Even when it posts, the frequency will drop from whatever I set it at to 3200-3433. This has been the case up to even like 1.5v. Are there, by chance, some manual loose 2ndary and tertiary timings that y’all might recommend as a baseline for overclocking? Or is that not a thing?

5) I’ve been following the MemTestHelper DDR4 overclocking guide. But, as I’ve heard, each board can act a little differently. Are there some general tips y’all have for overclocking on an Aorus z390 board? Thx <3


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Dup


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> I gotta say, the vrms on this board are fantastic. With a 140mm fan on the motherboard and a 120mm fan on the ram, vrms never went above 50c and ram never went above 40.3c during 1 hour occt-large/avx2. I really hope the 10 core 20 thread cpu coming out is compatible with this board as the board can definitely handle 2 extra cores and 4 extra threads.


Nope. LGA1200 socket so new motherboard will be required.I really dislike Intel. Since it will require a new motherboard I think I will try AMD next time.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> First start with an pre-validated stable CPU overclock to rule out any shenanigans.
> 
> Place a fan over the ram to rule out temperature related errors.
> 
> 4 sticks will overclock better than 2 sticks on these 4 dimm aorus boards. This includes higher frequency and tighter timings. 4 sticks will also perform better in games/loads than 2 sticks at the same frequencies/timings as a result of channel interleaving. As far as frequency limitations go, that is board dependent. For example, 3800 seems to be the top end for the aorus pro while 4133-4200 seems to be the top end for the aorus master. I'm not sure where the ultra falls.
> 
> As far as tCWL goes, the aorus master does not seem to like odd numbered tcwl. The ultra might be similar. Higher tCWL will also allow tighter tRDWR timings. For example, at [email protected], tCWL of 12 only allowed me to lower tRDWR to 13 while a tCWL of 14 allowed me to lower tRDWR to 12.
> 
> As far as stability between manual voltage/adaptive style voltage goes with memory overclocks, I was able to find stability using either manual vcore + turbo llc or DVID/Offset mode + high llc for karhu/hci/occt/aida/realbench/apex. I recommend finding stability with a manual vcore overclock first with no ramoverclock, then finding your stable ram overclock and then moving onto fluctuating voltage(dvid mode).
> 
> Too high of cache ratio can impact/limit memory overclocking. Hyperthreading can also impact memory overclocking. Higher ram frequencies with tight timings (particularly b-die)will demand more vcore when hyperthreading is enabled. For example, I have a 5ghz all core, 4.7ghz cache hyperthreading enabled overclock at 1.34v in bios manual voltage + turbo llc + [email protected] 17-17-17-37 that is OCCT-Large/AVX2 and karhu/hci stable. If I want to change the memory OC to 16-16-16-34 @ 4133 with tightest subtimings and high trefi while using the same cpu overclock settings, I have to add an additional 40mv vcore under load to be stable in addition to the extra sa/io/dram voltage requirements.
> 
> If you do decide to do a dvid/adaptive style overclock, make sure turbo and enhanced multicore performance are disabled just like you'd disable them for a manual vcore overclock. Use the manual core multiplier. I noticed I kept having issues with memory stability and/or occt large/avx2 stability when turbo was enabled regardless of manually setting power limits.
> 
> You mentioned you are running a not completely tested adaptive/dvid overclock and consider switching to manual vcore. Start with the manual vcore, find stability, oc the memory, find stability, then convert to dvid/adaptive.
> 
> EIST in the bios is what allows your voltage and clocks to fluctuate based on the load. Turn this on when using dvid mode.


Thanks, all great advice! Yeah I have turbo disabled, but I think I’ll go with your advice and switch to a manual vcore overclock.

Also *sigh* re 4 dimms vs 2. I know this is kind of subjective, but is it worth it to go to 32gb for gaming at 1440p? I’m not super wealthy (can afford to blow like $1,200 on this system), but shelling out another $120 for another set of Team Dark Pro.

Alsoooo, where would one put the fan to blow on the ram? I’m air cooling with a Dark Rock Pro 4, so I don’t know if it’s even possible to get airflow across my ram.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Athrutep

Hey, i have recently upgraded to the Aorus Elite. Is it normal that there is no option to enable/disable HPET on this motherboard? Also are all c-states enabled with the c-state control setting?


----------



## stasio

New Beta BIOS for Z390 on TT forum (or use my siggy).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

stasio said:


> New Beta BIOS for Z390 on TT forum (or use my siggy).


Good. These have the more performant, older, microcode. Thanks! Will give them a try.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Good. These have the more performant, older, microcode. Thanks! Will give them a try.


Interesting. Seems to be different than either of the two test Bioses somehow. (not just the microcode either).


----------



## Johaho

Doing a quick check on F11D. Cpu Vcore/Vagx protection is not available again.


----------



## GeneO

Johaho said:


> Doing a quick check on F11D. Cpu Vcore/Vagx protection is not available again.


I thought it was on mine. I will check again once I am through running some tests.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Johaho said:


> Doing a quick check on F11D. Cpu Vcore/Vagx protection is not available again.


I see both CPU Vcore and VAGX current protection under the CPU/VRM settings. I have the set to Auto.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> I thought it was on mine. I will check again once I am through running some tests.


He's talking about "Vcore/VAXG protection" which is another setting (100-400mv), not current protection. That's not there. (it was there in f11c/T1D/T0D).

And nope, all of the F10 / F11a/b bugs are back. Missing menus, tREFI issue, etc. None of the f11c fixes seem to be in there.

The only thing that seems to be partially fixed/working now is DVID Offset->Fixed vcore overvoltage bug.

I say partially working, because if you switch from fixed vcore to DVID mode with a non +0.00v offset, sometimes you have to reboot *twice* for it to read and use the CPU VID properly.
I even made sure I started at 1.205v to avoid the "1.20v" bug with auto/DVID mode. I did not see any overvoltage bugs when changing from DVID back to fixed mode, but I didn't spend too long checking. Went back to T0D.

Enabling SVID offset disables all voltage control again.

T0D (modded) is still the best BIOS. (except for the 1.20v fixed vcore bug, when changing from 1.20v fixed to auto or DVID).


----------



## Driller au

F11d bios has the tREFI bug for me and hates my 3600 mem OC that was stable on F10b think that has something to do with the command rate will test to find out

EDIT: booted straight into windows changing the cmd rate from 1 to 2


----------



## Johaho

GeneO said:


> I see both CPU Vcore and VAGX current protection under the CPU/VRM settings. I have the set to Auto.


The yellow marked is what i meant.


----------



## GeneO

Well that's just peachy.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

reachthesky said:


> which bios was allowing you to run cmd rate at 1 with 3600mhz?


F10b and i think nearly all the bios up till the refresh ones but i don't think you will with the high frequency Kedarwolf couldn't


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Modern Warfare is the best game engine I've ever seen possibly. Framerates are insanely high with stunning visuals.
Single player may be one of the best games ever. Multiplayer is still loose, doesn't really reward aim and reaction time as much as spraying first.. weapons kinda suck (all machine guns) not enough precision for me but its fun. 

Reachthesky.
I'm at 5.0 ghz 4133 17 17 17 36

I'm getting good frame rates. But I'd love to see a few benchmarks in a few scenarios vs your 
5.3 4133 15 15 15 ht off ..

I would like to see if its worth me even trying to get another config for that... ... however I got a 9900k instead of a i7 because of the HT because I was told it is better for gaming.

Also I got tired of trying to push my ram any farther. I'm at 38.6 NS latency and its at 1.24/1.24 and vcore 1.35 and I think thats ok for super long term use..


But I'd love to see actual min framerates because I'm on 240hz and I ideally want 240 ******* frames always... lol. I'd love to see the differences ( I also only have a 2080 super)


----------



## Salve1412

Guys, I need your opinion. Could too old microcodes cause the board not only to fail POST, but also not to show any debug code due to CPU incompatibility? I upgraded my 9900K to a 9900KS and my PC won't boot...I was already considering hardware issues, but then this atrocious doubt came to me: sincewith the 9900K I was using a modded F11c BIOS with older microcodes injected (BA BE if I remember correctly), could all of this make the mobo not recognize the KS at all? I see that BIOS F10 added support for the KS, a BIOS that has newer microcodes than the ones I was using...what do you think? Here is a video showing the behaviour of the system:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O8FjR7FFfrKzYPUEnv96ZtBBK3861ybU/view?usp=drivesdk

This is with BIOS Switch set to Dual; if i change it to Single the motherboard will stay powered on endlessly with no signs of activity (no codes even in this case). 
What do you think? Could this be possible? I'm leaning towards it because my Backup BIOS is still the original one the board came with (F4) and of course it doesn't support the KS. If so I'm going to win the dumbest-of-all-time prize...which would be the cheapest CPU i could get to test?

EDIT Actually in the CPU compatibility list BIOS F8 is indicated as the first compatible with the KS...I don't know which microcodes it contains, I'll check them, but it seems to me a bit strange that mine were even older.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> First start with an pre-validated stable CPU overclock to rule out any shenanigans.
> 
> Place a fan over the ram to rule out temperature related errors.
> 
> 
> 4 sticks will overclock better than 2 sticks on these 4 dimm aorus boards. This includes higher frequency and tighter timings. 4 sticks will also perform better in games/loads than 2 sticks at the same frequencies/timings as a result of channel interleaving. As far as frequency limitations go, that is board dependent. For example, 3800 seems to be the top end for the aorus pro while 4133-4200 seems to be the top end for the aorus master. I'm not sure where the ultra falls. The extreme is slightly better than the master due to the increased pcb layer count(i think?) and could probably achieve 4266+.
> 
> As far as tCWL goes, the aorus master does not seem to like odd numbered tcwl. The ultra might be similar. Higher tCWL will also allow tighter tRDWR timings. For example, at [email protected], tCWL of 12 only allowed me to lower tRDWR to 13 while a tCWL of 14 allowed me to lower tRDWR to 12.
> 
> As far as stability between manual voltage/adaptive style voltage goes with memory overclocks, I was able to find stability using either manual vcore + turbo llc + acdc set to auto or DVID/Offset mode + high llc + acdc set to 1/1 for karhu/hci/occt/aida/realbench/apex stability. I recommend finding stability with a manual vcore overclock first with no ramoverclock, then finding your stable ram overclock and then moving onto fluctuating voltage(dvid mode).
> 
> Too high of cache ratio can impact/limit memory overclocking. Cache ratio is typically best kept between 200mhz-400mhz within the all core ratio though if you can somehow manage a 1:1 ratio without needing to add extra voltage, then by all means run it. Find the highest possible cache ratio you can sustain without having to add any additional vcore to keep the cores stable. The only time I ever recommend adding additional voltage for the specific purpose of powering an even higher cache ratio is if you need to alleviate bottlenecking and that would only be if you can keep it cool enough. Cache ratio yields the largest impact on minimum fps/1% lows but does have an effect on average fps as well. Core ratio yields the largest impact on average fps and maximum fps.
> 
> Hyperthreading can also impact memory overclocking demanding substantial amounts of extra vcore and more VccIO. Higher ram frequencies with tight timings (particularly b-die)will demand more vcore when hyperthreading is enabled. For example, I have a 5ghz all core, 4.7ghz cache hyperthreading enabled overclock at 1.34v in bios manual voltage + turbo llc + [email protected] 17-17-17-37 that is OCCT-Large/AVX2 and karhu/hci stable. If I want to change the memory OC to 16-16-16-34 @ 4133 with tightest subtimings and high trefi while using the same cpu overclock settings, I have to add an additional 40mv vcore under load to be stable in addition to the extra sa/io/dram voltage requirements. If I want to go [email protected] then I have to raise vcore even further. To mitigate having to run more than 1.34v vrout under load in OCCT-Large/AVX2 to sustain cl15-4133, I turned off hyperthreading for my 5ghz 4.7ghz cache oc and increased the core ratio by one for 5.1ghz all core. Basically tighter/lower timings will require more vcore depending how voltage efficient your chip is. If you want to learn how your chip scales, start with finding a stable manual overclock for an average oc of 5ghz + xmp profile, Document all the voltages required. Then do the same cpu oc + same primary timings + tighten secondaries/tertiaries, document the voltages required. Then move up one step in frequency or down one step in cas latency, rinse repeat etc. This gives you a picture of how the chip scales at that frequency with specific memory overclocks. You can then decide which one suits your needs best or which one fits your voltage budget the best. Then roll with it. Or you can then see what the next core ratio has to offer and tune those overclocks etc etc.
> 
> If you do decide to do a dvid/adaptive style overclock, make sure turbo and enhanced multicore performance are disabled just like you'd disable them for a manual vcore overclock. Use the manual core multiplier. I noticed I kept having issues with memory stability and/or occt large/avx2 stability when turbo was enabled regardless of manually setting power limits.
> 
> You mentioned you are running a not completely tested adaptive/dvid overclock and consider switching to manual vcore. Start with the manual vcore, find stability, oc the memory, find stability, then convert to dvid/adaptive.
> 
> EIST in the bios is what allows your voltage and clocks to fluctuate based on the load. Turn this on when using dvid mode. Also turn on C3 when using dvid mode.


Oh also, when you mentioned adding additional vcore to support higher memory overclocks, do you mean cpu vcore?

I find instability from increasing memory frequency or lowering primary timings, in what order should I test the following:
- increase cpu vcore
- increase DRAM voltage
- increase DRAM training voltage
- increase VCCIO
- increase System Agent Voltage


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> Guys, I need your opinion. Could too old microcodes cause the board not only to fail POST, but also not to show any debug code due to CPU incompatibility? I upgraded my 9900K to a 9900KS and my PC won't boot...I was already considering hardware issues, but then this atrocious doubt came to me: sincewith the 9900K I was using a modded F11c BIOS with older microcodes injected (BA BE if I remember correctly), could all of this make the mobo not recognize the KS at all? I see that BIOS F10 added support for the KS, a BIOS that has newer microcodes than the ones I was using...what do you think? Here is a video showing the behaviour of the system:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O8FjR7FFfrKzYPUEnv96ZtBBK3861ybU/view?usp=drivesdk
> 
> This is with BIOS Switch set to Dual; if i change it to Single the motherboard will stay powered on endlessly with no signs of activity (no codes even in this case).
> What do you think? Could this be possible? I'm leaning towards it because my Backup BIOS is still the original one the board came with (F4) and of course it doesn't support the KS. If so I'm going to win the dumbest-of-all-time prize...which would be the cheapest CPU i could get to test?
> 
> EDIT Actually in the CPU compatibility list BIOS F8 is indicated as the first compatible with the KS...I don't know which microcodes it contains, I'll check them, but it seems to me a bit strange that mine were even older.


Did you press the clear CMOS button first?

9900KS was supported in AE and BE microcodes. It works on any BIOS that supports R0 stepping. What happens if you put your 9900k back in?
Easy answer is to put the 9900k back in, set it to single bios mode, boot, flash the backup bios (F4) to F9, test that out real fast, then put the 9900KS in.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Thanks, this helps a ton! Gives me a great baseline to start with.

Last two questions:

Someone on reddit suggested that changing ”memory enhancement settings” might allow better timings or stability at higher frequency. What does this setting does this do and do you recommend changing it? 

You mentioned “karhu/hci/occt-large/avx2”. I’ve only been running hci, do you recommend running all of them or just any one of them?

Ran hci all night with no errors and I’m pretty sure that 4000 16 18 18 38 @ 1.44v vdimm and 1.20v vccio/vccsa is the sweet spot for my current setup. 1.43v spits out errors, 4133 spits out errors even at 1.5v, 16 17 17 38 gave a single error at 150% at 1.45v, and 16 16 16 38 spits out errors even at 1.5v. Perhaps doing a proper manual vcore overclock may yield better results.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> You are probably spitting errors because not enough sa/io. b-die at tight timings and higher frequencies requires more sa/io. There is also a possibility you could have a really sensitive IMC. Could also be the sticks. What ram kit are you using?


The max sa/io I tried was 1.25v each.

And my cpu is an i7 9700k if that makes any difference for the IMC. I know that it means I won’t have to worry about hyperthreading lol.

I’m using Team Dark Pro 3200 14 14 14 31. They’re supposedly well binned B-Die and are always a fantastic value. Rn just $105. On sale like every other week. Some who own them claim to have gotten 4000 16 16 16 32 at under 1.45v dram voltage. I’m pretty jealous. Considering getting a 2nd pair to run in this system, or to swap out and if it won the silicon lottery just putting my current dimms in my old b350 R5 2400g setup.

https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820313712?Item=N82E16820313712&utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Wanted to share this from the intel AMA thread on reddit:
> 
> Dan basically hints at manual vcore overclocks causing harm over time in so many words. I guess we could say it "speeds up degradation". If you want your chip to last as long as possible or to suffer as little degradation as possible over time, move over to a dvid mode/acdc tuned overclock with EIST/C3 so that your voltage + frequency fluctuates depending on the load.


With that in mind, is there a good guide on adapting a verified stable manual overclock to an adaptive voltage setting? Ex: if I want to hit 1.35 cpu vcore, what should I set DVID?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> There is no real guide that I have been made aware of. I'll tell you this. I'm pretty sure that [email protected]/1 + medium LLC + dvid/Offset of +150mv will give **ABOUT** 1.35v non-avx load voltage give or take.
> Just be aware of the voltage dvid bug, when you switch over to dvid mode from manual vcore, dvid is gonna send excess voltage to your cpu. I recommend resetting the cmos or loading optimized defaults each time before activating/deactivating dvid mode to avoid the voltage bug entirely.


This bug was fixed in T0D.

The only bug left with voltage is when changing from 1.20v fixed vcore bug (DVID or Auto will not read CPU VID, it will remain at 1.20v, enabling SVID offset at 1.20v fixed will cause NO POST=NO POST CODE and must clear cmos. You can set 1.20v fixed after SVID offset is enabled however).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone willing to use that bios for more than a day as the bugs it contains are worse than the bugs it was trying to address. There is at least a work around for the dvid voltage bug in previous bioses, there are no work arounds for the other bugs in T0D. It's also worse for memory overclocking, If i'm not mistaken, another user cannot use [email protected] on that bios. It sounds/looks like gigabyte modified the wrong bios update or uploaded the wrong beta bios. Any idea when users can expect a proper bios update? Asking you since it looks like you play some sort of liaison role between gigabyte and intel or between gigabyte and endusers.


Hi, can you please tell me what bugs you found? I read these threads every day and I could not find a single bug report in T0D. All I could find is the RTL/IOL thing (I can't help with that) and the per channel timings thing (this was removed intentionally by Gigabyte. I have absolutely no say--remember I don't work for them).

The only bugs I found are the longstanding 1.20v fixed vcore bug (since 1.20v is an "Auto" setting or something) and the 300 khz issue.

I don't have any liaisons. I submitted a bug with the voltage and menu, nothing else and was contacted by someone who isn't even in the BIOS department who allowed me to text fixes. So I can't really answer these questions.

I submitted bugs on the DVID issue, the missing menu options/TREFI and on the 300 khz issue. Nothing else.

I didn't see anyone who tested T0D for 1T. Only F11c. Not sure about T1D however. I know that T0D allows you to enable SVID Offset without losing voltage control (DVID offsets are disabled because VID can already exceed 1.520v). I have absolutely no idea about what is where in Internal Bios builds. I would surely love to work at Gigabyte but I don't. Maybe after I buy that $500 Siglent SDS-1104X-E ...

I saw no differences in 1T on this bios. I've *never* been able to go past 3333 mhz 1T on any bios version. Dual rank dimms won't go higher than 3333-3466 mhz 1T on most boards buildzoid tested. Even on the XI Gene, 3600 mhz dual rank POSTED at 1T but was terribly unstable and was unable to stabilize no matter the voltage or timings.

If you can link me to the post where someone couldn't do 3600 mhz 1T on *single rank* dimms on T0D, I'd like to see it.


----------



## LordGurciullo

Reach the Sky.

I'm looking to see what the actual fps differences are from my setup - the 5.0 4133 17 17 17 36 ht on vs your 5.3 4133 15 15 15. 
I'm guessing like 5 percent better min frame rates? 

Also I have override manual 1.35 vcore... and 1.45dram and 1.25/1.25 . is this ok to run forever long term? I'm kinda not feeling like trying to transition atm... too busy to even try to mess with it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> The bugs you mentioned that you found are the bugs i'm referring to. I just went off based what you said after you had tested it.
> 
> I don't know if it was single rank or dual rank but it was someone in this thread who either tested the official beta bios after Stasio posted it or tested the modded version you posted. He was using 1T 3600 before and had to drop down to 2T on the new bios if i'm not mistaken. It's less than 10 pages back i think.


I remember someone talking about 1T on F11c but I still don't remember T1D comment about 1T. I'll try to look.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Everything is permissible, not everything is beneficial. From what a 22 year lead engineer at intel said on reddit, It sounds like running a flat fixed vcore is not so great long term and he used the word "harm" when describing longterm use. That's the strong impression I received. I pretty much can only regurgitate what he said. I did post the engineer's answer within the last few pages in this thread. The Intel ama is still going on throughout friday I believe, now is your opportunity to get real definitive answers directly from the mouth of intel.


Went back 30 pages. Found nothing except Geneo mentioning a doubled RTL/IOL on T1D and someone having higher latency on T1D (probably missed a subtiming).
No feedback on T0D at all except someone saying a DVID fix worked.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Screw it. I am back to f11c until Gigabyte gets their act together.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Either i'm mistaken or someone edited that information out. Lets go with I am mistaken.


Sent an email requesting they use the T0D branch (which was good) and why they reverted to the f11b branch, and asked about the 1.20v fixed vcore bug (switching to auto or dvid failing if starting at 1.20v fixed), RTL/IOL > 4000 mhz, 500 khz switching frequency stability issue, etc. Don't expect much though.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Went back 30 pages. Found nothing except Geneo mentioning a doubled RTL/IOL on T1D and someone having higher latency on T1D (probably missed a subtiming).
> No feedback on T0D at all except someone saying a DVID fix worked.


That was me talking about the 1T/2T timings its a dual channel kit https://www.scorptec.com.au/product/Memory/DDR4/75308-F4-3200C16D-16GTRS/?member_pricing=true with 2 kits so 32g 
The bios before the refreshed UI that i tested could run 1T, i use the modded F10b mainly all the bios after the refresh i can only run 2T , I am on the modded T0d atm which also can only do 2T


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> That was me talking about the 1T/2T timings its a dual channel kit https://www.scorptec.com.au/product/Memory/DDR4/75308-F4-3200C16D-16GTRS/?member_pricing=true with 2 kits so 32g
> The bios before the refreshed UI that i tested could run 1T, i use the modded F10b mainly all the bios after the refresh i can only run 2T , I am on the modded T0d atm which also can only do 2T


Is that kit on the QVL?
Can you post your full Asrock timing configurator 4.0.4 screens?

Are you using RTT/round trip latency termination values 60/60/120/120/40/40 ?

The only BIOS I ever saw which would just beep 5 times and fail to train at *XMP* settings at 1T was F8b.


----------



## Salve1412

Falkentyne said:


> Did you press the clear CMOS button first?
> 
> 9900KS was supported in AE and BE microcodes. It works on any BIOS that supports R0 stepping. What happens if you put your 9900k back in?
> Easy answer is to put the 9900k back in, set it to single bios mode, boot, flash the backup bios (F4) to F9, test that out real fast, then put the 9900KS in.


Thanks a lot for the answer. Yes, before powering on the PC after the CPU upgrade I pressed the CMOS button (and previously, before removing my former CPU, I had loaded the optimized defaults). Unfortunately I already sold my 9900K so I don't have any other processor to test at the moment. I ordered a Pentium G5400 that hopefully I'll receive in the next days. I see what you say about the BIOS support of the KS and also in the light of this I'm losing faith in my intuition about the too old microcodes...it's strange, I haven't been careless during the substitution and it's certainly not the first time I've done this; a DOA CPU, on the other hand, seems to me a really unlikely event. I even accurately inspected the CPU Socket looking for bent pins, but everything seems in order. Reseating the CPU, leaving just one RAM slot filled, clearing the CMOS by removing the battery and shortening the pins, switching to single BIOS, nothing has helped, and the total absence of motherboard codes is what looks even more worrying to me. I'll see when the new Pentium comes, thanks again.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Is that kit on the QVL?
> Can you post your full Asrock timing configurator 4.0.4 screens?
> 
> Are you using RTT/round trip latency termination values 60/60/120/120/40/40 ?
> 
> The only BIOS I ever saw which would just beep 5 times and fail to train at *XMP* settings at 1T was F8b.


Yes it's on the QVL,i leave the Tertiary on auto except tREFI after i set xmp + enhanced performance, never had any luck changing them


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> Thanks a lot for the answer. Yes, before powering on the PC after the CPU upgrade I pressed the CMOS button (and previously, before removing my former CPU, I had loaded the optimized defaults). Unfortunately I already sold my 9900K so I don't have any other processor to test at the moment. I ordered a Pentium G5400 that hopefully I'll receive in the next days. I see what you say about the BIOS support of the KS and also in the light of this I'm losing faith in my intuition about the too old microcodes...it's strange, I haven't been careless during the substitution and it's certainly not the first time I've done this; a DOA CPU, on the other hand, seems to me a really unlikely event. I even accurately inspected the CPU Socket looking for bent pins, but everything seems in order. Reseating the CPU, leaving just one RAM slot filled, clearing the CMOS by removing the battery and shortening the pins, switching to single BIOS, nothing has helped, and the total absence of motherboard codes is what looks even more worrying to me. I'll see when the new Pentium comes, thanks again.


Whose modded T0D did you use?
Mine or Kedarwolf's?
I just checked mine and the microcodes I modded are 100% identical to F10 final.


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> Thanks a lot for the answer. Yes, before powering on the PC after the CPU upgrade I pressed the CMOS button (and previously, before removing my former CPU, I had loaded the optimized defaults). Unfortunately I already sold my 9900K so I don't have any other processor to test at the moment. I ordered a Pentium G5400 that hopefully I'll receive in the next days. I see what you say about the BIOS support of the KS and also in the light of this I'm losing faith in my intuition about the too old microcodes...it's strange, I haven't been careless during the substitution and it's certainly not the first time I've done this; a DOA CPU, on the other hand, seems to me a really unlikely event. I even accurately inspected the CPU Socket looking for bent pins, but everything seems in order. Reseating the CPU, leaving just one RAM slot filled, clearing the CMOS by removing the battery and shortening the pins, switching to single BIOS, nothing has helped, and the total absence of motherboard codes is what looks even more worrying to me. I'll see when the new Pentium comes, thanks again.


What happens when you clear CMOS right now?
The board should power on and off extremely fast, three times, and then a 4th time. Does it even do that?


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Is it possible do an adaptive overclock setup with 0 DVID, and just playing with load line calibration and AC load line/DC load line values?


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> Is it possible do an adaptive overclock setup with 0 DVID, and just playing with load line calibration and AC load line/DC load line values?


Just use auto vcore in that case.
DVID is auto with a fixed offset.


----------



## Lurifaks

Falkentyne said:


> Whose modded T0D did you use?
> Mine or Kedarwolf's?
> I just checked mine and the microcodes I modded are 100% identical to F10 final.


Can flash this from bios with F8 ?

Regards


----------



## Falkentyne

Lurifaks said:


> Can flash this from bios with F8 ?
> 
> Regards


You need efiflash.
Qflash won't flash a modded bios (unless you hex edit it with instructions on win-raid)


----------



## Salve1412

Falkentyne said:


> Whose modded T0D did you use?
> Mine or Kedarwolf's?
> I just checked mine and the microcodes I modded are 100% identical to F10 final.


Didn't try any of the latest releases. I were on F11c modded by me with the injection of BE/BA microcodes. I even posted the BIOS on this thread a while ago (page 587). It seems strange to me that I did something wrong back then, since my BIOS ran without any issue at all until I switched the K to the KS yesterday.



Falkentyne said:


> What happens when you clear CMOS right now?
> The board should power on and off extremely fast, three times, and then a 4th time. Does it even do that?


Done plenty of CMOS resets: the behaviour after them is the one showed in the video I linked in my first post about this problem. The board doesn't start the usual post CMOS reset power on/off cycles: instead it starts with fans at 100%, stays like that for a while, turns it off, powers on again for a while, then off/on immediately, repeating this last process endlessly. 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O8F...w?usp=drivesdk

Don't know, it seems really bad to me...yet again, no physical damage to the socket, no "violence" against the board during the CPU replacement. Eagerly waiting for that Pentium Gold to try it out. In the meantime I'll maybe try to connect a speaker to the board in order to see If I get any acoustic clue.


----------



## Sheyster

Falkentyne said:


> Is Modern Warfare a game worth buying ? (None of the other COD's since COD4 were worth buying) or is that money better spent on Escape from Tarkov ?


It's the best COD since COD4, which I played for 3 years. Definitely more Battlefield-like with the Ground War mode, but this said it ain't no Battlefield. Vehicles like tanks and APC's are lacking and the scout heli is a joke compared to the BF3 and BF4 choppers. They're supposed to introduce a Battle Royale mode which might make it even more interesting. Worth buying IMHO.


----------



## Lurifaks

Falkentyne said:


> You need efiflash.
> Qflash won't flash a modded bios (unless you hex edit it with instructions on win-raid)


ok


----------



## LordGurciullo

40-50 min fps difference? ?
HOLY ****

Well... Will all games respond to this? Cause if so Why didn't we just buy a i7 and go for 5.3? 

I had read and watched vids that HT is actually a good thing.... 

I Guess I could create two profiles... but I'm getting burned out on the OC thing and life has picked up big time unlike in Dec/Jan.


And Yes maybe I should switch to adaptive mode... cause I leave my **** on all day... I was just hoping that
1.35 vcore and 1.45dram 1.25/1.25
would be ok long term....


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> You need efiflash.
> Qflash won't flash a modded bios (unless you hex edit it with instructions on win-raid)


It will flash a qflash-saved modded BIOS though.  This is a nice thing. I was able to go from f11d to my modded f11c from a save of the f11c.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> It will flash a qflash-saved modded BIOS though.  This is a nice thing. I was able to go from f11d to my modded f11c from a save of the f11c.


I didn't know that was even possible. Thank you.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> I didn't know that was even possible. Thank you.


Yes, really handy when you want to revert back as it keeps your settings and all. With Asus ROG you could flash modded BIOS with flashback without getting into a BIOS, but they had no way of saving a BIOS with settings intact.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

I cant figure out why Linx testing freezes my PC after just 23 secs (before it really starts to get going). Its got to do with my overclock. Im at 4.9Ghz with 1.2v + 0.02v offset which is prime stable etc. I've tried up to 1.2v+0.5v and same freeze with WHEA error.



I then tried leaving my RAM OC as is and putting the CPU overclock back to stock and Linx worked fine then.


Tried 5.0Ghz + 0.090v offset (5.0Ghz is prime stable for me @ +.055v) and no go.

I can play games fine, run all benchmarks fine on much lower voltages (no AVX).
Is Linx really THAT much more demanding than P95 (no AVX)?


EDIT: just tested Linx with AVX offset -2 and still freezes PC
EDIT2: tested with AVX-3 and it worked ...must be AVX!!!!


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> I cant figure out why Linx testing freezes my PC after just 23 secs (before it really starts to get going). Its got to do with my overclock. Im at 4.9Ghz with 1.2v + 0.02v offset which is prime stable etc. I've tried up to 1.2v+0.5v and same freeze with WHEA error.
> 
> 
> 
> I then tried leaving my RAM OC as is and putting the CPU overclock back to stock and Linx worked fine then.
> 
> 
> Tried 5.0Ghz + 0.090v offset (5.0Ghz is prime stable for me @ +.055v) and no go.
> 
> I can play games fine, run all benchmarks fine on much lower voltages (no AVX).
> Is Linx really THAT much more demanding than P95 (no AVX)?
> 
> 
> EDIT: just tested Linx with AVX offset -2 and still freezes PC


Wait, you're trying to run prime95 with AVX disabled?
AVX disabled puts barely any load on the system at all.

Did you test prime95 29.8 build 6 with AVX small FFT yet?
If you can't pass small FFT with AVX, don't even think about running LinX 35000 sample size. Small FFT FMA3 is harder to pass than small FFT AVX, and LinX is harder to pass than FMA3 !
LinX puts prime95 to shame.

Also in order to be LinX stable, all residuals must be the same in each loop.


----------



## Grizzly111

Falkentyne said:


> Wait, you're trying to run prime95 with AVX disabled?
> AVX disabled puts barely any load on the system at all.
> 
> Did you test prime95 28.8 build 6 with AVX small FFT yet?
> If you can't pass small FFT with AVX, don't even think about running LinX 3500 sample size. Small FFT FMA3 is harder to pass than small FFT AVX, and LinX is harder to pass than FMA3 !
> LinX puts prime95 to shame.
> 
> Also in order to be LinX stable, all residuals must be the same in each loop.



Yeah I just tried with AVX -3 offset and it worked. It was the AVX instructions that were causing the instability at my voltage. I'd rather run 1.2v+0.2v offset gaming with no AVX offset issues than 1.2v+0.6v and -3 offset just to pass Linx. @ 4.9Ghz


I use P95 26.6 as I think for my application that is more realistic.


If I use AVX on P95 my temps go too high as my ambient is around 30 degrees C...I am using a top of the line Deepcool 360 AIO too with thermal grizzly Kyronaut (which improved my temps by about 5 deg over stock) so cooling should be fine.


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Yeah I just tried with AVX -3 offset and it worked. It was the AVX instructions that were causing the instability at my voltage. I'd rather run 1.2v+0.2v offset gaming with no AVX offset issues than 1.2v+0.6v and -3 offset just to pass Linx. @ 4.9Ghz
> 
> 
> I use P95 26.6 as I think for my application that is more realistic.
> 
> 
> If I use AVX on P95 my temps go too high as my ambient is around 30 degrees C...I am using a top of the line Deepcool 360 AIO too with thermal grizzly Kyronaut (which improved my temps by about 5 deg over stock) so cooling should be fine.


I made way too many typos last post. Corrected.


----------



## Athrutep

stasio said:


> New Beta BIOS for Z390 on TT forum (or use my siggy).


Will it wipe my saved profiles and current settings when update the bios? I know it did that on my z77 is that still the case with the z390?


----------



## Driller au

Athrutep said:


> Will it wipe my saved profiles and current settings when update the bios? I know it did that on my z77 is that still the case with the z390?


 It will reset everything, wouldn't worry about trying this new bios full of bugs


----------



## Timur Born

I added 2x 8gb to my Aorus Master (T topology) for a total of 4x 8gb. In order to get the same timings Karhu stable I had to increase DDR voltage from 1.37 to 1.38v and also increase VCCIO slightly.

In the process I stumbled over two bugs in BIOS F11c, both of which are worked around by the same procedure.

- When I tried to increase several memory timings the board/BIOS would completely ignore my new settings and keep using the old ones. I only had to use my workaround once to fix this, now I can change timings and it will stick.

- When I tried to change any memory timing the board/BIOS would increase RTL and IO-L. For this I had to use the workaround every time I did timing changes.

The workaround was to save UEFI settings as a profile, load optimized defaults, reboot, then load the saved profile and reboot again.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## pXuis

Salve1412 said:


> Thanks a lot for the answer. Yes, before powering on the PC after the CPU upgrade I pressed the CMOS button (and previously, before removing my former CPU, I had loaded the optimized defaults). Unfortunately I already sold my 9900K so I don't have any other processor to test at the moment. I ordered a Pentium G5400 that hopefully I'll receive in the next days. I see what you say about the BIOS support of the KS and also in the light of this I'm losing faith in my intuition about the too old microcodes...it's strange, I haven't been careless during the substitution and it's certainly not the first time I've done this; a DOA CPU, on the other hand, seems to me a really unlikely event. I even accurately inspected the CPU Socket looking for bent pins, but everything seems in order. Reseating the CPU, leaving just one RAM slot filled, clearing the CMOS by removing the battery and shortening the pins, switching to single BIOS, nothing has helped, and the total absence of motherboard codes is what looks even more worrying to me. I'll see when the new Pentium comes, thanks again.


Are you using the aRGB headers on the motherboard?
I had a bug where after clearing the cmos I couldn't boot with any of the aRGB headers connected to LED strips or hubs. After removing the headers, I can boot and put them back. I need to do it every time I clear Cmos. It sounds stupid, but doesn't hurt to try. 

I was convinced I bricked my board. No post codes, nothing.


----------



## Athrutep

Driller au said:


> It will reset everything, wouldn't worry about trying this new bios full of bugs


Thanks for letting me know.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

So, finally getting down to testing for overclock stability on my i7 9700k. Primary use is gaming (otherwise I would have gotten an R7 3700x lol)

Took falkentyne’s advice on how to test with prime95 v29.8 b6

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28114032-post7.html

So,

1st instance 6 threads smallest FFT, AVX/AVX2 disabled 

2nd instance 2 threads custom FFT 512k-8192k, AVX2 disabled but AVX enabled, time to test: 0 minutes

But how long should I run this to check stability? This is literally my first time running prime95.


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> So, finally getting down to testing for overclock stability on my i7 9700k. Primary use is gaming (otherwise I would have gotten an R7 3700x lol)
> 
> Took falkentyne’s advice on how to test with prime95 v29.8 b6
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28114032-post7.html
> 
> So,
> 
> 1st instance 6 threads smallest FFT, AVX/AVX2 disabled
> 
> 2nd instance 2 threads custom FFT 512k-8192k, AVX2 disabled but AVX enabled, time to test: 0 minutes
> 
> But how long should I run this to check stability? This is literally my first time running prime95.



Run it as long as necessary to get through the full 8192K test size at the minimum. Anything longer (perfectionist / OCD desires, etc) is up to you.


----------



## Shtefy83

Hi everyone.

At beginning, thank you very much to all contributors in this post, its amount of knowledge contained here is amazing, really brings back faith in internet 

After long brake from any kind of "performance" PC I just build new rig. Somehow I avoided Ryzen craze and thanks to some sale on Gigabyte Z390 series (they were adding Gigabyte SATA 480GB for free here in UK) I bought Z390 Aorus Pro (no WiFi) with i5 9600KF.
After a week I am trying slight overclocking, but while I have small success there are few issues that concern me and I haven`t found solutions/mentions in this post (I haven't read whole thing, tried use "search" and Google) nor on Reddit. If its known issue, my apologies, and can I just for ask for links/directions, please?

As starting point I used BIOS "Optimised Defaults" or whatever this option is called in BIOS and without changing anything (no XMP profile, everything AUTO etc.) newest version of Prime95 (with AVX enabled) give me errors on 1 or 2 cores straight away ("rounding was 0.5 expected 0.4" error).
Quick search on Internet and that suppose to mean that there is some hardware issue. Further investigation showed, that when I was trying to run Prime95, voltage on processor dropped by a lot. HWInfo64 Vcore (from sensor named "ITE IT8688E") shows *1.067V* under AVX load, VR VOUT (from sensor named "Renesas ISL69138/69269") showed* 1.015V* under AVX load. 

First I tried F12d BIOS from Gigabyte web page, as it has in description: "Fix CPU Vcore and power behavior". But with this BIOS Prime95 freezes whole computer straight away, so I flashed back to F11.

Then I tried playing with voltages and LLC, computer was stable in short Prime95 runs (with and without AVX). Then I played with different options that I found in guides from Gigabyte, Reddit, this thread (power states, MCE, different Intel options)

I ended up with following:
4.8Ghz, Vcore 1.29V, AVX offset 2, LLC Turbo. MCE disabled. Power states and Intel options ON (hardly any diffrence with them OFF, but save some Watts while IDLE), XMP profile for memory enabled. In IDLE Vcore shown is *1.296V*, VR VOUT *1.263V*, under load Vcore* 1.260V*/VR VOUT *1.206V*. It passes both non-avx and avx Prime overnight tests (max temp 94 C on AVX, 81 on non-AVX). So I could should live a happy life now, just this massive voltage drops are puzzling to me, and I am not sure if my PC is working as intended. Any insight will be appreciated.

If its relevant, rest of my configuration:
i5 9600KF 
Z390 Aorus PRO F11 (default settings, except for those required for CPU O/C, look above) 
(GPU) Red Dragon 5700 XT (no O/C yet)
16GB Ballistix 3200Mhz (2x8) with XMP on (no O/C)
(cooler and paste) Arctic Freezer 34 Esports Duo with Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut
(PSU) Aerocool Project 7 P650
(case) Antec P101 Silent (closed, 1x140mm out, 3x120mm in)
Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB NVME
Gigabyte 480GB 2.5" SATA

EDIT:
While I was posting, KrampusKlaus above gave me solution, by linking Falkentyne post about how should Prime95 testing be done. I really believed you need fry your CPU with full AVX for hours to claim your rig as stable. Thank you, guys!


----------



## Grizzly111

Has anyone compared official F9 to F11c modded for performance and overclocking superiority?


----------



## GeneO

Grizzly111 said:


> Has anyone compared official F9 to F11c modded for performance and overclocking superiority?


f11c has newer microcode with security fixes that makes it a few percent worse in performance. f11c BIOS modded to use f9 level microcode performs the dame.

I found no improvement in overclocking (voltage or stability wise).

It was mostly an improvement in the user interface layout IMO.


----------



## Grizzly111

GeneO said:


> f11c has newer microcode with security fixes that makes it a few percent worse in performance. f11c BIOS modded to use f9 level microcode performs the dame.
> 
> I found no improvement in overclocking (voltage or stability wise).
> 
> It was mostly an improvement in the user interface layout IMO.



Thanks!


----------



## KrampusKlaus

I know that a lot of y’all have the aorus Master, but does anyone have information on the z390 aorus ultra f10b bios? It says it “fix[ed] cpu Vcore and power behavior.” Any idea what that’s about?


----------



## Athrutep

KrampusKlaus said:


> So, finally getting down to testing for overclock stability on my i7 9700k. Primary use is gaming (otherwise I would have gotten an R7 3700x lol)
> 
> Took falkentyne’s advice on how to test with prime95 v29.8 b6
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28114032-post7.html
> 
> So,
> 
> 1st instance 6 threads smallest FFT, AVX/AVX2 disabled
> 
> 2nd instance 2 threads custom FFT 512k-8192k, AVX2 disabled but AVX enabled, time to test: 0 minutes
> 
> But how long should I run this to check stability? This is literally my first time running prime95.



Good luck with the newest prime95 with avx enabled, that thing taxes your cpu to unrealistic levels that you will never reach in normal applications and makes overclocks unstable that are otherwise stable in other applications/games that utilize avx and it creates heat like stupid. 

i gave up trying to get my system stable in prime95 with avx on, i basically had to run almost 1.4V with llc set to turbo on my 9700k to get 5.1ghz no avx offset (because what is the point to use avx offset 4, then your overclock is only 4.7ghz) not to mention the heat. I get that it is for applications that use avx and tax your system more. But even the nvidea drivers sometimes bug out and trigger your avx offset.

I have my 9700K stable in realbench, prime 95 smallest fft no avx and it is stable in games like Hunt: Showdown (it utilizes AVX) and all other daily tasks i throw at it at 1.34V with LLC set to high. While it bluescreened trying to run Prime 95 avx at small fft.

I rather work to get my oc stable for the tasks i actually use it for and slightly increase the voltage if some program gives me trouble. Rather than the unrealistic mammoth of prime 95 smallest fft avx that makes even decent chips look like they lost the silicon lottery.

But that is just my opinion.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

KrampusKlaus said:


> So, finally getting down to testing for overclock stability on my i7 9700k. Primary use is gaming (otherwise I would have gotten an R7 3700x lol)
> 
> Took falkentyne’s advice on how to test with prime95 v29.8 b6
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28114032-post7.html
> 
> So,
> 
> 1st instance 6 threads smallest FFT, AVX/AVX2 disabled
> 
> 2nd instance 2 threads custom FFT 512k-8192k, AVX2 disabled but AVX enabled, time to test: 0 minutes
> 
> But how long should I run this to check stability? This is literally my first time running prime95.


About to lose my damn mind. Running this test all the way through with my ram at XMP, I thought that I was able to get a stable manual overclock of 5.0ghz, AVX offset 0, LLC Turbo, at exactly 1.3v vcore.

Then I tinkered with my memory settings and was able to pass 200% memtest HCI w/ 4000mhz, 16 18 18 36, tRFC 300 @ 1.45v memory, 1.5v training, 1.24 VCCIO, 1.25 VCCSA, with an additional 10mv vcore [1.31v total] just to be sure.

Try this setup again with prime95 and I get errors at even 1.32v. The only thing different is my memory overclock. Can these memory settings really draw >20mv vcore over what my processor needs? Is this normal?


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> About to lose my damn mind. Running this test all the way through with my ram at XMP, I thought that I was able to get a stable manual overclock of 5.0ghz, AVX offset 0, LLC Turbo, at exactly 1.3v vcore.
> 
> Then I tinkered with my memory settings and was able to pass 200% memtest HCI w/ 4000mhz, 16 18 18 36, tRFC 300 @ 1.45v memory, 1.5v training, 1.23 VCCIO, 1.24 VCCSA, with an additional 10mv vcore [1.31v total] just to be sure.
> 
> Try this setup again with prime95 and I get errors at even 1.32v. The only thing different is my memory overclock. Can these memory settings really draw >20mv vcore over what my processor needs? Is this normal?


Yes. The IMC handles hyperthreaded cores and memory. Sometimes a VCCIO increase will help you (I do not know enough about memory overclocking to know about VCCSA). If it doesn't, you must increase vcore.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Falkentyne said:


> Yes. The IMC handles hyperthreaded cores and memory. Sometimes a VCCIO increase will help you (I do not know enough about memory overclocking to know about VCCSA). If it doesn't, you must increase vcore.


But I’m running a 9700k, so no hyperthreading :/ would that still stress the IMC?

Edit: I’m rly just *****ing at this point. It’s been a long day of stress testing and I am personally very stressed out. Will be happy when it’s all over.

Thanks again for all the help. Overclocking can be very intimidating for the uninitiated, especially where there’s so much hardware specific information.

Aaaaaaand turns out 1.3v wasn’t stable at 5.0ghz w/ XMP after all.


----------



## Schmuckley

But did Aaron @Moparman ever use that L3014?

A guy got like 200+ boints last week with one.

Ugh, I got 2 kits of "Intel" 4K B-die, no way to test.

AMD doesn't even see it.


----------



## Gen.

Why is BIOS F11c normal and BIOS F11d not? tREFI is not regulated again, just like in F10...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Do y’all have any suggestions on settings to increase stability when overclocking with adaptive voltage? It feels like I’m almost stable at 5.0ghz AVX offset 0 at a certain voltage and then I get a hardware error when running falkentyne’s prime95 settings. I increase the DVID offset by 10mv and same thing.

And it’s not errors in the way I would expect. Like, sometimes it will seem stable about 40min I to the test and then I get an error. I increase by 10mv and then get an error in 5min. I swear I once made a successful pass and a half at 1.3v manual vcore, turbo llc, only ~1.25v VR VOUT under load during prime95. I’ve not been able to repeat this, even at ~1.31v VR VOUT under load.

Are there any general BIOS settings that y’all might recommend to improve stability in prime95?


EDIT: my current settings are

Core Frequency: 5.0ghz
Uncore Frequency: 4.7ghz
AVX Offset: 0

CPU Vcore: Normal
DVID: +0.110V
BCLK Adaptive Voltage: Auto
SVID Offset: Disabled
CPU Graphics Voltage: Auto
VCCIO: 1.24V
System Agent Voltage: 1.24V

Vcore LLC: Medium
AC Loadline: 1
DC Loadline: 1

DRAM Frequency: 4000mhz
CAS: 16
tRCD: 18
tRP 18
tRAS: 36
tRFC: 300

Enhanced Multi Core Performance: Disabled
CPU Flex Ratio Override: Disabled
Intel Turbo Boost: Disabled
Package Power Limit1 TDP (Watts): 4090
Package Power Limit1 Time: Auto
Package Power Limit2 TDP (Watts): 4090
Package Power Limit2 Time: Auto
Platform Power Limit1 TDP (Watts): 4090
Platform Power Limit1 Time: Auto
Platform Power Limit2 TDP (Watts): 4090
Power Limit3 (Watts): Auto
Power Limit3 Time: Auto
Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology: Enabled
CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E): Enabled
C3 State Support: Enabled
C6/C7 State Support: Enabled
C8 State Support: Enabled
C10 State Support: Enabled
Ring to Core offset (Down Bin): Auto
CPU EIST Function: Enabled
Race To Halt (RTH): Auto
Energy Efficient Turbo: Auto
Voltage Optimization: Auto

Internal Graphics: Auto



I can't keep on trying to increase the DVID offset because CPU package temps are already starting to approach 90c. And I have a sneaking suspicion that it's not just a lack of voltage that's keeping me from getting prime95 stable. I'm literally just about to give up on trying to pass even the 2 core fft 512-8912 AVX/6 core smallest fft no AVX and go back to my old DVID offset of 0.08v, which has never given me problems in games.


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> Do y’all have any suggestions on settings to increase stability when overclocking with adaptive voltage? It feels like I’m almost stable at 5.0ghz AVX offset 0 at a certain voltage and then I get a hardware error when running falkentyne’s prime95 settings. I increase the DVID offset by 10mv and same thing.
> 
> And it’s not errors in the way I would expect. Like, sometimes it will seem stable about 40min I to the test and then I get an error. I increase by 10mv and then get an error in 5min. I swear I once made a successful pass and a half at 1.3v manual vcore, turbo llc, only ~1.25v VR VOUT under load during prime95. I’ve not been able to repeat this, even at ~1.31v VR VOUT under load.
> 
> Are there any general BIOS settings that y’all might recommend to improve stability in prime95?
> 
> 
> EDIT: my current settings are
> 
> Core Frequency: 5.0ghz
> Uncore Frequency: 4.7ghz
> AVX Offset: 0
> 
> CPU Vcore: Normal
> DVID: +0.110V
> BCLK Adaptive Voltage: Auto
> SVID Offset: Disabled
> CPU Graphics Voltage: Auto
> VCCIO: 1.24V
> System Agent Voltage: 1.24V
> 
> Vcore LLC: Medium
> AC Loadline: 1
> DC Loadline: 1
> 
> DRAM Frequency: 4000mhz
> CAS: 16
> tRCD: 18
> tRP 18
> tRAS: 36
> tRFC: 300
> 
> Enhanced Multi Core Performance: Disabled
> CPU Flex Ratio Override: Disabled
> Intel Turbo Boost: Disabled
> Package Power Limit1 TDP (Watts): 4090
> Package Power Limit1 Time: Auto
> Package Power Limit2 TDP (Watts): 4090
> Package Power Limit2 Time: Auto
> Platform Power Limit1 TDP (Watts): 4090
> Platform Power Limit1 Time: Auto
> Platform Power Limit2 TDP (Watts): 4090
> Power Limit3 (Watts): Auto
> Power Limit3 Time: Auto
> Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology: Enabled
> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E): Enabled
> C3 State Support: Enabled
> C6/C7 State Support: Enabled
> C8 State Support: Enabled
> C10 State Support: Enabled
> Ring to Core offset (Down Bin): Auto
> CPU EIST Function: Enabled
> Race To Halt (RTH): Auto
> Energy Efficient Turbo: Auto
> Voltage Optimization: Auto
> 
> Internal Graphics: Auto
> 
> 
> 
> I can't keep on trying to increase the DVID offset because CPU package temps are already starting to approach 90c. And I have a sneaking suspicion that it's not just a lack of voltage that's keeping me from getting prime95 stable. I'm literally just about to give up on trying to pass even the 2 core fft 512-8912 AVX/6 core smallest fft no AVX and go back to my old DVID offset of 0.08v, which has never given me problems in games.


What motherboard is this?

If it's the Master or Xtreme, did you set VRM switching frequency to 300 khz first?
Also, try VCCIO 1.30v and VCCSA 1.320v first please.

If that helps, report back.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Falkentyne said:


> What motherboard is this?
> 
> If it's the Master or Xtreme, did you set VRM switching frequency to 300 khz first?
> Also, try VCCIO 1.30v and VCCSA 1.320v first please.
> 
> If that helps, report back.


It’s the Ultra, so I don’t have the option to set VRM switching frequency.

Tried those VCCIO and VCCSA settings and it still failed *le sigh*

Do any of the other settings I have look like they might have affected stability?

I’m wondering if perhaps I just got lucky the one time it passed 1.3 fixed voltage.


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> It’s the Ultra, so I don’t have the option to set VRM switching frequency.
> 
> Tried those VCCIO and VCCSA settings and it still failed *le sigh*
> 
> Do any of the other settings I have look like they might have affected stability?
> 
> I’m wondering if perhaps I just got lucky the one time it passed 1.3 fixed voltage.


What happens if you reduce the cache ratio by 100 mhz?


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Falkentyne said:


> What happens if you reduce the cache ratio by 100 mhz?


Tried, at several voltages, no go.


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> Tried, at several voltages, no go.


Try raising your tRFC to 360?
300 is a bit aggressive for 4000 mhz.
Probably won't help but you never know...


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Falkentyne said:


> Try raising your tRFC to 360?
> 300 is a bit aggressive for 4000 mhz.
> Probably won't help but you never know...


Ah, checked, I had actually switched to tRFC 360 my last few tests. So that didn’t work either.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Use standard LLC or High LLC for adaptive overclocks, I haven't passed a single occt-large/avx2 stress test using medium or low llc yet. Kedar is using high llc with his 5ghz adaptive profile, give it a shot.


Thanks for the suggestion. Re LLC, I’ve been trying to notice the different effects on VR VOUT under load. I watched buildzoid’s video on LLC and from what I gleaned it just shifts where the actual vcore sits under load, including the imperceptible voltage overshoots.

Is there a difference on stability between setting a higher LLC value (from “medium” to “high”) if you change the DVID offset to hit the same vcore (VR VOUT) under load? Does it change the behavior of the voltage spikes?

For now I’ve given up on prime95. Am 100 min into a RealBench test with no whea errors and max temps 78c with all my old settings. If I can play Jedi Fallen Order and Gears 5 with no crashes then I’ll be happy. Maybe I’ll try prime95 again this week or next weekend.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> A long time ago I tested medium llc with dvid mode. I turned on maximum performance windows power plan to see the idle and how much it would droop under load. It drooped about 45mv underload which is similar amount of vdroop to turbo llc + manual voltage set in bios. Medium llc + dvid mode is close to turbo llc in that aspect but medium also yields better temps. High LLC + dvid mode is similar to extreme llc + manual voltage set in bios when it comes to vdroop. High llc + dvid mode is better to use than extreme llc + manual voltage in bios though because temperatures and transients are a bit better. I prefer either standard llc or high llc with dvid overclocks personally, or once in a while low llc if i'm going turbo per core. Falkentyne is much more knowledgeable and equipped to answer voltage spike questions you might have, I wouldn't know where to start in that regard, sorry mate.
> 
> In terms of stability by matching the vcore, I did this with a 5ghz profile when I converted it from manual voltage in bios + turbo llc to a dvid mode overclock with high llc. It took the same amount of vcore underload to occt large-avx2 stable.
> 
> Btw, if you haven't already, make sure your cpu OC is stable before working on the ram otherwise it will always leave you wondering what the issue is if you run into problems trying to find stability. A note about cpu OC and ram stability, In my case, It took an extra 40mv vcore underload to go from [email protected] with ram timings untouched for 5ghz all core to be stable when going to a manually tuned ram profile with tighter timings.


Thanks. I really thought that I had a prime95 stable manual overclock w/XMP, but now same settings I can’t get it to pass again. So far, I’ve only ever seen errors from overclocking my GPU or memory too hard. But DVID offset of 0.08v, LLC medium, 5.0ghz core, 4.7ghz uncore seems to be perfectly fine.

Something I’ve noticed is that increasing vcore doesn’t seem to improve stability in prime95. Sometimes it even fails faster with more vcore. And eventually not even my Dark Rock Pro 4 can keep temps from spiking to >90c. Is stability in Prime95 temperature sensitive?


----------



## Grizzly111

Super Stable 4000Mhz 16-16-16 @ 1.45v 1.18/1.23 IO/SA for anyone that needs a good start for Gskill 3600CL16 RAM. BIOS: F11c

Will do 4133Mhz 16-17-17 @ 1.49v.


----------



## Driller au

Grizzly111 said:


> Super Stable 4000Mhz 16-16-16 @ 1.45v 1.18/1.23 IO/SA for anyone that needs a good start for Gskill 3600CL16 RAM. BIOS: F11c
> 
> Will do 4133Mhz 16-17-17 @ 1.49v.


Hey mate where in OZ did you buy that kit ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> I'm unable to answer any p95 questions, I don't use it. I test with Occt, realbench, aida64, karhu, hci, bfv, apex and timespy. (just gaming/occasional streaming/video editing)


Which do you find the most exacting? I've heard of OCCT, but I'm not familiar with the settings. What do you use?

Edit: just got OCCT 4.5.1, tried Linpack with AVX enabled, fails IMMEDIATELY even adding up to 0.05mv and temps immediately soar to 90c at that lvl. **** that lol...


----------



## Grizzly111

Driller au said:


> Hey mate where in OZ did you buy that kit ?


 @Driller au I had to order it online from Amazon. Impossible to find a matched set of NON-RGB B-die in Australia.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

Grizzly111 said:


> @Driller au I had to order it online from Amazon. Impossible to find a matched set of NON-RGB B-die in Australia.


yea had that problem, that's why i asked dunno if it's worth the extra money to go up from the 3600mhz i an at now but nice to know,
thanks


----------



## satinghostrider

Grizzly111 said:


> Super Stable 4000Mhz 16-16-16 @ 1.45v 1.18/1.23 IO/SA for anyone that needs a good start for Gskill 3600CL16 RAM. BIOS: F11c
> 
> Will do 4133Mhz 16-17-17 @ 1.49v.


Nice work!
What did you set your DDRVPP and DRAM Termination Voltage in the BIOS to?

Thanks!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> Would you mind explaining what DDRVPP is and in what scenarios it should be increased?


I know most manually set DDRVPP voltage to 2.50V and for this I do not know for which scenario it should be increased.
As for Dram Termination voltages, it should be set to half your VDIMM. But @KedarWolf has mentioned he is stable at less than half of his VDIMM and I am using 0.630V for my settings with 1.47V DRAM/Training.

Maybe some of you master tuners for memory overclocking can shed some light. I am keen to know also. I bought another pair of F4-3600C16D non-RGB RAM and it does not want to run at 4133Mhz with my older pair I bought over a year back. So I wanna try 4000Mhz and see if that works. I am currently using @KedarWolf's timings @ 4133Mhz and it works great with the older pair. For some odd reason, even the new ones are B-Die and A1 revision. Not sure why they can't work at 4,133Mhz when I add in the new ones even with all the timings on AUTO.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> If I Clock watchdog time out BSOD during a stress test and I know that I'm close to stable, is it always best to do 10mv increments of vcore or is it good to sometimes do 5mv of vcore? Referring to manual vcore in bios + turbo llc. Has anyone had their chip scale at 5mv intervals or is it always 10mv? For example, Does anyone have a chip that requires something like 1.305v manual vcore in bios or is it always in increments of 10mv like 1.3v or 1.31v?


I prefer using increments in 10mv compared to 5mv. Sometimes under load, 5mv hardly does anything and even if it does, I feel that it is at the edge of stability at that particular increment. I am using LLC High though.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

reachthesky said:


> If I Clock watchdog time out BSOD during a stress test and I know that I'm close to stable, is it always best to do 10mv increments of vcore or is it good to sometimes do 5mv of vcore? Referring to manual vcore in bios + turbo llc. Has anyone had their chip scale at 5mv intervals or is it always 10mv? For example, Does anyone have a chip that requires something like 1.305v manual vcore in bios or is it always in increments of 10mv like 1.3v or 1.31v?


10mv to get it rock stable and if not lazy drop it another 5 and re run all the tests. Laziness generally wins out so it’s 10mv for me.

Test suite:
P95 small non avx = 2hrs
Occt large/avx2 = 2hrs
X264 stress test = 30loops


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> gotcha. THank you.
> 
> I'm currently figuring out how my chips scales using manual vcore + turbo llc + different turbo ratios. For 4.8ghz all core + 5.1ghz single core + ring to core for cache between 4.5ghz-4.8ghz + [email protected], I need 1.24v manual vcore in bios + turbo llc to be 1 hour OCCT-Large/AVX2 stable. Without using Turbo ratios, 5ghz all core 4.7ghz cache + [email protected] needed 1.34v manual vcore in bios + turbo llc to pass the same test. I'll have to revisit 5ghz after i'm done with 4.9ghz to see if the vcore requirements drop when turbo ratios are enabled.


I am using 1.35V for 5.2Ghz on my 9900KS with 4.7Ghz Ring. Turbo Ratios all disabled. LLC is High and No AVX offset. I think you might be better off using turbo ratios at a lower voltage. I do not have a problem with heat though, stress testing I am getting 76 degrees on the hottest core after 1 hour on Prime 95 small FFTs.

Actually if you are using 1.34V on LLC Turbo, I think you have a good chip. Though I think running Turbo LLC on the board is not really a good thing due to transient voltages as @Falkentyne has mentioned earlier.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am using 1.35V for 5.2Ghz on my 9900KS with 4.7Ghz Ring. Turbo Ratios all disabled. LLC is High and No AVX offset. I think you might be better off using turbo ratios at a lower voltage. I do not have a problem with heat though, stress testing I am getting 76 degrees on the hottest core after 1 hour on Prime 95 small FFTs.
> 
> Actually if you are using 1.34V on LLC Turbo, I think you have a good chip. Though I think running Turbo LLC on the board is not really a good thing due to transient voltages as Falkentyne has mentioned earlier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I take it you spent around 500 dollars or more for sufficient cooling?
Click to expand...











Yup I'm on a full custom loop using EK.
Sure I'll get it done when I'm gone tonight. 🙂


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup I'm on a full custom loop using EK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gotcha. I was cheap on cooling, I spent about 190 on an AIO and got some liquid metal, gets me 5ghz avx stable on a trash chip. Might be able to handle occt-large/avx at 5.1ghz with around 1.4v manual vcore in bios but i'm too chicken to find out haha.
> 
> That's one hell of a system you go there, purrrrrty. Is that distilled water or are you using a coolant?
Click to expand...

Thanks mate! Well honestly I find more gains on memory overclocking than increasing 100Mhz on my CPU. I can do 5.3Ghz at 1.42V but it is not worth the heat for the amount of voltage needed. I find it grossly disproportionate. I'm using EK concentrated coolant with distilled water and the EK blue dye pack. 

I think if you can get 5.1Ghz stable with your current cooling, you are already better than most who are struggling to even get 5.0Ghz stable with obscene voltages.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks mate! Well honestly I find more gains on memory overclocking than increasing 100Mhz on my CPU. I can do 5.3Ghz at 1.42V but it is not worth the heat for the amount of voltage needed. I find it grossly disproportionate. I'm using EK concentrated coolant with distilled water and the EK blue dye pack.
> 
> I think if you can get 5.1Ghz stable with your current cooling, you are already better than most who are struggling to even get 5.0Ghz stable with obscene voltages.
> 
> 
> 
> I think most people struggle because they think they need their gaming cpu to be p95 stable for some reason. It's just a bad idea. Remove p95 from the equation and replace it with OCCT-Large/avx2 and you are automatically Apex legends/BFV stable no cpu internal errors or crashing.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I don't even run those tests for long. Like an hour max and I use Battlefront 2 and Battlefield 5 to test. For some odd reason, Battlefront 2 hates cache clocks at 4.8Ghz and above. Once I set it to 4.7Ghz, it is stable. And I do not want to add more voltage just to run a higher cache. I feel most put unnecessary stress on their systems to get it stable but realistic loads like gaming do not ever get close to the loads you see in P95.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Timur Born

Grizzly111 said:


> Super Stable 4000Mhz 16-16-16 @ 1.45v 1.18/1.23 IO/SA for anyone that needs a good start for Gskill 3600CL16 RAM. BIOS: F11c


I am curious if RTL and IO-L can be lowered at these high frequencies, too. Please save your settings as a profile, load optimized defaults, reboot, load your saved profile and reboot again. Do not change any UEFI settings afterwards and just check if latencies dropped.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> I think most people struggle because they think they need their gaming cpu to be p95 stable for some reason. It's just a bad idea. Remove p95 from the equation and replace it with OCCT-Large/avx2 and you are automatically Apex legends/BFV stable no cpu internal errors or crashing assuming they also test memory with karhu + hci.


I am one of those people, because I need my rig to be as stable overclocked as stock. One reason is that I test hardware, software and especially drivers.

The other reason is that every one in a while you *do* get a crash or odd behavior in games. This is more dramatic in strategy games where the overclocked PC is doing the computer turns. You just don't want errors to mess with the outcome of that.

Then there is the problem of power consumption. Using adaptive voltage shows that my CPU draws very considerably more power going from x48 to x49 and then with every higher multiplier. x47 to x48 is less dramatic already, but demonstrates why Intel chose to max out at x47 at stock. Everything below x47 is far less pronounced. So temperatures increase far more with every multiplier step above x47.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

I sent out my Master to the store where I purchased it asking for support: too much weirdness happening, since I managed to make it work just once, and even then my GPU wasn't seen in Windows. 

@Falkentyne sorry for bothering, wanted to ask you one thing: during the brief spark of sanity of my PC when I could enter the BIOS and then Windows I saw in the former a voltage reading of my 9900KS of 1.332V (modded BIOS F11c with BA/BE Microcodes) with every setting left on AUTO (I had just done a CMOS reset), while in the latter, after a few minutes, a Maximum VRVOUT value reported by HWInfo of 1.367V. Is it
(especially this second value) something to be expected with all CPU Voltage/LLC settings left on Auto, and therefore I will have to adjust everything manually? The only non-standard settings in Windows was having autonomous mode disabled after modifying a registry key (which I think is the same as having Speedshift disabled in BIOS). I'm asking because I just did the upgrade from a 9900K and then all sort of trouble started, so I haven't had any time to properly test this new CPU.


----------



## satinghostrider

Guys,

Any way for me to improve this?

Am on the following settings :

1.25V VCCIO/VSA
1.47V VDIMM/VTT
2.500 DDRVPP
0.603 DRAM TERMINATION VOLTAGE

Tried to drop TCWL to 13 but then it gets stuck and I have to clear CMOS and try again. So far with 14 it is working fine but would like to know if I could adjust anything further. Thanks Guys!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys,
> 
> Any way for me to improve this?
> 
> Am on the following settings :
> 
> 1.25V VCCIO/VSA
> 1.47V VDIMM/VTT
> 2.500 DDRVPP
> 0.603 DRAM TERMINATION VOLTAGE
> 
> Tried to drop TCWL to 13 but then it gets stuck and I have to clear CMOS and try again. So far with 14 it is working fine but would like to know if I could adjust anything further. Thanks Guys!
> 
> 
> 
> I noticed that when I loosened tRTP i had more flexibility in other timings. Aorus master doesn't like odd number tCWL very much. I noticed when I went conservative on tCWL, 1 or 2 below CL, it gave me more room to tighten other timings. I recommend testing with 32768 tREFI + 8 tCKE until all the other timings are stable and then put the finishing touches on. Is there a reason you are manually setting the termination voltage so low? Is auto not working well?
> 
> Here is a tRFC resource chart I use for reference from time to time. They say most b-die can do 160-180ns just fine, sometimes even lower.
Click to expand...

Ok so I set my DDRVPP and Dram Termination to Auto, 32768 tREFI and 8 tCKE? tCWL I keep it at 14? Thanks alot man!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so I set my DDRVPP and Dram Termination to Auto, 32768 tREFI and 8 tCKE? tCWL I keep it at 14? Thanks alot man!
> 
> 
> 
> I would raise tcwl to 16 and tRTP to 8 and see if that lets you tighten the rest of the secondaries/tertiaries.
Click to expand...

Ok so tCWL at 16 is an issue. I can't boot and had to clear CMOS. tRTP at 8 and tREFI at 32768 now. And tCWL back to 14.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so tCWL at 16 is an issue. I can't boot and had to clear CMOS. tRTP at 8 and tREFI at 32768 now.
> 
> 
> 
> hmmmmmm, interesting. I assume you've already tried 15? What about 17 or 18?
Click to expand...

Not tried 15. Now at 14 seems perfect with tRTP at 8 and tREFI at 32768. Anything else I can change?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

So my 4000mhz 16 18 18 38 memory overclock that passed an overnight run of memtest HCI and 3 hours of RealBench causes Jedi Fallen Order to crash. My 5.0ghz overclock with memory at XMP, completely fine. 

Samsung B-Die that is only stable at 3200 CL14. I really lost the silicon lottery somewhere, but I don’t know if it’s my memory or the IMC on my 9700k. Other than getting new ram, is there a way that I can check which is crap?


----------



## Intrud3r

Lowered my memory overclock to 17-22-22 @ 4000 @ 1.450V (in comparison to 16-22-22 @ 4000 @1.480V)

Was running 5.2 / 4.8 HT = off (with memory at C16) .... it was borderline stable.
Noticed I had to use higher voltages then I was used to ... been playing around with C16 for quite a while

Thought why not give it some more slack at put it back at C17.

Started testing and found that I can actually lower my cpu voltages again to the values I was used to before.

5.1 / 4.7 HT = on --> 1.344V under load
5.2 / 4.7 HT = off --> 1.344V under load

At C16 I needed 1.370V vcore under load to get the same stability (have not touched VCCIO / VCCSA yet, still the high values I have in my signature, prolly can lower them too)

(also still need to test 5.2 / 4.8 HT = off again, for now 5.2 / 4.7 is nice enough. 5.1 / 4.7 HT = on get's darn hot, so 5.2 HT = off for now)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Does starwars crash to desktop? Is it a bsod? Does the computer lock up?


Almost all CTD. Once I got a computer lock.

I have 5 hours of total play time previously with my current CPU and GPU overclock. Only problem was once the game hung at a loading screen.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> You probably have a ****ty chip. A decent to good motherboard can make a ****ty chip perform reasonably well though if you don't care about degradation.


Which chip? The CPU? And will a ****ty CPU degrade even if it runs under 80c and under 1.35 vcore?

Edit: I’ll give the 10mv dram bump a try, I’m also gonna try increasing the DVID offset a little in case it’s vcore related.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Who knows, Don't you want to find out?


I do. I just read somewhere that a good way of determining whether it’s the IMC or the ram that’s bad is checking one stick at a time. Does that sound right?

And I’ll try changing one variable at a time. Going to go back to the over lock settings that I rmb worked before and re-validate with memtest HCI. Then going to try with Fallen Order and try playing individually with dram voltage/vcore/VCCIO/VCCSA.

EDIT: sorry, I’m just exasperated. Spent an entire weekend doing stress tests and the only thing I’ve found that’s gaming stable is my original CPU overclock.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Just add the tick of dram and start playing already to see if it worked or not. stop complicating things lol. It's not uncommon to need an extra tick of dram voltage to be stable in games after passing memtests/cpu stress tests. See if that one simple tweak will give you stability before diving into a myriad of testing.


Thanks. And I really do appreciate all the advice you’ve given over the weekend. This thread has been a godsend.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Just paying it forward . You'll have to excuse my lack of patience though. It's like I want to help, but I don't want to ruin it for people either(as in solve the puzzle for you, because then you'd have less entertainment value out of your chip ). I think one of the biggest psychological product strengths that overclocking in general has is that there is a large sense of discovery. Taking that away would be a bad thing. Sometimes I don't know how to help people without taking that way ><. I guess I need more social engineering practice .


I agree with the fact that the learning curve is very nice and testing the potential is also really entertaining.
Still playing with my cpu even after 1.2 years ... just love to fiddle with it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

Well, after a lot more testing, playing, and trial and error, I believe I have failed to achieve stability above DDR4-4000 on my kit. I can get everything up to 4266 stable for short duration (1-2 hour) stress tests and medium duration (2-6 hour) gaming sessions, but eventually crashes start rearing their head. I did manage to stabalize my 5.2 GHz OC again, which I was thankful for at least. Slightly higher voltage than I wanted (under load, 1.368V) but I can live with it. 

It feels kind of lousy to get that far with memory repeatedly and then have to back off down to 4000, but I think I'm giving up going above 4000 MHz. I never have the patience to stabilize an OC when it requires essentially a full day or more of stress testing just to test if it's stable.

In case it's of use to anyone, my BIOS settings are attached


----------



## KrampusKlaus

I hear you. It’s like wanderlust but tinkering.

Whenever I get mods for games that I play, I often spend more time fiddling with settings and stats in the txt/xml files than I do actually playing the games themselves.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

Let's try these images again...


Spoiler


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

And when I do spend a ton of time playing games, it’s usually stuff that’s super old and isn’t even optimized to take full advantage of my system. Like Star Wars Empire at War or Total War Medieval 2.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## BigMack70

reachthesky said:


> How has [email protected] 6 been performing in games?


Haven't had any issues with it (edit - at least, not at 4000 MHz; I have not pinpointed what specifically, if it is something specific, has been causing instability above 4000), if that's what you are asking about. I've never really been sure if 6 or 8 is the better value there, though.

I don't like to do overnight testing, because I like to unwind with my games late at night after everything is done for the day... testing is for off and on during the day when I get spare moments between tasks with work


----------



## Falkentyne

BigMack70 said:


> Let's try these images again...
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Your TWR should be 16, not 10. TWR should be tRTP * 2.
Then tWCL can be set to TWR.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

BigMack70 said:


> Let's try these images again...
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Curious, 

Aside from the various voltage settings, are there any other of these BIOS settings that you’ve found helps improve stability?

I’m also playing with a DVID offset overclock and have more or less guessed which bios settings may or may not help.


----------



## BigMack70

KrampusKlaus said:


> Curious,
> 
> Aside from the various voltage settings, are there any other of these BIOS settings that you’ve found helps improve stability?
> 
> I’m also playing with a DVID offset overclock and have more or less guessed which bios settings may or may not help.


At 5.1, I could leave a lot of things on "auto" in the advanced CPU section and still be stable. To stabilize 5.2, I had to manually set everything there as shown. I also tried manually setting CPU Vcore current protection to extreme but I couldn't tell that it made any difference so returned it to auto.



Falkentyne said:


> Your TWR should be 16, not 10. TWR should be tRTP * 2.
> Then tWCL can be set to TWR.


OK. Made the change to TWR. I don't know what tWCL is; I assume you mean tCWL?


----------



## warbucks

Falkentyne said:


> Your TWR should be 16, not 10. TWR should be tRTP * 2.
> Then tWCL can be set to TWR.


Actually, this is not true. From the guide on Github, you don't have to run all of the timings at one preset. You might only be able to run tRRDS tRRDL tFAW at the tight preset, but you may be able to run tWR at the extreme preset.


----------



## Timur Born

reachthesky said:


> Ok so 4.9ghz all core, 5.2ghz single/double core passed 1 hour occt-large/avx2 at 1.29v manual vcore in bios + turbo llc.


If you want to test single core stability, download "Parkcontrol" and set core parking to 10% (aka all but 2 cores park). Then run load on 1 core, then 2 cores, then 3 cores and so on. Once you are sure that everything is stable, disable core parking again.


----------



## Falkentyne

BigMack70 said:


> At 5.1, I could leave a lot of things on "auto" in the advanced CPU section and still be stable. To stabilize 5.2, I had to manually set everything there as shown. I also tried manually setting CPU Vcore current protection to extreme but I couldn't tell that it made any difference so returned it to auto.
> 
> 
> 
> OK. Made the change to TWR. I don't know what tWCL is; I assume you mean tCWL?





warbucks said:


> Actually, this is not true. From the guide on Github, you don't have to run all of the timings at one preset. You might only be able to run tRRDS tRRDL tFAW at the tight preset, but you may be able to run tWR at the extreme preset.


Well if he was crashing at 4000 mhz, that's a good idea to consider testing at before tightening those timings up so much.


----------



## BigMack70

I haven't had any crashes @ the linked 4000 MHz settings. Only above that. Haven't found 100% stable settings at 4100, 4133, or 4266.


----------



## Grizzly111

Timur Born said:


> I am curious if RTL and IO-L can be lowered at these high frequencies, too. Please save your settings as a profile, load optimized defaults, reboot, load your saved profile and reboot again. Do not change any UEFI settings afterwards and just check if latencies dropped.



There is no way this board can lower RTLs on RAM >3900Mhz unless you use a BLCK overclock from 3900Mhz to 4000Mhz which is not reliable. Need to ask Gigabyte for a BIOS update that allows this to be accomplished successfully.


----------



## Timur Born

So you tried the profile->defaults->profile approach? I did not try this with high frequencies myself yet.


----------



## Grizzly111

Timur Born said:


> So you tried the profile->defaults->profile approach? I did not try this with high frequencies myself yet.



Yes. Optimized Defaults sets the RTLs to 5 each. When the 4000Mhz profile is loaded again & rebooted RTLs go back to 13/14. 4000Mhz RAM apears to be the stability sweetspot vs voltages needed on this board with the current BIOS. Asus APEX boards go much lower for RTLs at this frequency. Gigabyte for some reason sets it higher on the Master.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> So after consulting reddit, It seems that I can only run 4.8ghz safely for 24/7 use, 5ghz all core exceeds intel safe spec at certain loads. Do I now officially RMA this chip once and for all?



Why is that exactly? 



I have discovered that in order to run 4000Mhz RAM you need a higher Vcore. It is precisely what you mentioned.


For example I can run all-core 4.9Ghz stable with 1.2v+ 0.02v offset and 4.5 cache.


BUT. I can't run even 4.8Ghz with 1.2v and 4.4Ghz cache + 4000Mhz RAM. Stock RAM speed is fine. Kahru picks up an error almost instantly. I find that amazing.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

KedarWolf said:


> So, I just spent all day stress testing various cache settings, timings etc.
> 
> Here all the results.
> 
> If I have CPU at 5.0 GHz and lower cache from 47 to 45, I can run 4200 Mhz on RAM at 17-17-17-38 2T with a low tRFC of 345 stress-tested stable.
> 
> If I have the cache at 47 I can only run 4133 MHz at 17-17-17-38 2T with a tRFC of 374 for the same CPU voltage.
> 
> If I raise the CPU voltage by .040 I can run the tRFC at 339, not worth it.
> 
> 4200 Mhz at those timings with the cache at 45 does better in read, write and copy in AIDA64 cache and memory test than the 4133 MHz at a 47 cache.
> 
> Lastly, I put the RAM voltage at 1.46v for those timings. I set the DRAM Termination voltage at Auto which is .600v. If I set it to .730v or half of the RAM voltage as some have suggested, it fails the stress test.
> 
> In my BIOS screenshots, I included I disabled the drives not connected and the Serial port disabled as it's good practice to disable anything in the BIOS you're not actually using.
> 
> *And IMPORTANT NOTE! If you're going to stress test with LinX 0.9.5 have the power limits set as 200 or lower in the BIOS or an AVX Offset of 5 or higher you're going to have temps way too high and freeze up your PC as someone did using my settings WITHOUT setting the power limits.
> 
> You can test your temps by having HWInfo open, start LinX, wait the 15 seconds until it REALLY kicks in, see temps. I suggest if the hottest core is over 85C lower power limits or set a higher AVX Offset.*


 @KedarWolf Assuming I am on a 9900ks, do you think if I keep my cache at 4.7Ghz, would it still run at your settings given that the 9900K/9900KS has a slightly better IMC? Just curious. Or do I have to step down to 4.5Ghz in order to run this frequency at 4,200Mhz? TIA!


----------



## robertr1

If you don’t want to add more vcore for tuned ram, loosen up trrd-s/-l and tfaw 

They speed up AVX which in turn needs more voltage and the faster AVX processing leads to more heat also.

Obviously you will lose performance but you have to decide the trade off for yourself.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## robertr1

P95 small fft isn’t ram related. It runs entirely in Cpu cache. They’re two different things. 

You will likely run foul of Intel spec any with reasonable level of oc. You’re also not going to running in that range routinely unless you have work loads that mimic small fft AVX you’re working with all the time.

Most of us exceed Intel spec when stress testing.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> @KedarWolf Assuming I am on a 9900ks, do you think if I keep my cache at 4.7Ghz, would it still run at your settings given that the 9900K/9900KS has a slightly better IMC? Just curious. Or do I have to step down to 4.5Ghz in order to run this frequency at 4,200Mhz? TIA!
> 
> 
> 
> It's not worth running anything higher than 3900 memory on any gigabyte motherboard. They didn't properly engineer their memory overclocking technology like ASUS does and latency is substantially worse at 4000mhz or higher no matter what.
Click to expand...

Actually I tried Kedarwolf's settings for the 4,200 and it was faster than the 4,133Mhz but marginal only. His 4,200 has tCWL at 14 while his 4,133 had 13. So you're spot on that perhaps the Gigabyte Boards don't like odd tCWL's. I actually tried Lurifaks timings with CL16 for 4,133Mhz and that is incredibly fast. I'm still testing and seeing how stable that will be in games.

I actually wanted to try your CL15 for 4,133Mhz but I think that need 1.55V. Are you running that as your daily now? I'd love to try them out if you have the full bios settings. I searched and saw them but saw alot of revisions to your testing so I'm not sure what the exact values are.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually I tried Kedarwolf's settings for the 4,200 and it was faster than the 4,133Mhz but marginal only. I actually tried Lurifaks timings with CL16 for 4,133Mhz and that seems okay.
> 
> I actually wanted to try your CL15 for 4,133Mhz but I think that need 1.55V. Are you running that as your daily now? I'd love to try them out if you have the full bios settings. I searched and saw them but saw alot of revisions to your testing so I'm not sure what the exact values are.
> 
> 
> 
> His 4200 is faster than 4133 correct, but 3900 is faster than 4200 on these boards. It's entirely pointless to clock any higher than 3900 on these boards, you get worse performance. The golden rule for memory overclocking is do not sacrifice latency for bandwidth when overclocking or only trade 1 cas for 200 mhz or more in clockspeed. I don't mind revealing pain points or flaws in technology, I think we should be doing this more often to force/push innovation or to expose a brand for not living up to reasonable customer expectations.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I'm fairly new to clocking memory so forgive my ignorance. Do you have the 3900Mhz BIOS settings? I'd love to try them out and see how it works out.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Johaho

satinghostrider said:


> Totally agree. I'm fairly new to clocking memory so forgive my ignorance. Do you have the 3900Mhz BIOS settings? I'd love to try them out and see how it works out.


Here you go

For this setting i need an active Fan that cools the memory. Around 42 degrees it gets unstable.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

Johaho said:


> Here you go
> 
> For this setting i need an active Fan that cools the memory. Around 42 degrees it gets unstable.


Hey thanks man! Can you let me know the VCCSA and VCCIO Voltages including DIMM Voltage? Please also let me know which other voltages were changed. Thanks man! Can't wait to try this.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Johaho

satinghostrider said:


> Hey thanks man! Can you let me know the VCCSA and VCCIO Voltages including DIMM Voltage? Please also let me know which other voltages were changed. Thanks man! Can't wait to try this.


Dram Voltage+Dram Training Voltage i have set to 1.46V in Bios.

VCCSA and VCCIO you have to test it yourself, what your Cpu needs.


----------



## satinghostrider

Johaho said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey thanks man! Can you let me know the VCCSA and VCCIO Voltages including DIMM Voltage? Please also let me know which other voltages were changed. Thanks man! Can't wait to try this.
> 
> 
> 
> Dram Voltage+Dram Training Voltage i have set to 1.46V in Bios.
> 
> VCCSA and VCCIO you have to test it yourself, what your Cpu needs.
Click to expand...

Thank you Sir!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nammi

Even if an Intel rep came by here, you'd probably get directed to their RMA page.

Though if you're planning on nuking your chip, not sure if that'd get rejected or not... Unless you've got the tuning plan.


----------



## danakin

sup there. 

im pretty new on ocing my system. trying kedarwolfs settings from late october 2019.

9900k, 150i platinum, 3600 cl16 gskills non rgb.

i uploaded a pic with a 20 min stresstest with occt large avx2. Are these safe for 24/7 use /gaming ?

i recognized that with occt temps hit 91 on a single core for a second every few minutes. i dont have that problem with prime 95 1344´s. temps with prime are in the mid 70´s

thanks for answers

best regards,

pete


----------



## Nammi

danakin said:


> sup there.
> 
> im pretty new on ocing my system. trying kedarwolfs settings from late october 2019.
> 
> 9900k, 150i platinum, 3600 cl16 gskills non rgb.
> 
> i uploaded a pic with a 20 min stresstest with occt large avx2. Are these safe for 24/7 use /gaming ?
> 
> i recognized that with occt temps hit 91 on a single core for a second every few minutes. i dont have that problem with prime 95 1344´s. temps with prime are in the mid 70´s
> 
> thanks for answers
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete


Your chip does seem to be rather volt hungry, keeping temps in check during your daily tasks will be key for longevity(the lower the better). If possible degradation is something you'd like to avoid. Other than that, not spotting anything concerning.


----------



## Moparman

Schmuckley said:


> But did Aaron @*Moparman* ever use that L3014?
> 
> A guy got like 200+ boints last week with one.
> 
> Ugh, I got 2 kits of "Intel" 4K B-die, no way to test.
> 
> AMD doesn't even see it.



No I never had one of those Xeons. However send me those Bdie i'll give them a go.


----------



## JirenX

Hello. (English is not my first langue)
I have problems to understand how my i9 9900k work and hope that i can resolve my problem here. 2k19 summer i bought a new pc, 9900k 32gb ram 3000 cl16, aurous pro wifi, krakenx62. After i installed windows i noticed that i was hitting 85c in battlefield V and from there i started to tweak 9900k. First i started with a prime95, after 2 min 105c. I start to look on internet and look for answers and find out that prime 95 will stress the **** out of your pc and better to use aida64extreme or other things to stress. On aida after 5 min 95-100c temps. I start to tweack settings and i find out i can.t do 5.0 on all cores. Also on stock voltage sometime will go up to 1.425 on Vr Vout. i tried to do other things and seems like the only thing that helped me was to put both loadline calibrations on power saving and low.
Now since i want to give up after messing with diff settings for alot of time can u guys help me to find something stable.
Bios on board( aorus pro wifi) is f12c, lastes one.
I don.t know where to start or where to look. 
Thank you. I will provide any info/photos u need.


----------



## warbucks

Falkentyne said:


> Well if he was crashing at 4000 mhz, that's a good idea to consider testing at before tightening those timings up so much.


Absolutely, just wanted to clarify they aren't tied together in such a formulaic way.


----------



## satinghostrider

Anyone knows when the new BIOS will be released from BETA?


----------



## Grizzly111

Johaho said:


> Here you go
> 
> For this setting i need an active Fan that cools the memory. Around 42 degrees it gets unstable.


 Please use Kahru Memtest with 'Cache Enabled' setting OR HCI overnight + 10 loops TestMem5 Usmus V3 to see if that is stable. 



I found that 3900 CL15 requires a lot more DRAM voltage than 4000CL16. Wonder if that is worth it as matched Bdie sets are becoming more scarce. The 4000 always has better Read/Write by approx 1GB/sec. Not sure for gaming FPS if 1ns improvement in latency is superior.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## 3m3k

*z390 aourus master issues?*

Hello there, having bunch of issues with a new build system (6 months) - 

specs: 9900k - all auto - took OC off (was 5gh with 1.3V & llc on Turbo(6))
z390 aorus master - tried bioses from f8 to f11c
patriot viper 32GB(4x8) - cl19 4000Mhz
GPU - titan xp / gtx 780
sabrent 1TB m.2
PSU - Seasonic Focus platinium 850 / corsair hx 850 silver

not thermal issue for sure - GPU & CPU in custom loop 3x360 rad

issue: initially started on overclocked system (stable in realbench, intel burn test, geekbench, memtest, occt, 8-16 hrs on each) only thing not passing was prime95 with AVX. was having occasional crashes - seemed like a GPU/Gsync issue initially - no signal on screen, sometimes picture came back - could be working for days with no issue initially but ti became more frequent, occasional no post, and occasional "choppiness" of the OS post boot , occasional frame drops from 150 to 50 - required restart to fix , occasional crashes watching youtube or even starting chrome

i took all the OC off the GPU, CPU and switched XMP off - issues less frequent but still ongoing
tried different bioses, reinstaled GPU drivers - old and new ones - same issues on all configurations

swapped the GPU to 780 and used different pcie raiser - since then PC boots only with XMP off - the flashing underscore when posting seems to last longer and when the the XMP is enabled freezes mid windows boot.

tried with both RAM kits separately in different slots, different PSU's - and Ram passes the memtest with no problem (4 passes - all 13 tests)

is my mobo dying - had similar problems with Asus sabretooth 990FX - RMA sorted the issues out

please help, i'm out of ideas


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## 3m3k

is it a default setting now? i did not change anything in the control pannel after clean install of the drivers except : priority: Quality and the color settings from limited to full (0-256)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## 3m3k

reachthesky said:


> It is off by default. I got no ideas, sorry . I also wouldn't know what symptoms of a dying or malfunctioning motherboard look like either. Have you tried contacting gigabyte technical support to see what they say?


ordered another z390 master to doublecheck if Ram/CPU causes the issues and then the ssd - if all of these will be fine all points to the motherboard then...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## 3m3k

reachthesky said:


> Why not just RMA instead? What happens if it isn't the motherboard? You pay a restocking fee for the second board when you goto return it?


not with Amazon prime  faster this way, also need a PC up and running asap, RMA of the ASUS took almost a month as had to send it to the seller and then they sent it to Asus...


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> You should be getting more than 1ns improvement over c16-4000 with c15-3900, it's at least 2-3NS difference when all subtimings are tightened for both frequencies. Are your rtls for 3900 not training properly? You should be getting rtls 57/57/59/59 with [email protected] with iols 6/6/6/6.



I am getting @ 3900 CL16-16-16: IOLS 7/7/7/6 and 60/60/61/61 at the moment.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> If you are ok with trying max 24/7 ddr4 b-die volts, then you can try this:
> 
> clear cmos
> load preferred cpu OC profile in bios and then type in the following settings:
> 
> 1.25v sa/io
> 1.5v vdimm
> 1.5v training
> 
> [email protected]
> 
> manually type in the rtls/iols in both channels
> A: rtl 57
> rtl 57
> iol 6
> iol 6
> 
> 
> 
> B: rtl 59
> rtl 59
> iol 6
> iol 6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I used to use the above set up till I figured out c16-4500. c15-3900 @ 15-15-15-32 will offer between 36.9 ns and 37.3 ns latency on 4 dimms with cache ratio at 48 or 47. If you've tightened everything up as much as possible, you'll get a little over 60 gb/s reads/writes and about 58.5-59 gb/s copy on 4x8GB [email protected]



It won't let me enter in the RTLs / IOLS manually to teach channel on F11C


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

So, I had a BSOD yesterday while watching YouTube. MEMORY_MANAGEMENT. My old CPU overclock in place with memory at XMP.

After a bit of research, assumed that it was a driver issue conflicting with Firefox. So I turned off hardware acceleration, and updated every last out of date driver that I could find.

For posterity’s sake, decided to run memtest HCI on while I slept.

Woke up just now and saw that 2 errors had registered at just 150% (accidentally left sleep function on).

This has never happened before. I’ve had this ram running for almost 2 years at XMP in two different system with zero issues. 

I’m really worried that I might have damaged the memory or the IMC on my CPU while overclocking.

The memory is Samsung B-Die. XMP 3200 14 14 14 31. Most voltage I ever put through it was 1.5v vdim/training voltage (possibly 1.55) and 1.35v VCCIO/VCCSA. And I think the most vcore that ever went into my i7 9700k was around 1.38v. Do you think it’s possible that this might have damaged something?

Or is it possible that the auto VCCIO VCCSA values at XMP are too high? I’ve heard that some IMC on coffee lake processors just don’t like VCCIO or VCCSA set at too high a value. 

I’m hoping that it’s this, because last week I got no errors at 2600% memtest HCI while running my original 5.0ghz OC and a memory overclock where VCCIO and VCCSA we’re setting to 1.2v each.

Loaded up optimized defaults and XMP with VCCIO and VCCSA at 1.2v each to try and isolate the XMP profile with lower than auto values. Running memtest HCI. Praying that this comes back ok.

If it doesn’t pass with low voltage, how should I go about testing the ram from here? I’ve read somewhere that people tried reseating their memory, trying them in different dimm slots. Or should I just go straight to testing each stick individually?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Dannyele

Hello guys,


Do you think that I can still tight the timings on my ram considering that I have only 2 modules of 8gb and mainly for gaming purposes? This current config passed more than 3 hours of Karhu and like 12.500% coverage.


----------



## Eugene Whittal

Hallo new friends! 

I have a very peculiar issue, it's not a big one but it scratches my brain vigorously. 

I upgraded my mobo from Asus Tuf Z390 Pro Gaming to an Aorus Z390 Ultra. First thing I realize is my gpu is struggling in benches like Time Spy, erratic fps, loses around 5% score overall but the cpu/physics score is fine.

So changing power settings in windows from Balanced to High Performance fixes the issue. I'm pretty clued up when it comes to overclocking with both gpu and cpu, so I've tried all the necessary settings to fix this ranging from forcing Nvidia to run high performance on the gpu at all times, fiddling with Afterburner, and disabling c states and what what in bios. The normal ****. 

Nothing works, I have to run the cpu now at high performance mode 24/7 to ensure maximum performance. Not that it bothers me much, it doesn't save you that much electricity especially for an overclocking man. But still. What could be the cause for such an issue? I don't see the board being faulty? But it definitely didn't have this issue with the ****ty Asus mobo? 

Bios - F10b
Cpu - 9900k @ 5ghz
Gpu - Asus Rog Strix 1080 Ti
Psu - Corsair Rm1000x

Time spy score with balanced mode :

Graphics 10150 (but it's very erratic, micro stutterish)
Physics 12000

Time spy score with High Performance mode :

Graphics 10600 (completely normal performance like with the Asus)
Physics 12000


----------



## GeneO

KrampusKlaus said:


> So, I had a BSOD yesterday while watching YouTube. MEMORY_MANAGEMENT. My old CPU overclock in place with memory at XMP.
> 
> After a bit of research, assumed that it was a driver issue conflicting with Firefox. So I turned off hardware acceleration, and updated every last out of date driver that I could find.
> 
> For posterity’s sake, decided to run memtest HCI on while I slept.
> 
> Woke up just now and saw that 2 errors had registered at just 150% (accidentally left sleep function on).
> 
> This has never happened before. I’ve had this ram running for almost 2 years at XMP in two different system with zero issues.
> 
> I’m really worried that I might have damaged the memory or the IMC on my CPU while overclocking.
> 
> The memory is Samsung B-Die. XMP 3200 14 14 14 31. Most voltage I ever put through it was 1.5v vdim/training voltage (possibly 1.55) and 1.35v VCCIO/VCCSA. And I think the most vcore that ever went into my i7 9700k was around 1.38v. Do you think it’s possible that this might have damaged something?
> 
> Or is it possible that the auto VCCIO VCCSA values at XMP are too high? I’ve heard that some IMC on coffee lake processors just don’t like VCCIO or VCCSA set at too high a value.
> 
> I’m hoping that it’s this, because last week I got no errors at 2600% memtest HCI while running my original 5.0ghz OC and a memory overclock where VCCIO and VCCSA we’re setting to 1.2v each.
> 
> Loaded up optimized defaults and XMP with VCCIO and VCCSA at 1.2v each to try and isolate the XMP profile with lower than auto values. Running memtest HCI. Praying that this comes back ok.
> 
> If it doesn’t pass with low voltage, how should I go about testing the ram from here? I’ve read somewhere that people tried reseating their memory, trying them in different dimm slots. Or should I just go straight to testing each stick individually?


If you were running SA/IO at 1.35v 24x7, yeah, that is too high. I doubt running it at those voltages for a short period is detrimental, but... Good luck in any case.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

There are new microcodes available for Z390. I'll make a Master BIOS in about 8 hours when I get home from work if anyone wants to test them with microcodes, RST, GOP and Ethernet firmwares all the latest.

And someone here flashed a recent BIOS I modded, they are working just fine. I even had someone on WinRaid check the microcode updates in a BIOS and it was setup correctly. 

I can't test them currently, not using my Master.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Here is a link to the overclockers bsod list I found on reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...a_bsod_codes_when_ocing_and_possible_actions/
> 
> Maybe try more juice before testing the sticks 1 by 1 as it could potentially save you the time of having to test all the sticks 1 by 1. If more juice doesn't solve it, then you must test the sticks 1 by 1.
> 
> I don't think 1.38v vcore hurt anything(assuming you were still within intel safe spec when it comes to amp draw, if you weren't then maybe you degraded? I'm sure someone more knowledgeable could chime in). I don't think 1.5v or 1.55v vdimm/training hurt anything. I don't think 1.35v io/sa hurt anything(buildzoid said 1.35v sa/io was max safe in a recent youtube video). I think your chip is fine personally and that you need more juice or worst case have a bad stick based off the information you've given. I'm no expert though .
> 
> Definitely doesn't hurt to test though that is for sure. Your question probably warrants attention from the folks in the intel ddr4 stability thread, try posting in there to see what the general consensus is.


I set the vdimm to manual and increased by 0.010v to 1.36. Just passed 4 passes of memtest HCI with no errors. At auto voltage I would get errors by 150%. Because it is responding positively to voltage, this means it's not defective. Just not quite up to spec.

I'm hoping that the problem is BIOS related. Like, that my z390 Ultra's auto voltage setting just sucks, or that when I set XMP this last time that the ram trained with slightly unstable tertiary timings. Maybe if I set 1.35v manual it will work?

EDIT: Manually set vdimm to 1.35v and it gave no errors in 2 passes of memtest HCI. Huh. I wonder if something is wrong with the auto setting for vdimm. Perhaps this was the gigabyte voltage bug.

Whatever. I'm done. I lost the silicon lottery with these dimms, but at least they aren't broken. I can always just swap them out to my old R5 2400g + b350 mobo, which only likes max ram speeds of 3200, and buy a different kit in the future.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> I don't think I did any damage to my chip sending 1.6v into it. Just dialed in 5.1ghz 4.8ghz cache + xmp/4000 hyperthreading enabled on adaptive voltage and it is looking like i'll still pass occt just fine, 20 minutes left out of 1 hour test.
> 
> 40 minutes in:
> average package/cpu temp 72c
> max package/cpu temp 92c
> average vrout 1.363v
> 
> EDIT: Passed occt-large/avx2. Will have to memtest the cache/ram too.



Which version of occt did you use? I got 4.5.1 bc someone suggested it. Do you know if that version uses avx2 instructions on the large data set?


----------



## wholeeo

KedarWolf said:


> There are new microcodes available for Z390. I'll make a Master BIOS in about 8 hours when I get home from work if anyone wants to test them with microcodes, RST, GOP and Ethernet firmwares all the latest.
> 
> And someone here flashed a recent BIOS I modded, they are working just fine. I even had someone on WinRaid check the microcode updates in a BIOS and it was setup correctly.
> 
> I can't test them currently, not using my Master.


Are you able to unlock hidden menu options? Currently on your modded t0d bios.


----------



## KedarWolf

Master T0D with latest microcodes released today, latest Ethernet, RST and SATA and GOP firmwares.

Some peeps had issues with the latest F11d beta, hence T0D

*Important note: If security is an issue this is the BIOS to use as the microcode addresses some vulnerabilities that are recent. If you find it slower then older BIOS's and security is not a concern, go back to my earlier modded BIOS which has the fast microcodes.

And to be honest, the speed difference is really only noticable in benchmarks, normal users are better off using this one with the more secure microcodes.
*
Make a FreeDOS USB l like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.t0d /x

Use the modded Master T0D BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## KedarWolf

wholeeo said:


> Are you able to unlock hidden menu options? Currently on your modded t0d bios.


No, that is beyond what I'm capable of doing. I use a tool from WinRaid to mod these BIOS's, it's very reliable and I've been using it for years. But I've never been able to find a definitive guide for hex editing a BIOS and unlocking hidden BIOS options, so I've never been able to figure it out.


----------



## wholeeo

KedarWolf said:


> No, that is beyond what I'm capable of doing. I use a tool from WinRaid to mod these BIOS's, it's very reliable and I've been using it for years. But I've never been able to find a definitive guide for hex editing a BIOS and unlocking hidden BIOS options, so I've never been able to figure it out.


I've used UBU before but am banging my head on hex editing menu's to show up... It's beyond me. Either way thanks for the reply.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## danakin

KedarWolf said:


> Master T0D with latest microcodes released today, latest Ethernet, RST and SATA and GOP firmwares.
> 
> Some peeps had issues with the latest F11d beta, hence T0D
> 
> *Important note: If security is an issue this is the BIOS to use as the microcode addresses some vulnerabilities that are recent. If you find it slower then older BIOS's and security is not a concern, go back to my earlier modded BIOS which has the fast microcodes.
> 
> And to be honest, the speed difference is really only noticable in benchmarks, normal users are better off using this one with the more secure microcodes.
> *
> Make a FreeDOS USB l like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.t0d /x
> 
> Use the modded Master T0D BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Hey Kedar,

Getting a cinebench score of 195x-199x with the more secure bios. with the older one with faster micro codes, it was 2040-2080.

is this normal ?

best regards,

pete


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> It's not worth running anything higher than 3900 memory on any gigabyte motherboard. They didn't properly engineer their memory overclocking technology like ASUS does and latency is substantially worse at 4000mhz or higher no matter what.





Grizzly111 said:


> Please use Kahru Memtest with 'Cache Enabled' setting OR HCI overnight + 10 loops TestMem5 Usmus V3 to see if that is stable.
> 
> 
> I found that 3900 CL15 requires a lot more DRAM voltage than 4000CL16. Wonder if that is worth it as matched Bdie sets are becoming more scarce. The 4000 always has better Read/Write by approx 1GB/sec. Not sure for gaming FPS if 1ns improvement in latency is superior.


Very interesting. I have a lot of pages to catch up on in this thread, but I did a quick search and read through some RAM related posts. I've been running 4133 - 17-17-17-37-2T @ 1.50v on my 4x8GB G.Skill Tridentz RGB kit just fine. 

After tuning RAM on my 3970x build, I got the urge to want to tune my daily gaming desktop some more (Z390 Master w/ 9900KS / KF currently at 52x daily.)

So 3900 for our Master boards eh? Interesting... I'll try to lower the frequency to 3900 and tighten things up then and see if I can improve on my Cinebench R15 score of (2351cb) @ 52x all core (9900KF) @ 1.35v. 

* CB15 pic attached. 

I do run memtests as well, but I just have my own flavor of testing stability and CB test are just among one of them along with a laundry list of other tests..




reachthesky said:


> If you are ok with trying max 24/7 ddr4 b-die volts, then you can try this:
> 
> clear cmos
> load preferred cpu OC profile in bios and then type in the following settings:
> 
> 1.25v sa/io
> 1.5v vdimm
> 1.5v training
> 
> [email protected]
> tRC-47
> 
> manually type in the rtls/iols in both channels (if your bios allows you to)
> A: rtl 57
> rtl 57
> iol 6
> iol 6
> 
> 
> 
> B: rtl 59
> rtl 59
> iol 6
> iol 6
> 
> 280-400 trfc (vcore dependent, try 400 first with your current cpu voltage settings and then see how far you can bring it down without adding any extra vcore though if you want best performance go 280 and add somewhere between 10mv-40mv vcore)
> 
> 32768 tRefi (somewhat conservative, can adjust based on ambient, sometimes you can't get low trfc if you max out trefi to 65534)
> 
> Use extreme secondary timings from github ddr4 guide, almost all high end b-die can handle them no problem on 2dimm and 4dimm configurations. tCWL should be set to 14 for this profile as it allows enough room to fully tighten the tertiaries. tCWL 12 for this profile won't allow full yield on tertiaries resulting in worse performance unless you maybe had a playset of 4600 rated dimms or something.
> Use extreme tertiary timings from github ddr4 guide except tWRWR as they seem harder to bring down on 4 dimm configurations.
> Set all tRDWR timings to 12.
> 
> tWTR_L and tWTR_S will do their own thing regardless, don't worry if they don't show up in windows as 8/4, but still set them at 8/4 anyway.
> tRRD_L @ 4 is too tight on some b-die kits, if it isn't stable for you, try 6 instead. Lower tRRD_L = motherboard automatically lowers tWTR_L and tWTR_S for this profile. I don't know why it does this as it doesn't work that way for 4000mhz+ but it just does.
> 
> 
> Once all values are entered, save and exit bios to train it up all at once.
> 
> As a heads up, this profile is hotter during avx loads in stress testing but during gaming temps should be easily manageable. It's a great profile for use with g-sync + v-sync on a 240hz display @ full ultra settings with a 2080ti. I have not figured out a better performing profile yet for the aorus master on 4dimms that is 1.5v vdimm or less. If you are the type that wants the max performance at the max safe 24/7 volts on the aorus master for 240hz gaming, this is the one for you.
> 
> 
> c15-3900 @ 15-15-15-32 with "extreme" github guide timings across the board(cept tWRWR) will offer between 36.9 ns and 37.3 ns latency on 4 dimms with cache ratio at 48 or 47 when cam/icue/rgbfusion/etc aren't running in the background. If you've tightened everything up as much as possible, you'll get a little over 60 gb/s reads/writes and about 58.5-59 gb/s copy on 4x8GB [email protected] 5 GHZ all core.
> 
> Hats off to anyone who can get [email protected] with the same subtimings, in theory it can be done at 1.5v vdimm or less with the right 4 dimms/imc but I have not seen it yet on the z390 aorus master.


Thanks for sharing this info. I may give it a shot as well. Gosh 3900 14-14-14-30 would be beautiful ...might be stretching it though on my kit lol... . I mean they are Samsung B-Die and to be fair I haven't really tested them hard on any other board so the Z390 Master is the only home it has seen, which is very likely the weak link if anything...



KedarWolf said:


> There are new microcodes available for Z390. I'll make a Master BIOS in about 8 hours when I get home from work if anyone wants to test them with microcodes, RST, GOP and Ethernet firmwares all the latest.
> 
> And someone here flashed a recent BIOS I modded, they are working just fine. I even had someone on WinRaid check the microcode updates in a BIOS and it was setup correctly.
> 
> I can't test them currently, not using my Master.





KedarWolf said:


> Master T0D with latest microcodes released today, latest Ethernet, RST and SATA and GOP firmwares.
> 
> Some peeps had issues with the latest F11d beta, hence T0D
> 
> *Important note: If security is an issue this is the BIOS to use as the microcode addresses some vulnerabilities that are recent. If you find it slower then older BIOS's and security is not a concern, go back to my earlier modded BIOS which has the fast microcodes.
> 
> And to be honest, the speed difference is really only noticable in benchmarks, normal users are better off using this one with the more secure microcodes.
> *
> Make a FreeDOS USB l like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.t0d /x
> 
> Use the modded Master T0D BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Thanks @KedarWolf for taking the time to do this as always. Appreciate it man. Cheers.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> If you are ok with trying max 24/7 ddr4 b-die volts, then you can try this:
> 
> clear cmos
> load preferred cpu OC profile in bios and then type in the following settings:
> 
> 1.25v sa/io
> 1.5v vdimm
> 1.5v training
> 
> [email protected]
> tRC-47
> 
> manually type in the rtls/iols in both channels (if your bios allows you to)
> A: rtl 57
> rtl 57
> iol 6
> iol 6
> 
> 
> 
> B: rtl 59
> rtl 59
> iol 6
> iol 6
> 
> 280-400 trfc (vcore dependent, try 400 first with your current cpu voltage settings and then see how far you can bring it down without adding any extra vcore though if you want best performance go 280 and add somewhere between 10mv-40mv vcore)
> 
> 32768 tRefi (somewhat conservative, can adjust based on ambient, sometimes you can't get low trfc if you max out trefi to 65534)
> 
> Use extreme secondary timings from github ddr4 guide, almost all high end b-die can handle them no problem on 2dimm and 4dimm configurations. tCWL should be set to 14 for this profile as it allows enough room to fully tighten the tertiaries. tCWL 12 for this profile won't allow full yield on tertiaries resulting in worse performance unless you maybe had a playset of 4600 rated dimms or something.
> Use extreme tertiary timings from github ddr4 guide except tWRWR as they seem harder to bring down on 4 dimm configurations.
> Set all tRDWR timings to 12.
> 
> tWTR_L and tWTR_S will do their own thing regardless, don't worry if they don't show up in windows as 8/4, but still set them at 8/4 anyway.
> tRRD_L @ 4 is too tight on some b-die kits, if it isn't stable for you, try 6 instead. Lower tRRD_L = motherboard automatically lowers tWTR_L and tWTR_S for this profile. I don't know why it does this as it doesn't work that way for 4000mhz+ but it just does.
> 
> 
> Once all values are entered, save and exit bios to train it up all at once.
> 
> As a heads up, this profile is hotter during avx loads in stress testing but during gaming temps should be easily manageable. It's a great profile for use with g-sync + v-sync on a 240hz display @ full ultra settings with a 2080ti. I have not figured out a better performing profile yet for the aorus master on 4dimms that is 1.5v vdimm or less. If you are the type that wants the max performance at the max safe 24/7 volts on the aorus master for 240hz gaming, this is the one for you.
> 
> 
> c15-3900 @ 15-15-15-32 with "extreme" github guide timings across the board(cept tWRWR) will offer between 36.9 ns and 37.3 ns latency on 4 dimms with cache ratio at 48 or 47 when cam/icue/rgbfusion/etc aren't running in the background. If you've tightened everything up as much as possible, you'll get a little over 60 gb/s reads/writes and about 58.5-59 gb/s copy on 4x8GB [email protected] 5 GHZ all core.
> 
> Hats off to anyone who can get [email protected] with the same subtimings, in theory it can be done at 1.5v vdimm or less with the right 4 dimms/imc but I have not seen it yet on the z390 aorus master.



Thanks for the help @reachthesky! You're really experienced with this board. I managed to get the BIOS to auto-train the RTLs 57 57 59 59 + 6 6 7 6 using 1.5v VDIMM and 1.25v IO/SA for 3900CL15-15-15.


I do game at 240Hz with a 2080ti and always felt the RAM would be me the *consistent* FPS I wanted.


I am now at stock CPU clock settings whilst I test this RAM overclock but I normally run 4.9Ghz @ 1.23v which is OCCT stable.


HOWEVER...I've now begun testing LINX 0.9.5 and WOW! this thing really reveals flaws in RAM and CPU OC's. Although my RAM was 12000% Kahru stable, I still could not get matching residuals on Linx even though Linx said it effectively passed. I discovered Linx is a great tool for getting the right VCCIO/VCCSA. Really great.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> I absolutely <3 that new rig . Gorgeous.
> 
> I forgot to add that the reason 3900 is faster than 4000+ is solely because of gigabyte's inefficient rtls/iols at 4000+ and the lack of a bios option to adjust iol offsets like there is in asus bioses. The only way I was able to match or exceed the latency that 3900 has to offer was to pump 1.56v vdimm and clock at 15-15-15-32(or 28 if you can manage)@4133 or higher. Cas 15 [email protected] and
> cas 15 [email protected] was not enough due to rtls.
> 
> One other thing....If someone needs to prioritize bandwidth over latency for whatever reason, they can also get 4175mhz @ 16-16-16-34 with busclock 101.00 using around 1.5v or less vdimm for daily use. To note, May also require slightly more sa/io and vcore than usual due to overclocking the rest of the system components.
> 
> You might even be able to squeeze more out at equal or less voltage given that your 4x8gb b-die kit is 1-2 bins higher than mine. I'd be curious to know what the voltage requirements are for [email protected]/4133 with tight subtimings with your kit. If you end up doing any testing to see how they scale, please let us know ^^. i've been toying around with the idea of upgrading to a 4x8gb gskill rgb kit that can do [email protected]/4175 at 1.5v or less.


Thanks! I've been in the turning stages and have barely peeled off the stickers. 

I've just ran some tests and will post up some results here shortly. 

Teaser: I was able to boot/train just fine; 4000 / 15-15-15-32 @ 1.50v (50x All Core)


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> I'd recommend testing beyond 12000% karhu with cache enabled. Like, at least 20000% and even then throw it into HCI memtest afterwards for an additional 8 hours of testing at the minimum.
> 
> I guess if you need your cpu to do insane heavy lifting then testing in linx is good, but for my usage cases I found that I don't need to be stable enough for the extreme power virus tests like linx/gsat/p95. Imo, Stability is a scale and where you need to be on that scale depends on usage cases.


You're second paragraph. Brilliantly said. I completely agree. Viruses lol...

Testing in progress...


----------



## Falkentyne

Grizzly111 said:


> Thanks for the help @reachthesky! You're really experienced with this board. I managed to get the BIOS to auto-train the RTLs 57 57 59 59 + 6 6 7 6 using 1.5v VDIMM and 1.25v IO/SA for 3900CL15-15-15.
> 
> 
> I do game at 240Hz with a 2080ti and always felt the RAM would be me the *consistent* FPS I wanted.
> 
> 
> I am now at stock CPU clock settings whilst I test this RAM overclock but I normally run 4.9Ghz @ 1.23v which is OCCT stable.
> 
> 
> HOWEVER...I've now begun testing LINX 0.9.5 and WOW! this thing really reveals flaws in RAM and CPU OC's. Although my RAM was 12000% Kahru stable, I still could not get matching residuals on Linx even though Linx said it effectively passed. I discovered Linx is a great tool for getting the right VCCIO/VCCSA. Really great.


LinX puts Prime95 AVX to shame. Completely.
BTW LinX will give you wrong residuals if your cpu core is the LEAST bit unstable. You can pass Karhu /Gsat for 12 hours, pass small FFT FMA3 prime95 for 12 hours, and LinX with 35000 sample size will still complain about wrong residuals unless you put even more vcore into it. And you know it's vcore when you *disable* XMP and run your RAM at 2133 mhz and your residuals are still wrong.

Take an oscilloscope to the VRM chip or on-die sense and monitor the transient voltages. They're completely utterly garbage when LinX is running. The transients are even worse than Prime95 FMA3 128K FFT ! Like 100mv below and 100mv above what VR VOUT shows as your "minimum" average. That's why it's so hard to get correct residuals.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I'd recommend testing beyond 12000% karhu with cache enabled. Like, at least 20000% and even then throw it into HCI memtest afterwards for an additional 8 hours of testing at the minimum.
> I guess if you need your cpu to do insane heavy lifting then testing in linx is good, but for my usage cases I found that I don't need to be stable enough for the extreme power virus tests like linx/gsat/p95. Imo, Stability is a scale and where you need to be on that scale depends on usage cases.


Microcode 84 requires slightly less vcore for stability than the current "fast" ones, A2/AE/BE, and cinebench scores are the same as the regular good ones, but you don't want to use that microcode. Your BIOS would not like you if you used that microcode. CPU VID is capped at 1.320v max (fixed vcore ignores this). I have no idea what would happen if you enable "SVID Offset" on this microcode either (SVID offset usually allows the 1.520v cap to become 1.720v). Not interested in another "Black screen with all fans at 100% speed and no POST code again...

Using microcode 84 on T0D for awhile, on fixed vcore.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> LinX puts Prime95 AVX to shame. Completely.
> BTW LinX will give you wrong residuals if your cpu core is the LEAST bit unstable. You can pass Karhu /Gsat for 12 hours, pass small FFT FMA3 prime95 for 12 hours, and LinX with 35000 sample size will still complain about wrong residuals unless you put even more vcore into it. And you know it's vcore when you *disable* XMP and run your RAM at 2133 mhz and your residuals are still wrong.
> 
> Take an oscilloscope to the VRM chip or on-die sense and monitor the transient voltages. They're completely utterly garbage when LinX is running. The transients are even worse than Prime95 FMA3 128K FFT ! Like 100mv below and 100mv above what VR VOUT shows as your "minimum" average. That's why it's so hard to get correct residuals.


Truth lol ... for any p95 lovers, LinX is where it's at. It's no joke.



Falkentyne said:


> Microcode 84 requires slightly less vcore for stability than the current "fast" ones, A2/AE/BE, and cinebench scores are the same as the regular good ones, but you don't want to use that microcode. Your BIOS would not like you if you used that microcode. CPU VID is capped at 1.320v max (fixed vcore ignores this). I have no idea what would happen if you enable "SVID Offset" on this microcode either (SVID offset usually allows the 1.520v cap to become 1.720v). Not interested in another "Black screen with all fans at 100% speed and no POST code again...
> 
> Using microcode 84 on T0D for awhile, on fixed vcore.


I'm currently on the modded F10b KedarWolf bios and it has been super solid. I don't recall what microcode it's on..perhaps you'd know on top of your head?



reachthesky said:


> O i totally ganked that off someone on reddit haha . I certainly can't take credit for it but i feel the statement rings true. Like, I could add however much extra voltage I need for my cpu OC to be stable enough for linx and be more than likely forced to drop frequency by 100mhz or more due to vcore requirements of my chip, or I can just make sure i'm stable enough for what I do and get that extra 100-200mhz of performance. Also means I'm able to get by with just a 360mm aio on the cpu with liquid metal between the ihs/coldplate. If I want to be linx/p95 stable at higher frequencies i'd have to invest 500 dollars or more in custom cooling + 200 dollars for IHS made of silver or go direct die.


Ah no worries.  I'm totally with you... well said.

Right now I'm attempting.....14...... :O .....


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Z390 Master - RAM Tests (G.Skill Tridentz 4266MHz RGB 4x8GB Kit)

* This was quick back to back RAM test... nothing fancy and definitely not perfect as I know I could tune it to get more out of them. However, the point here is to show some quick benches at the respected settings....

My 4133 settings overall seem to be a better fit than tighter timings at lower frequencies. 

The kit did not like 3900 for some reason as it threw a fit, so I just scaled it down to 3600 for the heck of it...I would never run it that low, but for test and data purposes here it is...

I'd be curious what others are getting with their kits at >15 timings compared to their daily driver settings.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Interesting results, thanks for sharing. I think your your gskill kit should be able to manage cl15-3900 ezpz as it is 2 bins above mine(my gskill kit is [email protected]/4000). What dram/sa/io did you try using? Was xmp disabled or enabled? Did you try adding any additional vcore? your kit should have no problem doing [email protected] or at 4175 with 101 busclock at 1.45v-1.48v with fully tightened timings if you are keen on running slower ram in trade for higher frequency.
> 
> Did you try [email protected] or were you trying [email protected]? Or [email protected]?
> 
> Here is my [email protected] with 5.1 cores 4.8 cache.



Very welcome and likewise.. thanks for sharing. I haven't fiddled with it much after those quick tests as I had to finish up some work/rendering etc... but I'll get to some more RAM tuning hopefully later today. I'm positive that it could be faster on the read/writes on my system... they were way below what I was expecting, but I'm sure it's a kink somewhere that needs to be straightened out... I'll try some different variations later and let you know.


----------



## Grizzly111

What is the max safe VCCIO/VCCSA for bdie 24/7? I have a feeling I may need at least 1.30v + 1.5v VDIMM to stablise 3900CL15. This is my kit btw: https://www.gskill.com/specification/165/168/1536288991/F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK-Specification


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

@reachthesky, here are 3 benches with 4133 16-16-16-36 ....

The latency isn't bad at all.. was surprised for it to be at ~37ns which is great.. I'll take it... I'm sure with some more tuning from here as a base I can get it more tightened up.

I like the monster Writes... that's exactly what I need too...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Imagine what that latency would be like if it was cl15-3900 . You needed 2 extra cache bins to catch up in latency but are still behind in reads even though you are running a higher ram frequency and higher core speed. 4133 doesn't make sense on this board unless its cl15-4133 or better imo. I think the latency improvement will yield more of a real world difference than the extra2.5k-3k ish gb/s on writes. You'll get more average fps and improved 1% lows in FPS games for sure, I can guarantee that much as i've tested all the frequencies. There is a chance maximum fps will go up too. Try to get [email protected] if you can, it's the sweetspot. If you can't, don't sweat it. Ram 4000+ is generally nothing to scoff at, hell, most people would love to hit those clocks at any cas latency. I'm just a snob who wants the best possible performance for gaming . Don't mind me lol.
> 
> EDIT: If you can get to 16-16-16-34 instead of 16-16-16-36, you can probably break 60k reads consistently and 60k copy. My recommendation is prioritize copy and latency as much as possible. They(i'm not sure who) say that copy performance is most reflective of real world performance or something like that. (scroll over the word copy on the aida benchmark, a tip pops up and says this I think).


I completely understand. It's a balancing act and mathematically there are two roads to approximately the same destination. Lower frequency + Tighter timings vs Higher Frequency + Looser timings ... I'd rather have, "slightly" lower frequency with tighter timings over the latter any day. 

However, at the end of the day at these altitudes one would be hard pressed to notice a real world difference with most tasks. Even a few fps in games will not realistically make any difference to have any impact. It's more of a want than a realistic need. I get it though... trust me. I'll be up all night tuning just to obtain a goal, if I know for sure that the goal is obtainable. It takes work for sure... but rewarding...

Also, I'm sure there are a lot of settings that I could be changing so take these preliminary tests with a grain of fine sea salt for now lol.

Edit: I keep noticing your edits so I'm glad that I'm checking back on the previous posts haha..


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Deathtech00

Hey guys! 

So, I was wondering if @KedarWolf or anyone has shared their recent BIOS settings. The interface change and addition of new options has me rather curious as to what you guys might be using. I guess the wolf isn't using his Master anymore, so I was hoping someone with an adaptive stable OC could share there settings with me so that I can find a base to begin from? 

Also, is anyone else here using Hynix CJR? I have some CL16-3200 that shows in the Risen tuning program as A+ chips that should be capable of a lot more than their XMP, but I know how finicky this board can be. Was wondering what, if any, people are running for this configuration on the Z390 Aorus Master?

Thanks so much for the support of this community. You have been paramount on this journey, and I thank you all tremendously for your hard work, and sharing.


----------



## Intrud3r

Deathtech00 said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> So, I was wondering if @KedarWolf or anyone has shared their recent BIOS settings. The interface change and addition of new options has me rather curious as to what you guys might be using. I guess the wolf isn't using his Master anymore, so I was hoping someone with an adaptive stable OC could share there settings with me so that I can find a base to begin from?
> 
> Also, is anyone else here using Hynix CJR? I have some CL16-3200 that shows in the Risen tuning program as A+ chips that should be capable of a lot more than their XMP, but I know how finicky this board can be. Was wondering what, if any, people are running for this configuration on the Z390 Aorus Master?
> 
> Thanks so much for the support of this community. You have been paramount on this journey, and I thank you all tremendously for your hard work, and sharing.


Hi Deathtech00,

Here's my memory overclock on my Hynix AFR/CFR die's.


----------



## Deathtech00

Intrud3r said:


> Hi Deathtech00,
> 
> Here's my memory overclock on my Hynix AFR/CFR die's.


Thanks for the share! I wonder how comparable CFR is to CJR... I think CJR is supposed to do better? as a friend once said, Intel Memory overclocking is less of a hobby, and more of a full-time job.


----------



## Intrud3r

Deathtech00 said:


> Thanks for the share! I wonder how comparable CFR is to CJR... I think CJR is supposed to do better? as a friend once said, Intel Memory overclocking is less of a hobby, and more of a full-time job.


I have no idea about the difference between the different die's.
My first time memory overclocking so I'm still learning too


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Ya i tend to edit my posts because i did't complete my thought the first time or extra information comes to my mind that I should have mentioned in the first place. I think your result is good. And yeah, definitely takes ALOT of work. It's so damn rewarding though. That rig must be a blast to work with. I've seen some your 3dmark scores when browsing through results, nuts. How is that z390 dark btw? I hear many good things about the board. I was looking at one of your cpu-z validations, noticed you had a pair 4600mhz gskill dimms clocked at c15-4000 on the dark. Would you mind sharing the choice behind speed/cas there? Was it due to voltage requirements or were you chasing low latency at that time? How well were you able to tighten the subtimings on a pair of 4600 dimms when underclocked? I've considered buying two 2x8gb gskill ultra high end kits because I want to try to get [email protected]+ at 1.5v or less for daily use on this board. Do you think those 4600 dimms could get it done or would I have to go up to the 4800mhz dimms? Do you know of any overclockers who tried 4x8gb 4800mhz gskill dimms on a t-top board to see how well they under/overclock for daily use? I wish I could find people directly with the configuration I want to work towards to ask questions about it lol.
> 
> O damn, just noticed you got one of those P0 stepping chips. Those chips are damn good. I R Jelly lol


Ah yea no worries. I always make it a habit to scroll up just because anyway so all good. I've just ran a bunch of back to back tests and I can get the 36ns Lat no problem, but at 3900... I can get into the mid 36ns with 4000 15's, and 36.9ns with 4133 ... 

As for RAM on both of my test benches, those are the Royalz 4600 sticks... excellent kits for sure... 

The 4266 kit in my desktops are plenty good enough... after all it's just my daily driver for gaming and some work stuff ..

I think I've settled on a new daily driver setting...

4266 17-17-17-37 ... I'm happy with it. The lat is very decent for its clocks and heck it's what the sticks are classified as anyway so why not eh? 

If I wasn't on this W10 bloat I know I could hit 60K copy easily ... but everything is good enough... very solid Read/Write/Copy and Lat for the speed...


----------



## Dymblos

hey guys,. this kit run ok in the Master?
https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-4000MHz-CL17-17-17-37-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)
I mean, enable XMP and nothing more?
because i have been reading a lot of pages with people having problem with others kits when enable XMP


----------



## Lurifaks

iunlock said:


> Ah yea no worries. I always make it a habit to scroll up just because anyway so all good. I've just ran a bunch of back to back tests and I can get the 36ns Lat no problem, but at 3900... I can get into the mid 36ns with 4000 15's, and 36.9ns with 4133 ...
> 
> As for RAM on both of my test benches, those are the Royalz 4600 sticks... excellent kits for sure...
> 
> The 4266 kit in my desktops are plenty good enough... after all it's just my daily driver for gaming and some work stuff ..
> 
> *I think I've settled on a new daily driver setting...
> 
> 4266 17-17-17-37 ... I'm happy with it. The lat is very decent for its clocks and heck it's what the sticks are classified as anyway so why not eh? *
> 
> If I wasn't on this W10 bloat I know I could hit 60K copy easily ... but everything is good enough... very solid Read/Write/Copy and Lat for the speed...


Wow nice  , if u got 4266 stable u are the first i seen with this on Aorus Master


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

@iunlock 4266 is stable for you? What settings do you use besides timings? Could there be resistance or improvement?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Dymblos

uh.. what u mean? i always use 2 stick in my previous mobos .. im a little lost with this new boards
what u think about the aouros Ultra?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Dymblos

of.. that info is not in their website 
You know if there is a topic about 4 dimm optimized motherboards?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Lurifaks said:


> Wow nice  , if u got 4266 stable u are the first i seen with this on Aorus Master





reachthesky said:


> I don't think he did a full stability test yet since he said I think I just found my daily driver settings or something like that.





Gen. said:


> @iunlock 4266 is stable for you? What settings do you use besides timings? Could there be resistance or improvement?


I ran a long 3DMark loops of Time Spy and Fire Strike Ultra with zero errors. So far so good... one of many tests... All I need is game stable as this is just my gaming and semi-work rig. As long as it throws zero errors and it doesn't crash on me, that's pretty darn stable for me. 



reachthesky said:


> Don't use 2 sticks in the master, use 4. If you can't afford 4, sell the master off and get a 2 dimm board. It's a mediocre 4 dimm board as is, it's flicking terrible with 2 dimms. I hear the pro is a pretty good bang for the buck and it would leave you with more money left over for even better dimms .


I would much rather keep the Master board and save up for 2x more sticks rather than ridding the Master board entirely just to get 4x sticks on a Pro. That's just me though. IMO the Master board is one of, if not the best board in its class / price range. 



reachthesky said:


> Just for funsies, I'll raise you with c15-4200 while we wait for those results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1 round of modern warfare map:rust Full ultra settings 1080p rtx disabled/motion blur disabled. gsync compatible enabled + 240 fps limiter in NCP. This is my "tournament" profile for the tournaments I never play in because i'm always so busy fooling around with this thing . 1.35v sa/io + 1.57 vdimm ROFL. It's sillllly. Definitely not memtest stable but gaming stable.


Nice lol... wait til' I get to my Test Bench... I have yet to test RAM there, because I've already got those dialed in, but 1.57v I wouldn't ever use for a daily... pushing it... bench territory for sure, and great for numbers. Just careful not to run them long term. You wouldn't want to degrade those fancy Samsung B-Die Mem chips. 

To be clear my goal is to get the best balance at 1.50v (max.) ... not anything beyond that. If you want to see bench numbers for giggles I'll run them on my test bench with the 4600MHz kit lol...

* The pics are very blurry and hard to make out the numbers... maybe it's because I'm on my phone, but could you upload them with slightly better res? Thanks.

Regarding your question about the Z390 Dark board, simply put the best darn board, period. Both in its class/price range and even above. I'll put that board up against any of those fancy 800-1000 boards, any day. It's that good.


----------



## wholeeo

iunlock said:


> I ran a long 3DMark loops of Time Spy and Fire Strike Ultra with zero errors. So far so good... one of many tests... All I need is game stable as this is just my gaming and semi-work rig. As long as it throws zero errors and it doesn't crash on me, that's pretty darn stable for me.


Ram Test, TM5 1usmus V3 Profile, or GSAT for memory breh breh.


----------



## iunlock

wholeeo said:


> Ram Test, TM5 1usmus V3 Profile, or GSAT for memory breh breh.


Yup those are in the arsenal for tests.

Requoting some brilliant words..

"I guess if you need your cpu to do insane heavy lifting then testing in linx is good, but for my usage cases I found that I don't need to be stable enough for the extreme power virus (VIRUS) tests like linx/gsat/p95. IMO, Stability is a scale and where you need to be on that scale depends on usage cases."

I wish some people understood this:

"Stability is a scale and where you need to be on that scale depends on usage cases." - 100%

For my usage scenario on this rig, which is one of many, if it doesn't throw any errors and doesn't BSOD on me during long gaming sessions, recording, rendering, etc... then... What more can I ask for? 

Why would I change something that works without issues and needlessly juice up the ram some more to pass tests that are not relavent at all? 

I'll run it at my 4266mhz settings. So far so good. If I see even 1 error at any point I'll dial it back to my 4133 settings.

Mind you even at 4133, that's pretty solid for this particular board.


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> Yup those are in the arsenal for tests.
> 
> Requoting some brilliant words..
> 
> "I guess if you need your cpu to do insane heavy lifting then testing in linx is good, but for my usage cases I found that I don't need to be stable enough for the extreme power virus (VIRUS) tests like linx/gsat/p95. IMO, Stability is a scale and where you need to be on that scale depends on usage cases."
> 
> I wish some people understood this:
> 
> "Stability is a scale and where you need to be on that scale depends on usage cases." - 100%
> 
> For my usage scenario on this rig, which is one of many, if it doesn't throw any errors and doesn't BSOD on me then... What more can I ask for?
> 
> Why would I change something that works without issues and needlessly juice up the ram some more to pass tests that are not relavent at all?
> 
> I'll run it at my 4266mhz settings. So far so good. If I see even 1 error at any point I'll dial it back to my 4133 settings.





> Why would I change something that works without issues and needlessly juice up the ram some more to pass tests that are not relavent at all?


And the Vcore (for CPU tests that are not relevant at all?)


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> And the Vcore (for CPU tests that are not relevant at all?)


I'm confused. What do you mean, "And the Vcore (for CPU tests that are not relevant at all?)" Having a stable cpu at stable vcore is a given. 

You don't tune RAM first then CPU. I'd assume that you would know this already?... perhaps you meant something else?


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> I'm confused. What do you mean, "And the Vcore (for CPU tests that are not relevant at all?)" Having a stable cpu at stable vcore is a given.
> 
> You don't tune RAM first then CPU. I'd assume that you would know this already?... perhaps you meant something else?


I mean you need a MUCH higher vcore to pass LinX 0.9.6 35000 sample size with all matching residuals than you do to pass anything you would normally use in real world.
You need an even higher vcore than what FMA3 small FFT prime95 requires.

LinX isn't just about RAM stability.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> I mean you need a MUCH higher vcore to pass LinX 0.9.6 35000 sample size with all matching residuals than you do to pass anything you would normally use in real world.
> You need an even higher vcore than what FMA3 small FFT prime95 requires.
> 
> LinX isn't just about RAM stability.


Ah ok and correct LinX isn't just about RAM stability. I've never thought for that to be the case.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> I mean you need a MUCH higher vcore to pass LinX 0.9.6 35000 sample size with all matching residuals than you do to pass anything you would normally use in real world.
> You need an even higher vcore than what FMA3 small FFT prime95 requires.
> 
> LinX isn't just about RAM stability.





reachthesky said:


> That's the one issue with the idea of investing into a 4 dimm board with the idea of using 2 slots for an unknown unspecific amount of time until the need for more than 16gb kicks in. It's only good to do that if its a daisy chain board with 4 dimm slots because if you start out with 2 dimms on a t-topology, you are voluntarily gimping your performance for an unspecific amount of time(how ever long that is until the person needed to add sticks, we don't know). That sort of thing doesn't really flow with the purpose of enthusiast platforms right or geared towards the target market right? See what I mean? Better off selling the master and getting aorus pro, then the user will have an extra 100ish dollars to put into a good ram kit. Then if the user needs to get the full 32gb they can buy the dual ranked kit and sell the old kit. my 2 cents . I guess I just feel like it is more cost efficient and more performance effective to either start with a daisy chain 4 dimm board or start with a 2 dimm board or get a 4 dimm t-topology board if you are going to populate the slots all at once from the start.
> As per request: (readable scores ) I'm sure the dark will be able to blow these numbers away at the same cas/frequency, if you do end up doing some benching, would you mind trying out some cas 15 frequencies if you've got the time?
> 
> reads: 64478
> writes: 65604
> copy: 62044
> latency: 36.0 (can only get this lower if I clock to about 5.4 cores 5.1 cache but volts are silly).
> 
> I'm actually going to just run it daily no ****s given. I want this performance daily. I've heard many people running b-die between 1.5v-1.6v daily without degradation yet(or so others claim on reddit LOL). I don't mind joining them, the performance is SO good in games. They really ought to just make a ram stick that performs this well without having to tweak it but i imagine it would be hard to ensure compatibility with all processors. DDR5 will be exciting.
> 
> I didn't know it was ok or not frowned upon to run knowingly non-memtest stable ram configurations, but If you are going to lead by example, I will follow!
> 
> Can the z390 dark get 4800mhz on ram like the z390 apex or is it a crapshoot/luck? Been wanting an apex ever since those apex users have been pumping out stable configs between 4500-4800 in the ddr4 thread, its nuts! 35ns latency with like 70k gb/s or more performance lol. Just nuts. I gotta get these megahertz rofl.



Fair point. I wonder though if one is on a budget to begin with if the cost savings of going with a cheaper board would justify the difference in RAM cost? I guess it's just all relative to the usage case, how much RAM they really need and what type of RAM they opt for. 4GB single sticks are cheap, but although 16GB total is still good enough today with games etc... for some users 16GB is quickly becoming the new 8GB rock bottom standard. 

Regarding the Dark boards, the Z390 Dark is rated at 4600+ and my 4600 kits in there posted effortlessly like it was nothing. My X299 Dark posts 4600 like it's a feather as well ... It's next level amazing how good these boards are. I'm debating on even just putting in the Z390 Dark into my build, which I was actually going to do in the first place, but since I had the Z390 Master (and because it's such a solid board) I just kept it as my primary gaming board. Honestly the Z390 Dark is way over kill for what I need in the gaming rig and the Dark fits the bill better being on my test bench. 

I'm now looking forward to testing RAM on the Dark boards for bench sake and also for realistic-real-world sake as to see what it can do if I were to run my Dark as my daily. About those voltages above 1.5v daily. You know... I honestly think they'll be okay and I base this off of the fact that I've ran RAM sticks and beat them to the ground over many bench sessions, let alone the data that can easily be seen from all the other fellow overclockers/benchers out there that put their RAM through the ringer. It's not to say to run RAM at 1.5v - 1.6v for the heck of it, but like my view towards CPU's I think they are pretty resilient, because they are. The Samsung B-Die's are rated and tested at the 1.5v mark which is why I just choose to keep that mark as my max. Just personal preference and it's not because I worry that it'll fry my RAM if I run it any higher (voltages) ... 

If your after MHz, give the Dark board a serious consideration. The Z390 only has two mem slots, but dang does it scale well. Extremely strong. You won't be disappointed. I'll just say one thing though, be aware though that once you experience the awesomeness of that board, everything else will seem like weak sauce lol. It'll be really hard to justify using anything else even above its price range. As for me I'm completely content with the GB Z390 Master at the moment as my gaming rig, because it's the best in class for the price range. I got this thing on sale for ~200 so I'm not complaining one bit. 

All fun stuff... really enjoy this stuff a lot. 

For giggles here's a 50x Cinebench R20 run on the Z390 Master that topped its class...pretty impressive. Pic attached. 

I'd be curious to see what you can top out at with CB R20...would you mind running some benches at 50x to compare? I think your RAM might actually have better chips than mine... should be able to score well. 

Also attached are the top recorded scores of other 9900K/KF CBR20's at 50x .... as you can see this Z390 Master / regular gaming desktop topped them all... most of the "others" are on test benches lol...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Why don't you get some other motherboard already for god's sake.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> On top of all the let downs, I get to take a $$$ loss on reselling the board. Sick deal. lol


Yeah, but you are so angry over it seems like it would be worth it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> There are no sealed new in box z390 apex boards at original msrp available at this time or i probably would.


So you say there is nothing better than the master available? That doesn't cost a lot more? Then what are you complaining about? What about the Dark?


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> There are no sealed new in box z390 apex boards at original msrp available at this time or i probably would.


Z490 will be out within a month or two, although the CPU's will take longer. You know what to do....

And you probably don't care anymore at this point, but F11e fixes the bugs that were in F11d, which was the wrong code path (F11d was based on f11b, not f11c), and has the T0d DVID fix.
(SVID offset disables all voltage control again and this is on purpose; T0d's behavior was technically improper even if it was convenient; this was only intended to be used on Auto vcore mode and you must use the AC Loadline (with Standard Vcore LLC) to set the voltages.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Z490 will be out within a month or two, although the CPU's will take longer. You know what to do....


& look at the memory QVL to make sure the board is capable of what you want.


----------



## Intrud3r

Must admit, I'm quite happy with my Aorus Ultra board ... cpu overclocking went smooth, and memory overclocking (first time for me) went way better then I expected.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> There is stuff better than the master available, but, i don't want to shell out money just to up only 1 or 2 steps above my board. I'd rather just buy the best one and be done with it. But i seem to have come late to the party lol. hard to find new anymore as out of production. used pop up every now and then but i gotta have a new one. maybe one will pop up eventually. Otherwise falkentyne is right i should maybe take a look at what z490 has to offer when it comes out. Hopefully a 360mm aio can cool an overclocked 10core cpu ROFL.


You can still get the z390 dark at amazon for the regular price - it is the best from what I can tell. But you might as well wait for the next generation at this point, if you want to stick with Intel.


----------



## sygnus21

Dymblos said:


> hey guys,. this kit run ok in the Master?
> https://www.gskill.com/product/165/...GBDDR4-4000MHz-CL17-17-17-37-1.35V16GB-(2x8GB)
> I mean, enable XMP and nothing more?
> because i have been reading a lot of pages with people having problem with others kits when enable XMP


I can't say for sure if those modules will work or not. I'm of the impression they would, but.... What I would caution is if you've been following this thread like you say, you'd note a 4 DIMM kit is better than a 2 DIMM kit for these boards where overclocking is concerned.


----------



## sygnus21

iunlock said:


> Fair point. I wonder though if one is on a budget to begin with if the cost savings of going with a cheaper board would justify the difference in RAM cost? I guess it's just all relative to the usage case, how much RAM they really need and what type of RAM they opt for. 4GB single sticks are cheap, but although 16GB total is still good enough today with games etc... for some users 16GB is quickly becoming the new 8GB rock bottom standard.



I'd like to chime in by saying one should consider these things "before" buying their components. If you're going to buy a cheap board and components then you should not expect top end overclocking performance. There are extreme overclocking boards out to include Gigabyte's own Z390 Aorus Xtreme board (of which I have... and is overkill for my needs). The other part of that equation paying for the RAM needed needed to achieve those extreme overclocks... as well as having the adequate cooling for the system.

Sure just about any board and RAM kit can overclock, but how high and stable depends on the quality and design of the components... and those come with higher costs. And yes, not all boards specifically built for extreme overclocking are great "gaming" or multimedia boards. So in the end one needs to decide where they want to go. 

My two cents.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Can the z390 dark get 4800mhz on ram like the z390 apex or is it a crapshoot/luck? Been wanting an apex ever since those apex users have been pumping out stable configs between 4500-4800 in the ddr4 thread, its nuts! 35ns latency with like 70k gb/s or more performance lol. Just nuts. I gotta get these megahertz rofl.


Their QVL goes up to 4600, so yeah, 4800 is probably a crap shoot. Is there some reason you need a guaranteed 4800 or is it just for benchmarking or do you just have to have the top performer? Overclocking is sort of a crap-shoot by definition.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> Z490 will be out within a month or two, although the CPU's will take longer. You know what to do....
> 
> And you probably don't care anymore at this point, but F11e fixes the bugs that were in F11d, which was the wrong code path (F11d was based on f11b, not f11c), and has the T0d DVID fix.
> (SVID offset disables all voltage control again and this is on purpose; T0d's behavior was technically improper even if it was convenient; this was only intended to be used on Auto vcore mode and you must use the AC Loadline (with Standard Vcore LLC) to set the voltages.


Where is the F11e bios or is it one gigabyte sent you to test ?


----------



## Grizzly111

Intrud3r said:


> Must admit, I'm quite happy with my Aorus Ultra board ... cpu overclocking went smooth, and memory overclocking (first time for me) went way better then I expected.



Agreed. I've got decent, stable overclocks on RAM and CPU at safe voltages. Quite easily. Im happy.


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> Where is the F11e bios or is it one gigabyte sent you to test ?


f11e fixes the bugs in f11d because f11d was incorrectly based on f11b, not f11c (which is why the DVID fix was not working fully in f11d).
f11e is based on T1d, I believe.

I am not releasing it yet because there is still the 1.20v fixed vcore bug left to fix (changing from 1.20v fixed vcore to either auto or DVID mode will fail to set auto or dvid mode). This bug has been there since original BIOS, just like the DVID bug (which is now fixed).


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> actually I may take a look, good idea. Memory overclocking has become my favorite thing and i'm sure z490 will improve that along with better boards as memory overclocking keeps evolving.





reachthesky said:


> There is stuff better than the master available, but, i don't want to shell out money just to up only 1 or 2 steps above my board. I'd rather just buy the best one and be done with it. But i seem to have come late to the party lol. hard to find new anymore as out of production. used pop up every now and then but i gotta have a new one. maybe one will pop up eventually. Otherwise falkentyne is right i should maybe take a look at what z490 has to offer when it comes out. Hopefully a 360mm aio can cool an overclocked 10core cpu ROFL.


Definitely worth the wait. I'm very curious what GB/Aorus comes out with...



sygnus21 said:


> I'd like to chime in by saying one should consider these things "before" buying their components. If you're going to buy a cheap board and components then you should not expect top end overclocking performance. There are extreme overclocking boards out to include Gigabyte's own Z390 Aorus Xtreme board (of which I have... and is overkill for my needs). The other part of that equation paying for the RAM needed needed to achieve those extreme overclocks... as well as having the adequate cooling for the system.
> 
> Sure just about any board and RAM kit can overclock, but how high and stable depends on the quality and design of the components... and those come with higher costs. And yes, not all boards specifically built for extreme overclocking are great "gaming" or multimedia boards. So in the end one needs to decide where they want to go.
> 
> My two cents.


Very true. It's all relative to the usage case. In a lot of cases, people buy based on their wants and not actual needs. Most often times than not, people go overboard with their components, when they could be just fine with much lesser models. However, because we're humanoids and have that urge of always wanting the best (in respect to ones budget) we'll almost always go all out up to our wallets abilities. 

I've had very interesting conversations with a lot of folks regarding their set ups, actual needs and gaming. You'll love this one... so several people were firm on the fact that one needs this and that for them to game well. Really silly I know ... 

My simple analogy completely shut them down when I said,

"Give a PRO gamer a 1080p 60Hz monitor, cheap mouse, keyboard and a rock bottom spec that is just barely good enough to play a FPS title. Then give a really really good gamer the best of the best with a 240Hz monitor, top end mouse, keyboard and a decked out gaming PC. ---- The PRO Gamer will still walk circles around the really really good gamer ALL DAY."

The point being that, a lot of people tend to think that buying better more expensive parts will make them perform better... lol. 

The battle of unrealistic wants vs realistic needs. Being a humanoid ruins all of that logic. 



GeneO said:


> Their QVL goes up to 4600, so yeah, 4800 is probably a crap shoot. Is there some reason you need a guaranteed 4800 or is it just for benchmarking or do you just have to have the top performer? Overclocking is sort of a crap-shoot by definition.


Mmm I think one of my OC team mates posted 4800 on his Dark board... let me confirm. I'll get back to you. 

On the spec sheet it states 4600+ so it can actually go higher, just not tested with higher sticks because I don't think the 4800 was even out at the time of testing...


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> f11e fixes the bugs in f11d because f11d was incorrectly based on f11b, not f11c (which is why the DVID fix was not working fully in f11d).


Wow, just wow


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> Mmm I think one of my OC team mates posted 4800 on his Dark board... let me confirm. I'll get back to you.
> 
> On the spec sheet it states 4600+ so it can actually go higher, just not tested with higher sticks because I don't think the 4800 was even out at the time of testing...


The + is just a way of saying you are on your own and probably unlikely IMO. That same marketing tactic is used by Gigabyte as well for instance.


----------



## iunlock

GeneO said:


> The + is just a way of saying you are on your own and probably unlikely IMO. That same marketing tactic is used by Gigabyte as well for instance.


Which also indicates that it's possible. They're not hiding it. The + more so means that the specific kit has been tested, but not thoroughly validated for whatever reason. Sure, it is also an effective marketing eye candy to see that too. (+)

Companies focus their testing with RAM in the ranges that are more likely to be used by the average.


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> Which also indicates that it's possible. They're not hiding it. The + more so means that the specific kit has been tested, but not thoroughly validated for whatever reason. Sure, it is also an effective marketing eye candy to see that too.


Where do you get that information from or is that just supposition on your part? Gigabyte marketing said something like 4200+ for the master, but nobody appears to be able to get past 4133 stable, which is highest speed RAM listed in the board's QVL.


----------



## asdkj1740

reachthesky said:


> actually I may take a look, good idea. Memory overclocking has become my favorite thing and i'm sure z490 will improve that along with better boards as memory overclocking keeps evolving.


definitely, i guess they are working so hard now to get the marketing ddr4 oc xxxxmhz+ higher.
i really wish this time we wont be triggered again.

anyways i doubt this time they would still adopt t-topology.


----------



## asdkj1740

no offense but the evga z390 dark has 10 layers pcb desgin, which should be good enough to deal with 4600 8g*2.
i see someone posting 8g*4 4700mhz @ runmemtestpro 100% stable on arous xtreme z390 which has 8 pcb layers design.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Driller au

Falkentyne said:


> f11e fixes the bugs in f11d because f11d was incorrectly based on f11b, not f11c (which is why the DVID fix was not working fully in f11d).
> f11e is based on T1d, I believe.
> 
> I am not releasing it yet because there is still the 1.20v fixed vcore bug left to fix (changing from 1.20v fixed vcore to either auto or DVID mode will fail to set auto or dvid mode). This bug has been there since original BIOS, just like the DVID bug (which is now fixed).


Well if your testing can you see if when you set voltage for the memory if it goes to what you set it eg. i set voltage at 1.43V and in bios and HWinfo it shows 1.416V i know some older bios where the same, i am using T0d


----------



## Falkentyne

Driller au said:


> Well if your testing can you see if when you set voltage for the memory if it goes to what you set it eg. i set voltage at 1.43V and in bios and HWinfo it shows 1.416V i know some older bios where the same, i am using T0d


I don't do memory testing, sorry. 

And DDR voltage is read from the Super I/O chip (same one which reads VCCSA) or maybe that's 8688E instead of 8792E...regardless it's ITE, which is 12mv resolution and the power plane can cause it to jump as much as +/-12mv just like CPU Vcore sensor #1 (except that can bounce around as much as 60mv at steady current).


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> f11e fixes the bugs in f11d because f11d was incorrectly based on f11b, not f11c (which is why the DVID fix was not working fully in f11d).
> f11e is based on T1d, I believe.
> 
> I am not releasing it yet because there is still the 1.20v fixed vcore bug left to fix (changing from 1.20v fixed vcore to either auto or DVID mode will fail to set auto or dvid mode). This bug has been there since original BIOS, just like the DVID bug (which is now fixed).


Hi Falkentyne, can I ask you which microcode does the f11e use? probably the slowest one found in the F11c....
Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> Hi Falkentyne, can I ask you which microcode does the f11e use? probably the slowest one found in the F11c....
> Thanks


C6. D2 was released on win-raid which can be tested with the vmware cpu mcode updater as a driver but people are complaining about score losses again...

BTW does BE work on a 9900KS? AE works obviously but one user here with kedarwolf's modded BE bios got no post code and 100% fan speed with it (no idea if that's the fault of BE or something else).

You can just use UBU tool and mod AE (or A2 if you don't have a 9900KS) or 96 into it and flash with efiflash.
Even 84 works (seems to give 1C lower temps and very very very slightly increased min.vcore stability, similar to A2 vs AE), but CPU VID is capped at 1.320v in that one.

I'm still waiting for information on if the 1.20v fixed vcore bug will be addressed first which I reported again (in all known bioses, switching from an active 1.20v fixed vcore to dvid or auto vcore fails to work).


----------



## wholeeo

@reachthesky 

At what point with Ram Test do you fail with the vipers on XMP settings?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## warbucks

As of yesterday my 9900KS is now delided and being cooled using the rockitcool direct die frame. Dropped load temps by about 12C. I'm running OCCT avx2 right now, just passed the 60 minute mark(90 minute test), VROUT is reading 1.32V-1.33V, cpu is at 5.2Ghz and 4.8Ghz cache. Temps are in the 80-85C range(Ambient is 24C right now, my wife likes the house hot in the winter lol).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> looking good ^^. u doing occt large or occt small?
> 
> I just discovered the OC button on the motherboard. Cool feature. Automatically oced to 4.9 from stock in windows just by pressing the button once.
> 
> EDIT: the oc buttons adds 200mhz to whatever clock you have. I reset cmos then turned on enhanced multicore performance to go into windows at 5g. Then in windows I hit the oc button at it gives me 5.2ghz.


Without BSOD?
The voltages don't change when you press that button?


----------



## warbucks

reachthesky said:


> looking good ^^. u doing occt large or occt small?
> 
> I just discovered the OC button on the motherboard. Cool feature. Automatically oced to 4.9 from stock in windows just by pressing the button once.
> 
> EDIT: the oc buttons adds 200mhz to whatever clock you have. I reset cmos then turned on enhanced multicore performance to go into windows at 5g. Then in windows I hit the oc button at it gives me 5.2ghz.


OCCT small. Just finished a 90 minute run without any errors. Next up, attempting to see how low I can get vcore.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> when booting up @ stock and hitting the button in windows it changes to 4.9ghz with proper voltage under load. If I boot up with mce at 5ghz and hit it, I get a bsod when I try to bench due to not enough voltage, i'm guessing that's because 5.2ghz isn't on the vid table. I had to boot with low vcore llc + acdc-turbo to + mce to get enough voltage for 5.2ghz ht on from the oc button, everything else on auto .


First of all I want to thank you for all the time and work you've done with memory testing and even if you don't feel people appreciate it, I believe they do. And frankly I wish one of the companies would snap you up to work for them for testing their QVL and sending you hardware and I bet you would enjoy that.

You've been putting high volts into your CPU. You haven't seen any degradation? The best way I found to test degradation is to use stock clocks and to undervolt as low as possible until you are unstable and then raise vcore very slowly until you reach consistent (YOU KNOW FULL WELL HOW THESE BOARDS ACT) stability, and then record that point. Of course, switching frequency at 300 khz.

Then after doing your (nuclear.gif) torture testing, retesting at the stock known voltage and LLC point to see if it's still stable at that point in the future.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I test somewhat stock recently. stock cache is 43 but this is what i tested....occt-largeAVX2 with [email protected] (1 hour test)
> core-cache-llc-bios voltage
> 
> 47-44-turbo-1.21v
> 48-45-turbo-1.24v
> 49-46-turbo-1.29v
> 50-47-turbo-1.34v
> 51-48-turbo-1.39 FAIL
> If i want [email protected] instead of xmp, I have to add 10mv vcore on top of these ocs. If i want [email protected], each oc basically moves up full voltage level to compenstate for 50mhz more on the cores/cache from the busclock + ram demands(40mv increase out of possible 50mv).
> 
> 300khz switchrate on all of these. On the turbo llc profiles, acdc is left on auto and 0/0.
> 
> ACDC-1/1 for these
> 47-44-high-DVID+10
> 48-45-high-DVID+30
> 49-46-high-DVID+60
> 50-47-high-DVID+90
> 51-48-high-DVID+120
> 52-untested
> 
> 47-44-standard-DVID+110
> 48-45-standard-DVID+130
> 49-46-standard-DVID+160
> 50-47-standard-DVID+190
> 51-48-standard-DVID+220
> 52-untested
> 
> 
> 
> 50-47-standard-dvid+120-AVX offset 2 + ring to core <------without xmp voltage, with xmp voltage is +130.
> 
> 51-47-high-DVID+90 HT OFF
> 
> Have not messed around with low llc/medium much as of late.
> 
> SA/IO levels were at 1.25v for all the tests. Every occt test failed at 1.35v vdimm in bios @xmp profile timings. hwinfo64 shows it fluctuate from 1.356v-1.38v. I think I did a quick 1.4v for all the tests to find out if it would pass. Haven't gone back to see how much I could actually lower it, should probably do that too.
> 
> That's with xmp profile timings untouched. without xmp i think 10mv less maybe. These tests were all in the last 7 days using occt-large/avx2. Also did occt small/avx2 on 4.8. Ya i figured I need to record this stuff that way at any point I can go back and see if there is degradation at any point. I think straight 4.7ghz with 4.3ghz cache avx2 stable is like dvid +100 standard llc acdc 1-1 last I checked. Will have to check again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THank you for the compliment. THis stuff is fun though at times can be a little frustrating when i feel like i'm hitting a wall or not learning anything. I'd love to test stuff out, new toys are fun. Would definitely be cool to work for one of these companies for sure.
> 
> This OC button is actually really cool.


OCCT Large AVX2 is a RAM tester, right?
I just ran it and it puts barely any load on the CPU. I believe OCCT large/small are simply front ends or prime95 large/small fft tests or very similar.
So this would not be a good choice for testing CPU stability as opposed to RAM stability/IMC.

At 5.0/4.7, LLC Turbo, 1.270v fixed, 300 khz, Amps spikes topped out at 128, which is basically nothing (sustained loads were smaller). Note HT was enabled.

Can you test AIDA64 "stress FPU?" This puts more load than prime95 small FFT with avx disabled but not as much as AVX enabled, and watch for HWinfo WHEA's. Thats what I recommend. This puts a much larger load on the cores.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I can put the 4.7 and 4.8 in fpu with avx enabled for sure. Anything beyond that automatically draws alot alot of amps and is hot hot hot.


Your cooling is better than mine. I'm on a LM'd/re-sealed NH-D15 with IHS relidded. You shouldn't exceed 90C in your test if you're on water, unless you need more than 1.320v bios set (LLC Turbo). This test just tests the cores.
I'm about to cancel the OCCT Large AVX2 test because its not even heating anything up much. Max temp was 74C but it was averaging in the 60's so that was a spike (probably from FFT changes).

I'm running 1.270v Stress FPU + LLC Turbo right now. (x50/x47)
I believe I can pass this as long as VR VOUT doesn't drop below 1.205v at load.
Temps are 82C and VR VOUT is 1.209v at 155 amps right now.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Here is 48 multiplier in bios with OC button to 5ghz in aida fpu avx enabled. 49 multiplier with oc button to 5.1ghz gave system service exception bsod when I put it in aida. temps already hit 90c. btw, this amount of load voltage at 5ghz fails occtlarge/avx2. I can pass aida64 fpu enabled with turbo llc + 1.32v set in bios but i need 1.34v set in bios to pass occtlarge/avx2(both cases xmp).


Yeah that's very interesting. Your vcore requirement does seem like it's from the IMC working hard. I can pass OCCT large AVX2 with less vcore than I need for stress FPU, while yours is completely opposite. But I'm only at 3200 cas 14 with tight timings. Interesting.


----------



## Falkentyne

BTW, I was bored and tested 3600 mhz. I noticed I can't train my RAM at 17/17/17/39. It just completely fails regardless of what I throw at it. EVEN WITH EVERY TIMING ON AUTO it won't train at 1.45v.

But at the exact same settings it trains both 15/15/15/36 and 16/16/16/36 NO PROBLEM. But 17/17/17/39? NOPE.
19/19/19/43 failed too. Why? Why would 15 and 16 both train but higher ones won't?

BTW for the first time ever, I got 3733 mhz to actually train. The board kept acting like it wanted to fail, but it finally trained at 16/16/16/36. But it required 1.50v vdimm. 1.45v failed to train and would do the 5 long beeps thing (I have a PC speaker on the speaker jumper) and would say "Board failed to start due to an error in settings" or would just 5 beep and boot back at 2133 mhz. But it wasn't worth it since 15/15/15/36 @ 3600 mhz is easier to do with tighter timings. One thing I saw was after 3733 mhz trained, I was able to set tRFC to 336 and REFI to 65520 and it trained quickly without failing.

I am so glad I don't bother with memory testing. Memory testing is a waste of mental sanity.


----------



## iunlock

GeneO said:


> Where do you get that information from or is that just supposition on your part? Gigabyte marketing said something like 4200+ for the master, but nobody appears to be able to get past 4133 stable, which is highest speed RAM listed in the board's QVL.


I get the info from past history on RAM working past the QVL list on boards along with my own testing.

I'm actually running 4266 on my Master and so far so good. If you scroll back several pages you'll see my RAM posts. So far I've gamed like I usually do with the usual rendering etc... I have yet to put it through any memtest, which it may or may not pass with an A+, who knows, but again if you read what the previous posts you'll see what I said about, "stability" and what it means for my usage habits. 

So no...4133 isn't technically the highest the Master boards can handle. Have you tried 4266? Give it a shot and just use your computer like you would normally without the virus memtests etc... and just see if it throws any errors, BSOD, etc... Obtain that data first...

Then if you want put it through the memtests etc.. if that's your cup of tea. Based on the results after that, then proceed to tweak your RAM however you want. Whatever makes you happy..

IMO if you can do what you normally do, whether it's gaming, content creating etc... and if it doesn't throw any errors and doesn't BSOD on you then at least to me that's much more sensible than going back to underclock your RAM with adding more voltages just to make a virus memtest app happy. 

To each his own. 




warbucks said:


> As of yesterday my 9900KS is now delided and being cooled using the rockitcool direct die frame. Dropped load temps by about 12C. I'm running OCCT avx2 right now, just passed the 60 minute mark(90 minute test), VROUT is reading 1.32V-1.33V, cpu is at 5.2Ghz and 4.8Ghz cache. Temps are in the 80-85C range(Ambient is 24C right now, my wife likes the house hot in the winter lol).


Very nice mate. What cpu block are you using with the rockitcool direct die kit? I have my kit right beside me...still have yet to install it lol. 

Have you tried testing without avx? I'd be very interested to see the results..voltage, temps etc..



reachthesky said:


> looking good ^^. u doing occt large or occt small?
> 
> I just discovered the OC button on the motherboard. Cool feature. Automatically oced to 4.9 from stock in windows just by pressing the button once.
> 
> EDIT: the oc buttons adds 200mhz to whatever clock you have. I reset cmos then turned on enhanced multicore performance to go into windows at 5g. Then in windows I hit the oc button at it gives me 5.2ghz.


Haha that OC button... it's interesting to mess around with. I've only pressed it a few times in the very beginning and never revisited it again...



Falkentyne said:


> Without BSOD?
> The voltages don't change when you press that button?


That's what I was thinking...hmmm 



reachthesky said:


> Everyone please try the following, i'm curious what the results are.
> 
> Clear Cmos
> Go back into bios and ONLY make the follow changes:
> set xmp, set your sa/io/dram voltages
> enable ring to core
> disable speedshift
> set turbo ratios all to 49
> set cache ratio to 49
> disable IGPU and disable vt-d
> leave everything else on auto, yes, everything else
> 
> boot into windows
> 
> open up hwinfo64
> you should be at 4.9ghz all core and 4.6ghz cache
> then press the OC button
> If all goes well, you should be getting 5.1ghz all core 4.8ghz cache. run it through cinebench or whatever. Let us know how it goes


I'll test it out for you... very interesting in revisiting that OC button... 



Falkentyne said:


> Your cooling is better than mine. I'm on a LM'd/re-sealed NH-D15 with IHS relidded. You shouldn't exceed 90C in your test if you're on water, unless you need more than 1.320v bios set (LLC Turbo). This test just tests the cores.
> I'm about to cancel the OCCT Large AVX2 test because its not even heating anything up much. Max temp was 74C but it was averaging in the 60's so that was a spike (probably from FFT changes).
> 
> I'm running 1.270v Stress FPU + LLC Turbo right now. (x50/x47)
> I believe I can pass this as long as VR VOUT doesn't drop below 1.205v at load.
> Temps are 82C and VR VOUT is 1.209v at 155 amps right now.


What RAM frequency and timings are you running with your current cpu settings? One of my KF's (not the one in the gaming right currently) needs about the same voltages at 1.26-1.27v to be stable at 50x(x47) .... however, from looking at your vdroop that's pretty substantial, unless I'm missing something here. So you're running at 1.27 and your VROUT is showing 1.209v? I'd be interested to replicate your exact settings to see what vdroop my chip droops to...hmmm


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> I get the info from past history on RAM working past the QVL list on boards along with my own testing.


You intimated some knowledge of how the board manufacturer's test that "+" memory overclock rating: "Which also indicates that it's possible. They're not hiding it. The + more so means that the specific kit has been tested, but not thoroughly validated for whatever reason.)"

I see it is based on personal experience though.

People are interested to know whether you are memtest stable.


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> I get the info from past history on RAM working past the QVL list on boards along with my own testing.
> 
> I'm actually running 4266 on my Master and so far so good. If you scroll back several pages you'll see my RAM posts. So far I've gamed like I usually do with the usual rendering etc... I have yet to put it through any memtest, which it may or may not pass with an A+, who knows, but again if you read what the previous posts you'll see what I said about, "stability" and what it means for my usage habits.
> 
> So no...4133 isn't technically the highest the Master boards can handle. Have you tried 4266? Give it a shot and just use your computer like you would normally without the virus memtests etc... and just see if it throws any errors, BSOD, etc... Obtain that data first...
> 
> Then if you want put it through the memtests etc.. if that's your cup of tea. Based on the results after that, then proceed to tweak your RAM however you want. Whatever makes you happy..
> 
> IMO if you can do what you normally do, whether it's gaming, content creating etc... and if it doesn't throw any errors and doesn't BSOD on you then at least to me that's much more sensible than going back to underclock your RAM with adding more voltages just to make a virus memtest app happy.
> 
> To each his own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very nice mate. What cpu block are you using with the rockitcool direct die kit? I have my kit right beside me...still have yet to install it lol.
> 
> Have you tried testing without avx? I'd be very interested to see the results..voltage, temps etc..
> 
> 
> 
> Haha that OC button... it's interesting to mess around with. I've only pressed it a few times in the very beginning and never revisited it again...
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I was thinking...hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> I'll test it out for you... very interesting in revisiting that OC button...
> 
> 
> 
> What RAM frequency and timings are you running with your current cpu settings? One of my KF's (not the one in the gaming right currently) needs about the same voltages at 1.26-1.27v to be stable at 50x(x47) .... however, from looking at your vdroop that's pretty substantial, unless I'm missing something here. So you're running at 1.27 and your VROUT is showing 1.209v? I'd be interested to replicate your exact settings to see what vdroop my chip droops to...hmmm


It's just LLC Turbo, which is 0.4 mOhms of loadline. 1.270v set in BIOS and 155 amps in AIDA64 stress FPU

1270mv (bios set) - (155 * 0.4) = 1208mv (VR VOUT load)= matches right up. Not sure what you think is wrong but that's proper vdroop.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I guess tthat confirms your suggestion that it is also beneficial for ram testing right?
> 
> If i enabled svid offset and use auto vcore with the oc button like Im testing, will the cpu get what it needs to be stable at 51?
> 
> Here is occt large using the oc button to 5g off of 4.8. All auto vcore. ON a side note, one really good thing about occt-large is that it will tell you fast whether or not you have enough dram voltage, like usually within the first few minutes.


SVID offset is unreliable because AC Loadline only boosts the VID higher (than it would for a non AVX load) if it detects an AVX load. And if the AVX load stops, the VID won't boost and you'll get too low voltages because the base VID itself isn't high enough and then the boost starts going all over the place. It helps if you have a sustained AVX load (Cinebench R20, Prime95 AVX small FFT), but not for any mixed loads if the non AVX boost from AC Loadline is too low. For example when I enabled SVID offset at 5.2 ghz, 1.6 mOhms AC Loadline and Auto vcore and ran Battlefield 5, idle VR VOUT was 1.392v, and load VR VOUT bounced anywhere from 1.287v to 1.430v(!!) and it generated L0 cache errors.

But when I tested 5.2 ghz, 1.380v fixed vcore, LLC Turbo, Load VR VOUT didn't drop below 1.325v and no WHEA's in Battlefield 5.
I don't think using DVID + AC Loadline 0.01 mOhms + high DVID offset + LLC Turbo will help matters much idk

I suppose you can enable your "DVID" mode+offset voltage first, then enable SVID Offset and see what happens but don't yell at me if you see 1.4v load on your CPU 

You did say you didn't care if you burn it up, since 10900K is coming out right?


----------



## iunlock

GeneO said:


> You intimated some knowledge of how the board manufacturer's test that "+" memory overclock rating: "Which also indicates that it's possible. They're not hiding it. The + more so means that the specific kit has been tested, but not thoroughly validated for whatever reason.)"
> 
> 
> 
> I see it is based on personal experience though.
> 
> 
> 
> People are interested to know whether you are memtest stable.


So now you're making empty assumptions. Hmmm.... How do you know that I haven't reached out to Evga regarding their spec sheet?

It's apparent that you've failed to read the previous posts where I had mentioned that my 4600 kit posts without a sweat.

Imitated some knowledge? Please.....

Take some time to do some research from credible sources and from those who have overclocked ram way past the qvl.

Just because a ram isn't listed doesn't mean that it doesn't work on a particular board.

Not everyone is interested in memtest stable. Again, go look back a few pages to see what stable means...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> It's just LLC Turbo, which is 0.4 mOhms of loadline. 1.270v set in BIOS and 155 amps in AIDA64 stress FPU
> 
> 
> 
> 1270mv (bios set) - (155 * 0.4) = 1208mv (VR VOUT load)= matches right up. Not sure what you think is wrong but that's proper vdroop.


OK great. I guess I'm just used to seeing a smaller delta with my dark boards. Even with the master the vrout under load and idle aren't that spread apart.. Hmm I'll triple check to make sure and use aida64 (fpu).


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> OK great. I guess I'm just used to seeing a smaller delta with my dark boards. Even with the master the vrout under load and idle aren't that spread apart.. Hmm I'll triple check to make sure and use aida64 (fpu).


Delta depends purely on amps. Make sure you're monitoring VR VOUT.
eVGA dark vcore measurement isn't accurate because it doesn't read from the VRM on-die sense. It's like pre maximus XI vcore sensor or the Gigabyte "ITE 8792E" Master Vcore sensor. The transient voltages are splendid on the dark because of its over the top power measurement, VRM's and caps and inductors. But holy crap the BIOS is missing some basic options even MSI gives you.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> Delta depends purely on amps. Make sure you're monitoring VR VOUT.
> 
> eVGA dark vcore measurement isn't accurate because it doesn't read from the VRM on-die sense. It's like pre maximus XI vcore sensor or the Gigabyte "ITE 8792E" Master Vcore sensor. The transient voltages are splendid on the dark because of its over the top power measurement, VRM's and caps and inductors. But holy crap the BIOS is missing some basic options even MSI gives you.


I have the post code display on the Board set to show the vcore, which measures pretty accurately. As for the bios, the dark boards are indeed missing a lot of options, but the xoc bios is pretty feature rich. Also even the stock bios is very well optimized.


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> So now you're making empty assumptions. Hmmm.... How do you know that I haven't reached out to Evga regarding their spec sheet?


I don't that is why I asked you, and you just related a personal experience. So quit playing childish games.



> It's apparent that you've failed to read the previous posts where I had mentioned that my 4600 kit posts without a sweat
> 
> Not everyone is interested in memtest stable. Again, go look back a few pages to see what stable means...


So it is not memtest stable. Most people are interested in memtest stable and you posted in *that* context.


> Just because a ram isn't listed doesn't mean that it doesn't work on a particular board.


Oh really, that is news to me


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> I have the post code display on the Board set to show the vcore, which measures pretty accurately. As for the bios, the dark boards are indeed missing a lot of options, but the xoc bios is pretty feature rich. Also even the stock bios is very well optimized.


If you set Loadline calibration to "no vdroop" (100% reduced vdroop), does it show a voltage INCREASE at load compared to idle?
if it does, then it's showing the same exact reading as the Gigabyte "ITE 8792E" Vcore sensor.


----------



## iunlock

GeneO said:


> I don't that is why I asked you, and you just related a personal experience. So quit playing childish games.


Says the one that's making assumptions in the first place. Just drop it. It's clear who the childish one is here. You have nothing to show for.

Drop it.


----------



## GeneO

iunlock said:


> Says the one that's making assumptions in the first place. Just drop it. It's clear who the childish one is here. You have nothing to show for.
> 
> Drop it.


Dude, you are a real ass. Your making the assumptions.


----------



## sygnus21

iunlock said:


> Very true. It's all relative to the usage case. In a lot of cases, people buy based on their wants and not actual needs. Most often times than not, people go overboard with their components, when they could be just fine with much lesser models. However, because we're humanoids and have that urge of always wanting the best (in respect to ones budget) we'll almost always go all out up to our wallets abilities.
> 
> I've had very interesting conversations with a lot of folks regarding their set ups, actual needs and gaming. You'll love this one... so several people were firm on the fact that one needs this and that for them to game well. Really silly I know ...
> 
> My simple analogy completely shut them down when I said,
> 
> "Give a PRO gamer a 1080p 60Hz monitor, cheap mouse, keyboard and a rock bottom spec that is just barely good enough to play a FPS title. Then give a really really good gamer the best of the best with a 240Hz monitor, top end mouse, keyboard and a decked out gaming PC. ---- The PRO Gamer will still walk circles around the really really good gamer ALL DAY."
> 
> The point being that, a lot of people tend to think that buying better more expensive parts will make them perform better... lol.
> 
> The battle of unrealistic wants vs realistic needs. Being a humanoid ruins all of that logic.



Well to be honest most of us here (me included) have overkill systems (and I am a gamer). But we're PC enthusiasts so that's what we do... build overkill systems. Nothing new here. 

Anyway that wasn't the point of my post. The point was if you want to extreme overclock you need to get the components suitable for the task otherwise it's an exercise in frustration. In short, don't expect a mid grade $200 board to compete with a 3, 4 or 5 hundred dollar board where overclocks are concerned. Same goes for RAM. That's my point.


----------



## iunlock

GeneO said:


> Dude, you are a real ass. Your making the assumptions.


Drop it kid. Water under the bridge. Don't pollute the thread. 



sygnus21 said:


> Well to be honest most of us here (me included) have overkill systems (and I am a gamer). But we're PC enthusiasts so that's what we do... build overkill systems. Nothing new here.
> 
> Anyway that wasn't the point of my post. The point was if you want to extreme overclock you need to get the components suitable for the task otherwise it's an exercise in frustration. In short, don't expect a mid grade $200 board to compete with a 3, 4 or 5 hundred dollar board where overclocks are concerned. Same goes for RAM. That's my point.


Precisely. Which is why I stated that it's usually the case that we do go overboard with our builds. There's nothing wrong with that.  More power to the builder... It's fun and like you've said, it's what we do as enthusiasts. 

Also, what you've stated about expectations is obvious. Of course the higher end components will perform at higher levels. That's an obvious point, but yes I agree with the statement.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> If you set Loadline calibration to "no vdroop" (100% reduced vdroop), does it show a voltage INCREASE at load compared to idle?
> if it does, then it's showing the same exact reading as the Gigabyte "ITE 8792E" Vcore sensor.


I'll test it again when I fire up the test bench for benching and report back the findings. I have it set currently at 25% - 50% with my tuned settings.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> First of all I want to thank you for all the time and work you've done with memory testing and even if you don't feel people appreciate it, I believe they do. And frankly I wish one of the companies would snap you up to work for them for testing their QVL and sending you hardware and I bet you would enjoy that.
> 
> You've been putting high volts into your CPU. You haven't seen any degradation? The best way I found to test degradation is to use stock clocks and to undervolt as low as possible until you are unstable and then raise vcore very slowly until you reach consistent (YOU KNOW FULL WELL HOW THESE BOARDS ACT) stability, and then record that point. Of course, switching frequency at 300 khz.
> 
> Then after doing your (nuclear.gif) torture testing, retesting at the stock known voltage and LLC point to see if it's still stable at that point in the future.


I agree and same to you @Falkentyne as you're a huge asset to the community with your wealth of knowledge. It's greatly appreciated. 

Regarding the high voltage on the CPU, I've been running 1.45-1.48v on one of my 9900K's (P0) for a long time and when I load the saved 50x daily profile on it in the bios, everything works like a charm even with the aggressive tuned settings. Honestly for me there's really no need to run anything higher than 50x all core, but I do anyway lol.  - It has always been common practice for me to OC the CPU as high as I can for the given cooling solution on the rig that the CPU is in. Since all the rigs are water cooled with adequate cooling the temps are pretty respectable. CPU degradation is definitely more than just heat for sure, but at least from the CPU's that I've owned (Intel) they've been very resilient, even when they've been running in the 1.4v range. Same goes for my 7980XE that has been beaten to piece, but still chucking along. Out of the AMD chips however I did find degradation with my 1800x, which didn't surprise me, but I've definitely experienced it before. 



reachthesky said:


> I test somewhat stock recently. stock cache is 43 but this is what i tested....occt-largeAVX2 with [email protected] (1 hour test)
> core-cache-llc-bios voltage
> 
> 47-44-turbo-1.21v
> 48-45-turbo-1.24v
> 49-46-turbo-1.29v
> 50-47-turbo-1.34v
> 51-48-turbo-1.39 FAIL
> If i want [email protected] instead of xmp, I have to add 10mv vcore on top of these ocs. If i want [email protected], each oc basically moves up full voltage level to compenstate for 50mhz more on the cores/cache from the busclock + ram demands(40mv increase out of possible 50mv).
> 
> 300khz switchrate on all of these. On the turbo llc profiles, acdc is left on auto and 0/0.
> 
> ACDC-1/1 for these
> 47-44-high-DVID+10
> 48-45-high-DVID+30
> 49-46-high-DVID+60
> 50-47-high-DVID+90
> 51-48-high-DVID+120
> 52-untested
> 
> 47-44-standard-DVID+110
> 48-45-standard-DVID+130
> 49-46-standard-DVID+160
> 50-47-standard-DVID+190
> 51-48-standard-DVID+220
> 52-untested
> 
> 
> 
> 50-47-standard-dvid+120-AVX offset 2 + ring to core <------without xmp voltage, with xmp voltage is +130.
> 
> 51-47-high-DVID+90 HT OFF
> 
> Have not messed around with low llc/medium much as of late.
> 
> SA/IO levels were at 1.25v for all the tests. Every occt test failed at 1.35v vdimm in bios @xmp profile timings. hwinfo64 shows it fluctuate from 1.356v-1.38v. I think I did a quick 1.4v for all the tests to find out if it would pass. Haven't gone back to see how much I could actually lower it, should probably do that too.
> 
> That's with xmp profile timings untouched. without xmp i think 10mv less maybe. These tests were all in the last 7 days using occt-large/avx2. Also did occt small/avx2 on 4.8. Ya i figured I need to record this stuff that way at any point I can go back and see if there is degradation at any point. I think straight 4.7ghz with 4.3ghz cache avx2 stable is like dvid +100 standard llc acdc 1-1 last I checked. Will have to check again.
> 
> 
> THank you for the compliment. THis stuff is fun though at times can be a little frustrating when i feel like i'm hitting a wall or not learning anything. I'd love to test stuff out, new toys are fun. Would definitely be cool to work for one of these companies for sure.
> 
> This OC button is actually really cool.


Fantastic stuff. Have you tried with 1.30v sa/io? That has worked great for me for a lot of my tuned profiles. 

RAM tuning...Oooff...tedious isn't it? Appreciate all the time you're putting into testing things. Like we've discussed... extremely tedious, but extremely rewarding.


----------



## Grizzly111

Copy speeds @ 4133CL16 are nice!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Grizzly111 said:


> Copy speeds @ 4133CL16 are nice!


Excellent! Nice job. What model kit are your RAM sticks?


----------



## Grizzly111

iunlock said:


> Excellent! Nice job. What model kit are you RAM sticks?



Cheers! They are nothing special just these ones: https://www.gskill.com/specification/165/168/1536288991/F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK-Specification


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Grizzly111 said:


> Cheers! They are nothing special just these ones: https://www.gskill.com/specification/165/168/1536288991/F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK-Specification


Great kit. Good ol' Samsung B-Die ... 



reachthesky said:


> THese are the sa/io requirements for different scenarios for my chip:
> 
> 43-47 cache generally needs 1.25v sa/io with xmp
> 48/49 cache needs 1.3v sa/io no matter what
> 50 cache needs 1.35v sa/io with tuned ram no matter what
> 
> ram timings, tight as possible, 12 hour HCImemtest/karhu stable.
> 
> c16/4000, c16/ 4100 need 1.25v sa/io
> c15/3900, c15/4000 need 1.3v sa/io
> c15/4100, c15/4133 need 1.35v sa/io
> c17/4000, c17/4100, c17/4133 need 1.25v sa/io
> c16/4133 needs 1.3v sa/io
> c16/4175 needs 1.3v sa/io
> c18/4200 needs 1.3v sa/io
> 
> Non-memtest stable:
> c15/4200- 1.35v sa/io (benchmark/gaming stable)
> 
> Benchmark stable(but won't play games):
> c17-18/4500 1.35v sa/io
> c19/4533- 1.38v sa/io
> c20/4600- 1.4v sa/io
> 
> Misc:
> cX/4266/4300/4400 - once in a blue moon training on 4 dimms. Stability never found, sometimes benchable, sometimes not. Never usable for gaming
> c16/4500+ - can get into windows but no benchmarks
> cX/4666/4700- 1.4v sa/io (trains but won't go into windows no matter what)
> 4800 or higher-No train, motherboard reset.
> 
> Ram tuning is indeed rewarding. There is about a 10-12% increase in average FPS and a 30%-45% improvement in 1% lows/minimum fps just from moving from a basic c17/4000 xmp profile to a fully tuned low latency profile. People say it doesn't make a difference in games but I have to disagree. Ram tuning can allow a user to maintain around a 240 average fps in shooters at full ultra settings with a 2080 ti, otherwise you hover around the 200 range at xmp give or take. It also comes in handy when playing starcraft 2 team games like 2v2-4v4 since it is extremely cpu heavy when hundreds of units are on the battlefield at once. The low latency is key there. It's also the one thing that makes intel better than amd for gaming, 20-25% fps difference when comparing fully tuned systems.


Great break down. Thanks for sharing. Rep+ 

With your 4200/c15 and above... I have a funny feeling that you're scratching 1.60v'ish on the voltages eh?  That's very impressive that you were able to post at the 4600/c20...great milestone. 

Gaming and RAM wise, very true... it does make a difference. I'll spend some time with the RAM on the gaming rig later today and see what surprises it may bring. So far the 4266 settings are doing pretty well for gaming with no mem or cache errors... I'm usually pretty optimistic, but I don't think it'd pass any major memtests with a clean sheet, but dang ... I'm almost expecting a BSOD anytime now during games, but it hasn't happened yet. Who knows... only time will tell.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> For cl15/4200, vdimm needs to be 1.57v or 1.58v in bios tehe. The c20/4600 actually benched but I wasn't able to tighten the timings as much as cl19/4533 so cl19/4533 outperformed c20/4600 across the board with something like 9.7k multicore memory performance with hyperthreading disabled in geekbench 3 all without the need to be on LN2.


Ah I see... nice. Ya know?... 1.60v isn't as scary as it seems as I know several fellow overclockers (that compete) to use that as a base to tune. Would I run it there daily? Wellllll honestly no haha, but even if I had to I wouldn't be too nervous. It's not so much the fact that I think the kits can't handle the voltage, rather it's just way overboard for what I realistically need for my usage habits on the gaming rig. I'm going to try and tighten things down at 4266 and see where it hits a wall for real world daily usage stability. It shall be interesting...

Edit: I just saw your edit haha... regarding the timings at 4000, not yet but I sure will later today! Looking forward to it. - You have really good RAM... total winners.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lucasfrance

My memory OC that was rock stable for months suddenly whas no that much stable under heavy stress tests for a few weeks... 

After trying to recover this by increasing voltages I went back to the stable configuration and just made a cleaning of the memory sticks contacts with Ether and all is back to normal !!!

Even if the weather is not that much wet here in Switzerland (even not cold at all this year but this is an other story...) I suspect a very thin layer of oxidation appeared on the memory stick contacts that made my previously stable config a bit unstable.

Should you have this kind of experience (or also possibly to improve you memory OC!) try this very easy trick.

Note the very same applies to GPU/PCI (on the GPU side) and CPU/MB contacts (on the CPU side of course!).

Give a try and report back.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Yeah i'm not so much scared about putting up to 1.6v vdimm into the sticks, its the cpu IMC and board traces i'm concerned about. I actually kind of need somewhere between c15-4200 and c16-4400-4500 performance. Can the dark do c15-4133/4200+ or c16-4400-4500 at 1.5v vdimm or less for daily use? I heard the dark requires less vdimm than usual compared to most other boards.


The Dark can do 4000/c15 for sure as that is what I have it set at, and I'm pretty confident it can do 4133/c15. The limiting factor are the RAM sticks when it comes to the Dark, granted it's within specs of the board. Oh and the 4000/c15 is at 1.50v, which I keep as my max.



reachthesky said:


> @Falkentyne I think i know why a lot of people get instability with avx offsets(on auto/adaptive/dvid voltage at least). It's because of the cache. When the cpu turbo ratio multiplier is toned down(when the avx offset kicks in), it goes off the vid table for that multiplier when it comes to requested/received voltage). That multiplier's voltage is factored with a cache ratio 300mhz below it. So lets say you used a typical 5ghz all core, 4.7ghz cache overclock with avx offset of 2. When avx kicks in, cores goto 4.8ghz as expected. The cache is still at 4.7ghz though but the cpu is requesting/receiving only enough voltage to power 4.8ghz with 4.5ghz cache. That's why I think there is instability, not enough voltage for the 4.7 cache.
> 
> The solution to this is to turn on ring to core so that the cache fluctuates at 300mhz lower within whatever all core frequency cpu is currently at so that you are staying within the vid table when avx kicks in. This means that in the bios a user should make sure to also set the cache manually in the bios to 300mhz behind the all core frequency, ring to core will handle upclocking downclocking in windows when needed.
> 
> With ring to core enabled with the same config, behavior would look like this:
> 
> 5ghz all core 4.7ghz cache during non-avx loads
> 4.8ghz all core 4.5ghz cache during avx loads
> 
> Figured I'd share this incase anyone may have been banging their head against the wall as to why they were getting instability or if they tried to mitigate the instability by starting with an even lower cache ratio at the get go specifically with an avx offset oc.


100%. This is very true. As a rule of thumb when tuning my CPU I try to always keep the cache within 3x from the core frequency. It's an area that I don't revisit much since I prefer static, but great great point that you bring up. *thumbs up*


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## sygnus21

reachthesky said:


> Gigabyte doesn't say anything about 4200+ being extreme overclocking. They just say their boards will do it. Has anyone gotten 4400+ stable on ram? It is perfectly reasonable for a customer to expect the product to work as advertised. Gigabyte says 4400+ is doable on their marketing literature.


Instead of putting words in my mouth to fit your narrative you should actually read what I wrote. And the post you quoted is a clarification on an earlier post...



sygnus21 said:


> I'd like to chime in by saying one should consider these things "before" buying their components. If you're going to buy a cheap board and components then you should not expect top end overclocking performance. There are extreme overclocking boards out to include Gigabyte's own Z390 Aorus Xtreme board (of which I have... and is overkill for my needs). The other part of that equation paying for the RAM needed needed to achieve those extreme overclocks... as well as having the adequate cooling for the system.
> 
> Sure just about any board and RAM kit can overclock, but how high and stable depends on the quality and design of the components... and those come with higher costs. And yes, not all boards specifically built for extreme overclocking are great "gaming" or multimedia boards. So in the end one needs to decide where they want to go.
> 
> My two cents.


Apparently you're here to argue and not read.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Ya this kit is pretttty good. Best 4 dimm kit i've worked with so far. I'd like to get my hands on and test one of those GSkill [email protected] @ 1.5v vdimm xmp kits that should be coming out soon. I think they are geared for amd/x299 or something like that i think but i'm sure they'd be fine on z390 as i've used a quad channel x299 kit on here before. IC quality must be insanely high at those timings to pass qvl process on x299 because they have to support performing double of what we pull on z390 due to quad channel single dimm per channel config, much higher ic quality than something like 2x8gb cas 17-4000 and maybe a couple steps above my kit. probably won't even need anywhere close to 1.5v on a 2dimm dual channel config like the dark or apex for c15-4000 and I think could more than likely squeeze out somewhere between c15-4133 and c15-4200 @ 1.5v. I'd LOVE to work with those for sure.
> 
> EDIT: O lord I just saw for the first time what gskill revealed at one of the tradeshows earlier this year.....a cas17-5000 bdie kit on a 9900K. Nuts. They also showed a c18-5200 kit on a 9700k.


Very happy for you mate. It's always nice to win in the lottery at times eh? I think my 4x 4600 Royalz kits (on the X299 Dark currently) are winners, but that's a given considering the bin and the hefty price lol ... I just haven't had the chance to actually bench them. The 4266 kit in the gaming rig are just above average in the lottery I would say to be conservative. - Definitely looking forward to Samsungs new next gen modules... 

Also, I thought you'd might like this. 4600 @ 1.50v stock XMP just for giggles just to see if it posts and it more than just posts.  

* Please excuse the camera shot, I know I know I despise them too, but this was a quick one shot with one hand on the go... but hey for what it's worth it's legible haha without that wonky flash reflection right in the middle of the pic haha! jk jk ... 

Here are two links to random Firestrike runs at 4600MHz:
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19600439
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19600447


----------



## iunlock

@reachthesky
Had some time to tinker with my 4400MHz Royalz kit...

60K+ Copy. 

Check out that Latency! I've hit 34.0 on the dot on other runs, along with 67K Read and 66K+ Writes. 

4400-16-16-16-28 seems to be the limit...I tried to give it more juice at 15's, but it wasn't liking it.


----------



## iunlock

@reachthesky

I tried the 15-14-14-28 @ 4000 and it's being wonky ... hmmm I'll just have to spend some more time with it...

The latency is decent, but the Read and Copy is goofy...


----------



## satinghostrider

iunlock said:


> @reachthesky
> Had some time to tinker with my 4400MHz Royalz kit...
> 
> 60K+ Copy.
> 
> Check out that Latency! I've hit 34.0 on the dot on other runs, along with 67K Read and 66K+ Writes.
> 
> 4400-16-16-16-28 seems to be the limit...I tried to give it more juice at 15's, but it wasn't liking it.


Wow what SA/IO do you use for this? Just curious...
Would disabling Hyper-threading make it easier for higher RAM frequencies? Sure would like to know...


----------



## iunlock

satinghostrider said:


> Wow what SA/IO do you use for this? Just curious...
> 
> Would disabling Hyper-threading make it easier for higher RAM frequencies? Sure would like to know...


1.32v and I'm tuning for benches so all core, although some could run with only a few legs.


----------



## satinghostrider

iunlock said:


> 1.32v and I'm tuning for benches so all core, although some could run with only a few legs.


Haha epic reply! Thanks!!!


----------



## robertr1

iunlock said:


> @reachthesky
> Had some time to tinker with my 4400MHz Royalz kit...
> 
> 60K+ Copy.
> 
> Check out that Latency! I've hit 34.0 on the dot on other runs, along with 67K Read and 66K+ Writes.
> 
> 4400-16-16-16-28 seems to be the limit...I tried to give it more juice at 15's, but it wasn't liking it.


I don't know on the dark but is there a way to set a "mode" to tigthen your RTL's? if those were tight, you'd be in the 33ns range for latency with 16/4400 timings.


----------



## iunlock

robertr1 said:


> I don't know on the dark but is there a way to set a "mode" to tigthen your RTL's? if those were tight, you'd be in the 33ns range for latency with 16/4400 timings.


Well that depends. I didn't touch rtl's yet. (The dark does have the options). With the way that I have it tuned so far it's about where it should be.... 

33ns? If you've been able to achieve that, congrats. That's really good with some good tuning. Screenshot?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## warbucks

This is my new daily driver. I may try and tweak a few more timings but I'll use this for a bit before doing so. This direct die frame has been quite nice with my custom loop.


Internal AC LL: Auto
LLC : High
AC/DC : 1/1
Core voltage : Normal
Offset : +0.140mV
Core freq :52
Uncore: 48
vccio: 1.23V
vccsa: 1.28V
vdimm: 1.50V

VROUT under load(OCCT small AVX2) is 1.33V


----------



## JLamb

I've got my 9700k oveclocked to 5.3Ghz fully stable with 1.305v in the bios using manual constant voltage and LLC at Turbo ( lowest on VR VOUT is 1.266v). I've also managed to get my old Corsair Dominator Plats 2666Mhz C15 overclocked to run at 3500Mhz C15 with 1.44v and with SA/IO 1.20v/1.15v checked with Karhu. I've got a couple queries:



I want to switch to DVID for the voltage so it drops when idling. Is the best way to set LLC to Standard and find the corresponding Offset that equates to ~1.30v?

I've played around with tighting up some sub timings but just wondering what I can improve upon or if I'm overlooking some 'rules'.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Goood morning. Very nice scores mate. That 4600 kit and board is no joke. How well do the secondaries/tertiaries tighten up when clocked at xmp 4600 with 1.5v? Any room to tighten subs or do the sticks want more voltage than 1.5v? What kind of sa/io is required for xmp is operate on that board? Can the kit run @xmp at less than 1.5v vdimm?
> 
> [email protected] was indeed finicky. I booted/trained it with 1.5v and played games at 1.5v but it definitely wants more than that to pass a stress test. womp womp. Was hoping i could use those timings without having to increase voltage past 1.5v but meh. If it have to go over 1.5v for a really good 4000 profile, I might as well be clocking higher at that point. Not sure why your reads/copy were off here. I'd ask to see the subtimings to see if anything offered an explanation but I know how it goes when in the zone during benching, finish one onto the next ;P. It could also just be the performance difference between 4dimms interleaved vs 2 dimms interleaved, if i recall correctly 4dimms should offer more bandwidth but at the cost of up to 1-2 NS latency as the 2 extra dimm slots need to be accounted for in the trace layout when compared to 2dimm boards like the dark or apex. Would love to hear others' thoughts on this as well.
> 
> If you can stabilize that 4400 for daily use, that would be a monstrosity. o how I want 4400 on 4 dimms on this board, lol. What kind of sa/io/vdimm did 4400 with tight subs require?
> 
> In regards to the rtls on the board, do you manually set them after initial training or do they need to be toggled step by step by adjusting iol offsets?
> 
> related but unrelated, have you had the chance to try two 2x8GB high end kits on the master? Like 2 gskill 4400 kits or 4600 etc etc.
> 
> Have you tested using the same 9900K chip in both the master and the z390? If so, were the vcore requirements for each frequency beyond 5.0 lower for the z390 dark to hit the same clocks compared to the master?


Guten Morgen! Danke danke... yea the 4600 kit is very well binned indeed. I haven't even gotten to the secondaries or tertiaries in depth yet, as they're mainly all just on auto for now with the exception of a few. What's stunning is that the 4600 kit boots at 1.45v on xmp with sa/io at or a hair below 1.25v. 4400 on the 4400 kit seems very strong and I'm very optimistic that it can be tuned for daily since it only requires around 1.52v/1.32 sa/io, however it also works at 1.51v so I'll test it some more. The dark board does require less vcore by about ~200mv and overall a notch less over the Master. I have yet to try the 4600 kit in the Master, but I'm very tempted to. I might actually swap out the 4266 and put that onto the main test bench and just use the 4600 in the main gaming rig with some insane clocks/timings; since I really don't need 4600 or anywhere near there for my benching. Plus, it'd put the 4600 kit to good use where I'd be able to enjoy it on the daily driver... hmmm okay yea I'm going to do it lol. 

In relative terms the Master is very strong for its class. The Dark is 2x more than the Master, yet the Master holds its own and hangs pretty well.... as we know the Dark is on a whole another level though. But for the sake of seeing how far the Master can shine with premium ram sticks I hope to get around to testing them soon .. that'll be fun and exciting. 

As for the 4266 settings on the Master, I gamed a bit yesterday cycling through my titles and it's still going well with zero errors etc... I purposely had a bunch of things open / recording, streaming, monitoring apps, bunch of just random apps running more than usual and still 0 and 0 on errors and cache errors.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Can someone tell me which pch temperature reading is which in hwinfo64 please? PCH=chipset or is PCH=motherboard?


"PCH Temperature" is the chipset


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> You have 2 sets of 4600 sticks to test on the master? I'd be super eager to see results if you got multiple kits. How much out of 32gb ram is usable @4266 on the master before instability shows up? can you pass a memtest utilizing 16gb out of the 32gb?


I have 4x8GB 4600 and 2x8GB 4400 kits. The 4266 that I'm currently at on the Master is all 32GB (4x8GB). Which version of memtest would you like to see? memtest 7.0? Let me know and I'll be happy to test it as I'm curious myself.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> oooo do the 4x8gb 4600 please. HCI is really good because its heavy on the cache, I usually do that after i pass karhu but i'm just generally curious if there is a level of stability that can be achieved with 4 dimms if only half the memory is being utilized as opposed to the full 32gb while still having the benefit of being able to clock higher on 4 dimms vs 2 dimms on this board.


You've got it mate. I'll get to it hopefully tonight...if not then tomorrow. To confirm, memtest 7.0 (the latest?) Anything else in particular? I'll also test the full 32GB then disable half and test 16GB. Karhu wise I'll have to rebuy that I guess ... can't find the license key lol.


----------



## Grizzly111

iunlock said:


> You've got it mate. I'll get to it hopefully tonight...if not then tomorrow. To confirm, memtest 7.0 (the latest?) Anything else in particular? I'll also test the full 32GB then disable half and test 16GB. Karhu wise I'll have to rebuy that I guess ... can't find the license key lol.



Use TestMem5 with Usmus v3 config here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27937684-post4314.html


Run that for 10 loops as an initial test. 

Then run HCI Memtest overnight
And/OR Kahru overnight with cache option enabled.


Then you can proceed to P95 Blend/custom and lots of gaming (I find Battlefield 1 etc to be good for RAM testing).

If it passes all that then great.


----------



## Grizzly111

iunlock said:


> You've got it mate. I'll get to it hopefully tonight...if not then tomorrow. To confirm, memtest 7.0 (the latest?) Anything else in particular? I'll also test the full 32GB then disable half and test 16GB. Karhu wise I'll have to rebuy that I guess ... can't find the license key lol.



Use TestMem5 with Usmus v3 config here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/27937684-post4314.html


Run that for 10 loops as an initial test. 

Then run HCI Memtest overnight
And/OR Kahru overnight with cache option enabled.


Then you can proceed to P95 Blend/custom and lots of gaming (I find Battlefield 1 etc to be good for RAM testing).

If it passes all that then great.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Trying to be satisfied with my Team Dark Pro not overclocking much better over 3200 CL14, but I saw that the Patriot Viper Steel 4400 2x8 kit is in stupid sale for like $135 w/ Newegg’s email code.

Does anyone have experience overclocking these kits on Gigabyte Z390 boards? I noticed that they’re not QVL, and I’ve read online that many users with my board (Z390 Ultra) have had issues reaching 4400, or even 4000 w/ tight timings. On the other hand, Buildzoid did a video recently saying that this kit is one of his favorite for overclocking.

Also, relatedly, is there much of a difference between the Z390 Master and the Ultra in terms of memory overclocking? All things bring equal.

I might just save my $. Dropping like $150-300 on up to 4 dimms may not be worth it for gaming performance when I could instead spend it to upgrade my GPU when the next gen comes out, and just continue tightening the timings on my 3200 kit.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

I'm lowering my VCCIO and VCCSA voltages ... 

Running 5.2 / 4.8 HT = off
RAM = 3200 16-18-18 1.350V @ 4000 16-22-22 1.480V

I was running VCCIO / VCCSA voltages rather high trying to get higher then 4000. Didn't work so I settled at 4000. Now it's time to lower them again.

Never thought I could get this low already, but here goes.

VCCIO = 1.350 (results in 1.330V)
VCCSA = 1.320 (results in 1.330V)

Started lowering them to:

VCCIO = 1.320 (results in 1.300V)
VCCSA = 1.300 (results in 1.310V)

VCCIO = 1.290
VCCSA = 1.260

VCCIO = 1.260
VCCSA = 1.240

Now I'm running:

VCCIO = 1.200 (results in 1.199V)
VCCSA = 1.200 (results in 1.212V)

Did some stresstesting between the switching values. Last night let Karhu ramtest run (with FPU checkmark enabled) till at least 1000% ... no problems whatsoever. Ran HCI memtest till 100% ... no issues whatsoever ... I know these values are not 100% tested ... but I wanna see where my system actually craps out when lowering them ... already expected a nice BSOD when I lowered them both to 1.200V ... Booted into windows just fine, ran some stresstests just fine ... gaming was fine ... Not what I expected.

Wanna try if I can lower them even more ... 1.150V would be nice, but I am expecting a BSOD. We'll see


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Don't get bit by the snake. Popular consensus is that those dimms are a piss poor excuse for b-die. I agree . Just pony up the cash and get a good gskill kit already. All the budget alternatives are garbage juice if you are in pursuit of high clocks at good timings.


*sigh* I guess Buildzoid won the silicon lottery with the kit that he bought.

I’ll just have to be satisfied with what I have. 3200 CL14 seems to perform pretty well.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

KrampusKlaus said:


> Trying to be satisfied with my Team Dark Pro not overclocking much better over 3200 CL14, but I saw that the Patriot Viper Steel 4400 2x8 kit is in stupid sale for like $135 w/ Newegg’s email code.
> 
> Does anyone have experience overclocking these kits on Gigabyte Z390 boards? I noticed that they’re not QVL, and I’ve read online that many users with my board (Z390 Ultra) have had issues reaching 4400, or even 4000 w/ tight timings. On the other hand, Buildzoid did a video recently saying that this kit is one of his favorite for overclocking.
> 
> Also, relatedly, is there much of a difference between the Z390 Master and the Ultra in terms of memory overclocking? All things bring equal.
> 
> I might just save my $. Dropping like $150-300 on up to 4 dimms may not be worth it for gaming performance when I could instead spend it to upgrade my GPU when the next gen comes out, and just continue tightening the timings on my 3200 kit.


I actually played with these a bit over the weekend. Was able to get XMP settings Karhu stable up to about 1200% before getting an error. Tried a few things to try and get them stable before quitting, packing them up and creating my Amazon return.



Intrud3r said:


> I'm lowering my VCCIO and VCCSA voltages ...
> 
> Running 5.2 / 4.8 HT = off
> RAM = 3200 16-18-18 1.350V @ 4000 16-22-22 1.480V
> 
> I was running VCCIO / VCCSA voltages rather high trying to get higher then 4000. Didn't work so I settled at 4000. Now it's time to lower them again.
> 
> Never thought I could get this low already, but here goes.
> 
> VCCIO = 1.350 (results in 1.330V)
> VCCSA = 1.320 (results in 1.330V)
> 
> Started lowering them to:
> 
> VCCIO = 1.320 (results in 1.300V)
> VCCSA = 1.300 (results in 1.310V)
> 
> VCCIO = 1.290
> VCCSA = 1.260
> 
> VCCIO = 1.260
> VCCSA = 1.240
> 
> Now I'm running:
> 
> VCCIO = 1.200 (results in 1.199V)
> VCCSA = 1.200 (results in 1.212V)
> 
> Did some stresstesting between the switching values. Last night let Karhu ramtest run (with FPU checkmark enabled) till at least 1000% ... no problems whatsoever. Ran HCI memtest till 100% ... no issues whatsoever ... I know these values are not 100% tested ... but I wanna see where my system actually craps out when lowering them ... already expected a nice BSOD when I lowered them both to 1.200V ... Booted into windows just fine, ran some stresstests just fine ... gaming was fine ... Not what I expected.
> 
> Wanna try if I can lower them even more ... 1.150V would be nice, but I am expecting a BSOD. We'll see


I actually worked on this exact thing this week. Originally I was at 1.20 (VCCIO) and 1.25 (VCCSA) so I started extremely low from .95 and 1.00 and found my stuff to be stable at 1.05 (VCCIO) and 1.10 (VCCSA). I'm not pushing anything ridiculous on my ram however and have to do more testing on my lighter threaded workloads as I have multipliers as high as 54 depending on load at the moment.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

wholeeo said:


> I actually played with these a bit over the weekend. Was able to get XMP settings Karhu stable up to about 1200% before getting an error. Tried a few things to try and get them stable before quitting, packing them up and creating my Amazon return.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually worked on this exact thing this week. Originally I was at 1.20 (VCCIO) and 1.25 (VCCSA) so I started extremely low from .95 and 1.00 and found my stuff to be stable at 1.05 (VCCIO) and 1.10 (VCCSA). I'm not pushing anything ridiculous on my ram however and have to do more testing on my lighter threaded workloads as I have multipliers as high as 54 depending on load at the moment.


What about lower frequencies and higher timings? 4400 @CL19 for $135 a kit is pretty bonkers. But even getting like 4000 @ CL15 or like 4200 @ CL16 would be pretty sweet.

Edit: I now realize that those speeds and timings would probably have much lower latency than 4400 CL19...


----------



## Intrud3r

I'm ending up at the following:

VCCIO = 1.180V (results in 1.166-1.177V)
VCCSA = 1.160V (results in ~1.176V)

Test is still running, but i'm guessing i'm gonna get to 5000% no problems ...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> Just a heads up, You may find that you can pass a memtest at lower sa/io but may run into games like bfv/apex crashing, they typically demand a little bit more for stability.


As soon as I hit 5000% I'll go start some games and see how they roll ...


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Just a heads up, You may find that you can pass a memtest at lower sa/io but may run into games like bfv/apex crashing, they typically demand a little bit more for stability.


Of all of my games, Jedi Fallen Order will sniff out an unstable memory overlock within minutes. It’s like barely stable overclocks are Jedi that survived the purge, and JFO is an inquisitor with a helicopter lightsaber and over the top helmet + cape ensemble.


----------



## wholeeo

My go to is VMware Fusion on MacOS. If I’m unstable that thing will crash instantly.


----------



## sygnus21

KrampusKlaus said:


> *sigh* I guess Buildzoid won the silicon lottery with the kit that he bought.
> 
> I’ll just have to be satisfied with what I have. 3200 CL14 seems to perform pretty well.


Don't get caught up in the opinions of others. If you read this thread their RAM isn't exactly lighting up the world either. Remember overclocking is a crap shoot as to how high far any component can overclock - not just CPU, but also RAM.


----------



## Intrud3r

Time to test other stuff ... this seems ok.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

warbucks said:


> As of yesterday my 9900KS is now delided and being cooled using the rockitcool direct die frame. Dropped load temps by about 12C. I'm running OCCT avx2 right now, just passed the 60 minute mark(90 minute test), VROUT is reading 1.32V-1.33V, cpu is at 5.2Ghz and 4.8Ghz cache. Temps are in the 80-85C range(Ambient is 24C right now, my wife likes the house hot in the winter lol).


Hey there fellow KS owner, what bios are you running with the KS? Have you had any issues with any of the bios versions for the Master? If so, which version etc... I'm currently on the modded f10b and it has been working great with my K and KF's but I"m about to swap in the KS.

It looks like @Lurifaks was on f11c with his KS... hmmm
https://www.overclock.net/forum/28310310-post7409.html


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Check this out, its a nice tool for calculating latency
> 
> https://notkyon.moe/ram-latency.htm
> 
> Curious, what have you tried clocking your sticks to? I'm pretty sure that cl14 3200 can be brought up to cl17 4000/4133. Which board are you on? etc etc.
> 
> I tried to get cl15-4100-4200 stable on those sticks, wasn't happening. Couldn't get cl16-4200 either. Both xmp profiles were nopes when it came to stability as well. I've seen the kit used to success on the z390 apex/gene with a special bios version and on amd(downclocked to 3800? or w/e at cl14-16-16 or something like that).


As yes neat little tool, had that bookmarked, but haven't revisited it for ages since there are too many factors to RAM in general. A simple calculation of even taking the speed and dividing it by the Cas comes with many missing factors that can have an impact on RAM's performance etc... 

BTW I saw some of your threads while searching about the patriot 4400 kit.. they are on sale right now. I have the 4000 kit 8x8GB on the 3970x build and they scale very well... I'm actually looking forward to testing and tuning those some more when I can get around to it, but they were pulling some impressive numbers in terms of timings / frequency ...


----------



## warbucks

iunlock said:


> Hey there fellow KS owner, what bios are you running with the KS? Have you had any issues with any of the bios versions for the Master? If so, which version etc... I'm currently on the modded f10b and it has been working great with my K and KF's but I"m about to swap in the KS.
> 
> It looks like @Lurifaks was on f11c with his KS... hmmm
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28310310-post7409.html


I'm using f11c modded(I modded it myself to include latest orom's, but using the faster/older microcodes).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wam7

After seeing some of the exploits @reachthesky and @iunlock had achieved with RAM overclocking I thought I'd get some Team Group Xtreem C18 4000Mhz (B-die). 
I started by testing it at XMP but I was a little surprised to see that when on Auto the SA/IO volrages are at 1.38v in HWInfo, the same as VDimm.
I presume it is OK for me to leave it at that even though I seem remember from a while back seeing a video by Buildzoid who stated that 1.35v should be the max 24/7?


----------



## pXuis

Wam7 said:


> After seeing some of the exploits @reachthesky and @iunlock had achieved with RAM overclocking I thought I'd get some Team Group Xtreem C18 4000Mhz (B-die).
> I started by testing it at XMP but I was a little surprised to see that when on Auto the SA/IO volrages are at 1.38v in HWInfo, the same as VDimm.
> I presume it is OK for me to leave it at that even though I seem remember from a while back seeing a video by Buildzoid who stated that 1.35v should be the max 24/7?


I'd lower it and check stability. If motherboard Auto settings are anything to go by, it's very commonly too much voltage, and sometimes over what is considered safe.


----------



## Medvediy

Wam7 said:


> After seeing some of the exploits @reachthesky and @iunlock had achieved with RAM overclocking I thought I'd get some Team Group Xtreem C18 4000Mhz (B-die).
> I started by testing it at XMP but I was a little surprised to see that when on Auto the SA/IO volrages are at 1.38v in HWInfo, the same as VDimm.
> I presume it is OK for me to leave it at that even though I seem remember from a while back seeing a video by Buildzoid who stated that 1.35v should be the max 24/7?


First thing you need to do after powering on you PC after making it built is to check all voltages. Vcore, vdimm, vccio, vccsa. 
All motherboards are pushing some voltage to the moon. Like Master always making really bad vccio vccsa. For 4000C18 you need them not higher than 1.25. Sometimes it's 1.15.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Check this out, its a nice tool for calculating latency
> 
> https://notkyon.moe/ram-latency.htm
> 
> Curious, what have you tried clocking your sticks to? I'm pretty sure that cl14 3200 can be brought up to cl17 4000/4133. Which board are you on? etc etc.
> 
> I tried to get cl15-3900-4200 stable on those 4400 viper sticks, wasn't happening. Couldn't get cl16-4200 either. Both xmp profiles were nopes when it came to stability as well. I've seen the kit used to success on the z390 apex/gene with a special bios version and on amd(downclocked to 3800? or w/e at cl14-16-16 or something like that). I don't recommend that kit for these aorus boards. I'd keep working at ocing the cl14 3200 sticks.


Sorry, haven’t put my system specs in my sig.

i7 9700k Core 5.0; Uncore 4.7; AVX 0; DVID +0.06 (might work with lower, haven’t tried), LLC Medium; AC/DC 1/1
Dark Rock Pro 4
Aorus Z390 Ultra
Team Dark Pro 3200 CL14 (rn just tightened 2ndary timings and tREFI @ 25000)
EVGA RTX 2080 XC Ultra
Corsair TX850M

Best I could get overnight memtest HCI stable was 4000 16 18 18 38 w/ 2x8. I think my voltages were 1.44 vdimm/training, and something like 1.2-1.22 VCCSA/VCCIO. But it caused Jedi Fallen Order to crash. I might have been able to get them stable with a little more voltage but I got discouraged.

I haven’t tried 4000 17 17 17 XX. 4000 16 17 17 38 doesn’t work though. I really think that I can get 4000 16 18 18 38 stable if I play with it. I can live with running 10 mv more vdimm, VCCIO, VCCSA if necessary. But also I should really just shell out a few $ for an Aida64 license to test which settings actually have the best latency. Like how you found that a lower frequency and same timings seem to give you better latency.

Also noticed some weird behavior with that game. Turned off XMP but set 3200 14 14 14 31 manually, along with vdimm of 1.36, tRFC 280, tREFI 25000. Caused it to stutter and crash within minutes. Turned tREFI back to auto and the game played smooth as butter for the rest of the evening. BUT then I checked ASRock Configurator and it said that my tREFI was still 25000. So I went into the bios and manually set it back to 25000. Fallen Order still plays just fine. I don’t know what in the hell is going on. Maybe some weird Gigabyte bios crap, but maybe it just wants me to restart a few times before my memory is stable.

This makes me more hopeful that 4000 16 18 18 38 can actually run, maybe the prior instability during Fallen Order was just a hiccup. And maybe having XMP enabled with those manual timings and frequency was a problem too. *shrug* only testing will show what’s what.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Wam7 said:


> After seeing some of the exploits @reachthesky and @iunlock had achieved with RAM overclocking I thought I'd get some Team Group Xtreem C18 4000Mhz (B-die).
> I started by testing it at XMP but I was a little surprised to see that when on Auto the SA/IO volrages are at 1.38v in HWInfo, the same as VDimm.
> I presume it is OK for me to leave it at that even though I seem remember from a while back seeing a video by Buildzoid who stated that 1.35v should be the max 24/7?


Have y’all had good luck with the Team Group Xtreem kits? Thought about getting them but I think the heat spreaders are a tad too tall to fit under my DRP4


----------



## Wam7

pXuis said:


> I'd lower it and check stability. If motherboard Auto settings are anything to go by, it's very commonly too much voltage, and sometimes over what is considered safe.





Medvediy said:


> First thing you need to do after powering on you PC after making it built is to check all voltages. Vcore, vdimm, vccio, vccsa.
> All motherboards are pushing some voltage to the moon. Like Master always making really bad vccio vccsa. For 4000C18 you need them not higher than 1.25. Sometimes it's 1.15.


Thanks for confirming my thoughts. I'm just playing around with lowering the timings/benching/stability testing and trying to read through the last few months in this thread; in the search, clicking the drop down arrow and using the VB search, then searching for relevant posts from those more experienced users like @Falkentyne, @KedarWolf. There is a gold mine of pertinent and salient info in these thread, though finding it can be like mining for real gold!


----------



## minionod

Hi guys, 

I have been using my computer for a little bit now and i am thinking about overclocking my CPU (would like 5.0Ghz) And i need some help info to get me going to know what i should do.

(Sorry i am a total noob at this. lmao)

*First some PC info to get the ball rolling :*
CPU: Intel I9 9900K
CPU Cooler : Corsair H150I Pro RBG (3x Corsair LL120mm Fans) // 
Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Master (2x 8-PIN connector is used)
Power Supply: Corsair RM750x 80+ Gold
Ram: Corsair Vengeance 32Gb 3200Mhz


*Base temps:*
https://imgur.com/a/kaGKpfa 
https://imgur.com/a/u1NoeWX

(The cpu temps are on idle obv)

So When i got the pc i did a BIOS update (I am on F8 atm), no idea if i should install the latest version of the bios (Would it help?).

Second if i look online there are some things every is saying you should do :

_Load XMP profile.

Set CPU clock ratio to 50 .

Disabled the following in my Bios :

Intel® Speed Shift Technology, CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E), C3 State Support, C6/C7 State Support, C8 State Support and C10 State Support, Enhanced Multi-Core Performance.

Change the Uncore Frequency to 47. & Disable VT-d.

CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration on Turbo.

Change Vcore to 1.300V. Put TjMAX to 110°C
_

If this is true , Should i just do it? If not please i'd like some info on this why and so.

For Benchmarks i'd use Prime95,Cinebench R20 & Realbench.

Already thank you for reading!


----------



## Wam7

KrampusKlaus said:


> Have y’all had good luck with the Team Group Xtreem kits? Thought about getting them but I think the heat spreaders are a tad too tall to fit under my DRP4


I'm just at the beginning of my "fun testing time" but I thought I would aim for C15 3900Mhz rather than C16 4133/4200Mhz. So far I'm Karhu 3000% stable at 3900Mhz 15-17-17-38 but there is a long way to go and many more reboots to come... 

Here is the height of my Team Group Xtreem so you can maybe assess the impact a little better.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Is a good question. I keep hearing 1.3v or 1.35v as being max safe values. I have no idea what is accurate though.


All I got to go on is the electrical specifications Intel X series datasheet (circa 2018) (and I assume this holds for mainstream as well, especially since die shrink, these max could be lower):

section 5.4

https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...tasheets/6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

"The following table specifies absolute maximum and minimum ratings. At conditions outside functional operation condition limits, but within absolute maximum and minimum ratings, neither functionality nor long-term reliability can be expected. If a device is returned to conditions within functional operation limits after having been subjected to conditions outside these limits, but within the absolute maximum and minimum ratings, the device may be functional, but with its lifetime degraded depending on exposure to conditions exceeding the functional operation condition limits"

The absolute maximum for vccio and vcssa in the table is 1.35v

In section 5.5.1 are the DC (functional ranges):

vccsa 0.5 to 1.1
vccio 0.937 to 1.057

EDIT: 

For the 8th and 9th gen mainstream data sheet, Intel does not list separate maximum and minimum "absolute" values. They have just "typical" DC specification:

VCCSA - 1.05 typical
VCCIO - 0.95 typical


----------



## Moparman

reachthesky said:


> Is a good question. I keep hearing 1.3v or 1.35v as being max safe values. I have no idea what is accurate though.


 I have been running my Bdie at 1.43v since right after I made this thread and have not had one issue.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Interesting. Well, i think it is safe to assume that we've all far exceeded sa/io functional ranges just by loading xmp lol. O well. I'm gonna roll with somewhere between 1.3v and 1.35v for daily, whatever is needed between that range to support the ram oc I want.


I think their meaning for the X series is you would get more accelerated degradation as you approach the 1.35v and above that your processor would be toast in a short period. 
Be interesting to see how long the the IMC lasts for the high memory overclocks people are running with high vccio/vccsa


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Say, I have been running the T10d BIOS (modded with older microcode) for a while and I have been experiencing USB dropouts. By that I mean my keyboard or sound will stop working and I have to unplug and plug them back in. The devices are seen by windows but the device type is not recognized. I suppose it could be a windows 10 update thing. Anyhow I have reverted back to f11c to see if that fixes it. 

Anyone else seen this?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wam7

reachthesky said:


> Which kit is that? How many dimms are you running/which board? Are they stable at xmp?


They are these:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...3200mhz-quad-channel-kit-black-my-09y-tg.html

On a Aorus Master and did over 6000% Karhu on XMP so I presume they're stable


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> All I got to go on is the electrical specifications Intel X series datasheet (circa 2018) (and I assume this holds for mainstream as well, especially since die shrink, these max could be lower):
> 
> section 5.4
> 
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...tasheets/6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf
> 
> "The following table specifies absolute maximum and minimum ratings. At conditions outside functional operation condition limits, but within absolute maximum and minimum ratings, neither functionality nor long-term reliability can be expected. If a device is returned to conditions within functional operation limits after having been subjected to conditions outside these limits, but within the absolute maximum and minimum ratings, the device may be functional, but with its lifetime degraded depending on exposure to conditions exceeding the functional operation condition limits"
> 
> The absolute maximum for vccio and vcssa in the table is 1.35v
> 
> In section 5.5.1 are the DC (functional ranges):
> 
> vccsa 0.5 to 1.1
> vccio 0.937 to 1.057
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> For the 8th and 9th gen mainstream data sheet, Intel does not list separate maximum and minimum "absolute" values. They have just "typical" DC specification:
> 
> VCCSA - 1.05 typical
> VCCIO - 0.95 typical


Please keep in mind that Intel nowhere says what the "Functional" limits are.
The last time I EVER saw any "functional min/max" limits anywhere was in the Core 2 datasheet.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Please keep in mind that Intel nowhere says what the "Functional" limits are.
> The last time I EVER saw any "functional min/max" limits anywhere was in the Core 2 datasheet.


In the link I posted they *do* specify functional DC min and max limits. It is the only document I have ever seen them do that. It is the only place document I have ever seen them post absolutes as well. That is why i posted it.


----------



## Timur Born

My VCCIO is 1.05 V and VCCSA 1.1 V, so I am fine.  I had to increase these in order to run 4x 8gb at 3500 MT.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> In the link I posted they *do* specify functional DC min and max limits. It is the only document I have ever seen them do that. It is the only place document I have ever seen them post absolutes as well. That is why i posted it.


Oh. I was referring to the consumer chips. Sorry. I didn't check the X datasheet.
I raised up a storm years ago when Intel no longer gave functional limits for anything when the Sandy Bridge came out.


----------



## Wam7

reachthesky said:


> oooo I thought it was one of their higher speed bins like the 4500 bin. How well does the 4x16gb kit overclock past xmp? Not a lot of information out there for 64gb mrm oc configs on these boards.


Ah sorry for getting you excited without cause, they are just the 4 x 8GB not 16gb.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Oh. I was referring to the consumer chips. Sorry. I didn't check the X datasheet.
> I raised up a storm years ago when Intel no longer gave functional limits for anything when the Sandy Bridge came out.


Yeah, nothing on consumer chips for a very long time. Gives you a rough idea, and I think that is where the 1.35v that is bandied about probably originated.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

GeneO said:


> Say, I have been running the T10d BIOS (modded with older microcode) for a while and I have been experiencing USB dropouts. By that I mean my keyboard or sound will stop working and I have to unplug and plug them back in. The devices are seen by windows but the device type is not recognized. I suppose it could be a windows 10 update thing. Anyhow I have reverted back to f11c to see if that fixes it.
> 
> Anyone else seen this?


I’ve had this issue as well on macOS, haven’t noticed it much on Windows yet as I’m usually only on it for stress test lately.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Hmmmm. I'm pretty sure we can get your 4000 profile stable. Try loading up the 4000 16-18-18-38 profile that passed hci overnight and increase sa/io to 1.25v each and add just 10mv more vdimm. Launch jedi fallen order and try to play. Tell us if you get any crashing.


Ah yeah, seems to work!!! Played for about an hour today and it was stable at 4000 16 18 18 38 tRFC 380 1.45 vdimm 1.25 VCCIO 1.27 VCCSA. Happy to join the 4000 club with reasonable timings.

I think this weekend I may do some more testing, see how low I can get tRAS and tRFC, then what my minimum vdimm, sa/io are at those values. Then maybe I’ll get AIDA64 and do some latency testing.

Thanks for the advice over the past few weeks, it’s been a big help.


----------



## iunlock

Wam7 said:


> After seeing some of the exploits @reachthesky and @iunlock had achieved with RAM overclocking I thought I'd get some Team Group Xtreem C18 4000Mhz (B-die).
> I started by testing it at XMP but I was a little surprised to see that when on Auto the SA/IO volrages are at 1.38v in HWInfo, the same as VDimm.
> I presume it is OK for me to leave it at that even though I seem remember from a while back seeing a video by Buildzoid who stated that 1.35v should be the max 24/7?


1.35v is typically the max I push my RAM, but there are people who run higher daily without any issues. It's just one of those things. Personal preference for the most part and how comfortable you feel...

Congrats on your RAM kits... you should be able to tighten those up pretty well. 



reachthesky said:


> Woke up this morning, room was nice and cold. Of course I had to do a morning bench .
> 
> 5.2ghz all core, 4.8ghz cache hyperthreading disabled.


What is your best score without HT disabled? With R15 and your RAM tuning you should be landing in the 2300's. My PR so far is 2351cb ... 



reachthesky said:


> Is a good question. I keep hearing 1.3v or 1.35v as being max safe values. I have no idea what is accurate though.





reachthesky said:


> Interesting. Well, i think it is safe to assume that we've all far exceeded sa/io functional ranges just by loading xmp lol. O well. I'm gonna roll with somewhere between 1.3v and 1.35v for daily, whatever is needed between that range to support the ram oc I want.


That's the range I like to stay in... just personal preference. 



reachthesky said:


> Ahhhh. Yeah i'm curious. What about all those people with z390 apex boards running at 4800mhz daily? There is no way they were able to stay under 1.35v sa/io to stabilize that ram speed daily. Do you know anyone with that hardware at those specs that has run into any issues yet?


True... and with such loose timings at those speeds, let alone higher latency, there's definitely a better all around medium to be had... I'm curious what they'd be able to do with 4400/4500 settings with some good tuning...



KrampusKlaus said:


> Ah yeah, seems to work!!! Played for about an hour today and it was stable at 4000 16 18 18 38 tRFC 380 1.45 vdimm 1.25 VCCIO 1.27 VCCSA. Happy to join the 4000 club with reasonable timings.
> 
> I think this weekend I may do some more testing, see how low I can get tRAS and tRFC, then what my minimum vdimm, sa/io are at those values. Then maybe I’ll get AIDA64 and do some latency testing.
> 
> Thanks for the advice over the past few weeks, it’s been a big help.


Very nice. Try to shoot for 4000 16-16-16-28, if not 17-17-17-30 should yield some game stable settings. If you're trying to stay at 1.45v vdimm and 1.25 vccio / 1.27 vcca then being in the 16's might be a stretch, but give it a shot and see where you end up. Good luck on tuning! Looking forward to seeing your results.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Last one for today, I promise . 35.5 NS gaming stable [email protected] Fastest possible config on my system. Turns out order of best latency @ CL15 is 4200>3900>4133>4100>4000.


Finally got around to swapping in the 4600 kit into the gaming rig. I first tried 4000 14-14-14-28 and it ran just fine in game. 4200 15-14-14-28 runs fine in game too without any errors. I may try for 4400 for the heck of it, but either way this kit should yield some good timings at the 4000-4266 range, which I'd be happy with for a daily. The last kit was already good enough, but swapping these in just had to happen. Note: I haven't tuned in depth yet at 4200 so I should be able to improve things across the board.

35.3 Latency so far...


----------



## satinghostrider

Guys,

I have finalized my memory overclock @ 4,133MHz 17-17-17-38 and am not going to touch it further.
I am currently at 5.2Ghz core and 4.7Ghz cache.
I want to try to bring up my cache to 4.9Ghz to optimize the overclocks.
I am currently at 1.36V Vcore and 1.25V VCCSA/VCCIO.

Say if I want to push to 4.9Ghz on cache, what voltages should I be concerned increasing? Should I be upping my VCCI/VCCSA and/or Vcore? And by how much?

Thanks Guys!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

satinghostrider said:


> Guys,
> 
> I have finalized my memory overclock @ 4,133MHz 17-17-17-38 and am not going to touch it further.
> I am currently at 5.2Ghz core and 4.7Ghz cache.
> I want to try to bring up my cache to 4.9Ghz to optimize the overclocks.
> I am currently at 1.36V Vcore and 1.25V VCCSA/VCCIO.
> 
> Say if I want to push to 4.9Ghz on cache, what voltages should I be concerned increasing? Should I be upping my VCCI/VCCSA and/or Vcore? And by how much?
> 
> Thanks Guys!


Right on, good job! Those are solid settings as I have a profile with those from early testing when I first got the Master. You could definitely tighten those up for sure and be just as stable. My previous daily was 4133 16-16-16-36. Regarding your cache if you want to run 49x then you'd likely have to up your vcore and sa/io respectively. Go in smaller increments and see where it likes it. Every set up is different as you know so it becomes a balancing act. 



reachthesky said:


> Looking goood! how much vdimm and how much sa/io? Do try to get 4400 memtest stable as well.


Thanks! I'm tuning for new daily settings at >1.50v and >1.30v sa/io. However, the sa/io was at 1.25v/1.27v ... I'll definitely try 4400 as well...


----------



## satinghostrider

iunlock said:


> Right on, good job! Those are solid settings as I have a profile with those from early testing when I first got the Master. You could definitely tighten those up for sure and be just as stable. My previous daily was 4133 16-16-16-36. Regarding your cache if you want to run 49x then you'd likely have to up your vcore and sa/io respectively. Go in smaller increments and see where it likes it. Every set up is different as you know so it becomes a balancing act.


Hey thanks alot man! Yeah I tried Grizzly's cl16 settings and they were incredibly great. But it was not 16-16-16-36. I don't have a problem pumping more vdimm as I just got a cooler and right now at 1.46V after 3 hours of gaming, my memory does not cross 27 degrees. 

Ok so I'll start with 10mv increments with CPU score and VCCSA/VCCIO I should put at 1.3V? I read @reachthesky mention you will need that much if you plan to run 4.8/4.9 cache.


----------



## iunlock

satinghostrider said:


> Hey thanks alot man! Yeah I tried Grizzly's cl16 settings and they were incredibly great. But it was not 16-16-16-36. I don't have a problem pumping more vdimm as I just got a cooler and right now at 1.46V after 3 hours of gaming, my memory does not cross 27 degrees.
> 
> Ok so I'll start with 10mv increments with CPU score and VCCSA/VCCIO I should put at 1.3V? I read @reachthesky mention you will need that much if you plan to run 4.8/4.9 cache.


Set it to 1.30v sa/io and tune from there and see what your ceiling is at those voltages. Like for me, my daily driver tuning goal is to get the max out of 1.50v vdimm and 1.30v sa/io max ... Realistically I'd be fine with anything below 1.60v vdimm and 1.35v sa/io, but it's just my personal preference to stay within the parameters of 1.50v and 1.30v. 

Good luck! Looking forward to seeing where you settle...


----------



## Falkentyne

satinghostrider said:


> Guys,
> 
> I have finalized my memory overclock @ 4,133MHz 17-17-17-38 and am not going to touch it further.
> I am currently at 5.2Ghz core and 4.7Ghz cache.
> I want to try to bring up my cache to 4.9Ghz to optimize the overclocks.
> I am currently at 1.36V Vcore and 1.25V VCCSA/VCCIO.
> 
> Say if I want to push to 4.9Ghz on cache, what voltages should I be concerned increasing? Should I be upping my VCCI/VCCSA and/or Vcore? And by how much?
> 
> Thanks Guys!


Raise VCC VTT to 1.2-1.3v. You may also have to raise VCCIO considerably as well or even vcore.


----------



## satinghostrider

iunlock said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey thanks alot man! Yeah I tried Grizzly's cl16 settings and they were incredibly great. But it was not 16-16-16-36. I don't have a problem pumping more vdimm as I just got a cooler and right now at 1.46V after 3 hours of gaming, my memory does not cross 27 degrees.
> 
> Ok so I'll start with 10mv increments with CPU score and VCCSA/VCCIO I should put at 1.3V? I read @reachthesky mention you will need that much if you plan to run 4.8/4.9 cache.
> 
> 
> 
> Set it to 1.30v sa/io and tune from there and see what your ceiling is at those voltages. Like for me, my daily driver tuning goal is to get the max out of 1.50v vdimm and 1.30v sa/io max ... Realistically I'd be fine with anything below 1.60v vdimm and 1.35v sa/io, but it's just my personal preference to stay within the parameters of 1.50v and 1.30v.
> 
> Good luck! Looking forward to seeing where you settle...
Click to expand...




Falkentyne said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys,
> 
> I have finalized my memory overclock @ 4,133MHz 17-17-17-38 and am not going to touch it further.
> I am currently at 5.2Ghz core and 4.7Ghz cache.
> I want to try to bring up my cache to 4.9Ghz to optimize the overclocks.
> I am currently at 1.36V Vcore and 1.25V VCCSA/VCCIO.
> 
> Say if I want to push to 4.9Ghz on cache, what voltages should I be concerned increasing? Should I be upping my VCCI/VCCSA and/or Vcore? And by how much?
> 
> Thanks Guys!
> 
> 
> 
> Raise VCC VTT to 1.2-1.3v. You may also have to raise VCCIO considerably as well or even vcore.
Click to expand...

Thanks Guys! I'm gonna try it in a few hours!


----------



## iunlock

satinghostrider said:


> Thanks Guys! I'm gonna try it in a few hours!


Sounds great. I've been gaming and just got done rendering a video without any errors with the 4200/c16 settings. I may try to get 4400 game stable, but with the looser timings it may not be worth it, let alone the higher voltages all around...


----------



## Lurifaks

Are there any tips when it comes to clocking the bus clock on the Master


----------



## satinghostrider

Falkentyne said:


> Raise VCC VTT to 1.2-1.3v. You may also have to raise VCCIO considerably as well or even vcore.





iunlock said:


> Sounds great. I've been gaming and just got done rendering a video without any errors with the 4200/c16 settings. I may try to get 4400 game stable, but with the looser timings it may not be worth it, let alone the higher voltages all around...


Guys,

Thanks so much for the guidance! I managed to get 5.2Ghz/4.9Ghz stable now. Had to up Vcore to 1.38V, VCCIO/VCCSA to 1.30V and VCCVTT to 1.2V.
Have attached a screenshot below. I think I can go a lot more for my memory as my temps are well below 30 degrees now with my new cooler and I am at 1.48V for VDIMM/TRAINING. 

Did some Cinebench runs back to back and about an hour of gaming on both Battlefront 2 and Battlefield 5. So far so good. I will continue to test and see how it goes.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> What does vcc vtt control?


According to @Falkentyne, it is your cache termination voltage. I read his other posts where if you want to max out your cache frequency, 1.2V is what you should start out with. Range should be between 1.2V-1.3V. I'm pretty damn happy so far at 5.2/4.9. Next is to see if I can do 4,133Mhz at 16-16-16-36.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

satinghostrider said:


> According to @Falkentyne, it is your cache termination voltage. I read his other posts where if you want to max out your cache frequency, 1.2V is what you should start out with. Range should be between 1.2V-1.3V. I'm pretty damn happy so far at 5.2/4.9. Next is to see if I can do 4,133Mhz at 16-16-16-36.


It's PLL Termination Voltage (at least that's what it is called on Asus).
And I don't know if it works. I got that info from a HWBOT thread where Alex Ro said 1.2-1.3v will help you max your cache on ambient cooling.

BTW what happens if you did not raise VCCVTT? What happened if you left it on default?


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> Raise VCC VTT to 1.2-1.3v. You may also have to raise VCCIO considerably as well or even vcore.


Darn Falkentyne ... you are a life saver once more ! 

Thank you.

I tried 5.2 / 4.9 before, but as soon as I switched 4.8 --> 4.9 my memory latency upped by a min. of 2 ns ... Didn't even bother stresstesting as that was not what it needed to do, it should be lower.

Now that i've read your comment about VCC VTT voltage, I thought ... let's try this again.

My VCC VTT was at 1.020V
Upped it to 1.200V

Switched my cache to 4.9 and booted into windows.

Memory latency is now 1 ns lower then with 4.8

Goody goody !


----------



## Falkentyne

Intrud3r said:


> Darn Falkentyne ... you are a life saver once more !
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> I tried 5.2 / 4.9 before, but as soon as I switched 4.8 --> 4.9 my memory latency upped by a min. of 2 ns ... Didn't even bother stresstesting as that was not what it needed to do, it should be lower.
> 
> Now that i've read your comment about VCC VTT voltage, I thought ... let's try this again.
> 
> My VCC VTT was at 1.020V
> Upped it to 1.200V
> 
> Switched my cache to 4.9 and booted into windows.
> 
> Memory latency is now 1 ns lower then with 4.8
> 
> Goody goody !


You need to verify and double verify things like this by setting it back, rebooting or even rebooting twice and doing two tests per boot then setting it up again and re-testing. These boards act very inconsistently.


----------



## Intrud3r

Falkentyne said:


> You need to verify and double verify things like this by setting it back, rebooting or even rebooting twice and doing two tests per boot then setting it up again and re-testing. These boards act very inconsistently.


What the .... 

As you mentioned ...

I tested Cinebench r20 (2x) and my memory latency again (5x) ... still about the same score in Cinebench and still 1 ns lower then before. so all good.
Rebooted, tested again. Still the same score in cinebench, and 1 ns lower then before so all good.

Rebooted, into bios, lowered VCC VTT again to 1.020V

Ok ... Cinebench 2x ... scored 35 points higher then before, both runs exactly the same.
Memory latency is still 1 ns lower then before ... 

What ?

Rebooted again, tested again ... same thing.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> Is there a direct guide available that fully explains what those oddball voltages do that also specifies when a user should tweak them in what specific scenarios?


*lurk*

This would be super helpful...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wam7

reachthesky said:


> no worries. still looking forward to your results ^^


They are probably a couple bins behind the ones you are using so I'm not expecting much more.  
My aim was to get below 40ns, which I did on 3900Mhz 15-17-17-38 at 39.4ns. I tightened up the secondary timings and that didn't make much difference if any difference in latency which is what I'm aiming for as this translates to tangible performance benefits in the programs I use.

When I get more time I will dabble in the tertiary timings which I think I remember reading years ago have an even bigger effect than the secondary timings.

PS. I think I read earlier in the thread that you were tempted to get a Maximus XI board due to the better memory overclocking. I can agree that they definitely seem better for memory. I had one for a while at the same time as the Master and I noticed that the sub timings were tighter at XMP using exactly the same sticks of memory than the Master. This was also true for the X470 boards that I had for both Asus and Gigabyte, with the Asus boards using tighter sub-timings when using exactly the same sticks of memory at XMP. 

With the Maximus XI though they are poor for general CPU overclocking and for some reason put about 10c extra heat into the CPU for the same Vcore used on the Master. At first I thought they used less voltage as well but that is because IT8688E sensor reading in HWInfo64 is more accurate on the Asus boards so correspond precisely to VR VOUT. I lost at least 100Mh - 200Mhz CPU overclocking on the Maxiumus XI board compared to the Master which is way more than better memory overclocking can make up for.


----------



## Grizzly111

reachthesky said:


> Some guy claims he had c17-4500 stable on the master. Waiting for him to make up some bs excuse as to why he can't provide evidence just like the rest of the entire internet.



EXACTLY. Unless I specify otherwise, when I post my results it is TM5 1Usmus V3 10 loops stable + Kahru/HCI overnight PLUS P95 Blend 1hr PLUS Realbench 30 mins PLUS hours of Battlefield passed successfully.


----------



## wholeeo

Some people in this very thread said a couple runs of 3DMark = Ram Stable. :laughings


----------



## iunlock

RAM stability test stable does not equal game stable.

Some people fail to understand that and too caught up in trying to satisfy a bench app lol. 
@reachthesky, who's the lad claiming 4700/c17 stable. I'd like to interview him. *cough*


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

@reachthesky опробуйте мои настройки, вот и всё


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

@reachthesky


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

@reachthesky
tRFC=296-288-280...
tWTR_L=7 & tWRRD_dg=27
tWTR_S=4 & tWRRD_dg=24
May be tWRRD_dd=7

Файл настроек (https://yadi.sk/d/n6XktPMnpIFrRA)


----------



## Gen.

Кстати, tWTR_L=1 у меня тоже работает хорошо!)))


----------



## Akoshnai

Hello! I got a Z390 AORUS ULTRA + 9900kf a week ago and updated to F10b, is it ok or should i stick to F9?

I tried a OC Guide to 5GHZ and but it seems unstable, i would love some tips as the guide its based on the AORUS MASTER F6b: 




Things to Change:
-MCE: Auto (shouldnt i disable it?)
-CPU CLICK RATIO 50
-UNCORE/RING RATIO 47
-TURBO BOOST: AUTO (Shouldnt i disable it?)
-TURBO RATIO PER CORE: AUTO (Shouldnt i set it to 50?)
-CORE CURRENT LIMIT (AMPS): 255 (Couldnt find it anywhere)
-INTEL SPEED SHIFT: AUTO (Shouldnt i disable it?)
-CPU ENHANCED HALT (C1E): DISABLED
-C3 DISABLED 
-C6/C7 DISABLED 
-C8 DISABLED
-C10 DISABLED
-FAST BOOT ENABLED
-VCORE 1.275V
-VCCIO: AUTO
-SA VOLTAGE: AUTO
-LLC TURBO
-INTERNAL AC/DC LOAD LINE: AUTO (TURBO IF VOLTAGES DROPS)
-CPU VCORE CURRENT PROTECTION: EXTREME (Couldnt find it anywhere)
-PWN PHASE CONTROL: EXTREME PERF (Couldnt find it anywhere)

Beside the VCORE do these settings make sense? Anything i Miss?

Sorry for the long post im trying to learn/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif


----------



## Falkentyne

Akoshnai said:


> Hello! I got a Z390 AORUS ULTRA + 9900kf a week ago and updated to F10b, is it ok or should i stick to F9?
> 
> I tried a OC Guide to 5GHZ and but it seems unestable, i would love some tips as the guide its based on the AORUS MASTER F6b: https://youtu.be/d8rY4TrcDXg
> 
> Things to Change:
> -MCE: Auto (shouldnt i disable it?)
> -CPU CLICK RATIO 50
> -UNCORE/RING RATIO 47
> -TURBO BOOST: AUTO (Shouldnt i disable it?)
> -TURBO RATIO PER CORE: AUTO (Shouldnt i set it to 50?)
> -CORE CURRENT LIMIT (AMPS): 255 (Couldnt find it anywhere)
> -INTEL SPEED SHIFT: AUTO (Shouldnt i disable it?)
> -CPU ENHANCED HALT (C1E): DISABLED
> -C3 DISABLED
> -C6/C7 DISABLED
> -C8 DISABLED
> -C10 DISABLED
> -FAST BOOT ENABLED
> -VCORE 1.275V
> -VCCIO: AUTO
> -SA VOLTAGE: AUTO
> -LLC TURBO
> -INTERNAL AC/DC LOAD LINE: AUTO (TURBO IF VOLTAGES DROPS)
> -CPU VCORE CURRENT PROTECTION: EXTREME (Couldnt find it anywhere)
> -PWN PHASE CONTROL: EXTREME PERF (Couldnt find it anywhere)
> 
> Beside the VCORE do these settings make sense? Anything i Miss?
> 
> Sorry for the long post im trying to learn/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif


New GUI menus are still missing options on some SKU's (CPU Current Limit, tREFI doesn't work, CPU PLL Overvoltage+mv missing, etc), although the only real problem is the tREFI setting.
The extra VRM settings are only on the Master and Xtreme. Ultra/Pro/Wifi/Gaming X/UD doesn't have them. You do have the internal VR settings however (only AC/DC Loadline does anything on them; they overrule the presets in "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" if non-zero).


----------



## Akoshnai

Falkentyne said:


> New GUI menus are still missing options on some SKU's (CPU Current Limit, tREFI doesn't work, CPU PLL Overvoltage+mv missing, etc), although the only real problem is the tREFI setting.
> The extra VRM settings are only on the Master and Xtreme. Ultra/Pro/Wifi/Gaming X/UD doesn't have them. You do have the internal VR settings however (only AC/DC Loadline does anything on them; they overrule the presets in "CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line" if non-zero).


 thanks for the reply, beside those missing settings, do the rest make sense as mentioned? Anything else to change beside maybe the VCORE?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## coolkwc

Guys, i'm loss.

I just replaced my RMA 9900K to 9900KS, rock stable at 5GHz even Prime95, however core temperature reach 100'C although i'm using EK-KIT P280.

So i just want to try using AVX -2 so that it will run at 4.8Ghz during AVX load and stay at 5GHz the rest of the time.
However the CPU always dropping to 4.8GHz even in desktop mode, it is not suppose the case right? Anything i set wrongly? Or my understanding of AVX offset is wrong? Or the AVX offset is buggy?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Haxor1337

Please help!

I had a system built about 3 months ago with a Z390 Aorus Ultra and since then I've been having sporadic boot failures when trying to power the system on.

First there's no video output while the mobo LED code immediately starts at 7F, then 03, 7F, 03, then cycles trough the C's until C4 for a couple seconds and the PC restarts and I get a BIOS screen saying "Boot failure detected". I load optimized defaults and then it starts normally, I restart to apply XMP Profile 1 to get my 3200 MHz back and no problems whatsoever from that point until it randomly happens again when I try to power on the PC later another time.

I looked up for the codes in my mobo's manual but 7F is just "reserved for AMI use" (no idea what that means) and 03 is straight up not listed.

I had gone about two weeks without the issue happening once just to have it reappear about two weeks ago out of nowhere, so it seems to be very random.

I've been using the PC all this time otherwise with zero issues once it has booted up properly, issue only happens sometimes when trying to power it on.

I've never overclocked anything.

I've tried to:
-Clear CMOS with a screwdriver shorting the corresponding two pins
-Update to latest BIOS F10b
-Run optimized defaults only, including RAM with XMP disabled at 2400 MHz
-Run a pass of memtest for an hour, 0 errors.
-Disable fast startup

Nothing made a difference.

I'm starting to get increasingly worried and paranoid. I'm asking here because getting the issue to happen on demand isn't easy and taking it where I bought the parts to have it checked will be very difficult for me at the moment :/


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## coolkwc

Haxor1337 said:


> Please help!
> 
> I had a system built about 3 months ago with a Z390 Aorus Ultra and since then I've been having sporadic boot failures when trying to power the system on.
> 
> First there's no video output while the mobo LED code immediately starts at 7F, then 03, 7F, 03, then cycles trough the C's until C4 for a couple seconds and the PC restarts and I get a BIOS screen saying "Boot failure detected". I load optimized defaults and then it starts normally, I restart to apply XMP Profile 1 to get my 3200 MHz back and no problems whatsoever from that point until it randomly happens again when I try to power on the PC later another time.
> 
> I looked up for the codes in my mobo's manual but 7F is just "reserved for AMI use" (no idea what that means) and 03 is straight up not listed.
> 
> I had gone about two weeks without the issue happening once just to have it reappear about two weeks ago out of nowhere, so it seems to be very random.
> 
> I've been using the PC all this time otherwise with zero issues once it has booted up properly, issue only happens sometimes when trying to power it on.
> 
> I've never overclocked anything.
> 
> I've tried to:
> -Clear CMOS with a screwdriver shorting the corresponding two pins
> -Update to latest BIOS F10b
> -Run optimized defaults only, including RAM with XMP disabled at 2400 MHz
> -Run a pass of memtest for an hour, 0 errors.
> -Disable fast startup
> 
> Nothing made a difference.
> 
> I'm starting to get increasingly worried and paranoid. I'm asking here because getting the issue to happen on demand isn't easy and taking it where I bought the parts to have it checked will be very difficult for me at the moment :/


I'm having a exactly same issue as you, using Aorus Master, in fact this problem only occur on my 2nd RMA board where i received 2 months ago, not the 1st one.

The problem i'm having was same, boot failure detected out of nowhere, and the same issue happen with Pentium G5420 plug on the same board.
When this happen, even a BIOS clear by pressing the CMOS switch at the back won't help some times, and try with different RAM also same. It just start at C4 and restart from 7F, looping until gave a non stop long beep!!!

I start to think this is board variation rather than CPU or RAM.

But one thing i can confirmed is, although i set to XMP profile, the failure less likely to happen if i manually set the timing rather than let it AUTO. This is what i learnt from somewhere online where the board is having hard time to get the right timing although it should follow the XMP profile!! Unbelievable.


----------



## Athrutep

Akoshnai said:


> thanks for the reply, beside those missing settings, do the rest make sense as mentioned? Anything else to change beside maybe the VCORE?


Disable intel speed shift (disabling this will be energy inefficient and it will run your cpu at a performance state the whole time but it will make it more stable) and fast boot as well.

It also depends what benchmarks you test it on. And the voltage required can be different from 9900 to 9900. Any 9900 should be able to reach 5ghz, but most guides use the avx offset. So without avx offset it might require more voltage. And some tests like Prime 95 with avx2 and avx on are just unrealistic and i would like to see a 9900 or 9700 that will run 5ghz stable with low voltage in prime 95 on smallest fft with avx and avx2 on.

Also your cooling solution has to be very good as the 9900 gets hot af.

Benchmarks that you should try in this order up to the hardest to test for stability are

1.Realbench
2.Prime 95 small fft's no avx no avx2
3.Cinebench R15
4.Cinebench R20 (uses avx)
5.Prime 95 avx on small fft's

And use HWiNFO for monitoring

And if you want an unrealistic test where anything but golden chips are unstable Prime 95 smallest fft's avx2 and avx enabled (completely overkill and you won't ever reach that level of stress with normal games)

Usually after the first 3 tests your system should be stable in any game, if you do a lot of rendering, video compression, video editing , then it makes sense to run the other tests as well. Most people will just run an avx offset of 2-3, i have actually seen very little people overclock to like 5ghz without avx offset and it being stable in prime with avx and avx2 enabled.

Things like the nvidea driver trigger the avx offset though, so if you can't get it stable no matter what at 5ghz then your 9900 might not be up to the task, then just run 4.8ghz no avx offset, in most games there is very little performance increase between 4.8ghz to 5ghz


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Nizzen

reachthesky said:


> So this is an enthusiast website right? Did anyone here really buy a 9900k to only overclock it by 100mhz? Avx offsets are garbage for gaming, just run the highest possible frequency that you can keep stable AND under 80c during gaming. My 2 cents.


Battlefield V using Avx, so no avx offset for me. 5.2ghz works great here. 1.32v.

As long as it's Bf V stable, it's stable enough for me. Plying BF V only on this computer


----------



## sygnus21

reachthesky said:


> So this is an enthusiast website right? Did anyone here really buy a 9900k to only overclock it by 100mhz?


Yes (and no). I built an i9-9900K system (system specs below) and outside of XMP for the RAM, I'm not overclocking anything. Perfectly comfortable with that decision 

That said, I'm not anti overclock, I just no longer have the patience or will to do it anymore. I Just want to use my PC as is for games and photography without hassle. 

My two cents.


----------



## Akoshnai

reachthesky said:


> So this is an enthusiast website right? Did anyone here really buy a 9900k to only overclock it by 100mhz? Avx offsets are garbage for gaming, just run the highest possible frequency that you can keep stable AND under 80c during gaming. My 2 cents.


 Why 80c exactly? I have a Kraken x62 with Push-Pull im usually in the High 70s low 80s when im stress testing / Playing CPU intensive games like Battlefield or Hunt Showdown



Akoshnai said:


> Things to Change:
> -MCE: Auto (shouldnt i disable it?)
> -CPU CLICK RATIO 50
> -UNCORE/RING RATIO 47
> -TURBO BOOST: AUTO (Shouldnt i disable it?)
> -TURBO RATIO PER CORE: AUTO (Shouldnt i set it to 50?)
> -CORE CURRENT LIMIT (AMPS): 255 (Couldnt find it anywhere)
> -INTEL SPEED SHIFT: AUTO (Shouldnt i disable it?)
> -CPU ENHANCED HALT (C1E): DISABLED
> -C3 DISABLED
> -C6/C7 DISABLED
> -C8 DISABLED
> -C10 DISABLED
> -FAST BOOT ENABLED
> -VCORE 1.275V
> -VCCIO: AUTO
> -SA VOLTAGE: AUTO
> -LLC TURBO
> -INTERNAL AC/DC LOAD LINE: AUTO (TURBO IF VOLTAGES DROPS)
> -CPU VCORE CURRENT PROTECTION: EXTREME (Couldnt find it anywhere)
> -PWN PHASE CONTROL: EXTREME PERF (Couldnt find it anywhere)
> 
> Beside the VCORE do these settings make sense? Anything i Miss?


Then i should DISABLE Speed Shift and Fast Boot, but everything else makes sense? Oh! BTW i dont care about energy comsuption, im using the ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE power plan, is that alright?
Im using a AORUS ULTRA BTW, some settings like PWN PHASE CONTROL are nowhere to be found in my bios (F10b)


----------



## sygnus21

coolkwc said:


> Guys, i'm loss.
> 
> I just replaced my RMA 9900K to 9900KS, rock stable at 5GHz even Prime95, however core temperature reach 100'C although i'm using EK-KIT P280.
> 
> So i just want to try using AVX -2 so that it will run at 4.8Ghz during AVX load and stay at 5GHz the rest of the time.
> However the CPU always dropping to 4.8GHz even in desktop mode, it is not suppose the case right? Anything i set wrongly? Or my understanding of AVX offset is wrong? Or the AVX offset is buggy?


Hi, I remember you were having RAM issues which turned out to be a bad CPU. Anyway I just want to say glad you got that sorted out. As to your question, I've no answer since I'm not overclocking.

Again, welcome back and do be careful this time with the overclocks. 

Peace


----------



## Falkentyne

Haxor1337 said:


> Please help!
> 
> I had a system built about 3 months ago with a Z390 Aorus Ultra and since then I've been having sporadic boot failures when trying to power the system on.
> 
> First there's no video output while the mobo LED code immediately starts at 7F, then 03, 7F, 03, then cycles trough the C's until C4 for a couple seconds and the PC restarts and I get a BIOS screen saying "Boot failure detected". I load optimized defaults and then it starts normally, I restart to apply XMP Profile 1 to get my 3200 MHz back and no problems whatsoever from that point until it randomly happens again when I try to power on the PC later another time.
> 
> I looked up for the codes in my mobo's manual but 7F is just "reserved for AMI use" (no idea what that means) and 03 is straight up not listed.
> 
> I had gone about two weeks without the issue happening once just to have it reappear about two weeks ago out of nowhere, so it seems to be very random.
> 
> I've been using the PC all this time otherwise with zero issues once it has booted up properly, issue only happens sometimes when trying to power it on.
> 
> I've never overclocked anything.
> 
> I've tried to:
> -Clear CMOS with a screwdriver shorting the corresponding two pins
> -Update to latest BIOS F10b
> -Run optimized defaults only, including RAM with XMP disabled at 2400 MHz
> -Run a pass of memtest for an hour, 0 errors.
> -Disable fast startup
> 
> Nothing made a difference.
> 
> I'm starting to get increasingly worried and paranoid. I'm asking here because getting the issue to happen on demand isn't easy and taking it where I bought the parts to have it checked will be very difficult for me at the moment :/





coolkwc said:


> I'm having a exactly same issue as you, using Aorus Master, in fact this problem only occur on my 2nd RMA board where i received 2 months ago, not the 1st one.
> 
> The problem i'm having was same, boot failure detected out of nowhere, and the same issue happen with Pentium G5420 plug on the same board.
> When this happen, even a BIOS clear by pressing the CMOS switch at the back won't help some times, and try with different RAM also same. It just start at C4 and restart from 7F, looping until gave a non stop long beep!!!
> 
> I start to think this is board variation rather than CPU or RAM.
> 
> But one thing i can confirmed is, although i set to XMP profile, the failure less likely to happen if i manually set the timing rather than let it AUTO. This is what i learnt from somewhere online where the board is having hard time to get the right timing although it should follow the XMP profile!! Unbelievable.


Any of you using a wireless dongle device (mouse, etc)?


----------



## Wam7

Falkentyne said:


> You need to verify and double verify things like this by setting it back, rebooting or even rebooting twice and doing two tests per boot then setting it up again and re-testing. * These boards act very inconsistently*.


Isn't that the truth! The exact settings can give me quite differing results. Also the F10 key doesn't always work for me when I want to save and exit the bios and the "boot override" option in the bios doesn't work at all. I have several disks with individual OS' on but I still have to exit the bios and press the F12 key if I want to swap between them without changing the default boot OS.

You're still not going to release the latest F11d (?) that you had? Any idea when it will be finalised? I'm tempted to flash one of the modded bios' but prefer to wait for this round of betas to mature to full release with all the fixes you mentioned.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wam7 said:


> Isn't that the truth! The exact settings can give me quite differing results. Also the F10 key doesn't always work for me when I want to save and exit the bios and the "boot override" option in the bios doesn't work at all. I have several disks with individual OS' on but I still have to exit the bios and press the F12 key if I want to swap between them without changing the default boot OS.
> 
> You're still not going to release the latest F11d (?) that you had? Any idea when it will be finalised? I'm tempted to flash one of the modded bios' but prefer to wait for this round of betas to mature to full release with all the fixes you mentioned.


The 1.20v fixed->Auto/DVID bug may never be fixed.
The PWM switching frequency issue will not be fixed this generation. (use 300 khz unless your loadline calibration is at standard/normal, even then any gains at 400/500 may not be measurable if any).

But....


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is F11e modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.11e /x

Use the modded Master F11e BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11e modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes.


Thanks Kedarwolf


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> What is f11e? Changelog by chance?


f11d bugs reverted from what I can see.

Seems to be identical to T0D except enabling SVID Offset freezes the last voltage mode (again) and disables all voltage control, so it seems like T1D without the slightly slow reboot cycle.
No changelogs otherwise.

Apparently this isn't supposed to be proper behavior, as Asus boards have SVID offset enabled by default (Set DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms and raise AC Loadline on an Asus Maximus XI, you will see CPU VID will exceed 1.52v easily), but from what I seem to be hearing, Gigabyte combined 'SVID Offset' option with ' SVID Support' (an Asus option) being disabled. Again I have no idea what is proper behavior. I suspect T0D is proper behavior, but even on T0D, you can't change DVID offsets if SVID offset is disabled, just auto and manual vcores. And there's still the 1.20v fixed Vcore bug (enabling Auto/DVID from 1.20v fixed will prevent VID from responding and keep the vcore at 1.20v fixed, and enabling SVID Offset from 1.20v fixed will freeze the VRM and give NO POST code and force a clear CMOS, regardless of BIOS version).

You guys really need to contact Gigabyte yourselves instead of relying on me to do all the work. They're already getting annoyed with me, and I don't like it.


----------



## KedarWolf

Falkentyne said:


> f11d bugs reverted from what I can see.
> 
> Seems to be identical to T0D except enabling SVID Offset freezes the last voltage mode (again) and disables all voltage control, so it seems like T1D without the slightly slow reboot cycle.
> No changelogs otherwise.
> 
> Apparently this isn't supposed to be proper behavior, as Asus boards have SVID offset enabled by default (Set DC Loadline to 0.01 mOhms and raise AC Loadline on an Asus Maximus XI, you will see CPU VID will exceed 1.52v easily), but from what I seem to be hearing, Gigabyte combined 'SVID Offset' option with ' SVID Support' (an Asus option) being disabled. Again I have no idea what is proper behavior. I suspect T0D is proper behavior, but even on T0D, you can't change DVID offsets if SVID offset is disabled, just auto and manual vcores. And there's still the 1.20v fixed Vcore bug (enabling Auto/DVID from 1.20v fixed will prevent VID from responding and keep the vcore at 1.20v fixed, and enabling SVID Offset from 1.20v fixed will freeze the VRM and give NO POST code and force a clear CMOS, regardless of BIOS version).
> 
> You guys really need to contact Gigabyte yourselves instead of relying on me to do all the work. They're already getting annoyed with me, and I don't like it.


Okay if I link it on the Gigabyte Beta BIOS thread? I'm asking because you shared it here.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Okay if I link it on the Gigabyte Beta BIOS thread? I'm asking because you shared it here.


You can do as you wish. I'm in too bad of a mood to really care anymore.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> The 1.20v fixed->Auto/DVID bug may never be fixed.
> The PWM switching frequency issue will not be fixed this generation. (use 300 khz unless your loadline calibration is at standard/normal, even then any gains at 400/500 may not be measurable if any).
> 
> But....


Here is a thought. Since you can save a modded BIOS image with qflash and then load the same image via qflash without having to resort to a bootable USB and EFIFLASH, what if we distributed a qflash BIOS image with optimized settings (and even updated ME firmware)?

There may be an issue with saving it from one configuration (CPU model, memory type and dimm count, etc,) and loading it into a different configuration, but maybe once you load it and boot, the BIOS would sort it out. I think worst case the most you would have to do is to a CMOS reset after loading it. 


Anybody willing to try? I got a different CPU than most of you (an 8086k). What could go wrong? LOL.

In any case, I find it very useful to save a qflash file for each bios version once setup. It keeps all of the settings and the ME firmware and fan curves as well. I can very quickly switch between BIOS versions and even different settings for the same BIOS.


----------



## coolkwc

Falkentyne said:


> Haxor1337 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please help!
> 
> I had a system built about 3 months ago with a Z390 Aorus Ultra and since then I've been having sporadic boot failures when trying to power the system on.
> 
> First there's no video output while the mobo LED code immediately starts at 7F, then 03, 7F, 03, then cycles trough the C's until C4 for a couple seconds and the PC restarts and I get a BIOS screen saying "Boot failure detected". I load optimized defaults and then it starts normally, I restart to apply XMP Profile 1 to get my 3200 MHz back and no problems whatsoever from that point until it randomly happens again when I try to power on the PC later another time.
> 
> I looked up for the codes in my mobo's manual but 7F is just "reserved for AMI use" (no idea what that means) and 03 is straight up not listed.
> 
> I had gone about two weeks without the issue happening once just to have it reappear about two weeks ago out of nowhere, so it seems to be very random.
> 
> I've been using the PC all this time otherwise with zero issues once it has booted up properly, issue only happens sometimes when trying to power it on.
> 
> I've never overclocked anything.
> 
> I've tried to:
> -Clear CMOS with a screwdriver shorting the corresponding two pins
> -Update to latest BIOS F10b
> -Run optimized defaults only, including RAM with XMP disabled at 2400 MHz
> -Run a pass of memtest for an hour, 0 errors.
> -Disable fast startup
> 
> Nothing made a difference.
> 
> I'm starting to get increasingly worried and paranoid. I'm asking here because getting the issue to happen on demand isn't easy and taking it where I bought the parts to have it checked will be very difficult for me at the moment :/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> coolkwc said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm having a exactly same issue as you, using Aorus Master, in fact this problem only occur on my 2nd RMA board where i received 2 months ago, not the 1st one.
> 
> The problem i'm having was same, boot failure detected out of nowhere, and the same issue happen with Pentium G5420 plug on the same board.
> When this happen, even a BIOS clear by pressing the CMOS switch at the back won't help some times, and try with different RAM also same. It just start at C4 and restart from 7F, looping until gave a non stop long beep!!!
> 
> I start to think this is board variation rather than CPU or RAM.
> 
> But one thing i can confirmed is, although i set to XMP profile, the failure less likely to happen if i manually set the timing rather than let it AUTO. This is what i learnt from somewhere online where the board is having hard time to get the right timing although it should follow the XMP profile!! Unbelievable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Any of you using a wireless dongle device (mouse, etc)?
Click to expand...

Yes, i do. logitech unify receiver. Why? Anything to do with the issue?


----------



## GeneO

coolkwc said:


> Yes, i do. logitech unify receiver. Why? Anything to do with the issue?


https://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/8663/aorus-master-reset-problem-discovered

Though I do not have a problem with my logitech G305 wireless.


----------



## coolkwc

GeneO said:


> coolkwc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, i do. logitech unify receiver. Why? Anything to do with the issue?
> 
> 
> 
> https://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/8663/aorus-master-reset-problem-discovered
> 
> Though I do not have a problem with my logitech G305 wireless.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing, that's interesting. I have the M590, but the same receiver pair to keyboard as well


----------



## coolkwc

sygnus21 said:


> coolkwc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys, i'm loss.
> 
> I just replaced my RMA 9900K to 9900KS, rock stable at 5GHz even Prime95, however core temperature reach 100'C although i'm using EK-KIT P280.
> 
> So i just want to try using AVX -2 so that it will run at 4.8Ghz during AVX load and stay at 5GHz the rest of the time.
> However the CPU always dropping to 4.8GHz even in desktop mode, it is not suppose the case right? Anything i set wrongly? Or my understanding of AVX offset is wrong? Or the AVX offset is buggy?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, I remember you were having RAM issues which turned out to be a bad CPU. Anyway I just want to say glad you got that sorted out. As to your question, I've no answer since I'm not overclocking.
> 
> Again, welcome back and do be careful this time with the overclocks.
> 
> Peace/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

This time is 9900ks, i don't even need to OC myself for it to stay at 5GHz all the time.

I really found this KS is different in Auto and Manual OC. When i set 50 ratio with auto vcore and load line, it can run prime95 smallest FTT without issue with Vcore reading around 1.29V in CPU-Z/HWinfo. However if i mimic the vcore by set it at 1.3V with turbo LLC, prime95 will fail with 'watch dog problem' BSOD even the Vcore is slightly higher then Auto. So what i do now is just left the multiplier to 50, all in Auto with no AVX offset, this will be my 24/7 setting.

No fun at all.


----------



## coolkwc

sygnus21 said:


> reachthesky said:
> 
> 
> 
> So this is an enthusiast website right? Did anyone here really buy a 9900k to only overclock it by 100mhz?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes (and no). I built an i9-9900K system (system specs below) and outside of XMP for the RAM, I'm not overclocking anything. Perfectly comfortable with that decision /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> That said, I'm not anti overclock, I just no longer have the patience or will to do it anymore. I Just want to use my PC as is for games and photography without hassle.
> 
> My two cents.
Click to expand...

Same here. Can we said we are no longer interested in OC? Haha.

I'm 35 this year with 2 kids, so basically i don't have time to mess with it and extract just a 100MHz advantage with repetitive stress test. And from my recent experience, i know i don't even have time or patient anymore to wait for RMA. It just too hassle to me.


----------



## Falkentyne

coolkwc said:


> This time is 9900ks, i don't even need to OC myself for it to stay at 5GHz all the time.
> 
> I really found this KS is different in Auto and Manual OC. When i set 50 ratio with auto vcore and load line, it can run prime95 smallest FTT without issue with Vcore reading around 1.29V in CPU-Z/HWinfo. However if i mimic the vcore by set it at 1.3V with turbo LLC, prime95 will fail with 'watch dog problem' BSOD even the Vcore is slightly higher then Auto. So what i do now is just left the multiplier to 50, all in Auto with no AVX offset, this will be my 24/7 setting.
> 
> No fun at all.


Auto LLC and Auto Vcore use "Standard/Normal Loadline Calibration" (1.6 mOhms) and AC Loadline is responsible for boosting the vcore up at full load (Formula for this boost is Vcore (VR VOUT)=vCPU + (Amps * AC Loadline mOhms) - (Amps * Loadline Calibration mOhms). vCPU is "CPU Default VID". This default VID can be found by setting both AC Loadline and DC Loadline to "1" in Internal VR Settings (Do this on fixed vcore, not on auto vcore). Turbo is 0.4 mOhms. Standard/Normal is 1.6 mOhms. It's an easy formula.

Turbo LLC has MUCH MUCH worse transients than Standard LLC. Even if "VR VOUT" is the same at max load on both settings, transients will cause much lower voltage dips. That's why you crash. (Note: High, Turbo and Extreme LLC will have better transients at 300 khz VRM Switching frequency, than "Auto" (400 khz). 500 khz is even worse than 400 at high/turbo/Extreme LLC--don't use it unless you are on "Standard" loadline calibration.

Compare LLC2 (Standard/Normal LLC on Gigabyte) with LLC6 (Turbo LLC on GB). This was taken at 70 amps.

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

Transients are the sudden drop at the beginning below the "middle" voltage area, which is the load voltage step (as well as the spike at the end of the load step).


----------



## coolkwc

Falkentyne said:


> Auto LLC and Auto Vcore use "Standard/Normal Loadline Calibration" (1.6 mOhms) and AC Loadline is responsible for boosting the vcore up at full load (Formula for this boost is Vcore (VR VOUT)=vCPU + (Amps * AC Loadline mOhms) - (Amps * Loadline Calibration mOhms). vCPU is "CPU Default VID". This default VID can be found by setting both AC Loadline and DC Loadline to "1" in Internal VR Settings (Do this on fixed vcore, not on auto vcore). Turbo is 0.4 mOhms. Standard/Normal is 1.6 mOhms. It's an easy formula.
> 
> Turbo LLC has MUCH MUCH worse transients than Standard LLC. Even if "VR VOUT" is the same at max load on both settings, transients will cause much lower voltage dips. That's why you crash. (Note: High, Turbo and Extreme LLC will have better transients at 300 khz VRM Switching frequency, than "Auto" (400 khz). 500 khz is even worse than 400 at high/turbo/Extreme LLC--don't use it unless you are on "Standard" loadline calibration.
> 
> Compare LLC2 (Standard/Normal LLC on Gigabyte) with LLC6 (Turbo LLC on GB). This was taken at 70 amps.
> 
> https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/
> 
> Transients are the sudden drop at the beginning below the "middle" voltage area, which is the load voltage step (as well as the spike at the end of the load step).


Thanks, looks interesting.

Would you mind to guide if i would like to find a lower voltage for stable 5GHz OC now? What kind of parameter you would like me to post in order for you to give advise?
Sorry i know it had been stated somewhere in this thread but i don't think i can find it easily within these few thousand posts.

My aim is to further bring down the temperature for 5GHz if possible.


----------



## Falkentyne

coolkwc said:


> Thanks, looks interesting.
> 
> Would you mind to guide if i would like to find a lower voltage for stable 5GHz OC now? What kind of parameter you would like me to post in order for you to give advise?
> Sorry i know it had been stated somewhere in this thread but i don't think i can find it easily within these few thousand posts.
> 
> My aim is to further bring down the temperature for 5GHz if possible.


Lower the Loadline Calibration (LLC) and raise the vCPU (fixed vcore/VID) or use offset voltage with lowest LLC's. It's better to use a higher offset voltage and lower LLC and AC Loadline than a lower offset and higher AC Loadline (Even if LLC is the same in both), because ACLL responds "irregularly" to current loads, especially mixed AVX/non AVX erratic loads. AC Loadline works well in sustained high load situations like Cinebench R20 and Prime95 small FFT, where the load is very even and balanced, but when you try something like Battlefield 5, and you rely "too much" on AC Loadline to get a stable output VR VOUT, you may get instability because the load varies too much in BF5.


----------



## Lurifaks

GeneO said:


> In any case, I find it very useful to save a qflash file for each bios version once setup. It keeps all of the settings and the ME firmware and fan curves as well. I can very quickly switch between BIOS versions and even different settings for the same BIOS.


Hi, could you guide me how to do this, sounds very interesting ?


----------



## sygnus21

coolkwc said:


> Same here. Can we said we are no longer interested in OC? Haha.


Yeah, I'm done with it. Every now and then I'll do a quick button OC just to get a higher bench score and then go back to defaults. 



coolkwc said:


> I'm 35 this year with 2 kids, so basically i don't have time to mess with it... [snip]


I remember that age a long time back  Now my daughters are in their 30's (30 & 34) and their kids keep me and the wife busy 

Oh, and as seen in my system specs I've a Logitech mouse and KB using a Logitech receiver and have no issues with re-boots or anything of the sort


----------



## Wam7

GeneO said:


> Here is a thought. Since you can save a modded BIOS image with qflash and then load the same image via qflash without having to resort to a bootable USB and EFIFLASH, what if we distributed a qflash BIOS image with optimized settings (and even updated ME firmware)?
> 
> There may be an issue with saving it from one configuration (CPU model, memory type and dimm count, etc,) and loading it into a different configuration, but maybe once you load it and boot, the BIOS would sort it out. I think worst case the most you would have to do is to a CMOS reset after loading it.
> 
> 
> Anybody willing to try? I got a different CPU than most of you (an 8086k). What could go wrong? LOL.
> 
> In any case, I find it very useful to save a qflash file for each bios version once setup. It keeps all of the settings and the ME firmware and fan curves as well. I can very quickly switch between BIOS versions and even different settings for the same BIOS.


That is a great idea. Having been bitten once before with a bad EFIFlash that bricked my motherboard I'm slightly reticent though not averse to be doing any further USB EFIFlashing. I did manage to recover my Master but it is not as straight forward as it is in the manual and even getting it to switch between bios' can take several attempts (I created an earlier post on exactly how to fix a bricked board using QFlash)

I (we) really appreciate @KedarWolf releasing the modded bios with fastest microcodes etc though it would be immense if he or someone could release the saved QFlash file, so to remove that slightly higher element of risk associated with the USB EFIFlash.


----------



## KedarWolf

Wam7 said:


> That is a great idea. Having been bitten once before with a bad EFIFlash that bricked my motherboard I'm slightly reticent though not averse to be doing any further USB EFIFlashing. I did manage to recover my Master but it is not as straight forward as it is in the manual and even getting it to switch between bios' can take several attempts (I created an earlier post on exactly how to fix a bricked board using QFlash)
> 
> I (we) really appreciate @KedarWolf releasing the modded bios with fastest microcodes etc though it would be immense if he or someone could release the saved QFlash file, so to remove that slightly higher element of risk associated with the USB EFIFlash.


I fried my 9900k and bought a 9600kf until I get my tax refund. Not sure a saved BIOS is a good idea. 

Edit, I'm I'm running it at 5.1GHZ, .155v offset AC Loadline 1, 4.7Cache, 4000 memory, likely would need a BIOS reset for anyone else.


----------



## satinghostrider

Guys, on fixed vcore, would changing the pwm phase control and vcore current protection do anything to optimise my overclocks? Saw some people setting it to exm perf or something. I'm currently on auto for everything on that page except for load line calibration set to high.


----------



## Wam7

satinghostrider said:


> Guys, on fixed vcore, would changing the pwm phase control and vcore current protection do anything to optimise my overclocks? Saw some people setting it to exm perf or something. I'm currently on auto for everything on that page except for load line calibration set to high.


These are my settings for my fully stable 5.3Ghz (9700K) overclock that I picked up from this thread and a couple informative 'talking head' videos. My voltage range on the VR VOUT goes from ~1.295 to ~1.250v under load. I'm still in the testing phase but playing with memory more so now.


----------



## satinghostrider

Wam7 said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys, on fixed vcore, would changing the pwm phase control and vcore current protection do anything to optimise my overclocks? Saw some people setting it to exm perf or something. I'm currently on auto for everything on that page except for load line calibration set to high.
> 
> 
> 
> These are my settings for my fully stable 5.3Ghz (9700K) overclock that I picked up from this thread and a couple informative 'talking head' videos. My voltage range on the VR VOUT goes from ~1.295 to ~1.250v under load. I'm still in the testing phase but playing with memory more so now.
Click to expand...

Wow that is alot of help! Thanks man that is some impressive clocks. I'm at 5.2/4.9 and just want to optimise my bios settings further. This community has been alot of help like @Falkentyne, @reachthesky @KedarWolf, etc.


----------



## Wam7

KedarWolf said:


> I fried my 9900k and bought a 9600kf until I get my tax refund. Not sure a saved BIOS is a good idea.
> 
> Edit, I'm I'm running it at 5.1GHZ, .155v offset AC Loadline 1, 4.7Cache, 4000 memory, likely would need a BIOS reset for anyone else.


Really sorry to hear your fried your 9900K, how did that happen, too much Vcore? 

If I understand what @GeneO is saying is that by saving the modded bios in QFlash then that process now makes the modded bios QFlash-able. From my understanding it doesn't save particular profiles of that CPU as you would have in the Save/Load Profile section, it would just have to be same motherboard version. If you have an Aorus Master I'm willing to test your saved QFlash file of the your last modded F11e bios.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys, on fixed vcore, would changing the pwm phase control and vcore current protection do anything to optimise my overclocks? Saw some people setting it to exm perf or something. I'm currently on auto for everything on that page except for load line calibration set to high.
> 
> 
> 
> extreme perf on pwm phase control is a necessity for tight memory overclocks. You'll fail p95/occt large avx loads if it is set to high perf(high perf is good for keeping temps lower but not for tight memory ocs). Just learned this last week, tested a couple different memory OCS with different phase control options, extreme always passed occt and high perf always failed occt within minutes.
Click to expand...

I find that I need to up my VCCIO and VCCSA to 1.35V to be stable at 4.9Ghz Cache at 4133Mhz 16-17-17-37-374. By setting to extreme perf, does that mean I could reduce my VCCIO and VCCSA? My temps are at 83 degrees during OCCT. But gaming is under 70 degrees. Thanks in advance!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> The higher sa/io requirements *could be* strictly due to the cache ratio and separate from the ram. I'm not sure if setting phase control to extreme would impact sa/io levels but it doesn't hurt to find out . Let us know the results ^^.


Thanks for the insight. I saw one of your earlier posts where you mentioned the various SA/IO voltages and that guided me tremendously to figuring out why I was crashing in some games and OCCT. Just found 1.35V for both of them on the high side but my temps are pretty good.


----------



## encrypted11

It is also possible to reduce FCLK on early power on to 800MHz (system agent frequency) to reduce SA IO voltage requirements.

You'd ultimately need to weigh the impact on system agent (mostly PCIe, IMC, iGPU related) frequency reduction against better headroom on other subsystems and the overall impact against benchmarks.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wam7

reachthesky said:


> are vid tables lower on the 9700k or something? I tried +165mv with medium llc @5.3ghz ht/off on a 9900k + acdc 1/1 and I get 1.375v-1.395v under load
> 
> edit: sounds like you have a GREAT chip. +165mv is BFV stable for me @ 5.3ghz ht off 4.9ghz cache [email protected] Well that worked out well lol. Had been using +150mv on llc high to achieve the same stability but temps were a bit higher due to using high llc instead of medium. Now cbr15/cbr20 benchies are under 80c. BFV temps are lower as well. Lower overall vcore during gaming too. need to see how far I can push the ram without the need for additional vcore.


VID's will vary even between CPU's of the same version! I agree this is a good CPU. With more voltage it can go higher but I like the cool silence! 

Glad I can help you out as your many screenshots have helped immensely now that I'm trying to tighten tertiary timings. I've got 3900Mhz 15-15-15-32 stable so far thanks in large part to you.


----------



## Lurifaks

@reachthesky

Do you have any tips for what I can run tRC at 4133-16-17-17 with the patriot 4400 ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Lurifaks

reachthesky said:


> I had zero luck with getting patriot sticks stable. tRC = tRP + tRAS on these boards for most part.


Ok, thanks for your reply


----------



## Madness11

Guys ,have a big mistake... my 4x8 Kingston hyperX predator ( 4000c19 ) won't work a stable .... every time bsod.... help pls.. try everything. Put more Voltage ( around 1.4) .. won't be stable ... 3600 work fine .. but 4000 nop .. mb aorus master


----------



## wholeeo

Madness11 said:


> Guys ,have a big mistake... my 4x8 Kingston hyperX predator ( 4000c19 ) won't work a stable .... every time bsod.... help pls.. try everything. Put more Voltage ( around 1.4) .. won't be stable ... 3600 work fine .. but 4000 nop .. mb aorus master


We're going to need more info than that to help. For starters post some Asrock Timing Configurator screenshots.


----------



## Madness11

Here the configurator.. if start stress test is fine ... if play any game , bsod....


----------



## Madness11

This with no oc cpu , and all auto ( just xmp and 1.4v )


----------



## KedarWolf

Wam7 said:


> Really sorry to hear your fried your 9900K, how did that happen, too much Vcore?
> 
> If I understand what @GeneO is saying is that by saving the modded bios in QFlash then that process now makes the modded bios QFlash-able. From my understanding it doesn't save particular profiles of that CPU as you would have in the Save/Load Profile section, it would just have to be same motherboard version. If you have an Aorus Master I'm willing to test your saved QFlash file of the your last modded F11e bios.


Attached. Master QFlash save.


----------



## Wam7

Madness11 said:


> Here the configurator.. if start stress test is fine ... if play any game , bsod....


Is this brand new RAM or used RAM that were previously stable at 4000Mhz but no longer are?



KedarWolf said:


> Attached. Master QFlash save.


Many thanks, I'll give this a test when I get up.


----------



## Madness11

Wam7 said:


> Madness11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here the configurator.. if start stress test is fine ... if play any game , bsod....
> 
> 
> 
> Is this brand new RAM or used RAM that were previously stable at 4000Mhz but no longer are?
> Yes , new one ram .
Click to expand...


----------



## Haxor1337

Falkentyne said:


> Any of you using a wireless dongle device (mouse, etc)?


Sorry for the late response. Yes... I have a Logitech G305. I had seen a thread in another site about a weird OS that wouldn't boot if a wireless receiver was connected. I thought it was a stupid idea that it could be my problem but I decided to try anyway so I started disconnecting the receiver before turning my PC on, however the issue happened on the second day.

But now that you mention it again, a month and a half ago I got a wired mouse that I used instead of the G305 for like a couple weeks. I think those were the two weeks where I didn't have the issue happen once. Then I started using the G305 again.

I guess I need to try again, this time I'm gonna disconnect the receiver before shutting down too and reconnect after a successful boot. It would be really dumb if that's the issue but I would be happy. Although I'm thinking it was all a weird coincidence and I'm gonna have to RMA something.

One last thing, could my issue be related to a faulty PSU at all? I've pretty much ruled out CPU and RAM and the main suspects are the board, the PSU and the mouse again.


----------



## Wam7

Madness11 said:


> Yes , new one ram .


Then you need to return it as it should run at XMP with stock settings. This can happen (and is more probable) with high speed RAM and has happened to me. I just returned mine as faulty and the shop replaced them for free.


----------



## Wam7

@KedarWolf

Thanks again for the F11e Qflashable bios. I swallowed hard and did a test flash this morning. It worked, though as you did suspect it seemed to take some of your settings, are all these your current settings? This is what I had on first boot into the bios. If they are then it should just be a case of loading Optmized Defaults before saving the bios.


----------



## Grizzly111

satinghostrider said:


> I find that I need to up my VCCIO and VCCSA to 1.35V to be stable at 4.9Ghz Cache at 4133Mhz 16-17-17-37-374. By setting to extreme perf, does that mean I could reduce my VCCIO and VCCSA? My temps are at 83 degrees during OCCT. But gaming is under 70 degrees. Thanks in advance!


 @satinghostrider - honestly I would run my 4000CL16-16-16 overclock. I only need 1.45v VDIMM + 1.18/1.23v IO/SA. It's been super stable. I now run this daily. You won't notice a difference in game FPS. It's your RAM but until Gigabyte release more stable BIOS's for higher RAM overclocks....I truly don't think it's worth going to 1.35v for that small an improvement.


----------



## satinghostrider

Grizzly111 said:


> @satinghostrider - honestly I would run my 4000CL16-16-16 overclock. I only need 1.45v VDIMM + 1.18/1.23v IO/SA. It's been super stable. I now run this daily. You won't notice a difference in game FPS. It's your RAM but until Gigabyte release more stable BIOS's for higher RAM overclocks....I truly don't think it's worth going to 1.35v for that small an improvement.


I actually re-did my overclocks from scratch and realise that I have been using 10mv less than what I should be using. 
I also managed to clock my 4,133Mhz @ 16-16-16-36-288 at 1.47V so now everything runs well. But I maintained using 4.8Ghz cache instead of pushing it further. I think it is plenty for me.
I did use your settings for a few weeks and I had no issues at all. Games felt more responsive compared to 4133 CL17. But now I can run 4133 at CL16 and so far so good!
Thanks again for your settings man!


----------



## Salve1412

@reachthesky Knowing your interest in memory overclocking, I'd like to share with you my recent experience after I swapped both my 9900K (P0) and my Master for a 9900KS (R0) and another Master (this time a G2 Edition) while keeping the same RAM kit (F4-4266C17Q-32GTZR), kit that, incidentally, is in the Master QVL. With my previous board and CPU I couldn't go past 4133 CL16 (tight timings): 4200 and 4266 were unstable even at XMP timings. With this new CPU and motherboard combo the situation isn't different, if not slightly worse in terms of reachable RAM speed. I was able to considerably lower VCCIO and VCCSA at the same exact 4133 CL16 frequency with the same exact timings (from 1.22-1.20 of the K to 1.13-1.15 of the KS), having Uncore at 47 with the KS versus 46 of the K, but 4200 and 4266 are a no go: the board really struggles to POST and when it manages to do that everything is highly unstable. I could try increasing DRAM Voltage over 1.5V but it seems to me absurd if the kit is rated at 1.45V. I don't know, but at this point I'd rather blame these boards, that seem to hit a huge wall past 4133MHz (at least with not so high voltages), and question Gigabyte testing procedures and overestimations before adding a kit to their QVL, than accuse the CPUs' IMC.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Madness11

Idk ... I put 1.45v , still got bsod .. Haha.. I think is broken mb or ram ... coz can't work at 4000


----------



## Wam7

satinghostrider said:


> Wow that is alot of help! Thanks man that is some impressive clocks. I'm at 5.2/4.9 and just want to optimise my bios settings further. This community has been alot of help like @Falkentyne, @reachthesky @KedarWolf, etc.


I forgot to add the other relevant setting is that IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline should be set to 1.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

Wam7 said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow that is alot of help! Thanks man that is some impressive clocks. I'm at 5.2/4.9 and just want to optimise my bios settings further. This community has been alot of help like @Falkentyne, @reachthesky @KedarWolf, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> I forgot to add the other relevant setting is that IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline should be set to 1. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
Click to expand...

Does that make a difference for me since I am on fixed vcore? I remember @Falkentyne mentioning it does nothing on fixed vcore.
Just as a matter of clarity, do you guys disable your Thermal Velocity Boost voltage optimisation under fixed vcore? Mine is currently disabled.


----------



## Falkentyne

satinghostrider said:


> Does that make a difference for me since I am on fixed vcore? I remember @Falkentyne mentioning it does nothing on fixed vcore.
> Just as a matter of clarity, do you guys disable your Thermal Velocity Boost voltage optimisation under fixed vcore? Mine is currently disabled.


None of those settings matter one bit on fixed vcore. I do NOT know if TVB ratio clipping matters or not however (that's supposed to be a laptop setting).


----------



## KedarWolf

Wam7 said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Thanks again for the F11e Qflashable bios. I swallowed hard and did a test flash this morning. It worked, though as you did suspect it seemed to take some of your settings, are all these your current settings? This is what I had on first boot into the bios. If they are then it should just be a case of loading Optmized Defaults before saving the bios.


Yes, they are my settings on my temp 9600k CPU, I thought it transferred the settings as well. :/


----------



## KedarWolf

reachthesky said:


> How is performance on the modded qflashed bios? That has the older best performing microcodes right?


Yes, it has the older best performing microcodes and all updated firmware, GOP and all.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, it has the older best performing microcodes and all updated firmware, GOP and all.


Well I thought you said this wasn't a good idea. 

So the big payoff is you can flash an ME update, save it with qflash and transmit that on. If you check, all the current gigabyte BIOS contain ME firmware that is vulnerable.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> Attached. Master QFlash save.


Are you willing to try flashing a master qflash image made with a different CPU (8086k) loaded with current settings (not optimized default) and updated ME firmware? Qflash does preserve profiles btw.
If so I will post an f11e qflash image.


----------



## Wam7

reachthesky said:


> How is performance on the modded qflashed bios? That has the older best performing microcodes right?


For the few CPU Benchmarks I did, they were all faster with this F11e. A quick latency check in AIDA showed a small inscrease from ~38.5 to ~38.9 but as this can fluctuate quite a bit even using the same bios/settings then I'm not too fussed about that. Overclocks on CPU and memory are still stable which is what matters to me.



KedarWolf said:


> Yes, they are my settings on my temp 9600k CPU, I thought it transferred the settings as well. :/


Yes you were right, which seems slightly illogical but could prove handy. If my system couldn't handle your settings I think it would just load the defaults in the same way it does if one overclocks outside of it's limits, though if you load Optimised Defaults before hand then all should be good.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> Well I thought you said this wasn't a good idea.
> 
> So the big payoff is you can flash an ME update, save it with qflash and transmit that on. If you check, all the current gigabyte BIOS contain ME firmware that is vulnerable.


My email notification said you originally stated,

"Typical of you to take someone else's work and ideas and take credit for it with no acknowledgement. You are pretty despicable."

*** were you talking about, it was pretty obvious someone requested the saved QFlash with the BIOS with all the mods I did.

BTW, I never upgraded the ME firmware yet, but I'm not sure if it saves with a BIOS. I can update it and check though.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> My email notification said you originally stated,
> 
> "Typical of you to take someone else's work and ideas and take credit for it with no acknowledgement. You are pretty despicable."
> 
> *** were you talking about, it was pretty obvious someone requested the saved QFlash with the BIOS with all the mods I did.
> 
> BTW, I never upgraded the ME firmware yet, but I'm not sure if it saves with a BIOS. I can update it and check though.


I didn't see your previous post. Hey and thanks for the rep (there is such a button)

Yes, the ME firmware is saved with qflash as I said. 

Attached is my master qflash made with an 8086k and I think has the updated ME firmware. Give it a go?

EDIT: 
Here is a link to the Intel CSME tool to check the ME firmware and test if it is vulnerable. 

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/do...d-Management-Engine-Intel-CSME-Detection-Tool


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

I am just curious if you increase your cache frequency with tight timings eg. 4133Mhz 16-16-16-36 at 1.47V, do you need to touch your VCCSA/VCCIO voltages? I'm currently at 1.38V for vcore and 1.27V for both VCCSA/VCCIO at 4.8Ghz cache and 5.2Ghz core.

I am thinking of dropping my cache down to 47x to reduce my voltages slightly. @reachthesky I saw one of your posts stating you need 1.3V VCCSA/VCCIO for cache 4.8Ghz-4.9Ghz but only need 1.25V VCCSA/VCCIO for 4.7Ghz frequency.


----------



## Intrud3r

satinghostrider said:


> I am just curious if you increase your cache frequency with tight timings eg. 4133Mhz 16-16-16-36 at 1.47V, do you need to touch your VCCSA/VCCIO voltages? I'm currently at 1.38V for vcore and 1.27V for both VCCSA/VCCIO at 4.8Ghz cache and 5.2Ghz core.
> 
> I am thinking of dropping my cache down to 47x to reduce my voltages slightly. @reachthesky I saw one of your posts stating you need 1.3V VCCSA/VCCIO for cache 4.8Ghz-4.9Ghz but only need 1.25V VCCSA/VCCIO for 4.7Ghz frequency.


Just some added information ... 

I'm running 5.2 / 4.9 HT = off atm @ ~1.370V

VCCIO = 1.210V
VCCSA = 1.240V

If I switch to 5.1 / 4.8 HT = on, I need more voltage as I get WHEA errors. Prolly only VCCIO / VCCSA as I've ran those 2 values up to 1.330V before and that worked flawlessly at 5.1 / 4.8 HT = on.


----------



## Timur Born

VRM noise due to load state changes (C-states +- P-states +- Turbo +- Hyperthreading) is stupid loud on this board. But it helps me do noise tests with audio equipment at least. We pump so much current through these systems nowadays and switch so quickly between full load and null load that the hardware cannot keep quiet about it.


----------



## satinghostrider

Intrud3r said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am just curious if you increase your cache frequency with tight timings eg. 4133Mhz 16-16-16-36 at 1.47V, do you need to touch your VCCSA/VCCIO voltages? I'm currently at 1.38V for vcore and 1.27V for both VCCSA/VCCIO at 4.8Ghz cache and 5.2Ghz core.
> 
> I am thinking of dropping my cache down to 47x to reduce my voltages slightly. @reachthesky I saw one of your posts stating you need 1.3V VCCSA/VCCIO for cache 4.8Ghz-4.9Ghz but only need 1.25V VCCSA/VCCIO for 4.7Ghz frequency.
> 
> 
> 
> Just some added information ...
> 
> I'm running 5.2 / 4.9 HT = off atm @ ~1.370V
> 
> VCCIO = 1.210V
> VCCSA = 1.240V
> 
> If I switch to 5.1 / 4.8 HT = on, I need more voltage as I get WHEA errors. Prolly only VCCIO / VCCSA as I've ran those 2 values up to 1.330V before and that worked flawlessly at 5.1 / 4.8 HT = on.
Click to expand...

Thanks man I'll use that to test. I've got to 5.3/5.0 HT OFF at 1.4V but I feel Battlefield 5 feels not as smooth as with HT ON. I think I will drop to 4.7Ghz cache and ease off on both the voltages. I find that running tighter timings with higher cache frequency requires a tad more vcore and VCCIO/VCCSA. Annoying thing is that it takes alot of testing to get these numbers right. Battlefront 2 will abnormally crash to the desktop if it is not stable but I can be stable on P95 and OCCT!


----------



## Intrud3r

satinghostrider said:


> Thanks man I'll use that to test. I've got to 5.3/5.0 HT OFF at 1.4V but I feel Battlefield 5 feels not as smooth as with HT ON. I think I will drop to 4.7Ghz cache and ease off on both the voltages. I find that running tighter timings with higher cache frequency requires a tad more vcore and VCCIO/VCCSA. Annoying thing is that it takes alot of testing to get these numbers right. Battlefront 2 will abnormally crash to the desktop if it is not stable but I can be stable on P95 and OCCT!


Agreed ... Battlefront 2 / BF5 / NFS Heat are darn heavy on the system ... they find errors rather fast even if it passes prime / realbench.


----------



## pXuis

9900KS
5.1Ghz / 4.8Ghz Ring
AVX = 0

Dvid +0.145
ac/dc 1:1
Vcore LLC Low
Switch Rate: 300
All Cstates and stepping enabled.

VROut
Idle: 1.336vish to 1.35v 
Non AVX Load, ie R15: 1.23v
AVX Load, ie. R20: 1.26v


Prime 95 4 Hours Stable. Small with AVX Disabled
Aida64 FPU+CPU+Cache 3 Hours Stable.

Solder on this chip sucks. Cores differ with as much as 22C, my previous 9900k was similar until I delidded it. Won't be delidding the KS with Gen10 around the corner (resale and all that).
I can stabilize 5.2 but with the extreme variance in core temperature, it gets hard to stress test.
____

This is one of the first Gskill Trident kits, Jdec is rated at 2133 so it's a pretty old bin.
Ran Memtest to 400% which is enough for my gaming needs.
I decided to watercool my ram as well, the sticks in the middle ran up to 50+C even with a fan aimed at them and got unstable in long tests or gaming sessions.
I haven't even seen 35C on them since watercooling. 

17-17-17-38 @ 4133 /trfc 280, decently tight secondaries and tertiaries. 
1.5V Dram and training.
0.75 termination
VCCIO/SA both 1.3V.

I just can't get 15-15-15-32 or 16-16-16-36 stable regardless of secondaries or tertiaries. Maybe I'm missing something. Dropping down to 3900 and going c15/16 is a no go as well.


----------



## satinghostrider

pXuis said:


> 9900KS
> 5.1Ghz / 4.8Ghz Ring
> AVX = 0
> 
> Dvid +0.145
> ac/dc 1:1
> Vcore LLC Low
> Switch Rate: 300
> All Cstates and stepping enabled.
> 
> VROut
> Idle: 1.336vish to 1.35v
> Non AVX Load, ie R15: 1.23v
> AVX Load, ie. R20: 1.26v
> 
> 
> Prime 95 4 Hours Stable. Small with AVX Disabled
> Aida64 FPU+CPU+Cache 3 Hours Stable.
> 
> Solder on this chip sucks. Cores differ with as much as 22C, my previous 9900k was similar until I delidded it. Won't be delidding the KS with Gen10 around the corner (resale and all that).
> I can stabilize 5.2 but with the extreme variance in core temperature, it gets hard to stress test.
> ____
> 
> This is one of the first Gskill Trident kits, Jdec is rated at 2133 so it's a pretty old bin.
> Ran Memtest to 400% which is enough for my gaming needs.
> I decided to watercool my ram as well, the sticks in the middle ran up to 50+C even with a fan aimed at them and got unstable in long tests or gaming sessions.
> I haven't even seen 35C on them since watercooling.
> 
> 17-17-17-38 @ 4133 /trfc 280, decently tight secondaries and tertiaries.
> 1.5V Dram and training.
> 0.75 termination
> VCCIO/SA both 1.3V.
> 
> I just can't get 15-15-15-32 or 16-16-16-36 stable regardless of secondaries or tertiaries. Maybe I'm missing something. Dropping down to 3900 and going c15/16 is a no go as well.


Did you try @Gen. memory timings? It worked for me. But mine however, is the F4-3600C16 kit non-RGB memory. I also have a Vengeance Airflow cooler located over my memory and I haven't been seen past 35 degrees on mine. But pumping it over 1.55V I can past 35 degrees easily.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/28327296-post11496.html

Why not try this and see if it works for you?


----------



## Nammi

pXuis said:


> Solder on this chip sucks. Cores differ with as much as 22C, my previous 9900k was similar until I delidded it.


Wait what, 22C?... I would've rma'd straight away, considering it's only an 8 core chip.


----------



## satinghostrider

Nammi said:


> pXuis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Solder on this chip sucks. Cores differ with as much as 22C, my previous 9900k was similar until I delidded it.
> 
> 
> 
> Wait what, 22C?... I would've rma'd straight away, considering it's only an 8 core chip.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's a huge delta!


----------



## pXuis

satinghostrider said:


> Did you try @Gen. memory timings? It worked for me. But mine however, is the F4-3600C16 kit non-RGB memory. I also have a Vengeance Airflow cooler located over my memory and I haven't been seen past 35 degrees on mine. But pumping it over 1.55V I can past 35 degrees easily.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28327296-post11496.html
> 
> Why not try this and see if it works for you?


Ganna give it a shot, thanks!



Nammi said:


> Wait what, 22C?... I would've rma'd straight away, considering it's only an 8 core chip.


Not sure if core temp difference would be a vaild excuse for RMA?, guess I could give it a shot. (Webhallen)
I'll have to check how much it differs under stock settings though.


----------



## Nammi

pXuis said:


> Not sure if core temp difference would be a vaild excuse for RMA?, guess I could give it a shot. (Webhallen)
> I'll have to check how much it differs under stock settings though.


Ah Webhallen, so you're also from the northern parts of EU. I've had good costumer service through them, though it was years ago.

I take it you're already past the 2 weeks return period. If they do decline the rma request, you could always leave a negative review on something like prisjakt and see if they budge. =p


----------



## KrampusKlaus

pXuis said:


> 9900KS
> 5.1Ghz / 4.8Ghz Ring
> AVX = 0
> 
> Dvid +0.145
> ac/dc 1:1
> Vcore LLC Low
> Switch Rate: 300
> All Cstates and stepping enabled.
> 
> VROut
> Idle: 1.336vish to 1.35v
> Non AVX Load, ie R15: 1.23v
> AVX Load, ie. R20: 1.26v
> 
> 
> Prime 95 4 Hours Stable. Small with AVX Disabled
> Aida64 FPU+CPU+Cache 3 Hours Stable.
> 
> Solder on this chip sucks. Cores differ with as much as 22C, my previous 9900k was similar until I delidded it. Won't be delidding the KS with Gen10 around the corner (resale and all that).
> I can stabilize 5.2 but with the extreme variance in core temperature, it gets hard to stress test.
> ____
> 
> This is one of the first Gskill Trident kits, Jdec is rated at 2133 so it's a pretty old bin.
> Ran Memtest to 400% which is enough for my gaming needs.
> I decided to watercool my ram as well, the sticks in the middle ran up to 50+C even with a fan aimed at them and got unstable in long tests or gaming sessions.
> I haven't even seen 35C on them since watercooling.
> 
> 17-17-17-38 @ 4133 /trfc 280, decently tight secondaries and tertiaries.
> 1.5V Dram and training.
> 0.75 termination
> VCCIO/SA both 1.3V.
> 
> I just can't get 15-15-15-32 or 16-16-16-36 stable regardless of secondaries or tertiaries. Maybe I'm missing something. Dropping down to 3900 and going c15/16 is a no go as well.


I was just going to post here that I was noticing high average idle voltages with my own Normal vcore DVID offset overclock. But if this is what you're seeing, maybe it's normal.


i7 9700k
5.0 core/4.7 ring
DVID Offset: +0.06v (0.05v is OCCT and Realbench stable but was giving me weird performance in Jedi Fallen Order, no crashing just stuttering. 0.06v seems to be the sweet spot)

AVX = 0
ac/dc 1:1
LLC = medium
EIST and most c-states enabled

VR Vout
Gaming, OCCT Large, Realbench: ~1.26-1.27v (forgot off the top of my head)
Idle (Firefox): bounces around from 0.833-1.288v, average of about 1.22v

It just seems odd to me because all of the vcore and vid readings from HWInfo are giving me average idle voltages of around 0.82-0.87v. Why would my actual idle vcore, as recorded by VR Vout, be so much higher?

Are these idle voltages normal? I would have assumed that a non-static vcore overclock would downvolt more at idle.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Deathtech00

reachthesky said:


> I believe the modded bios helps memory OC a little bit. I have CL15-4200(101.63 bclk) in karhu right now. It usually fails at 7% or within 1 minute when using f9 stock bios but with the f11e modded bios, it is still going. I know it doesn't say much since it hasn't yet fully passed 8 hours, but to go from failing right away to not failing right away is a plus and makes me think this bios is at least a little better for mem oc than previous bios I have used. Some of you may be able to revisit your mem overclocks and tighten up a little more, or possibly hit a better clockspeed or improved cas etc. Hopefully the d4 hangups in the past between restarts/boots @4200 were native to F9 though time will tell.
> 
> The modded bios also uses different RTT resistance settings for certain memory frequencies. For CL15 4133 on F9 bios, the board used 60/60/60/60/40/40. On this bios, it uses 60/60/20/20/40/40 for CL15 4133. I think this bios may also require slightly less dram voltage for the same clockspeed as well. Haven't tested to see if cpu vcore requirements changed for any given frequency yet, will have to do that later, more interested in seeing if [email protected] can be memtest stabilized at this time. I haven't checked yet but I wonder if it is using 60/60/20/20/40/40 for 4200, could explain why It hasn't errored in karhu(yet!?!?).
> 
> One thing to note, booting up behaves differently than the other bios. It does this thing where it spends about 4-5 seconds on code 50 during boot sequences, restarts and ram training. Is this happening fpr anyone else?
> 
> A great thing about this bios, the vrm coil whine is much lower. It's not completely gone and is still audible, but it is much better than F9 that's for sure.
> 
> In terms of raw performance compared to f9 bios, it feels snappier for sure. Benchmarks are about the same or slightly better. The main thing is that the system actually feels more responsive than it was.
> 
> Kudos to @KedarWolf, @Falkentyne and @GeneO for doing this stuff. Much appreciated. Qflash modded bios was a great idea ^^.
> 
> I'll probably discover more stuff as I work with the bios but I am very excited to have something new to test out, i'll be sure to post updates. Cheers


 @reachthesky hasn't responded. I can only discern that his machine exploded.
(EDIT: He posted while I was typing this out. Left for posterity and hilarity at my expense.)

 Curious how this is working out for you? I also have a weird issue with T0D where randomly it will sit at "8" for a bit, then powercycle. It seems to lag occasionally as I test things, for example, while I am still trying to get my HynixCJR above 3200 Mhz bouncing in and out and rebooting and whatnot, randomly it will start to boot... slowly? then I get the "8" error, Power Cycle, everything fires up fine, minus the fact that I have to reload optimized defaults before it will boot even known working settings. Then back to square one. It is quite frustrating, in fact I may leverage the crowd here and see if you guys can help me out.

@KedarWolf - Is this your latest recommended firmware for the Z390 Master? Using the QFlash method? 

Thanks again to everyone in this forum. You guys have made this board fun.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

reachthesky said:


> The chip is downvolting to your chip's vid table + dvid offset + llc factored in and idling around .820v-.870v. DVID mode is working as intended here. If you want voltage to downvolt as much as possible as frequently as possible, turn off speedshift. C1E is nice but i've heard people get stutters in games while using it, may want to turn that one off for now. I like to only enable EIST + C3 for downclocking when using dvid mode). Also, if you set AVX offset to AUTO, you'll pull less volts on average, the chip intelligently pulls just enough for non-avx loads and will automatically add about 30mv for avx loads when needed.


Speedshift is the thing you need to disable indeed. My VR VOUT was hovering around 1.220V too ... with drops to 0.880 or so .... 

After I disabled speedshift, I get 0.857V idling ... nice and steady.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

Well I guess I'll post my question here since the DDR4 thread is pretty useless nowadays unless you're running B-Die with some top clocks.

Is there a general rule of what is an acceptable spread between tCL & tRCD/tRP? Also, are there any secondary/tertiary that can help lower tRCD/tRP?

Playing around with 64GB worth of Ballistix sticks, E-Die, and am at [email protected] but the tRCD/tRP are pretty high at 20. Perhaps I should drop down frequency and try for tighter primaries.


----------



## Deathtech00

reachthesky said:


> It's great so far. No hiccups yet. Passed 8 hours of karhu @c15-4200, will have to throw it in hci overnight tonight for good measure.
> 
> I think the "8" error means the timings entered in are bad or something. I'll get "8" once in a great while when I mess with frequencies that generally don't play well with this board(4266+). I wouldn't know what to suggest for those sticks, i've only worked with Hynix MFR so-dimms, B-Die so-dimms and B-Die dimms. If you didn't clear cmos after flashing the new bios, clear cmos. I haven't used T0D at all, can't offer much help here. sorry mate.


Ah, so I misunderstood then. Is the new @KedarWolf "qflash" bios not based on T0D?

Lots of people say this Hynix CJR is close in terms of quality to B-Die, and I dont know if its the weird quarks of this board or not, but I cannot seem to get the thing to do decent timings above XMP. Using Ryzen DRAM calc for suggestions only as well, seems to not really apply to our board (for obvious reasons) but I thought maybe I could see some range of timings to try. At least with T0D, it has been frustrating. 

I may go try the intel DDR4 forum, but as this board is so picky I was hoping to come across someone here with experience with the modules I have.

In fact, I want to upgrade. I keep hearing Samsung is going to come out with some new chips, but honestly it would probably be overkill for this board. What is some good ram (that isnt GSkill Royals) that one could buy for a decent price these days? I do use my machine as a "virtualization" lab of sorts, so 32 GB is needed. I also play games on it, mostly WoW and Control for the moment.

Once upon a time when Z390 was new, people were saying that 3600 Mhz is the sweet spot for this board. Now that it has matured a bit, I wonder if that is still the case? I would welcome any suggestions from the more ram affluent users here if they have any wisdom to share.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Deathtech00

reachthesky said:


> The new qflash modded bios is based off the latest retail stock bios(f11c iirc). Don't worry about samsung's new die, buildzoid did some testing and they aren't high performers like b-die(he was able to hit 5000mhz on a stick but performance was trash). For this board on 4dimms, c15-3900 seems to be the sweet spot for latency as it can be achieved at around 1.5v vdimm unless you can push the dimms to c15-4133+. c16-4133 is a happy medium between both latency and bandwidth. cl17-4133 is also fine. cl18-4200 is a waste, c16/4133 offers about the same bandwidth with better latency. cl15/16-4000 are also fine.
> 
> When shopping for a kit, ask yourself what do you want to do with the kit. If you really enjoy tinkering, I recommend a high end gskill b-die kit as they provide loads of entertainment value in addition to the performance. If you just want some frequency and are fine without tinkering or less mileage when tinkering, there is a new g.skill trident z royal 4x8gb 18-22-22-42? @ 4000 1.35v kit for 289 USD. It's not b-die so it won't be the best for tinkering/tight timings but it's a great value for 4000mhz dimms that look flashy. I think its the cheapest 4x8gb 4000mhz kit on the market right now, its just not b-die so you can't expect to get crazy tight timings.


For the C15-3900 kit you mention, do you have a manufacturer or model number? I love to tinker. It's the main reason for this system, in fact. I have been eyeing some of the "Teamgroup XTREEM" chips simply because they are B-Die. I don't care about flashy, necessarily. Don't get me wrong, I want my system to look decent, but that takes a backseat to performance. Also, RGB is OK, but I would prefer non-rgb. Mostly because the software to control RGB is always crap and its unnecessary heat.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## minionod

Hi guys, 

I have been using my computer for a little bit now and i am thinking about overclocking my CPU (would like 5.0Ghz) And i need some help info to get me going to know what i should do.

Sorry i am a total noob at this. lmao

*First some PC info to get the ball rolling :*
CPU: Intel I9 9900K
CPU Cooler : Corsair H150I Pro RBG (3x Corsair LL120mm Fans) // 
Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Master (2x 8-PIN connector is used)
Power Supply: Corsair RM750x 80+ Gold
Ram: Corsair Vengeance 32Gb 3200Mhz

Base temps:

https://imgur.com/a/kaGKpfa 
https://imgur.com/a/u1NoeWX

(The cpu temps are on idle obv)

So When i got the pc i did a BIOS update (Now i'm on version F8), no idea if i should install the latest version of the bios (Would it help?).

Second if i look online there are some things every is saying you should do :

Load XMP profile.

Set CPU clock ratio to 50 .

Disabled the following in my Bios :

Intel® Speed Shift Technology, CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E), C3 State Support, C6/C7 State Support, C8 State Support and C10 State Support, Enhanced Multi-Core Performance.

Change the Uncore Frequency to 47. & Disable VT-d.

CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration on Turbo.

Change Vcore to 1.300V. Put TjMAX to 110°C

If this is true , Should i just do it? If not please i'd like some info on this why and so.


For Benchmarks i'd use Prime95,Cinebench R20 & Realbench.

Already thank you for reading!


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Are there any modded bios for the Aorus Ultra?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Madness11

Guys pls , give me full correct info , about timings , Vccio, vssao, etc , for aorus master )) and hyperx predator 4000c19 ... coz I don't know , why my ddr4 work wrong .. most thx .


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Falkentyne said:


> Lower the Loadline Calibration (LLC) and raise the vCPU (fixed vcore/VID) or use offset voltage with lowest LLC's. It's better to use a higher offset voltage and lower LLC and AC Loadline than a lower offset and higher AC Loadline (Even if LLC is the same in both), because ACLL responds "irregularly" to current loads, especially mixed AVX/non AVX erratic loads. AC Loadline works well in sustained high load situations like Cinebench R20 and Prime95 small FFT, where the load is very even and balanced, but when you try something like Battlefield 5, and you rely "too much" on AC Loadline to get a stable output VR VOUT, you may get instability because the load varies too much in BF5.


Also, damn. I know this was from a few days ago, and I rmb either you or reachthesky saying that low LLC functions better with normal vcore + a DVID offset because medium LLC with normal vcore has similar behavior to tubo LLC with fixed vcore. This answers a question that I was about to ask rn (“why is it better? Are the transients different at the same vcore under load?”).

So, posthumous thanks.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> The short, Higher LLC levels give worse transient responses. If there is a dramatic shift in load at any point, higher llc levels with dvid mode can cause voltage to fluctuate too low causing whea bsods/hwinfo64 errors or too high causing an unnecessary increase in temps/amps/power draw. This situation can cause overclockers to "chase voltage" for stability but the real solution is to lower the llc with a slight bump in voltage to create stability. Falkentyne would be able to give you a more clear, concise and thorough explanation.


Might this affect memory stability too???

Hoping beyond hope that I can do better than 4000 16 18 18 38 @ 1.45 vdimm...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Madness11

reachthesky said:


> Madness11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys pls , give me full correct info , about timings , Vccio, vssao, etc , for aorus master /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif)) and hyperx predator 4000c19 ... coz I don't know , why my ddr4 work wrong .. most thx .
> 
> 
> 
> You have to give us something to work with? What is the exact issue you are experiencing? Post all your settings.
Click to expand...

I have bsod in games ... on 4000mghz . With 3600 some bsod , some no.
9900k aorus master , 32gb hyperx predator hx440c19pb3ak2, psus antec hcp850.
With stress test all fine , games bsod , on stock all fine . So ,idk what to do .


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Madness11

reachthesky said:


> Madness11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have bsod in games ... on 4000mghz . With 3600 some bsod , some no.
> 9900k aorus master , 32gb hyperx predator hx440c19pb3ak2, psus antec hcp850.
> With stress test all fine , games bsod , on stock all fine . So ,idk what to do .
> 
> 
> 
> We still need more information. I assume you have a usb stick. screenshot every screen in your bios using f12 so that we can see your bios settings. It will automatically save the screenshots to the usb stick. Then post the images here so we can take a look at your settings.
Click to expand...

Here ..


----------



## Madness11

Where I can get f12 ???


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Madness11

reachthesky said:


> Madness11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here ..
> 
> 
> 
> YO go troll another thread with your upside down potato camera photos please.
Click to expand...

Where I m trolling ??? If idk how make a screen in bios , tell me and I will do


----------



## AndrejB

Madness11 said:


> reachthesky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madness11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here ..
> 
> 
> 
> YO go troll another thread with your upside down potato camera photos please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where I m trolling ??? If idk how make a screen in bios , tell me and I will do
Click to expand...

Put a fat32 formated usb stick into the usb connector, go into the bios press f1 and see how to screenshot...

But the upsidedown photos...

Also maybe tell us the code of the bsod


----------



## Dannyele

Hello guys, im still using the official F10b BIOS for the Aorus Master. Is it recommended to update to the last one of @KedarWolf ?


It scares me flashing the BIOS like that way... May it can be flashed on the backup bios one?


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I honestly don't know. maybe? The cache voltage rail is tied to the core voltage rail thus uses the same level of llc that you set for the core voltage rail so I guess it is possible for memory ocs to be unstable due to poor transient responses from too high of llc? @Falkentyne What do you think?


Such a thing would only matter if reducing the cache ratio allowed you to reduce core voltage.
VCCSA/VCCIO are not in any way tied to LLC or the vcore rail (it uses its own chip to generate those voltages).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> It seems to be a little bit better for memory OC. On the old stock official bioses, I could not get c15-4200 stable no matter what regardless of voltages/llc. I've only had 16 hours to work with it, 8 of them I was asleep. Keep in mind, flashing an unofficial bios technically voids the motherboard warranty. I decided to say screw it and qflashed it after I saw someone else said they qflashed it and posted screenshots of kedarwolf's 9600k cpu settings that were still saved. Hopefully gigabyte will still honor the warranty if I ever had to RMA. By the way, his settings disable 2 cores(9600K after all) immediately after being flashed, You'll need to reset cmos after successfully qflashing. Some of my harddrives weren't recognized either until I reset cmos. Whether or not you want to qflash a modded/unofficial bios is up to you. I think if you are happy with your oc and happy with performance and prefer to have the remainder of the warranty intact, stick with official bios. Also, if security is a major concern, stick with updated official bioses, they use the most secure microcodes if i'm not mistaken. If you are after best performance possible, unofficial bios is the way to go because of the older better performing microcodes. But again, make sure you are qflashing the right bios. You need to make sure the post says it is qflashable. If the post containing the bios file does not say qflashable, don't qflash it.
> 
> 
> Also, i'm pretty sure that qflashing an unofficial bios that had not been saved in the bios by the distributor via qflash prior to being distributed will result either in an instant brick for the motherboard or will brick that specific bios chip that it is being flashed to. Make sure the qflashable unofficial bios you are receiving to qflash is in fact a qflashable bios because if it is not, it could brick the bios chip you are flashing or possibly the board. Be wise and keep one chip with an official bios on it just in case. Again, props to the guys who make the better bios possible.
> 
> I do wonder if your 4266 xmp profile can be memtest stabilized and then subs tightened on a modded bios.


You can't Qflash any modded BIOS. Qflash won't allow it. There is a way to do it but requires a hex edit and if anyone wants to know how they need to do their own research (only requires one byte changed, so it's not hard).
Efiflash is the only way to flash a modded BIOS. You can Qflash *ANY* unofficial BIOS that is NOT modded. This is assuming that "Official" means "F6, F7, F9, F11, etc) and unofficial mean "beta bioses." Best to make sure the terms are clearly enumerated to avoid confusion here. Need to distinct "Unofficial" vs "modded."

Someone else's qflash backup of a modded bios is something else entirely. This simply makes Qflash able to accept it since it has to be able to flash its own backups, but I would never do that. That's a bit much for even me. I don't know why people are scared of EFIflash anyway, especially since EFIflash 0.80 can now flash both bioses at once (one person was able to recover a bricked BIOS that way by booting to the secondary and running EFIflash 0.80 with the /DB switch. Note I do not know if the board has to be in "dual bios" mode for this to work or not). Note if the BIOS chip is completely unwriteable you need to either force flash it with a SPI programmer or if it's electrically broken (this is EXTREMELY rare and unlikely), desolder it (if secondary BIOS) and solder a new chip on, or remove the socketed primary and replace that.

BTW you seem to be the memory timing expert here.
I tried to ask you earlier but maybe you missed it.

How come I can train no problem at 15/15/15/36 @ 3600 (2T), 16/16/16/36 @ 3600, but can't train 17/17/17/anything @ 3600 or 19/19/19/anything @ 3600? What is stopping higher timings from working?
Note I can even train 16/16/16/36 @ 3733 (!) but requires 1.5v and the board barely manages it.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> For those who are curious, Here is the full bios configuration I used for c15/4200 (f11e bios). For some reason c15-4200 won't train for me using regular 42:1 memory strap/ratio, I had to piggy back off of training 4133mhz with a 101.63 busclock overclock.
> 
> The entire screenshot album can be found here: https://imgur.com/a/1XPIllg


How did you figure out to use those RttNOM/Park/Wr settings? You find it better than,

60
60
120
120
40
40?

Also, is there anywhere I can read up on these? Googled a bunch in the past to no avail.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> I started paying attention to the greyed out timing column that usually displays the standard xmp profile timings after training different frequencies/cas latencies. I would usually leave the rtt settings on auto. I noticed the rtt nom/park/wr settings would change in the greyed out column or right column after training something new. So I thought lets see if I enter those in from scratch after clearing cmos to see if it gives me what I want. The only content I've been able to come across that talks anything about the rtt nom/park/wr settings was buildzoid's video "blunders to 4533" on the aorus master. He talked about needing to manually enter in 60/60/120/120/40/40 for 4000MHz ram and up or something along those lines. I'm thinking the rtt nom/park/wr settings are somehow linked or related to cas latency. It appears that the lower the cas latency, the lower the rtt nom/park/wr settings are. That's why I think there is some sort of correlation between the two or w/e.


Yes, that's the video I got 60/60/120/120/40/40 from. Information on the internet is pretty vague on these. I know they're a measurement of ohms, that's all I know. I've also like you notice them change at different frequencies.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Yeah i've looked everywhere, I couldn't find any information that I was able to understand other than what buildzoid shared lol. btw, i updated that post to contain more info


So I set 3733 mhz at 16/16/16/36, 2T, tRFC 320, tREFI 65520, tRTP 7, TWR 14, tCWL 16, and it worked, but it literally kept trying to re-train like 10 times before it POST'ed (I can see the red LED switch positions and my speakers make a popping sound each time).

Note I'm using dual rank 2x16 GB Cas 14 3200 mhz Gskill dimms, so I guess 3733 mhz is good?
But bandwidth and latency are no better than 15/15/15/36, 3600 mhz


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> When moving up a full step in cas(same numbers across cl/trp/trcd), you need at least 200mhz of frequency increase to justify the addition of 1 cas latency other wise it is not efficient overclock(this is assuming 2nds/3rds are equally aggressive on both profiles). Going from c15-3600 to c16-3733 only provides an extra 133mhz. 1 full cas is too much to trade for 133mhz hence why you aren't seeing any performance gain so instead try to trade less than a full cas......Try tightening up to 15-16-16 or 15-17-17 or 16-15-15. Or if you haven't already, try [email protected] but be prepared to use 1.5v or more vdimm. getting up to 3733 is good but see if you can get those gains by adjusting primaries otherwise it is not worth the extra voltage/133hz if bandwidth/latency is the same. Are all the timings tuned or just the ones you listed? I don't know why speakers acted funky or the mass re-train, maybe you are at the edge of your chip's IMC or maybe at the edge of the sticks or maybe it just took a while for the IMC to figure it out? I honestly don't know. Which bios are you on?
> 
> I've never used DR sticks, it's hard to give advice without understanding exactly how tough they are on the IMC. I feel like all I can offer is basic tuning advice.
> 
> Have you tried just jamming 1.5v or 1.55v vdimm with 1.25-1.3v sa/io to see if it gets the ball rolling at 14-14-14-32(or 30 or 28) or 15-15-15-32(or 28)@3733/3800 with those 2 sticks?


Impossible to POST at 3800 no matter what is thrown at it. If it posts it posts at 2800 mhz at best.
Also I found that for some reason, 3733 mhz 16/16/16/36 is unstable @ 1.50v @ 0.750v DDR Termination, but is at 0.803v DDR Termination.

Um.....do you know why?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I don't know why. Please school me like usual


Have you tried raising DDR Termination higher than 1/2 DDRV?
If you're using 1.5v on your RAM, try 0.8v Termination and see if that helps you at your 4133 or better.

It helped me at 3733 mhz but as you said that's a useless frequency at CL16 instead of 3600 at CL15.

Don't go above 0.9v termination and 0.9v may just not work period. And as always you do it at your own risk.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I'm using 1.58v vdimm on the ram. Are you thinking that the high dram voltage requirement for c15-4200 could be an illusion because it didn't work till 1.58v vdimm when ddr vtt reached about .8 due to ddr vtt being on auto?


I can't answer this. The only way to answer that is to set DDR to 1.5v manually and keep DDR VTT at 0.80v.
Remember to ALWAYS boot back into BIOS to make sure the changes actually changed and didn't set your memory to something stupid.

When I set (by accident because I forgot) DDR to 1.5v and DDR VTT to 0.671v because I had it on 0.675v before (fixed) and I had DDR training voltage at 1.35v (stupid me) at 3733 mhz, when it finally trained, DDR VTT was at 0.80v somehow (even though it was still set to 0.675v in the BIOS!), which is 1/2 of 1.6v (memory was at 1.5v though). 

When I moved it down to 0.750v, Apex Legends crashed and burned and prime95 112k AVX disabled in-place crashed and burned after 5 minutes too. When I set it back to 0.803v, it flew like the sun.

So yeah the only way to answer your question is for you to try it yourself. You're quite good at that, after all.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wam7

Intrud3r said:


> Speedshift is the thing you need to disable indeed. My VR VOUT was hovering around 1.220V too ... with drops to 0.880 or so ....
> 
> After I disabled speedshift, I get 0.857V idling ... nice and steady.


Hmm, I tested this out but for me disabling Speedshift keeps my CPU mainly at 5.3Ghz. This is with with EIST, C1 and C3 enabled. The voltages also stay higher on average.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Intrud3r

I've got enabled atm:

EIST
C-States (all enabled)
C-state limit (or however it's called) = auto

disabled:
speedshift


----------



## Wam7

Intrud3r said:


> I've got enabled atm:
> 
> EIST
> C-States (all enabled)
> C-state limit (or however it's called) = auto
> 
> disabled:
> speedshift


OK, when I tried to enable all C-States I immediately got instability. I'll do some more testing...


----------



## Deathtech00

reachthesky said:


> I'm using 1.58v vdimm on the ram. Are you thinking that the high dram voltage requirement for c15-4200 could be an illusion because it didn't work till 1.58v vdimm when ddr vtt reached about .8 due to ddr vtt being on auto?


The voltages on this sound extremely high to me, or maybe I have been reading the wrong guides. From what I have read, 1.5+ is Max for B-Die only, and (for my kit, HynixCJR) anything above 1.4v is supposed to become worse. (github DDR4 OC guide)

Say, for instance, you had a nice shiny set of 4 non-B-die memory that you wanted to "slightly safely" test the limits of. What Voltage/DDRVTT/SA/IO would you poke at to see if you could start finding the optimal balance between Frequency & Timings on the Z390 Aorus master? My problem seems to be that anything above a slight bump in freq causes training to fail, and similarly to @Falkentyne, it will usually fail to train and clock itself lower than what I had set. 

Something odd that I did notice is that when I go to manually select a different ram frequency, the little info bar at the bottom of the freq selection that shows what you are currently set to in orange, Auto by default, seems to automatically change itself. As you browse to select different frequencies that number will jump to something astronimical. like, 5800Mhz. Now, if you pick 3200 (or whatever) and hit enter, the combo box will show "DDR4-3200". But if you hit enter and the menu to select freq pops back up, even though the selector is still on 3200, the current selection box at the bottom will then jump to some high extreme number. I have started to just type in the frequency that I need, but I don't know if this is causing an issue or not. This persists through CMOS resets (back of the mobo) and FW upgrades. Just an oddity on my end, though I suspect it isn't actually picking these frequencies, it is possible this could be related to some of the mem training oddities we have seen throughout the Z390 Master's product cycle. If it is trying to calculate tertiary timings based on some insane number, I could see that being a reason it fails or trains the memory "wrong" at times.

For reference, the Ram is TEAMGROUP Nighthawk RGB [email protected] 3200Mhz XMP Hynix CJR (I can provide any screenshots if anyone is willing to help me out, as well as Thaiphoon report)

I mentioned a bit back about how I am looking at different ram so I can upgrade to a more "tuneable, tweakable" kit. But if there is a chance I am doing something wrong or missing something altogether, I was hoping the community here would help me out.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Deathtech00 said:


> For the C15-3900 kit you mention, do you have a manufacturer or model number? I love to tinker. It's the main reason for this system, in fact. I have been eyeing some of the "Teamgroup XTREEM" chips simply because they are B-Die. I don't care about flashy, necessarily. Don't get me wrong, I want my system to look decent, but that takes a backseat to performance. Also, RGB is OK, but I would prefer non-rgb. Mostly because the software to control RGB is always crap and its unnecessary heat.


Since you were thinking about the Xtreems, the 4300 18 20 20 44 1.45v dimms are on sale for like $145 on Newegg rn. If they're a good kit, it's a bonkers deal.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

Wam7 said:


> OK, when I tried to enable all C-States I immediately got instability. I'll do some more testing...



I enable all C-states except package, which I leave on auto. I found if I enabled package, I would often crash or misbehave coming out of sleep mode. package c-state=auto appears to mean disabled. 
For some reason, speedshift seems to run VRVOUT higher than with it disabled even though vcore appears to behave as expected. So I use EIST instead. 
I have speedshift enable in BIOS but disabled in Windows through power management (autonomous mode disabled).


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> i'm fine with using 1.58v dram voltage. I don't mind running 1.58v voltage. I can certainly appreciate your passion for overclocking as well as your suggestion, however, if you wouldn't mind, if you happen to have any more suggestions similar to the one you mentioned, write them down on a piece of paper, crumble it up and throw it out. I'll use as much god damn voltage as I want.


Lol!


----------



## Intrud3r

That last part made me chuckle too ...


----------



## KrampusKlaus

GeneO said:


> I enable all C-states except package, which I leave on auto. I found if I enabled package, I would often crash or misbehave coming out of sleep mode. package c-state=auto appears to mean disabled.
> For some reason, speedshift seems to run VRVOUT higher than with it disabled even though vcore appears to behave as expected. So I use EIST instead.
> I have speedshift enable in BIOS but disabled in Windows through power management (autonomous mode disabled).


I had the same problem with speed shift on. At reachthesky’s advice, I disabled it in the bios last night and VR Vout finally started dropping to actual idle voltages at idle.


----------



## Deathtech00

reachthesky said:


> i'm fine with using 1.58v dram voltage. I don't mind running 1.58v voltage. I can certainly appreciate your passion for overclocking as well as your suggestion, however, if you wouldn't mind, if you happen to have any more suggestions similar to the one you mentioned, write them down on a piece of paper, crumble it up and throw it out. I'll use as much god damn voltage as I want.


I don't know what you're talking about. Not once did I make a suggestion, I merely asked a question. Specifically what your thoughts were on using that kind of voltage on a non B-Die kit.

There is no reason to be a dick about it.


----------



## Deathtech00

KrampusKlaus said:


> Since you were thinking about the Xtreems, the 4300 18 20 20 44 1.45v dimms are on sale for like $145 on Newegg rn. If they're a good kit, it's a bonkers deal.


Thanks man! I'll check it out now.

+Rep

Edit: The kit he is mentioning is here if anyone else is interested : https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820331243

I think some of these are B-Die, and others are not. Gonna research a bit and see if I can tell at all.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

I'm kind of happy with my new 64 GB E Die Kit. :sad-smile


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Wam7

GeneO said:


> I enable all C-states except package, which I leave on auto. I found if I enabled package, I would often crash or misbehave coming out of sleep mode. package c-state=auto appears to mean disabled.
> For some reason, speedshift seems to run VRVOUT higher than with it disabled even though vcore appears to behave as expected. So I use EIST instead.
> I have speedshift enable in BIOS but disabled in Windows through power management (autonomous mode disabled).


This put me on to the fix, you're proving quite indispensable. 
I was trying to find "autonomous mode disabled" and was looking in the Advanced Power Options settings, checked the Minimum Processor State and noticed it was surprisingly set to 100%, even though I was using the Balanced profile. I set to it to 20% and immediately the CPU behaved as I would have expected it, dropping down to 800Mhz with also the voltages dropping as well. +Rep left.


----------



## GeneO

Wam7 said:


> This put me on to the fix, you're proving quite indispensable.
> I was trying to find "autonomous mode disabled" and was looking in the Advanced Power Options settings, checked the Minimum Processor State and noticed it was surprisingly set to 100%, even though I was using the Balanced profile. I set to it to 20% and immediately the CPU behaved as I would have expected it, dropping down to 800Mhz with also the voltages dropping as well. +Rep left.


That happens quite often to me in the Windows power settings - every once and a while it gets confused and sets the minimum processor level to 100%. Been doing it to me for years, so I just check it every so often.

Glad I could indirectly help. BTW, you can enable (make visible) the autonomous mode and other hidden power settings in the power options menu by registry tweaks for the various settings (you change their "attributes" value to 2). 
If you want to, shoot me a PM and I can give you guidance:


----------



## Wam7

Well as the first guinea pig to try out the F11e Modded QFlashable I requested from @KedarWolf and suggested by @GeneO, I should report back after a few days of testing.

Stability has not been compromised and compared to the F10 I was on previously; benchmarks are slightly higher across the board. The F11e has at least 4 extra options that I counted in the bios than the F10.
On F10, 4000Mhz 15-15-15-30 failed Karhu (Cache On) after a few minutes, whereas on F11e it passed several hours, though as latency is (surprisingly) lower with 3900Mhz 15-15-15-30 I use that. 

The caveat with using F11e QFlashable is that it contains KedarWolf's settings so if your CPU/Memory is not capable of the speeds he was running at then you might run into issues on the first boot, though it *should* eventually boot. As has been suggested it would probably be best to do a clear CMOS on first boot, though I did not do this.


----------



## danakin

hello everyone.

just a little question. i ran some prime 1344 small ftts for a little test. 4.7 ghz with some stock settings (9900k)

can anybody tell me why a single core jumps to 71 for a second (8 degrees more than the others) for a second ?

is this normal ?

best regards,


pete


----------



## Deathtech00

danakin said:


> hello everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> just a little question. i ran some prime 1344 small ftts for a little test. 4.7 ghz with some stock settings (9900k)
> 
> 
> 
> can anybody tell me why a single core jumps to 71 for a second (8 degrees more than the others) for a second ?
> 
> 
> 
> is this normal ?
> 
> 
> 
> best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pete


Commonly called the "world thread" for games, it usually is an indicator that some other process was also using the core, and was possibly loaded heavier (and already a bit warmer) than the rest.

Perfectly normal to see a temporary spike in core temp/use if the core was already doing work. If it was similar to the other cores, I might think that your cooling just took a second to pick up the transient change from 0-100% use, but as it seems to be just the one I don't think that is the case. 

Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk


----------



## Deathtech00

Wam7 said:


> Well as the first guinea pig to try out the F11e Modded QFlashable I requested from @KedarWolf and suggested by @GeneO, I should report back after a few days of testing.
> 
> Stability has not been compromised and compared to the F10 I was on previously; benchmarks are slightly higher across the board. The F11e has at least 4 extra options that I counted in the bios than the F10.
> On F10, 4000Mhz 15-15-15-30 failed Karhu (Cache On) after a few minutes, whereas on F11e it passed several hours, though as latency is (surprisingly) lower with 3900Mhz 15-15-15-30 I use that.
> 
> The caveat with using F11e QFlashable is that it contains KedarWolf's settings so if your CPU/Memory is not capable of the speeds he was running at then you might run into issues on the first boot, though it *should* eventually boot. As has been suggested it would probably be best to do a clear CMOS on first boot, though I did not do this.


I, too, am using @KedarWolf 's QFLash bios. Not only did I experience oddities after flashing, but some persisted even after a cmos reset. Notable, when I would get a "your bios failed to boot" message, and it shows what it set as the default proc freq, it would show 5 Ghz, rather than stock on the board @ 4.7. Also, it seemed to be rather picky about certain settings. Here is what I did and it completely cleared up all odd stuff.

Swapped over to my backup BIOS after booting, flashed the Qflash, cleared all settings and recreated a "new" qflash from my board. when I went to flash this one, I used the Qflash method that updates BOTH bios systems. 

Once I booted back up, and flashed the version I created from my board, all oddness halted. I can also share this, as Kedar is using a 9600K in the interim, and I have a 9900k, and I am not sure if that affects it in anyway. I have more to add, but cant at the moment. I will be back in a bit.


----------



## Gen.

Raised tCL from 15 to 16 and tRFC from 264 to 296, but lowered the voltage from 1.540V to 1.440V

P.S. I'm testing 3600 14-14-32 at 1.440V


----------



## wholeeo

Seems like ever since I've installed F11E I keep losing my dualboot options. Windows Boot Manager constantly takes over. Not sure if it's a Window's thing or Bios but I didn't have the issue before. I'll have to test further once I get home.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> What makes you set tWR to 16 instead of something like 10? Is it specifically to lower dram voltage requirements?


I do WR = CL (16 = 16 or 14 = 15 or 16 = 15) and RTP = WR / 2


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> Are you using the same dimms that you were using for [email protected] 1.54v ?


Yes, it's them, just decided to lower the voltage


----------



## KedarWolf

reachthesky said:


> @KedarWolf Do you happen to have a qflashable f9 bios modded with the fastest microcodes I could snag off you?


I'll make one for you when I get home from work.

But peeps, for the first time ever I think I'm going AMD for the CPU, 3950x (16 core, 32 thread) and an X570 MSI Godlike motherboard. It's a Daisy Chain motherboard, not T-Topology, and supports up to DDR4 5000 on the QVL list for two DIMMs of the four slots populated.

I'm not paying $1500 CAD for Corsair DDR4 5000 though, I'll get G.Skill 2x8GB 4800MHz for about $600 CAD, also on the QVL list.

I watched the Buildzoid breakdown on the motherboard and it has the DDR4 memory record and on the breakdown of the memory setup on the board, it's basically the best motherboard for two DIMM memory overclocking ever. plus a really great VRM setup.


----------



## Wam7

KedarWolf said:


> I'll make one for you when I get home from work.
> 
> But peeps, for the first time ever I think I'm going AMD for the CPU, 3950x (16 core, 32 thread) and an X570 MSI Godlike motherboard. It's a Daisy Chain motherboard, not T-Topology, and supports up to DDR4 5000 on the QVL list for two DIMMs of the four slots populated.
> 
> I'm not paying $1500 CAD for Corsair DDR4 5000 though, I'll get G.Skill 2x8GB 4800MHz for about $600 CAD, also on the QVL list.
> 
> I watched the Buildzoid breakdown on the motherboard and it has the DDR4 memory record and on the breakdown of the memory setup on the board, it's basically the best motherboard for two DIMM memory overclocking ever. plus a really great VRM setup.


On my 3900X overclocking memory is limited by the FCLK which you want to keep 1:1 with the memory otherwise it's a big performance hit and increase in latency. This in effect limits the maximum memory to 3800Mhz (1900 FCLK) though most people would struggle to get that, needing a combination of strong IMC, memory and motherboard. The most I can go to on my 3900X is 3733Mhz C14-14-14-28 (1866 FCLK) and with that my latency in AIDA64 is ~63ns.


----------



## KedarWolf

Wam7 said:


> On my 3900X overclocking memory is limited by the FCLK which you want to keep 1:1 with the memory otherwise it's a big performance hit and increase in latency. This in effect limits the maximum memory to 3800Mhz (1900 FCLK) though most people would struggle to get that, needing a combination of strong IMC, memory and motherboard. The most I can go to on my 3900X is 3733Mhz C14-14-14-28 (1866 FCLK) and with that my latency in AIDA64 is ~63ns.


Interesting, RAM at 5000MHz, 3900x.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/d9zn15/insane_5000_mhz_ram_speed_on_ryzen_3900x/

Buildzoid Breakdown.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=886&v=MLja1q-M4SU&feature=emb_logo


----------



## Deathtech00

KedarWolf said:


> I'll make one for you when I get home from work.
> 
> 
> 
> But peeps, for the first time ever I think I'm going AMD for the CPU, 3950x (16 core, 32 thread) and an X570 MSI Godlike motherboard. It's a Daisy Chain motherboard, not T-Topology, and supports up to DDR4 5000 on the QVL list for two DIMMs of the four slots populated.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not paying $1500 CAD for Corsair DDR4 5000 though, I'll get G.Skill 2x8GB 4800MHz for about $600 CAD, also on the QVL list.
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the Buildzoid breakdown on the motherboard and it has the DDR4 memory record and on the breakdown of the memory setup on the board, it's basically the best motherboard for two DIMM memory overclocking ever. plus a really great VRM setup.


I would like to get in on that F9 as well, please!

I am also considering an AMD build, but less as a desktop and more as a server/workstation for audio.
Running a few guitars with live fx on each of the 4 channels (2 per guitar) and quite a few mics on independent channels for the drums (8-10) would be much better with the higher core count. Also, as a pseudo test lab for virtualization. 

Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk


----------



## Wam7

KedarWolf said:


> Interesting, RAM at 5000MHz, 3900x.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/d9zn15/insane_5000_mhz_ram_speed_on_ryzen_3900x/
> 
> Buildzoid Breakdown.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=886&v=MLja1q-M4SU&feature=emb_logo


Taken from the first Reddit post "Running in async (2:1, MEMCLK:FCLK) mode". Ideally, for overall performance you want to be running at 1:1, once you go above 1900 then it will switch to 2:1. Go into 15mins into the DerBauer video you linked (not Buildzoid) where he explains and you see the latency chart. Then go to 17min for the Adobe Prem scores and you will see 3733Mhz is faster than 5000Mhz.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deathtech00 said:


> I would like to get in on that F9 as well, please!
> 
> I am also considering an AMD build, but less as a desktop and more as a server/workstation for audio.
> Running a few guitars with live fx on each of the 4 channels (2 per guitar) and quite a few mics on independent channels for the drums (8-10) would be much better with the higher core count. Also, as a pseudo test lab for virtualization.
> 
> Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk


Master F9 Modded, all firmware, fastest microcodes.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

reachthesky said:


> Cheers, many thanks KedarWolf.





reachthesky said:


> Cheers, many thanks KedarWolf.


I had an issue updating the ME firmware but with help from someone on WinRaid, I got it done!!

Here's a QFlash file WITH the latest ME Firmware and I flashed it to my not ME patched backup BIOS and the ME firmware is up to date. 

It has my BIOS settings so you may have to reset your BIOS after flashing.

You can run the Intel ME checker to check.


----------



## coolkwc

Guys. the video in the link shown the boot loop of my Aorus Master. It happen in both 9900KS and Pentium G5420.

It will happen when i turn OFF/hibernate and soft OFF for >15 minutes, once press ON, boot loop happen.
Clear BIOS at the back randomly work.


----------



## wholeeo

Well this is weird. I’m on F11e and no matter which settings I play with any AVX loads drop my multiplier to 49 @ 5200. Anyone have any ideas? I didn’t have this issue before so not sure what setting is triggering this.


----------



## Wam7

coolkwc said:


> Guys. the video in the link shown the boot loop of my Aorus Master. It happen in both 9900KS and Pentium G5420.
> 
> It will happen when i turn OFF/hibernate and soft OFF for >15 minutes, once press ON, boot loop happen.
> Clear BIOS at the back randomly work.
> 
> https://youtu.be/YKI8VcRzTUI


What bios are you on, have you tried a different/updated bios?


----------



## wholeeo

wholeeo said:


> Well this is weird. Iâ€™️m on F11e and no matter which settings I play with any AVX loads drop my multiplier to 49 @ 5200. Anyone have any ideas? I didnâ€™️t have this issue before so not sure what setting is triggering this.


Seems like AVX Offset set to 0 doesn’t work for me. I set it to 1 and AVX loads run at 51 @ 5200. 0 drops it 3 bins. I’m confused....


----------



## Voidlol

Hey guys, bought aorus master z390 + 9900ks + g.skill 3600 16-19-19-38, 4x8gb. On everything stock, with only xmp profile enabled i get some random system freezes, once per couple of days. Sound is keep going if it was music from streaming service for a while, and only reset helps me. There is no dump, minidump, bsod or whatever, only kernel power 41(63) in windows event. This was on F10 version from official site. Realbench passes 8 hours, memtest passes all tests multiple times. Any ideas/suggestions?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> Seems like AVX Offset set to 0 doesn’t work for me. I set it to 1 and AVX loads run at 51 @ 5200. 0 drops it 3 bins. I’m confused....


Flash the unmodded f11e on the backup (or other) BIOS and see if the same thing happens, please. It won't take more than a few minutes to do.


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> Flash the unmodded f11e on the backup (or other) BIOS and see if the same thing happens, please. It won't take more than a few minutes to do.


This is the unmodded version but I did update the microcode to the latest versions and CFG unlocked and flashed via Windows AFUWINGUI. All block options enabled, and ME Firmware Block with entire checked.

Do you have the copy you’d like for me to flash?


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> This is the unmodded version but I did update the microcode to the latest versions and CFG unlocked and flashed via Windows AFUWINGUI. All block options enabled, and ME Firmware Block with entire checked.
> 
> Do you have the copy you’d like for me to flash?


No. I can't reproduce this bug with either the unmodded version (with slow microcodes flashed with Qflash) or the modded one with AE microcodes (Note that I flashed with EFIflash in command line USB boot disk, not AFUwinGUI. What is afuwingui?)

Did you clear the CMOS with the CMOS clear back button ?


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> No. I can't reproduce this bug with either the unmodded version (with slow microcodes flashed with Qflash) or the modded one with AE microcodes (Note that I flashed with EFIflash in command line USB boot disk, not AFUwinGUI. What is afuwingui?)
> 
> Did you clear the CMOS with the CMOS clear back button ?


I’m asking if you have the unmodded version. Is it the same one from tweaktown?

Aptio V AFI Firmware Update Utility


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> I’m asking if you have the unmodded version. Is it the same one from tweaktown?
> 
> Aptio V AFI Firmware Update Utility


Yes it's the exact same one, except I used UBU tool myself to put AE microcodes into it like I always do now.


----------



## wholeeo

Falkentyne said:


> Yes it's the exact same one, except I used UBU tool myself to put AE microcodes into it like I always do now.


Once I'm done with this GSAT I'll take shots of my settings to see if anything is out of place. Also, if I enable turbo boost and set the ratio's say to 52 and disable turbo boost, and change my core ratio to 53, 5200 remains until I re-enable Turbo Boost and set the ratios to 53.

edit: well seems like it was a false alarm. Clearing cmos fixed the 0 offset. I’d still consider it some sort of bug though but now I have no idea how to reproduce it.


----------



## coolkwc

Wam7 said:


> What bios are you on, have you tried a different/updated bios?


Yes, try with both F10 and F11c.


----------



## AndrejB

Anyone notice prolonged cold boot on f11e?


----------



## Falkentyne

AndrejB said:


> Anyone notice prolonged cold boot on f11e?


Prolonged cold boot=usually memory training. You can look at the POST code display. If the numbers are changing, it's RAM training.
If the board is sitting there stuck on A0 or A2, probably a USB device freezing POST.


----------



## AndrejB

Falkentyne said:


> Prolonged cold boot=usually memory training. You can look at the POST code display. If the numbers are changing, it's RAM training.
> If the board is sitting there stuck on A0 or A2, probably a USB device freezing POST.


Yep memory training. Also timings that are stable on 11c are not on 11e.

Wish Gigabyte would ask Asus for help in programming the memory module of the bios, their team can't get it right for a year and a half now 🙂 gets irritating seeing people with looser timings getting better results on hero boards..


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Preach. Tired of feeling like I got ripped off. **** ain't fair.
> 
> @Falkentyne I'm going to ask you, are you working for gigabyte now? Are you in any shape or form employed by gigabyte or by an external temp agency to fill Matt's old position here? I need to know your official capacity here before I build my case. I want to make sure I have gone through all the proper official channels in communicating with gigabyte employees before I send my product findings and experience to Jacoby&Meyers and the FTC. I believe this is a strong case of Bait and Switch.


Nope. Not even close. I asked if I could work for them however, but nothing.
I even asked if I could test boards for them as I wanted to buy an oscilloscope.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Ok thank you for confirming this, much appreciated. Kudos to you for being an outstanding individual on these forums assisting people.


Thank you. That's basically why I was asking to test bioses. I wanted to find a way to sneak into the industry somehow, buy an oscillioscope, and get to test boards and get hardware like buildzoid and Steve. That's never going to happen.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## wholeeo

My next board will definitely be an ASUS like in the past. Shame the XI Formula has crappy VRMs for the price.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> It's all good, I used to want to do that as well up until recently until I realized all the ridiculous bs that goes on in this industry. It's time for a bit of regulation.


Are you being serious? Overclocking is at-your-own-risk at best. It is never going to be regulated, it is just tolerated, and t used to not even be tolerated. It is also such a small segment of the computer market that won't impact any bottom line if it goes away. What motivation could anyone have to regulate it and how could they even do so?


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Are you being serious? Overclocking is at-your-own-risk at best. It is never going to be regulated, it is just tolerated, and t used to not even be tolerated. It is also such a small segment of the computer market that won't impact any bottom line if it goes away. What motivation could anyone have to regulate it and how could they even do so?


This is the truth. Let's not forget when Intel was multiplier locking all of their processors, and the ONLY ones that were unlocked were the $1,000 extreme edition chips...
The Pentium MMX, P2 and Pentium III chips were all multiplier locked IIRC. You had to increase the FSB to overclock and hope you had a /3 or /4 divider (at 133 mhz FSB) so your IDE HDD's wouldn't get scrambled ...


----------



## Medvediy

coolkwc said:


> Guys. the video in the link shown the boot loop of my Aorus Master. It happen in both 9900KS and Pentium G5420.
> 
> It will happen when i turn OFF/hibernate and soft OFF for >15 minutes, once press ON, boot loop happen.
> Clear BIOS at the back randomly work.
> 
> https://youtu.be/YKI8VcRzTUI


That looks like hard memory training.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here a QFlash modded BIOS you can flash from within the BIOS with Optimised Defaults and the latest ME firmware.

Some peeps are saying overclocking a bit better flashing modded BIOS's with QFlash.

And from my experience, even Efiflash can flash it if you prefer.


----------



## TAGTRAUM

KedarWolf said:


> Here a QFlash modded BIOS you can flash from within the BIOS with Optimised Defaults and the latest ME firmware.
> 
> Some peeps are saying overclocking a bit better flashing modded BIOS's with QFlash.
> 
> And from my experience, even Efiflash can flash it if you prefer.


Can i flash F9 on system with 9900KS, i'm on f11e modded by you, but everybody here claims about best performance on F9, but it's haven't KS support. And in your modded f11e i can't check ME version by Intel tool, and MEI device shows error 45 in Device Manager (seems MEI is installed but off)


----------



## Lurifaks

TAGTRAUM said:


> Can i flash F9 on system with 9900KS, i'm on f11e modded by you, but everybody here claims about best performance on F9, but it's haven't KS support. And in your modded f11e i can't check ME version by Intel tool, and MEI device shows error 45 in Device Manager (seems MEI is installed but off)


I have used F9 official with 9900KS with no problem


----------



## Wam7

KedarWolf said:


> Here a QFlash modded BIOS you can flash from within the BIOS with Optimised Defaults and the latest ME firmware.
> 
> Some peeps are saying overclocking a bit better flashing modded BIOS's with QFlash.
> 
> And from my experience, even Efiflash can flash it if you prefer.


Really appreciate your time and effort in doing these.
I will have to switch from your modded F11e as I'm also starting to get lock ups in the bios. Will give this one a go next.


----------



## sygnus21

reachthesky said:


> Preach. Tired of feeling like I got ripped off. **** ain't fair.
> 
> @Falkentyne I'm going to ask you, are you working for gigabyte now? Are you in any shape or form employed by gigabyte or by an external temp agency to fill Matt's old position here? I need to know your official capacity here before I build my case. I want to make sure I have gone through all the proper official channels in communicating with gigabyte employees before I send my product findings and experience to Jacoby&Meyers and the FTC. I believe this is a strong case of Bait and Switch.





GeneO said:


> Are you being serious? Overclocking is at-your-own-risk at best. It is never going to be regulated, it is just tolerated, and t used to not even be tolerated. It is also such a small segment of the computer market that won't impact any bottom line if it goes away. What motivation could anyone have to regulate it and how could they even do so?


I think reach is reaching here and has ignored the basic tenets of overcloking - it's a crap-shoot with no guarantees. In fact I'd ask him to produce one document where Gigabyte guaranteed an overclock of x speeds on their motherboards? Likewise a RAM or CPU manufacturer?


----------



## Falkentyne

sygnus21 said:


> I think reach is reaching here and has ignored the basic tenets of overcloking - it's a crap-shoot with no guarantees. In fact I'd ask him to produce one document where Gigabyte guaranteed an overclock of x speeds on their motherboards? Likewise a RAM or CPU manufacturer?


The Aorus Xtreme Waterforce / 5G board comes with a binned 5.1 ghz CPU but I wonder how many people bought that.


----------



## Falkentyne

Wam7 said:


> Really appreciate your time and effort in doing these.
> I will have to switch from your modded F11e as I'm also starting to get lock ups in the bios. Will give this one a go next.


Can you please flash the UNMODDED F11e (only faster microcodes changed, nothing else) and test this? 
Because I have not seen a single person who had random lockups in the unmodded BIOS (except microcodes).

You can also flash my version using EFIFLASH which *only* has older microcodes updated and nothing else (Note I have '96' microcode rather than the usual 'AE' I usually patch in (AE was in all the Gigabyte releases from F8 to F10) in it because i was testing older microcodes. Also note that apparently AE has broken "TSX-NI" (whatever the hell that is) and BE doesn't, but BE was performing worse in some PS4 emulator on Linux than A2 or older microcodes, which don't support TSX-NI at all.


----------



## sygnus21

Falkentyne said:


> The Aorus Xtreme Waterforce / 5G board comes with a binned 5.1 ghz CPU but I wonder how many people bought that.


I'm not talking about a crafted system built to a specific overclocked point - Plenty of those on the market. I'm talking buying individual parts and being told they're guaranteed to OC to whatever spec a builder wants. That isn't happening.


----------



## Athrutep

Does someone know if disabling Turbo Power limits and disabling Turbo per core limit control would contribute to a more stable overclock, or should i leave it on auto? I understand correctly that disabling both would be the same as enabling them and setting them to the highest limits manually right?


----------



## Falkentyne

Athrutep said:


> Does someone know if disabling Turbo Power limits and disabling Turbo per core limit control would contribute to a more stable overclock, or should i leave it on auto? I understand correctly that disabling both would be the same as enabling them and setting them to the highest limits manually right?


Keeping them on auto or disabling it has no difference. The board overrides the base power limits for you anyway by default.
Per Core Limit Control is only used for Turbo boost ratios, to set "which" physical core gets the highest boost when you set different core ratios for different loads. At an all core fixed ratio, it's irrelevant.


----------



## Athrutep

Falkentyne said:


> Keeping them on auto or disabling it has no difference. The board overrides the base power limits for you anyway by default.
> Per Core Limit Control is only used for Turbo boost ratios, to set "which" physical core gets the highest boost when you set different core ratios for different loads. At an all core fixed ratio, it's irrelevant.


Thank you Falkentyne that answers pretty much everything.


----------



## wholeeo

What’s the verdict on ASPM? Yay or nay? I currently have them all disabled except for Platform Power Management which I’m not sure does anything if I have the options under it disabled.


----------



## msromike

*My Saga*

Guess I need to ask for help. Running 9700k with H115i. I tried the Gigabyte (GB) method to OC and couldn't get it stable even at 4.9. So I flashed the F9 bios that KedarWolf posted since at least the menus and settings were the same. I then re-tried the GB method along with a couple of seemingly reputable YouTuber methods. I could not get it stable even using 1.40v and AVX -2 offset. 

I was going to give up. Then I though what about leaving everything as optimal settings and just changing the Turbo settings?

So I just enabled Multi-Core Enhancement, set all the cores to 49 and raised the TDP on the package to 225W. It seemingly works with the cooler running out of head room right at the point where the fans become too loud.

I ran OCCT and Prime95, rock solid all cores at 4.9 ghz all the time. I noticed in HW Info the cores are pegged at 4.9 ghz always but the "effective core clock" ranges from 300 mhz to 4.9 ghz depending on load. TDP and temps vary from 25w and 30c at idle to just under the max TDP of 225w and 80c at full load (and I mean FULL load.) I also noticed per core vid is 1.405v at idle and DROPS to 1.28v to 1.34v or so at full load.

So is this a valid method of overclocking or am I asking for trouble? It can't be this easy.


----------



## rhombus

Can someone with a z390 aorus pro wifi let me know if avx offset is working for you? It doesn't work at all for me and I'm not sure if it's this model or my individual board. 

i7-8700 cpu, z390 aorus pro wifi, bios f12c (latest).


----------



## Deathtech00

msromike said:


> Guess I need to ask for help. Running 9700k with H115i. I tried the Gigabyte (GB) method to OC and couldn't get it stable even at 4.9. So I flashed the F9 bios that KedarWolf posted since at least the menus and settings were the same. I then re-tried the GB method along with a couple of seemingly reputable YouTuber methods. I could not get it stable even using 1.40v and AVX -2 offset.
> 
> I was going to give up. Then I though what about leaving everything as optimal settings and just changing the Turbo settings?
> 
> So I just enabled Multi-Core Enhancement, set all the cores to 49 and raised the TDP on the package to 225W. It seemingly works with the cooler running out of head room right at the point where the fans become too loud.
> 
> I ran OCCT and Prime95, rock solid all cores at 4.9 ghz all the time. I noticed in HW Info the cores are pegged at 4.9 ghz always but the "effective core clock" ranges from 300 mhz to 4.9 ghz depending on load. TDP and temps vary from 25w and 30c at idle to just under the max TDP of 225w and 80c at full load (and I mean FULL load.) I also noticed per core vid is 1.405v at idle and DROPS to 1.28v to 1.34v or so at full load.
> 
> So is this a valid method of overclocking or am I asking for trouble? It can't be this easy.


Enabling MCE in F9 may give your chip more Voltage than it needs, decreasing the lifespan, and in this case for no better performance. The GB method "should" work for everyone, but OC'ing is a silicon lottery, so #NeverForget. Also, once you get the base GB stuff set in, you can tweak it down a bit usually. There is some oddity about that manual, but I cant't recall what it is off the top of my head.

What you are actually seeing is that MCE is setting a voltage setting automatically, one that your CPU needs. Also, being P95 AVX stable is a bit much anyway. most people don't want to test with that application, as it is considered to be an unrealistic workload in practice, and more of a power virus than anything.

Here is what I think you should try. Since every chip is different, we need to find what works with your CPU/Mobo/Ram combo (so many variables!)

First off. Disable XMP and any overclocks on your ram that you have set. period. We want a clean slate going into this, and having the ram tweaked can affect that substantially. If you are running a high frequency kit like 4000mhz+. If you have a GPU overclock within windows please disable that as well.

Setup your "GB" mode overclock. Set everything exactly as you did when it failed. Don't forget to set the LLC to turbo, as we are going for a straight voltage overclock first, before we consider anything adaptive. We just wanna find the sweet spot.

Stick a USB drive in the system before you boot. Go down each one of your pages, including the sub pages for voltages and such, and hit F12. This will auto save a screenshot to the usb drive.

Upload the files here (don't use mobile, it will jack everything up). Also, if you can get to windows run HWinfo64 and even though it is "unstable" get a screenshot of HWinfo and post it here as well. it is more likely you need some fine tuning and can probably hit 5 Ghz without as much trouble as you think. Remember, this is a new experience and requires a kind of humbleness to continue to learn. 

1.4v is way outside the comfort zone for a 24/7 overclock, and I have yet to see a 9900k that couldn't hit it around 1.35v max. Correct me here overlords, but I believe 1.32v max seems to be the normal average for a 5.0Ghz AC OC.

Get this info together and I will be happy to help you figure out whats up. 

MCE is crap and will wear your proc out over time with overvoltage. Its a factory overclock, and 99% of those are complete and utter ****e.


----------



## wholeeo

rhombus said:


> Can someone with a z390 aorus pro wifi let me know if avx offset is working for you? It doesn't work at all for me and I'm not sure if it's this model or my individual board.
> 
> i7-8700 cpu, z390 aorus pro wifi, bios f12c (latest).


I had a similar experience on F11e on my Master board last week. Offset 0 seemed to not work at all while the others did. @Falkentyne suggested I clear CMOS and that fixed the issue for me so I suggest you try that if you haven't already.


----------



## Wam7

reachthesky said:


> See if tRDWR timings can goto 12. If they can't, then tcwl at 14 is probably getting in your way. Take a look at your secondary timings and maybe consult the github guide or raja's guide on here.


Can anybody point me to the github guide or Raja's guide. I've been searching for the past few days to try and track them down but to no avail.


----------



## wholeeo

Wam7 said:


> Can anybody point me to the github guide or Raja's guide. I've been searching for the past few days to try and track them down but to no avail.


https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md

You can also scroll down to the bottom to find Raja's guide as well as others.


----------



## GeneO

Wam7 said:


> Can anybody point me to the github guide or Raja's guide. I've been searching for the past few days to try and track them down but to no avail.


Well here is the github at least:

https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md#overclocking

Well I see it was already posted


----------



## msromike

Ok: F9 modded BIOS, 9700k (not 9900k), H115i, Gskill F4-3600C16-8GVKC32 4x 8GB

5.0 ghz clock @ CPU Vcore 1.35v

This is what it takes to boot into windows, crashes soon after starting P95 with AVX instructions disabled. Does the VID seem high to you?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Lurifaks said:


> I have used F9 official with 9900KS with no problem


Thanks for confirming this. After reading over a few pages I saw that KedarWorf posted the F9Modded bios which I was going to flash, but wasn't sure as I thought F10 as when they included the KS support? Then I saw your post...



KedarWolf said:


> I'll make one for you when I get home from work.
> 
> But peeps, for the first time ever I think I'm going AMD for the CPU, 3950x (16 core, 32 thread) and an X570 MSI Godlike motherboard. It's a Daisy Chain motherboard, not T-Topology, and supports up to DDR4 5000 on the QVL list for two DIMMs of the four slots populated.
> 
> I'm not paying $1500 CAD for Corsair DDR4 5000 though, I'll get G.Skill 2x8GB 4800MHz for about $600 CAD, also on the QVL list.
> 
> I watched the Buildzoid breakdown on the motherboard and it has the DDR4 memory record and on the breakdown of the memory setup on the board, it's basically the best motherboard for two DIMM memory overclocking ever. plus a really great VRM setup.





Deathtech00 said:


> I would like to get in on that F9 as well, please!
> 
> I am also considering an AMD build, but less as a desktop and more as a server/workstation for audio.
> Running a few guitars with live fx on each of the 4 channels (2 per guitar) and quite a few mics on independent channels for the drums (8-10) would be much better with the higher core count. Also, as a pseudo test lab for virtualization.
> 
> Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk





reachthesky said:


> @iunlock how is that rock solid 4266 coming along? Did it pass a memtest yet .


Thanks @KedarWolf for the F9modded Bios. Regarding going AMD, it has its perks only if the strengths are utilized. It's extremely good at what it's designed for, but for gaming the good ol' mature 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 9900K/KF/KS are still King for gaming, which is why my main rig still remains a 9900KS/2080Ti config. @Deathtech00 you're in the right frame of mind and the AMD build will suit you well for your audio / workstation tasks... 

My 3970x build is only used for workstation tasks and it smashes anything multi core intensive tasks that I throw at it. My only gripe is the latency that exists in multiple areas, however, I don't expect a turbo diesel to be able to cut corners across the track. Also, @KedarWolf @Deathtech00 if you're wanting to overclock the CPU to its limits, I'd be weary of pushing AMD with higher voltages as the 7nm is very young and I along with other overclockers can confirm that the new AMD chips integrity is not as good as Intel's more mature 14nm process. I can no longer obtain the clocks at the voltages I originally benched with and this has been a common theme in the overclocking realm. If you're staying in the mild territory with voltages you'll be fine, but just something to think about if you're planning to go all out with the AMD cpu's... Whereas with my 7980XE I've ran it through rigorous benching at stupid voltages and every profile that I've originally set for it since day one works every time without a glitch. - I foresee this reality with the young 7nm processes issue and its degradation coming out as time goes on, but mainly from actual overclockers.

@reachthesky you know my stance when it comes to game stable vs memtest stable. I'm not going to run looser timings just to satisfy a virus synthetic app that doesn't mean anything to my daily tasks and usage habits. 4266 is rock solid for 'game stable' (Zero errors, zero bsod, nada), but it doesn't like memtest for hours on end and I didn't expect it to. My new daily is at 4133/CL16, which has been running just as great and I like it due to the faster latency over the 4266 settings. They both work great...

Speaking of RAM and well AMD... while we're on the subject, I figured you guys would like this.

My 3970x build / Asus Zenith II Extreme / Samsung B-Die

3733MHz @ 14-13-13-35-1T

Check out the Read/Write and Copy speeds LOL...


----------



## Madness11

Guys , where I can find F9 from k.s ?? Please share 🙂 thanks


----------



## Grizzly111

My PC keeps rebooting itself randomly at idle in Windows 10....any one know the reason for this? Only happens when in the desktop browsing or if the PC is just left alone. Would love some suggestions. I'm on the modded F11c


----------



## Driller au

Grizzly111 said:


> My PC keeps rebooting itself randomly at idle in Windows 10....any one know the reason for this? Only happens when in the desktop browsing or if the PC is just left alone. Would love some suggestions. I'm on the modded F11c


If you haven't got C3 enabled try enabling it fixed that for me and a few others here


----------



## Intrud3r

Grizzly111 said:


> My PC keeps rebooting itself randomly at idle in Windows 10....any one know the reason for this? Only happens when in the desktop browsing or if the PC is just left alone. Would love some suggestions. I'm on the modded F11c


Maybe enable dummy load if it's not enabled yet.


----------



## warbucks

So, is f11e(modded) safe to upgrade to? Are folks finding it better than f11c? I believe I read a couple people were finding slightly better memory overclocks?


----------



## Falkentyne

warbucks said:


> So, is f11e(modded) safe to upgrade to? Are folks finding it better than f11c? I believe I read a couple people were finding slightly better memory overclocks?


f11e has the overvoltage DVID ->fixed vcore fix, which was tested in T0D/T1D. I could find no difference in performance or function between T1D and f11e. T0D allows you to enable "SVID Offset" without disabling changing vcore (although you still can't change dvid offsets if you enable that), while all the others disable all voltage modes if you enable SVID offset. They admitted this may not be proper behavior (Since Asus boards have SVID Offset mode enabled by default), and it's possible T0D is close to correct behavior (Besides the 1.20v fixed vcore bug).

All of the current Bioses will not use DVID or Auto vcore properly if the "Fixed" Vcore is currently set to 1.20v (vcore will remain 1.20v and serial VID will be ignored) and this bug will NOT be fixed (They are busy with the Z490 boards), and enabling SVID offset (which uses serial VID +200mv ceiling) when fixed vcore is at 1.20v will cause no voltage to be sent to the CPU, forcing a clear CMOS. Use any other vcore besides 1.20v to avoid that bug.


----------



## Gen.

Hello! I play with the resistances.


----------



## wholeeo

So what is the trick to get RTL's to stick? I believe someone posted it some pages ago.


----------



## GeneO

wholeeo said:


> So what is the trick to get RTL's to stick? I believe someone posted it some pages ago.


Once you get what you want for IOL/RTL. enable fast memory boot. It will not retrain after that and the RTL/IOL will stick.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Once you get what you want for IOL/RTL. enable fast memory boot. It will not retrain after that and the RTL/IOL will stick.


Does this also apply if the system is turned off *AND* the power supply is switched off (or plug removed from mains?).


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Does this also apply if the system is turned off *AND* the power supply is switched off (or plug removed from mains?).


IME, yes.

I have also noticed the following:

Shut off power, do clear cmos, boot to bios
load your profile with memory overclock (and with memory fast boot enabled)
save settings and reboot
You will go into a boot loop because it does not train the memory with fast memory boot enabled


----------



## wholeeo

GeneO said:


> Once you get what you want for IOL/RTL. enable fast memory boot. It will not retrain after that and the RTL/IOL will stick.


So basically, roll the dice until you get what you want and then don't roll anymore. :wheee:


----------



## Grizzly111

Driller au said:


> If you haven't got C3 enabled try enabling it fixed that for me and a few others here



Thanks m8 I will try that. I have tried the dummy load option but didnt do anything.


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> So basically, roll the dice until you get what you want and then don't roll anymore. :wheee:


lol


----------



## GeneO

wholeeo said:


> So basically, roll the dice until you get what you want and then don't roll anymore. :wheee:


It is the only game in town


----------



## lucasfrance

Could someone please post the moded Z390 Xtreme f9e bios ?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Gen.

I got 4 errors, trying to figure it out


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

TM5 with Extreme1 config is as strong as Karhu (even a bit stronger). I'm still playing with resistances to figure out which ones I need. Benchmarks run only at 100% stability.


----------



## Salve1412

Gen. said:


> Hello! I play with the resistances.


That ~30 Minutes stability at 4266MHz with 16-16-16-40 is a far better result than what I could ever achieve with two Masters, a 9900K and 9900KS and a QVL 4266 CL17 G.Skill kit (high instability persisting even at 17-18-18-38 and with more relaxed XMP timings). If I read correctly VCCIO and VCCSA are set in BIOS at 1.3V and DRAM Voltage at ~1.5V, right? I see that you are with an i7- 8700K: maybe 8700k's IMC is simply better than 9900K/KSes' memory controller?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

I used for 4200 and 4266 16-16-16-40-56, CCD_S=4, CCD_L=7, WRWR_sg=7, WRWR_dg=7; memory improvement - auto, resistance 60, 60, 60, 60, 40, 40, memory voltage 1.500V, training 1.500V, VPP 2.500V, VTT 0.762V. I’m studying myself.

P.S. As I understand it, the most stable result on the Z390 Master is 4133?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Grizzly111

@Gen. I found 1Usmus V3 to be better at detecting errors much faster than Anta777 Extreme config. Within 10 mins 1Usmus found an error that took Anta777 45 minutes to do the same. I do 10 loops of 1Usmus V3 + 12000% of Kahru as a minimum before I game. 



Stability-wise vs voltage needed I found for this mobo 4000CL16 to be the best.


----------



## Gen.

@Grizzly111 I am stable at 4100 16-16-36-52 and 60-60-120-120-40-40 1.44V or 1.45V.
@reachthesky I don’t know what to come up with from this board. There is an idea to switch to MEG ACE Z390 or take 2x IX APEX. How does MEG ACE drive 4 dice? How does she drive 2?


----------



## Gen.

Also, I had stable results at 4200 16-16, but in the morning when I woke up and was happy with the test, I got bsod when I opened the browser


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Salve1412

@Gen. Tried those settings and voltages for 4200 and 4266...lots of errors in TM5 Anta config. after a few seconds and even a couple of BSODs


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> z390 Apex XI or bust. memory traces optimized for 4800mhz.


My dice are capable of 4500 17-17 with rtl 63-65, much more? IX Apex can do that!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Found something interesting in one of buildzoid's videos for the z390 aorus master. vccsa/vccio chip placement. I wonder if having a fan over these would also help will higher ram frequencies like it does with having a fan over the dimms/memory power thingies located inbetween the 24 pin connector. Placement is odd though, part of it is located underneath the first nvme drive. I think i'm gonna take out the nvme and get a fan on the chips to see if it makes a difference.


VCCSA/IO supply chips draws so little current it won't matter, and it's the CPU that uses VCCSA and VCCIO. If you want more stability, go sub-zero.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> ix apex is only rated up to 4266. User would have to hit the silicon lottery with the board itself to get more than 4266 I would think. You have an Apex IX as well? 17-17/4500 is very good.


I drove a lot of people to IX Apex memory. Always takes no lower than 4400. Usually 4400-4600! + it is flashed into X Apex with the Z270 chipset. And for X Apex it says: Optimized wiring of two DIMM memory slots, which allows to achieve the frequency of DDR4 modules at the level of 4500 MHz and higher


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> I figured out a manual formula for calculating tWRRD_SG and tWRRD_DG. Usually if you leave it on auto the motherboard will take care of it but sometimes it doesn't. Setting these manually can help improve memory training(on the aorus master at least!).
> Adding 20 to whatever you have tWTR_L set to will give you tWRRD_SG.
> Adding 20 to whatever you have tWTR_S set to will give you tWRRD_DG.


I prescribe everything manually. 
WRRD_sg=6+CWL+WTR_L
WRRD_dg=6+CWL+WTR_S


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> Ooooo, how did you come up with that formula?


It has been known for a long time  WTR_S and WTR_L can generally be left in auto mode. For example, if you want to make WTR_S = 4, and your CWL = 14, just set WRRD_dg = 6 + 14 + 4 = 24 and that's it


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> I used to leave it on auto but after switching bioses so many times something must have gotten messed up because things weren't training properly for certain profiles I use until I manually entered them in.


My WTR's are in auto mode ... I only flash BIOS through rufus + dos with efiflash


----------



## lucasfrance

lucasfrance said:


> Could someone please post the moded Z390 Xtreme f9e bios ?
> 
> Thanks in advance!


Anyone please?


----------



## KedarWolf

lucasfrance said:


> Anyone please?


All firmwares and fastest stable BA microcodes updated.


----------



## Alemancio

With all the BIOS for the Aorus Master on this thread, what's the recommended one?

I'm on F10C, but see many are on F9B, others want the T0D, etc.

Thoughts?


----------



## lucasfrance

KedarWolf said:


> All firmwares and fastest stable BA microcodes updated.


MANY THANKS!


----------



## rhombus

wholeeo said:


> I had a similar experience on F11e on my Master board last week. Offset 0 seemed to not work at all while the others did. @Falkentyne suggested I clear CMOS and that fixed the issue for me so I suggest you try that if you haven't already.


thanks for the reply. for me offset never triggered whether I set 2 10 20 or auto, tried prime95 avx and asus realbench. I returned the board so no more testing unfortunately. at least I know it works on aorus master.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

reachthesky said:


> The dram power thingies(yep that's the technical term!) located in between the dimms and the 24 pin mobo cable also don't draw a lot of current yet those have to be kept cool enough for memory stability at high clockspeeds(along with the dimms of course!). Based on that behavior, I think it could be possible(Just a possibility Falkentyne!) the sa/io chips could be really sensitive to heat and have the same type of effect on high clockspeeds as the dram power thingies, regardless of current.


Oh damn, I’m curious to hear about your findings!

Is this a spot where the front intake fans on a normal case might not hit it? Bc of obstruction by the 24-pin connector?


----------



## Gen.

I try a new motherboard on my dies (I took it for a week or return it to the store by law). While testing one die


----------



## Gen.

1.42V + RTL

I'm trying now RRD_L=4, RFC=312.


----------



## wholeeo

My quality of life has been so much better after I've stopped messing with ram overclocking. No more stress testing, no more looking at my uEFI screen or GSAT/RAMTEST 90% of the time I'm at my computer. No more seeing my monitor suddenly blank out and me thinking it crashed.

I'm actually using the computer now. Amen. :yessir:


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> Why upgrade for only 10% more performance?


I had a few bsod after I configured the memory ...


reachthesky said:


> Also, why not test all 4 sticks at once?


First I want to check each module for the maximum frequency


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> I guess we'll be seeing you around


I'm going to live my life vicariously through you my friend. :thumb:


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> Man, I really want that z390 apex xi motherboard. A 20% increase in memory performance would be hottttttt right now.


I can’t find her anywhere. I purchased MEG ACE for 20,000 rubles on 03/10/2020, today, due to the crisis, it costs 23,500 in one store and 26,000 in another. Our memory bars are unique! Here is another screen for you


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

Here's what happened on the first module of 4 (4 DIMMs). 4400 17-17 1 DIMM (RTL + 1.42V DONE).


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Man, these Aorus boards are crazy.

Even the mid tier ones are fantastic for CPU overclock stability, but even the Master is meh at memory overclocking.

Like, holy crap. An MSI board that allows you to get 20% better memory performance than a Master!?!? How did Gigabyte manage to do one thing so well but another so “meh”?

Like, I can comfortably overclock to 5.1 without hitting 90C peak core temps on my Z390 Ultra and i7 9700k (air cooling), but I can’t do any better than 4000 16 18 18 38 at 1.45v with a pair of 3200 CL14 dimms. Even increasing to 1.5 vdimm and 1.3 sa/io doesn’t allow me to push higher frequencies or lower primaries. Nor can I do 3600 CL14. This is really weird.


----------



## Gen.

KrampusKlaus said:


> Man, these Aorus boards are crazy.
> 
> Even the mid tier ones are fantastic for CPU overclock stability, but even the Master is meh at memory overclocking.
> 
> Like, holy crap. An MSI board that allows you to get 20% better memory performance than a Master!?!? How did Gigabyte manage to do one thing so well but another so “meh”?
> 
> Like, I can comfortably overclock to 5.1 without hitting 90C peak core temps on my Z390 Ultra and i7 9700k (air cooling), but I can’t do any better than 4000 16 18 18 38 at 1.45v with a pair of 3200 CL14 dimms. Even increasing to 1.5 vdimm and 1.3 sa/io doesn’t allow me to push higher frequencies or lower primaries. Nor can I do 3600 CL14. This is really weird.


It infuriates me rebooting several times when setting up memory. The processor is not clear, then at 1.24V 4.8 / 4.6 it is stable, then BSOD on the 20th run of LinX. I could 4x8GB on Master Z390 3600 13-14-31, 3866 14-15-33, 4100 15-16-35 1.54V. Let's see how MEG ACE behaves on 4 dimmers


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Real curious to hear your results with the Ace. But I picked up my Aorus Z390 Ultra for $85, so there’s not a whole lot for me to complain about. To get better ram performance I would probably have to drop like $250 on a mobo, and/or $100-300 on more/better ram (another pair of Team Dark Pro, or 4 dimms of Xtreems).


----------



## Gen.

KrampusKlaus said:


> Real curious to hear your results with the Ace. But I picked up my Aorus Z390 Ultra for $85, so there’s not a whole lot for me to complain about. To get better ram performance I would probably have to drop like $250 on a mobo, and/or $100-300 on more/better ram (another pair of Team Dark Pro, or 4 dimms of Xtreems).



I told you about the behavior of the Z390 Master.

P.S. 2 dimming of 4 could only 4400 17-17 at 1.44V, but could 4500 17-17 1.5V (did not try below) when the first is not.


----------



## iunlock

KrampusKlaus said:


> Man, these Aorus boards are crazy.
> 
> Even the mid tier ones are fantastic for CPU overclock stability, but even the Master is meh at memory overclocking.
> 
> Like, holy crap. An MSI board that allows you to get 20% better memory performance than a Master!?!? How did Gigabyte manage to do one thing so well but another so “meh”?
> 
> Like, I can comfortably overclock to 5.1 without hitting 90C peak core temps on my Z390 Ultra and i7 9700k (air cooling), but I can’t do any better than 4000 16 18 18 38 at 1.45v with a pair of 3200 CL14 dimms. Even increasing to 1.5 vdimm and 1.3 sa/io doesn’t allow me to push higher frequencies or lower primaries. Nor can I do 3600 CL14. This is really weird.





KrampusKlaus said:


> Real curious to hear your results with the Ace. But I picked up my Aorus Z390 Ultra for $85, so there’s not a whole lot for me to complain about. To get better ram performance I would probably have to drop like $250 on a mobo, and/or $100-300 on more/better ram (another pair of Team Dark Pro, or 4 dimms of Xtreems).


I hear ya..it's a give and take situation and going with the one that best suit your needs. Going with the Master was a no brainer for me since I got a heck of a deal on it and because the board catered to my CPU OC'ing. It does good enough on RAM for what most people need and is no slouch there in that department, so between the two I'd still opt for the Master if I had to buy one again. For what you paid for the Ultra, it's really hard to criticize it much like you've mentioned. If you're after RAM, I'd save some extra pennies and just go all out with the EVGA Z390 Dark, which will give you the best of both worlds. Catch it on sale and it's not much of a stretch from paying full retail for the Master. *I've attached a pic of my G.Skill Royalz 4400 kit on my Z390 Dark. I'm pretty confident that there's more headroom too...that was just a quick on the fly "let's see if it posts and run benches," quickie. 

Have yo


----------



## iunlock

9900KS finally installed on the Master. I just left the bios at the f10b and started tuning. So far all my 9900[KF] 50x, 51x 52x, and 53x profiles work fine. After hours of gaming, video encoding, rendering etc... zero issues. 

The KF is great, but I was curious how much my temps would improve with the less voltage from the KS and dang... It's enough to warrant the swap. The KF I would keep at 50x for a lax daily setting and it'd hit mid 60C's (water cooled) max during long gaming sessions. With the KS using the same profile with less voltage it's hitting high 50C's, as expected...on average about 6C improvement in temps. 

I've created a 53x profile for the KS and gamed on it for a while last night and it held very well without any hiccups. The temps hit mid to upper 60C's, which was pretty surprising. (3x 360 Rads, R1 push/pull, R2 push, R3 push in a sealed off case). 

Fellow KS owners, how's everything running so far and any new news? I had to up my voltages just a bit to play nicely with my RAM timings, but so far so good. Would you mind sharing your settings for the following? (bios version, RAM info, CPU OC info) I'd be curious get an average with the data..Thanks
@Lurifaks @TAGTRAUM @Voidlol @pXuis @warbucks @Salve1412 and any other KS owners that I've missed...

For me so far (very early stages as I just installed the KS last night; tuning in progress...) RAM: 4133-16-16-16-32 @ 1.50v
50x @ 1.17v / 51x @ 1.22v / 53x @ 1.30v ... I still haven't tuned the 52x settings yet, but that's next once I get home.

Edit: OK so 52x profile done @ 1.25v... I have a feeling I can go a notch down to 1.24v, along with a notch down on the rest of the profiles. I loosened up the ram a tad to 4133-16-16-16-32, which seems to be the sweet spot for me to run lower voltages. Gaming Temps at 52x are in the upper 50C's. I'll take it.


----------



## Salve1412

iunlock said:


> 9900KS finally installed on the Master. I just left the bios at the f10b and started tuning. So far all my 9900[KF] 50x, 51x 52x, and 53x profiles work fine. After hours of gaming, video encoding, rendering etc... zero issues.
> 
> The KF is great, but I was curious how much my temps would improve with the less voltage from the KS and dang... It's enough to warrant the swap. The KF I would keep at 50x for a lax daily setting and it'd hit mid 60C's (water cooled) max during long gaming sessions. With the KS using the same profile with less voltage it's hitting high 50C's, as expected...on average about 6C improvement in temps.
> 
> I've created a 53x profile for the KS and gamed on it for a while last night and it held very well without any hiccups. The temps hit mid to upper 60C's, which was pretty surprising. (3x 360 Rads, R1 push/pull, R2 push, R3 push in a sealed off case).
> 
> Fellow KS owners, how's everything running so far and any new news? I had to up my voltages just a bit to play nicely with my RAM timings, but so far so good. Would you mind sharing your settings for the following? (bios version, RAM info, CPU OC info) I'd be curious get an average with the data..Thanks
> @Lurifaks @TAGTRAUM @Voidlol @pXuis @warbucks and any other KS owners that I've missed...
> 
> For me so far (very early stages as I just installed the KS last night; tuning in progress...) RAM: 4133-16-16-16-32 @ 1.50v
> 50x @ 1.17v / 51x @ 1.22v / 53x @ 1.30v ... I still haven't tuned the 52x settings yet, but that's next once I get home.
> 
> Edit: OK so 52x profile done @ 1.25v... I have a feeling I can go a notch down to 1.24v, along with a notch down on the rest of the profiles. I loosened up the ram a tad to 4133-16-16-16-32, which seems to be the sweet spot for me to run lower voltages. Gaming Temps at 52x are in the upper 50C's. I'll take it.


May I ask you which LLC level are you using for this profiles? Have you also overclocked the Uncore? My KS at 5.1 Clock 4.8 Uncore seemingly needs at least 1.285 with LLC High in order to begin to appear stable in heavier stress tests such as OCCT Large Data set no Avx and Prime 1344. RAM is at 4133 16-16-16-36 with tightened secondaries. BIOS F11c modded with BA/BE microcodes.


----------



## sygnus21

wholeeo said:


> My quality of life has been so much better after I've stopped messing with ram overclocking. No more stress testing, no more looking at my uEFI screen or GSAT/RAMTEST 90% of the time I'm at my computer. No more seeing my monitor suddenly blank out and me thinking it crashed.
> 
> I'm actually using the computer now. Amen. :yessir:


LOL, I discovered that years ago with the overall overclock experience. Now I don't overclock and don't miss it. I just enjoy the build I have as is. And when I do "bench", I just do the quick OC thing, bench, reset, and move on. No worries about burning out components in chasing OC numbers


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Salve1412 said:


> May I ask you which LLC level are you using for this profiles? Have you also overclocked the Uncore? My KS at 5.1 Clock 4.8 Uncore seemingly needs at least 1.285 with LLC High in order to begin to appear stable in heavier stress tests such as OCCT Large Data set no Avx and Prime 1344. RAM is at 4133 16-16-16-36 with tightened secondaries. BIOS F11c modded with BA/BE microcodes.


Hey there. At 51x I'm running 49x uncore (zero avx = always  and LLC set to Turbo. Nice ram timings, what are your secondaries set at? Could you run a Aida64 RAM test with those settings and post the screenshot? I'd be curious to see how it compares to my ram settings which are similar to your primaries. If you're up for it try the modded f10b bios as I've found pretty good luck with it. YMMV, however it's worth a shot. I have yet to test anything with the modded f9 bios yet. Maybe on the next rainy day. So far, everything is running cherry on all the 4 profiles so I'd like to enjoy it for a while before messing with it again lol.

Something interesting that I've found between the KF and KS. So with the KF before at 50x @ 1.26v the max temps after a long gaming session was ~60C peak. With the KS at 50x with lower voltages and after running back to back CPU intensive tests at 100% core utilization the temps are the same at ~60C peak. Gaming temps right now with the KS at 50x are in the high 40C's - low 50C's.


----------



## Salve1412

iunlock said:


> Hey there. At 51x I'm running 49x uncore (zero avx = always /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif and LLC set to Turbo. Nice ram timings, what are your secondaries set at? Could you run a Aida64 RAM test with those settings and post the screenshot? I'd be curious to see how it compares to my ram settings which are similar to your primaries. If you're up for it try the modded f10b bios as I've found pretty good luck with it. YMMV, however it's worth a shot. I have yet to test anything with the modded f9 bios yet. Maybe on the next rainy day. So far, everything is running cherry on all the 4 profiles so I'd like to enjoy it for a while before messing with it again lol.
> 
> Something interesting that I've found between the KF and KS. So with the KF before at 50x @ 1.26v the max temps after a long gaming session was ~60C peak. With the KS at 50x with lower voltages and after running back to back CPU intensive tests at 100% core utilization the temps are the same at ~60C peak. Gaming temps right now with the KS at 50x are in the mid 50C's.


Sure thing! I'll attach two screenshots. As for voltages, DRAM Voltage is 1.46V, VCCIO 1.16V and VCCSA 1.17V. Today I've run some tests with manual Vcore after a while (I was using DVID) and with this memory overclock and timings I need at least 1.29V LLC High in order to pass 10 runs of RealBench benchmark without L0 Cache Errors popping up in HWInfo. Maybe I'll give Turbo LLC a shot and see how the CPU behaves. BIOS F10b also could be an idea, as you suggest: you're using the fastest microcodes, right? Overall, yours seems to be a really good chip! Can I ask you to run a benchmark in Cinebench R20 at 5.1 and tell me which VR VOUT and Current IOUT values HWinfo reads during the test with RAM at 4133 CL16?


----------



## sygnus21

reachthesky said:


> What was the purpose of overbuying on the motherboard if you don't OC? That extra 200-300 could have gone towards a better GPU. Also, If you don't overclock, whats the purpose of frequenting an OC forum?


Cause it's my money and I spend it as I see fit. You worry about your money and let me worry about mine. 

And just because I don't overclock doesn't mean I'm barred from participating in this thread. Additionally, though I don't overclock doesn't mean I'm not gaining anything from being here. Not everyone in this forum overclocks and some even have question outside of overclocking which I do try to answer. 

And BTW I thought the name of this thread was "(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)" I happen to own a Gigabyte Z390 board.

Have a good one


----------



## marik123

Seems like the Aorus Pro is capable of running 4000mhz on 4 sticks of RAM. I got my RAM finally stabled at 4000mhz 16-17-17-37 2T 1.45v in bios, VCCSA/VCCIO = 1.2.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Salve1412 said:


> Sure thing! I'll attach two screenshots. As for voltages, DRAM Voltage is 1.46V, VCCIO 1.16V and VCCSA 1.17V. Today I've run some tests with manual Vcore after a while (I was using DVID) and with this memory overclock and timings I need at least 1.29V LLC High in order to pass 10 runs of RealBench benchmark without L0 Cache Errors popping up in HWInfo. Maybe I'll give Turbo LLC a shot and see how the CPU behaves. BIOS F10b also could be an idea, as you suggest: you're using the fastest microcodes, right? Overall, yours seems to be a really good chip! Can I ask you to run a benchmark in Cinebench R20 at 5.1 and tell me which VR VOUT and Current IOUT values HWinfo reads during the test with RAM at 4133 CL16?


Sounds good. Definitely give f10b a shot as it may produce better results for you overall than the current bios that you're on. I'm also on the fastest microcodes yes... This chip is the best out of my KS's for sure, but oddly KS #2 and #3 seem to do just as well if not slightly better at higher clocks. Overall they are all within a margin of error for the most part from each other. I've also been testing some of my different profiles and tuning a bit to get a new solid base line for 4133 with the KS since all the IMC's strength are different... I've attached a few ram tests with my current settings and with some tweaks. I've managed to get into the upper 36 in latency with a consistent 36.8ns and low 37's with a slightly tweaked settings, but with higher copy speeds. I'll play around with it some more... As for R20 at 51x if I recall the iout is ~121A with the vout ~1.197v when set at 1.22v. I've also attached my best CB20 run of 5643cb, along with CB15 (2379cb) and CB11.5 (25.68) PR's for reference with this KS on the Master. I must say not too shabby as I think those are the highest KS scores from a GB Aorus Master Z390, because the top scores on H20 are also my scores from my EVGA Z390 Dark. I think with a little more ram tuning I may be able to surpass my PR's on the Dark board, which is pretty exciting and would be a nice accomplishment for a Master board at half the cost...


----------



## Salve1412

iunlock said:


> Sounds good. Definitely give f10b a shot as it may produce better results for you overall than the current bios that you're on. I'm also on the fastest microcodes yes... This chip is the best out of my KS's for sure, but oddly KS #2 and #3 seem to do just as well if not slightly better at higher clocks. Overall they are all within a margin of error for the most part from each other. I've also been testing some of my different profiles and tuning a bit to get a new solid base line for 4133 with the KS since all the IMC's strength are different... I've attached a few ram tests with my current settings and with some tweaks. I've managed to get into the upper 36 in latency with a consistent 36.8ns and low 37's with a slightly tweaked settings, but with higher copy speeds. I'll play around with it some more... As for R20 at 51x if I recall the iout is ~121A with the vout ~1.197v when set at 1.22v. I've also attached my best CB20 run of 5643cb, along with CB15 (2379cb) and CB11.5 (25.68) PR's for reference with this KS on the Master. I must say not too shabby as I think those are the highest KS scores from a GB Aorus Master Z390, because the top scores on H20 are also my scores from my EVGA Z390 Dark. I think with a little more ram tuning I may be able to surpass my PR's on the Dark board, which is pretty exciting and would be a nice accomplishment for a Master board at half the cost...


Nice results and thanks for sharing them! Could you post an Asrock timing configurator screenshot so that I can see your subtimings? I tried LLC Turbo at 1.22V (5.1GHz Uncore 48 AVX Offset 0). All power saving features were disabled. Ran Cinebench R20: Current IOUT was ~130.000A, VR VOUT dropped to 1.170V and I had a 0X124 BSOD towards the end of the run. If I raise voltage to 1.24V in BIOS I get ~134.000 IOUT and ~1.190 VR VOUT, passing the test. I'm curious to see if F10b changes something and I get values more similar to yours.


----------



## Salve1412

Can someone explain me this thing regarding DVID? Let's say I overclock my 9900KS to 5.1GHz Uncore 48 AVX Offset 0, all power saving features disabled, on a Z390 Aorus Master motherboard BIOS F11c modded with BA/BE microcodes. RAM is overclocked at 4133 16-16-16-36 with tightened timings, VCCIO is at 1.16V, VCCSA at 1.17V.
I set a fixed Vcore of 1.29V in BIOS with LLC High (or 1.24V LLC Turbo, which produces similar results). I run two tests with the following current and voltage values (all of them read in HWInfo):

LLC Turbo 1.24V BIOS
Cinebench R20 ~134A Current IOUT 1.189V VR VOUT 
5 minutes OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled alternating between ~133A-1.190V and ~123A-1.192V

LLC High 1.29V BIOS
Cinebench R20 ~133A 1.186V
5 minutes OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled alternating between ~133A-1.186V and 121A-1.195V

So similar values with both LLCs and not so much difference between an AVX and a non-AVX test. Now, if I try to switch to DVID mode I look for corresponding VR VOUT values in Cinebech. For example I set LLC High, IA AC Loadline 1, IA DC Loadline 80, offset +0.005mV. I run Cinebench and I read 1.19-1.2V in VR VOUT and ~135 Current IOUT. At this point, if I try to rerun the same OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled it's an immediate crash either with a WHEA or a Clock_Watchdog_Timeout BSOD, because the VR VOUT drops too much (I guess around 1.15-1.16V, since it fails so instantly I can't even see any change of value in HWInfo). Of course I can raise the offset to 0.025mV in order to compensate this and reach the 1.8-1.9V I had with fixed Vcore, but then Cinebench runs at 1.22V and 140amps (and temperature increases by 5-6 degrees). Is this voltage range something to be expected with DVID, maybe due to different VID reactions to AVX and non-AVX workloads?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> Can someone explain me this thing regarding DVID? Let's say I overclock my 9900KS to 5.1GHz Uncore 48 AVX Offset 0, all power saving features disabled, on a Z390 Aorus Master motherboard BIOS F11c modded with BA/BE microcodes. RAM is overclocked at 4133 16-16-16-36 with tightened timings, VCCIO is at 1.16V, VCCSA at 1.17V.
> I set a fixed Vcore of 1.29V in BIOS with LLC High (or 1.24V LLC Turbo, which produces similar results). I run two tests with the following current and voltage values (all of them read in HWInfo):
> 
> LLC Turbo 1.24V BIOS
> Cinebench R20 ~134A Current IOUT 1.189V VR VOUT
> 5 minutes OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled alternating between ~133A-1.190V and ~123A-1.192V
> 
> LLC High 1.29V BIOS
> Cinebench R20 ~133A 1.186V
> 5 minutes OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled alternating between ~133A-1.186V and 121A-1.195V
> 
> So similar values with both LLCs and not so much difference between an AVX and a non-AVX test. Now, if I try to switch to DVID mode I look for corresponding VR VOUT values in Cinebech. For example I set LLC High, IA AC Loadline 1, IA DC Loadline 80, offset +0.005mV. I run Cinebench and I read 1.19-1.2V in VR VOUT and ~135 Current IOUT. At this point, if I try to rerun the same OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled it's an immediate crash either with a WHEA or a Clock_Watchdog_Timeout BSOD, because the VR VOUT drops too much (I guess around 1.15-1.16V, since it fails so instantly I can't even see any change of value in HWInfo). Of course I can raise the offset to 0.025mV in order to compensate this and reach the 1.8-1.9V I had with fixed Vcore, but then Cinebench runs at 1.22V and 140amps (and temperature increases by 5-6 degrees). Is this voltage range something to be expected with DVID, maybe due to different VID reactions to AVX and non-AVX workloads?


CPU base VID (vCPU) stops scaling at 5 ghz. So 5 and 5.1 ghz will have the same vCPU. vCPU can be read by setting both ACLL and DCLL to 1. Yes, LLC:High is 0.8 mOhms, so setting DC Loadline to 80 will show the same vdroop on the "VID" as LLC:High vdroop shows on VR VOUT (idle to load) but there's a problem now.

AC Loadline affects base vcore from vCPU. Setting ACLL to 1 basically uses vCPU - (LLC mOhms* amps) +vOffset as your vcore. However AC Loadline responds differently if an AVX load is detected or not. It also seems to be erratic if the load constantly changes, especially when vCPU no longer scales on multiplier. I'm not even sure how this works, but I recall some people saying that an AVX load causes vCPU to increase by 30mv on Haswell.

I've seen very bizarre voltages, ranging from too high, to BSOD or generating L0 errors, for example, when I set auto vcore (DVID basically, but with no offset), ACLL:160, Vcore LLC: Standard, and 5.2 ghz and "SVID Offset"=Enabled (this allows ACLL to boost Vcore higher than 1.520v before vdroop. SVID offset is NOT vOffset).

Cinebench R20 ran with absolutely no problem like this, which VR VOUT around 1.32v at 155 amps or so. However, Battlefield 5, which used lower amps, showed a VR VOUT ranging from 1.271v to 1.43v(!). ACLL was simply unable to boost vcore reliably because of the mixed loads, and 1.271v is far too low. Thus: Errors.

You're using ACLL:1, so what is probably happening is that 30mv AVX vCPU boost is happening erratically or not happening when you actually need it. And VR VOUT's sensor may not even be fast enough to show it to begin with.

You need to raise vOffset (DVID) to compensate for this. Or use a fixed vcore.


----------



## Salve1412

reachthesky said:


> 3900MHz
> For best gaming performance, Prioritize memory performance in the following order when overclocking your ram. Going beyond 3900 on these boards=latency penalty(worse performance).
> 1. latency
> 2. copy speed
> 3. read speed
> 4. write speed
> 
> 
> Here are the timings and 3 quick aida64 benchies. This will pass a memtest too.
> 
> O and for those who are curious....
> 
> 1.5v VDimm/training voltages
> 1.3v SA/IO voltages
> 60/60/60/60/40/40 RTT Resistances
> F9 stock bios
> This profile outperforms everything in gaming up until [email protected] with identical subs sans twtr_s/l(solely because of gigabytes improper rtl training at 4000mhz and above).


Thanks for the tip but unfortunately with these exact settings and voltages my system won't POST (the board starts the training process as usual but it hangs at C1 after some cycles, powers off and reverts back to stock settings) and I prefer not to experiment with even higher voltages for 3900MHz. Maybe I'll try BIOS F9 original and see if it is somehow better (right now I'm on F11c modded with BA/BE microcodes). 




Falkentyne said:


> CPU base VID (vCPU) stops scaling at 5 ghz. So 5 and 5.1 ghz will have the same vCPU. vCPU can be read by setting both ACLL and DCLL to 1. Yes, LLC:High is 0.8 mOhms, so setting DC Loadline to 80 will show the same vdroop on the "VID" as LLC:High vdroop shows on VR VOUT (idle to load) but there's a problem now.
> 
> AC Loadline affects base vcore from vCPU. Setting ACLL to 1 basically uses vCPU - (LLC mOhms* amps) +vOffset as your vcore. However AC Loadline responds differently if an AVX load is detected or not. It also seems to be erratic if the load constantly changes, especially when vCPU no longer scales on multiplier. I'm not even sure how this works, but I recall some people saying that an AVX load causes vCPU to increase by 30mv on Haswell.
> 
> I've seen very bizarre voltages, ranging from too high, to BSOD or generating L0 errors, for example, when I set auto vcore (DVID basically, but with no offset), ACLL:160, Vcore LLC: Standard, and 5.2 ghz and "SVID Offset"=Enabled (this allows ACLL to boost Vcore higher than 1.520v before vdroop. SVID offset is NOT vOffset).
> 
> Cinebench R20 ran with absolutely no problem like this, which VR VOUT around 1.32v at 155 amps or so. However, Battlefield 5, which used lower amps, showed a VR VOUT ranging from 1.271v to 1.43v(!). ACLL was simply unable to boost vcore reliably because of the mixed loads, and 1.271v is far too low. Thus: Errors.
> 
> You're using ACLL:1, so what is probably happening is that 30mv AVX vCPU boost is happening erratically or not happening when you actually need it. And VR VOUT's sensor may not even be fast enough to show it to begin with.
> 
> You need to raise vOffset (DVID) to compensate for this. Or use a fixed vcore.


Thanks for the explanation. From what I can see the "issue" concerns only non-AVX stress tests, because that 30mV AVX vCPU boost during AVX tests seems to happen systematically (I still haven't tried games that use AVX but I'll do that soon), so this boost may very well give reason for all of this. So basically if I want to keep using DVID I have to raise the Offset at the cost of giving probably more voltage than necessary to the CPU during heavy AVX operations (and higher current with higher temperatures), or I may just go for fixed Vcore and have lower and more uniform voltages under any kind of workload but no voltage drop at idle when CPU downclocks (I would enable DVID for this specific reason). Guess you can't have it both ways at the end of the day.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Huh, imma give this a try.

Curious, have you benched 3600 with super tight primaries?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Falkentyne said:


> CPU base VID (vCPU) stops scaling at 5 ghz. So 5 and 5.1 ghz will have the same vCPU. vCPU can be read by setting both ACLL and DCLL to 1. Yes, LLC:High is 0.8 mOhms, so setting DC Loadline to 80 will show the same vdroop on the "VID" as LLC:High vdroop shows on VR VOUT (idle to load) but there's a problem now.
> 
> AC Loadline affects base vcore from vCPU. Setting ACLL to 1 basically uses vCPU - (LLC mOhms* amps) +vOffset as your vcore. However AC Loadline responds differently if an AVX load is detected or not. It also seems to be erratic if the load constantly changes, especially when vCPU no longer scales on multiplier. I'm not even sure how this works, but I recall some people saying that an AVX load causes vCPU to increase by 30mv on Haswell.
> 
> I've seen very bizarre voltages, ranging from too high, to BSOD or generating L0 errors, for example, when I set auto vcore (DVID basically, but with no offset), ACLL:160, Vcore LLC: Standard, and 5.2 ghz and "SVID Offset"=Enabled (this allows ACLL to boost Vcore higher than 1.520v before vdroop. SVID offset is NOT vOffset).
> 
> Cinebench R20 ran with absolutely no problem like this, which VR VOUT around 1.32v at 155 amps or so. However, Battlefield 5, which used lower amps, showed a VR VOUT ranging from 1.271v to 1.43v(!). ACLL was simply unable to boost vcore reliably because of the mixed loads, and 1.271v is far too low. Thus: Errors.
> 
> You're using ACLL:1, so what is probably happening is that 30mv AVX vCPU boost is happening erratically or not happening when you actually need it. And VR VOUT's sensor may not even be fast enough to show it to begin with.
> 
> You need to raise vOffset (DVID) to compensate for this. Or use a fixed vcore.


 Have you tried BF5 with a fixed vcore? That range of 1.271v to 1.43v wow... I'll fire up BF later and test some of my profiles as I haven't done that yet with the KS.


----------



## Falkentyne

iunlock said:


> Have you tried BF5 with a fixed vcore? That range of 1.271v to 1.43v wow... I'll fire up BF later and test some of my profiles as I haven't done that yet with the KS.


BF5 has no problems at 5.2 ghz, 1.380v + LLC Turbo (300 khz).


----------



## wholeeo

So I've replaced my monoblock with a cpu block so that I could direct die mount so I'm selling the monoblock.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/147...upremacy-evo-nickel-plexi-140-a-new-post.html

Aorus gang got first dibs.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Please update us with temp differences/comparisons etc. Also, which liquid metal option are you using?


He's probably using this.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> Are those filled with Adamantium?!?
> 
> Have you done heads up testing with your recipe vs liquid ultra or conductonaut?


It's no more than 2C difference.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

Salve1412 said:


> Can someone explain me this thing regarding DVID? Let's say I overclock my 9900KS to 5.1GHz Uncore 48 AVX Offset 0, all power saving features disabled, on a Z390 Aorus Master motherboard BIOS F11c modded with BA/BE microcodes. RAM is overclocked at 4133 16-16-16-36 with tightened timings, VCCIO is at 1.16V, VCCSA at 1.17V.
> I set a fixed Vcore of 1.29V in BIOS with LLC High (or 1.24V LLC Turbo, which produces similar results). I run two tests with the following current and voltage values (all of them read in HWInfo):
> 
> LLC Turbo 1.24V BIOS
> Cinebench R20 ~134A Current IOUT 1.189V VR VOUT
> 5 minutes OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled alternating between ~133A-1.190V and ~123A-1.192V
> 
> LLC High 1.29V BIOS
> Cinebench R20 ~133A 1.186V
> 5 minutes OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled alternating between ~133A-1.186V and 121A-1.195V
> 
> So similar values with both LLCs and not so much difference between an AVX and a non-AVX test. Now, if I try to switch to DVID mode I look for corresponding VR VOUT values in Cinebech. For example I set LLC High, IA AC Loadline 1, IA DC Loadline 80, offset +0.005mV. I run Cinebench and I read 1.19-1.2V in VR VOUT and ~135 Current IOUT. At this point, if I try to rerun the same OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled it's an immediate crash either with a WHEA or a Clock_Watchdog_Timeout BSOD, because the VR VOUT drops too much (I guess around 1.15-1.16V, since it fails so instantly I can't even see any change of value in HWInfo). Of course I can raise the offset to 0.025mV in order to compensate this and reach the 1.8-1.9V I had with fixed Vcore, but then Cinebench runs at 1.22V and 140amps (and temperature increases by 5-6 degrees). Is this voltage range something to be expected with DVID, maybe due to different VID reactions to AVX and non-AVX workloads?


I saw your post shortly after you posted it, but I was on my phone on tapatalk so it would have been a workout typing a book from the phone lol. But, it looks like Falk did a great job in breaking it down. Simply put as you already know it has to do with the vdroop and how the board implements what I call "switching and hand offs," which has a lot of unknowns with its behavior. For me personally and having spent many hours with trial and error with this board, I prefer sticking to static voltages over messing with a combination of the offset route. Just personal preference and at the end of the day, pick your flavor and what works best for your given hardware.  With your KS though I'd try sticking with the lowest static and tuning from there. Just a suggestion. - It boils down to what produces the best results and for me going the static route has always been best route. YMMV as always. btw sent you a DM.



reachthesky said:


> 3900MHz
> For best gaming performance, Prioritize memory performance in the following order when overclocking your ram. Going beyond 3900 on these boards=latency penalty(worse performance).
> 1. latency
> 2. copy speed
> 3. read speed
> 4. write speed
> 
> Here are the timings and 3 quick aida64 benchies. This will pass a memtest too.
> 
> O and for those who are curious....
> 
> 1.5v VDimm/training voltages
> 1.3v SA/IO voltages
> 60/60/60/60/40/40 RTT Resistances
> F9 stock bios
> This profile outperforms everything in gaming up until [email protected] with identical subs sans twtr_s/l(solely because of gigabytes improper rtl training at 4000mhz and above).
> 
> 
> Top 3 in gaming performance for stable achievable daily driver 4x8dimm configurations on the aorus master:
> 
> 1. c15-4200 (1.58v)
> 
> 2. c15-3900 (1.5v) <extremely voltage efficient
> 
> 3. c15-4133 (1.56v)
> 
> c15-3900 should be fairly easy to hit. If your dimms/imc can do [email protected] with tight subs, you can probably do [email protected] with tight subs.


Try my new settings as I'd be curious how it compares to your 3900 settings in games. When you can put these settings through the ringer (your usual gaming) just as you did to obtain the fps data for your 3900 settings. I've been gaming on my settings for the past 2.5 hours and right before that ran blender, 3dmark combined test loops + unigine heaven, rendered a video, wprime etc... making sure the cpu was getting taxed 100% all core and it hasn't thrown any errors yet. Usually for my initial test methodology I combine wprime 1024M with Fire Strike Extreme Combined Test Loop + CB15 and CB20 back to back to back runs for the first initial test to see if there are any cache errors. Typically it'd throw an error right away if the settings are too aggressive, but if it doesn't throw any errors I move onto more tests with blender, rendering, encoding etc...which are also very heavy that resemble my real world work tasks. Then obviously gaming tests with my other testing protocols... 

At any rate, I've spent a ton of hours tuning and tweaking over the past few weeks ... these are the best results I've tuned so far on the Master so I'm hanging up RAM tuning for a while so that I can actually enjoy the system lol... these are way good enough and I prefer running 4133 over lower frequencies as the Copy and Latency with my new settings are the best I've seen from my own testing and data so I'll take it. 

You seem to have pretty strong RAM so you might be able to tighten these up more to get a faster Copy and lower Latency. I'm curious what you can do...

Anyhow... game time. RAM tuning complete...I'm done for a while lol. Enjoy. 

@Salve1412 just tagging you as well buddy as you may be able to further improve on this as well. 



Falkentyne said:


> BF5 has no problems at 5.2 ghz, 1.380v + LLC Turbo (300 khz).


Great.


----------



## satinghostrider

iunlock said:


> I saw your post shortly after you posted it, but I was on my phone on tapatalk so it would have been a workout typing a book from the phone lol. But, it looks like Falk did a great job in breaking it down. Simply put as you already know it has to do with the vdroop and how the board implements what I call "switching and hand offs," which has a lot of unknowns with its behavior. For me personally and having spent many hours with trial and error with this board, I prefer sticking to static voltages over messing with a combination of the offset route. Just personal preference and at the end of the day, pick your flavor and what works best for your given hardware.  With your KS though I'd try sticking with the lowest static and tuning from there. Just a suggestion. - It boils down to what produces the best results and for me going the static route has always been best route. YMMV as always. btw sent you a DM.
> 
> 
> 
> Try my new settings as I'd be curious how it compares to your 3900 settings in games. When you can put these settings through the ringer (your usual gaming) just as you did to obtain the fps data for your 3900 settings. I've been gaming on my settings for the past 2.5 hours and right before that ran blender, 3dmark combined test loops + unigine heaven, rendered a video, wprime etc... making sure the cpu was getting taxed 100% all core and it hasn't thrown any errors yet. Usually for my initial test methodology I combine wprime 1024M with Fire Strike Extreme Combined Test Loop + CB15 and CB20 back to back to back runs for the first initial test to see if there are any cache errors. Typically it'd throw an error right away if the settings are too aggressive, but if it doesn't throw any errors I move onto more tests with blender, rendering, encoding etc...which are also very heavy that resemble my real world work tasks. Then obviously gaming tests with my other testing protocols...
> 
> At any rate, I've spent a ton of hours tuning and tweaking over the past few weeks ... these are the best results I've tuned so far on the Master so I'm hanging up RAM tuning for a while so that I can actually enjoy the system lol... these are way good enough and I prefer running 4133 over lower frequencies as the Copy and Latency with my new settings are the best I've seen from my own testing and data so I'll take it.
> 
> You seem to have pretty strong RAM so you might be able to tighten these up more to get a faster Copy and lower Latency. I'm curious what you can do...
> 
> Anyhow... game time. RAM tuning complete...I'm done for a while lol. Enjoy.
> 
> @Salve1412 just tagging you as well buddy as you may be able to further improve on this as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Great.



Hey @iunlock,

Do you have the voltages you use for your memory at 4133 at CL15? What VCCIO and VCCSA are you using mate?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## iunlock

satinghostrider said:


> Hey @iunlock,
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have the voltages you use for your memory at 4133 at CL15? What VCCIO and VCCSA are you using mate?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance!


1.50v dimm, sa 1.29, io 1.30. My goal was to stay below 1.50v and below 1.30v and no higher than that. I could likely get more out of the ram kit, but that'd require more gas, which I'm not interested in for daily settings. Hope that helps.


----------



## satinghostrider

iunlock said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey @iunlock,
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have the voltages you use for your memory at 4133 at CL15? What VCCIO and VCCSA are you using mate?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> 
> 
> 1.50v dimm, sa 1.29, io 1.30. My goal was to stay below 1.50v and below 1.30v and no higher than that. I could likely get more out of the ram kit, but that'd require more gas, which I'm not interested in for daily settings. Hope that helps.
Click to expand...

Thank you so much! 
I'm gonna a try CL15 later tonight based on your settings. Btw, did you change your RTLs or you left them on AUTO in the bios? As I understand, anything over 3900, RTLs are all over the place.


----------



## iunlock

satinghostrider said:


> Thank you so much!
> I'm gonna a try CL15 later tonight based on your settings. Btw, did you change your RTLs or you left them on AUTO in the bios? As I understand, anything over 3900, RTLs are all over the place.


I left them on auto. RTL's on the master are a crap shoot indeed.


----------



## wholeeo

reachthesky said:


> Please update us with temp differences/comparisons etc. Also, which liquid metal option are you using?


Well I already had it delidded with the monoblock but with the IHS back on, conductonaut between die and IHS, and KPX between ihs and block. On stock with less voltage than I am using now I'd easily hit above 95+ even with the CPU block on AVX loads.

Now delidded with conductonaut between the die and cpu block I rarely pass 80c. These are my temps after a 2 hour run of OCCT Large Data set.

Need to take care of them cache errors. @Falkentyne , more vcore or more VCCSA?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Using some of reachthesky’s and falkentyne’s recommended settings for DVID offset overclocking, I’m now running my 9700k on air cooling (DRP4) with the following:

Universal Settings

AVX Offset: Auto
AC/DC: 1/1
LLC: Normal
Enhanced Multi Core Performance: Auto
Turbo Boost: Auto
Intel Speed Shift: Disabled
C States: C3 Enabled, the rest disabled
Ring to Core: Auto
EIST: Enabled

With those settings, the following voltage/frequencies pass 30 min OCCT v4.5.1 Large, 30 min Realbench, and Gears 5/Fallen Order

5.0 core
4.7 ring
DVID +0.100v (0.090v and lower BSODs)
VR Vout hovers around 1.27v (+/- 0.005v) during OCCT

5.1 core
4.8 ring
DVID +0.150v (0.140v and lower BSODs)
VR Vout hovers around 1.31 (+/- 0.005v) during OCCT

I might try for 5.2 but I have a feeling that Realbench temps might exceed 85C with my current cooling solution. Still might be fine because I haven’t played a game that’s gotten even close to Realbench temps under load.

I’m admittedly a bit jealous about the frequencies that y’all are able to get on your 9900K and KS chips both with and without HT. But, feeling pretty good about what I can achieve with my modest setup.

With that in mind, I have a few questions:

- what are the benefits of AVX Offset set to Auto as opposed to 0 for gaming stability?

- what’s the benefits of having a high ring/uncore frequency for gaming? In other words, have y’all with a 2080 ti tested 5.2 core 4.9 ring vs 5.2 core 4.8 ring during gaming? (ht off, bc I have a 9700k)

- lastly, what are the highest safe voltage spikes in VR Vout? Using a +0.150v DVID offset and Normal LLC I can get recorded spikes as high as 1.39v (max as recorded on HWInfo64). I know that transients are supposed to be lowest when using Normal LLC, but should I be concerned about increasing voltages any higher for a 24/7 overclock?

Also, thanks again for all of your advice. This forum has helped a ton at learning how to squeeze the most performance out of my rig, with a low overall power consumption. All I ever really wanted was to get 5.1ghz gaming stable, and I’m happy to have achieved that goal. If I’m somehow able to squeeze 5.2ghz out of this thing I’ll be over the moon.

Edit: did a few tests, yeah I don't think that I can push this to even 5.2 core 4.8 ring with any voltage that I'd be comfortable with.


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> Using some of reachthesky’s and falkentyne’s recommended settings for DVID offset overclocking, I’m now running my 9700k on air cooling (DRP4) with the following:
> 
> Universal Settings
> 
> AVX Offset: Auto
> AC/DC: 1/1
> LLC: Normal
> Enhanced Multi Core Performance: Auto
> Turbo Boost: Auto
> Intel Speed Shift: Disabled
> C States: C3 Enabled, the rest disabled
> Ring to Core: Auto
> EIST: Enabled
> 
> With those settings, the following voltage/frequencies pass 30 min OCCT v4.5.1 Large, 30 min Realbench, and Gears 5/Fallen Order
> 
> 5.0 core
> 4.7 ring
> DVID +0.100v (0.090v and lower BSODs)
> VR Vout hovers around 1.27v (+/- 0.005v) during OCCT
> 
> 5.1 core
> 4.8 ring
> DVID +0.150v (0.140v and lower BSODs)
> VR Vout hovers around 1.31 (+/- 0.005v) during OCCT
> 
> I might try for 5.2 but I have a feeling that Realbench temps might exceed 85C with my current cooling solution. Still might be fine because I haven’t played a game that’s gotten even close to Realbench temps under load.
> 
> I’m admittedly a bit jealous about the frequencies that y’all are able to get on your 9900K and KS chips both with and without HT. But, feeling pretty good about what I can achieve with my modest setup.
> 
> With that in mind, I have a few questions:
> 
> - what are the benefits of AVX Offset set to Auto as opposed to 0 for gaming stability?
> 
> - what’s the benefits of having a high ring/uncore frequency for gaming? In other words, have y’all with a 2080 ti tested 5.2 core 4.9 ring vs 5.2 core 4.8 ring during gaming? (ht off, bc I have a 9700k)
> 
> - lastly, what are the highest safe voltage spikes in VR Vout? Using a +0.150v DVID offset and Normal LLC I can get recorded spikes as high as 1.39v (max as recorded on HWInfo64). I know that transients are supposed to be lowest when using Normal LLC, but should I be concerned about increasing voltages any higher for a 24/7 overclock?
> 
> Also, thanks again for all of your advice. This forum has helped a ton at learning how to squeeze the most performance out of my rig, with a low overall power consumption. All I ever really wanted was to get 5.1ghz gaming stable, and I’m happy to have achieved that goal. If I’m somehow able to squeeze 5.2ghz out of this thing I’ll be over the moon.


Auto and 0 are the same thing, unless Auto allows the BIOS to control the offset via another setting. Usually MCE being enabled allows MCE to manually set any options that are set to Auto (Auto LLC with MCE enabled sets LLC to Turbo, for example).


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Which dimms are those? Is that 8hrs+ hci memtest/karhu memtest stable? If you didn't change tcke to 6 and left it at 8, is latency the same or is it higher? If it is higher, how much higher?


It's the same kit as before. G.Skill Royalz 4600mhz 4x8GB. I haven't tested between the tcke settings. As for memtests you can go ahead and test that if you'd want. Did you not read my previous post several pages back? Lol.


reachthesky said:


> ZXOMG THAT LATENCY! LOL


So how's it working out for you? Why is your copy at only ~58K MB/s? That's really low. You should be well above 60K MB/s if you're using the settings... Anything above 60K is good enough even if it means looser settings elsewhere.

When you can run Cinebench 11.5, 15 and 20 with your best cpu and ram settings and post them.

Edit: Try the modded bios f10b.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here's the Z390 Master T1D BIOS with the latest updated ME firmware. It's Q-Flash flashable but works with efiflash as well.

I find the T1D working best for me.


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Here's the Z390 Master T1D BIOS with the latest updated ME firmware. It's Q-Flash flashable but works with efiflash as well.
> 
> I find the T1D working best for me.


Can you do T0D instead of T1D?

T1D still has debugging loops left in it (It was an internal test BIOS, not intended for release, remember?)
If you get a BSOD in T1D, you will get 5 strangely toned beeps on restart (if you have a PC Speaker hooked up) and it will boot automatically to BIOS.

This was removed in T0D.


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> Here's the Z390 Master T1D BIOS with the latest updated ME firmware. It's Q-Flash flashable but works with efiflash as well.
> 
> 
> 
> I find the T1D working best for me.


Thanks as always @KedarWolf. I wish our boards had more bios switches on it lol, like the dark boards ... At least 3x would be nice.

What type of improvements have you noticed? Better cpu OC? Better ram OC? Require lower voltages?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

T0D modded, latest firmwares, fastest microcodes, latest ME firmware.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> The RTLs don't want to align to 64/66/66/66. they are 66/66/68/68 for me no matter what at c15/4133. I'm leaning heavily towards thinking its the quality of dimms at play here. The aida64 bench was a test run with secondaries and tertiaries left on auto, i guess it was an error or something because i ran it again right after and latency came up normal. Is it the bios version or just simply the dimms responsible for rtls?


Ah perhaps. I'd say it's due to them being different dimm kits for sure. Give f10b a shot and see if it changes any characteristics with ram tuning? Your dimms seem pretty strong so I would think they are more than capable, but then again it could very well be the strange rtls behaviour at play here with the Master due to being on a different dimm kit.


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> T0D modded, latest firmwares, fastest microcodes, latest ME firmware.


That was fast lol... thanks a bunch. Very much appreciated. 

Out of curiosity what are some of the Pro's you've noticed on this modded T0D vs the modded f9?


----------



## KedarWolf

iunlock said:


> That was fast lol... thanks a bunch. Very much appreciated.
> 
> Out of curiosity what are some of the Pro's you've noticed on this modded T0D vs the modded f9?


Tried T0D, memory stability problems in RamTest I don't have in T1D.


----------



## Salve1412

Just made an unpleasant discovery. Was testing fixed voltage of 1.250 LLC Turbo with my KS at 5.1GHz 4.8 Cache and it passed 10 runs of RealBench benchmark test, 30 minutes of OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled, 10 runs of Cinebench R20, 4 runs of x264 Stability Test (power savings features were disabled both in BIOS and in Windows). Then went back to some stuff I had to do and tried to create a RAR archive from about 40 MP3 Lame files I had in a folder (20 in one subfolder and 20 in another, about 300 MB), so I right clicked on the folder, clicked "add to <folder_name>.rar", and during the process (which should last a few seconds) the PC froze: no BSOD or reboot. I had to hit reset and wait a couple of seconds for system to reboot. Symptoms seemed identical to CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT BSODs I've experienced sometimes while testing overclocking but without the blue screen (CPU probably fails so badly it can't create one in time). I've repeatedly tried the same compression and most of the time system either shows CPU L0 Cache errors in HWInfo or freeze during the process. Upping the Vcore seems to improve the situation for the moment. The strange thing is that when the compression is succesful, with or without L0 errors, I don't notice any significant voltage drop in HWInfo (I would be prone to think that freezing would happen due to an excessive amount of it), so if drops have something to do with the crash it is not registered at software level. I noticed though that while compressing I can hear a more distinct coil whine/buzzing noise from the CPU area. Switching to Adaptive mode I've experienced the same instability with my previous offset, so I'm adjusting it. Are Winrar compressions particulary heavy on CPU?


----------



## Falkentyne

KedarWolf said:


> Tried T0D, memory stability problems in RamTest I don't have in T1D.


I have no idea what the changelogs are. All I was told was that T0D did the DVID Fix a different way than T1D. They have test build branches and I don't know what they do internally.
The only thing I saw was that T0D removed that BSOD debug thing and allowed you to change SVID Offset while on fixed vcore (again, 1.20v does not work unless you enable SVID Offset before changing vcore to 1.20v. This exact vcore should be avoided anyway even on newest BIOS due to bugs when changing voltage modes).


----------



## Falkentyne

Salve1412 said:


> Just made an unpleasant discovery. Was testing fixed voltage of 1.250 LLC Turbo with my KS at 5.1GHz 4.8 Cache and it passed 10 runs of RealBench benchmark test, 30 minutes of OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled, 10 runs of Cinebench R20, 4 runs of x264 Stability Test (power savings features were disabled both in BIOS and in Windows). Then went back to some stuff I had to do and tried to create a RAR archive from about 40 MP3 Lame files I had in a folder (20 in one subfolder and 20 in another, about 300 MB), so I right clicked on the folder, clicked "add to <folder_name>.rar", and during the process (which should last a few seconds) the PC froze: no BSOD or reboot. I had to hit reset and wait a couple of seconds for system to reboot. Symptoms seemed identical to CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT BSODs I've experienced sometimes while testing overclocking but without the blue screen (CPU probably fails so badly it can't create one in time). I've repeatedly tried the same compression and most of the time system either shows CPU L0 Cache errors in HWInfo or freeze during the process. Upping the Vcore seems to improve the situation for the moment. The strange thing is that when the compression is succesful, with or without L0 errors, I don't notice any significant voltage drop in HWInfo (I would be prone to think that freezing would happen due to an excessive amount of it), so if drops have something to do with the crash it is not registered at software level. I noticed though that while compressing I can hear a more distinct coil whine/buzzing noise from the CPU area. Switching to Adaptive mode I've experienced the same instability with my previous offset, so I'm adjusting it. Are Winrar compressions particulary heavy on CPU?


Did you disable all C-states before doing this test?
PWM switching frequency @ 300 khz ?


----------



## Salve1412

Falkentyne said:


> Did you disable all C-states before doing this test?
> PWM switching frequency @ 300 khz ?


Yep, C-States, Speedshift, EIST, RTH, Voltage Optimization disabled and power plan in Windows set to High Performance. PWM switching 300KHz. Bumping the Vcore up two notches seemingly did the trick. Curious that I could pass without any error those other tests which were way heavier and then fail almost sistematically this little compression. However it definitely was a Clock Watchdog Timeout kind of error: BSODs with this code started to appear occasionally after the freezing. Going to readjust Offset values for my adaptive profile (may be trickier due to EIST and C3 being enabled).


----------



## KedarWolf

Salve1412 said:


> Just made an unpleasant discovery. Was testing fixed voltage of 1.250 LLC Turbo with my KS at 5.1GHz 4.8 Cache and it passed 10 runs of RealBench benchmark test, 30 minutes of OCCT Large Data Set AVX Disabled, 10 runs of Cinebench R20, 4 runs of x264 Stability Test (power savings features were disabled both in BIOS and in Windows). Then went back to some stuff I had to do and tried to create a RAR archive from about 40 MP3 Lame files I had in a folder (20 in one subfolder and 20 in another, about 300 MB), so I right clicked on the folder, clicked "add to <folder_name>.rar", and during the process (which should last a few seconds) the PC froze: no BSOD or reboot. I had to hit reset and wait a couple of seconds for system to reboot. Symptoms seemed identical to CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT BSODs I've experienced sometimes while testing overclocking but without the blue screen (CPU probably fails so badly it can't create one in time). I've repeatedly tried the same compression and most of the time system either shows CPU L0 Cache errors in HWInfo or freeze during the process. Upping the Vcore seems to improve the situation for the moment. The strange thing is that when the compression is succesful, with or without L0 errors, I don't notice any significant voltage drop in HWInfo (I would be prone to think that freezing would happen due to an excessive amount of it), so if drops have something to do with the crash it is not registered at software level. I noticed though that while compressing I can hear a more distinct coil whine/buzzing noise from the CPU area. Switching to Adaptive mode I've experienced the same instability with my previous offset, so I'm adjusting it. Are Winrar compressions particulary heavy on CPU?


Usually, a freeze without BSOD is cache instability. Lower cache or raise vcore. AIDA 64 Extreme cache only stress test best way to check the cache for instability.


----------



## Salve1412

KedarWolf said:


> Usually, a freeze without BSOD is cache instability. Lower cache or raise vcore. AIDA 64 Extreme cache only stress test best way to check the cache for instability.


Never ran that test. Will give it a shot, thanks.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> Did that cl15-4133 ever pass a memtest?


I haven't ran it yet and have no interest in running it through a virus app for 8 hours lol. Feel free to try it on your end mate. Did you not read my previous posts?  You already know my stance on those synthetic apps. If you want, go ahead and run it for 8 hours if you feel the need to. I doubt it'll pass, but the bigger point that we've addressed multiple times already is this. 

If you can run "game and work stable," without any errors, crashes, freezes, bsod etc at tighter timings and higher frequencies... then what's the issue? 

Would you lower the frequency and loosen the timings just to satisfy a virus app, achieving no gain but higher latency and slower ram performance all together? See that doesn't make sense to me.... but to each their own. 

That has been my point all along. Even if a RAM setting can't pass a synthetic virus test, doesn't mean that it can't perform just fine with "real world," usage tasks. 

I have yet to receive any errors yet with my current settings, so why would I go out of my way to address an issue that doesn't exist in respect to my usage habits? Why would I go lower the frequency and loosen the timings and deal with higher latency? For me personally I don't find the logic in that. Makes zero sense. - The fact is, there are no issues with my usage habits and the ram settings that I have it at currently. 

I'm also very picky with a very low tolerance with RAM and errors. If I see even 1 glitch, error or any odd behavior with my usage, I scrap the settings all together and readjust accordingly. 

I get the need for ultra bullet proof ram stability for certain people, I get it.... trust me... bench apps do serve a purpose for the small majority. However, I personally would rather have the best performance, rather than gimping it for no reason...

At the end of the day it's all about performance and results. My system is running like a charm so until it gives me something to critique I'm happy right where it is for now. For the past few days I've been running it on my 53x profile and it has been running great. One of my flight sim games with maxed out settings near maxes out the vram on the 2080Ti and ~21GB usage on the system ram lol. So far so good...


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> For clarification, karhu/hci memtest aren't power virus ram tests. gsat is a power virus ram test.
> 
> You have me curious/confused. What makes you say things like "I'm also very picky with a very low tolerance with RAM and errors. If I see even 1 glitch, error or any odd behavior with my usage, I scrap the settings all together and readjust accordingly." but then be totally against a real stability test?
> 
> Are you afraid all the time spent tuning will be a waste because it might fail the test thus the desire to not do a test?


You're confused because you're not separating the context of what is being said. Tuning aggressive settings will most often times than not, not make it through extreme ram tests. That's a given that doesn't need any further explanation. It's very obvious and you should know that already. It's important to read and retain before you answer, because based on your replies it's pretty clear that you're failing to read, comprehend, forgetting or all of the above. 

What I meant about having low tolerance is that if I see even 1 error with an aggressive ram tune during my usage, I'll attend to it immediately to make adjustments and not just leave it be lol... understand now? It's very simple. Again, pay attention to the context and it might save you from being confused. 

I think you're having a hard time distinguishing between "real world usage / game / work related stability," vs "extreme memtest stability." Don't forget about "bench stable," either which is another category that you may have a hard time understanding since you're not into that stuff. There have been many discussions about this so there's no need to beat an old topic to pieces. 

Again, if you want to test the settings with your kit and put it through 8 hours of whatever, then feel free to do so. Whatever floats your fancy.

At the end of day it's about what works for you and what doesn't. If you want to run ram at lower clocks, looser timings and higher latency then that's up to you. If you think satisfying an app is the only way then that's up to you as well. I personally don't care for the apps unless I'm tuning for clients who actually need that level of intense ram stability for the work that they do. 

Are you afraid and getting confused because you're not able to hit the ram performance after trying out all the different settings? Is your kit capable? Now you've got me curious.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> iunlock said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're confused because you're not separating the context of what is being said. Tuning aggressive settings will most often times than not, not make it through extreme ram tests. That's a given that doesn't need any further explanation. It's very obvious and you should know that already.
> 
> What I meant about having low tolerance is that if I see even 1 error with an aggressive ram tune during my usage, I'll attend to it immediately to make adjustments and not just leave it be lol... understand now? It's very simple. Again, pay attention to the context and it might save you from being confused.
> 
> I think you're having a hard time distinguishing between "real world usage / game / work related stability," vs "extreme memtest stability." Don't forget about "bench stable," either which is another category that you may have a hard time understanding since you're not into that stuff. There have been many discussions about this so there's no need to beat an old topic to pieces.
> 
> Again, if you want to test the settings with your kit and put it through 8 hours of whatever, then feel free to do so. Whatever floats your fancy.
> 
> At the end of day it's about what works for you and what doesn't. If you want to run ram at lower clocks, looser timings and higher latency then that's up to you. If you think satisfying an app is the only way then that's up to you as well. I personally don't care for the apps unless I'm tuning for clients who actually need that level of intense ram stability for the work that they do.
> 
> Are you afraid and getting confused because you're not able to hit the ram performance after trying out all the different settings? Is your kit capable? Now you've got me curious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what you are saying is that your memory overclock does not actually pass a stability test? How do you expect to retain influence as a vendor/reseller when you don't even properly tune/test your systems?
Click to expand...

A stability test means nothing really. Sure, you could say you are certified stable after putting the PC through a couple of hours of torture test to achieve this. I used to do this years back and run torture tests overnight only to find games crashing within minutes after that. These days I just run the torture tests for at max half hour or an hour then focus stability entirely in games.

If games like Battlefront 2 and Battlefield 5 can be stable even after hours of gaming, to me that is stable enough. Frostbite engines are extremely sensitive to bad overclocks. I do not need to torture my PC to convince myself or others that it is stable. You have to understand everyone uses their PC for different usages. The context of stability is different for everyone.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> A stability test means nothing really. Sure, you could say you are certified stable after putting the PC through a couple of hours of torture test to achieve this. I used to do this years back and run torture tests overnight only to find games crashing within minutes after that. These days I just run the torture tests for at max half hour or an hour thenfocus stability entitely in games.
> 
> If games like Battlefront 2 and Battlefield 5 can be stable even after hours of gaming, to me that is stable enough. Frostbite engines are extremely sensitive to bad overclocks. I do not need to torture my PC to convince myself or others that it is stable. You have to understand everyone uses their PC for different usages. The context of stability is different for everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one is suggesting p95 or anything or even gsat. A memory test is proper and basic procedure for any rig, just like a vision test is a proper procedure for your eyes. I said it before and i'll say it again, hci memtest and karhu aren't over the top torture tests and at the least, you should be able those. Hell, even using aida64's memory test for 8-12 hours is better than not using a memory test at all.
> 
> 
> 
> Practice good habits instead of developing bad ones.
Click to expand...

Running Aida stability test includes stressing the memory as well which I do for about an hour. I have no interest to run kahru or HCI memtest as even passing those I have crashes in Battlefront 2 until I had to increase my VCCIO/VCCSA to get it completely stable.

Sure Memtest and Kahru are good habits but not running it is not a bad habit either. Why should I waste my time running those when games can pick up crashes way faster than sitting like a duck waiting for it to complete. I've said it before and I'm saying it again, stability is in the context of what you use your PC for. If it serves well and runs reliably, then it's good enough for users like me that only use the computer to predominantly game and some light office work.

Same way I can tell you running more than 1.5V for your DDR is a bad habit but you will reply that you can run whatever the hell you want to. So I really do not think you should be preaching 'habits' in the first place when you do not follow them yourself for something as simple as voltage limits.


----------



## iunlock

reachthesky said:


> So what you are saying is that your memory overclock does not actually pass a stability test? How do you expect to retain influence as a vendor/reseller when you don't even properly tune/test your systems?


So what I am saying is exactly what I have posted several times that you've clearly failed to read and comprehend. 

How do I expect to retain influence? What kind of silly question is that? - The answer is obvious and very simple. I would never advertise my aggressive RAM tuning as work station stable. Are you kidding me? Why would you even assume that? Answer: Because you're failing to separate the context of what is being said here regarding this topic and making yourself believe what you want to believe. 

How many times does it have to be said that there are differences between stability in respect to its usage habits? 

Why are you so married to an app and in denial?

You really need to get a grip of reality bud, because it really sounds like you're in denial perhaps due to you not being able to reach the performance with your ram kit. Don't take that frustration out on others. 

What is it with you? Did my settings not work out for you? If not, don't take it out on others and have it cloud your mind. You have a sub 4000 kit OC'ing to beyond 4000 so you should be happy with that. Don't expect it to do something unrealistic for the given bin then get upset if it doesn't work out the way you expected it to. It's okay...really... 



satinghostrider said:


> A stability test means nothing really. Sure, you could say you are certified stable after putting the PC through a couple of hours of torture test to achieve this. I used to do this years back and run torture tests overnight only to find games crashing within minutes after that. These days I just run the torture tests for at max half hour or an hour then focus stability entirely in games.
> 
> If games like Battlefront 2 and Battlefield 5 can be stable even after hours of gaming, to me that is stable enough. Frostbite engines are extremely sensitive to bad overclocks. I do not need to torture my PC to convince myself or others that it is stable. You have to understand everyone uses their PC for different usages. The context of stability is different for everyone.


Precisely and well said. Some people don't seem to understand this no matter how simple it is broken down.




reachthesky said:


> No one is suggesting p95 or anything or even gsat. A memory test is proper and basic procedure for any rig, just like a vision test is a proper procedure for your eyes. I said it before and i'll say it again, hci memtest and karhu aren't over the top torture tests and at the least, you should be able those. Hell, even using aida64's memory test for 8-12 hours is better than not using a memory test at all.
> 
> Practice good habits instead of developing bad ones.


No one is suggesting p95? Oh really? Hmmm because if you do a search p95 has been suggested many times in the past here, which also is frowned upon by people who understand that it is an unrealistic synthetic app. 

What may be a proper memory test for you does not mean that it is the only way. Your view on what is proper is heavily skewed, because you have cemented the idea of what you think is proper that is clouding you from seeing the reality here. 

Practice good habits instead of developing bad ones? I agree... so you should start reading and understanding the context here so that you don't react with blanket statements and clumping things together to fit your narrative. 

For starters here: "There are different definitions of stable."

A.) Work Station / MemTest Stable: Means just that. 

B.) Game Stable: Means just that.

C.) Bench Stable: Means just that.

Also you still haven't answered my question. 

IF, you're able to run 4133 15-15-15-32 with ~62K Copy and low 35ns Latency (@ >1.50v) without any errors (Zero Errors), crashes, bsod, and/or any interruption with gaming and your daily usage habits...

...Would you lower your frequency, loosen timings and voluntarily gimp your performance just to satisfy a memtest app?

The question is actually pretty rhetorical, because based on your replies it's quite obvious what the answer is, but I'm sure people would like to hear it from the horses mouth. Give a logical explanation as to why you would alter something and create an imaginary problem to something that doesn't exist in respect to your usage habits (specifically gaming and non work station related tasks) to bow down to a memtest app...

We'll wait....




satinghostrider said:


> Running Aida stability test includes stressing the memory as well which I do for about an hour. I have no interest to run kahru or HCI memtest as even passing those I have crashes in Battlefront 2 until I had to increase my VCCIO/VCCSA to get it completely stable.
> 
> Sure Memtest and Kahru are good habits but not running it is not a bad habit either. Why should I waste my time running those when games can pick up crashes way faster than sitting like a duck waiting for it to complete. I've said it before and I'm saying it again, stability is in the context of what you use your PC for. If it serves well and runs reliably, then it's good enough for users like me that only use the computer to predominantly game and some light office work.
> 
> Same way I can tell you running more than 1.5V for your DDR is a bad habit but you will reply that you can run whatever the hell you want to. So I really do not think you should be preaching 'habits' in the first place when you do not follow them yourself for something as simple as voltage limits.


You're spot on. See I knew that I wasn't the only one to see things logically lol. I mean it's really not that hard to understand, but I don't know why it's so hard for some people. It baffles me to be honest. 

I do agree and can confirm that real world habits like intensive games can pick up errors (issues) really fast if there is one. Battlefield is great and very taxing... I've been playing my flight sim that is very demanding on the system ram and vram. I flew for 3+ hours without right after my new ram settings with zero issues. The system RAM was at ~21GB+ avg load lol... On my OSD I have the error indicators there and I always keep a watch out to see if that 0 turns to 1. If the RAM wasn't game stable it would have crashed hard almost immediately with this heavy title. 

I also agree with what you said: "Same way I can tell you running more than 1.5V for your DDR is a bad habit but you will reply that you can run whatever the hell you want to. So I really do not think you should be preaching 'habits' in the first place when you do not follow them yourself for something as simple as voltage limits."

It is my hope that the logical inputs being stated here are taken within context and well understood by those who fail to comprehend basic logic.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## clipz_bg

Hi guys,
What is the best z390 auros pro bios?
My cpu is i7 9700k. I had stability issues with RAM with f12 and roll back to f11 and think everything is OK but still decide to ask.


----------



## KedarWolf

Hey peeps, I officially moved to an AMD 3950x CPU and MSI Prestige X570 Creation motherboard. I got pretty much a golden chip. 

I can still do BIOS mods for you all, but can't test them, old system disassembled for sale locally.


----------



## Intrud3r

Oh darn ... I'll miss your being here ...


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> Hey peeps, I officially moved to an AMD 3950x CPU and MSI Prestige X570 Creation motherboard. I got pretty much a golden chip.
> 
> I can still do BIOS mods for you all, but can't test them, old system disassembled for sale locally.


Congrats on the new set up. Was it due to the type of work that made you go with more cores? Thanks for sticking around for the bios stuff.


----------



## Deathtech00

KedarWolf said:


> Hey peeps, I officially moved to an AMD 3950x CPU and MSI Prestige X570 Creation motherboard. I got pretty much a golden chip.
> 
> 
> 
> I can still do BIOS mods for you all, but can't test them, old system disassembled for sale locally.




Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk


----------



## KedarWolf

iunlock said:


> Congrats on the new set up. Was it due to the type of work that made you go with more cores? Thanks for sticking around for the bios stuff.


I just wanted a new system to play with and I fried my 9900k delidding it, I'm really happy with my 3950x, bit slower in gaming I'm sure but not by much and I got a decent chip, the IMC is incredible for Ryzen!!

Edit: Plus most modern games take advantage of multithreading and it's becoming more and more popular in games!!

https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...950x-overclocking-thread-64.html#post28376284


----------



## sygnus21

KedarWolf said:


> Edit: Plus most modern games take advantage of multithreading and it's becoming more and more popular in games!!


Hmm.... I'm still looking for the game(s) that utilizes 8-Cores, let alone one that utilizes 16. Found any?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## KedarWolf

My 9900k See the Graphic results.

Edit: The first 3950x score was a bit high. New one below is with the exact same graphics settings on both runs.










My 3950x.










I really see no reason to not go AMD now, even for gaming.


----------



## Deathtech00

Falkentyne said:


> The hell ?


Ran outta toilet paper would be my guess. 

Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk


----------



## warbucks

Falkentyne said:


> The hell ?


Too much voltage. Fried his central processing unit.


----------



## Deathtech00

warbucks said:


> Too much voltage. Fried his central processing unit.


Truly "gone fishing".

Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk


----------



## Markymark Yo

Hi there,

my previous setup:
i5 8600k 5GHz 1.28v avx on max temp 67-69'C stress
aorus z390 pro cf (f9 bios)
2x8gb g.skill 3600 cl15 (F4-3600C15D-16GTZ)
750w dark power pro

Just to make the story short, everything was running perfect and full stable.Recently i've changed cpu to i7 9700k and all crashed when set xmp profile 1. System won't boot and all lights on the board flashing. Clear cmos doesn't seem to work. I had to unplug power cable and take the battery out. I tried everything lose timing, mem voltage 1.375v, vccio and vccsa 1.15-1.125v, change slots, single stick etc...

Definitely an issue with xmp and i7 9700k unfortunately now the lights are flashing and i cant get it back to work ( black screen

I also had i7 8700k in the past and never had any problems with this memory and the xmp works just fine... any thoughts?

Sorry for my english


----------



## Falkentyne

Markymark Yo said:


> Hi there,
> 
> my previous setup:
> i5 8600k 5GHz 1.28v avx on max temp 67-69'C stress
> aorus z390 pro cf (f9 bios)
> 2x8gb g.skill 3600 cl15 (F4-3600C15D-16GTZ)
> 750w dark power pro
> 
> Just to make the story short, everything was running perfect and full stable.Recently i've changed cpu to i7 9700k and all crashed when set xmp profile 1. System won't boot and all lights on the board flashing. Clear cmos doesn't seem to work. I had to unplug power cable and take the battery out. I tried everything lose timing, mem voltage 1.375v, vccio and vccsa 1.15-1.125v, change slots, single stick etc...
> 
> Definitely an issue with xmp and i7 9700k unfortunately now the lights are flashing and i cant get it back to work ( black screen
> 
> I also had i7 8700k in the past and never had any problems with this memory and the xmp works just fine... any thoughts?
> 
> Sorry for my english


Are you sure you didn't bend any pins? This sounds a lot like a bent pin problem.

Do you still have the 8700k? What happens if you swap it back in?

And clear cmos method is:

Unplug power supply cable (or turn PSU rocker switch off).
Short "Clear RTC/Clear CMOS" Jumpers marked on the board with screwdriver or jumper block for 30 seconds. Remove jumper then plug power supply back in and then power on.


----------



## Markymark Yo

Falkentyne said:


> Are you sure you didn't bend any pins? This sounds a lot like a bent pin problem.
> 
> Do you still have the 8700k? What happens if you swap it back in?
> 
> And clear cmos method is:
> 
> Unplug power supply cable (or turn PSU rocker switch off).
> Short "Clear RTC/Clear CMOS" Jumpers marked on the board with screwdriver or jumper block for 30 seconds. Remove jumper then plug power supply back in and then power on.


Thank you for reply, i do have i5 8600k . So the flashing lights might be the cause of bent pin or memory problem? I will change cpu and report when back home.


----------



## Dannyele

Hello guys!


I'm currently using 2x8gb ram (*F4-4266C19D-16GTZR*), but unfortunately cannot be running at those speeds even raising the SA/IO/DDR voltages... I thought that was stable at [email protected] but it failed around 40 mins (2600% Karhu). So currently im at 3600 CL15 with some tight on the timmings:






















¿You think that I can increase the performance considering that this rig is purely for gaming at 4K/60fps - 1440p/144fps?


----------



## Alemancio

Dannyele said:


> Hello guys!
> 
> 
> I'm currently using 2x8gb ram (*F4-4266C19D-16GTZR*), but unfortunately cannot be running at those speeds even raising the SA/IO/DDR voltages... I thought that was stable at [email protected] but it failed around 40 mins (2600% Karhu). So currently im at 3600 CL15 with some tight on the timmings:
> 
> ¿You think that I can increase the performance considering that this rig is purely for gaming at 4K/60fps - 1440p/144fps?


The Aorus Master (being T-Topology) rarely works well with only 2 Dimms beyond 3600MHz, regardless of vIO, vSA, vDimm. For 4000MHz+ you'd need to populate all 4 DIMMs.

If you're staying with 2 DIMMs, you can try tweaking:

1. Try 1T
2. Try 15-14-14-32
3. Try reducing tRFC to 220~250
4. Try reducing tWTR_L, tWTR_S, tCKE, all the tRDWR's, tWRRD's
5. Try retraining your RAM to get better IOLs, those are very bad. Try to get 40~60s range.

OC Guide


----------



## Dannyele

Alemancio said:


> The Aorus Master (being T-Topology) rarely works well with only 2 Dimms beyond 3600MHz, regardless of vIO, vSA, vDimm. For 4000MHz+ you'd need to populate all 4 DIMMs.
> 
> If you're staying with 2 DIMMs, you can try tweaking:
> 
> 1. Try 1T
> 2. Try 15-14-14-32
> 3. Try reducing tRFC to 220~250
> 4. Try reducing tWTR_L, tWTR_S, tCKE, all the tRDWR's, tWRRD's
> 5. Try retraining your RAM to get better IOLs, those are very bad. Try to get 40~60s range.
> 
> OC Guide



Hello buddy!


I tried to tight even more, but it fails early on Karhu... (1T instant, also if I try to lower the primaries...)


The actual ones I've seen that it fails passed like 6500% with almost 2 hours... so it seems that it's not 100% stable... but no errors so far...


Regarding the IOLS/RTLs I cannot change it on 10b, I think that there is some kind of bug and whatever number I set on BIOS it doesn't change... so that's why the IOLs are bad


----------



## Deathtech00

*Ram Tweaking*

So, I have this Hynix CJR that seems to be half decent. I haven't done a ton of Ram OC, but was hoping someone can help me find the sweet spot for this kit. Not sure how much you can rely on it for this platform, but the Ryzen DRAM Calc says the chip quality is 95%, and says the OC "potential" is around 3900 CL16.


I am currently sitting here at around 3466-16.18.18.32

It would seem like I should be able to at least hit 3600, and maybe I am not using enough voltage as I have been playing it a bit safe, but for whatever reason it seems to really not want to stabilize at 3600 or above.


So far, I am stable at 3466 and these timings with 1.26 SA and 1.18 VCCIO, and 1.4V on the sticks. These are in 4x8 config, and I get around 43-42.6 ns with it in the Aida64 cache bench. 

I may be a glutton for punishment, but I want to try and get that little bit more bandwidth if I can, without going to crazy extreme measures. Although, apparently Samsung just finished some new EuV DDR4 based on their new process, but with the apocalypse going on and all, noone knows if or when we may see them commercially available.


Thoughts on where I may want to start? Help a guy out and I will +rep


----------



## Alemancio

Dannyele said:


> Hello buddy!
> 
> 
> I tried to tight even more, but it fails early on Karhu... (1T instant, also if I try to lower the primaries...)
> 
> 
> The actual ones I've seen that it fails passed like 6500% with almost 2 hours... so it seems that it's not 100% stable... but no errors so far...
> 
> 
> Regarding the IOLS/RTLs I cannot change it on 10b, I think that there is some kind of bug and whatever number I set on BIOS it doesn't change... so that's why the IOLs are bad


If Karhu fails, try increasing vDIMM all the way up to 1.45V or VCCSA/VCCIO up to 1.28V. If Karhu fails after several hours it could be dimms temperature.

You're right about not being able to manually set IOLs/RTLs, but you can force the motherboard to re-train automatically and you'll get different IOLs/RTLs. The option in BIOS is Memory Boot Mode (i think it should be Enabled instead of AUTO).

Let us know if this helps


----------



## Driller au

Deathtech00 said:


> So, I have this Hynix CJR that seems to be half decent. I haven't done a ton of Ram OC, but was hoping someone can help me find the sweet spot for this kit. Not sure how much you can rely on it for this platform, but the Ryzen DRAM Calc says the chip quality is 95%, and says the OC "potential" is around 3900 CL16.
> 
> 
> I am currently sitting here at around 3466-16.18.18.32
> 
> It would seem like I should be able to at least hit 3600, and maybe I am not using enough voltage as I have been playing it a bit safe, but for whatever reason it seems to really not want to stabilize at 3600 or above.
> 
> 
> So far, I am stable at 3466 and these timings with 1.26 SA and 1.18 VCCIO, and 1.4V on the sticks. These are in 4x8 config, and I get around 43-42.6 ns with it in the Aida64 cache bench.
> 
> I may be a glutton for punishment, but I want to try and get that little bit more bandwidth if I can, without going to crazy extreme measures. Although, apparently Samsung just finished some new EuV DDR4 based on their new process, but with the apocalypse going on and all, noone knows if or when we may see them commercially available.
> 
> 
> Thoughts on where I may want to start? Help a guy out and I will +rep


Check out my post on page 647 post 6463, i had gskill hynix CJR 3200mhz at 3600mhz in the end i had the DDRV at 1.41V the command rate is at 1 and that is on the modded F11b bios if i was using the later bios i had to have the CR at 2


----------



## djc5166

Z390 AORUS MASTER (1.0)
F11c BIOS
Intel Corei9-9900k
Win 10 64-bit 1909
Samsung 960Pro NVME (1TB)

Creative SB AE-9 (PCIE1-1 slot)
EVGA 2080ti (PCIE16-1 slot)

Initially was using the M2P socket for a Samsung 960Pro NVME drive. Drive was running at pcie 3.0 @x4 mode.

Now, today I need the full bandwidth of the PCIE16-3(x4) slot (shared bandwidth with M2P socket), so I moved the 960Pro NVME drive to the M2A socket.

960Pro seems to now only run at pcie 3.0 @x2 mode in the M2A socket (verified in BIOS and in Samsung Magician toolbox).

The Z390 Master manual states that M2A socket bandwidth is shared with SATA3 1 connector. It also says all 3 of these M.2 slots should run @x4 (I'm assuming -unless- they are sharing bandwidth)

I've tried unplugging devices from SATA1, and also disabling the port entirely in the BIOS. I have also tried disabling all 6 (0-5) SATA3 ports. The M2A socket continues to run the 960Pro in @x2 mode and not @x4.

Anyone know what I can do to resolve this?


----------



## GeneO

djc5166 said:


> Z390 AORUS MASTER (1.0)
> F11c BIOS
> Intel Corei9-9900k
> Win 10 64-bit 1909
> Samsung 960Pro NVME (1TB)
> 
> Creative SB AE-9 (PCIE1-1 slot)
> EVGA 2080ti (PCIE16-1 slot)
> 
> Initially was using the M2P socket for a Samsung 960Pro NVME drive. Drive was running at pcie 3.0 @x4 mode.
> 
> Now, today I need the full bandwidth of the PCIE16-3(x4) slot (shared bandwidth with M2P socket), so I moved the 960Pro NVME drive to the M2A socket.
> 
> 960Pro seems to now only run at pcie 3.0 @x2 mode in the M2A socket (verified in BIOS and in Samsung Magician toolbox).
> 
> The Z390 Master manual states that M2A socket bandwidth is shared with SATA3 1 connector. It also says all 3 of these M.2 slots should run @x4 (I'm assuming -unless- they are sharing bandwidth)
> 
> I've tried unplugging devices from SATA1, and also disabling the port entirely in the BIOS. I have also tried disabling all 6 (0-5) SATA3 ports. The M2A socket continues to run the 960Pro in @x2 mode and not @x4.
> 
> Anyone know what I can do to resolve this?


The M.2 should always get 4 PCI-E lanes, not part of the bandwidth, it is "either or". For example, if you use use M2A it should get 4 PCI-E lanes and SATA3 1 slot will be inoperable. Did you run a bandwidth test (like cyrstaldiskmark) to verify you have only two lanes of bandwidth? Could be a MB or BIOS issue. Try reseating the 960 in the m.2.


----------



## Deathtech00

Driller au said:


> Check out my post on page 647 post 6463, i had gskill hynix CJR 3200mhz at 3600mhz in the end i had the DDRV at 1.41V the command rate is at 1 and that is on the modded F11b bios if i was using the later bios i had to have the CR at 2


Thanks man, checking it out now. 

Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk


----------



## djc5166

GeneO said:


> The M.2 should always get 4 PCI-E lanes, not part of the bandwidth, it is "either or". For example, if you use use M2A it should get 4 PCI-E lanes and SATA3 1 slot will be inoperable. Did you run a bandwidth test (like cyrstaldiskmark) to verify you have only two lanes of bandwidth? Could be a MB or BIOS issue. Try reseating the 960 in the m.2.


I think for this slot it is only inoperable if it is a SATA m.2 drive. STATA1 remains functional for me while the drive is running @2x.

I did not run any other tools yet, but both the BIOS and Magician show @2x.


----------



## GeneO

djc5166 said:


> I think for this slot it is only inoperable if it is a SATA m.2 drive. STATA1 remains functional for me while the drive is running @2x.
> 
> I did not run any other tools yet, but both the BIOS and Magician show @2x.


Yes, I see that. That is weird, I do not understand this. I thought all slots were 4x for NVME SSD. The specs imply that. I have my 960 pro in M2P - I have never tried the other M.2 slots.


----------



## djc5166

GeneO said:


> Yes, I see that. That is weird, I do not understand this. I thought all slots were 4x for NVME SSD. The specs imply that. I have my 960 pro in M2P - I have never tried the other M.2 slots.


The manual says it should be x4 for all three slots.

I will try reseating it. Is it possible there could be something wrong with the board itself?


----------



## djc5166

djc5166 said:


> The manual says it should be x4 for all three slots.
> 
> I will try reseating it. Is it possible there could be something wrong with the board itself?


Tried all day, can't get anything in that slot to run at x4 (Even with all SATA ports disconnected and/or disabled). Even tried running NVME under iRST, still runs at x2.

The other 2 slots run at x4 just fine. I've tried the same drives in each of the 3 slots. SATA4/5 are disabled when using the one tied to them (as expected).



Wondering if this is just a board defect, should I open an RMA? I don't really want to waste my time sending it in if it's likely there is nothing for Gigabyte to fix.


----------



## scaramonga

djc5166 said:


> Tried all day, can't get anything in that slot to run at x4 (Even with all SATA ports disconnected and/or disabled). Even tried running NVME under iRST, still runs at x2.
> 
> The other 2 slots run at x4 just fine. I've tried the same drives in each of the 3 slots. SATA4/5 are disabled when using the one tied to them (as expected).
> Wondering if this is just a board defect, should I open an RMA? I don't really want to waste my time sending it in if it's likely there is nothing for Gigabyte to fix.


OK here with 2 drives @ x4. Gonna be adding a third tomorrow. I don't use SATA, nor the PCIE16-3(x4) slot, so will post back to see if that also reads as x4.


----------



## djc5166

scaramonga said:


> OK here with 2 drives @ x4. Gonna be adding a third tomorrow. I don't use SATA, nor the PCIE16-3(x4) slot, so will post back to see if that also reads as x4.


Thanks for the reply, curious to see the result.

I have a 970evo in another machine, I can try it in this one.

The motherboard actually lists it as 3.0 x4 @ 3.0 x2, so I highly doubt its the drive itself, also it is @x4 in the other sockets.


----------



## scaramonga

djc5166 said:


> Thanks for the reply, curious to see the result.
> 
> I have a 970evo in another machine, I can try it in this one.
> 
> The motherboard actually lists it as 3.0 x4 @ 3.0 x2, so I highly doubt its the drive itself, also it is @x4 in the other sockets.



3rd drive fitted, and all fine @ x4


----------



## iunlock

KedarWolf said:


> My 9900k See the Graphic results.
> 
> Edit: The first 3950x score was a bit high. New one below is with the exact same graphics settings on both runs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 3950x.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really see no reason to not go AMD now, even for gaming.


Hey there @KedarWolf, the first screen shot shows an 8700K, not 9900K.  Out of curiosity what's the highest overall score you've been able to achieve with the 3950x? (Fire Strike, Time Spy etc...) I'd be curious to compare it with my data. Ironically I've been doing a lot of game testing on the Master the past few days to gather data on the realistic fps gains from CPU, RAM and GPU OC'ing ... pretty interesting stuff... I've already compared the data (9900KS/KF/K) to my 3970x and it's no match... the 3970x even has a game mode that disables 16 cores and even with the max oc that it can do for 'game stable,' (which isn't much) it still can't hang with the KS/KF/K. 

Where fps matters:
For most people the gains from overclocking won't make much of a difference, but for those who are maxing out their settings with 4K or 1440p and hovering around ~60fps (for 4K that is) the gain in fps does matter in those cases if let's say one is using g-sync and wanting to stay above 60fps. I've been testing some titles with maxed out settings that really makes the 2080Ti sweat, granted some of the 'in game' settings like MSAA etc.. are useless and just fps robbing*, however, there are people who are in situations where every bit of fps counts to keep them above the 'hard deck' of not dropping below 60fps (lows). In situations like this, getting the most out of all of the hardware combined does matter, especially for titles that are cpu intensive. This is where intel shines with its ability to scale better than amd with faster ram, ram timings, lower latencies etc... 

Aside to just CPU frequency, there are other factors at play of course. Going with amd will suit most gamers as they'll never notice a difference playing on a stock system, but for enthusiasts wanting the absolute best single core performance, intel still has an edge when it comes to gaming without the latency issues that amd suffers from. If my 3970x could game to my expectations like the 9900KS/KF/K's can, I would be using the 32-core beast for gaming as well, but it can't. The latency across its architecture on the amd is a nightmare and for those with an eye for it can notice it easily like one can notice a 60Hz monitor from a 144Hz. 

IMO there are many reasons to not go amd still, especially for gaming as I've stated above. It's no secret that amd is the best bang for the buck, but it also lacks where it lacks. Aside to the latency issues with amd, the 7nm process is still very young and for some hard core overclockers, including myself, the lack of integrity of the process shows in scenarios where the original OC voltages don't stick anymore after benching sessions. Also, on the front end with 7nm it seems new and shiny, yet amd still can't scale to the 5.0GHz mark, while suffering to remain in the low 40x territory. Having more cores does help in certain situations despite the lower frequencies, but when looking at the ratio of the minimal improvements with double the cores, for a primary gamer the multi core improvements for non gaming tasks don't justify the jump, especially when games won't benefit from the extra cores. 

One thing to be aware of are the clueless YT reviewers who pair the 9900K's with a 3200 ram kit lol... *face palm* Or the ones that run the cpu's stock. I don't know what is more cringing; the clueless reviewers or those who buy an unlocked cpu to only keep it stock? To each his own, fair enough but dang... IMO it's important to compare things at their full potential rather than gimping something (intel) to make the other look better (amd). Fair is fair and IMO it's silly for one to buy an unlocked CPU and not use any of its potential, when they could just save money and buy a 3900x or something if they're keeping it stock. Anyhow...

It all boils down to the users realistic usage habits. If someone actually needs all the cores they can get for the work that they do, then amd hands down. However, do keep in mind that popular software's like Adobe have its limits with how many cores it can actually utilize. 

The current amd mobile chipsets are looking pretty promising, but it still lacks from not being able to overclock/scale like Intels HK unlocked chips. I'm hoping that amd's next gen cpu's will scale better and to break that 5.0GHz barrier, because for the majority of the consumers it really is a psychological mile stone, something that amd should have been able to do already, but has still failed to do so. Once amd addresses the latency issues and up their core clocks, at that point is when Intel will become obsolete, if amd continues to offer more for the money. Until then they both have their strengths where they have it, but for gaming, Intel still is King for gaming with a much more mature process despite the amount of +'s . 

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## djc5166

scaramonga said:


> 3rd drive fitted, and all fine @ x4


Thank you, I have a 2nd board that I tested a 970evo in and it is x4 in all the slots. I still have to test my 960pro in it, but I highly doubt it's the drive itself.


----------



## lpittman

Hey everyone! First time posting here, and first time overclocking. Just saying hello and hoping for a little help and guidance through my project.

Aorus Master (F11c)
i9-9900k
4x8gb Team DDR4 4133 - TXKD416G4133HC18FDC01
Corsair AOI CPU Cooler
Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB
EVGA 750GS

CPU @ 5.1 / 4.8
Vcore 1.33
LLC Turbo
VCCIO 1.22
CPUSAV 1.22

Mem @ 4133
DRAMV 1.420
Timing 18-18-18-38-95 (stock)

CPU certainly seems stable so far although I haven't fully stress test or burned it in yet.

Memory is getting a few errors after 15 or so minutes running memtest86 (from USB).

I was thinking of just getting the memory running correctly at stock speeds before really pushing hard on the CPU, however it seems I'm struggling to make that happen already. Am I hitting a cache issue trying to run at 5.1/4.8?

I see a lot of comments throughout here about modded bios - but there doesn't seem to be a "go-to" - what is the point of the modded bioses? I have read many of the posts, but don't understand some of the terminology so it's hard to get my head around it. If I was going to start with one - what would be recommended?

The main question I have is - does it make more sense to work on memory frequency, or timing? 

And finally - are there any general tips or thoughts that I should be considering while I'm getting started?

Cheers guys!

Luke


----------



## philhalo66

On my Z390 AORUS Pro the default settings is pushing nearly 1.5V into the CPU even with MCE turned off. i set everything to default and in prime95 the VCORE is pushing 1.48V that cannot be normal. manually setting 1.235V results in 1.178V in prime95 and P95 says hardware failure. Is there something wrong with my board or is gigabyte just pushing a ton of voltage for no reason? And what kind of voltage should the CPU be at? I tried to search and every single thread gave a wildly different answer, some 1.1v, other 1.4V im not overclocking so i just want to know what the actual stock intel voltage is. I never had this much trouble with anything before so im not sure whats up.


----------



## akelu

I am running Z390 Aorus Master Bios F11c.

Few questions
1) Where can I find core current limit in bios (I remember used to set this to 255 amps) - also is this necessary?

2) Where can I find TJMAX in bios? Also, what is the default TJMAX for 9900k on this motherboard?

3) Should I just completely rely on VR VOUT IR35201? And just ignore whatever it says in bios when i set vcore? because what VR VOUT shows is the final result, that's all that matter? 

4) Where is ring to core offset and do I still need to disable it as per gigabyte overclocking guide?

Thanks!


----------



## Deathtech00

*Sweet!*



Driller au said:


> Check out my post on page 647 post 6463, i had gskill hynix CJR 3200mhz at 3600mhz in the end i had the DDRV at 1.41V the command rate is at 1 and that is on the modded F11b bios if i was using the later bios i had to have the CR at 2


Awesome. This dialed right in for me with no issues. interesting. If it makes any difference I am using an F10b version of the UEFI, and I was able to use just a hair less voltage @ 1.38, with the same SA/IO settings you had.


----------



## Gen.

Here are some screenshots


----------



## kgtuning

Count me in.


----------



## lpittman

Little piece of info for people looking at the Fractal Meshify C & an Aorus Master - I had to remove the backplate from the board to properly mount it in this case. The backplate stands out farther than the case standoffs and if you were to tighten it down it would put a roughly 4mm bend in the board from top to bottom.


----------



## GeneO

lpittman said:


> Little piece of info for people looking at the Fractal Meshify C & an Aorus Master - I had to remove the backplate from the board to properly mount it in this case. The backplate stands out farther than the case standoffs and if you were to tighten it down it would put a roughly 4mm bend in the board from top to bottom.


Are you going to get longer stand-offs?

https://www.moddiy.com/search.php?search_query=stand+off

https://www.performance-pcs.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=motherboard+stand+off


----------



## Gen.

lpittman said:


> Little piece of info for people looking at the Fractal Meshify C & an Aorus Master - I had to remove the backplate from the board to properly mount it in this case. The backplate stands out farther than the case standoffs and if you were to tighten it down it would put a roughly 4mm bend in the board from top to bottom.


Interesting. I have H500P Mesh White and no such problems were observed


----------



## lpittman

GeneO said:


> Are you going to get longer stand-offs?
> 
> https://www.moddiy.com/search.php?search_query=stand+off
> 
> https://www.performance-pcs.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=motherboard+stand+off


I am considering it - however it would have to lift it up 2mm or more to fit and therefor the back panel will be misaligned and the video card will be sitting up and when tightened down could be a problem.


----------



## lpittman

Here is where I've been able to get so far. Any tips on going further?

DRAM: 1.40v
VCCIO: 1.15v
VCCSA: 1.20v


----------



## lpittman

Quick adjustment and got above the 60mb/s mark! Woohoo.

Increase freq to 4100MHz.
Increased DRAM to 1.42
VCCIO to 1.20v

and tRDRD_dr to 6 from 7.


----------



## Driller au

Deathtech00 said:


> Awesome. This dialed right in for me with no issues. interesting. If it makes any difference I am using an F10b version of the UEFI, and I was able to use just a hair less voltage @ 1.38, with the same SA/IO settings you had.


Nice glad to worked for you,i think i started out at 1.390V to, in later bios it would throw a memory related BSOD after a long gaming session so i went to 1.410V even though it would pass a long memtest session. Also a little more detail on the CR setting if you upgrade your bios using CR2 started with the bios with the new style UI


----------



## lpittman

Sitting here doing some more testing, tuning etc and discovered something interesting. For the hell of it, I reset bios back to "optimized" defaults and took note of where everything is setup initially. Everything as expected. I then enabled the XMP Profile 1 for my memory and checked it out as well and found that the DDR Volt is 1.40 (as expected) but *VCCSA is 1.368v and VCCIO is 1.364*. During my overclocking I was keeping these at around 1.20v but then upon further stress testing it threw errors around the 600% mark in Karhu... I wonder if that was my issue?

Everything I've read through here says to try and keep at 1.3v or under for those settings so this was a surprise.

What are peoples thoughts on this? Should I push that high when I go through my ram overclocking again?


----------



## Gen.

Hello to all!
Tell me, which BIOS is the most stable for you? I turn to the pros of this business. I tried F8, F9, F9 Mod, F10, F10b, F11c, F11e, T1d, T0d


----------



## metalspider

lpittman said:


> Sitting here doing some more testing, tuning etc and discovered something interesting. For the hell of it, I reset bios back to "optimized" defaults and took note of where everything is setup initially. Everything as expected. I then enabled the XMP Profile 1 for my memory and checked it out as well and found that the DDR Volt is 1.40 (as expected) but *VCCSA is 1.368v and VCCIO is 1.364*. During my overclocking I was keeping these at around 1.20v but then upon further stress testing it threw errors around the 600% mark in Karhu... I wonder if that was my issue?
> 
> Everything I've read through here says to try and keep at 1.3v or under for those settings so this was a surprise.
> 
> What are peoples thoughts on this? Should I push that high when I go through my ram overclocking again?


that's normal but bad practice by ram manufacturers.running the vccsa and vccio that high can help stabilize a ram OC but will also degrade the IMC a lot faster and then the ram OC will become unstable over time since the cpu can no longer sustain it.stick to the manual safe voltages.


----------



## Nizzen

metalspider said:


> lpittman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sitting here doing some more testing, tuning etc and discovered something interesting. For the hell of it, I reset bios back to "optimized" defaults and took note of where everything is setup initially. Everything as expected. I then enabled the XMP Profile 1 for my memory and checked it out as well and found that the DDR Volt is 1.40 (as expected) but *VCCSA is 1.368v and VCCIO is 1.364*. During my overclocking I was keeping these at around 1.20v but then upon further stress testing it threw errors around the 600% mark in Karhu... I wonder if that was my issue?
> 
> Everything I've read through here says to try and keep at 1.3v or under for those settings so this was a surprise.
> 
> What are peoples thoughts on this? Should I push that high when I go through my ram overclocking again?
> 
> 
> 
> that's normal but bad practice by ram manufacturers.running the vccsa and vccio that high can help stabilize a ram OC but will also degrade the IMC a lot faster and then the ram OC will become unstable over time since the cpu can no longer sustain it.stick to the manual safe voltages.
Click to expand...

The "safe" voltages is just wild guessing
Noone has done any "degrading" testing on this plattform yet.

I like to run "24/7" setting for 9900k under 1.3v both vccsa/vccio. I don't know why 😛
I'm not going to keep this cpu for a long time anyway, so maybe I'll just run 4600mhz c16 memory with 1.45v+ vccsa/vccio all the time...


----------



## Gen.

Also, I do not recommend going above 3900 on the master. 
At 4000 and above there will be terrible training. Your IO-L+IO-L Offset MANDATORY must be <=28. (7+21 or 6+21).
Even at 3900 15-15 you will be faster than at 4133 15-15. 

I could not achieve stability at 4200.

If I can find X Formula or XI Formula I will go to it. She can 4266 and even saw 4300-4400 (screen).

I’m thinking about switching to IX Apex CoffeeMode from 4500 17-17 2x8 or dual rank (2x16) 4000 15-15.


I think you were pleased to deal with me. All the best. If anything, I will still appear here.


----------



## Gen.

Hey. I tried 4266 16-16. Now I'm trying 4300 16-16


----------



## LordGurciullo

Wish I had just got a dark. All my ps/2 keyboards (and I have a ton) are now unusable because I have to use a ps/2 adapter to usb which seems to add noticeable lag to gaming...

any solutions?


----------



## spin5000

Hi everyone. I'm going to get back into CPU and RAM overclocking with my 9700K, G.Skill Samsung b-die 3600 CL16, and Z390 Gigabyte Aorus Pro. I'm currently on bios F12b. I see F12b isn't listed anymore on the Gigabyte site but F12d is. Should I upgrade to F12d? Going by these forums, I see so many bugs or options being fixed as well as bugs or options being introduced from bios version to bios version with Gigabyte boards and therefore, since moving to a Gigabyte board, I never know if I should update my bios or not...

Should I update from F12b to F12d with the Gigabyte Aorus Pro before starting the overclocking process?


Also, with all the recent vulnerability exploits that have emerged since December 2019 (it's now April 2020), how come Gigabyte's entire line of Z390 boards still has no bios newer than December 2019?


EDIT:
I've adjusted RAM timings to conservative timings that I know are 100% stable but I'm getting weird behaviour. AS Rock tool is reporting all my timings as the default. Aida64 DRAM Timings does report the correct timings but all my RAM benchmarks are pretty much identical to the default RAM timings benchmarks. When I go back to the BIOS, the modified RAM timings are indeed there. I tried disabling/enabling XMP (while keeping the modified RAM timings) but nothing changes. I rebooted my PC probably 5 times or so through all this as I heard there used to be a bug where you had to reboot twice for the new RAM timings to stick but it doesn't seem to be working.

Help?????..............


----------



## MrTheSuperMario

Hi, I installed the T1d modded bios and I get this error about Intel Management Engine. 
Currently, this hardware device is not connected to the computer. (Code 45)

To fix this problem, reconnect this hardware device to the computer.


----------



## Falkentyne

MrTheSuperMario said:


> Hi, I installed the T1d modded bios and I get this error about Intel Management Engine.
> Currently, this hardware device is not connected to the computer. (Code 45)
> 
> To fix this problem, reconnect this hardware device to the computer.


Was this Kedarwolf's dump? Or someone else's?

Try T0D (you can use Qflash).
If you don't like the results with T0D, use f11e from the tweaktown beta bios page.


----------



## metalspider

spin5000 said:


> Hi everyone. I'm going to get back into CPU and RAM overclocking with my 9700K, G.Skill Samsung b-die 3600 CL16, and Z390 Gigabyte Aorus Pro. I'm currently on bios F12b. I see F12b isn't listed anymore on the Gigabyte site but F12d is. Should I upgrade to F12d? Going by these forums, I see so many bugs or options being fixed as well as bugs or options being introduced from bios version to bios version with Gigabyte boards and therefore, since moving to a Gigabyte board, I never know if I should update my bios or not...
> 
> Should I update from F12b to F12d with the Gigabyte Aorus Pro before starting the overclocking process?
> 
> 
> Also, with all the recent vulnerability exploits that have emerged since December 2019 (it's now April 2020), how come Gigabyte's entire line of Z390 boards still has no bios newer than December 2019?
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> I've adjusted RAM timings to conservative timings that I know are 100% stable but I'm getting weird behaviour. AS Rock tool is reporting all my timings as the default. Aida64 DRAM Timings does report the correct timings but all my RAM benchmarks are pretty much identical to the default RAM timings benchmarks. When I go back to the BIOS, the modified RAM timings are indeed there. I tried disabling/enabling XMP (while keeping the modified RAM timings) but nothing changes. I rebooted my PC probably 5 times or so through all this as I heard there used to be a bug where you had to reboot twice for the new RAM timings to stick but it doesn't seem to be working.
> 
> Help?????..............



im using f12e from the gigabyte beta bios thread and seems ok with my regular ram oc.had some strange stability issues at idle with f11 so i decided to try the latest beta after a few random crashes at idle overnight.
they even listed fixing a cpu vcore issue...


----------



## MrTheSuperMario

It was Kedar's Wolf Dump. T0d still inhibits the same issue. I will try the F11e beta bios and see if the issue goes away. For some reason they cause issues with windows detecting the Intel Management Engine Interference. When I try updating the me interface to the latest driver to see if I can fix the issue of it not detecting, it tells me the platform is not supported.


----------



## MrTheSuperMario

F11e fixed the issue


----------



## shaolin95

Hey guys, weird issue here.
I got an Acer 240Hz monitor and now when booting up, I always get a 5 beep code and no BIOS displays on any of my monitors. I wont have any image until the Windows login.
If I unplug the Acer then it boots up normally. I tried unplugging my other 2 monitors just in case but still the same.
Anyone seen that before? Maybe I should try Bios F11 or whatever is recommneded these days. 
I am currently running F10b

Thanks!


----------



## MrTheSuperMario

*MrTheSuperMario*

I never have these issues running f11c, or even the newest f11e. You should try either one of those bios files.


----------



## Gen.

I use T1d Kedarwolf and have no problems with it (https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-832.html#post28368944) and try 3900CL14.


----------



## AndrejB

Gen. said:


> I use T1d Kedarwolf and have no problems with it (https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-832.html#post28368944) and try 3900CL14.


Hey Gen, do you mind sharing your bios settings (screenshots). I'm interested to see how you got so low rtls.


----------



## warbucks

AndrejB said:


> Hey Gen, do you mind sharing your bios settings (screenshots). I'm interested to see how you got so low rtls.


His RTLs are low because he's staying below 4000Mhz for memory frequency.


----------



## AndrejB

warbucks said:


> His RTLs are low because he's staying below 4000Mhz for memory frequency.


I know, trying the same frequency gets me 59, 61 on auto after retraining multiple times.

When I enter a value it does something stupid like 68,62.

I am going for 3900 16-16-16-35 @ 1.4v on sticks that are xmp 4000 17-17-17-37 @ 1.35v


----------



## shaolin95

shaolin95 said:


> Hey guys, weird issue here.
> I got an Acer 240Hz monitor and now when booting up, I always get a 5 beep code and no BIOS displays on any of my monitors. I wont have any image until the Windows login.
> If I unplug the Acer then it boots up normally. I tried unplugging my other 2 monitors just in case but still the same.
> Anyone seen that before? Maybe I should try Bios F11 or whatever is recommneded these days.
> I am currently running F10b
> 
> Thanks!


Turns out it was just the long cable not able to deal with 240Hz correctly. I may still try F11e if that is much better than 10b that I currently have. Opinions?
Thanks


----------



## lpittman

What would cause OCCT 5.5 Large/AVX2 to simply freeze the PC and not throw errors?

vcore too low?


----------



## KedarWolf

lpittman said:


> What would cause OCCT 5.5 Large/AVX2 to simply freeze the PC and not throw errors?
> 
> vcore too low?


It's usually cache instability that freezes a PC. You can check it with AIDA 64 cache only stress test.

And yes, lower cache ratio or more vcore voltage the fix.


----------



## lpittman

KedarWolf said:


> It's usually cache instability that freezes a PC. You can check it with AIDA 64 cache only stress test.
> 
> And yes, lower cache ratio or more vcore voltage the fix.


Great - thanks for the info!


----------



## MrTheSuperMario

There is no issues with overclocking, but it was causing the intel management engine driver to not work. This got fixed with f11e. Maybe my hardware just did not support the firmware update from the wonderful bios of T1d and T0d he posted.


----------



## Dannyele

Karhu keeps me failing with almost 2 hours (+7000%)... and I'm experiencieng some game crashes like COD:Warzone or Sea of Thieves...


maybe should I try to tweak more the RAM?


----------



## lpittman

During my last (and first) attempt at a memory o/c I went too quickly and although it was 'fast' it certainly wasn't stable.

So I started over and now the CPU is 90m OCCT Large/AVX2 & 4h WarZone stable and the memory is 9h Karhu stable on top of that, so I'm considering it to be stable enough for my use currently.

Wouldn't mind some input from some of you experienced guys at this point. Is there anything obviously wrong I need to fix? Any tips or suggestions are welcome.

Otherwise I'm just going to keep plugging away a little bit at a time.

Cheers! And hope everyone is healthy and happy!


----------



## lpittman

Dannyele said:


> Karhu keeps me failing with almost 2 hours (+7000%)... and I'm experiencieng some game crashes like COD:Warzone or Sea of Thieves...
> maybe should I try to tweak more the RAM?


I am by no means an expert, there are many other people here with more experience to help you. But, I figured I would share with you what I've been learning over the last few days as I was in the same boat as you.

I have a feeling it will be very difficult to figure out what aspect of your overclock is causing you your issues.

What I had to do was roll back my settings and work through one thing at a time until it was stable. So I reset memory timings all back to auto, dropped the frequency and loosened the primary timings. Then from there I made sure the system as whole was stable. I ran OCCT Large/AVX2 for 90 minutes, followed my Karhu. Karhu made 18000% at that point. So now I knew my CPU was stable and my memory didn't have any flaws.

At that point I focused only on memory frequency. I set vdimm to 1.40 and SA/IO to 1.2 each and proceeded to bump up frequency until it showed issues booting and then actually chose to increase vdimm & SA/IO up to 1.45/1.25/1.25 and my frequency became stable. Then I ran OCCT Large/AVX2 and it crashed. Found I had to bump my vcore up a tad, so I did and re-ran. Then I could get through 90m OCCT Large/AVX2 and 18000% Karhu again.

Then after that I worked on primaries only. Dropping them, tediously, 1 each and doing the full suite of tests each time. Now my system has a safe, but stable o/c on it and I'm working on tightening it up further.

By doing it methodically you can very quickly and easily tell what is causing you issues. If you're just throwing in a "setup" that someone else has posted (not sure if that's what you're doing or not) and attempting to run it, you'll never know what the problem is.

Anyhow - just my two cents. It's possible there is somewhere here who may easily just point out what your issue is though, and then I'll feel like an idiot. lol.

Cheers!


----------



## Canson

Hello guys,

Does anybody have coil whine from Z390 Aorus Master while gaming and also while alt+tab from the game?

I have seen youtube videos and forums posts that talks about disabling C1 in bios to get rid of the coil whine. Well it did solve it for me but thats only for idle.

I thought first that maybe it was my Strix 2080 Ti that coil whined , so i did change it already 2 times and still have coil whine on my third gpu.
Today i tried my GTX 780 Ti from my old pc and the same coil happened on this also. In game and when i al+tab from the game.
My psu is Seasonic 1000W Prime Ultra Titanium (dont really think there is any coil whine from it).


The high pitched sound does really come from VRM part from what i can hear, and since i have the coil whine even when i alt+tab from the game i suspect it really is the moderboard that coil whines badly.



Does anybody have the same problem as me?

Is there any voltage settings for VRM in bios that i could try? Just to see if it helps somehow.


----------



## lpittman

Canson said:


> Hello guys,
> 
> Does anybody have coil whine from Z390 Aorus Master while gaming and also while alt+tab from the game?
> 
> I have seen youtube videos and forums posts that talks about disabling C1 in bios to get rid of the coil whine. Well it did solve it for me but thats only for idle.
> 
> I thought first that maybe it was my Strix 2080 Ti that coil whined , so i did change it already 2 times and still have coil whine on my third gpu.
> Today i tried my GTX 780 Ti from my old pc and the same coil happened on this also. In game and when i al+tab from the game.
> My psu is Seasonic 1000W Prime Ultra Titanium (dont really think there is any coil whine from it).
> 
> 
> The high pitched sound does really come from VRM part from what i can hear, and since i have the coil whine even when i alt+tab from the game i suspect it really is the moderboard that coil whines badly.
> 
> 
> 
> Does anybody have the same problem as me?
> 
> Is there any voltage settings for VRM in bios that i could try? Just to see if it helps somehow.



I have the same issue - awful isn't it? I tried a replacement board as well and the new one I got was actually worse.

Only thing that gets rid of it (for me) is to disable all c-states.


----------



## Canson

lpittman said:


> I have the same issue - awful isn't it? I tried a replacement board as well and the new one I got was actually worse.
> 
> Only thing that gets rid of it (for me) is to disable all c-states.


When you disable all C-states does it fix the coil whine even in game? or when alt+tabed from the game?


For me when i disable all the c-states , it only fixed the coil whine in idle.


----------



## lpittman

Canson said:


> When you disable all C-states does it fix the coil whine even in game? or when alt+tabed from the game?
> 
> For me when i disable all the c-states , it only fixed the coil whine in idle.


Yes, it got rid of it completely.


----------



## Wam7

iunlock said:


> Hey there @KedarWolf, the first screen shot shows an 8700K, not 9900K.  Out of curiosity what's the highest overall score you've been able to achieve with the 3950x? (Fire Strike, Time Spy etc...) I'd be curious to compare it with my data. Ironically I've been doing a lot of game testing on the Master the past few days to gather data on the realistic fps gains from CPU, RAM and GPU OC'ing ... pretty interesting stuff... I've already compared the data (9900KS/KF/K) to my 3970x and it's no match... the 3970x even has a game mode that disables 16 cores and even with the max oc that it can do for 'game stable,' (which isn't much) it still can't hang with the KS/KF/K.
> 
> Where fps matters:
> For most people the gains from overclocking won't make much of a difference, but for those who are maxing out their settings with 4K or 1440p and hovering around ~60fps (for 4K that is) the gain in fps does matter in those cases if let's say one is using g-sync and wanting to stay above 60fps. I've been testing some titles with maxed out settings that really makes the 2080Ti sweat, granted some of the 'in game' settings like MSAA etc.. are useless and just fps robbing*, however, there are people who are in situations where every bit of fps counts to keep them above the 'hard deck' of not dropping below 60fps (lows). In situations like this, getting the most out of all of the hardware combined does matter, especially for titles that are cpu intensive. This is where intel shines with its ability to scale better than amd with faster ram, ram timings, lower latencies etc...
> 
> Aside to just CPU frequency, there are other factors at play of course. Going with amd will suit most gamers as they'll never notice a difference playing on a stock system, but for enthusiasts wanting the absolute best single core performance, intel still has an edge when it comes to gaming without the latency issues that amd suffers from. If my 3970x could game to my expectations like the 9900KS/KF/K's can, I would be using the 32-core beast for gaming as well, but it can't. The latency across its architecture on the amd is a nightmare and for those with an eye for it can notice it easily like one can notice a 60Hz monitor from a 144Hz.
> 
> IMO there are many reasons to not go amd still, especially for gaming as I've stated above. It's no secret that amd is the best bang for the buck, but it also lacks where it lacks. Aside to the latency issues with amd, the 7nm process is still very young and for some hard core overclockers, including myself, the lack of integrity of the process shows in scenarios where the original OC voltages don't stick anymore after benching sessions. Also, on the front end with 7nm it seems new and shiny, yet amd still can't scale to the 5.0GHz mark, while suffering to remain in the low 40x territory. Having more cores does help in certain situations despite the lower frequencies, but when looking at the ratio of the minimal improvements with double the cores, for a primary gamer the multi core improvements for non gaming tasks don't justify the jump, especially when games won't benefit from the extra cores.
> 
> One thing to be aware of are the clueless YT reviewers who pair the 9900K's with a 3200 ram kit lol... *face palm* Or the ones that run the cpu's stock. I don't know what is more cringing; the clueless reviewers or those who buy an unlocked cpu to only keep it stock? To each his own, fair enough but dang... IMO it's important to compare things at their full potential rather than gimping something (intel) to make the other look better (amd). Fair is fair and IMO it's silly for one to buy an unlocked CPU and not use any of its potential, when they could just save money and buy a 3900x or something if they're keeping it stock. Anyhow...
> 
> It all boils down to the users realistic usage habits. If someone actually needs all the cores they can get for the work that they do, then amd hands down. However, do keep in mind that popular software's like Adobe have its limits with how many cores it can actually utilize.
> 
> The current amd mobile chipsets are looking pretty promising, but it still lacks from not being able to overclock/scale like Intels HK unlocked chips. I'm hoping that amd's next gen cpu's will scale better and to break that 5.0GHz barrier, because for the majority of the consumers it really is a psychological mile stone, something that amd should have been able to do already, but has still failed to do so. Once amd addresses the latency issues and up their core clocks, at that point is when Intel will become obsolete, if amd continues to offer more for the money. Until then they both have their strengths where they have it, but for gaming, Intel still is King for gaming with a much more mature process despite the amount of +'s .
> 
> Just my 2 cents.


These are also my finding with my 3900x vs the 9700k at 5.3Ghz. When only around 8 cores are being utilised then the 9700K is still comfortably ahead in all aspects.


----------



## shaolin95

iunlock said:


> One thing to be aware of are the clueless YT reviewers who pair the 9900K's with a 3200 ram kit lol... *face palm*


Are you for real now? There is NOTHING wrong running 3200 (well CAS14 at least) sticks with the 9900k...


----------



## iunlock

shaolin95 said:


> Are you for real now? There is NOTHING wrong running 3200 (well CAS14 at least) sticks with the 9900k...


What's more surprising is that you're completely missing the point rofl. I'll let you try to figure it out.


----------



## shaolin95

iunlock said:


> What's more surprising is that you're completely missing the point rofl. I'll let you try to figure it out.


Oh I figured it already and I know your kind. Welcome to my ignored list


----------



## Nizzen

shaolin95 said:


> iunlock said:
> 
> 
> 
> One thing to be aware of are the clueless YT reviewers who pair the 9900K's with a 3200 ram kit lol... *face palm*
> 
> 
> 
> Are you for real now? There is NOTHING wrong running 3200 (well CAS14 at least) sticks with the 9900k...
Click to expand...

Why nerf the cpu with low memoryspeed?


----------



## satinghostrider

Nizzen said:


> shaolin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iunlock said:
> 
> 
> 
> One thing to be aware of are the clueless YT reviewers who pair the 9900K's with a 3200 ram kit lol... *face palm*
> 
> 
> 
> Are you for real now? There is NOTHING wrong running 3200 (well CAS14 at least) sticks with the 9900k...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why nerf the cpu with low memoryspeed?
Click to expand...

I'm clueless to why people run 3200Mhz memory with the 9900k or even the 9700k for that matter. I found the biggest gains in benchmarks followed by a tremendous improvement in my 0.1% lows in games simply by going past 4000Mhz with tight timings. This gains are not placebo but I check my frame rates and frame times in games. 

Simply put, Intel processors with its monolithic die design loves high frequencies. And even better if you can tighten the timings. This is not a matter of opinion but a matter of fact. Just because reviews or people say going higher has no benefit doesn't mean it does not have a difference. Anyone who has played with memory timings will tell you how much of a difference it makes. Choosing not to belief that is another thing altogether.


----------



## Falkentyne

satinghostrider said:


> I'm clueless to why people run 3200Mhz memory with the 9900k or even the 9700k for that matter. I found the biggest gains in benchmarks followed by a tremendous improvement in my 0.1% lows in games simply by going past 4000Mhz with tight timings. This gains are not placebo but I check my frame rates and frame times in games.
> 
> Simply put, Intel processors with its monolithic die design loves high frequencies. And even better if you can tighten the timings. This is not a matter of opinion but a matter of fact. Just because reviews or people say going higher has no benefit doesn't mean it does not have a difference. Anyone who has played with memory timings will tell you how much of a difference it makes. Choosing not to belief that is another thing altogether.


Because higher speed memory is very expensive. And higher speed dual rank sticks is even *more* expensive. And there's nothing wrong with buying 3200 CL14 sticks. Dual rank 2x16 GB sticks should be able to do 3600 CL15 in most systems but may require 1.45v+ and some IO.

Why all the hate for people who aren't running $500 sticks and RTX 2080 Super's ? I have 3200 CL14 and a Vega64. I'm not complaining. I'm just glad I'm alive, especially since I have the virus for awhile. What's really important here?


----------



## Nizzen

satinghostrider said:


> I'm clueless to why people run 3200Mhz memory with the 9900k or even the 9700k for that matter. I found the biggest gains in benchmarks followed by a tremendous improvement in my 0.1% lows in games simply by going past 4000Mhz with tight timings. This gains are not placebo but I check my frame rates and frame times in games.
> 
> Simply put, Intel processors with its monolithic die design loves high frequencies. And even better if you can tighten the timings. This is not a matter of opinion but a matter of fact. Just because reviews or people say going higher has no benefit doesn't mean it does not have a difference. Anyone who has played with memory timings will tell you how much of a difference it makes. Choosing not to belief that is another thing altogether.


True story 
I have 9900k with Asus Apex and 3900x with Asrock x570 Taichi. Memory mathers on both plattforms.

9900k is unbeatable in cpubound games. The biggest different I saw in a game was Battlefield V multiplayer. Pushing 230fps in 1080p with 9900k+ 2080ti and barly 170fps with "max oc" 3900x 2080ti and 3800c14 tweaked memory

Memorylatency was 37ns VS 63ns.


----------



## satinghostrider

Falkentyne said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm clueless to why people run 3200Mhz memory with the 9900k or even the 9700k for that matter. I found the biggest gains in benchmarks followed by a tremendous improvement in my 0.1% lows in games simply by going past 4000Mhz with tight timings. This gains are not placebo but I check my frame rates and frame times in games.
> 
> Simply put, Intel processors with its monolithic die design loves high frequencies. And even better if you can tighten the timings. This is not a matter of opinion but a matter of fact. Just because reviews or people say going higher has no benefit doesn't mean it does not have a difference. Anyone who has played with memory timings will tell you how much of a difference it makes. Choosing not to belief that is another thing altogether.
> 
> 
> 
> Because higher speed memory is very expensive. And higher speed dual rank sticks is even *more* expensive. And there's nothing wrong with buying 3200 CL14 sticks. Dual rank 2x16 GB sticks should be able to do 3600 CL15 in most systems but may require 1.45v+ and some IO.
> 
> Why all the hate for people who aren't running $500 sticks and RTX 2080 Super's ? I have 3200 CL14 and a Vega64. I'm not complaining. I'm just glad I'm alive, especially since I have the virus for awhile. What's really important here?
Click to expand...

There is no hate I just don't understand why some people act like they are on ******* periods when truth is told. Neither do we look down on those with lesser hardware. I guess the quarantine is really wearing some people down big time.


----------



## Nizzen

Falkentyne said:


> Because higher speed memory is very expensive. And higher speed dual rank sticks is even *more* expensive. And there's nothing wrong with buying 3200 CL14 sticks. Dual rank 2x16 GB sticks should be able to do 3600 CL15 in most systems but may require 1.45v+ and some IO.
> 
> Why all the hate for people who aren't running $500 sticks and RTX 2080 Super's ? I have 3200 CL14 and a Vega64. I'm not complaining. I'm just glad I'm alive, especially since I have the virus for awhile. What's really important here?


3200c14 is very overclockable! 3200c14 does easy 4000mhz. Many does 4400c17 with the right MB 

Why run Amd Ryzen 3900x @2133mhz if you can run it at 3600mhz with the same sticks? Yes it's stupid 

This is OCN, not stock-clock.net or nerfCPU.net


----------



## Falkentyne

Nizzen said:


> 3200c14 is very overclockable! 3200c14 does easy 4000mhz. Many does 4400c17 with the right MB
> 
> Why run Amd Ryzen 3900x @2133mhz if you can run it at 3600mhz with the same sticks? Yes it's stupid
> 
> This is OCN, not stock-clock.net or nerfCPU.net


Whats the point of that insult?
Are people running at "stock clocks" forbidden from coming here?
Fine. Ban me then.


----------



## Intrud3r

Please don't touch @Falkentyne

And get better F. Stay healthy.


----------



## AndrejB

Intrud3r said:


> Please don't touch @Falkentyne
> 
> And get better F. Stay healthy.


+1


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
3200c14 2x16gb is closer to 250.us not bad 
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232378

Don't want to use 1.45v get 3600c16 and shouldn't need more than 1.4v for 4k mhz at about the same price


----------



## encrypted11

I paid about $130 for these SK Hynix CJR dual ranked sticks from Klevv Essencore (16GB x2) at 3200MHz XMP there was a tremendous amount of headroom at the same 1.35V XMP voltage.


----------



## AndrejB

Well if we are all sharing, I'm cheep and cautious 
Finally got close to 500 gflops


----------



## Intrud3r

mkay ... my hynix chips.

Funny thing tho ... running 3dmark firestrike with the settings shown in the screenshot nets in about 266XX points ... 

Running signature settings atm ([email protected]) which gives me about 274XX points ... 

Still finetuning.

Middle screenshot is fastest I could get looking at latency.

Lowest screenshot is the highest I could run my sticks.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## GeneO

reachthesky said:


> Hmmmmmm.
> 
> 
> 
> So after going back and forth for months, I think I have a final opinion on this motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it is decent. For 270 dollars, it is decent. It's not the best, it's far from being the worse. I think it has a good usage case and target market. Based on price/performance compared to other boards with 4 dimms, I think it is one of the better buys. I think its a good option for someone who does more than just game and for someone who is getting into overclocking for the first time. For the ultra enthusiast, it's not the best choice by any means but you'll still have some fun tinkering.
> 
> 
> 
> As for the software issues, the good thing is that none of the software is required for the board to perform well. So if you can forgo that stuff, it will keep things easier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the ramspeed promise is somewhat disappointing, when you look at price and why someone would want/need a board like this, It isn't the biggest game changer. 4133 is still pretty good on 4 dimms.
> 
> So yeah, for any gamer + content creator, this is a pretty decent option. My mind has been changed. THank you for all your help over the past few months.


OK, I'll give this a bit of time for the happy pills to wear off. LOL


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## memery.uag

*New BIOS for the Z390 Pro Wifi*

Hey all it's been a while, I dropped in to check if there is anyone here on the Wifi Pro Aorus that has tried any of the newer updates from the Gigabyte site, I'm on the f10 now but I think it's time for an update. Any advice?


----------



## lpittman

encrypted11 said:


> I paid about $130 for these SK Hynix CJR dual ranked sticks from Klevv Essencore (16GB x2) at 3200MHz XMP there was a tremendous amount of headroom at the same 1.35V XMP voltage.


Hey man - is there a premade mint/stressapptest package that is burnable to a USB drive available somewhere?


----------



## Kstyles69

*BIO's recommendations*

I have a 9900KS any BIO's recommendations? I can't find a modded list or anything. So what are you 9900KS people running and why you chose that BIO's?


----------



## Nizzen

Kstyles69 said:


> I have a 9900KS any BIO's recommendations? I can't find a modded list or anything. So what are you 9900KS people running and why you chose that BIO's?


Ks is just a bit binned 9900k. Nothing special 🙂


----------



## lpittman

Hey guys,

I'm continuing my memory clocking and have noticed that the DRAM Frequency in ASROCK moves +/- 1/2 mhz differences once in awhile. For example I'll load it once and it'll show 3900 and then close and reopen and it shows 3898. Then close it and open again and it goes back to 3900.

Is this normal or is it an indication that something is unstable?

Cheers


----------



## buellersdayoff

lpittman said:


> Hey man - is there a premade mint/stressapptest package that is burnable to a USB drive available somewhere?



https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...application-test-tiny-bootable-linux-iso.html


----------



## AndrejB

lpittman said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm continuing my memory clocking and have noticed that the DRAM Frequency in ASROCK moves +/- 1/2 mhz differences once in awhile. For example I'll load it once and it'll show 3900 and then close and reopen and it shows 3898. Then close it and open again and it goes back to 3900.
> 
> Is this normal or is it an indication that something is unstable?
> 
> Cheers


That's normal, because the base clock moves a bit.

The things I found to cause mem instability are:
- not setting secondaries to what you defined
- improper rtls (this one is common on this board if pushing to the limit)


----------



## lpittman

buellersdayoff said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/180...application-test-tiny-bootable-linux-iso.html


Amazing! Thank you!




AndrejB said:


> That's normal, because the base clock moves a bit.
> 
> The things I found to cause mem instability are:
> - not setting secondaries to what you defined
> - improper rtls (this one is common on this board if pushing to the limit)


Great, thanks.


----------



## Kstyles69

I have a weird situation. I have a 9900KS on a Z390 Master. The temps are all crazy all of a sudden. My AIO is working fine, optimized default BIOs, replaced the AIO greese, and still weird. 

Aida64 will hit 100c in 5 seconds. This is the weird part, I installed a F11c modded BIOs and the temps were back to normal. I slowly adjusted BIOs settings. I was stable at 5.1Ghz with vcore on auto. Prime95 with 5.0Ghz AVX was 85C, Aida64 76C range. Normal*****

The second I put Vcore to 1.34v from auto the temps went crazy again back to 100c in 5 seconds. I put Vcore from 1.34v back to Auto. Did not fix the 100c in 5 seconds issue. I loaded optimized defaults and the temps are still crazy under Aida64. I flashed back to F10b bios loaded defaults...then flashed back to the F11c thinking that's how I got the normal temps back orginally... even with everything default I get 100c temps in 5 seconds. Any thoughts is welcome.

Update* Fixed* When I get a bad OC/PC crashes my Corsiar pump defaults into "quite mode" so it couldn't keep up with thermals. Resetting it back to "balanced" or "extreme" fixed it.


----------



## jlp0209

Been a long time since I've checked this thread, a problem I experienced last year has reared its ugly head again. Z390 Aorus Master. Currently on BIOS F11c. My wife accidentally flipped a power switch while my PC was powered on and now I am experiencing the "flipped bios" issue again. Neither main nor backup BIOS is corrupt, but if the switch is set to "1" the backup BIOS gets booted, and the bBIOS LED is lit. Flipping to "2" the main BIOS gets booted, mBIOS LED is lit. I tried my previously posted "fix" that solved it last year, but no dice this time (powering off with both BIOS switches set to "1", removing battery, clear CMOS, pressing the power button on the board itself, then finally plugging in and turning back on).

I've already tried flashing the main BIOS again (switch set to "2", boot into BIOS, set switch to "1", flash). Boots up with the backup BIOS. 

Absolutely nothing fixes the problem. I can't believe this is still even an issue with this board / BIOS. I'm all ears if anyone has experienced this recently and been able to fix it.


----------



## TWiST2k

Aorus Pro

Just read through a few hundred pages of this thread. I originally came here after I lost my setting on f10 bios after installing new ram, was not able to restore my backup, so I upgraded and settled on the newest f12e and adjusting to the new GUI (would have been nice when I first got it ). Everything was dialed in perfect at 5ghz @1.28v before this and am going to try to get it all dialed in again, I read a lot of different things about bugs, hoping the f12e is ok as a base. 

New ram is g.skill neo 2x32, I never bothered OCing the ram before, I might mess with it a bit, but I just want to get my CPU OC back together. It had been so long since I first set it up I forgot everything I changed.

No questions just yet, made a lot of notes from my reading and am going to go see if I can get things working properly again. Shout out to @Falkentyne for all the great posts over the last several months here and thanks to everyone else I made some notes from, but he stood out with the amount of info I gleamed. 

9900kf direct die w/ waterblock
2080 ti w/ waterblock
custom loop, 2 x 480 UT60 rads. D5 Next pump, blah blah.

Everything was perfect before I tried to install the ram and my bios took a dump and then my backup was corrupt haha. Oh well, at least I don't have the Rona (knocks on wood)!


----------



## TWiST2k

Originally edited this as it was a double post, but I might as well use it now.

I am noticing a lot of the settings I found posted here are not even available in my Aorus Pro, I am using these are on the top end GB boards. My last settings PC froze shortly after running LinX and this time it failed on the first test but did not freeze. When this first happened I was hoping it was going to be a quick fix to get back to where I was, but now it seems like it is going to take some trial and error to get back to where I was on bios F10. Maybe I should revert bioses?

I will continue to edit this post with any updated info until someone else posts after me.


----------



## Dannyele

Dannyele said:


> Karhu keeps me failing with almost 2 hours (+7000%)... and I'm experiencieng some game crashes like COD:Warzone or Sea of Thieves...
> 
> 
> maybe should I try to tweak more the RAM?





Well, after spending the whole weekend adjusting the timmings and frequencies for this RAM (even updating to the last modded bios by KedarWolf) I've ended with this best timming that I could get.


I'm pretty happy now even knowing that I've lost my current (will say was non-stable to be honest) 5ghz OC but I prefer just lettings the cpu at stock (1.17 volts at stock, disabled all c-states and tweaking BIOS with optimal parameters as loadlines etc) but having stable 4000Mhz RAM.


Next step (if I'm really feeling the mood) will try to OC at 5ghz (at least with x43 cache, this time no x47) and see if I can get something fine, but honestly I think that the difference in gaming from 4.7 to 5 will not be that much for the headaches.



Just thank you everyone from this forum as since I've changed from my 4790K last November I've been keep reading and learning so many things about OC and this world :thumb:


----------



## TWiST2k

Solved an unrelated issue and I have my pics I took of the bios before putting in the ram (These are from BIOS F10). Of course in my positive attitude of "I have a backup of the settings!" was not as dutiful as I could have been in backup redundancy. I think I am only missing 1 important page of setting (I have some others I did not attach).

Running LinX on my 7th pass and nothing is acting wonky (typing this while it is running), but I think the numbers are suppose to match or something (Not familiar with LinX). But so far things are much less dreadful then they were when this whole mess started.

I attached pics of my bios settings I saved and of my LinX thus far.

Thanks!

:UPDATE:

LinX finished without error (Pic attached)

:UPDATE 2:

It was AVX Offset, turned it to 0 and ran LinX got a BSOD for SYSTEM_SERVICE_EXCEPTION (From what I read this might be due to RAM)

Rebooted into the BIOS, upped the ram voltage to 1.4

Ran LinX again and BSOD for INTERRUPT_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED (Read this might be CPU related)

Upped my vcore to 1.285 and am going to try again now.

:UPDATE 3:

This time I got a BSOD for IRQ_NOT_LESS_THEN_EQUAL or whatever it is. Vcore is at 1.285, RAM at 1.4 I had my ring cache setting at 45, put it down to 43 (No clue if its related to this) It really is a shame I did not have my settings from before saved properly. There is like 1 screen from the BIOS I think I am missing that would have helped me here.

Let's see what BSOD I get this time! It could be Linx pushing my OC hard then. I believe when I was testing last time I was doing 8 hours of Realbench and then just using the PC, gaming, etc, had no issues. Maybe LinX is pushing it harder, or the F10 vs F12e BIOS is and me missing that page of setting is the culprit.

:UPDATE 4:

BSOD System Service Exception again. Decided to put the ram back to stock and disable XMP, it was stupid to mess with both at the same time with new RAM. When doing so, got the click click and my bios reset (just going back to stock, ***!!) So I am going to setup my CPU OC again and concentrate on that and see where it gets me. 

This whole thing has turned into a total nightmare, I should have just stuck with my 4 x 16GB and not bothered with this 2 x 32GB upgrade, never would have lost my OC, never would have updated my BIOS, never would be here posting after messing with this, all, night, long. Ugh.

Changes from before for roundup;

BIOS from F10 to F12e
RAM 4 x 16GB to 2 x 32GB
Lost some of my original CPU OC settings.

Gotta get back to the golden place, I got games to play!!!


----------



## Falkentyne

TWiST2k said:


> Solved an unrelated issue and I have my pics I took of the bios before putting in the ram (These are from BIOS F10). Of course in my positive attitude of "I have a backup of the settings!" was not as dutiful as I could have been in backup redundancy. I think I am only missing 1 important page of setting (I have some others I did not attach).
> 
> Running LinX on my 7th pass and nothing is acting wonky (typing this while it is running), but I think the numbers are suppose to match or something (Not familiar with LinX). But so far things are much less dreadful then they were when this whole mess started.
> 
> I attached pics of my bios settings I saved and of my LinX thus far.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> :UPDATE:
> 
> LinX finished without error (Pic attached)
> 
> :UPDATE 2:
> 
> It was AVX Offset, turned it to 0 and ran LinX got a BSOD for SYSTEM_SERVICE_EXCEPTION (From what I read this might be due to RAM)
> 
> Rebooted into the BIOS, upped the ram voltage to 1.4
> 
> Ran LinX again and BSOD for INTERRUPT_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED (Read this might be CPU related)
> 
> Upped my vcore to 1.285 and am going to try again now.
> 
> :UPDATE 3:
> 
> This time I got a BSOD for IRQ_NOT_LESS_THEN_EQUAL or whatever it is. Vcore is at 1.285, RAM at 1.4 I had my ring cache setting at 45, put it down to 43 (No clue if its related to this) It really is a shame I did not have my settings from before saved properly. There is like 1 screen from the BIOS I think I am missing that would have helped me here.
> 
> Let's see what BSOD I get this time! It could be Linx pushing my OC hard then. I believe when I was testing last time I was doing 8 hours of Realbench and then just using the PC, gaming, etc, had no issues. Maybe LinX is pushing it harder, or the F10 vs F12e BIOS is and me missing that page of setting is the culprit.


Those BSOD's are not RAM related. They're hyperthreading related. It means your CPU isn't stable.
Disabe hyperthreading and you'll only see WHEA Uncorrectable Error or Clock Watchdog Timeout BSOD's rather than errors that look like RAM/IMC (the IMC helps deal with hyperthreading).


----------



## TWiST2k

Falkentyne said:


> Those BSOD's are not RAM related. They're hyperthreading related. It means your CPU isn't stable.
> Disabe hyperthreading and you'll only see WHEA Uncorrectable Error or Clock Watchdog Timeout BSOD's rather than errors that look like RAM/IMC (the IMC helps deal with hyperthreading).


Thanks for the input! I updated my most recent post several times while I have been testing. I will mess with it and see where I get now.

Thanks again!

:UPDATE:

Made a couple of smaller tweaks and disabled hyper-threading and got several successful LinX runs and then it failed on me. I feel like I am getting closer now at least.


----------



## GeneO

nm


----------



## Medvediy

Nothing heard about new bios for MASTER? F11e is the latest and got no issues?


----------



## TWiST2k

Been messing with settings, found another interesting thread with the resident Aorus Guru @Falkentyne and @wholeeo (Nice don't starve avatar!). Following the settings there (https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...rclocking-i9-9900k-gigabyte-z390-aorus-2.html) as a base and tweaking slightly I have had my closest to golden LinX runs, but still have not had 100% success on a 10 round run. 

So close! This is all on F10 as I reverted BIOSES for testing, I may try these settings on F12e or F11 and see how they turn out on them.

:UPDATE:

Adding pics from my current bios setting for F10. Just flashed to F11 and going to add all of these settings back and see how things go.


----------



## shaolin95

Medvediy said:


> Nothing heard about new bios for MASTER? F11e is the latest and got no issues?


I am interested in this too. I am still on 10b so wondering if there is any benefit moving to F11.
Anyone can give some feedback?


----------



## Kstyles69

I have an unlimited budget on some RAM. Figured you all could help. Of course I want best Mhz/CAS ratio but also want 64GB to future proof a virtual machine setup and use a RAM disc. What do you all recommend I buy?

***Edit lets stay under $1000


----------



## Falkentyne

Kstyles69 said:


> I have an unlimited budget on some RAM. Figured you all could help. Of course I want best Mhz/CAS ratio but also want 64GB to future proof a virtual machine setup and use a RAM disc. What do you all recommend I buy?


Did you just say unlimited budget ?


----------



## TWiST2k

Kstyles69 said:


> I have an unlimited budget on some RAM. Figured you all could help. Of course I want best Mhz/CAS ratio but also want 64GB to future proof a virtual machine setup and use a RAM disc. What do you all recommend I buy?
> 
> ***Edit lets stay under $1000


Sounds like someone got their stimulus check.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Looking at this MB for my next system. Current system is 14 years old with only GPU upgraded since. 

I plan to reuse some of my components.

Cool Master Trooper case (new but been sitting in the back room for 6+ years)
PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W Power Supply (Hope I don't need to upgrade this yet)
EVGA 970 SSC (will upgrade to a 2080 or better in the near future)
Samsung 860 EVO 500GB + 2TB HD

Below is my plan for new MB, CPU and Ram. Any thought? I wonder if the ram is a good choice. I'm not really planning to overclock much other then fine tune ram speed and timing.


----------



## AndrejB

ShawnTRD said:


> Looking at this MB for my next system. Current system is 14 years old with only GPU upgraded since.
> 
> I plan to reuse some of my components.
> 
> Cool Master Trooper case (new but been sitting in the back room for 6+ years)
> PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W Power Supply (Hope I don't need to upgrade this yet)
> EVGA 970 SSC (will upgrade to a 2080 or better in the near future)
> Samsung 860 EVO 500GB + 2TB HD
> 
> Below is my plan for new MB, CPU and Ram. Any thought? I wonder if the ram is a good choice. I'm not really planning to overclock much other then fine tune ram speed and timing.


If you aren't planning on overclocking the ram, then you're set.

Just make sure the latency of that ram isn't to high, 3600c16 is ok.

If you want to overclock, get 4x8gb


----------



## ShawnTRD

AndrejB said:


> If you aren't planning on overclocking the ram, then you're set.
> 
> Just make sure the latency of that ram isn't to high, 3600c16 is ok.
> 
> If you want to overclock, get 4x8gb


No just adjust ram setting to run at spec.


----------



## GeneO

ShawnTRD said:


> Looking at this MB for my next system. Current system is 14 years old with only GPU upgraded since.
> 
> I plan to reuse some of my components.
> 
> Cool Master Trooper case (new but been sitting in the back room for 6+ years)
> PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W Power Supply (Hope I don't need to upgrade this yet)
> EVGA 970 SSC (will upgrade to a 2080 or better in the near future)
> Samsung 860 EVO 500GB + 2TB HD
> 
> Below is my plan for new MB, CPU and Ram. Any thought? I wonder if the ram is a good choice. I'm not really planning to overclock much other then fine tune ram speed and timing.


If your PSU is 14 years old, you need to replace it. For one, your should use two EPS12V for your motherboard, and that PSU probably has only one. The CPU is power hungry and the capacitors on that PSU would have started going long ago and I expect it is would not deliver full or clean power.


----------



## philhalo66

GeneO said:


> If your PSU is 14 years old, you need to replace it. For one, your should use two EPS12V for your motherboard, and that PSU probably has only one. The CPU is power hungry and the capacitors on that PSU would have started going long ago and I expect it is would not deliver full or clean power.


you dont need to use 2 of those power connectors unless your pulling 300+ watts. Buildzoid has reviewed pretty much every gigabyte Z390 board and he said numerous times its a waste unless your on the X299 platform or doing extreme overclocking.


----------



## Falkentyne

philhalo66 said:


> you dont need to use 2 of those power connectors unless your pulling 300+ watts. Buildzoid has reviewed pretty much every gigabyte Z390 board and he said numerous times its a waste unless your on the X299 platform or doing extreme overclocking.


Using two instead of 1 will stabilize the 12v input better. One user tested this and found a 5-10mv voltage reduction improvement when overclocking. Not much but if it's free it's free...and it's not hard for any end user to see. Just look in the VRM section of HWinfo64.



ShawnTRD said:


> Looking at this MB for my next system. Current system is 14 years old with only GPU upgraded since.
> 
> I plan to reuse some of my components.
> 
> Cool Master Trooper case (new but been sitting in the back room for 6+ years)
> PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W Power Supply (Hope I don't need to upgrade this yet)
> EVGA 970 SSC (will upgrade to a 2080 or better in the near future)
> Samsung 860 EVO 500GB + 2TB HD
> 
> Below is my plan for new MB, CPU and Ram. Any thought? I wonder if the ram is a good choice. I'm not really planning to overclock much other then fine tune ram speed and timing.


Please do NOT use that PSU!
I had that exact one and upgraded it to a Seasonic 1000P in 2012, which is still in use now. That original silencer, which came out in 2006 I think, does NOT have 8 pin PCIE connectors (2x6 pin) so it can't be used with modern video cards, and I don't remember if the EPS12v is a 4 or 8 pin anymore either (maybe it was 8 and 4). Pretty sure it was a Seasonic M12D based platform.

Not to be confused with the "Mark 3" unit which seems to be some OCZ rebrand of something else, with strange modular connectors.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Using two instead of 1 will stabilize the 12v input better. One user tested this and found a 5-10mv voltage reduction improvement when overclocking. Not much but if it's free it's free...and it's not hard for any end user to see. Just look in the VRM section of HWinfo64.


And an old supply with an old cable - not safe if it draws near the limit I expect. I would also expect it to be nosier because of its age, which would probably limit overclocking.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> And an old supply with an old cable - not as safe if it draws near the limit I expect. I would also expect it to be nosier because of its age, which would probably limit overclocking.


I was editing my post when you replied. I had that exact same Silencer but upgraded it in 2012. Of course me burning out the 4 pin by using a QX9650 on a P5WDH didn't help matters 
I told him to upgrade it. He can't even use modern video cards on that PSU.


----------



## philhalo66

Falkentyne said:


> Using two instead of 1 will stabilize the 12v input better. One user tested this and found a 5-10mv voltage reduction improvement when overclocking. Not much but if it's free it's free...and it's not hard for any end user to see. Just look in the VRM section of HWinfo64.
> 
> 
> 
> Please do NOT use that PSU!
> I had that exact one and upgraded it to a Seasonic 1000P in 2012, which is still in use now. That original silencer, which came out in 2006 I think, does NOT have 8 pin PCIE connectors (2x6 pin) so it can't be used with modern video cards, and I don't remember if the EPS12v is a 4 or 8 pin anymore either (maybe it was 8 and 4). Pretty sure it was a Seasonic M12D based platform.
> 
> Not to be confused with the "Mark 3" unit which seems to be some OCZ rebrand of something else, with strange modular connectors.


id argue thats gigabytes garbage voltage regulation. i set 1.2v and it goes anywhere from 1.14 to 1.5 regardless of the LLC setting. one of the reasons im getting rid of this and grabbing an asus board in a few weeks. But hey, maybe my board is just faulty.


----------



## Falkentyne

philhalo66 said:


> id argue thats gigabytes garbage voltage regulation. i set 1.2v and it goes anywhere from 1.14 to 1.5 regardless of the LLC setting. one of the reasons im getting rid of this and grabbing an asus board in a few weeks. But hey, maybe my board is just faulty.


Vcore sensor/VR VOUT isn't affected by this. But transients are.
That's on the mosfet (12v input) side, which is duty cycled to vcore. Sensors won't pick up anything on vcore--you would need an oscilloscope.

I had the 12v drop to 11.25v on a worn out PCIE cable. Caused random black screen crashes (no recovery). GPU voltage readout didn't show any problem however.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> It's that time again for some good ol' humble brag as a new achievement has been accomplished. #1 in the world for lowest latency memtest stable 4x8GB configuration on the Z390 Aorus master + 9900K at reasonable voltages.....until someone beats me (looking at you @iunlock)
> 
> 
> 
> 4x8GB 3933MHz 1.5v dram voltage, 1.3v system agent voltage, 1.3v IO voltage


How in the hell did you get 35.4ns?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> I binned each dimm from the 4x8gb gskill cl17 4000 kit and placed the strongest/best clocking dimms closest to the chip with the worst clocking dimms farthest from the chip. This allowed me to hit [email protected] using the same voltages that was required to hit [email protected] Here are my timings, tRC is set to 43. Granted this post should probably be in the ddr4 stability thread, I felt it was better off here since many users face difficulties on these boards for memory overclocking. Hopefully users start binning each stick, maybe we will start seeing crazy memtest stable results that we never thought was possible on these boards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't take all the credit though, none of this would have been possible without everyone's guidance here. Thank you.


Dude that's impressive. Well done. Can you give a bit more insight into your process of binning each stick?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Kstyles69

reachthesky said:


> I binned each dimm from the 4x8gb gskill cl17 4000 kit and placed the strongest/best clocking dimms closest to the chip with the worst clocking dimms farthest from the chip. This allowed me to hit [email protected] using the same voltages that was required to hit [email protected] Here are my timings, tRC is set to 43. Granted this post should probably be in the ddr4 stability thread, I felt it was better off here since many users face difficulties on these boards for memory overclocking. Hopefully users start binning each stick, maybe we will start seeing crazy memtest stable results that we never thought was possible on these boards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't take all the credit though, none of this would have been possible without everyone's guidance here. Thank you.


Awesome job! Keep pushing. Your almost in the 20's on Latency hahahahaha.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> Here is the process I used. I'm not sure if it is considered proper or if it is the best approach but it did yield positive results. Perhaps someone more experienced may know of a better or more streamlined approach.
> 
> I took all the dimms out and labeled each one with a post it note so that I could track each stick's identity/performance throughout the entire process in order to avoid any mix up of the sticks. I then put 1 stick in the ram slot closest to the chip and dialed in the highest frequencies I could for that stick. I did this individually for each stick. Then I took the best performing stick and kept it in the ram slot closest to the chip. I then took turns adding a second stick for dual channel(3rd ram slot from the chip) to find which 2nd stick would allow me to train/boot the highest frequencies. The best performing 2nd stick was then relocated directly next to the first stick on the board to lead the other channel. With the 2 remaining sticks left, I alternated which slots they were in and again tested to see the highest frequencies I could train boot.
> 
> This process allowed me to achieve the following new results on 4x8GB configuration:
> 
> 3933mhz memtest stable 35.4ns 15-14-14-28 1.5v vdimm 1.3v sa/io 5.25ghzCores/4.85ghzCache - lowest latency 4x8gb config i've seen on this board to date with a 9900K/KS/KF that is memtest stable.....until someone tops it as the game goes. Prior to binning the sticks, My previous lowest latency memtest stable profile for 1.5v vdimm was 3900mhz 15-15-15-32 35.9ns 5.3ghzCores/4.9GHzCache.
> 
> 4266mhz memtest stable 19-20-20-42(auto timings) 1.45v vdimm 1.35v sa/io via training simultaneously 4200mhz memory strap + 101.5 busclock OC(4263) 4266 memory strap trains just fine but isn't stable, must use busclock version* survives coldboots, no hang ups. aida64 performance was very close to the performance of a 19-19-19-39 xmp rated kit for 4266 with timings untouched. A new personal achievement for highest memtest stable frequency though I could not find memtest stability at all when adjusting secondary/tertiary timings. I won't be using this profile though as 3933mhz offers superior gaming performance with lower sa/io requirements.
> 
> Unfortunately, rtls/iols for 4000mhz+ still don't align properly with optimal ramstick placement. It was really nice getting a new faster profile though^^. Happy my efforts yielded positive results.
> 
> If anyone has any insight to improve the approach towards binning sticks or stick order placement etc, do share ^^.
> 
> Also, if anyone has figured out the trick to getting rtls/iols to align properly at 4000mhz+, please do tell!



Nice detail, thanks. Curious about a couple more things - 

What timing(s) did you use when you were pushing each sticks frequency?
What voltage(s)? I assume 1.5/1.3/1.3?

What vcore (and other settings) do you need to get this all stable with a 4.85 GHz cache? I am currently struggling to get my memory stable at 4.7GHz and am bumping down to 4.6GHz to try again.

Currently I'm at: 16-15-15-32 @ 4000MHz, 1.50/1.3/1.3, 1.35 vcore and 50/46 ratios. If I loosen it up I can run at 47... but... you know. lol


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> For memory training I usually train with higher levels of sa/io, 1.3v,1.35v or sometimes I leave it on auto for training 4400+ which most times defaults to 1.38v. Then I work it down as much as possible. There are times where a frequency is unreachable/untrainable unless you really give it some juice but still memtest stable with lower levels of voltage. For dram voltage and dram training voltage, this depends on the sticks i think. or this could be motherboard/bios behavior, who knows. My sticks can train certain frequencies/cas timings ONLY if I leave it on auto, even if I were to try manually setting the same voltage that auto gives it. Though most frequencies/timings cooperate as you'd expect and require me to set them manually and train with regular approach. Sometimes I can train a specific frequency/set of timings by only setting the training voltage in the bios and leaving dram voltage on auto followed up by going back into the bios and setting it manually right after it trains. Sometimes a memory strap won't be stable or won't train or won't work but using a slightly lower memory strap + ocing the busclock will get it to train or get you the same frequency stable. For this binning process, I tried each of those training methods for finding the highest possible frequency I could stabilize in memtest(4266) as well as finding the highest frequency with the best possible latency with proper rtls/iols i could stabilize(3933) at 1.5v vdimm and 1.3v sa/io or less that I could stabilize in memtest. I typically train with 1.5v dram training voltage in the very beginning before finalizing stability, once stability has been reached I bring it down as low as possible. Sometimes 1.55v dram training voltage can help too. Sa/io, auto is almost always suitable/fine for training since it can make training easier it most cases, though if you find your motherboard led debug code thing turning off during training it may be a sign of imc weakness to higher levels of volts and should be set manually instead/lowered. Once you find a stable config, try to bring sa/io as low as possible while maintaining stability. b-die at tight timings and higher frequencies require much higher levels of sa/io than usual. 4x8gb dimms can require more sa/io/dram voltages than 2x8gb dimms at identical timings/frequencies. Be sure to keep a personal record of the voltage requirements for frequencies/timings so that you can see visually how your sticks scale with your chip. It eventually allows you to find the "sweet spot".


Lots of great info. Thanks. I don't know if I have that kind of patience - to go through that training process. I've disabled "fast memory boot" and am just letting it train however it decides to do so. I've now got down to 15-15-15-32 @ 4000 with the secondaries and terts tightened (although they can probably be tightened further now) and am just firing up MemTestPro to see where it's at.

Would love some input/advice as I go if you're up for helping me. If so I'll go ahead and post all the details of where I'm at.

Cheers


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> i'm not sure how much help I can offer as i'm not familiar with your specific set of hardware(i don't know how it feels). I can maybe guide you in a direction based off certain parameters/observations/symptoms/information given in regards to your primary timings/frequency but I don't want to take any of the fun out of overclocking by doing it for you. ram sticks are like insanely sophisticated cool puzzles that provide hours of entertainment through discovery/tweaking. I don't want to do the discovering for you because that would ruin the puzzle, but i'll nudge you in a direction that I think will help while still allowing you to discover things for yourself if you are comfortable with it . if you haven't already, please download asrock timing configurator. Post a screenshot from asrock timing configurator so we can see your c15-4000 timings. Also post a screenshot of hwinfo64 so I can see all your voltages.


Oh yea dude - definitely don't want you take the fun out of it. I'm enjoying it immensely! But it's definitely nice to have someone to work "with" a bit on it ya know?

Hardware - Aorus Master, i9-9900k @ 5.0/4.6, 1.35 vcore.

Just had an error pop up at 44%/thread in MemTestPro. Going to loosen off tRFC a bit and try again.


----------



## lpittman

One thing that I know only comes with plenty of experience is the relationship between some of the timings. I'm sure many of them affect others, that's where I am most curious. Do I have anything "out of balance" ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> What ram kit is that?


TXKD416G4133HC18FDC01

https://www.newegg.ca/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820331244?Item=N82E16820331244


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Kstyles69

*THREAD UPDATE OVERHAUL NEW USERS:*
I've been an noob onlooker of this thread for 6 days doing tons of benching... and instead of new people scrolling 500+ pages like the noob I am...here is for all you all new noobs like me. :thumb:

*This is strictly "My Results" I found working best for me. Every MOBO, CPU, RAM is binned differently.*

*Z390 Aorus Master BIOs*
Modded F11C Click here for download 
Specifically this has older faster BE microcode and has other fixes such as ethernet firmware. Confirmed +50 points Cinebench R20 scores with this microcode.
To install: Use Rufus download click here to turn a USB stick into a "FreeDOS" in the "Boot selection" and click "start." Once finished, put the 1.11c and efiflash.exe on the USB stick. Go into Bios... F7 Optimized Defaults, F10 Save/Exit, on restart press F12 and load the USB stick. Do not load EUFI on the USB stick. Type the following... efiflash.exe 1.11C /x

*BIOs Settings*
General Safe Starting Settings with good CPU cooler and well ventilated case, good PSU. 
Vcore 1.31V, AVX Offset 2, Enhanced Multicore Performance Disabled, Ring Ratio 44, DRAM Voltage 1.36v, CPU VCCIO 1.22, CPU System Agent Voltage 1.22, Active Turbo Ratios Disabled, Disable C-states if PC crashes during idol, Turbo Power Limits Disable, Turbo Per Core Limit Control Disable, Disable ten settings from top to bottom on page starting from VT-d to CPU Flex Ratio Override, DRAM Training Voltage 1.45v, Vcore Loadline Calibration Turbo, CPU Vcore Current Protection Extreme, CPU Vcore PWM Switch Rate 300KHz, VAXG PWM Switch Rate 300KHz, PWM Phase Control eXm Perf, in Settings tab under IO disable integrated graphics. 

*Monitoring Software:*
HWinFO64 click here to download use the "senors" option to monitor. On the bottom of the list also has Windows Hardware Errors that it reports. Keep this running during all stress tests and keep an eye on it.
Keep CPU max temps below 85C, RAM could cause errors over 41C so try to stay close to that.
Under a crash sometimes I lose my Corsair AIO pump settings as it defaults back to low performing "quiet mode" so keep an eye on that.

Thaiphoon Burner click here for download  
This software shows you specifically what type of memory you have. Either Samsung B-die, A die, Micron B-die, M-die. They all have different temperature threshold and overclocking capabilities before they start spitting out errors. Samsung B-die is considered the best overclocking. Once you open Thaiphoon Burner click the "Read" option to view what you have. Micron B-die I personally couldn't get past 1.37v before it hits 43.5C and starts spitting errors. Samsung B-die I could go 1.42v and seemed fine reaching 42.5C. 

*Finding Stable CPU Clock speed:*
Clear CMOS as needed. In BIOs...Adjust CPU Clock ratio higher. If crashes add more CPU Vcore. Monitor temps. Do not exceed 1.34 Vcore under Turbo Load Line Calibration as it's to much heat in stress testing. Adjust AVX offest as needed if it crashes in AVX workloads. Before stress testing turn on your Memory XMP settings then adjust System Memory Multiplier down. For example, if XMP sets RAM to 3600Mhz then turn it down to 3200Mhz. Setting Load Line Calibration From Turbo to High and setting Vcore to 1.34v-1.39v could result in better OC with similar temps as Turbo. 

Non AVX stress test
Prime95 download here 
To set Prime95 to run non AVX. Start/Stop a stress test and it creates a "local file." Edit the local file in Prime95 using a notepad and type in CpuSupportsAVX=0 then save notepad. Completely exit out of Prime95 especially in the system tray as exiting doesn't fully exit. Load up Prime95 again as it would now use the local file. If the computer crashes you might have to re edit the local file again. I do not recommend running an AVX workload "CpuSupportsAVX=1" in Prime95 as it generates unrealistic heat. The torture test to use is Small FFT L1/L2/L3 caches. Run for 20 minutes to 1 hour.

AVX stress test: 
Aida64 click here to download
Under Tools/System Stability Test... check CPU, FPU, and cache...Click Start. Run for 20 minutes to 1 hour.

Benchmarking CPU AVX test:
Just because you pass a 5.1Ghz stable stress test for example... it could result in a lower benchmark score. So play around with scores.
Cinebench R20 download click here
To get the best score, in Windows go to... task manager...Details tab... then right click Cinebench.exe and set Priority to "real time." All kill any bakground processes like Nivida Gefore Experience and others. Run Cinebench. Your computer will freeze during the test because of it being "real time." 

Best Non AVX CPU benchmark:
3D Mark Timespy benchmark click here to download
Sadly this is also a GPU benchmark and the the CPU benchmark is last but this test I find very consistent scores CPU wise. Plus it's a real world test leading up to the CPU stress test to further test stability.
For best scores, set this to real time priority/kill background processes like mentioned with Cinebench R20. 

Best All-around test most used:
LinX 9.6 click here to download
Both AVX and Non AVX workloads, tests RAM, gives benchmark called Gflops, and test stability with Residual hashes. Must have all matching Residual to pass 100% stability. To run put "3500" in top left box. Put "5" in the top right box. Click the box below 3500 to start. Close all programs while running...do not run any programs or browse the web....extremely sensitive. You are deemed good as long as all the Residuals match. Taking a stop/try again run on your OC to match Residuals is normal as it is very sensitive. If all Residuals are wrong or 3 of 5 wrong, clearly you have a bad OC somewhere. Higher the GFLOP the faster your real world Memory/CPU OC is. VERY HEAT INTENSIVE BEWARE. 
To get best scores and less miss-matching Residuals, set to real time priority/kill background processes like Cinebench R20.

*Memory Overclocking:*
This guide is specifically for Samsung B-die kits. Anything non-Samsung b-die "Samsung M-die is also good" save the headache and only adjust CAS, tRCD, tRP, tRAS and leave the rest on AUTO. Use Thaiphoon Burner software to see what you have. Also, AORUS uses T-Topology so usings four DIMMS is important for max OC. Be prepared to clear your CMOS all the fooking time. This OC takes about 10+ hours on average.

Again, guide specifically for B-die Samsung kits.
Adjust Voltages/Monitoring:
Set your XMP profile. Set CPU VCCIO and CPU System Agent Voltage to 1.25. DRAM Voltage to 1.45, DRAM Training to 1.45. You will reduce voltages later, so blow a fan on your Memory for the time being. RAM can cause errors anything after 41C. Use HWiNFO64 "sensors" to monitor everything. You must benchmark after every setting using Aida64 under "Benchmark" "Memory Read/Write/Copy/Latency." Do x3 tests and take average of each. Also, stop all running background applications to insure accuracy.
Find Max Mhz:
In BIOs bump System Memory Multiplier +1 setting up until failed post. When finding max Mhz best to try a few times as Memory Training could fail but succeed after a few attempts. Once failed, go back to your last successful boot. Use HCI Memtest software and allocate 80% of memory and do 100% coverage to see if it's stable.
Find CAS Latency:
Using same process as finding Mhz, bump it down -1. Once failed post go back to your last successful boot and run HCI Memtest.
Find tRCD & tRP:
Same process as finding CAS. Bump both -1 at a time.
Find tRAS:
tRAS=tRCD & tRP...possibly +1 or +2... or "+" more at higher 3800+ frequencies.
Finding tWR:
Improves latency 10 to 18 lower better.
Finding tRC:
tRC=tRP + tRAS
Finding tFAW:
tFAW=tRRD_L x4
Finding tRFC:
Anywhere between 290-480. Good starting spot is x10 your tRAS.
Finding tREFI:
Higher is better between 18,000-64,000. Good starting spot is 32768.
Rest is set to AUTO as I'm not schooled enough in.
Lower voltages:
Lower CPU VCCIO and System Agent Voltage -.01 and retest stability using Memtest at 25% coverage up until errors happen. Up voltage back up as needed. Ideally you want to be around 1.2v. Your Uncore Ratio is also effected by this voltage.
Lower DRAM Voltage same as you did with CPU VCCIO. Ideally, you want to be around 1.39v for DRAM because going over 40C is bad....lower voltage if you hit over 40C or lower voltage if you dont have Samsung B-die 

*Stress Testing Memory:*
HCI MemTest click here to download 
Keep allocating 2500MB RAM until you use 80% of total RAM. Run until all do 100% coverage.

GSAT click here to download
Create a bootable ISO USB using RUFUS. Restart PC hit F12 on boot, load the USB, let the program load for 30 seconds before typing, type in stressapptest -W -s 3600 in the command promt. stressapptest -W -s 3600 ...threads say when the program pauses do to voltage spike it's normal.

RAM Timing Monitoring:
AsrockTimingConfigv4.04 Click here to download

*Benchmarking Memory* 
Aida64
Go to tools and click Cache/Memory benchmarking.

Monitor your Gflops and Residuals all the time:
Use LinX 9.5 and get the GFlops higher while getting same Residuals. Close all background apps and don't open any programs.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> Post an aida64 benchmark screenshot real quick please.
> 
> Also, At which points during the tuning process did you complete a memtest? Did you stability test 15-15-15-32 with the rest of the timings on auto? Did you re-test during secondary timing tuning before moving onto tertiaries?
> 
> Are the secondaries as low as they will go before tuning tertiaries? Have you tried max trefi? Have you tried deviating from the rules found on websites/forums when it comes to primaries/secondaries? Some ddr4 "rules and relationships" are bendable. When you tuned your secondaries for the first time at cl15, did you monitor performance difference as you went through each timing?
> 
> Try this:
> See what happens if deviate from the tWR/tRTP rules, maybe try lowering tWR to 12 or 10. Compare before and after aida64 benchmarks to gauge what kind of impact this change has on performance. I tend to deviate from some of the rules these days but they make a good general guideline.


I have been doing OCCT & MemTestPro at nearly every step of the way. Usually after changing 1 setting.

_"Did you stability test 15-15-15-32 with the rest of the timings on auto?"_

No, I did not. Perhaps I should reset and start over here. I had to bump down to 3900 to get it get through Memtest (currently at 100% per thread with no errors and running). I should probably set everything back to auto and work on it some more. One thing that has popped up is the RTL/IOL are returning different results upon reboot at the moment. That tells me it's not very stable, even though Memtest appears to be running fine.

_"Are the secondaries as low as they will go before tuning tertiaries?"_

They were initially yes. I worked on frequency, then primaries, then secondaries, then terts performing multiple memtests at each stage.

_"Have you tried max trefi?"_

I actually don't know what it is.  But I've been bumping it up slowly. But I'm definitely mixing too many changes now.

I'm thinking I should either step back to my 16-16-16-4000 @ 1.40/1.21/1.20 (which is what I was working on before trying to squeeze it down to 15-15-15-4000, and now 3900) and continuing fine tuning that, or I should reset again now that I've committed to these voltages and start from the beginning.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> Your rtls are better than average for cas15 4000 on this board which is a good thing. Maybe see how much voltage it takes for 15-15-15-32 @ 3900/4000/4100/4133 to be stable with subtimings left on auto. See how your sticks scale, then know it will take extra voltage on top to tune the subs. Save aida64 benchmarks for each frequency with subtimings on auto so that you can compare base latency, only save one benchmark per frequency, the best latency result out of maybe 4 or 5 tries per frequency. When you do aida64 benchmarks, make sure you've exited any extra programs, run aida64 as administrator and then set priority to realtime for aida64 in windows task manager. Then decide on a frequency that fits your voltage budget or based on what suits your needs/desires. your cas16 4000 already works, you can always go back at any time.....but I bet you are curious just how much performance you can squeeze out of those sticks. .
> 
> How was the cas15 4000 latency compared to the cas 15 3900 latency in aida64? Best case scenarios


I like that plan. I'll work on it tonight.

The cas15 3900 latency was slightly quicker - I think it actually got in the high 37s. I'm not sure if I took screen snaps all the way through. I'll do that more often this time.

And yes. I'm definitely very curious how much I can squeeze out!


----------



## lpittman

What causes the RTLs & IOLS to be different between reboots?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> I have no idea. I also have no idea how to get good/consistent rtls on this board at 4000mhz+. It seems to be a crap shoot. I think once a long time ago i might have had good rtls for c15 4000 and i probably did it by mistake lol or it was just magic, wish i knew how to replicate it.


lmao. Okay.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> seriously, sometimes you can type them in and it will work, like with 3900/3933, I typed in the 57/57/59/59 and it worked fine(which you should try to do for 3900). If i try to use your 64/64/66/66 for c15-4000 it gives me 64/66/66/68 regardless or if i try iunlock's 64/66/66/66 for c15-4133 it still gives me 66/66/68/68. I could never get the rtls to align well enough for c15-4000/4100/4133 to exceed c15-3900 strap's rtls in latency. If you find out the solution for manually tuning rtls/iols, do tell us.


Will do! Maybe I'll keep it on auto timings for awhile and just play with RTLs. What is considered "too high" for RTLs anyway?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> You'll know when rtls are too high or flat out suboptimal/bad when a higher frequency at the same exact cas/timings performs worse than a lower frequency when it comes to memory latency. for instance, if [email protected] with [email protected] has lower memory latency compared to [email protected] with [email protected], then the c15-4000 rtls/iols are bad/suboptimal. Higher frequency at same timings should always yield better memory latency compared to lower frequency when using the same base primary timings with all subs on auto. The rtl spacing is consistent from 3200-3933, but then starting at 4000 it deviates from previous rtl spacing and jumps by almost 10 in some cases to mid 60s for c15 at 4000 and up. It is also like this for other cas latencies at the same frequencies. I don't know how to control it or what effects it but it makes 4000mhz and higher at any cas latency perform slower than it should.


Right! Okay, thanks man.

So far it feels like 15-15-15-32 @ 3900 is the sweet spot, but @4000 is close.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> That's the way it seems if prioritizing latency depending on your voltage budget. If you can clock higher to higher memory straps than 3900 at cas15, maybe you can outmuscle the rtls with enough extra frequency to match latency from cas15-3900? It took me an extra 300mhz, c15-4200. Your rtls are better though....
> 
> But then there is also that space in between 3900 and 4000....



https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/g3iboa/9900k_looking_to_undervolt_and_possibly_alter_the/


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Shaman

No PS/2 port is proving to be a real show stopper with trying to get anything else other than Win10 64bit to install (Aourus Master) Even Win10 32bit has issues with Z390. Anyone have any success with any PCIe based cards sporting PS/2 or even serial ports (for serial mice/keyboard use)? 

Its turning out to be a one and one OS ONLY motherboard, that OS being Win10 64bit. (not counting a cludge of hacky drivers and malware from Win-Raid forums promising USB3.x support for Z390)

What a shame, great VRM, awesome OC potential, yet even low end ASUS z390 boards have a PS/2 for legacy support for some Hwbot fun.


...
..
.


----------



## TG_bigboss

Im looking into the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master. Any issues i need to be aware of? 

Also does this board include the same Anti pop as the extreme? I have powered speakers so they always pops when the PC first turns on.


----------



## Shaman

I went from a Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 which had horrible onboard audio issues (just about same audio layout & chipset as this Aorus Master) yet the audio issues are gone, so I'm guessing they have improved upon that formula. MB5 and creative support was yanked, and there are no fancy software suites. However, there are "third party" solutions out there (techPowerUp forum project) 

As for issues, other than the lack of legacy PS/2, serial, no third party USB controllers/ICs other than Z390 handling it all (stuff I listed in the previous post), well lets see... the post/debug read-out is in the usual bottom of the ocean position, as I like to call it, and not up by the RAM as some more "smarter" Z390 boards have it. Which depending on if you have multi-GPU, crowded case, thick USB cabling, or similar, might make the debug readout useless unless taken out of the case. Another thing to watch out is the RAM OC capabilities. Its pretty bad (B-die kit here and my 9600k is stuck at 3333MHz). Mind you, I was getting a better OC with this kit on a first gen Ryzen. Yes, un-overclockable memory controller on the Ryzen performed better! The CPU (9600k in my case) OCs great. The mem controller seems solid otherwise, so it has to be a board peculiarity.

That said, VRM is solid and runs extremely cool. The Z390 chipset itself is pretty cool and will run cool as well. CPU OC is amazing, crappy RAM OC aside. 

So, if you are looking for a Win10-64bit only board with amazing VRM and great CPU OC capabilities, this is your board.


...
..
.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Shaman

So, just to make sure I'm doing this right: what would be a nice solid timing preset for a B-die for Aourus Master, stock advertised settings are 16-18-18-36 @ 1.35 with 3000MHz for this B-die kit. I pushed this same kit to 3466 on Ryzen first gen with stock settings. Even got some tighter timings with a bit more volts. On Aorus Master I'm stuck at 3333MHz with RELAXED timings (17-19-19-38) and MORE voltage (tried going up to 1.45V) even. How bad is this board on the RAM front?

...
..
.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> If latency is the number 1 priority, sure i'd say so. I play at 240hz 1080p so latency has to be my top priority as i'm looking to try to maintain a full 240fps at all times in the titles i play. If you can clock higher to higher memory straps than 3900 at cas15, maybe you can outmuscle the rtls with enough extra frequency to match latency from cas15-3900? It took me an extra 300mhz, c15-4200. Your rtls are better though....
> 
> But then there is also that space in between 3900 and 4000....How much of that space is usable @3900 memory strap cas15 rtls?


I'm actually going to work on 16-16-16-32 @ 4100 for awhile. The RTL/IOLs aren't that out of whack. At 4133 it struggles to boot unless I throw huge voltage at it. 4200 I could get to boot but the RTL/IOLs are way out of whack. In all cases, my latency sits around 40.4 to 41.0 with all timings set to auto. So I am thinking I can still get sub 40 latency at 4100 once I start tightening.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> @*Falkentyne* So i've read some posts about PLLOC volts on various forums. It seems it is tied to vddq rail or something like that which is specific memory oc related. Is there any way I can monitor this voltage in windows? Looking to see what xmp currently sets it at so I can see how much headroom I have to work with so that I can figure out how much of an offset to add.
> 
> 
> Like, I wonder if me using xmp + manual timings for 3933 sets PLLOC volts to exactly what my ddr4 voltage is manually set to(1.5v) or if it just sets it to 1.2v or 1.3v based off an xmp parameter or something.


Not on this motherboard. CPU PLL Voltage (VCCPLL) and CPU PLL OC Voltage (VCCPLL_OC) MUST be at least 150mv apart or greater. Too close and you get a clock_watchdog_timeout because the PLL freezes. These settings are for subzero stuff. They do virtually nothing for air unless someone finds something helps. VCCPLL_OC below 1.20v affects the DTS temp sensors and makes some (not all) of the cores report strange temp spreads. Monitoring works on Asus and eVGA, maybe. And the link I gave you on reddit was for you to help that guy with 'Per Core Limit Control' or to correct me cuz I don't know if I even explained it right.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> gotcha, ty.
> 
> 
> Gave the link a re-read. You covered it well, nothing I could add.


But how does per core overclocking work if your "turbo boost ratios" don't line up with your Per Core Limit Control ratios (in a different order)?

Like if you had the 2 and 3 core load TBR's set to x52, and the 1 core TBR set to x53, and the 4 core TBR at x50, and you skipped x51 here (lets say 5-8 core loads are all x49 in Turbo Boost Ratios), but you did something like set Core #4 in Per core limit control as x53, Core #6 as x51, Core #8 as x50 and Core #2 as x49, you see? You didn't set any per-core of 52 at all. 

I think you see what I am getting at. That's what confuses me.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## ShawnTRD

I have my AORUS Master coming this week with a 9600K and 2x16GB G.Skill 3600. Anything I should know before building? BIOS is to install or avoid? BIOS settings?


----------



## Falkentyne

reachthesky said:


> I couldn't begin to tell you, I haven't played with turbo per core in months. It was cute and exciting at first but in the long run, it just made more performance sense for me to disable HT and jack my all cores as high as possible. All I can suggest is follow the same turbo ratio spacing that intel sets.
> for example:
> on the 9900k, intel turbo ratios are 47/47/47/48/48/49/50/50.
> 
> 
> Follow the spacing for the ratios, for example:
> 48/48/48/49/49/50/51/51
> 
> 
> or 49/49/49/50/50/51/52/52
> 
> 
> or 50/50/50/51/51/52/53/53
> 
> 
> 
> etc
> 
> Then if you want to set turbo per core specific frequencies per core, enter in the maximum frequency for that specific core to boost to in the "turbo Per core limit control" menu. Turbo per core limit frequencies can only go as high as the turbo ratios you've set. Then if you want specific cores to handle certain workloads for specific programs on a regular basis to utilize the extra megahertz, you'd have to assign each specific program in windows affinity AND in the program shortcut to use whatever specific cores or specific amount of cores. When assigning specific cores to specific programs in windows affinity, you have to use cores from the top to the bottom in linear order. If you choose say the first core and the last core, the boost isn't going to work right. If you chose like the first 3 cores for a program to use, as long as you don't have any other loads going on, windows is going to use those three cores for that program and those three cores will boost to the 3-core turbo ratio you have set in the bios. Long story short, use the same order in the bios.
> 
> 
> 
> For example:
> 
> 
> You've set your turbo ratios in the bios to
> 
> 1c 53
> 
> 2c 53
> 
> 3c 52
> 
> 4c 51
> 
> 5c 51
> 
> 6c 50
> 
> 7c 50
> 8c 50
> 
> 
> Then Enter the same order from top to bottom in the "turbo per core limit control" menu if you want to assign programs to leverage certain ratios AND specific cores all the time when temperature permits to get higher frequencies during non-all core workloads.
> 
> core 0 53
> 
> core 1 53
> 
> core 2 52
> 
> core 3 51
> 
> core 4 51
> 
> core 5 50
> 
> core 6 50
> 
> core 7 50
> 
> 
> If you didn't care which cores use the boost and when, then you can still use the turbo ratios and leave the turbo limit control menu set to auto. By leaving turbo limit control it on auto, all cores will be allowed to hit the maximum turbo ratio - WHEN THE WORKLOAD CALLS FOR AND TEMPS PERMIT. This means there will be slightly less opportunities for the turbo to be useful but you don't have to bother assigning things in windows affinity. It will also shuffle the work out between different cores more often.
> 
> 
> 
> If you use the same top to bottom order for turbo per core limit control as you have as the turbo ratios, You can also choose to enable speed shift epp 0 in throttlestop + enable multicore performance + windows maximum power plan and the cores will idle at the highest frequencies in the exact same order as set in the turbo per core limit control menu. This set up is best for someone who is on a custom loop and already maxed out their all core ratio as high as their system can handle.
> 
> If a user wants the best voltages while under all core load on the master while still being able to use higher non-all core turbo ratios and turbo per core OC, the user will need to use either standard llc + powersaving or acdc 1/1 + offset to hit the higher ratios *or* low llc + powersaving or acdc 1/1 + offset to hit the higher ratios. If you go medium llc or higher + offset, you'll have too much voltage than required for your all core load(for most chips, if you have a serious godlike chip, you might get the extra turbo ratios at zero additional voltage cost past your all-core voltage requirement, it's rare for this to happen but it has happened).
> 
> 
> 
> Ring to core is something people will want to use. If you do, know that you may need more sa/io to support that higher cache. You won't need the same amount of voltage at 50 cache ratio with a non-all core workload as you would with 50 cache on an all core workload. In otherwords, you don't have to move up an entire voltage step like you normally would. Ring to core will bind your cache at 300mhz less than whatever the heaviest load on your cores is operating at. It also allows you to sometimes get 1:1 performance on cores/cache during smaller loads at your all-core frequency boost. If you have ring to core enabled with 53/53/52/51/51/50/50/50, you'll be getting 5.3cores/5.0cache during 1c/2c loads or 5.2ghz/4.9cache during 3c loads etc etc.
> 
> 
> I haven't tested it in awhile to see if there are any more operational qwuirks or behaviors that can be leveraged/discovered. This is all I remember/know from the F9 bios. I briefly tested turbo per core in f11e and f10, didn't see any new behaviors. I've abandoned it entirely since you can't control individual core speed during all core workloads like you can on ryzen/hdt platforms and that it makes more sense for my specific usage case to just rock the highest all core frequency possible with ht off.


Thank you very much


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Kstyles69

ShawnTRD said:


> I have my AORUS Master coming this week with a 9600K and 2x16GB G.Skill 3600. Anything I should know before building? BIOS is to install or avoid? BIOS settings?


Read my new users guide a few pages back.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Kstyles69 said:


> Read my new users guide a few pages back.


There is 850 pages here


----------



## Falkentyne

ShawnTRD said:


> There is 850 pages here


CPU VRM switching frequency to 300 khz.


----------



## Kstyles69

ShawnTRD said:


> There is 850 pages here


Page 849


----------



## Kstyles69

Can someone explain when I lower CAS on my memory my benchmark Latency doesn't really improve. Any other setting I have to set along with lowering CAS to improve latency? All i seem to do is improve read,write, copy times...but my latency I can never improve.
**Edit** My bad, it was scaling correctly after I tested to CAS 18 and CAS 19. There is just no improvement gain going from 18 to 17 CAS as it's probably not stable at CAS 17.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

Kstyles69 said:


> Can someone explain when I lower CAS on my memory my benchmark Latency doesn't really improve. Any other setting I have to set along with lowering CAS to improve latency? All i seem to do is improve read,write, copy times...but my latency I can never improve.
> **Edit** My bad, it was scaling correctly after I tested to CAS 18 and CAS 19. There is just no improvement gain going from 18 to 17 CAS as it's probably not stable at CAS 17.


Are you running the benchmark multiple times and checking the results? It can swing quite a bit between runs.


----------



## Kstyles69

Is it possible to bin individual memory or do you think having at least 1 set of RAM to enable dual channel would alter results?


----------



## Kstyles69

lpittman said:


> Are you running the benchmark multiple times and checking the results? It can swing quite a bit between runs.


Three swings per result and taking average.


----------



## Kstyles69

reachthesky said:


> which ram slots are you using? Are you using the first slot and 3rd slot from the chip or are you using the 2nd slot and 4th slot from the chip?


I'm using slot 2 and 4...furthest from CPU.

**edit** swapped to slot 1 and 3 and getting same latency.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Kstyles69

Shaman said:


> So, just to make sure I'm doing this right: what would be a nice solid timing preset for a B-die for Aourus Master, stock advertised settings are 16-18-18-36 @ 1.35 with 3000MHz for this B-die kit. I pushed this same kit to 3466 on Ryzen first gen with stock settings. Even got some tighter timings with a bit more volts. On Aorus Master I'm stuck at 3333MHz with RELAXED timings (17-19-19-38) and MORE voltage (tried going up to 1.45V) even. How bad is this board on the RAM front?
> .


 Keep the highest frequency and just start lowering the timings...eventually your timings can out perform your desired 3600Mhz+. You can check benchmark memory speeds using Aida64.


----------



## Kstyles69

reachthesky said:


> Are you able to train higher frequency now or reduce cas latency?


I swapped back to my B-die samsung kit as this Micron B-die is just junk in comparison. Sending that advertised "b-die" back...they scammed me thinking it was Samsung. Not being able to adjust secondary timings hurts everything.


----------



## Kstyles69

*Updated my post NEW USERS vist page 849 for more updated from this post for Memory Overclocking:*

*Memory Overclocking:*
This guide is specifically for Samsung B-die kits. Anything non-Samsung b-die "Samsung M-die is also good" save the headache and only adjust CAS, tRCD, tRP, tRAS and leave the rest on AUTO. Use Thaiphoon Burner software to see what you have. Also, AORUS uses T-Topology so usings four DIMMS is important for max OC. Be prepared to clear your CMOS all the fooking time. This OC takes like 10+ hours to do.

Again, guide specifically for B-die or M-die Samsung kits as A-die and others, the voltages could be to high.
Adjust Voltages/Monitoring:
Set your XMP profile. Set CPU VCCIO and CPU System Agent Voltage to 1.25. DRAM Voltage to 1.45, DRAM Training to 1.45. You will reduce voltages later, so blow a fan on your Memory for the time being. RAM can cause errors anything after 41C. Use HWiNFO64 "sensors" to monitor everything. You must benchmark after every setting using Aida64 under "Benchmark" "Memory Read/Write/Copy/Latency." Do x3 tests and take average of each. Also, stop all running background applications to insure accuracy.
Find Max Mhz:
In BIOs bump System Memory Multiplier +1 setting up until failed post. When finding max Mhz best to try a few times as Memory Training could fail but succeed after a few attempts. Once failed, go back to your last successful boot. Use HCI Memtest software and allocate 80% of memory and do 100% coverage to see if it's stable.
Find CAS Latency:
Using same process as finding Mhz, bump it down -1. Once failed post go back to your last successful boot and run HCI Memtest.
Find tRCD & tRP:
Same process as finding CAS. Bump both -1 at a time.
Find tRAS:
tRAS=tRCD & tRP...possibly +1 or +2... or "+" more at higher 3800+ frequencies.
Finding tWR:
Improves latency 10 to 18 lower better.
Finding tRC:
tRC=tRP + tRAS
Finding tFAW:
tFAW=tRRD_L x4
Finding tRFC:
Anywhere between 290-480. Good starting spot is x10 your tRAS.
Finding tREFI:
Higher is better between 18,000-64,000. Good starting spot is 32,768.
Rest is set to AUTO as I'm not schooled enough in.
Lower voltages:
Lower CPU VCCIO and System Agent Voltage -.01 and retest stability using Memtest at 25% coverage up until errors happen. Up voltage back up as needed. Ideally you want to be around 1.2v. Your Uncore ratio in bios is also effected by this voltage.
Lower DRM Voltage same as you did with CPU VCCIO. Ideally you want to be around 1.39v.
Final test:
Run GATS stress test software and prey it passes. Passes means your 100% stable. If failed, bump voltage up and or readjust settings. 

*Stress Testing Memory:*
HCI MemTest click here to download 
Keep allocating 2500MB RAM until you use 80% of total RAM. Run until all do 100% coverage.

GSAT click here to download
Create a bootable ISO USB using RUFUS. Restart PC hit F12 on boot, load the USB, let the program load for 20 seconds, type in stressapptest -W -s 3600 in the command promt. stressapptest -W -s 3600 ...threads say when the program pauses do to voltage spike it's normal.

LinX 9.6 click here to download
Keep checking that GFLOP score and Residuals match.

RAM Timing Monitoring:
AsrockTimingConfigv4.04 Click here to download


----------



## Kstyles69

lpittman said:


> Will do! Maybe I'll keep it on auto timings for awhile and just play with RTLs. What is considered "too high" for RTLs anyway?


Can you give a specific guide on how your manipulating your RTL's.


----------



## Medvediy

reachthesky said:


> I have no idea. I also have no idea how to get good/consistent rtls on this board at 4000mhz+. It seems to be a crap shoot. I think once a long time ago i might accidentally gotten good rtls for c15 4000 and i probably did it by mistake lol or it was just magic, wish i knew how to replicate it.


Do you heave really clean Windows while you're getting so smooth latency?
Or you're closing all precesses in Task manager?


----------



## Medvediy

And is your setup could past Linx 0.9.6 test?
If yes - please add screenshot with HWinfo and Linx worked together. Just want to find out how it works on your system!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

@reachthesky - Here is where I'm currently at. Finding my latency didn't decrease much, if at all, going from 15-15-15-32 @ 3900 to 16-16-16-32 @ 4100 and in fact the slightly looser primaries allowed me to drop voltage a bit. Currently at 1.45 dram, 1.21 VCCSA and 1.20 VCCIO.

Still working through secondaries, then on to tertiaries, but it's looking solid so far.

Any thoughts? Or just keep pushing away?


----------



## Kstyles69

My 27/7 OC.

Before looking at this thread I was as at 62 RAM latency, 14,900 Time Spy score, 420sih Gflop LinX. Thanks everyone that's keeping this thread alive.

Only problem with setup is my Memory as I'm running x2 16GB setup but I'm happy with what they perform at. Getting 7 less latency isn't worth the $500 price tag. 

Can somebody explain how they are reducing their RTL's so I can reduce latency?

Next step is to wait for my 40mm fan to cool memory to arrive in mail to push 1.48v RAM voltage. Currently RAM boots at CAS 13.

1.31 Vcore, Turbo LLC, 0 AVX offset, DRAM 1.44v, 45 Ring Ratio, 1.24v VCCIO/VCCSA, GSAT passed, Prime 95 30 minute Non AVX passed, Aida64 30 minute FPU/cache passed.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> I use OCCT/Aida64/HCI Memtest/Karhu/3dmark. I usually run 1.39-1.42v vcore underload sometimes more if i'm at 5.4ghz, I wouldn't want to fry my chip in any of those power virus tests like gsat/linx/p95 etc. I do believe in having a stable system though, so i made sure to buy some quality programs that do the job well. GSAT/Linx/p95 are great quality programs as well but not for my usage cases.
> 
> Here is my testing regiment in no particular order:
> aida64 fpu avx enabled
> OCCT large avx enabled
> HCI memtest 95% of all ram underload
> karhu cache enabled 95% of all ram underload
> 3dmark timespy cputest only looped @ 1080p
> battlefield 5/apex legends(falkentyne pioneered these, genius idea)
> 
> 
> Currently stress testing this right now:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we failed 3.5 hours in. temps peaked at 42ish. Didn't put a fan on the ram, shame on me. Gonna put a fan on the ram and see if it passes. If not, will try trdwr @ 11. If it fails again, we go back to [email protected] with tcwl 14 and 12/8 twtr.


Worthy, even very. I will try to repeat your result. You and I have good modules and we are familiar. I can 3900 14-15-15-33 1.56V. I'm on now


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

@reachthesky

Thanks for the awesome reply. I didn't "quote" to keep the thread tidy, but I have read, digested and appreciate all the great info and insight.

I'm going to take your advice and play with those other timings once I have "finished" what I started here at 16-16-16 @ 4100.

Here is where I'm currently at if you're curious. It's turning out really great to me and I'll definitely be saving this as one of my go-to's.

I've gone through everything and did an initial tightening and now I'm working through them again, one at time and bringing them all down a second round. I'll do a third one once that is done.

At this screen shot the system is 90m OCCT Large/AVX2 and 200% per thread MemTestPro stable. I'm going to run GSAT over night to double check that the memory is solid before continuing tomorrow.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Medvediy

Could anyone help me with one thing? I've lost original antenna for Wifi/BT z390 aorus master. Need to find new one. 
Does anybody knows what type of antennas connectors are on this Motherboard?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Anyone have the Noctua NH-D15 or NH-D15S on the Master? Wanna make sure they fit.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

reachthesky said:


> Off to a good start! i'm jealous of your rtls ><. I'm curious though, whats the motivation behind running c16-4100 when c15-4000 outperforms it? You are sacrificing a full cas for only 100 megahertz extra. You could have a decent - good performing c15-4000. Difference in minimum fps/1% lows between the two @ 1080p ultra is large, like 15%-25% large. c15-4000 will give you better average fps as well. You need cas16-4174 to come close to cas15-4000 but 1% lows still aren't as good. You need cas16-4200 to sort of break even but 1% lows will be ever so slightly under. Just want all the megahertz you can get? If so, I totally understand .


Well I wasn't super keen on running at 1.50/1.30/1.30 for 24/7 use. But frankly my experience is null compared to many here... so maybe it's not that big a deal. Plus, working through the timings I was finding it much more picky and then finally, once pushed too far, it corrupted the boot loader and I had to re-install (don't care about the reinstall), and that was telling me that it was too close to the edge in terms of stability.

I'll tackle it again once I finish this profile and then run my own set of comparables to see which I prefer.


----------



## Gen.

I started doing binning, here is the result of one module


----------



## Kstyles69

I've joined the 500 club. My eyes got big seeing Command Rate 1 yields 20 extra GFLOP in LinX over Command Rate 2. :thumb:


----------



## Falkentyne

Kstyles69 said:


> I've joined the 500 club. My eyes got big seeing Command Rate 1 yields 20 extra GFLOP in LinX over Command Rate 2. :thumb:


How are you cooling that chip in LinX 0.9.6 ?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Kstyles69

Falkentyne said:


> How are you cooling that chip in LinX 0.9.6 ?


Corsair H150i AIO. Triple RAD with Noctua fans. If you have problems with heat in AVX benchmarks, try adjusting trDWR_dg to 15 and tRDWR_dd to 16 in BIOs. Lower those numbers -1 up until hit 85C max.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kstyles69 said:


> Corsair H150i AIO. Triple RAD with Noctua fans. If you have problems with heat in AVX benchmarks, try adjusting trDWR_dg to 15 and tRDWR_dd to 16 in BIOs. Lower those numbers -1 up until hit 85C max.


I adjusted those TRDWR values long ago (before anyone even mentioned them except in the DDR4 thread rarely--if you search that thread you will see me asking about this and "AVX heat") like a year ago or more, and they didn't make one iota of difference  But I gave up trying to throw 190 amps into my chip and degrading it slowly.


----------



## Gen.

Hi!


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> Nice! Try changing busclock to 101, enable fast boot for the memory and try to go into windows, see if you get the cl14-3933.


I said that I will achieve this  The other 2 modules are probably bad, you need to work with them. I want to try CR = 1


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## lpittman

Falkentyne said:


> I adjusted those TRDWR values long ago (before anyone even mentioned them except in the DDR4 thread rarely--if you search that thread you will see me asking about this and "AVX heat") like a year ago or more, and they didn't make one iota of difference  But I gave up trying to throw 190 amps into my chip and degrading it slowly.


Funny. I just spent some time on AVX temps. My discovery was tRRD_L and tRRD_S had a fairly large impact on AVX. When I set them at 6 my max package temp during OCCT Large/AVX2 is 91C, I tried dropping them down to 4 and the max package temp went up to 99C. Same ambient temp. Same tests. All very controled.


----------



## Falkentyne

lpittman said:


> Funny. I just spent some time on AVX temps. My discovery was tRRD_L and tRRD_S had a fairly large impact on AVX. When I set them at 6 my max package temp during OCCT Large/AVX2 is 91C, I tried dropping them down to 4 and the max package temp went up to 99C. Same ambient temp. Same tests. All very controled.


Yes, TRRD_S and TFAW * 4 have a large impact on Gflops (I don't know what TRRD_L should be in relation however). But I didn't test TRDWR changes with LinX, only small FFT Prime95, which might be the reason I didn't see any temp changes.


----------



## Gen.

@reachthesky Playing with the processor bus is an individual matter, I would not, honestly. Also, on a 100+ MHz bus, memory training disappears if you turn it on.
What are your modules? I have F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK.


----------



## lpittman

Well I hit the limit, I suppose without adding more voltage anywhere. Pretty happy with these results actually.

5.0 ghz/4.6 ghz @ 1.35vcore & turbo llc
1.45 vdimm & training
1.21 VCCSA
1.20 VCCIO

I suspect I could actually drop the memory voltages if I worked at it a bit more. But I would rather reset and work on the 15-15-15-32 @ 4000 I was fooling around with before.


----------



## lpittman

Falkentyne said:


> Yes, TRRD_S and TFAW * 4 have a large impact on Gflops (I don't know what TRRD_L should be in relation however). But I didn't test TRDWR changes with LinX, only small FFT Prime95, which might be the reason I didn't see any temp changes.


Ah okay. I never tested _L and _S separately mind you. Sounds like you already knew this but just thought I'd share my findings anyway!


----------



## Falkentyne

lpittman said:


> Ah okay. I never tested _L and _S separately mind you. Sounds like you already knew this but just thought I'd share my findings anyway!


I meant TFAW=TRRD_S * 4, that is.
I don't even know what these values do. I just copy what you guys do and hope for the best. I know it's some bank window access or something.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Mark Brayman

Been lurking here the last few weeks working on my 9900k OC on my Aorus Master. I posted my settings and results over on Reddit. 

What do you guys think?

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...urce=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf


----------



## Kstyles69

Gen. said:


> I started doing binning, here is the result of one module


I was going to do that also. Binning looks fun. Amazing piece of hardware you found. How many are you going to bin? Can you bin one stick at a time or you need two?


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## CoreyHUN

So i've been trying to overclock my 9900k to 4.9ghz all cores but can't get it stable.

I can get through cinebench with AVX offset at 1, but system crashes out after a few minutes on prime98 with WHEA UNCORRECTABLE ERROR.

Running latest F11c bios version.


I also have this weird behavior that I have to enable Turbo Boost, then set all Active Turbo Ratios to 49 or whatever else then disable turbo boost, otherwise it will run the previous ratios if I just disable turbo boost.

I am quite new to overclocking, I just collected some information from guides and tested around with them. Wonder if anyone can help me out to get it stable, goal would be 5.0ghz all cores

Config:
i9 9900k
Trident Z Neo 3600mhz 2x16
NZXT Kraken x72
Aorus Master


----------



## Mark Brayman

CoreyHUN said:


> So i've been trying to overclock my 9900k to 4.9ghz all cores but can't get it stable.
> 
> I can get through cinebench with AVX offset at 1, but system crashes out after a few minutes on prime98 with WHEA UNCORRECTABLE ERROR.
> 
> Running latest F11c bios version.
> 
> 
> I also have this weird behavior that I have to enable Turbo Boost, then set all Active Turbo Ratios to 49 or whatever else then disable turbo boost, otherwise it will run the previous ratios if I just disable turbo boost.
> 
> I am quite new to overclocking, I just collected some information from guides and tested around with them. Wonder if anyone can help me out to get it stable, goal would be 5.0ghz all cores
> 
> Config:
> i9 9900k
> Trident Z Neo 3600mhz 2x16
> NZXT Kraken x72
> Aorus Master



Have you changed your VCORE LLC yet? If not set it to high or turbo. Should help you with the vdroop?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CoreyHUN

If by LLC you mean the CPU Vcore loadline calibration, yes I have it changed to Turbo, you can see all the things I have changed on the screens above, (and the default favorites). Didn't change anything else.


----------



## Gen.

3600 13-13 CR=1 1.55V.


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## Dannyele

Hello guys, currently I'm stable 100% with this (i've tried to tight more the timmings but no luck at all, as I'm using 2x8):


Vcore at 1.20 in BIOS (in the image above it's at 1.17 or 1.18, but was untable sometimes while gaming).
SA 1.25
IO 1.25
DDR 1.46


















The thing is if I try to OC the 9900K (pushing vocre, chaning only the cpu clock at 50, stock cache at 43, not the ring/llc clock) then the RAM OC it gets unstable (even instant errors on Karhu)


Is it normal this behaviour? Anyway, I got bad luck on silicon lottery with this 9900k as Im stable at around 1.35 set in BIOS, so I don't know if it's worth that vcore for just 300mhz clock raise and for gaming only...


----------



## Falkentyne

Dannyele said:


> Hello guys, currently I'm stable 100% with this (i've tried to tight more the timmings but no luck at all, as I'm using 2x8):
> 
> 
> Vcore at 1.20 in BIOS (in the image above it's at 1.17 or 1.18, but was untable sometimes while gaming).
> SA 1.25
> IO 1.25
> DDR 1.46
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is if I try to OC the 9900K (pushing vocre, chaning only the cpu clock at 50, stock cache at 43, not the ring/llc clock) then the RAM OC it gets unstable (even instant errors on Karhu)
> 
> 
> Is it normal this behaviour? Anyway, I got bad luck on silicon lottery with this 9900k as Im stable at around 1.35 set in BIOS, so I don't know if it's worth that vcore for just 300mhz clock raise and for gaming only...


Yes, because you are using hyperthreading. You must raise VCCIO and VCCSA in that case and test that if just vcore isn't enough.


----------



## Gen.

reachthesky said:


> fire off an aida64 bench! Haven't seen c13 3600 cr1 before, curious what it looks like. Nice job


Come on a little later, okay? I'm trying now to make 3800 14-14-CR1, 3866 14-14-CR1, 3900 14-14-CR1


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## spazbob

Hi folks. Quick question as I'm scouring the web but struggling to find a definitive answer:

I have a z390 Aorus Master with an i9700k. I want 32GB RAM, not too worried about going to 64GB in future.

I can't find an "official" answer on whether its better these days to go with 2x 16gb or 4x 8gb. My last build was 5 years ago when it was always recommended to go with 2 sticks instead of 4 to reduce the load on the memory controller. But now, I keep finding bits of wisdom saying the Master is a T-topology board and so 4 sticks is actually better for stability? Can anyone point me to the right advice on this?

I'm not really looking to overclock the memory, I'm aiming for a cool, quiet and stable build on the 9700k.

I had ordered a Corsair LPX 3200 CL16 32GB kit, considering swapping it for some 3600 CL17 but wondering whether to go for the 4 x8gb or 2x 16gb.

Main gaming is flight sims which tend to be CPU rather than GPU limited so fast stable memory is the priority.

Thanks


----------



## reachthesky

Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


----------



## alv-OC

Hello guys!

I'ts been a while since my last post but I've been following the new posts and trying suggeted BIOS, etc...

This is mi last stable configuaration for 24/7 so far:


https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=340532&thumb=1


https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=340530&thumb=1


I can't lower the VCCIO|SA or it starts showing errors on HCI memtest regarding de RAM voltage and loosing the timings.

I'd like to get better latencies but i dont really know what specific subtimings touch or how far to go. 

- tRRD_L/S are good, as wel as tWTR_L/S wich I control through tRRWD_sg/dg
- tWR seems to have a huge impact on stability althoug I'm not sure about its impact on performance.
- I can get Cache to 4.9GHz but only stable for short time like fast Testbench, it crashes badly while gaming and don't want to trade more Vcore for that little gain in performance (if nothing)
- Higest temp I've seen was 93ºC while Stress testing on Prime 95 Small FFT, average maximun is about 80ºC and while gaming is about you can see on the screenshot (75-76ºC)

Any suggestion?


----------



## Driller au

spazbob said:


> Hi folks. Quick question as I'm scouring the web but struggling to find a definitive answer:
> 
> I have a z390 Aorus Master with an i9700k. I want 32GB RAM, not too worried about going to 64GB in future.
> 
> I can't find an "official" answer on whether its better these days to go with 2x 16gb or 4x 8gb. My last build was 5 years ago when it was always recommended to go with 2 sticks instead of 4 to reduce the load on the memory controller. But now, I keep finding bits of wisdom saying the Master is a T-topology board and so 4 sticks is actually better for stability? Can anyone point me to the right advice on this?
> 
> I'm not really looking to overclock the memory, I'm aiming for a cool, quiet and stable build on the 9700k.
> 
> I had ordered a Corsair LPX 3200 CL16 32GB kit, considering swapping it for some 3600 CL17 but wondering whether to go for the 4 x8gb or 2x 16gb.
> 
> Main gaming is flight sims which tend to be CPU rather than GPU limited so fast stable memory is the priority.
> 
> Thanks


4 sticks is better on the master because of the T-Topology,personally i would go with the 3600 mhz kit then if you decide to OC you should get 3900~4000 mhz easily. I had a 3200 mhz 32g kit in mine ended up going to 3600 mhz kit and run it at 4000 mhz 32g 
Some of memory OCers here could give you more guidance then me Try to find some samsung B-Die i got mine of amazon a few months ago


----------



## Driller au

reachthesky said:


> Deleted. Please delete and remove this account from this website as per gdpr laws.


What's this about ? I had to google what gdpr laws are


----------



## Deathtech00

Driller au said:


> What's this about ? I had to google what gdpr laws are



He frequently goes off the rails at times. Great guy, highly intelligent, but I worry that he might be having a rough go at the moment.


----------



## Sheyster

Deathtech00 said:


> He frequently goes off the rails at times. Great guy, highly intelligent, but I worry that he might be having a rough go at the moment.


Yeah... Reminds me of Two-Face from Batman. Volatile as hell. We're probably better off without him, IMHO.


----------



## Gen.

A few screenshots for you from Russia


----------



## alv-OC

I love that 3900MHz CL 14-14-14-34, but I wouldn't get there even at 1.600v on RAM, I cant even get stable at 4000 CL15-15-15-35 @ 1.5v, moreover my IMC looks like doesn't like to go over 1.300v on SA and 1.260 on IO, it start to show up RAM errors at high voltages, so it's going to be much difficult for me to be stable.


----------



## Gen.

3800 14-14 CR=1>3900 14-14 CR=2 . 3800 14-14 CR=1 ~ 3966 14-14 CR=2.


----------



## Kstyles69

Noctua NF-A4x10 FLX, 3-Pin Premium Cooling Fan (40mm) link is here
Low profile setup to cool-off your DIMMS. Dropped 3.5C. Currently at 1.41v... I'm hoping to push to 1.47v now. 
Used some heavy duty 3M double sided tape to mount.
Can use fan curve in Bios...80% speed is dead quite at 3,900 RPM.
**Edit** 1.47v tops out at 39.5C so pushing to 1.49v :specool:


----------



## reachthesky

Sheyster said:


> Yeah... Reminds me of Two-Face from Batman. Volatile as hell. We're probably better off without him, IMHO.


I don't think me expressing distain/frustration for being unhappy in the past with a product warrants character assassination. I was unkind a few times here and I apologize for that. I took back what I had said about the motherboard and had pointed out the strengths of this board. Does this make me two faced? No. This means I was really unhappy with the board for awhile and then once things got better my attitude changed towards it. I don't see that as being two faced. I see that as someone's attitude towards something changing over time towards a more positive direction, normal human behavior. I see that as a good thing. But i'm not the only person or group of people who were unhappy with it at first, I think it's more of a reflection on gigabyte, but i digress.

Violatile as hell - Insert ram overclocker joke here. I may get frustrated at times and express that frustration, but violatile? That's a bit extreme and not in the xoc type of way. Trying to learn the art of overclocking on a desktop motherboard for the first time is extremely hard, i'm sure everyone gets frustrated at times. I'm not perfect and neither are you. Again, I'm sorry.


I thank everyone for their guidances here in the past. I apologize to those who i've rubbed the wrong way and I wish you all the best.

Take care and continue the pursuit of performance.

Please delete and remove this account from this website according to GDPR laws.


----------



## Gen.

3866 14-14 CR=1 1.55V


----------



## alv-OC

Kstyles69 said:


> Noctua NF-A4x10 FLX, 3-Pin Premium Cooling Fan (40mm) link is here
> Low profile setup to cool-off your DIMMS. Dropped 3.5C. Currently at 1.41v... I'm hoping to push to 1.47v now.
> Used some heavy duty 3M double sided tape to mount.
> Can use fan curve in Bios...80% speed is dead quite at 3,900 RPM.
> **Edit** 1.47v tops out at 39.5C so pushing to 1.49v :specool:


Nice! I had a very simmilar idea:


https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=340804&thumb=1

Now with the summer comming up is almost a must-to have for me, otherwise the temps start rising fast.


----------



## lpittman

Never mind!


----------



## ShawnTRD

Got my system built yesterday. Only BIOS changes I've made is the XMP memory. Don't plan to overclock but I'm wondering if I should change any setting from AUTO to a manual setting. Like voltages or other option. Still have original F10 BIOS version


----------



## alv-OC

ShawnTRD said:


> Got my system built yesterday. Only BIOS changes I've made is the XMP memory. Don't plan to overclock but I'm wondering if I should change any setting from AUTO to a manual setting. Like voltages or other option. Still have original F10 BIOS version


If you don't want to Oveclclock and it woks at it shlould, then don't touch anything.

one thing though, Auto settings and XMP both toguether tend to put more voltge on the IMC than it really needs to work, if it concerns you have a look on HWinfo anf if they are over 1.250v you could lower them, other than that if your RAM is stable with the XMP and you don't want to have any headhache just leave it.


----------



## Kstyles69

alv-OC said:


> If you don't want to Oveclclock and it woks at it shlould, then don't touch anything.
> 
> one thing though, Auto settings and XMP both toguether tend to put more voltge on the IMC than it really needs to work, if it concerns you have a look on HWinfo anf if they are over 2.500v you could lower them, other than that if your RAM is stable with the XMP and you don't want to have any headhache just leave it.


You bought a Aorus MOBO to overclock everything. Don't think general safe default overclock is "good enough." Have fun with what you bought. Push everything to the max at safe heat/voltages then dial it down 5%. VCSSA/System Agent Voltage should be at 1.25v or less. I go with 1.24. Reference to page 849 for help.


----------



## Kstyles69

reachthesky said:


> I don't think me expressing distain/frustration for being unhappy in the past with a product warrants character assassination. I was unkind a few times here and I apologize for that. I took back what I had said about the motherboard and had pointed out the strengths of this board. Does this make me two faced? No. This means I was really unhappy with the board for awhile and then once things got better my attitude changed towards it. I don't see that as being two faced. I see that as someone's attitude towards something changing over time towards a more positive direction, normal human behavior. I see that as a good thing. But i'm not the only person or group of people who were unhappy with it at first, I think it's more of a reflection on gigabyte, but i digress.
> 
> Violatile as hell - Insert ram overclocker joke here. I may get frustrated at times and express that frustration, but violatile? That's a bit extreme and not in the xoc type of way. Trying to learn the art of overclocking on a desktop motherboard for the first time is extremely hard, i'm sure everyone gets frustrated at times. I'm not perfect and neither are you. Again, I'm sorry.
> 
> 
> I thank everyone for their guidances here in the past. I apologize to those who i've rubbed the wrong way and I wish you all the best.
> 
> Take care and continue the pursuit of performance.
> 
> Please delete and remove this account from this website according to GDPR laws.


This is a great MOBO despite setting RTL values. Memory training can be rough at times for me personally but eventually works. MOBO's capability is spot on for what I paid for. Not being able to train to 3600Mhz easily but it can train to 4000Mhz easily I think dumb...I assume I could be setting something wrong on my end. However, I rate it 9/10. This owners thread really makes the MOBO much better then any other Z390 also.


----------



## Kstyles69

spazbob said:


> Hi folks. Quick question as I'm scouring the web but struggling to find a definitive answer:
> 
> I have a z390 Aorus Master with an i9700k. I want 32GB RAM, not too worried about going to 64GB in future.
> 
> I can't find an "official" answer on whether its better these days to go with 2x 16gb or 4x 8gb. My last build was 5 years ago when it was always recommended to go with 2 sticks instead of 4 to reduce the load on the memory controller. But now, I keep finding bits of wisdom saying the Master is a T-topology board and so 4 sticks is actually better for stability? Can anyone point me to the right advice on this?
> 
> I'm not really looking to overclock the memory, I'm aiming for a cool, quiet and stable build on the 9700k.
> 
> I had ordered a Corsair LPX 3200 CL16 32GB kit, considering swapping it for some 3600 CL17 but wondering whether to go for the 4 x8gb or 2x 16gb.
> 
> Main gaming is flight sims which tend to be CPU rather than GPU limited so fast stable memory is the priority.
> 
> Thanks


Having 2 DIMMS is fine. What I've "heard" not personally "experienced" is that not having 4 DIMMS hurts the high frequency range like 3700Mhz+ overclocking. Personally, I use x2 DIMMS @ 3500Mhz at 14-16-16-32...Aida64 showing Latency at 42. I'm happy with my x2 16GB sticks setup and not interested in chasing benchmarks further. My humble opinion also is x2 DIMMS puts less strain on the CPU's memory controller so your not stressing it as much which could "in theory" yield better CPU overclock then a 4 DIMMS setup. Also 16GB DIMMS are "generally" dual rank. Having x4 dual rank 16GB DIMMS in theory should stress the CPU's IMC even more...so if your thinking about upgrading to x4 DIMMS I would do x4 8GB single rank kits....but again... this is all just theory. Bump the VSSIO and System Agent voltage to 1.25v and I'm sure your CPU could probably run any DIMM setup.


----------



## spin5000

Currently on Gigabyte BIOS F12d (most recently released BIOS)...

I have the Gigabyte Aorus Pro BIOS not truly applying RAM timings when I check in Windows even though they show correctly in the BIOS. The problem somehow went away like a month ago but now they're not sticking again. How do I fix this? I thought the issue was fixed by simply rebooting the PC a 2nd time but that's not working. Windows still showing my XMP values. Arggghhhhhhhhhh.

Never had so many issues, bugs, etc. with every major brand of motherboard in 15 years until I finally used a Gigabyte board for the first time (Aorus Z390 Pro). From vcore values that vary absolutely ridiculously (despite constant CPU frequency), to some RAM timing values being bugged and not being able to be manually set, to overall RAM timings simply not sticking, and others not mentioned. Never falling for motherboard VRM hype (the reason many moved over to Gigabyte boards for Z390) again. The other brands' equivalent boards overclock just as good and with just as good stability despite their "inferior" VRM. Unbelievable, it's like Gigabyte is a new company and Z390 is the first time they've ever made a motherboards.

I thought when everyone talked about not liking Gigabyte BIOS' that they just meant the layout was different. I figured, "who cares? In a day or 2 you'll get used to it." But I now realize I was mistaken and it's not the layout of the BIOS but rather the inner workings itself of Gigabyte BIOS' - the "under the hood" stuff" that _really_ matters - that's a mess.

It's like it doesn't matter what version of BIOS I use, it's just a mess in one way or another. Not to mention there hasn't been a BIOS update in, what, almost 5 months now on the Z390 Aorus line despite constant issues with currently released BIOS'? First and last time, at-least for the foreseeable future.

Sorry, had to rant. Couldn't take it anymore. More issues with my first every Gigabyte board than all motherboards from all other brands combined over 15 years.


EDIT: OK, I found the trick. You can restart as many times as you want or try to re-apply the BIOS settings as many times as you want and that won't work. The only way to trick the BIOS into actually working properly, at least according to what just happened here on my end, is to literally "shut down" the PC and then power it up again. A "restart" isn't good enough, you have to literally do "shut down." What a joke.


----------



## Gen.

Who cares, I specifically rechecked my setting


----------



## metalspider

spin5000 said:


> Currently on Gigabyte BIOS F12d (most recently released BIOS)...
> 
> I have the Gigabyte Aorus Pro BIOS not truly applying RAM timings when I check in Windows even though they show correctly in the BIOS. The problem somehow went away like a month ago but now they're not sticking again. How do I fix this? I thought the issue was fixed by simply rebooting the PC a 2nd time but that's not working. Windows still showing my XMP values. Arggghhhhhhhhhh.
> 
> Never had so many issues, bugs, etc. with every major brand of motherboard in 15 years until I finally used a Gigabyte board for the first time (Aorus Z390 Pro). From vcore values that vary absolutely ridiculously (despite constant CPU frequency), to some RAM timing values being bugged and not being able to be manually set, to overall RAM timings simply not sticking, and others not mentioned. Never falling for motherboard VRM hype (the reason many moved over to Gigabyte boards for Z390) again. The other brands' equivalent boards overclock just as good and with just as good stability despite their "inferior" VRM. Unbelievable, it's like Gigabyte is a new company and Z390 is the first time they've ever made a motherboards.
> 
> I thought when everyone talked about not liking Gigabyte BIOS' that they just meant the layout was different. I figured, "who cares? In a day or 2 you'll get used to it." But I now realize I was mistaken and it's not the layout of the BIOS but rather the inner workings itself of Gigabyte BIOS' - the "under the hood" stuff" that _really_ matters - that's a mess.
> 
> It's like it doesn't matter what version of BIOS I use, it's just a mess in one way or another. Not to mention there hasn't been a BIOS update in, what, almost 5 months now on the Z390 Aorus line despite constant issues with currently released BIOS'? First and last time, at-least for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Sorry, had to rant. Couldn't take it anymore. More issues with my first every Gigabyte board than all motherboards from all other brands combined over 15 years.
> 
> 
> EDIT: OK, I found the trick. You can restart as many times as you want or try to re-apply the BIOS settings as many times as you want and that won't work. The only way to trick the BIOS into actually working properly, at least according to what just happened here on my end, is to literally "shut down" the PC and then power it up again. A "restart" isn't good enough, you have to literally do "shut down." What a joke.


well technically its still a beta bios since it has the letter at the end of the version number.sounds like you didnt trigger the ram retraining until you did a complete shutdown.there's some setting for that too but nevermind.
ive been running the latest version F12e from the beta bios thread without issue.

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios.html


----------



## Gen.

Can you give me the settings for overclocking CPU to Z390 Aorus Master?


----------



## alv-OC

Kstyles69 said:


> You bought a Aorus MOBO to overclock everything. Don't think general safe default overclock is "good enough." Have fun with what you bought. Push everything to the max at safe heat/voltages then dial it down 5%. VCSSA/System Agent Voltage should be at 1.25v or less. I go with 1.24. Reference to page 849 for help.


Sometimes the IMC requires more juice to run del OC stable, especially with all RAM Slots populated, high speeds and/or weak IMCs... I can't get stable 4000MHz CL16 with less than 1.260v on IO and 1.300v on SA. IMC is rated at 1.35v max as safe, some MoBOs (some Asus on first BIOS versions, and others aswell) used to smash about 1.400v that's why no one should run XMP with VCCIO|SA on Auto. I can't say if this BIOS issues still exist, but having a look to meake sure worths the time.


----------



## Kstyles69

spin5000 said:


> Currently on Gigabyte BIOS F12d (most recently released BIOS)...
> 
> I have the Gigabyte Aorus Pro BIOS not truly applying RAM timings when I check in Windows even though they show correctly in the BIOS. The problem somehow went away like a month ago but now they're not sticking again. How do I fix this? I thought the issue was fixed by simply rebooting the PC a 2nd time but that's not working. Windows still showing my XMP values. Arggghhhhhhhhhh.
> 
> Never had so many issues, bugs, etc. with every major brand of motherboard in 15 years until I finally used a Gigabyte board for the first time (Aorus Z390 Pro). From vcore values that vary absolutely ridiculously (despite constant CPU frequency), to some RAM timing values being bugged and not being able to be manually set, to overall RAM timings simply not sticking, and others not mentioned. Never falling for motherboard VRM hype (the reason many moved over to Gigabyte boards for Z390) again. The other brands' equivalent boards overclock just as good and with just as good stability despite their "inferior" VRM. Unbelievable, it's like Gigabyte is a new company and Z390 is the first time they've ever made a motherboards.
> 
> I thought when everyone talked about not liking Gigabyte BIOS' that they just meant the layout was different. I figured, "who cares? In a day or 2 you'll get used to it." But I now realize I was mistaken and it's not the layout of the BIOS but rather the inner workings itself of Gigabyte BIOS' - the "under the hood" stuff" that _really_ matters - that's a mess.
> 
> It's like it doesn't matter what version of BIOS I use, it's just a mess in one way or another. Not to mention there hasn't been a BIOS update in, what, almost 5 months now on the Z390 Aorus line despite constant issues with currently released BIOS'? First and last time, at-least for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Sorry, had to rant. Couldn't take it anymore. More issues with my first every Gigabyte board than all motherboards from all other brands combined over 15 years.
> 
> 
> EDIT: OK, I found the trick. You can restart as many times as you want or try to re-apply the BIOS settings as many times as you want and that won't work. The only way to trick the BIOS into actually working properly, at least according to what just happened here on my end, is to literally "shut down" the PC and then power it up again. A "restart" isn't good enough, you have to literally do "shut down." What a joke.


I have two Aorus Masters and didn't have your Memory issue. Are you usings two dimms? Using DIMM slot 2 and 4 is what the manual says to do. Maybe you are putting them in slots 1 and 2 which is not how your supposed to occupy 2 dimms.


----------



## Falkentyne

spin5000 said:


> Currently on Gigabyte BIOS F12d (most recently released BIOS)...
> 
> I have the Gigabyte Aorus Pro BIOS not truly applying RAM timings when I check in Windows even though they show correctly in the BIOS. The problem somehow went away like a month ago but now they're not sticking again. How do I fix this? I thought the issue was fixed by simply rebooting the PC a 2nd time but that's not working. Windows still showing my XMP values. Arggghhhhhhhhhh.
> 
> Never had so many issues, bugs, etc. with every major brand of motherboard in 15 years until I finally used a Gigabyte board for the first time (Aorus Z390 Pro). From vcore values that vary absolutely ridiculously (despite constant CPU frequency), to some RAM timing values being bugged and not being able to be manually set, to overall RAM timings simply not sticking, and others not mentioned. Never falling for motherboard VRM hype (the reason many moved over to Gigabyte boards for Z390) again. The other brands' equivalent boards overclock just as good and with just as good stability despite their "inferior" VRM. Unbelievable, it's like Gigabyte is a new company and Z390 is the first time they've ever made a motherboards.
> 
> I thought when everyone talked about not liking Gigabyte BIOS' that they just meant the layout was different. I figured, "who cares? In a day or 2 you'll get used to it." But I now realize I was mistaken and it's not the layout of the BIOS but rather the inner workings itself of Gigabyte BIOS' - the "under the hood" stuff" that _really_ matters - that's a mess.
> 
> It's like it doesn't matter what version of BIOS I use, it's just a mess in one way or another. Not to mention there hasn't been a BIOS update in, what, almost 5 months now on the Z390 Aorus line despite constant issues with currently released BIOS'? First and last time, at-least for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Sorry, had to rant. Couldn't take it anymore. More issues with my first every Gigabyte board than all motherboards from all other brands combined over 15 years.
> 
> 
> EDIT: OK, I found the trick. You can restart as many times as you want or try to re-apply the BIOS settings as many times as you want and that won't work. The only way to trick the BIOS into actually working properly, at least according to what just happened here on my end, is to literally "shut down" the PC and then power it up again. A "restart" isn't good enough, you have to literally do "shut down." What a joke.


Why do you have fast boot or MRC fast boot enabled? Disable them both.


----------



## spin5000

Kstyles69 said:


> I have two Aorus Masters and didn't have your Memory issue. Are you usings two dimms? Using DIMM slot 2 and 4 is what the manual says to do. Maybe you are putting them in slots 1 and 2 which is not how your supposed to occupy 2 dimms.


2x 8gb sammy b-die - slots 2 & 4




Falkentyne said:


> Why do you have fast boot or MRC fast boot enabled? Disable them both.


"Fast boot" in the "Boot" menu is definitely disabled (I always disable it).

Not sure about "MRC fast boot", I can't find a setting called that.

I did see a setting in the "Tweaker" menu called "memory boot mode" and that's set to auto (the entire "Tweaker" menu is set to auto).

Anyways. The problem fixed itself after the full shut-down. It came back once but then I did a shut-down again (2x in a row just to be sure) and it went away again and hasn't come back since although I haven't changed any memory timings manually, I've only loaded saved BIOS profiles so maybe I haven't tested it properly (maybe the issue doesn't happen when memory timings change from loaded BIOS profiles but only from manual tweaks). Seems to be OK for now.

Speaking of the "Tweaker" menu, does anyone know if I should change any of the following settings from auto for Sammy B-die RAM OC'ing (2x8GB 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 TridentZ RGB kit)? I currently have them still at stock frequency & primary timings but now that I've got some fairly decent secondary & tertiary timings nailed down (needed vram 1.40v, 1.38v had errors), I'd like to get into experimenting with frequency & primaries. Trying to see if I can do either 4266, 4133, or 4000 considering they're b-dies.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

@Gen. @Falkentyne 4x8GB 4400MHz 19-19-19-39-2T VDimm/1.4v SA-IO/1.35v


----------



## Gen.

XGS-Duplicity said:


> @Gen. @Falkentyne 4x8GB 4400MHz 19-19-19-39-2T VDimm/1.4v SA-IO/1.35v


Please Karhu RAM TEST, HCI MEMTEST, TestMem5 @extreme1.


----------



## alv-OC

I thought that my rig is haunted or something;

Every thing was working fine for over a week, then on friday my GF was playing Witcher 3 and she told me that the PC just went black and turned on again, when I went to see what happened I realised that the 2nd BIOS kicked in and all the configuration was basically on Deafult. I spent yesterday all day trying to get it back working as before but it wouldn't boot with the RAM over 3600MHz regardless the voltage... I flashed both BIOS twice, swaped the RAM sticks in different slots, tryed different timings... then today I decided to take all apart, reasemble and it came to life as before. Currently 100% stable acoding to HCI memtest...

Trying to find anything realted on internet I found a guy on a OC forum in a Discord channel that I'm in and he told me that somtimes the OC frames for Direct Die Contact can get bent enough (the metal is too thin) or get loose over time to cause stability issues due to poor contact with the socket... thant could explain why my PC got fixed after reasembling.

Just wanted to share with you in case it happens to someone else.


----------



## Medvediy

@alv-OC, bios version you use?


----------



## alv-OC

@Medvediy F11e currently, and I also have F11c on the 2nd BIOS, for me the F11e seems to perfom a bit better


----------



## metalspider

spin5000 said:


> 2x 8gb sammy b-die - slots 2 & 4
> 
> 
> "Fast boot" in the "Boot" menu is definitely disabled (I always disable it).
> 
> Not sure about "MRC fast boot", I can't find a setting called that.
> 
> I did see a setting in the "Tweaker" menu called "memory boot mode" and that's set to auto (the entire "Tweaker" menu is set to auto).
> 
> Anyways. The problem fixed itself after the full shut-down. It came back once but then I did a shut-down again (2x in a row just to be sure) and it went away again and hasn't come back since although I haven't changed any memory timings manually, I've only loaded saved BIOS profiles so maybe I haven't tested it properly (maybe the issue doesn't happen when memory timings change from loaded BIOS profiles but only from manual tweaks). Seems to be OK for now.
> 
> Speaking of the "Tweaker" menu, does anyone know if I should change any of the following settings from auto for Sammy B-die RAM OC'ing (2x8GB 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 TridentZ RGB kit)? I currently have them still at stock frequency & primary timings but now that I've got some fairly decent secondary & tertiary timings nailed down (needed vram 1.40v, 1.38v had errors), I'd like to get into experimenting with frequency & primaries. Trying to see if I can do either 4266, 4133, or 4000 considering they're b-dies.


best i could do stable on my aorus pro was 3866mhz maybe with newer bioses i should try again but i dont want to.can get 4000mhz to boot and look ok but havent tested enough to say its stable.before f11 it never did that.
i have some gskill bdies with an xmp of 4266mhz 19-19-19-39


----------



## spin5000

metalspider said:


> best i could do stable on my aorus pro was 3866mhz maybe with newer bioses i should try again but i dont want to.can get 4000mhz to boot and look ok but havent tested enough to say its stable.before f11 it never did that.
> i have some gskill bdies with an xmp of 4266mhz 19-19-19-39


Your kit is rated for 4266 and you can't go higher than 3866? I thought the point of spending extra money for sammy b-dies is because they're the best overclockers yet you're having to downclock...I'm assuming this is either due to a weak motherboard itself, mother BIOS, or CPU IMC (or a combo) rather than the RAM kit itself...Yes?


----------



## KedarWolf

Been having a ton of good times with my 3950x and tweaking stuff, even got memory at decent timings at 3800MHz which is good for the platform. 

Anyways, here's the F11e Master BIOS, two versions, one with the latest, most secure microcodes, another with the BA/BE microcodes, the best performing ones.

The RST, GOP and Ethernet firmwares all the latest as well. 

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

Be in the Main BIOS, not the Backup BIOS, and the following command will flash both BIOS's.


Code:


efiflash 1.11e /x /db

if you just want to flash the selected BIOS by itself,


Code:


efiflash 1.11e /x

*I strongly recommend you select the backup BIOS to flash first by itself with


Code:


efiflash 1.11e /x

 as I cannot test these BIOS's (they have ALWAYS worked fine in the past) then you can flash it back to a known working BIOS if your BIOS does not work by selecting the Main BIOS using the DIP switch on the motherboard and


Code:


efiflash bios.*** /x /db

*Use the modded Master F11e BIOS, the efiflashexe and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## stasio

Master and some others new BetaBIOS (F12f) on TT forum.....


----------



## alv-OC

@KedarWolf thank you sir  I'll be trying my current F11e against the F11e with fastest microcodes later today


EDIT: I just flashed my BuckUp BIOS from F11c to F11e with fastest microcodes, same config as my other F11e BIOS. I can't notice much difference, it trained memory right away and mabe 20/25 more points on Cinebench R15, latency exact same.


----------



## Medvediy

stasio said:


> Master and some others new BetaBIOS (F12f) on TT forum.....


Great thx! No info about changes?


----------



## stasio

Medvediy said:


> Great thx! No info about changes?


No.


----------



## CoreyHUN

So my config is the following:
z390 Aorus Master.
i9 9900k
NZXT Kraken X72
Trident Z Neo 2x16GB 3600mhz.

I've been tinkering around with overclocking in the past days.I think I got a stable 4.9ghz all core overclock with 0 AVX offset at 1.3 Vcore, Survives Cinebench R20, maximum 87°C degrees. 
On Prime95 small FFTs without AVX, I get up to 95°C real fast, I stop the stress-test there, same happens with Aida64's FPU only test. I had a few hours gaming session with RDR2, maximum temperatures of 52-54°C
Not sure if these temperatures are okay? 

Changes I made in BIOS (version F9)
Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
XMP Enabled
CPU Clock Ratio: 49
CPU Vcore: 1.300v
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
Intel Speedshift: Disabled
Turbo Boost: Disabled (if not, all active turbo ratios at 49)


----------



## GeneO

stasio said:


> Master and some others new BetaBIOS (F12f) on TT forum.....


Whee, something new to play with! Thanks


----------



## WINTENDOX

What BIOS aorus Master recomiend oc? Used oficial f11c other BIOS actualized?

Enviado desde mi Redmi Note 8 Pro mediante Tapatalk


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

@Gen. 
Работая на стабильность 35.1ns


----------



## GeneO

The new Master f11f BIOS has the "fast" microcodes. I updated the RST EFI and ROM with UBU and flashed the BIOS, entered my 51x overclock (didn't notice anything new in the BIOS). So far nothing remarkable.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> The new Master f11f BIOS has the "fast" microcodes. I updated the RST EFI and ROM with UBU and flashed the BIOS, entered my 51x overclock (didn't notice anything new in the BIOS). So far nothing remarkable.


Well that's a pleasant surprise for sure. Thank you.


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> @Gen.
> Работая на стабильность 35.1ns



This is actually awesome work dude 




GeneO said:


> The new Master f11f BIOS has the "fast" microcodes. I updated the RST EFI and ROM with UBU and flashed the BIOS, entered my 51x overclock (didn't notice anything new in the BIOS). So far nothing remarkable.



Thank you so much for taking the time to check and share


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> This is actually awesome work dude
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you so much for taking the time to check and share


감사합니다

@Gen. 
Ошибка c14 / 3933. Работаю над этим сейчас.


----------



## metalspider

spin5000 said:


> Your kit is rated for 4266 and you can't go higher than 3866? I thought the point of spending extra money for sammy b-dies is because they're the best overclockers yet you're having to downclock...I'm assuming this is either due to a weak motherboard itself, mother BIOS, or CPU IMC (or a combo) rather than the RAM kit itself...Yes?


well thats high speed ram for you.yes its a motherboard limitation as far as i can tell since it doesnt have as many pcb layers as the aorus master for example.
it was the cheapest good bdie i could find at the time and its 2 kits of 2x8gb and not a single kit of matched 4x8gb which can matter too apparently.

getting speeds over 3866mhz to work is tough so i didnt expect the ram to run at its xmp.
too bad it didnt have a slower xmp profile too but i tuned it manually and getting decent performance out of it.


----------



## bastian

GeneO said:


> The new Master f11f BIOS has the "fast" microcodes. I updated the RST EFI and ROM with UBU and flashed the BIOS, entered my 51x overclock (didn't notice anything new in the BIOS). So far nothing remarkable.


Than this is probably not a BIOS from Gigabyte - why would they downgrade their BIOSs to less secure versions?

I personally avoid all BIOSs posted on that forum - as they get them from "whereever". Not just official from Gigabyte.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

at 13-13-13-28 on 4x8gb dimms, board trained 3500 automatically instead of 3900. 

This was the best I could do for latency. Going back to rework [email protected] to get memtest stable.


----------



## Falkentyne

bastian said:


> Than this is probably not a BIOS from Gigabyte - why would they downgrade their BIOSs to less secure versions?
> 
> I personally avoid all BIOSs posted on that forum - as they get them from "whereever". Not just official from Gigabyte.


They get them from Gigabyte.
Either directly from HQ or released to end users who are trying to get bug fixes.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

bastian said:


> Than this is probably not a BIOS from Gigabyte - why would they downgrade their BIOSs to less secure versions?
> 
> I personally avoid all BIOSs posted on that forum - as they get them from "whereever". Not just official from Gigabyte.



I used a modded bios with fast microcodes to achieve memtest stable [email protected] awhile back. It could not be done on any official bios, modded/microcode bios is a requirement for that. I think modded bios with fast microcodes or updated irst etc etc is good and can be helpful for users who are in the pursuit of performance or wish to have those features. It is optional and good to have available for those who want them.


----------



## bastian

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I used a modded bios with fast microcodes to achieve memtest stable [email protected] awhile back. It could not be done on any official bios, modded/microcode bios is a requirement for that. I think modded bios with fast microcodes or updated irst etc etc is good and can be helpful for users who are in the pursuit of performance or wish to have those features. It is optional and good to have available for those who want them.


I don't think users should run older microcodes with less secure mitigations just to gain a few points in a synthetic benchmark.

Anyway, I question the source of this most recent microcode, as Gigabyte would not be developing eventual public BIOSs with less secure mitigations. The only justification I could see them running a newer build BIOS with older less secure microcodes is they definitely didn't think it would be out in the public and they are testing something specific.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

bastian said:


> I don't think users should run older microcodes with less secure mitigations just to gain a few points in a synthetic benchmark.
> 
> Anyway, I question the source of this most recent microcode, as Gigabyte would not be developing eventual public BIOSs with less secure mitigations. The only justification I could see them running a newer build BIOS with older less secure microcodes is they definitely didn't think it would be out in the public and they are testing something specific.



I was under the impression modded bioses are a work of labor by the community though someone can correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## bastian

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I was under the impression modded bioses are a work of labor by the community though someone can correct me if I am wrong.


There can be some benefit, like updating other things not yet updated. But mitigations are there for a reason.


----------



## GeneO

bastian said:


> I don't think users should run older microcodes with less secure mitigations just to gain a few points in a synthetic benchmark.
> 
> Anyway, I question the source of this most recent microcode, as Gigabyte would not be developing eventual public BIOSs with less secure mitigations. The only justification I could see them running a newer build BIOS with older less secure microcodes is they definitely didn't think it would be out in the public and they are testing something specific.


Frankly, that is their business, not yours. 

Gigabyte doesn't really keep their BIOS secure. They never update the ME firmware (check with the Intel CSME tool to see if the management engine firmware is secure). In addition, Microsoft updates microcode through Windows and the latest microcode updates from Microsoft, are those "fast" microcodes. This is important point since most microcode security fixes also require operating system code changes in order to implement the security fix. 

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4497165/kb4497165-intel-microcode-updates

This is not the first time Gigabyte has done this. It is *BETA* firmware after all, and Gigabytre has been known to regress fixes fixes (llke providing a new beta based on much older version) for example. In other words they aren't very careful with their beta.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

bastian said:


> There can be some benefit, like updating other things not yet updated. But mitigations are there for a reason.



I dunno what to tell you. If you want the mitigations, use them, if not, then don't. You can totally decide for yourself, just not for other people. But it sounds like you've made your stance. So what now? What is the next step after you've decided that you prefer the security mitigations?


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I used a modded bios with fast microcodes to achieve memtest stable [email protected] awhile back. It could not be done on any official bios, modded/microcode bios is a requirement for that. I think modded bios with fast microcodes or updated irst etc etc is good and can be helpful for users who are in the pursuit of performance or wish to have those features. It is optional and good to have available for those who want them.


4200MHz ClL15 is my wet dream hahaha  I can't go over either 4200 CL17 or 4000MHz CL 16, wich is theorically almost the same. I migt get satbe al 4000MHz CL5 smashing a ton of voltage in the IMC and the RAM but I'm on de edge of the safe limit for a daily OC.... perhaps loosing a bit the secondry timings? Damm it! now I feel the urge to test it.


----------



## Smokediggity

On my Master, the Core Current Limit (Amps) and CPU VCore/VAXG Protection options are missing from F11f and the Turbo Per Core Limit Control menu is broken (it should be expandable).


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> On my Master, the Core Current Limit (Amps) and CPU VCore/VAXG Protection options are missing from F11f and the Turbo Per Core Limit Control menu is broken (it should be expandable).


Oh wow. They used the wrong code branch again? That would also mean tREFI gets locked to 65534 if you exceed 9998 ...

Didn't the same thing happen with f11d ? f11e used the new code branch. Send them over a bug report in a support ticket if possible.


----------



## GeneO

Smokediggity said:


> On my Master, the Core Current Limit (Amps) and CPU VCore/VAXG Protection options are missing from F11f and the Turbo Per Core Limit Control menu is broken (it should be expandable).


CPU Vcore and VAXG Current protection limits are there in my f11f. Forgot to check on current limit and Turbo Per Core Control. Hang on.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> CPU Vcore and VAXG Current protection limits are there in my f11f. Forgot to check on current limit and Turbo Per Core Control. Hang on.


Can you kindly check on the RAM tREFI setting also?
If settings >9998 actually work then all the menus should work. Unless a new bug surfaced.


----------



## Smokediggity

Falkentyne said:


> Oh wow. They used the wrong code branch again? That would also mean tREFI gets locked to 65534 if you exceed 9998 ...
> 
> Didn't the same thing happen with f11d ? f11e used the new code branch. Send them over a bug report in a support ticket if possible.


I didn't check tREFI before going back to F11e, but it certainly feels like they used the broken F11b (which I believe F11d was also based on) branch given the other missing options. I'll send them a bug report shortly.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Can you kindly check on the RAM tREFI setting also?
> If settings >9998 actually work then all the menus should work. Unless a new bug surfaced.


Will check later. Going out for a bike ride.


----------



## Smokediggity

Falkentyne said:


> Can you kindly check on the RAM tREFI setting also?
> If settings >9998 actually work then all the menus should work. Unless a new bug surfaced.


I reflashed F11f just for you. I can confirm that the tREFI bug has returned. F11f was definitely built using the wrong branch, again...


----------



## GeneO

Decided not to ride. 

anything over trefi = 9998 goes to 65k


----------



## Falkentyne

Smokediggity said:


> I reflashed F11f just for you. I can confirm that the tREFI bug has returned. F11f was definitely built using the wrong branch, again...


Thank you. I just reported it.
Does using a VRM Switching frequency of 500 khz still require a higher CPU Vcore than 300 khz (this apparently only applies when Loadline Calibration is higher than "low").


----------



## GeneO

IDK. Went back to f11e. Seems like every other beta is a cluster f*


----------



## Dibbler

GeneO said:


> IDK. Went back to f11e. Seems like every other beta is a cluster f*



Is there any chance that you could upload the F11e bios for the Master board.? 

I downloaded and applied the latest beta but then it seems that the previous betas for the Z390 boards have been edited out of their linked post. 

If anyone else has got a copy of that bios and could upload it that would be great. 

Thanks.


----------



## Falkentyne

Dibbler said:


> Is there any chance that you could upload the F11e bios for the Master board.?
> 
> I downloaded and applied the latest beta but then it seems that the previous betas for the Z390 boards have been edited out of their linked post.
> 
> If anyone else has got a copy of that bios and could upload it that would be great.
> 
> Thanks.


Attached original f11e (with slower microcodes) and modded f11e with fastest microcodes (only one changed was 96 for 9900k, B4 for R0 steppings). 96 was the first release microcode. 84 was pre-release and also pre-spectre mitigations but that doesn't allow TJMax changing and VID is capped at 1.320v (VID, not vcore). So 96...

Modded ones MUST be flashed with EFIflash /X in command prompt from a Fat32 USB boot disk (e.g. Rufus, etc).


----------



## Dibbler

Falkentyne said:


> Attached original f11e (with slower microcodes) and modded f11e with fastest microcodes (only one changed was 96 for 9900k, B4 for R0 steppings). 96 was the first release microcode. 84 was pre-release and also pre-spectre mitigations but that doesn't allow TJMax changing and VID is capped at 1.320v (VID, not vcore). So 96...
> 
> Modded ones MUST be flashed with EFIflash /X in command prompt from a Fat32 USB boot disk (e.g. Rufus, etc).


That is very generous of you, thanks for posting both of them. Most appreciated.


----------



## alv-OC

Need help guys

I've trying to go from this:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=342162&thumb=1

Either way:

1 Going up to 4200MHz mantaining the same latencies with 1.300v in both VCCSA/IO and 1.520v on DRAM but I keep getting few 'Copy' errors on HCImemtest.

2 keeping 4000MHz and lowering primary timings to 15-15-15-35 but I get many many errors also bumping the voltages.


What else do you think I can do?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> Need help guys
> 
> I've trying to go from this:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=342162&thumb=1
> 
> Either way:
> 
> 1 Going up to 4200MHz mantaining the same latencies with 1.300v in both VCCSA/IO and 1.520v on DRAM but I keep getting few 'Copy' errors on HCImemtest.
> 
> 2 keeping 4000MHz and lowering primary timings to 15-15-15-35 but I get many many errors also bumping the voltages.
> 
> 
> What else do you think I can do?


My suggestion is to see how your ram kit scales at each cas/frequency with secondaries/tertiaries on auto. For example, see how much voltage it takes c16 4000/4100/4133 etc to be stable with only the primaries set.


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> My suggestion is to see how your ram kit scales at each cas/frequency with secondaries/tertiaries on auto. For example, see how much voltage it takes c16 4000/4100/4133 etc to be stable with only the primaries set.


Sure I actually did it some time ago, I remember that required much less in the IMC, like 1.190v and 1.220v, RAM was about 1.450v, for 4200MHz Cl 17 and all the rest on Auto. 

Isn't it weird that huge jump in voltaje for just 1 step on primary latencies (and tight secondaries)?? I thoung that I could maby loose some of the secondary and tertiary timings,... do you think RTLs and IOLs looks fine? Also i'm using 60 60 120 120 40 40 on the Rtt's


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> Sure I actually did it some time ago, I remember that required much less in the IMC, like 1.190v and 1.220v, RAM was about 1.450v, for 4200MHz Cl 17 and all the rest on Auto.
> 
> Isn't it weird that huge jump in voltaje for just 1 step on primary latencies (and tight secondaries)?? I thoung that I could maby loose some of the secondary and tertiary timings,... do you think RTLs and IOLs looks fine? Also i'm using 60 60 120 120 40 40 on the Rtt's



There is indeed a huge jump when switching a full cas similar to how a chip's frequency scales with voltage.

the rtls/iols look about what i'd expect from [email protected] on this board give or take, They have a chance at being stable since they are aligned. Did you manually set the rtts? or did you leave them on auto for the motherboard to handle it? If you were to put the rtts on auto, train the ram and then go back into the bios not once but twice after training the ram, what rtts does the motherboard give you?


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> There is indeed a huge jump when switching a full cas similar to how a chip's frequency scales with voltage.
> 
> the rtls/iols look about what i'd expect from [email protected] on this board give or take, They have a chance at being stable since they are aligned. Did you manually set the rtts? or did you leave them on auto for the motherboard to handle it? If you were to put the rtts on auto, train the ram and then go back into the bios not once but twice after training the ram, what rtts does the motherboard give you?



Alright I've tryed what you said, Rtts on auto a let the MoBo do MemTraining twice MY Rtts now are 80 80 20 20 60 60, what does this tell you? should I try MemTraining after CMOS?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> Alright I've tryed what you said, Rtts on auto a let the MoBo do MemTraining twice MY Rtts now are 80 80 20 20 60 60, what does this tell you? should I try MemTraining after CMOS?


Is your ram profile stable with the new rtts?


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Is your ram profile stable with the new rtts?


Yes, the exact same confing with Auto Rtt's is stable so far, 110% on HCI. I've tryed then 4200 Cl16 and Cl15, pased Training but got errors on HCI, also 4000MHz Cl15 and same resoult, 'copy' errors

all this other tests were done with 1.300v VCCIO and 1.320v VCCSA and 1.560v on RAM (BIOS F11e w/ fast microcodes)

I have no clue to what else I can do.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> Yes, the exact same confing with Auto Rtt's is stable so far, 110% on HCI. I've tryed then 4200 Cl16 and Cl15, pased Training but got errors on HCI, also 4000MHz Cl15 and same resoult, 'copy' errors
> 
> all this other tests were done with 1.300v VCCIO and 1.320v VCCSA and 1.560v on RAM (BIOS F11e w/ fast microcodes)
> 
> I have no clue to what else I can do.



i'm assuming if you want those high memory ocs to be memtest stable, modded bios is required. I used to use it awhile back. I stopped using it because during every single restart/reboot and post ram training the motherboard would get stuck on a code 50 for 4 seconds then resume whatever it was supposed to do next. I think I was the only one to have this issue, could just be my hardware. Dunno if it has to do with my ram kit or what not. Even after a reflash it kept happening. I also didn't like it because at the time, I was working on cl14-3900 on f9 bios and the rtls were something like 56/55/57/56 or something like that so the f11e didn't allow me to punch those in for easy training. Rtls can still train funky for the tighter primaries/higher frequencies so its important that i'm able to re-enter all four of them manually to retrain.


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> i'm assuming if you want those high memory ocs to be memtest stable, modded bios is required. I used to use it awhile back. I stopped using it because during every single restart/reboot and post ram training the motherboard would get stuck on a code 50 for 4 seconds then resume whatever it was supposed to do next. I think I was the only one to have this issue, could just be my hardware. Dunno if it has to do with my ram kit or what not. Even after a reflash it kept happening. I also didn't like it because at the time, I was working on cl14-3900 on f9 bios and the rtls were something like 56/55/57/56 or something like that so the f11e didn't allow me to punch those in for easy training.


Ive seen people saying that F10 (one of its versions, can't recall) was a little more friendly with RAM OC despite al the other issues with AVX offset and that stuff, which one would you reccomend me for a greater RAM estability? I'm currently on F11e moded by KedarWolf.

In the meantime I will CMOS and keep trying this settings, I've found that the more you force training the memory with a specific settings it tends to figure it out how to make it work...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> Ive seen people saying that F10 (one of its versions, can't recall) was a little more friendly with RAM OC despite al the other issues with AVX offset and that stuff, which one would you reccomend me for a greater RAM estability? I'm currently on F11e moded by KedarWolf.
> 
> In the meantime I will CMOS and keep trying this settings, I've found that the more you force training the memory with a specific settings it tends to figure it out how to make it work...



I wouldn't be able to give you a concrete answer here. I don't have extensive testing for all the bioses. I tried a few out. I have to go. Good luck everyone


----------



## lpittman

Hey guys,

I've got my system running "stable" with 5.0 ghz, 0 avx offset, 4.6ghz cache and the memory tuned to 16-16-16-4100 with all secondaries and tertiaries tightened.

Other fun info:
llc: turbo
vcore: 1.33
vr vout: 1.27 (under 100% load obv)
vdimm: 1.45
vccsa: 1.21
vccio: 1.20

By stable I mean 90m OCCT Large/AVX2 and 1000%+ HCI MemTestPro, plus hours of Warzone.

During OCCT the CPU Package maxes out at 89C and averages 77C.

For the hell of it I thought I'd see if I can squeeze 5.1 out of it. I started by bumping vcore up to 1.34, then 1.35, 1.36 and finally just went to 1.38 and couldn't get it to pass OCCT. It just BSODs with the WHEA uncontrollable error.

I understand that that is usually an indication that there isn't enough vcore, however I don't think I need to be up over 1.38 to get this stable and I suspect it's my memory settings.

Anyone have any thoughts/tips/info that would be helpful right now? I'd rather not have to start loosening off timings. Are there other bios settings that could help here?

Cheers


----------



## Driller au

alv-OC said:


> Ive seen people saying that F10 (one of its versions, can't recall) was a little more friendly with RAM OC despite al the other issues with AVX offset and that stuff, which one would you reccomend me for a greater RAM estability? I'm currently on F11e moded by KedarWolf.
> 
> In the meantime I will CMOS and keep trying this settings, I've found that the more you force training the memory with a specific settings it tends to figure it out how to make it work...


F10b is the one your looking for this is Kedarwolfs modded one


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> F10b is the one your looking for this is Kedarwolfs modded one


Here is F10b, but with newer matching RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware, the same fastest microcodes though. 

Loving my AMD 3950x and 2x16GB Trident Z Neo 16-16-16-38 3600 RAM at 3800MHz.

Come to the Dark Side, peeps, you'll be rewarded.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F10b, but with newer matching RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware, the same fastest microcodes though.
> 
> Loving my AMD 3950x and 2x16GB Trident Z Neo 16-16-16-38 3600 RAM at 3800MHz.
> 
> Come to the Dark Side, peeps, you'll be rewarded.


Do they have cookies ?


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F10b, but with newer matching RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware, the same fastest microcodes though.
> 
> Loving my AMD 3950x and 2x16GB Trident Z Neo 16-16-16-38 3600 RAM at 3800MHz.
> 
> Come to the Dark Side, peeps, you'll be rewarded.


thank you sir! 

Any bug or error to be awere of when testing this BIOS?


----------



## Deathtech00

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F10b, but with newer matching RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware, the same fastest microcodes though.
> 
> Loving my AMD 3950x and 2x16GB Trident Z Neo 16-16-16-38 3600 RAM at 3800MHz.
> 
> Come to the Dark Side, peeps, you'll be rewarded.





alv-OC said:


> thank you sir!
> 
> Any bug or error to be awere of when testing this BIOS?



Just got myself some b-die. Rocking [email protected] completely stable, and can probably go a little lower, just got it yesterday. This platform still ain't half bad, considering its age in comparison to the newer AMD ones, and a lot of us bought it around the end of Dec 2018.


----------



## warbucks

Deathtech00 said:


> Just got myself some b-die. Rocking [email protected] completely stable, and can probably go a little lower, just got it yesterday. This platform still ain't half bad, considering its age in comparison to the newer AMD ones, and a lot of us bought it around the end of Dec 2018.


What's your Vcore, VCCIO/SA/ VDimm and Cache set to?


----------



## Salve1412

Deathtech00 said:


> [
> 
> Just got myself some b-die. Rocking [email protected] completely stable, and can probably go a little lower, just got it yesterday. This platform still ain't half bad, considering its age in comparison to the newer AMD ones, and a lot of us bought it around the end of Dec 2018.


Completely stable in what sense? Have you run any Memory testing application, and if so which one, if I may ask you? Which RAM kit do you have and which voltages are you running DRAM, VCCIO, VCCSA at? Sorry for all the questions, but I spent a lot of time trying to make a 4266 QVL kit Memtest stable with two different Masters, a 9900k and a KS without any success so I eventually gave up... I'm really curious to know how people manage to do that.


----------



## Deathtech00

warbucks said:


> What's your Vcore, VCCIO/SA/ VDimm and Cache set to?



I'm still working on stabilizing voltages to a non test level, but they aren't terrible. Later today I am going to try reducing IO/SA. I just got the kit yesterday afternoon, and I'm a single dad, so I don't have as much time as some of you guys 


5GHz all core, 0 AVX, Liquid metal with a custom polished straight copper heatsink. I also have a complete custom water loop to cool with, which helps tremendously. Temps in hardcore AVX tests have never exceeded 80 Degrees, so I may have a bit of headroom. I am not interested in chasing bench numbers, but I do require stability. PCH temps after running multiple VM's all day never even got to 50 Deg. 



Vcore is at 1.325/VCCIO 1.28/VCCSA 1.32/ Vdimm 1.45 (XMP Voltage default)/47 Ring

Edit : To Clarify, 100% Stable TM5 @ 1000%, and ran again for about an hour and a half in the TM5 built in test within Ryzen Dram calc.
I am using a straight voltage OC currently, as I haven't quite got the adaptive style dialed in. I am also using @*KedarWolf* 's F9 UEFI, but am going to look at the new F10 he dropped on us yesterday.


Edit 2: Adding some temps. Make sure to +Rep if this post has helped you out!


----------



## Deathtech00

Salve1412 said:


> Completely stable in what sense? Have you run any Memory testing application, and if so which one, if I may ask you? Which RAM kit do you have and which voltages are you running DRAM, VCCIO, VCCSA at? Sorry for all the questions, but I spent a lot of time trying to make a 4266 QVL kit Memtest stable with two different Masters, a 9900k and a KS without any success so I eventually gave up... I'm really curious to know how people manage to do that.



XMP dials in great once you set SA and IO to auto. it wants to juice it pretty hard though, so I am already running it leaner than what "AUTO" wants to set it to by quite a bit. You definately want to play around with each individual kit.


These are TEAMGROUP XTREEM modules, that recently went on sale. I bought the 4300 kit, with full intention of downclocking it to 4000 and getting some tighter timings, hoping it was just a slightly better binned version of the 4100's. So far, it seems to have paid off, and I am rocking 4266 at or below the XMP settings.



I bought 2 of the 16GB kits, as I do a lot of virtualization and utilize Hyper-threading and VT-d. These are non-RGB modules, which was a plus for me, but some may not care for it. I am already thinking of ways I want to "de-badge" it even further. It should also be noted that I believe these are also QVL certified, but cant confirm atm.


https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820331243?Item=N82E16820331243


Edit : Make sure to +Rep if this post has helped you out!


----------



## Salve1412

Deathtech00 said:


> I'm still working on stabilizing voltages to a non test level, but they aren't terrible. Later today I am going to try reducing IO/SA. I just got the kit yesterday afternoon, and I'm a single dad, so I don't have as much time as some of you guys /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 5GHz all core, 0 AVX, Liquid metal with a custom polished straight copper heatsink. I also have a complete custom water loop to cool with, which helps tremendously. Temps in hardcore AVX tests have never exceeded 80 Degrees, so I may have a bit of headroom. I am not interested in chasing bench numbers, but I do require stability. PCH temps after running multiple VM's all day never even got to 50 Deg.
> 
> 
> 
> Vcore is at 1.325/VCCIO 1.28/VCCSA 1.32/ Vdimm 1.45 (XMP Voltage default)/47 Ring
> 
> Edit : To Clarify, 100% Stable TM5 @ 1000%, and ran again for about an hour and a half in the TM5 built in test within Ryzen Dram calc.
> I am using a straight voltage OC currently, as I haven't quite got the adaptive style dialed in. I am also using @*KedarWolf* 's F9 UEFI, but am going to look at the new F10 he dropped on us yesterday.
> 
> 
> Edit 2: Adding some temps. Make sure to +Rep if this post has helped you out!





Deathtech00 said:


> XMP dials in great once you set SA and IO to auto. it wants to juice it pretty hard though, so I am already running it leaner than what "AUTO" wants to set it to by quite a bit. You definately want to play around with each individual kit.
> 
> 
> These are TEAMGROUP XTREEM modules, that recently went on sale. I bought the 4300 kit, with full intention of downclocking it to 4000 and getting some tighter timings, hoping it was just a slightly better binned version of the 4100's. So far, it seems to have paid off, and I am rocking 4266 at or below the XMP settings.
> 
> 
> 
> I bought 2 of the 16GB kits, as I do a lot of virtualization and utilize Hyper-threading and VT-d. These are non-RGB modules, which was a plus for me, but some may not care for it. I am already thinking of ways I want to "de-badge" it even further. It should also be noted that I believe these are also QVL certified, but cant confirm atm.
> 
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/team-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820331243?Item=N82E16820331243
> 
> 
> Edit : Make sure to +Rep if this post has helped you out!


Well, that seems quite a nice result, and at reasonable voltages too! Max memtest stable I could do with relatively low voltages and tight timings was 4133 CL16, so well done! Thanks for the answer.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

deleted.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

deleted


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

deleted.


----------



## lpittman

What would you guys consider the absolute best low-profile memory, regardless of price?


----------



## Medvediy

XGS-Duplicity said:


> i'm going to add more frequencies and some guesses to the table.
> 1.5v 3733 - 14-13-13-28/30


Great work! Could you make the same for 1.4 and 1.45V?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Medvediy said:


> Great work! Could you make the same for 1.4 and 1.45V?


trying to squeeze the most performance possible so it will require more than 1.4 or 1.45.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

I want to share something in regards to memory OC usability/stability on this board with f9 bios.


My 5.25ghz 8c/8t with powersaving preset + low llc + offset cannot play games with [email protected] @1.5v vdimm. I couldn't even launch modern warfare without it crashing, tried several attempts.



If i use acdc-1/1 + high llc + offset for the same core/cache frequency instead, i can play games with [email protected] @1.5v vdimm. No issues playing modern warfare let alone launching it.


If i tried powersaving preset + medium llc or high llc + offset , it isn't usable.



Only thing I can take away from this behavior is that higher llc + manual acdc + offset may be required for higher memory oc, at least when it comes to dvid mode oc.


----------



## Wirerat

lpittman said:


> What would you guys consider the absolute best low-profile memory, regardless of price?


Corsair vengeance LPX goes to 4400mhz cl 19. B-die at 4000mhz and above speeds. Gonna be expensive. 

Crucial balistix sport uses Micron E dies. The 3000 cl 15 and 3200 cl 16 kits both oc to 3600 cl 16 or better. These are much cheaper.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I want to share something in regards to memory OC usability/stability on this board with f9 bios.
> 
> 
> My 5.25ghz 8c/8t with powersaving preset + low llc + offset cannot play games with [email protected] @1.5v vdimm. I couldn't even launch modern warfare without it crashing, tried several attempts.
> 
> 
> 
> If i use acdc-1/1 + high llc + offset for the same core/cache frequency instead, i can play games with [email protected] @1.5v vdimm. No issues playing modern warfare let alone launching it.
> 
> 
> If i tried powersaving preset + medium llc or high llc + offset , it isn't usable.
> 
> 
> 
> Only thing I can take away from this behavior is that higher llc + manual acdc + offset may be required for higher memory oc, at least when it comes to dvid mode oc.


This makes no sense.
Power Saving AC/DC is AC=40, DC=130.

AC=40 gives higher operating voltages than AC=1. DC is not imprortant.

What happens if you manually set AC=40 and DC=130? Is it still unstable?
(i assume offset DVID value used is identical to AC=1, DC=1 , LLC High, right?)

What happens if you set AC=40, DC=1 ?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> This makes no sense.
> Power Saving AC/DC is AC=40, DC=130.
> 
> AC=40 gives higher operating voltages than AC=1. DC is not imprortant.
> 
> What happens if you manually set AC=40 and DC=130? Is it still unstable?
> (i assume offset DVID value used is identical to AC=1, DC=1 , LLC High, right?)
> 
> What happens if you set AC=40, DC=1 ?



I don't know why that is, only reporting my findings here as I toy around with different combos to see if the system behaves differently.

This is what I used

5.28ghz powersaving preset + llc low + +120mv offset 



and 


5.28ghz acdc 1-1 llc high +150mv offset

the latter allowed me to use c16-4266 in games while the first settings did not. voltages used are the voltages required to support the clockspeeds on my chip. I wouldn't be able to explain why it is working like this. i'd take a video to show non-stop footage of it behaving that way between oc settings but i don't have a camera.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I don't know why that is, only reporting my findings here as I toy around with different combos to see if the system behaves differently.
> 
> This is what I used
> 
> 5.28ghz powersaving preset + llc low + +120mv offset
> 
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 5.28ghz acdc 1-1 llc high +150mv offset
> 
> the latter allowed me to use c16-4266 in games while the first settings did not. voltages used are the voltages required to support the clockspeeds on my chip. I wouldn't be able to explain why it is working like this. i'd take a video to show non-stop footage of it behaving that way between oc settings but i don't have a camera.


Can you do me a favor and try 5.28 ghz AC=40, DC=130+LLC Low+120mv, manually in Internal VR settings?

It should also fail like the "Powersaving" preset.

I have a "guess" as to why your ACDC=1, +150mv passes. I just need to confirm the above question first though.

(I do not do memory overclocking. I don't even know how to do RTL's. I tried setting 66/66/67/67 (translation: i don't know what I'm doing) for my 2x16 GB 3200 mhz Gskill, and the system rebooted at 3600 mhz CPU, 2133 mhz RAM everything reset even turbo ratios  Then when I LOADED my saved 5 ghz profile, it set my RTL's to 81/60/81/60 instead of 81/51/81/53 and I lost 2ns of latency until I CLEARED CMOS and then loaded the 5 ghz profile.

Yeah no memory overclocking for me!


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Can you do me a favor and try 5.28 ghz AC=40, DC=130+LLC Low+120mv, manually in Internal VR settings?
> 
> It should also fail like the "Powersaving" preset.
> 
> I have a "guess" as to why your ACDC=1, +150mv passes. I just need to confirm the above question first though.
> 
> (I do not do memory overclocking. I don't even know how to do RTL's. I tried setting 66/66/67/67 (translation: i don't know what I'm doing) for my 2x16 GB 3200 mhz Gskill, and the system rebooted at 3600 mhz CPU, 2133 mhz RAM everything reset even turbo ratios  Then when I LOADED my saved 5 ghz profile, it set my RTL's to 81/60/81/60 instead of 81/51/81/53 and I lost 2ns of latency until I CLEARED CMOS and then loaded the 5 ghz profile.
> 
> Yeah no memory overclocking for me!


Yeah I really don't know why it does that. Not really sure how to do rtls either.


----------



## opt33

On Gigabyte Aorus Master is there a bios setting for "activating" a PCIE slot? Im on bios F11c, only bios I have used. 

PCIE slot 2 seems to work correctly and recognize any pcie drive, but pcie slot 3 only seems to recognize a pcie drive if it has the OS on it.

Option 1
slot 2 pcie 8x = intel optane drive recognized by bios
slot 3 PCIE 4x = Samsung 960 drive with pcie adaptor, drive does not show up in bios.

Option 2
slot 2 PCIE 8x = samsung 960 drive with pcie adaptor recognized in bios in slot 2, works fine.
slot 3 PCIE 4x = intel optane with OS drive recognized by bios in this slot ? because it has OS on it.

Obviously will just use option 2, but out of curiosity after wasting hours, is there a setting in bios somewhere that I am missing for "activating" PCIE slot 3 so it knows I plugged something into it, like a PCIE drive without the OS?


----------



## ZomBy7

Hey,

I dont know what to do, but my aida64 memory values are completly low.
I checked all timings and i dont find anything weird.

Maybe someone can find the issue and can help, thx

Hardware-Info: 9900k, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (F12c), 4 x 8GB Patriot 4000 CL19


----------



## Falkentyne

ZomBy7 said:


> Hey,
> 
> I dont know what to do, but my aida64 memory values are completly low.
> I checked all timings and i dont find anything weird.
> 
> Maybe someone can find the issue and can help, thx
> 
> Hardware-Info: 9900k, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (F12c), 4 x 8GB Patriot 4000 CL19


yeah those scores are extremely bad.
I get higher scores at 3200 mhz CL 14 at default XMP settings.
Also your L2 and L3 cache speeds are much lower than normal.


----------



## metalspider

ZomBy7 said:


> Hey,
> 
> I dont know what to do, but my aida64 memory values are completly low.
> I checked all timings and i dont find anything weird.
> 
> Maybe someone can find the issue and can help, thx
> 
> Hardware-Info: 9900k, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (F12c), 4 x 8GB Patriot 4000 CL19


 your subtimings and tertiary timings are the cause for this.
you even have tcwl slower then tcl which is never done.

you need to tune and test timings and the ram.
try this guide: https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md#intel---lga1151
or this: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-784.html#post27784556


----------



## ZomBy7

That shouldn´t be the problem because i got with the same RAM Timings this aida64 scores.
I tried to load the XMPs, still low write and read speeds.

It seems like the Bios is simply ****ed up.


----------



## alv-OC

I've been trying many configs both with F10 Official and F11c moded (Kedar's). The best and only profile 100% stable is 4000 Cl 16 and tRFC 280 tREFI at max 1.200v and 1.220v on IMC, 1.45v RAM.

The other profiles that seems to be cose to be satable are:

-> 4000 Cl 15 15 15 35, tRFC 300, tREFI max, 1.460v on RAM and 1.230v/1.250v in IMC
-> 4200 Cl 15 15 15 35, tRFC 350, tREFI max, 1.470v on RAM and 1.230v/1.250v in IMC
-> 4400 Cl 16 16 16 36, tRFC 300, tREFI max, 1.500v on RAM and 1.240v/1.260v in IMC

->4000 Cl 14 14 14 34 - can make post but instant crash on windows loading... 

All theese other profiles are satable until the 20(ish)% on HCI and as soon as the Sitcks aproach to 40º they start to spit errors.

For some reason I can't make any of them stable. I've palyed with voltages up and down, trained to get the best RTLs and IOLs possible and then blocked then with Fast Boot, flashed BIOS, lowered the Cache ratio (from 48 to 46), bumped 0,010v VCore, tried different VRM changes, higher tRFCs and lower tREFIs (this makes things even worst), swapped the RAM sticks to different slots... nothing improves anything...

This is so freaking frustrating, any idea, please?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Heads up, f11e's fast boot mode does not work properly. It only works properly in the aspect that you can use it to jump into windows without training, however, No matter what the memory configuration is, the board will always attempt to retrain the memory after a shutdown no matter the timings/profile. it could be the regular trained xmp profile and it still retrains the memory on a fresh boot when fast boot is enabled. I have not encountered this issue with any other bios. 

Any idea how to get this bios to not retrain memory on every boot? If not, what is the next best bios for mem oc?


----------



## lsevald

ZomBy7 said:


> Hey,
> 
> I dont know what to do, but my aida64 memory values are completly low.
> I checked all timings and i dont find anything weird.
> 
> Maybe someone can find the issue and can help, thx
> 
> Hardware-Info: 9900k, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi (F12c), 4 x 8GB Patriot 4000 CL19


I don't see anything wrong, maybe a process running in the background as all your numbers seem low? Malware?

I have a similar setup. Aorus Pro non WiFi (F10), 4 x 8GB G.Skill F4-3600C15-8GTZ (bdie). And this is pretty mush as high as I can go; Karhu Ram test and GSAT stable for a 4-5hours each. I can get it RAM test stable at a little better timings, but sometimes my board fails to train when cold booting, so I run this for now. This trains really easy on my board (within 10 seconds). In BIOS I have:

tRC=49 (tRAS+TRP)
tWTR_S=Auto
tWTR_L=Auto
tCCD_S=Auto
tCCD_L=Auto

RTL's: 57-57-59-59
IoLatR's: 6-6-6-6
RTT's: 60-60-120-120-40-40

The rest manually entered as seen in ASRock Timing Configurator. As for voltages in BIOS my setup needs:

VCCIO=1.250V
VCCSA=1.290V
VDDR=1.460V
VDDR Training=1.460V

I haven't had time to test this thoroughly, but my setup seems really picky about VCCSA, it seems to need a lot (or rather just the right amount). Sadly I have yet to be able to train at any higher speeds, no matter how loose timings I try, 4000 seems impossible. Unless there some magic RTL/RTT's that can help. This is also the only BIOS I have tried. Good luck!


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

whelp, I went back to the stock bios. f11e is nothing magical. It's actually the worse bios for memory oc since it forces a retrain on every boot. I do not recommend that bios at all.


----------



## ZomBy7

lsevald said:


> I don't see anything wrong, maybe a process running in the background as all your numbers seem low? Malware?
> 
> I have a similar setup. Aorus Pro non WiFi (F10), 4 x 8GB G.Skill F4-3600C15-8GTZ (bdie). And this is pretty mush as high as I can go; Karhu Ram test and GSAT stable for a 4-5hours each. I can get it RAM test stable at a little better timings, but sometimes my board fails to train when cold booting, so I run this for now. This trains really easy on my board (within 10 seconds). In BIOS I have:
> 
> tRC=49 (tRAS+TRP)
> tWTR_S=Auto
> tWTR_L=Auto
> tCCD_S=Auto
> tCCD_L=Auto
> 
> RTL's: 57-57-59-59
> IoLatR's: 6-6-6-6
> RTT's: 60-60-120-120-40-40
> 
> The rest manually entered as seen in ASRock Timing Configurator. As for voltages in BIOS my setup needs:
> 
> VCCIO=1.250V
> VCCSA=1.290V
> VDDR=1.460V
> VDDR Training=1.460V
> 
> I haven't had time to test this thoroughly, but my setup seems really picky about VCCSA, it seems to need a lot (or rather just the right amount). Sadly I have yet to be able to train at any higher speeds, no matter how loose timings I try, 4000 seems impossible. Unless there some magic RTL/RTT's that can help. This is also the only BIOS I have tried. Good luck!


Tried CMOS Reset, Loading Defaults, Flashing back to F11/F10, only used 2 Dimm Modules, used different RAM Slots. 
Still the same issue.


----------



## GeneO

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Heads up, f11e's fast boot mode does not work properly. It only works properly in the aspect that you can use it to jump into windows without training, however, No matter what the memory configuration is, the board will always attempt to retrain the memory after a shutdown no matter the timings/profile. it could be the regular trained xmp profile and it still retrains the memory on a fresh boot when fast boot is enabled. I have not encountered this issue with any other bios.
> 
> Any idea how to get this bios to not retrain memory on every boot? If not, what is the next best bios for mem oc?


I do not have this problem with f11e, though I do not have much of a memory overclock, just some tightened timings. I am at borderline RTL/IOL though so would so would see it trying to retrain these.

EDIT: Actually, come to think of it, I do see it get in this mode every once in a while where it starts taking longer to boot (memory training I expect). I can correct it with a CMOS reset and a single train.


----------



## lsevald

ZomBy7 said:


> Tried CMOS Reset, Loading Defaults, Flashing back to F11/F10, only used 2 Dimm Modules, used different RAM Slots.
> Still the same issue.


Seems to me something has to be stealing CPU/RAM bandwidth when your OS is loaded, those numbers make no sense to me otherwise. Even the cache numbers seems low. But I will try something close to your settings and see if I can duplicate the issue.

EDIT: here's what I get duplicating your settings, same CPU&Cache speed also. Win10 1607. Benchmark numbers looks fine. At this point I would try a clean OS install on an old harddisk if you got one laying around.


----------



## ZomBy7

lsevald said:


> Seems to me something has to be stealing CPU/RAM bandwidth when your OS is loaded, those numbers make no sense to me otherwise. Even the cache numbers seems low. But I will try something close to your settings and see if I can duplicate the issue.
> 
> EDIT: here's what I get duplicating your settings, same CPU&Cache speed also. Win10 1607. Benchmark numbers looks fine. At this point I would try a clean OS install on an old harddisk if you got one laying around.


Thx that you tried my settings. 

*Found the Solution:*
The Windows Feature Hyper-V triggers these problems. I needed this feature for the Docker Container Service.
Maybe one day this solution will be helpful for someone else.


----------



## GeneO

ZomBy7 said:


> Thx that you tried my settings.
> 
> *Found the Solution:*
> The Windows Feature Hyper-V triggers these problems. I needed this feature for the Docker Container Service.
> Maybe one day this solution will be helpful for someone else.


I can validate this. I ran into this problem some time ago - I had just forgotten. LOL.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Ok boys. I figured out how to get good rtls/iols at 4000mhz without manipulating the busclock.

I trained 3900 at my tuned 15-15-15-32 timings @ regular required voltages and changed trfc to 320. Went back into bios to verify I got the right rtls for 3900(57/57/59/59), Then I increased training voltage, vdimm and sa/io, enabled fast boot and changed the memory strap from 3900 to 4000. Into windows ezpz. Just need to adjust voltages and test for stability. 4000mhz with good rtls yay. I hope this post helps somebody! 3900 vs 4000 comparison, same rtls, same timings except 280 trfc for 3900.


----------



## Salve1412

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Ok boys. I figured out how to get good rtls/iols at 4000mhz without manipulating the busclock.
> 
> I trained 3900 at my tuned 15-15-15-32 timings @ regular required voltages and changed trfc to 320. Went back into bios to verify I got the right rtls for 3900(57/57/59/59), Then I increased training voltage, vdimm and sa/io, enabled fast boot and changed the memory strap from 3900 to 4000. Into windows ezpz. Just need to adjust voltages and test for stability. 4000mhz with good rtls yay. I hope this post helps somebody! 3900 vs 4000 comparison, same rtls, same timings except 280 trfc for 3900.


Hope it's stable for you! When I tried this trick going from 3900 to 4000 system was highly unstable and BSODed like crazy (but it was over a year ago with an inferior BIOS, and maybe I was too conservative with voltages and stuff).


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Salve1412 said:


> Hope it's stable for you! When I tried this trick going from 3900 to 4000 system was highly unstable and BSODed like crazy (but it was over a year ago with an inferior BIOS, and maybe I was too conservative with voltages and stuff).



nope not stable rofl. exactly as you said, bsoded like crazy. 15-16-16-32 at the same rtls might be workable, it was stable in windows for the short time i messed with it before trying 15-17-17-34 to go up to 4066 but that didn't work out. Will have to tweak 15-16-16-32 if it can be done at 1.5v with the 3900 rtls.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

GeneO said:


> I do not have this problem with f11e, though I do not have much of a memory overclock, just some tightened timings. I am at borderline RTL/IOL though so would so would see it trying to retrain these.
> 
> EDIT: Actually, come to think of it, I do see it get in this mode every once in a while where it starts taking longer to boot (memory training I expect). I can correct it with a CMOS reset and a single train.


maybe there is something wrong with my hardware set up, who knows. It did it with any manual overclock i put in and even with just regular xmp rated profile with everything on auto. probably something on my end.


----------



## GeneO

XGS-Duplicity said:


> maybe there is something wrong with my hardware set up, who knows. It did it with any manual overclock i put in and even with just regular xmp rated profile with everything on auto. probably something on my end.


I've temporarily rolled back to qflashed f11c to see if I still see this infrequent mode where the boot takes longer (presumably from training).


----------



## AndrejB

Anyone know to fix when the motherboard clicks on then instantly off (rgb on on ram stays on) after pressing the power button?

Caused by, unplugging the psu and clearing cmos, not powering on after and then leaving off the whole night. Then this morning powered on and after the first training (reboot) it clicked off.

Tried taking the cmos battery and putting one ram stick in different slots, same result. Worked less than a year...

Edit: nvm, psu died, seasonic 1000w titanium... Lol...


----------



## PanglacialWurm

For an Aorus Z390 Ultra paired with an i7-9700k, any idea(s) on what the max safe manual vCore (BIOS) setting is in conjunction with Turbo LLC, accounting for transient voltage spikes? I've seen the picture of what happens when you combine 1.29~ manual vCore with a max 193 amp load/draw while using "Ultra Extreme" LLC (0 mOhm vdroop loadline), and obviously I want to steer clear of 200 mV transient voltage spikes. Any idea(s) or guesstimates on what sort of spikes you encounter on Turbo LLC while going from, say, 120~ amps benchmark load down to an idle load of 20~ amps?


And, in a similar vein, if one were to drop down to High LLC and raise BIOS vCore, any idea what the max safe idle vCore is?


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Ok boys. I figured out how to get good rtls/iols at 4000mhz without manipulating the busclock.
> 
> I trained 3900 at my tuned 15-15-15-32 timings @ regular required voltages and changed trfc to 320. Went back into bios to verify I got the right rtls for 3900(57/57/59/59), Then I increased training voltage, vdimm and sa/io, enabled fast boot and changed the memory strap from 3900 to 4000. Into windows ezpz. Just need to adjust voltages and test for stability. 4000mhz with good rtls yay. I hope this post helps somebody! 3900 vs 4000 comparison, same rtls, same timings except 280 trfc for 3900.


Would you mind to share with me your VCore, your VRM sttings amd your IMC /vRAM voltages?? I'll be traying later today the same proces you say, but I'm pretending to go from 3900 Cl16 to 4200 Cl16, and cross my fingers this time works

Im so so close to get 4200 Stable, but I get 3 or 4 errors at HCI 100%, can't relate them to anything in paticular. My actual voltages are (in BIOS) 1.360 vCore, 1.500 vRAM, 1.240 IO and 1.260 SA

@KedarWolf: I have som wierd behaviour on the vRAM on F11e, voltages between 1.450 and 1.500 Or vRAM aren't the same on HWinfo. For example I set 1.490 amd see that it's curretly feeding only 1.476v... but if I set 1.500v it does feed 1.500v. Same happens when I go over 1.500v, if i set it to 1.510, it remains at 1.500, its like there were a loose of current or some king of vDroop. I've Efiflashed the BIOS 3 times and the issue persist... has anyone reported this before? any posible solution?


This is the most stable timings I found, have a look to my IO-Ls... can't get them under 13-14...

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=343804&thumb=1


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

I don't even remember what voltages I was using for that, probably somewhere north above safe recommendations. It was unstable during testing so I cancelled it quickly. See if a retrain helps you align the iols to 14/14/14/14.


----------



## Shaman

This is the most stability I could get out of my low-bin bdie, that's C1 by the way with 1.43V. 3350mhz ish... Sigh... That said, my VCCIO and VCCSA are pretty low (0.97v and 1.04). Before anyone goes "Pump them up!". Going as high as 1.25v and 1.30, respectively, I still couldn't get stability even a single 50mhz more. I did get it stable at 3700mhz and 3820mhz when I let the motherboard pick the secondaries with the "Normal" and "Relax oc" options (I set it at 18-20-20-40 and let the motherboard do the rest). "Relax OC" booted at 3820mhz and was fully stable.... but I was getting 15k read/write in AIDA. Hahaha!!! Didn't check with Asrock utility, but Im going to guess whatever it did to the secondaries, it was pretty atrocious and RELAXED! (I set 18-20-20-40 and chose "Relax OC" to get that 3820MHz.). All the tests were done between 1.4V to 1.49V for RAM/Train voltages.

Any suggestions or tips?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Is this normal? Should I be missing a metal thingy in one of these connectors? This is the 24 pin motherboard cable


----------



## GeneO

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Is this normal? Should I be missing a metal thingy in one of these connectors? This is the 24 pin motherboard cable


The 24 pin connector is actually 23. There used to be a 5v pin there but it is no longer used.


----------



## EarlZ

I need some advise on my OC, My 9700K clocks quite poorly and can only do 4.8Ghz, I currently have IA AC loadline to 85 (IA DC to 160) to ensure that I dont BSOD on idle however I can see the my VRout can reach as high as 1.32v


Any advise what else to try to maintain 4.8Ghz clock speeds and lowering the peak voltage?


----------



## alv-OC

Well , this is going to be my new 24/7 Overclocking, looks like going over 3900 MHz is rocket sience for the Gigabyte BIOS developper team. I tryed to train the RTls and IO-Ls and then lock them by forcing the MoBo to 'Fast Boot' and bumping the voltages a bit... I can get into windows but theese extra 100MHz with the same latencies gave me even worse performance going from 36.9ns @3900 to 38.3ns @4000 and it wasn't stable at all...

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=344234&thumb=1

The other configuration that seems to be equal or even better in performance (+/-36.4ns, and over 65.000Mb/s of bandwidth) is 4400Mhz Cl16 but since the RTLs and IO-Ls get ridiculously high i cant get it fully stable, i keep getting a few errors here and there.

I can't understand why is this so difficult for them to do it right, my next MoBo is going to be an Asus Apex or a Formula...


----------



## warbucks

alv-OC said:


> Well , this is going to be my new 24/7 Overclocking, looks like going over 3900 MHz is rocket sience for the Gigabyte BIOS developper team. I tryed to train the RTls and IO-Ls and then lock them by forcing the MoBo to 'Fast Boot' and bumping the voltages a bit... I can get into windows but theese extra 100MHz with the same latencies gave me even worse performance going from 36.9ns @3900 to 38.3ns @4000 and it wasn't stable at all...
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=344234&thumb=1
> 
> The other configuration that seems to be equal or even better in performance (+/-36.4ns, and over 65.000Mb/s of bandwidth) is 4400Mhz Cl16 but since the RTLs and IO-Ls get ridiculously high i cant get it fully stable, i keep getting a few errors here and there.
> 
> I can't understand why is this so difficult for them to do it right, my next MoBo is going to be an Asus Apex or a Formula...


What's VCCIO/SA, Vcore, LLC, Vdimm set to in the bios?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

I want to hit 4400 stable for daily use. How do I do that? My IMC is good enough.


----------



## alv-OC

warbucks said:


> What's VCCIO/SA, Vcore, LLC, Vdimm set to in the bios?


In BIOS: 
- VCCIO: 1.260v
- VCCSA:1.280v
- VRAM: 1.490v
- VCORE: 1.360v



XGS-Duplicity said:


> XGS-Duplicity	I want to hit 4400 stable for daily use. How do I do that? My IMC is good enough.?


You'll have to smash a ton of voltage (if it accepts it, not always IMCs do) or you just can't


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> In BIOS:
> - VCCIO: 1.260v
> - VCCSA:1.280v
> - VRAM: 1.490v
> - VCORE: 1.360v
> 
> 
> 
> You'll have to smash a ton of voltage (if it accepts it, not always IMCs do) or you just can't



How much voltage? above 1.4v system agent and IO? 





The board defaults to 1.38v of each for 4400 and 1.4v of each for 4500. Maybe I try 1.45v each or 1.5v each?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Is there a q-flashable f10b with fastest microcodes available by chance?


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> How much voltage? above 1.4v system agent and IO?
> 
> The board defaults to 1.38v of each for 4400 and 1.4v of each for 4500. Maybe I try 1.45v each or 1.5v each?


NO!! no no no, trust me, i'm sure you don't want to put 1.400v in the IMC nither on the SA or the IO !!!! 1.350v is considered an absolute NO GO ABOVE, 1.300v is about what I would consider safe for a 24/7 overclock, and thats its already a lot of voltage, in both SA and IO, but it would be better if you can keep it under that.

Seriously, if you put that much votlage on the IMC you would degrade it so fast.

Thats why every one with a bit of knowledge will tell you that you should never ever use XMP with VCCIO and VCCSA on Auto, specially along with high speed memory kits.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

alv-OC said:


> NO!! no no no, trust me, i'm sure you don't want to put 1.400v in the IMC nither on the SA or the IO !!!! 1.350v is considered an absolute NO GO ABOVE, 1.300v is about what I would consider safe for a 24/7 overclock, and thats its already a lot of voltage, in both SA and IO, but it would be better if you can keep it under that.
> 
> Seriously, if you put that much votlage on the IMC you would degrade it so fast.
> 
> Thats why every one with a bit of knowledge will tell you that you should never ever use XMP with VCCIO and VCCSA on Auto, specially along with high speed memory kits.



Yeah but high speed 4800 kits require 1.3-1.4 so what gives? Like if I were to upgrade to z490 aorus master + 10900K cpu and 4x8gb 4800mhz, It will require lots of sa/io right?


----------



## Gen.

While I binning RAM, I put 2 slats on the shelf and left the best. Perhaps I will upgrade to LGA1200 with my successful standards and make 4400 16-16 cr1 (2), maybe 4700 17-17. Now I'm trying to make 1.51V and RFC=264


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Gen. said:


> While I binning RAM, I put 2 slats on the shelf and left the best. Perhaps I will upgrade to LGA1200 with my successful standards and make 4400 16-16 cr1 (2), maybe 4700 17-17. Now I'm trying to make 1.51V and RFC=264



very nice overclock


----------



## Bitsn

*F11e updated... really.... secure codes*

I don't know why everyone claims that his bios modules are up to date and if i check them.... only see old modules...
so I decide to catch Kedar's and update to the latest modules(LAN 0.0.29 and RSTDriver and Orom 17.8.3.xxxx)

the other thing was the efiflash file.... i don't know if someone who puts this in has tested it with a modded bios on a aorus master.... but if i try to flash with this it spills an error
so packed in the latest modded efiflash which worked fine for me

and last but not least....there is a tool written by fernando(from win-raid forum) callin UEFI BIOS Updater.... easy to use and self explaining for the peops who wants to update by your own
google it u would find it easily.... he written guides for it to so everyone can understand how it works and how to use


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ffQsxxZ7qLaymkUXTjmOFdLRi4sqfHZG/view?usp=sharing


----------



## Gen.

Everything went well with 1.51V and 264 RFC.We must try 256


----------



## hadesx82

Can someone point me to the optimized Bios flashes for this board? I'm trying to access the power control settings in an effort to reduce coil whine I suspect coming from the VRMs and my current bios version doesn't seem to have access to those settings (F10 beta). Also does anyone have any suggestions on how to reduce it further?


----------



## GeneO

hadesx82 said:


> Can someone point me to the optimized Bios flashes for this board? I'm trying to access the power control settings in an effort to reduce coil whine I suspect coming from the VRMs and my current bios version doesn't seem to have access to those settings (F10 beta). Also does anyone have any suggestions on how to reduce it further?


Some have had luck disabling c-states, in particular C1E/EIST.


----------



## hadesx82

GeneO said:


> Some have had luck disabling c-states, in particular C1E/EIST.


I disabled all Cstates already = (.


----------



## hadesx82

Also, the high frequency buzz goes away under load (cinebench for example).


----------



## GeneO

hadesx82 said:


> I disabled all Cstates already = (.


rats. 

It could be graphics card or even indirectly your PSU. I once had coil whine in my graphics card and when I replaced the PSU, it went away. Anyway, good luck - I hate annoying noises


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

I am currently testing:
[email protected] 4x8GB

Bios values
1.52v vdimm
1.3v System Agent 

1.3v IO
5.1ghz
4.7ghz cache
8c/8t


----------



## Nizzen

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I am currently testing:
> [email protected] 4x8GB
> 
> Bios values
> 1.52v vdimm
> 1.3v System Agent
> 
> 1.3v IO
> 5.1ghz
> 4.7ghz cache
> 8c/8t


If you want 4400 c15-15-15, you need Asus Apex and using 2x8GB good binned b-die memory. The IMC need to be up to the task too  Watercooling on the memory is pretty smart too, as you will need 1.6v+ vdram


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Nizzen said:


> If you want 4400 c15-15-15, you need Asus Apex and using 2x8GB good binned b-die memory. The IMC need to be up to the task too  Watercooling on the memory is pretty smart too, as you will need 1.6v+ vdram



There is no z390 apex xi sealed brand new available.


----------



## Gen.

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I am currently testing:
> [email protected] 4x8GB
> 
> Bios values
> 1.52v vdimm
> 1.3v System Agent
> 
> 1.3v IO
> 5.1ghz
> 4.7ghz cache
> 8c/8t


Your workout has gone bad. The difference in RTL should be no more than 2. You have 3 (54-57)


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Gen. said:


> Your workout has gone bad. The difference in RTL should be no more than 2. You have 3 (54-57)



rtl spacing should be no more than 2 between the 2nd dimm in the first channel and the 1st dimm in the second channel and no more than 2 inside a channel. ideally you want them as close as possible. This memory strap at cl14 trains sometimes 54/55/56/56 and sometimes 54/55/56/57. I already tested 54/55/56/56 and it could not be stabilized. I'm pretty sure 54/55/56/56 is for [email protected] and maybe [email protected] [email protected] gives 54/54/56/56. [email protected] gives 55/55/57/57. As per the rtl rule, I already memtested stable 12 hours hci/karhu [email protected] with 64/66/66/68 rtls and that has a difference of 4 from beginning to end which is why I think the rtl rule is no more than 2 between the 2nd dimm in the first channel and the 1st dimm in the second channel and no more than 2 inside of a channel. In the past, When i try manipulating [email protected] rtls to 64/66/66/66, it's unstable. i'm pretty sure [email protected] just needs 1 more tick of vdimm.

visually speaking
[email protected] 54/54/56/56
[email protected] 54/55/56/57(this is the space in between a normal 200mhz frequency jump for this kitwhen ram is scaling linearly at 50% between full 200mhz memory straps, 3733 is 33mhz oddball jump and looks like 54/55/56/56 while i suspect 3866 would look like 56/57/57/57 or something)
[email protected] 55/55/57/57

I don't know how to explain what I see in my mind other than showing the 3700/3900 comparison and then showing how 3800 is in between using rtls from start to finish from both other straps but 54/55/56/57 for [email protected] for this kit/imc on this board seems correct for 4dimms. i suspect if it was 2 dimms at [email protected] rtls would be 55/56 or 54/55. We could ask ourselves, then why isn't the rtls for 3800 55/55/56/56 on 4 dimms since that is in between perfectly and I say that it because we've never seen 4dimms rtls on this board be even for 1 channel and the other with only 1 space in between. 

Example: 
We always see on the aorus master at tight/low timings....
4x8GB 66/66/68/68 or 68/68/70/70 or 55/55/57/57(2 spacing in between 2nd dimm in first channel and 1st dimm in second channel with each channels rtls matching for 4 dimms) but we never see 55/55/56/56 or 68/68/69/69(single spacing between 2nd dimm in first channel and 1st dimm in second channel with each channels rtls matching for 4 dimms). So i suspect because we never see that, 55/55/56/56 would be not possible on 4 dimms on this board but 54/55/56/57 is possible. or maybe this is how the board/dimms behave when you are reaching imc limits? like maybe we see 55/55/56/56 for lower frequencies on 4 dimms that aren't as hard on the imc? 

I think all these numbers are set in stone for each frequency/cas strap FOR THIS SPECIFIC BOARD and sometimes you just don't get the right ones or sometimes you do. Just have to figure out which numbers belong to which strap/cas. Or maybe i'm seeing things completely wrong. i'd like to hear other user's insight on what they think about this. I think its interesting to see the behaviors and how numbers shift and how patterns begin to form after 200mhz memory strap rtls have started to reveal themselves over time through binning. maybe this stuff is all up to the ram kit, or maybe its decided by the board in someway in conjuction with the imc i dunno. All i know is I start to see a pattern with rtls across the frequency range.

I added 10mv vdimm, test is going further and sticks got hotter this time around by a degree. past 1 hour mark so far, previously failing around 47 minutes into the first hour with 10mv less vdimm. EDIT: it started spitting errors again with around 40 minutes left of 2 hour test when the hottest stick was at 41 though hottest stick peak temp was 43.5 at one point earlier in the test. Adding another 10mv vdimm and giving it another go. at 1.54v Vdimm right now. if it doesn't pass two hours with 1.54v then i gotta wait till the tiny fan comes in. 










EDIT: trained [email protected] and it gave me 54/55/56/56 6/6/6/6 as suspected. on a side note, I was able to get [email protected] 1.55v 49/50/51/51 5/6/6/5 for rtls/iols. .1ns faster than [email protected] 









it did error again about 1 hour 30 minutes into a 2 hour test for [email protected] with 1.54v vdimm, 2nd time around the same time frame with 1.53v and 1.54v. more than likely stick temp. karhu isn't as tough, doing [email protected] with 52/48 8c/8t and temps are way lower. 

An odd thing i noticed, don't know if it is stick related but sometimes I had to alternate between training with +150mv offset/high llc and +170mv offset/medium llc depending on which strap i was working with. Sometimes one would always gives me subpar rtls in the 60's while sometimes the other would train up good rtls. Then i'd bring down the vcore afterwards after training. For the tighter/lower timings with proper rtls for example, I can't train [email protected] unless I use +150mv offset minimum meanwhile i can train [email protected] with subpar rtls on stock voltage ezpz. I guess some timings requires more vcore or different to train? That's the only conclusion I can draw from my observations. Also, Turning on enhanced multicore performance just for training seems to improve training, I do disable it afterwards. When I train ram I also leave turbo ratios on auto and set cpu clock to 53 and cache to 49 always. Sometimes when I leave at 51/47 or 50/46 it won't train optimally or train at all(for the cas 14 stuff), dunno if that is stick related or imc related or board related. It's interesting how teetering around with different settings yields different results.

also, with the cas 14 frequency range, I wasn't able to "correct" the rtls by typing them in ever or boot directly with the proper rtls typed in, i always had to retrain again afterwards if I didn't get proper rtls/iols and leave them on auto. With something like cas 15 3900, I can type in the rtls/iols that belong to the strap and it will train. I guess different frequencies/cas latencies behave/train differently? Also, If you ever get stuck on a code 7F at the end of a memory training, let it sit for a few seconds and it will restart on its own, the mobo will try to train it again and alot of the time it trains it better the second time around.


----------



## EarlZ

I've been getting some ethernet related issues on my board, are the bios files found on gigabytes website contain a full flash including ethernet firmware updates?


----------



## Gen.

@XGS-Duplicity 6-6-6-6 54-55-56-56 looks great.

And here we are playing with a friend from 4000 19-19 1.20V. I only got it with 1.23V. He has a ROYAL 4000 17-17 and 1.2V takes place from 4000 19-19.


----------



## Gen.

@XGS-Duplicity 6-6-6-6 54-55-56-56 looks great.

And here we are playing with a friend from 4000 19-19 1.20V. I only got it with 1.23V. He has a ROYAL 4000 17-17 and 1.20V takes place from 4000 19-19.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Gen. said:


> @*XGS-Duplicity* 6-6-6-6 54-55-56-56 looks great.
> 
> And here we are playing with a friend from 4000 19-19 1.20V. I only got it with 1.23V. He has a ROYAL 4000 17-17 and 1.2V takes place from 4000 19-19.



Thank you. I saw you posted in ddr4 thread ^^, +1 rep, very solid tune. Can you post thaiphoon burner shot? I want to see type of PCB/ICs that royal 4000 17-17 use and compare to trident z rgb 4000 17-17. 

Memory performance for [email protected] with 50/46 8c/8t. completed 2 hours of occt large avx2 enabled @ 1.52v vdimm 1.3v system/io. Re-running again at 1.5v vdimm and 1.25v system/io.


----------



## Gen.

@ XGS-Duplicity , There is a kind of A2 board, A1 2133 chips. I also have 3600 16-16. But he has either 3866 14-16, or 4000 15-17, or 4000 14-16 1.53 or 1.54V. RCD+2 (RCD+3) from CL.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

2 hour occt job complete at 1.5v vdimm, 1.25v system agent/io. Do i try to goto 1.2v system/io or is this ok? I kind of want to try more frequencies...the itch.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Gen. said:


> @ XGS-Duplicity , There is a kind of A2 board, A1 2133 chips. I also have 3600 16-16. But he has either 3866 14-16, or 4000 15-17, or 4000 14-16 1.53 or 1.54V. RCD+2 (RCD+3) from CL.



3866/4000 14-16-32 tras or 34 tras? 4000 15-17-34 tras or 36 tras?


----------



## Elric2a

Hi I got this board for few days and I'd like to have an expert opinion on my settings for my 8086k 

I first set up a manual oc and I was stable on occt with 1.325, I guess my chip isn't golden.. 

The temps were at 79c max, large files avx 2
Cpu is delidded.

I was not sure about turbo boost setting and if there are tweaks that would help me reduce vcore too 

Thanks 

ADVANCED FREQUENCY SETTINGS

CPU Base clock 100
CPU upgrade : auto
Enhanced multi core performance disabled
CPUclock ratio 50
FCLK frequency for early power on : 1Ghz
XMP : profile 1
Vt-d disabled
Turbo boost disabled
IA AC/DC at 1

Advanced cpu core settings
AVX offset : 0
Uncore ratio : 45
Intel turbo boost technology : off
Cores : 50 all cores
C state : enabled
SpeedShift : enabled

ADVANCED VOLTAGE SETTINGS
Advanced power settings
CPU internal AC/ DC Load Lines : auto
CPU VCORELoadline calibration: high 

CPU core voltage control

CPU vcore : auto (1.380 at load)/
offset -0.05
VCCIO 1.10
CPU SA : 1.10
CPU current limit 255
Power maxed out
Cpu vcore PWM switch rate : 300


Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## GeneO

Yes, not golden. I have a delidded 8086k @ 5.1 GHz, Uncore= 48, AVX=0 with vcore=1.332 (VR Vout = 1.285), 63c under OCCT LDS AVX2. 

Pretty much same settings as you except I run LLC = turbo and offset -0.015v. You may be unstable when not under load with such a large negative offset. That is why I run LLC=turbo (which has the disadvantage of larger transients, but I am 24x7 stable under them). However, at 5 GHz, I couldn't get my voltage low enough in offset mode because of the chip VID, so I ran 5GHz for a bit on fixed voltage OC before moving to 5.1 offset 24x7.


----------



## Elric2a

On auto my vcore was 1.38 so I just applied the offset 1.38-1.332=0.048, isn't that right? I was on turbo first but trying high. Maybe it was in my head but I heard some kind of coil whine when I was on turbo.. 

Yep not golden 

Bur still OK? Could I find a way to stabilise at lower vcore for same results? Thanks 


Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

So i chased the pattern with rtls.
[email protected] 54/54/56/56
[email protected] 54/55/56/56 2 hour occt job completed 1.5v vdimm 1.25v system/io

[email protected] 57/57/59/59 
[email protected] 57/58/59/59 <-----entered rtls and iols manually and trained 3900 frequency with desired timings for 3933, then used 101 busclock with fastboot enabled to jump from 3900 to 3939(registers in aida64 as 3933 each time), completed 2 hour occt job. 1.5v vdimm, 1.3v system/io (will re-run at 1.25v to see if these can be lowered). Chose these rtls based on how the 3700-3733 jump looks in rtls. will obviously have to do longer testing but 2 hours occt large avx 2 pretty good start.











Quick performance comparisons - All the same secondaries/tertiaries across the board. all at 1.5v vdimm and some amounts of system/io. (3533 cr1 41 [email protected] 1.55v)


----------



## hadesx82

How do I access PWM switching frequency and some of the other advanced power features in the bios? I have the latest version and I can't seem to find them.


----------



## GeneO

hadesx82 said:


> How do I access PWM switching frequency and some of the other advanced power features in the bios? I have the latest version and I can't seem to find them.


What board? Some settings, like the switching frequency, They are only available in the master.


----------



## Falkentyne

hadesx82 said:


> How do I access PWM switching frequency and some of the other advanced power features in the bios? I have the latest version and I can't seem to find them.


They can be unlocked by a bios mod you can request done for your BIOS on the win-raid bios modding section, if you make a post asking for help, but it's unknown whether they will be functional on your board. You can view the options by directly opening the bios with AMIBCP 5.02.0031, but you have to follow their exact instructions for how to get those values to be available (and no, you can NEVER, EVER, EVER edit the downloaded Gigabyte file directly with AMIBCP, ever).


----------



## hadesx82

I have the Gigabyte Z390 Ultra motherboard.


----------



## Kstyles69

How do you manually change rtls iols?


----------



## Mannekino

Tomorrow I will be getting an i9-9900K based system with a GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER motherboard and RTX 2080 Super graphics card. I'm coming from an AMD Ryzen 2700X based system and I'm used to regularly installing chipset drivers directly downloaded from the AMD website.

What kind of post-install tasks should I be doing in terms of:



Drivers (I can only think of NVIDIA drivers right now)
Tweaks/optimizations
(GIGABYTE) Utilities
I went to the GIGABYTE website and found the following drivers for the motherboard. Are there any particular ones I should or shouldn't install?



Audio drivers
Chipset drivers
LAN drivers
There are also SATA RAID, VGA and WLAN+BT drivers, don't think I will be needing those but want to be sure.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kstyles69 said:


> How do you manually change rtls iols?


Choose a frequency 3900 or below. Train it. Go back into bios, take a look at rtls/iols. They should usually be even like 55/55/57/57 or 58/58/60/60 when using a flat cas like 15-15-15 or 16-16-16 with an even 100 mhz strap. I suspect it depends on the dimms/imc but some even 100mhz straps may use something like 54/55/56/57 or 64/66/66/68. You don't know for sure until you start writing down which rtls are given to you for each memory strap/cas latency. I'd focus on a single flat cas strap at first going up and down the frequency ladder. Record all the data. 

When you get something like 54/55/56/56 instead of 54/54/56/56, it's probably for the next substrap that gives an extra 33mhz. If you see something like 55/55/56/57, it's probably something for the next substrap that gives an extra 66mhz. At least that is how it is with my kit/imc.

For example, when I train 3500 cr1 13-13-13-28, it automatically gives me rtls for 3533 - 49/50/51/51, the 50 is the oddball for the extra 33mhz. If I wanted the rtls for 3500 or if my imc couldn't handle 3533, i'd have to either key them in for 3500(49/49/51/51), or re-train till I get them. But since it can handle it, I increase busclock to 101 and then enable fastboot since I already have the right rtls for 33mhz strap(plus there is no option for 3533 in bios so only way to get it is increase busclock after training, it always registers as 3533 in aida benchmark and aida cpu-id like a real strap would though).

If your bios gives you the option to enter in rtls/iols for each channel, then you can correct them by typing in the right value. On bioses that only allow to you program 1 channel, it may be harder to reach oddball memory straps with tight timings. Wrong/incompatible values won't train or will result in being thrown into the 60s. If your bios only lets you set rtls/iols for one channel then you can set them for the even 100mhz straps usually, if trying to reach an oddboll 33mhz/66mhz strap and the bios doesn't give the option to adjust both channels -then you have roll the dice again till you get the rtls/iols that you want. I use F9 bios, it allows adjustment of rtls/iols for both channels. I'm not sure which other bioses allow it. 

By rolling the dice/re-train after being given wrong rtls, I mean by disabling fastboot and retraining with the timings you want to land on till you get the rtls you want. In my experience on this board, Sometimes a little more system agent, io voltage and dram training voltage can help rtls/iols train better, sometimes more vcore.

From what i've gathered through testing, we can manipulate or find the correct rtls/re-roll rtls/iols for 3900 and below. I have not seen or figured out a way to do it for 4000 and up. This is all I know about rtls as of right now.


----------



## Kstyles69

Page 849 I made a general posting to help you out.


----------



## Kstyles69

Mannekino said:


> Tomorrow I will be getting an i9-9900K based system with a GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER motherboard and RTX 2080 Super graphics card. I'm coming from an AMD Ryzen 2700X based system and I'm used to regularly installing chipset drivers directly downloaded from the AMD website.
> 
> What kind of post-install tasks should I be doing in terms of:
> 
> 
> 
> Drivers (I can only think of NVIDIA drivers right now)
> Tweaks/optimizations
> (GIGABYTE) Utilities
> I went to the GIGABYTE website and found the following drivers for the motherboard. Are there any particular ones I should or shouldn't install?
> 
> 
> 
> Audio drivers
> Chipset drivers
> LAN drivers
> There are also SATA RAID, VGA and WLAN+BT drivers, don't think I will be needing those but want to be sure.


page 849 Not sure if I do this correctly compared to others, but I just download Driver Booster and it finds all my drivers. I've been doing this for years now. Once you have all the drivers uninstall driver booster as its free/contains ads. I generally dont download the drivers from the Gigabyte manufacture website as "my opinion" they might not be updated. Only thing good about Gigabyte download site "my opinion" is getting BIOS. But even there BIOS is outdated compared to the modified BIOS that people made with updated firmware on this forum.


----------



## Kstyles69

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Choose a frequency 3900 or below. Train it. Go back into bios, take a look at rtls/iols. They should usually be even like 55/55/57/57 or 58/58/60/60 when using a flat cas like 15-15-15 or 16-16-16 with an even 100 mhz strap. I suspect it depends on the dimms/imc but some even 100mhz straps may use something like 54/55/56/57 or 64/66/66/68. You don't know for sure until you start writing down which rtls are given to you for each memory strap/cas latency. I'd focus on a single flat cas strap at first going up and down the frequency ladder. Record all the data.
> 
> When you get something like 54/55/56/56 instead of 54/54/56/56, it's probably for the next substrap that gives an extra 33mhz. If you see something like 55/55/56/57, it's probably something for the next substrap that gives an extra 66mhz. At least that is how it is with my kit/imc.
> 
> For example, when I train 3500 cr1 13-13-13-28, it automatically gives me rtls for 3533 - 49/50/51/51, the 50 is the oddball for the extra 33mhz. If I wanted the rtls for 3500 or if my imc couldn't handle 3533, i'd have to either key them in for 3500(49/49/51/51), or re-train till I get them. But since it can handle it, I increase busclock to 101 and then enable fastboot since I already have the right rtls for 33mhz strap(plus there is no option for 3533 in bios so only way to get it is increase busclock after training, it always registers as 3533 in aida benchmark and aida cpu-id like a real strap would though).
> 
> If your bios gives you the option to enter in rtls/iols for each channel, then you can correct them by typing in the right value. On bioses that only allow to you program 1 channel, it may be harder to reach oddball memory straps with tight timings. Wrong/incompatible values won't train or will result in being thrown into the 60s. If your bios only lets you set rtls/iols for one channel then you can set them for the even 100mhz straps usually, if trying to reach an oddboll 33mhz/66mhz strap and the bios doesn't give the option to adjust both channels -then you have roll the dice again till you get the rtls/iols that you want. I use F9 bios, it allows adjustment of rtls/iols for both channels. I'm not sure which other bioses allow it.
> 
> By rolling the dice/re-train after being given wrong rtls, I mean by disabling fastboot and retraining with the timings you want to land on till you get the rtls you want. In my experience on this board, Sometimes a little more system agent, io voltage and dram training voltage can help rtls/iols train better, sometimes more vcore.
> 
> From what i've gathered through testing, we can manipulate or find the correct rtls/re-roll rtls/iols for 3900 and below. I have not seen or figured out a way to do it for 4000 and up. This is all I know about rtls as of right now.


Not sure if I'm reading correctly. My 3733Mhz is deemed stable at 15-16-16-32 but the rtls are horrid. I tried to downclock the memory by changing up CAS and Mhz until it reads something more exceptionable like 56/58. Once achieved, I enable fast boot then go back to my settings of 3733Mhz 15-16-16-32? I tried this and when I boot into Windows ASrock Timing show 66/68 rtls. I run x2 16GB DIMMS btw. What am I doing wrong?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kstyles69 said:


> Not sure if I'm reading correctly. My 3733Mhz is deemed stable at 15-16-16-32 but the rtls are horrid. I tried to downclock the memory by changing up CAS and Mhz until it reads something more exceptionable like 56/58. Once achieved, I enable fast boot then go back to my settings of 3733Mhz 15-16-16-32? I tried this and when I boot into Windows ASrock Timing show 66/68 rtls. I run x2 16GB DIMMS btw. What am I doing wrong?


Did you enable memory fast boot or fast boot? They are two different settings.


----------



## Kstyles69

Falkentyne said:


> Did you enable memory fast boot or fast boot? They are two different settings.


Thanks for your quick reply. I did read it right away but been spending the past 2 hours trying to figure this out. I've was using fast boot and not memory fast boot. I tried the process again this time with memory fast boot and still not understanding this RTL manipulation concept. I apologize for my ignorance. Your guidance is much appreciated. Since I use x2 DIMMS on slot 2/4 my RTL's are generally always 81/81/66/66 for example in BIOS. Always same numbers like 66/66 for 3733 cas 15 and never 64/66 in BIOS. I assume 66/66 is okay but I'm not sure because when I boot into Windows Asrock Timing "pictured" always shows the -2 downstep in RTL's. 

To reiterate the process that I'm comprehending, I downclock the Mhz and cas to 3200Mhz cas 15 for example until I hit something like 81/81/56/56...then enable memory fast boot and revert back to 3733 15-16-16-32 save/exit/reboot? The example I just gave is what I've been doing. I tried 54/54, 55/55, and 56/56 with no luck. Tried the same process again with 3700Mhz and still doesn't stick when I reenter Windows or go back into BIOS...keeps reverting to the mid/high 60's RTL's. I can type in my RTL's but that never sticks either on my F11C modified BIOS.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

You only get to adjust rtls if they are misaligned, if yours are showing up 62/64 on 2 dimms for whatever cas/frequency strap, they are aligned. You can't just fast boot with a strap and be stable, you have to have the right rtls that belong to the fastboot strap(like 3933 from 3900 or 3533 from 3500, 2 fastbootable configs). It looks like the rtls you are getting belong to that strap? What happens if you try more system agent/io? If i use low system/io and try to train cas 14 3800/3900 i more frequently than not get rtls in the 60s.


----------



## alv-OC

H guys after destroying one of my 4 Modules when taking off the heatsinks (I riped 3 of the ICs off the PCB...) to watercool them I binned the the other 3 modules and I got 2 of them stable at 4200 Cl16 VCCIO/SA: 1.260v/1.280v and vRAM: 1.500v

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=345270&thumb=1

Until I get the broken one replaced (or whatever) I'll be runing this config 24/7 as is giving me both a high banwith (over 60.000 on Read, Write and Copy) and a very nice latency about 37.3ns (+/-).

I find that the best way to train RTLs and IOLs is by doing waht XGS-Duplicity says, going to 3900 and work from there, however no matter what voltage, subtimings or frequency you put, when you go over 4000MHz they make a pretty big jump and the latency gets wreck. My lasts tests under 4000 were:

3900 Cl15 -> 36.3 /36.5 ns
4000 Cl15 -> 38.6+ ns

The only diference were the RTLs and the IOLs...


----------



## Lurifaks

alv-OC said:


> H guys after destroying one of my 4 Modules when taking off the heatsinks (I riped 3 of the ICs off the PCB...) to watercool them I binned the the other 3 modules and I got 2 of them stable at 4200 Cl16 VCCIO/SA: 1.260v/1.280v and vRAM: 1.500v
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=345270&thumb=1
> 
> Until I get the broken one replaced (or whatever) I'll be runing this config 24/7 as is giving me both a high banwith (over 60.000 on Read, Write and Copy) and a very nice latency about 37.3ns (+/-).
> 
> I find that the best way to train RTLs and IOLs is by doing waht XGS-Duplicity says, going to 3900 and work from there, however no matter what voltage, subtimings or frequency you put, when you go over 4000MHz they make a pretty big jump and the latency gets wreck. My lasts tests under 4000 were:
> 
> 3900 Cl15 -> 36.3 /36.5 ns
> 4000 Cl15 -> 38.6+ ns
> 
> The only diference were the RTLs and the IOLs...


Nice work! I could never get anything above 4000 to work with 2 modules on the Master. Sorry for your lost module


----------



## alv-OC

Lurifaks said:


> Nice work! I could never get anything above 4000 to work with 2 modules on the Master. Sorry for your lost module


thanks! 

yeah clumsy me, I should have heated up the modules first with a haidryer and this wouldnt happen, that ****ty-Sticky pads are so freaking well glued.... learned the lesson the hard and expensive way...

Now I hope that G.Skill can sell me just one RAM module, perhaps one on the unpaired ones that they might have at the RMA center, but even though it would be a sad solution as I already know that my 3rd module ins't as good as the other two... I might be selling them and save money for that G.Skill 4000 CL15 kits... they look soooo good


----------



## Elric2a

Hi can someone please explain me this setting, aorus Master Z390 ?
Should i leave it on auto?


Also, ihear this weird noise in my case, it seems to have disappeared when I disabled C-State. Si i guess it was coil whine? Can disabling c state have any influence or temps?

Thanks


----------



## Mannekino

Hi, I hope you guys can help me with a sanity check of my overclock. I bought a secondhand 9900K based system with an Z390 AORUS MASTER motherboard. Here are the full specs:



Intel Core i9-9900K
Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Super Gaming X Trio
Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic
Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro CMW16GX4M2C3200C16
Corsair Commander PRO
Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro Light Enhancement Kit
Corsair Hydro H150i Pro RGB 360mm Liquid CPU Cooler
Corsair LL120 RGB LED (6x)
Corsair HX850i
Samsung 970 Pro 1TB
I found a relatively recent video on YouTube with a guide for overclocking an 9900K on the Z390 AORUS MASTER that seems to be exactly what I'm looking for. This presenter comes across and trustworthy and knowledgeable so I followed his guide and everything seems to be working fine. Here is the link:






My BIOS settings are basically optimized defaults with XML profile set and the following changes for the overclock. With the latest BIOS the screens are completely different but I managed to find everything mentioned in the video.










You can view an album here with screenshot of all the pages I made changes on: https://imgur.com/a/yWgY0ux

Some additional information and context to what I'm trying to achieve.



The previous owner had it at 5.1 GHz with 1.350 V which seemed a bit too much.
My use case is primarily playing StarCraft II which is single threaded, heavily CPU dependent and Intel favored.
I sometimes stream also but I use the NVIDIA codec.
I pretty much have 1 or 2 virtual machines (VirtualBox) running all day
I sometimes play other games such as CS:GO or DOOM.

I'm not looking for an extreme overclock or anything, I'm happy with just 5 GHz on all cores or even a stable boost to 5 GHz on 1 or 2 cores when I play StarCraft II. Based on that information I have the following questions.



Does this overclock match my use case, if not, what would you change?
Without any the overclock (just XMP) my cores never boosted to 5 GHz (which I what I want for StarCraft II) but got stuck at 4.7 GHz, was this normal behavior?
I've run some stress tests such as Superposition, Prime95 and CINEBENCH R20. Temperatures looked good during gaming and testing except during CINEBENCH R20 which quickly went above 90 °C. During other tests it settled around 70-75 °C. Should I reapply thermal paste as I do not know if it's the default from the Corsair AIO?
Is it desirable in my use case to still have under clocking of the CPU when I'm not doing much? If so, what do I need to change, enable "Speed Shift" again?
Thank for the help.


----------



## Falkentyne

Mannekino said:


> Hi, I hope you guys can help me with a sanity check of my overclock. I bought a secondhand 9900K based system with an Z390 AORUS MASTER motherboard. Here are the full specs:
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9-9900K
> Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
> MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Super Gaming X Trio
> Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic
> Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro CMW16GX4M2C3200C16
> Corsair Commander PRO
> Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro Light Enhancement Kit
> Corsair Hydro H150i Pro RGB 360mm Liquid CPU Cooler
> Corsair LL120 RGB LED (6x)
> Corsair HX850i
> Samsung 970 Pro 1TB
> I found a relatively recent video on YouTube with a guide for overclocking an 9900K on the Z390 AORUS MASTER that seems to be exactly what I'm looking for. This presenter comes across and trustworthy and knowledgeable so I followed his guide and everything seems to be working fine. Here is the link:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Sk4ISqmL88
> 
> My BIOS settings are basically optimized defaults with XML profile set and the following changes for the overclock. With the latest BIOS the screens are completely different but I managed to find everything mentioned in the video.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can view an album here with screenshot of all the pages I made changes on: https://imgur.com/a/yWgY0ux
> 
> Some additional information and context to what I'm trying to achieve.
> 
> 
> 
> The previous owner had it at 5.1 GHz with 1.350 V which seemed a bit too much.
> My use case is primarily playing StarCraft II which is single threaded, heavily CPU dependent and Intel favored.
> I sometimes stream also but I use the NVIDIA codec.
> I pretty much have 1 or 2 virtual machines (VirtualBox) running all day
> I sometimes play other games such as CS:GO or DOOM.
> 
> I'm not looking for an extreme overclock or anything, I'm happy with just 5 GHz on all cores or even a stable boost to 5 GHz on 1 or 2 cores when I play StarCraft II. Based on that information I have the following questions.
> 
> 
> 
> Does this overclock match my use case, if not, what would you change?
> Without any the overclock (just XMP) my cores never boosted to 5 GHz (which I what I want for StarCraft II) but got stuck at 4.7 GHz, was this normal behavior?
> I've run some stress tests such as Superposition, Prime95 and CINEBENCH R20. Temperatures looked good during gaming and testing except during CINEBENCH R20 which quickly went above 90 °C. During other tests it settled around 70-75 °C. Should I reapply thermal paste as I do not know if it's the default from the Corsair AIO?
> Is it desirable in my use case to still have under clocking of the CPU when I'm not doing much? If so, what do I need to change, enable "Speed Shift" again?
> Thank for the help.


You need to ignore the turbo boost ratios and set a global multiplier of x50. Set the turbo boost ratios back to Auto.
You can't get a 1 core boost of x50 because windows will automatically use at least one other core for its own windows things, which will prevent any 1 core boost from ever working at full 1 core loads.


----------



## Mannekino

Falkentyne said:


> You need to ignore the turbo boost ratios and set a global multiplier of x50. Set the turbo boost ratios back to Auto.
> You can't get a 1 core boost of x50 because windows will automatically use at least one other core for its own windows things, which will prevent any 1 core boost from ever working at full 1 core loads.


Alright, I will give this a try and set those back to "Auto". 

*Edit*

So I made the changes. But did you mean, put the main setting on Enabled and then each individual one on Auto










Or, put the whole thing on Auto?


----------



## GeneO

He meant disable turbo boost tech and set the CPU clock ratio to 50.


----------



## Elric2a

You mean intel turbo boost? 

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## GeneO

Yrs if you want all cores of at 50.


----------



## Elric2a

Yep. I have disabled it.
I will get a 9900ks tomorrow if the post office does not fail I hope I can get something nice and stable out of it  

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Mannekino

GeneO said:


> He meant disable turbo boost tech and set the CPU clock ratio to 50.


I did set the CPU clock to 50. In my initial post/reply I showed a screenshot of all the changes I made. Now I'm confused.


----------



## AndrejB

Mannekino said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> He meant disable turbo boost tech and set the CPU clock ratio to 50.
> 
> 
> 
> I did set the CPU clock to 50. In my initial post/reply I showed a screenshot of all the changes I made. Now I'm confused.
Click to expand...

He told you to just to return per core ratio to auto (advanced cpu menu) and keep cpu core ratio (first menu).

So you should be good now or share all your bios settings by going into the bios, plugging in a USB and hitting F10 or something to screenshot (F1 for the help, where it says which button it is)


----------



## Falkentyne

Mannekino said:


> I did set the CPU clock to 50. In my initial post/reply I showed a screenshot of all the changes I made. Now I'm confused.


If your settings aren't working, power the system off, press the clear CMOS button on the back, let it do its thing, then go back in your system, delete all the garbage in "My favorites", then go to "CPU Clock Ratio", set it to x50. Go to CPU Cache ratio, set it to x45. Go to Vcore Loadline Calibration, set it to Turbo. Go to CPU VRM switching Frequency (Important), set it to 300 khz. Go go Cpu Vcore voltage, set it to 1.30v. (do not change CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line).

Save, exit, re-enter BIOS, then set your XMP stuff.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Ugh.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Ugh.


Why not take this opportunity to join the memory overclocking camp and grab an Apex 12 this time around? Or an Extreme if you need all four slots (or if you want to part with your money. It's competing with the Dark and Godlike in that price class). Then you won't have to worry about RTL's and IOL's anymore.


----------



## AndrejB

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Ugh.


Or somehow get Gigabyte to actually provide us with a properly built bios.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

i like the aorus line up. I kind of want to upgrade to z490 + aorus master + 10900k + 4x8gb 4800mhz ram but i don't know if i'm experienced enough to tune to 4800mhz quite yet. I like the support I get here. It is very much appreciated.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> i like the aorus line up. I kind of want to upgrade to z490 + aorus master + 10900k + 4x8gb 4800mhz ram but i don't know if i'm experienced enough to tune to 4800mhz quite yet. I like the support I get here. It is very much appreciated.


What exactly do you like about the Aorus Lineup that you don't like about the Asus?
You've probably spent more time memory overclocking than I have spent tuning voltages...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> What exactly do you like about the Aorus Lineup that you don't like about the Asus?
> You've probably spent more time memory overclocking than I have spent tuning voltages...



Memory overclocking takes a long time. It's fun though. It's like a sophisticated puzzle. The thing about aorus is that it controls all my lighting. I have the aorus gpu, aorus ssd and teamgroup delta rgb max ssd and rgb fans. all of it can be controlled through rgb fusion. will an asus motherboard lighting control a gigabyte aorus gpu lighting?

Does this look right for RTLS? i've been pushing them up/down. 



[email protected] 57/57/59/59
[email protected] 57/58/59/59 



Tuning to the end of the imc or stick trying to reach as close to cas15 4000 as possible. 



[email protected] 57/59/59/59? working from the 3933 rtls, i changed the 58 to a 59 instead of changing the 57 to 58 since I figured changing the 57 to a 58 would increase overall latency.


----------



## Mannekino

Falkentyne said:


> If your settings aren't working, power the system off, press the clear CMOS button on the back, let it do its thing, then go back in your system, delete all the garbage in "My favorites", then go to "CPU Clock Ratio", set it to x50. Go to CPU Cache ratio, set it to x45. Go to Vcore Loadline Calibration, set it to Turbo. Go to CPU VRM switching Frequency (Important), set it to 300 khz. Go go Cpu Vcore voltage, set it to 1.30v. (do not change CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line).
> 
> Save, exit, re-enter BIOS, then set your XMP stuff.



*Edit: while I was typing the response below Prime95 was running for about 7 minutes and then my PC crashed, so back to the drawing board I guess. Didn't have issues last night. Ran my PC for about 3-4 hours with the 5 GHz overclock doing several Superposition stress tests and CINEBENCH runs.*

It is working. Basically all I have changed right now is:



XMP profile 1 applied
Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
CPU Clock Ration: 50
AVX Offset: 0
Intel Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
CPU Vcore: 1.300V

Everything else is set to optimized defaults except for some minor changes such as CSM disabled. It's giving me a 5 GHz all core overclock right now. So is this it? Seems too easy 

I will probably start watching a bunch of other videos on 9900K overclocking to gather more information.

The only thing that has me worried are the very high temperatures during CINEBENCH. Within seconds it goes over 90 °C, is this an AVX load? After running Prime95 for 20 minutes it settles around 69 °C with some peaks to 84 °C because of some lag in my AIO fans ramping up. I'm considering reapplying the thermal paste, as I do not know how it was done since I've bought the system secondhand. But the build was overall very well done. I'm going to update my signature now so it can be helpful going further with te conversation.

Here is a screenshot of some measurements 5 minutes after starting Prime95.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

I test this now. While I cannot adjust trcd/trp from eachother(trcd should be 15 here and trp 14 i think) i'm hoping that I can leave them both at 14 and add 1 to tras to care of spacing for the extra 33mz since I think i found the right rtls/iols for 3966. errr I should have posted this is the ddr4 stability thread my b.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Mannekino said:


> *Edit: while I was typing the response below Prime95 was running for about 7 minutes and then my PC crashed, so back to the drawing board I guess. Didn't have issues last night. Ran my PC for about 3-4 hours with the 5 GHz overclock doing several Superposition stress tests and CINEBENCH runs.*
> 
> It is working. Basically all I have changed right now is:
> 
> 
> 
> XMP profile 1 applied
> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
> CPU Clock Ration: 50
> AVX Offset: 0
> Intel Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> CPU Vcore: 1.300V
> 
> Everything else is set to optimized defaults except for some minor changes such as CSM disabled. It's giving me a 5 GHz all core overclock right now. So is this it? Seems too easy
> 
> I will probably start watching a bunch of other videos on 9900K overclocking to gather more information.
> 
> The only thing that has me worried are the very high temperatures during CINEBENCH. Within seconds it goes over 90 °C, is this an AVX load? After running Prime95 for 20 minutes it settles around 69 °C with some peaks to 84 °C because of some lag in my AIO fans ramping up. I'm considering reapplying the thermal paste, as I do not know how it was done since I've bought the system secondhand. But the build was overall very well done. I'm going to update my signature now so it can be helpful going further with te conversation.
> 
> Here is a screenshot of some measurements 5 minutes after starting Prime95.


What does disabling CSM do?


----------



## Mannekino

XGS-Duplicity said:


> What does disabling CSM do?


It has nothing to do with overclocking. It's disabling the Compatibility Support Module which can be used for non-EFI boot environments. Since I only have Windows 10 I don't need it and it makes sure my SSD gets properly formatted with EFI.

If you want to disable CSM you should do it prior to installing Windows.

It gives you the proper EFI partition layout like this:


----------



## Mannekino

So I was watching another overclocking video on YouTube and viewer made a comment about his settings.

This is the video: 




The commenter said



> If you look at turbo boost technology. Its set to auto and some cores already push to 5ghz. Put everything to default. Then enable turbo boost tech, enhanced multicore, hyperthreading, Intel speed shift, and adjust ram speed. You don't have to touch voltages leave that on auto or clock ratios. It should run fine. I know everyones cpu is different but it should work perfectly well. My cpu stays at a solid 5ghz.



So I figured, why not give that a try? My current settings are:



Optimized defaults
XMP profile 1 applied
Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Enabled (manually set it to Enabled)
Hyper-Threading Technology: Enabled (manually set it to Enabled)
Intel Turbo Boost Technology: Enabled (manually set it to Enabled)
Intel Speed Shift Technology: Enabled (manually set it to Enabled)

That's it! I rebooted my PC and all the cores were running at 5.0 GHz. I did a short "CPU Stress Test with AVX" of 5 minutes and it ran fine. I also did a single run of CINEBENCH R20. I will post an update probably much later today after I ran more tests.










Two things that have me worried a bit:



During the CINEBENCH R20 run the CPU Vcore went to 1.416 (HWMonitor) the power draw during CINEBENCH is enormous.
Package temperature went to a peak of 98 °C (HWMonitor) but it was significantly lower during the Intel test.










I have a pretty beefy CPU cooler. The fans of my AIO are linked to the coolant temperature with a custom fan curve that I set yesterday. I think my fan curve is decent. Since I bought the computer second hand I don't know if any custom thermal paste was applied, if so, how well it was done. I'm considering reapplying the thermal paste. Aside from the high temperatures during CINEBENCH R20 the temperatures seem fine.










Any thoughts on this "overclock"? Also with CINEBENCH R15 I got a score of 2050 which is higher than the manual overclock I had yesterday (1971). With the settings to Auto I got a score of 1664.


----------



## alv-OC

Mannekino said:


> So I was watching another overclocking video on YouTube and viewer made a comment about his settings.
> 
> 
> During the CINEBENCH R20 run the CPU Vcore went to 1.416 (HWMonitor) the power draw during CINEBENCH is enormous.
> Package temperature went to a peak of 98 °C (HWMonitor) but it was significantly lower during the Intel test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


You are watching the wrong sensor.... use HWInfo, and look at the VR OUT sensor... any other sensor is just wrong. Z390 Master has many sensors like rigth after de VRM and right before the socket among some others... you are interested only in the actual voltage feeded into the silicon wich is VR OUT.


----------



## Elric2a

Hi,

Are those settings fine for stable OC (besides Vcore which I have to test obviously, gonna get a 9900ks when the post office is not failing 


ADVANCED FREQUENCY SETTINGS

CPU Base clock 100
CPU upgrade : auto
Enhanced multi core performance disabled
CPUclock ratio 50
FCLK frequency for early power on : 1Ghz
XMP : profile 1
Vt-d disabled

Advanced cpu core settings
AVX offset : 0
Intel Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
Uncore ratio : 45
Cores : 50 all cores
C state : disabled
SpeedShift : disabled or can i leave enabled ?
Turbo per core limit control : auto

ADVANCED VOLTAGE SETTINGS
Advanced power settings
CPU VCORE Loadline calibration turbo

CPU core voltage control 

CPU vcore : 1.3 to start? 
VCCIO 1.15
CPU SA : 1.15
CPU current limit 255
Power maxed out
Cpu vcore PWM switch rate : 300 
CSM : disabled


----------



## alv-OC

Elric2a said:


> Hi,
> 
> Are those settings fine for stable OC (besides Vcore which I have to test obviously, gonna get a 9900ks when the post office is not failing
> 
> 
> ADVANCED FREQUENCY SETTINGS
> 
> CPU Base clock 100
> CPU upgrade : auto
> Enhanced multi core performance disabled
> CPUclock ratio 50
> FCLK frequency for early power on : 1Ghz
> XMP : profile 1
> Vt-d disabled
> 
> Advanced cpu core settings
> AVX offset : 0
> Intel Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
> Uncore ratio : 45
> Cores : 50 all cores
> C state : disabled
> SpeedShift : disabled or can i leave enabled ?
> Turbo per core limit control : auto
> 
> ADVANCED VOLTAGE SETTINGS
> Advanced power settings
> CPU VCORE Loadline calibration turbo
> 
> CPU core voltage control
> 
> CPU vcore : 1.3 to start?
> VCCIO 1.15
> CPU SA : 1.15
> CPU current limit 255
> Power maxed out
> Cpu vcore PWM switch rate : 300
> CSM : disabled


I would say that those voltages on the IMC are a little bit optimistic if you are going to use XMP o use high speed RAM kits, but for the rest it should work just fine. I haven't seen any 9900k using more than 1.300v for 5.0GHz, nontheless if you are stable you should try to work down the vCore and see the lowest you can get it stable (or pushing 5.1GHz?? up to you)

Some people (me included) like to disable all C-States and all other energy saving features like EIST, Voltage Optimization, Core Boost technologies etc... but it is not mandatory unless you persuit really hinh OCs like 5.2 or 5.3GHz with also hihg cache ratios (48, 49, 50GHz)


----------



## Elric2a

IMC? Do you speak of Vccsa and Io? What would be fine then?

well I do have some coil whine when c state is enabled and i haven't seen any differences in temperatures if disabled. My concerns are temps, not electric bill to be honest. 
I will probably go with those settings and then see to "convert" it to adaptive vcore since i like the frequencies and voltage to lower at idle to have lower temps and so quieter fans.

I just aim at a stable and not too warm 5Ghz, not more  What would you suggest for it? thanks


----------



## alv-OC

Elric2a said:


> IMC? Do you speak of Vccsa and Io? What would be fine then?
> 
> well I do have some coil whine when c state is enabled and i haven't seen any differences in temperatures if disabled. My concerns are temps, not electric bill to be honest.
> I will probably go with those settings and then see to "convert" it to adaptive vcore since i like the frequencies and voltage to lower at idle to have lower temps and so quieter fans.
> 
> I just aim at a stable and not too warm 5Ghz, not more  What would you suggest for it? thanks


Yeah, IMC is VCCSA and IO... the voltage it need will depend on your RAM configuration and how lucky were you with your chip (silicon lottery), you will find it once you pass a MemTest, if you get errors this will mean that you need to feed more voltage to VCCIO & SA (and maybe also to the vRAM??)

Just to put you on context, in my case I need over 1.250v on both for a 2x8Gb 4200MHz Cl16, and 1.500 (Samsung B-Die) on the vRAM... you need to test your system and find the lowest and stable voltages for you.


----------



## Elric2a

Never did any memtest but I have trident Z 3466Mhz and 1.15 is fine now with my 8086k but I'll get the other CPU tomorrow 

Should i run this memtest to be sure? https://www.memtest86.com/

For the vcore test, which one should i start with do you think on a 9900kf?
Also what about "Turbo per core limit control" shoud i leave it on auto
thanks again !


----------



## Mannekino

Did GIGABYTE change the names of these settings in their latest BIOS?



*TjMAX Temperature* to *CPU Over Temperature Protection*
*Uncore Ratio* to *Ring Ratio*

*Is there any consensus on which BIOS is the best the use at the moment?* I flashed to the latest version which is F11c.

I'm still trying to get my system stable. I've reapplied the thermal paste and altered my stress testing methodology. Currently I've maxed out the bottom intake fans and top exhaust fans (of the AIO cooler).

My PC crashes about 5 minutes into Prime95 testing but during this test the package temperature is around 68-70 °C. I saw it rise before the last crash. Everything else is fine so far; CINEBENCH R15 and R20 run without any problems and with the fans at maximum the package temperature goes to about 88 °C during both these tests. I've also run Unigine Superposition for about 15 minutes without any issues and a 10 minute Intel Extreme Tuning Utility stress test.

I've currently applied the settings from a video I linked earlier. These are:



XMP Profile 1
Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
CPU Clock Ratio: 50
AVX Offset: 0
TjMAX Temperature: 100
Uncore Ratio: 47
Package Power Limit1 - TDP: 4090
Package Power Limit2: 4090
Core Current Limit(Amps): 255
CPU Enhanced Halt(C1E): Disabled
C3 State Support: Disabled
C6/C7 State Support: Disabled
C8 State Support: Disabled
C10 State Support: Disabled
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo (Level 6)
CPU Vcore Current Protection: Extreme
PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf
CPU Vcore: 1.3V

Not sure how to proceed next. Maybe apply an AVX Offset of 3 and/or increase the Vcore to 1.350V?


----------



## Falkentyne

Mannekino said:


> Did GIGABYTE change the names of these settings in their latest BIOS?
> 
> 
> 
> *TjMAX Temperature* to *CPU Over Temperature Protection*
> *Uncore Ratio* to *Ring Ratio*
> 
> *Is there any consensus on which BIOS is the best the use at the moment?* I flashed to the latest version which is F11c.
> 
> I'm still trying to get my system stable. I've reapplied the thermal paste and altered my stress testing methodology. Currently I've maxed out the bottom intake fans and top exhaust fans (of the AIO cooler).
> 
> My PC crashes about 5 minutes into Prime95 testing but during this test the package temperature is around 68-70 °C. I saw it rise before the last crash. Everything else is fine so far; CINEBENCH R15 and R20 run without any problems and with the fans at maximum the package temperature goes to about 88 °C during both these tests. I've also run Unigine Superposition for about 15 minutes without any issues and a 10 minute Intel Extreme Tuning Utility stress test.
> 
> I've currently applied the settings from a video I linked earlier. These are:
> 
> 
> 
> XMP Profile 1
> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
> CPU Clock Ratio: 50
> AVX Offset: 0
> TjMAX Temperature: 100
> Uncore Ratio: 47
> Package Power Limit1 - TDP: 4090
> Package Power Limit2: 4090
> Core Current Limit(Amps): 255
> CPU Enhanced Halt(C1E): Disabled
> C3 State Support: Disabled
> C6/C7 State Support: Disabled
> C8 State Support: Disabled
> C10 State Support: Disabled
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo (Level 6)
> CPU Vcore Current Protection: Extreme
> PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf
> CPU Vcore: 1.3V
> 
> Not sure how to proceed next. Maybe apply an AVX Offset of 3 and/or increase the Vcore to 1.350V?


I prefer f11e. f11e has the DVID fix and no missing menus. F11f has missing menus and broken trefi (like f10/f11a,f11b, etc).
T0d is also decent.


----------



## Mannekino

Can these BIOS versions be found on the GIGABYTE website? Because I thought I downloaded the latest version F11c shows up in the BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

Mannekino said:


> Can these BIOS versions be found on the GIGABYTE website? Because I thought I downloaded the latest version F11c shows up in the BIOS.


I posted f11e and T0d (T0D with fast intel microcodes) in this thread some time ago. Search back and you'll find it. Between 1 to 2 months ago.


----------



## Mannekino

OK thanks. So far everything run stable with the settings I posted in this comment: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-879.html#post28448562

However when it comes to Prime95, my PC crashes when it starts the second type of test (I choose Blend option) unfortunately the name is not in the log. The temperature also shoots up to 93 °C and then my PC locks up.

I've upped the voltage 1.350V but that didn't help.

Everything else is running without crashes or lockups.



Played some StarCraft II and DOOM Eternal
CINEBENCH R15 and R20 multiple runs
Intel Extreme Tuning Utility, all 3 types of stress test, normal, AVX and AVX2, for 15 minutes each
Unigine Superpostion stress test for 20 minutes
*Currently running AIDA64 System Stability Test, so far so good, but the temperature is quite high bouncing between 83-93 °C Finished 30 minutes stress test*

So I finished the AIDA64 stress test for 30 minutes without any issues. Was even doing other stuff like watching some YouTube during it.










I'm going to lower the voltage to 1.300V again and run AIDA64 another 30 minutes to see if it runs fine. Maybe I should stop caring about the lockup from Prime95?

@Falkentyne do you know answer to my question above about the name change for those two configuration options I mentioned?


----------



## alv-OC

I find the F11e the best BIOS so far, T0d has kind of a strange behaviour in my MoBo but you might get different resoults. Also, I find 1.350v quite high for 5.0GHz, you are either runing a low LLC profile or you just lost the silicon lotery, I guess .


----------



## Mannekino

alv-OC said:


> I find the F11e the best BIOS so far, T0d has kind of a strange behaviour in my MoBo but you might get different resoults. Also, I find 1.350v quite high for 5.0GHz, you are either runing a low LLC profile or you just lost the silicon lotery, I guess .


I've put that to Turbo if I'm getting your setting right. I put my CPU Vcore to 1.300V now and I'm running AIDA64 again for 30 minutes. I've also put all my fan profiles back to normal operation to see how it deals with the stress test without the fans maxed out.

Here are my current settings, they're just a bit above this reply: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-879.html#post28448562


----------



## Mannekino

Falkentyne said:


> I posted f11e and T0d (T0D with fast intel microcodes) in this thread some time ago. Search back and you'll find it. Between 1 to 2 months ago.


It took some heavy page browsing, but I think I found it. Can you confirm this is the correct file?

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-801.html#post28339440

Can I just use the flashing utility in the BIOS with this?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Does T0d allow for adjustment of all 4 rtls/iols or only 1 channel?


----------



## alv-OC

Mannekino said:


> I've put that to Turbo if I'm getting your setting right. I put my CPU Vcore to 1.300V now and I'm running AIDA64 again for 30 minutes. I've also put all my fan profiles back to normal operation to see how it deals with the stress test without the fans maxed out.
> 
> Here are my current settings, they're just a bit above this reply: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-879.html#post28448562


Ah ok, I see, sorry I misundertood you man, 1.300v for 5.0GHz its jost OK, I mean, it should be fully stable. On 1.350v you should be able to get at 5.2GHz and 4.7Ghz on Caches... If you can manage the temps for sure.


----------



## Falkentyne

Mannekino said:


> It took some heavy page browsing, but I think I found it. Can you confirm this is the correct file?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-801.html#post28339440
> 
> Can I just use the flashing utility in the BIOS with this?


Yes that's Qflashable, it's not modded, already comes with fast microcodes I think (I forgot).
T0D that I posted with modded microcodes requires EFIflash /X to flash it in a freedos boot drive.
T0D allows you to toggle between fixed vcore and auto vcore when SVID OFFET is enabled, although DVID still cannot be adjusted. All the other bioses lock out all voltage control (freezes on the last setting) if you enable SVID offset.

Be warned: regardless of ANY bios (even f11e), if you are on fixed vcore 1.200v and enable SVID Offset, you will be forced to clear CMOS. You won't even get a POST code display. Although you can enable SVID offset first and then switch to 1.20v if you so choose.

SVID Offset allows Serial VID to exceed 1.520v, up to 1.720v. Asus boards have this enabled by default.

I highly recommend f11e (or T0D if you want it) because the DVID bug can cause a lot of overvoltage on previous bioses (ones before T0D / T1D) when switching voltage modes. That was a pretty severe bug that was finally fixed.

T1D had some sort of debugging code left in it, if you got a BSOD, you would get several beeps and reboot directly to BIOS. T0D and T1D were test bioses I was testing for the DVID fix.


----------



## Mannekino

Thanks, I've flashed BIOS F11e and for the time being I've only applied the XMP profile. I don't think I will be getting into any offset settings. That's seems a bit to complicated for me.

So after watching about 10 or so overclocking video tutorials on YouTube, a couple of articles (including the one from TweakTown) and the official 5 GHz all core overclocking guide from GIGABYTE, I've come to a few conclusions and I'm wondering if these are correct.

*General conclusion on the 5 GHz all core overclock*

If I simply set "Enhanced Multi-Core Performance" to Enabled, nothing else, I get a 5 GHz all core overclock. This seems to work just fine, I've run a couple tests with this. From what I read this will cause the CPU Vcore (and perhaps other voltages) to automatically increase to levels which are not desirable. I've noticed when using this method I see CPU Vcore close or just over 1.400V. Is this conclusion correct? If so, is this the primary reason to do it manually to achieve the same results with lower voltages?

*Specific settings for a manual overclock*

Gathering all the information from the video tutorials, articles, etc, it seems the common primary settings are as follows:



Apply the XMP profile for your memory
Enhanced Multi-Core Performance: Disabled
CPU Clock Ratio: 50
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo (Level 6)
CPU Vcore: 1.300V

Then many of the videos also have these settings. The official GIGABYTE guide also states that you should disable VT-d but I'm using that.



AVX Offset: 0 (or increase if experiencing instability with Prime95)
TjMAX Temperature: 100 or 110
Uncore Ratio: 47
CPU Enhanced Halt(C1E): Disabled
C3 State Support: Disabled
C6/C7 State Support: Disabled
C8 State Support: Disabled
C10 State Support: Disabled

And finally a couple also suggest these settings:



Intel Speed Shift Technology: Disabled
Package Power Limit1 - TDP: 4090
Package Power Limit2: 4090
Core Current Limit(Amps): 255
CPU Vcore Current Protection: Extreme
PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf

I'm not sure of this one with a manual overclock:



Intel Turbo Boost Technology: Default or Disabled?

Am I missing anything in this list to achieve a relatively easy and efficient 5 GHz overclock for daily use?

Also I'm still not sure if I got this right, but did GIGABYTE change the names of these settings?



TjMAX Temperature > CPU Over Temperature Protection
Uncore Ratio > Ring Ratio

Thank you for your patience


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

is there a guide that fully explains dvid overclock mode and which settings I need to use? Every time I think i have it down, i don't.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> Yes that's Qflashable, it's not modded, already comes with fast microcodes I think (I forgot).
> T0D that I posted with modded microcodes requires EFIflash /X to flash it in a freedos boot drive.
> T0D allows you to toggle between fixed vcore and auto vcore when SVID OFFET is enabled, although DVID still cannot be adjusted. All the other bioses lock out all voltage control (freezes on the last setting) if you enable SVID offset.
> 
> Be warned: regardless of ANY bios (even f11e), if you are on fixed vcore 1.200v and enable SVID Offset, you will be forced to clear CMOS. You won't even get a POST code display. Although you can enable SVID offset first and then switch to 1.20v if you so choose.
> 
> SVID Offset allows Serial VID to exceed 1.520v, up to 1.720v. Asus boards have this enabled by default.
> 
> I highly recommend f11e (or T0D if you want it) because the DVID bug can cause a lot of overvoltage on previous bioses (ones before T0D / T1D) when switching voltage modes. That was a pretty severe bug that was finally fixed.
> 
> T1D had some sort of debugging code left in it, if you got a BSOD, you would get several beeps and reboot directly to BIOS. T0D and T1D were test bioses I was testing for the DVID fix.



So the difference with F11e and T0D is only the voltage bug fix. Does F11e and T0D come with the latest microcode and LAN ROM ?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> So the difference with F11e and T0D is only the voltage bug fix. Does F11e and T0D come with the latest microcode and LAN ROM ?


F11e and T0D both have the DVID / fixed vcore/adjustment fix, which is a VERY important fix, as multiple users have run into suddenly seeing 1.5-1.6v after changing vcore modes in the past.

T0D has an "experimental" way of doing it which allowed SVID Offset to not disable all voltage control. But DVID adjustments still get locked out.
SVID Offset is not important for 99% of users. Allowing VID to exceed 1.520v when using Auto or Offset vcore modes when using a high mOhms AC Loadline causes erratic and unpredictable voltages in "mixed" loads, particularly if you exceed the highest turbo multiplier (this is NOT a Gigabyte issue--this is purely related to Intel's side with the VRM specification).


----------



## zamdam

I have the Z390 Aorus Master and my rear line out and Mic ports stop working.. I submitted a ticket to Gigabyte about this and they sent me a link to an article that is from 2018.. This is a brand new PC i built and the sound and mic was working for the first week. Then boom.. No workie. Uninstalled everything to do with sound in device manager and the realtek software, rebooted, reinstalled, rebooted and it worked.. Worked for 3 days. Then had to do it all over again. Lasted for 2 days and the mic stopped working.. Tried it again and still no mic.

The case's front panel line out and mic ports work and havent stopped working... But i dont want to use them.. I want to use the rear ports.. 

Any guesses why this motherboard is punishing me? This is my first Gigabyte board..


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> F11e and T0D both have the DVID / fixed vcore/adjustment fix, which is a VERY important fix, as multiple users have run into suddenly seeing 1.5-1.6v after changing vcore modes in the past.
> 
> T0D has an "experimental" way of doing it which allowed SVID Offset to not disable all voltage control. But DVID adjustments still get locked out.
> SVID Offset is not important for 99% of users. Allowing VID to exceed 1.520v when using Auto or Offset vcore modes when using a high mOhms AC Loadline causes erratic and unpredictable voltages in "mixed" loads, particularly if you exceed the highest turbo multiplier (this is NOT a Gigabyte issue--this is purely related to Intel's side with the VRM specification).


Thanks for the quick reply, Any chance you would also know if this contains the latest microcodes and LAN firmware?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Thanks for the quick reply, Any chance you would also know if this contains the latest microcodes and LAN firmware?


Here is F11e modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/12/2020.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.11e /x

Use the modded Master F11e BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11e modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/12/2020.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.11e /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11e BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Thank you very much for the file and the detailed instructions!


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

is there a qflashable bios with the fastest microcodes that also allows the user to adjust all 4 rtls and all 4 iols that also doesn't have the trefi bug?


----------



## ShawnTRD

Anyone know about this boards support for DAC audio? I'm new to this DAC Audio stuff but shouldn't there be RCA type outputs to run to a separate amp?


----------



## EarlZ

ShawnTRD said:


> Anyone know about this boards support for DAC audio? I'm new to this DAC Audio stuff but shouldn't there be RCA type outputs to run to a separate amp?


You should be able to run your external DAC via USB or Optical, There is no need for RCA as that would mean you are letting the onboard audio do the conversion process, I use a Topping DX3 Pro via optical.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Yeah my understanding is the Master Boards come with a DAC controller. 
"125dB SNR AMP-UP Audio with ALC1220 & High-End ESS SABRE 9118 DAC with WIMA audio capacitors"



EarlZ said:


> ShawnTRD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone know about this boards support for DAC audio? I'm new to this DAC Audio stuff but shouldn't there be RCA type outputs to run to a separate amp?
> 
> 
> 
> You should be able to run your external DAC via USB or Optical, There is no need for RCA as that would mean you are letting the onboard audio do the conversion process, I use a Topping DX3 Pro via optical.
Click to expand...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Coil whine - What causes it? Can't seem to make it go away. This thing sounds like a honda civic while under load lol.


----------



## Mannekino

XGS-Duplicity said:


> is there a guide that fully explains dvid overclock mode and which settings I need to use? Every time I think i have it down, i don't.


I found this short guide and I'm quite interested in trying it: https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/


----------



## EarlZ

ShawnTRD said:


> Yeah my understanding is the Master Boards come with a DAC controller.
> "125dB SNR AMP-UP Audio with ALC1220 & High-End ESS SABRE 9118 DAC with WIMA audio capacitors"


Yeah that is the on-board sound 'card' most if not all modern mother boards have those built in


----------



## Mannekino

I did more testing but I can't get Prime95 stable. My PC crashes about 10-30 seconds into the "Small FFTs" stress test. All the other tests run without issues. Below are the results of today. I went back to BIOS F11c after trying F11e (I had some crashes but maybe due to overclock settings). I've been doing test runs with:



AIDA64 System Stability Test (about 30 minutes)
Intel Extreme Tuning Utility Stress Test with Normal, AVX and AVX2 (15 minutes each)
CINEBENCH R15 (5 passes)
CINEBENCH R20 (5 passes)

*So where to go from here? Try more settings? Should I care about Prime95? I also did some searching on this topic and on Reddit /r/intel and /r/overclocking this question has popped up with comments from people saying this can happen and can be ignored.*

*Preferred overclock settings so far*

Optimized defaults with the following changes:



X.M.P. profile applied
Enhanced Multi-Core Support: Disabled
CPU Clock Ratio: 50
CPU Vcore: 1.300
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
CPU Vcore Current Protection: Extreme
PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf

Notes I made with these settings:



VR OUT goes a little bit higher when not doing anything.
VR OUT overall is lower. During AIDA64 it's around 1.250V (around 1.290V idle)
CPU Package temperature is lower. *No throttling occurred*.
CPU Package Power was around 183W during AIDA64.
CB R15 2063 PASS peak CPU Package temperature 83.
CB R20 4966 PASS peak CPU Package temperature 88.

Here is a screenshot graphs during AIDA64 testing










*Only enabling Enhanced Multi-Core Performance*

Optimized defaults with the following changes:



X.M.P. profile applied
Enhanced Multi-Core Support: Enabled

Notes I made with these settings:



VR OUT less difference between idle and during benchmark *but there seems to be more fluctuation in the voltage*.
VR OUT overall is higher. During AIDA64 it's around 1.310V (around 1.350V idle).
CPU Package temperature peaked at 97 during AIDA64. *Throttling occurred on 3 cores*.
CPU Package Power was around 193W during AIDA64
CB R15 2063 PASS peak CPU Package temperature 85
CB R20 4917 PASS peak CPU Package temperature 90

Here is a screenshot graphs during AIDA64 testing


----------



## oscarf

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11e modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/12/2020.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.11e /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11e BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.



Hi mate, First many thanks for this ????
Right now i have in my Aorus Z390 Master bios F11c, the last stable from gigabyte.
I wonder if i can flash my bios with the F11e modded and then load my previously saved profiles settings from F11c?


----------



## KedarWolf

oscarf said:


> Hi mate, First many thanks for this ????
> Right now i have in my Aorus Z390 Master bios F11c, the last stable from gigabyte.
> I wonder if i can flash my bios with the F11e modded and then load my previously saved profiles settings from F11c?


No, won't work with different BIOS revisions.


----------



## Mannekino

Mannekino said:


> I did more testing but I can't get Prime95 stable. My PC crashes about 10-30 seconds into the "Small FFTs" stress test. All the other tests run without issues. Below are the results of today. I went back to BIOS F11c after trying F11e (I had some crashes but
> 
> *So where to go from here? Try more settings? Should I care about Prime95? I also did some searching on this topic and on Reddit /r/intel and /r/overclocking this question has popped up with comments from people saying this can happen and can be ignored.*


Well, I did some more reading in the past 1-2 hours or so. I searched Google for "Prime95 AVX 9900K" and I found a bunch of posts on Reddit, this forum and other places. Including some interesting comments from @Falkentyne both here and on Reddit. 

I also watched this video from der8auer where he says he was using Prime95 26.6 without AVX. I opted to just use the latest version but I disabled AVX. I was running all my previous tests with AVX and the consensus seems to be that this is insane 

https://youtu.be/95Ujni7-fVM?t=1072

So I ran Prime95 without AVX for 30 minutes now without my system crashing. Before this it would crash under 30 seconds or even faster. Package temperature peaked at 95 °C. So I'm happy with the results and perhaps interested into optimizing a bit further and see if I can get get my CPU Vcore under 1.300.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

So, the story:

Built my machine a year ago with an Aorus Z390 Master, 8086K CPU and 2x16GB 3200 C14 Gskill ram (Gskill 3200C14 ). I enabled XMP on that with no issues. Ran 1600MHz at 14-14-14-34 right off the bat. A while ago I swapped in a 9900KS and put the 8086K in an ITX build. Then the machine would not run XMP at all. I left it alone until yesterday when I decided to twist the machine's arm a bit. I want my ram running at spec or better! I know the CPUs are only spec'ed for 1333/DDR4-2666, but I've read that these new CPUs have pretty good memory controllers.

I enabled XMP, but proceeded to manually change the memory speeds and set the voltage to 1.35V. SPD is 15-15-15-36-50, so when I say C15 below those are the timings I'm referencing. When C14, it's 14-14-14-34-48. Pass is getting to Windows and running an Aida64 speed test. Fail is CMOS getting reset.

Here's what I got:
800 C14 - pass
1066 C15 - pass
1066 C14 - pass
1200 C15 - pass
1200 C14 - pass
1333 C14 - pass (stock CPU memory speed)
1466 C14 - pass. I boosted VCCIO to 1.15V, Sysagent 1.15, PCHcore to 1.06. More just in case than anything else. I really don't know what I'm doing here so I kept the voltages modest.
1500 C15 - pass
1600 C15 - pass. Could not replicate after the bios would not accept the next speed below.
1600 C14 - fail. This is the XMP timings I'm trying for.

Currently at 1500 C15.

Bios is the current release at F11c.

Would gladly accept input on how to get this working better. Just for fun, a nice round 50GB/sec read speed would be sweet, if not a bit more. Topped out at 46-48GB/sec I think.


----------



## oscarf

KedarWolf said:


> No, won't work with different BIOS revisions.



Okay, but will i find all the same settings in the modded F11e as they are in F11c? 
If so then i might be able to take note of all from F11c !

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

Voodoo Rufus said:


> So, the story:
> 
> Built my machine a year ago with an Aorus Z390 Master, 8086K CPU and 2x16GB 3200 C14 Gskill ram ( https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-...82E16820232218 ). I enabled XMP on that with no issues. Ran 1600MHz at 14-14-14-34 right off the bat. A while ago I swapped in a 9900KS and put the 8086K in an ITX build. Then the machine would not run XMP at all. I left it alone until yesterday when I decided to twist the machine's arm a bit. I want my ram running at spec or better! I know the CPUs are only spec'ed for 1333/DDR4-2666, but I've read that these new CPUs have pretty good memory controllers.
> 
> I enabled XMP, but proceeded to manually change the memory speeds and set the voltage to 1.35V. SPD is 15-15-15-36-50, so when I say C15 below those are the timings I'm referencing. When C14, it's 14-14-14-34-48. Pass is getting to Windows and running an Aida64 speed test. Fail is CMOS getting reset.
> 
> Here's what I got:
> 800 C14 - pass
> 1066 C15 - pass
> 1066 C14 - pass
> 1200 C15 - pass
> 1200 C14 - pass
> 1333 C14 - pass (stock CPU memory speed)
> 1466 C14 - pass. I boosted VCCIO to 1.15V, Sysagent 1.15, PCHcore to 1.06. More just in case than anything else. I really don't know what I'm doing here so I kept the voltages modest.
> 1500 C15 - pass
> 1600 C15 - pass. Could not replicate after the bios would not accept the next speed below.
> 1600 C14 - fail. This is the XMP timings I'm trying for.
> 
> Currently at 1500 C15.
> 
> Bios is the current release at F11c.
> 
> Would gladly accept input on how to get this working better. Just for fun, a nice round 50GB/sec read speed would be sweet, if not a bit more. Topped out at 46-48GB/sec I think.


Can you please copy a working link here? That link is broken.
Is it this one?

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb...2218?Item=N82E16820232218&Tpk=N82E16820232218

I don't know about that one but this one should be working on your 9900KS, as this works on my 9900k.
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232560?Item=N82E16820232560

Try to set all of the tertiary timings and subtimings from a known working profile, including timings that you might not think is important, including those weird values below the subs (they may be called resistances). Don't leave any timing on auto unless you can't find a manual timing for it.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

Falkentyne, thanks for the link find. I fixed it above.


----------



## AndrejB

Voodoo Rufus said:


> Falkentyne, thanks for the link find. I fixed it above.


Did you try running xmp with 1.4v?

Could be that the chips just degraded


----------



## zamdam

Has anyone had any issues with the rear audio line out and mic ports on the board?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

So question: you know how silicon lottery used to sell 6700k chips @ 4.9ghz @ 1.44v manual vcore set it bios w/ turbo llc? Since coffee lake is based on the same architecture, i should probably be ok with my 9900k @ 5.3ghz 8c/8t @ 1.44v manual vcore set in bios with turbo llc as long as i'm not doing crazy loads right? All I do is play games with this PC.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> So question: you know how silicon lottery used to sell 6700k chips @ 4.9ghz @ 1.44v manual vcore set it bios w/ turbo llc? Since coffee lake is based on the same architecture, i should probably be ok with my 9900k @ 5.3ghz 8c/8t @ 1.44v manual vcore set in bios with turbo llc as long as i'm not doing crazy loads right? All I do is play games with this PC.


You already know the answers to these questions though...


----------



## Mannekino

Yesterday I tried the "Dynamic Vcore" method of overclocking as shown in this post https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

I also read through about 20 pages of this thread starting from #500 to find some additional information. I don't know if I did anything wrong, but it went terrible.

I couldn't get my system stable and I ended up with a +0.050 offset which gave me higher voltages in BIOS and HWiNFO and my system was very unstable. *I don't understand how a +0.050 offset would give me high voltages because I would have to go to at least +0.090 right?*

Well, after that I tried going back to my stable 5 GHz overclock settings and then things got weirder. I've read about the DVID bug and I was on BIOS F11c. After changing the settings and going back to the BIOS I saw a voltage of 1.4XX. So I rebooted again and then it was normal.

Then the really weird stuff started happening to my computer and it took me a while to figure it out. When typing an address in Google Chrome, or trying to browse through my bookmarks things got "laggy" for a lack of a better term. For example when I typed "wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww" in the address bar it wouldn't add the w's smooth one by one, the w's appeared in chunks, kinda like rubbing banding in a game. When browsing my bookmarks it wouldn't immediately popup sub-menus, there was a delay.

Also when I went to Discord and started scrolling up and down it was displaying the same rubber banding behavior. I opened up HWiNFO and started looking at the screen when my computer was behaving in this way and I noticed the problem occurred each time I saw the clock frequency drop along with the Core VID values as shown in this part of HWiNFO.










After I saw this I decided to flash my BIOS again to F11e and the problem disappeared. With my current overclock I still get lower clock frequencies when idle and the Core VID values also drop, but my computer is acting completely fine right now and so far it's stable.

My current overclock settings are:



BIOS: F11e
Enhanced Multi-Core Support: Disabled
CPU Clock Ratio: 50
Ring Ratio: Auto (43)
AVX Offset: 0
X.M.P. memory profile applied
CPU Vcore: 1.300
C-States Control: Disabled
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
CPU Vcore Current Protection: Extreme
PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf

I tried lowering the CPU Vcore to 1.290V but then I couldn't get through LinX. So 1.300V seems to be my stable voltage.

The C-States Control settings are now grouped in a drop down menu where you can select: Auto, Enabled or Disabled. After selecting Enabled you can manually set each C-state. Does selecting Disabled actually disable all these settings? What about the last setting "Package C State Limit" which doesn't have a Enabled or Disabled setting, what happens to that one if you select the top-level to Disabled?










Lastly, I've been reading comments (primarily from @Falkentyne on this forum, Reddit and he seems to pop-up everywhere ) about the *CPU Vcore PWM Switch Rate* and that you should set it to 300.0KHz. Based on my overclock settings above should I do this? I've watched Buildzoid's video on the Z390 AORUS MASTER and he said that lowering the frequency decreases efficiency. I'm out of my depth on this topic so some advice would be appreciated.


----------



## Thunder-74

Mannekino said:


> Yesterday I tried the "Dynamic Vcore" method of overclocking as shown in this post https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/
> 
> I also read through about 20 pages of this thread starting from #500 to find some additional information. I don't know if I did anything wrong, but it went terrible.
> 
> I couldn't get my system stable and I ended up with a +0.050 offset which gave me higher voltages in BIOS and HWiNFO and my system was very unstable. *I don't understand how a +0.050 offset would give me high voltages because I would have to go to at least +0.090 right?*
> 
> Well, after that I tried going back to my stable 5 GHz overclock settings and then things got weirder. I've read about the DVID bug and I was on BIOS F11c. After changing the settings and going back to the BIOS I saw a voltage of 1.4XX. So I rebooted again and then it was normal.
> 
> Then the really weird stuff started happening to my computer and it took me a while to figure it out. When typing an address in Google Chrome, or trying to browse through my bookmarks things got "laggy" for a lack of a better term. For example when I typed "wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww" in the address bar it wouldn't add the w's smooth one by one, the w's appeared in chunks, kinda like rubbing banding in a game. When browsing my bookmarks it wouldn't immediately popup sub-menus, there was a delay.
> 
> Also when I went to Discord and started scrolling up and down it was displaying the same rubber banding behavior. I opened up HWiNFO and started looking at the screen when my computer was behaving in this way and I noticed the problem occurred each time I saw the clock frequency drop along with the Core VID values as shown in this part of HWiNFO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After I saw this I decided to flash my BIOS again to F11e and the problem disappeared. With my current overclock I still get lower clock frequencies when idle and the Core VID values also drop, but my computer is acting completely fine right now and so far it's stable.
> 
> My current overclock settings are:
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS: F11e
> Enhanced Multi-Core Support: Disabled
> CPU Clock Ratio: 50
> Ring Ratio: Auto (43)
> AVX Offset: 0
> X.M.P. memory profile applied
> CPU Vcore: 1.300
> C-States Control: Disabled
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
> CPU Vcore Current Protection: Extreme
> PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf
> 
> I tried lowering the CPU Vcore to 1.290V but then I couldn't get through LinX. So 1.300V seems to be my stable voltage.
> 
> The C-States Control settings are now grouped in a drop down menu where you can select: Auto, Enabled or Disabled. After selecting Enabled you can manually set each C-state. Does selecting Disabled actually disable all these settings? What about the last setting "Package C State Limit" which doesn't have a Enabled or Disabled setting, what happens to that one if you select the top-level to Disabled?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lastly, I've been reading comments (primarily from @Falkentyne on this forum, Reddit and he seems to pop-up everywhere ) about the *CPU Vcore PWM Switch Rate* and that you should set it to 300.0KHz. Based on my overclock settings above should I do this? I've watched Buildzoid's video on the Z390 AORUS MASTER and he said that lowering the frequency decreases efficiency. I'm out of my depth on this topic so some advice would be appreciated.



I used that guide and found an optimal situation giving + 0.030v. Important and always make a clear cmos of the bios, especially if you switch from fixed voltage to dynamic voltage and vice versa, otherwise you will find yourself with an incorrect VID. This is my experience. For VRMs, set 300khz which is better


----------



## Mannekino

Thunder-74 said:


> For VRMs, set 300khz which is better


Why is better though? Haven't been able to understand this yet.


----------



## alv-OC

XGS-Duplicity said:


> So question: you know how silicon lottery used to sell 6700k chips @ 4.9ghz @ 1.44v manual vcore set it bios w/ turbo llc? Since coffee lake is based on the same architecture, i should probably be ok with my 9900k @ 5.3ghz 8c/8t @ 1.44v manual vcore set in bios with turbo llc as long as i'm not doing crazy loads right? All I do is play games with this PC.



5.3GHz ist actually a pretty high OC for an 9900K... If I were you I would aim for a 9900KS and eventhough you will be very likely need to keep the caches under 46GHz and disable HT to meake it stable, some games have AVX instructions and this will the true proof for your OC stability. Also going over 1.400v will put way so much heat out of you chip that i dont even think that Direct Die + silicon deliding will cool that down. 

That said, you probably need to know that going from 5.2GHz to 5.3GHz won't give you any real benefit, 1 or 2 FPS if any... you will get more performance focusing on the RAM (and oviously ont he GPU thats for sure) rather than squezing 100MHz more on the core... it's just not worth of the effort and risk just for gaming, maby for OC competitoin or perhaps just because you like it.


----------



## Falkentyne

Using 400 or 500 khz requires a slight increase in cpu vcore for baseline stability (about 10mv each step) than 300 khz, when using loadline calibration at higher levels (Standard/Normal, which is 1.6 mOhms of vdroop, do not seem to be affected).


----------



## Gen.

Hello everyone. I don’t wish anyone rotten gigabytes anymore. I bought myself APEX XI. By the way, a master in 2 dimms can also. Why take 4 dimmers if 2 dimmers are accelerated just like 4 dimmers are not clear. 4200 are not stable at any timings and voltages.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

Here's all the timings I can pull from CPU-Z. I don't see any in the bios that have timings in the decimal range. Only seem to be whole numbers?



> JEDEC timings table CL-tRCD-tRP-tRAS-tRC @ frequency
> JEDEC #1 10.0-10-10-24-34 @ 727 MHz
> JEDEC #2 11.0-11-11-27-38 @ 800 MHz
> JEDEC #3 12.0-12-12-29-41 @ 872 MHz
> JEDEC #4 13.0-14-14-32-45 @ 945 MHz
> JEDEC #5 14.0-14-14-34-48 @ 1018 MHz
> JEDEC #6 15.0-15-15-36-50 @ 1066 MHz
> JEDEC #7 16.0-15-15-36-50 @ 1066 MHz
> XMP profile XMP-3200
> Specification DDR4-3200
> Voltage level 1.350 Volts
> Min Cycle time 0.625 ns (1600 MHz)
> Max CL 14.0
> Min tRP 8.75 ns
> Min tRCD 8.75 ns
> Min tRAS 21.25 ns
> Min tRC 30.00 ns
> Min tRRD 3.50 ns
> XMP timings table CL-tRCD-tRP-tRAS-tRC-CR @ frequency (voltage)
> XMP #1 14.0-14-14-34-48-n.a @ 1600 MHz (1.350 Volts)


----------



## lsevald

For instance min tRCD=8.75ns: 

Time=1/Frequency

1/1600000000Hz (actual frequency for 3200)=0.000000000625s=0.625ns*14 (what you enter in BIOS)=8.75ns

So if you want to try your RAM at say 3600MT/s, specs says you should enter:

Time pr clock cycle for 3600: 1/1800M=0.555ns

8.75/0.555=15.76 or round up to 16 which would give you 16*0.555=8.88ns and you stay above the required min spec of 8.75

Sorry for the mess, tried to make it easy and failed


----------



## EarlZ

I have a G.Skill Trident Z CL16 3200Mhz (8GB x 4) what is the average expected overclock on these sticks ?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> I have a G.Skill Trident Z CL16 3200Mhz (8GB x 4) what is the average expected overclock on these sticks ?


If it's the 16-16-16-36 version, 4000 and up to 4200.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> If it's the 16-16-16-36 version, 4000 and up to 4200.


Its the 16-18-18-38


----------



## EarlZ

Something about running my CPU overclocked is messing with my Ethernet download speeds, has anyone experienced this ?


----------



## philhalo66

Anyone having their Led's permanently orange? For example i set everything to white in RGB fusion and the LED strips i have are perfect white but every single LED on the motherboard itself has a weird yellowish/orange ting to it. Anyone else seen this? Pictures are pretty bad but you can clearly see the chipset and ram LED's have a yellowish tint.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

31 guests, popular thread this morning


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Its the 16-18-18-38


Oh, I think that RAM is Hynix.

You MIGHT get 4000, likely less.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, I think that RAM is Hynix.
> 
> You MIGHT get 4000, likely less.


I have zero exp with RAM overclocking on DDR4, Should I just leave the timings to whatever XMP uses and try to say set the clocks for 3600-4000 ?


----------



## ezveedub

philhalo66 said:


> Anyone having their Led's permanently orange? For example i set everything to white in RGB fusion and the LED strips i have are perfect white but every single LED on the motherboard itself has a weird yellowish/orange ting to it. Anyone else seen this? Pictures are pretty bad but you can clearly see the chipset and ram LED's have a yellowish tint.




Did you select the setting for all one color or individuals? You can have the RGB headers different color from individual sections of the mobo. I assume your under one color setting. If probably delete RGB fusion and download the latest version and see what happens. I’ve never had any color issue with the software to date. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> Using 400 or 500 khz requires a slight increase in cpu vcore for baseline stability (about 10mv each step) than 300 khz, when using loadline calibration at higher levels (Standard/Normal, which is 1.6 mOhms of vdroop, do not seem to be affected).


Hi Falkentyne, i have a question for you.

from another your post (on TeachpowerUP), i see this calculation
...
For example:
1.340v Bios set and Loadline calibration: Turbo / LLC6, and pulling 150 amps:
1340 mv - (0.4 * 150) = 1280mv = 1.280v.
....
I've use the guide with Offset voltage and LLC on "Low", 5ghz on 8 cores an AVX 0
Under Cinebench R20, from HWInfo I've:

Vcore IT8688E = 1,26
Vcore IT8792E = 1,265
VR VOUT IR 35201 = 1,227
AMP = 126.75A

From your formule => 1265mv - (X * 126) = 1227mv => 1.227v

I've that X = 0,3 mOhms 

However I tried with Cinebench R15, the voltages change, but "X" remains 0.3 mOhms 

So little possible with LLC set to LOW? I'm doing it wrong ?

EDIT:

I Tried with LLC on "Turbo" (Cinebench R20)

Vcore IT8688E = 1,392
Vcore IT8792E = 1,397
VR VOUT IR 35201 = 1,344
AMP = 156A

loadline = 0,34 mOhms .....

I doubt that the formula can only be applied to fixed voltage and that VR VOUT is not the simple difference between Vcore and Vdroop.



This is the guide (https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/)


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> Hi Falkentyne, i have a question for you.
> 
> from another your post (on TeachpowerUP), i see this calculation
> ...
> For example:
> 1.340v Bios set and Loadline calibration: Turbo / LLC6, and pulling 150 amps:
> 1340 mv - (0.4 * 150) = 1280mv = 1.280v.
> ....
> I've use the guide with Offset voltage and LLC on "Low", 5ghz on 8 cores an AVX 0
> Under Cinebench R20, from HWInfo I've:
> 
> Vcore IT8688E = 1,26
> Vcore IT8792E = 1,265
> VR VOUT IR 35201 = 1,227
> AMP = 126.75A
> 
> From your formule => 1265mv - (X * 126) = 1227mv => 1.227v
> 
> I've that X = 0,3 mOhms
> 
> However I tried with Cinebench R15, the voltages change, but "X" remains 0.3 mOhms
> 
> So little possible with LLC set to LOW? I'm doing it wrong ?
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> I Tried with LLC on "Turbo" (Cinebench R20)
> 
> Vcore IT8688E = 1,392
> Vcore IT8792E = 1,397
> VR VOUT IR 35201 = 1,344
> AMP = 156A
> 
> loadline = 0,34 mOhms .....
> 
> I doubt that the formula can only be applied to fixed voltage and that VR VOUT is not the simple difference between Vcore and Vdroop.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the guide (https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/)


VR VOUT is 100% accurate and is always "BIos set voltage - (Current IOUT * LLC mOhms).

LLC Turbo is 0.4 mOhms.
LLC Low=1.3 mOhms.


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> VR VOUT is 100% accurate and is always "BIos set voltage - (Current IOUT * LLC mOhms).
> 
> LLC Turbo is 0.4 mOhms.
> LLC Low=1.3 mOhms.


Thank you for reply, but then how can I explain the values ​​I have? also setting LLC to turbo, the calculated value has not changed much, I have had an increase in all voltage readings .
Is it possible that it does not apply to a dynamic voltage?

This is under Aida 64 with only FPU test (LLC on Low = 0.34mOhms)
what do you think about it?


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> Thank you for reply, but then how can I explain the values ​​I have? also setting LLC to turbo, the calculated value has not changed much, I have had an increase in all voltage readings .
> Is it possible that it does not apply to a dynamic voltage?


I don't know and I don't deal with offset voltage, sorry.
What motherboard do you have?
The Intersil boards have an error with manual voltage, causing voltage to be 15mv lower than what you set in the BIOS. I thought that was fixed in the reworked GUI Bioses but I don't know. The Master doesn't have this bug.

And that article you linked uses DVID.
And as I said,
Voltage curve for absolute max safe voltage on ambient should be 1520mv - (amps * 1.6)=load mv, plug in the amps you're getting.
The voltage you will get on fixed vcore is Bios voltage - (LLC mOhms * Amps)=VR VOUT


----------



## Thunder-74

I have an Aorus Master with Bios F11d
you are very kind, I see that you are everywhere on the web trying to help everyone. 
I tried to do oc with fixed Vcore and LLC on High / Turbo as recommended by many, but to be stable at 5ghz I have to give at least 1.35v with high temperatures. With this OC, I will have lowered the cores temperatures by 15 degrees. I feel comfortable then, but my questions were to understand if something can be regulated abnormally, such as an LLC that is too aggressive despite its setting in the BIOS.


----------



## philhalo66

ezveedub said:


> Did you select the setting for all one color or individuals? You can have the RGB headers different color from individual sections of the mobo. I assume your under one color setting. If probably delete RGB fusion and download the latest version and see what happens. I’ve never had any color issue with the software to date.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yeah, i have tried setting all individually and syncing all i even tried older versions of RGB Fusion and it still has a yellowish tint.


----------



## Gen.

Hey. Samples with Apex XI and mine G.Skill TridentZ 3600 16-16


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Gen. said:


> Hey. Samples with Apex XI and mine G.Skill TridentZ 3600 16-16



very nice result! Would you mind showing us aida64 bench? Interested in comparing copy scores to my c15-4133. Have you been able to get the dimms to 4800mhz yet?


EDIT: Best I can do is [email protected] 1.56v/vdimm and 1.3v sa/io. 63.5k-64k reads, 64k-64.5k writes, 61k-61.5k copy and 36ns latency.


----------



## metalspider

Thunder-74 said:


> Thank you for reply, but then how can I explain the values ​​I have? also setting LLC to turbo, the calculated value has not changed much, I have had an increase in all voltage readings .
> Is it possible that it does not apply to a dynamic voltage?
> 
> This is under Aida 64 with only FPU test (LLC on Low = 0.34mOhms)
> what do you think about it?


your vr vout looks ok and doesnt go higher then 1.281v.
the easy way to do offset mode vcore on giagbyte z390 is to set vrm llc to power savings,leave cpu llc on auto and set an offset around +0.075 
negative offsets with other llc settings can cause crashes on idle......

on the aorus pro my fixed vcore for [email protected] was 1.325v cpu llc turbo
while adaptive i did vrm llc power savings with offset of +0.075v


----------



## Thunder-74

metalspider said:


> Thunder-74 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for reply, but then how can I explain the values â€‹â€‹I have? also setting LLC to turbo, the calculated value has not changed much, I have had an increase in all voltage readings .
> Is it possible that it does not apply to a dynamic voltage?
> 
> This is under Aida 64 with only FPU test (LLC on Low = 0.34mOhms)
> what do you think about it?
> 
> 
> 
> your vr vout looks ok and doesnt go higher then 1.281v.
> the easy way to do offset mode vcore on giagbyte z390 is to set vrm llc to power savings,leave cpu llc on auto and set an offset around +0.075
> negative offsets with other llc settings can cause crashes on idle......
> 
> on the aorus pro my fixed vcore for [email protected] was 1.325v cpu llc turbo
> while adaptive i did vrm llc power savings with offset of +0.075v
Click to expand...

i set vrm as you say. currently I have offset + 0.030v and llc on Low. with fixed voltage above set 1.35v .. too much for how I see it. I believe that if I set llc on auto, I would have an increase of voltage


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> i set vrm as you say. currently I have offset + 0.030v and llc on Low. with fixed voltage above set 1.35v .. too much for how I see it. I believe that if I set llc on auto, I would have an increase of voltage


LLC on Auto is intel spec (= Normal / Standard) of max vdroop if MCE is disabled. So normally, LLC=Auto, Standard and Normal are all Intel spec of 1.6 mOhms of vdroop.
So LLC Auto is more vdroop than LLC=Low. (Low=1.3 mOhms, Auto/Standard/Norm=1.6 mOhms).

MCE enabled will change any "Auto" setting in the BIOS to a certain preset (for LLC, that should be Turbo).


----------



## metalspider

well of course mce is disabled in the settings i gave.
offset mode is for when you want adaptive voltage.no point in it if you are staying on fixed voltage.
set cpu vcore mode to normal and set the offset in dynamic vcore (dvid)


----------



## Thunder-74

metalspider said:


> well of course mce is disabled in the settings i gave.
> offset mode is for when you want adaptive voltage.no point in it if you are staying on fixed voltage.
> set cpu vcore mode to normal and set the offset in dynamic vcore (dvid)



my MCE is on AUTO... 
I still have the dynamic VID. I don't think MCE interferes with this

as Falkentyne said, it defines different values ​​for the AUTO settings of other parameters ... correct me if I'm wrong


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## metalspider

im pretty sure mce auto is the same as disabled in most bios versions.


----------



## bastian

metalspider said:


> im pretty sure mce auto is the same as disabled in most bios versions.


Not necessarily. Pretty sure ASUS for example AUTO was enabled.


----------



## Falkentyne

bastian said:


> Not necessarily. Pretty sure ASUS for example AUTO was enabled.


Pretty sure Auto only enables MCE if you sync all cores instead of leaving the AI options at auto. Otherwise it respects Intel's power limits.


----------



## lsevald

I'm trying the 12f beta on my Pro board. Works good and I seem to gain a bump in RAM speed, but I also seem to lose ~5% FPS in a couple of games I tested using these newer BIOS'es. So I extracted the CPU microcode in this BIOS for my 906EC P0 9900k, and found:

cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000AE_2019-02-14_PRD_FA8DD1F3

Is that a bad one performance wise? I'm looking for the most performance, not security, as it's a PC only for gaming. Which one is recommended for that?


----------



## Falkentyne

lsevald said:


> I'm trying the 12f beta on my Pro board. Works good and I seem to gain a bump in RAM speed, but I also seem to lose ~5% FPS in a couple of games I tested using these newer BIOS'es. So I extracted the CPU microcode in this BIOS for my 906EC P0 9900k, and found:
> 
> cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000AE_2019-02-14_PRD_FA8DD1F3
> 
> Is that a bad one performance wise? I'm looking for the most performance, not security, as it's a PC only for gaming. Which one is recommended for that?


Anything older than C6 is good.


----------



## lsevald

Falkentyne said:


> Anything older than C6 is good.


Thanks! So the microcode in this beta BIOS is pretty old(ver AE dated 2019-02-14), and there's only one "good" alternative, the BE version dated 2019-05-17 fitting your parameter. Any point trying that one? I'm going to retest my games to see if I really lost 5% FPS, as it's probably due to something else then.


----------



## Falkentyne

I saw no FPS loss in BE vs AE in windows. What I do know is that AE has broken TSX-NI and that BE apparently fixed that but has some sort of performance hit with it enabled. Or maybe it was AE that had broken performance. 
Not like I pay attention to Linux. A2 which doesn't support TSX-NI (apparently) seems to be faster on those programs when you disable the support and some people wanted A2 just for that reason. I don't know what I'm talking about here either. I got this from a Linux forum where they were discussing console emulators.

It was C6 (and CA and D2 and newer, if any) which had the bad performance penalties--even if you disable all windows security patches, it doesn't matter.


----------



## Gen.

4533 17-17-1T (3+2 DIMM) 1.510VDRAM-1.31250VCCIO-1.36250VCCSA

P.S. I recommend throwing the master in the trash. This is not pay, this is ****


----------



## Smokediggity

F11g is out for the Master. Same bugs as F11b, F11d, F11f... I really don't think they're trying.


Also just noticed that disabling CSM will change your bios resolution. You can confirm by pressing Alt + F6 in the bios.


----------



## lsevald

How much does higher tFAW hurt performance? Performance in AIDA seems to not suffer much, if any. By accident I found out that higher tFAW helps quite a bit stabilizing RAM oc on my setup (Aorus Pro, 4x8GB 3600 CL15 GSkill Bdie, P0 9900k). I had typed 14 instead of 16 for tFAW while quickly testing out different BIOS versions. tFAW less than 4xtRRD_S is not valid, so I suspect the board is running it at Auto (often 40 and higher depending on RAM speed). So, my new method now is setting tFAW at Auto, then try going for the RAM speed I want and lowering timings as much as possible, and lastly lower tFAW until it fails (tFAW=24-32 range seems to work well for 3800CL15-4000CL17 speeds). I'm now able to run 3900CL16-4000CL17 on my Pro with 4 sticks, fairly low VCCSA (1.16V) and reasonable Vddr(1.41V). I'm also able to boot, post and bench at 4133, but that's probably way too high for this motherboard and low latency tuned RAM.


----------



## Falkentyne

lsevald said:


> How much does higher tFAW hurt performance? Performance in AIDA seems to not suffer much, if any. By accident I found out that higher tFAW helps quite a bit stabilizing RAM oc on my setup (Aorus Pro, 4x8GB 3600 CL15 GSkill Bdie, P0 9900k). I had typed 14 instead of 16 for tFAW while quickly testing out different BIOS versions. tFAW less than 4xtRRD_S is not valid, so I suspect the board is running it at Auto (often 40 and higher depending on RAM speed). So, my new method now is setting tFAW at Auto, then try going for the RAM speed I want and lowering timings as much as possible, and lastly lower tFAW until it fails (tFAW=24-32 range seems to work well for 3800CL15-4000CL17 speeds). I'm now able to run 3900CL16-4000CL17 on my Pro with 4 sticks, fairly low VCCSA (1.16V) and reasonable Vddr(1.41V). I'm also able to boot, post and bench at 4133, but that's probably way too high for this motherboard and low latency tuned RAM.


No one can tell you how much it hurts performance. Benchmarks like this don't exist. It's up to crazy people like you and me to run the RAM tests and then see if it affects gaming benchmarks or not. Someone in the DDR4 thread said loosening TFAW and TRRD_S can reduce AVX temps at the cost of a little performance though.


----------



## Dibbler

Smokediggity said:


> F11g is out for the Master. Same bugs as F11b, F11d, F11f... I really don't think they're trying.
> 
> 
> Also just noticed that disabling CSM will change your bios resolution. You can confirm by pressing Alt + F6 in the bios.


Really....?!

It would be interesting to know what has been "positively" changed in that latest revision change.


----------



## Alemancio

Gen. said:


> 4533 17-17-1T (3+2 DIMM) 1.510VDRAM-1.31250VCCIO-1.36250VCCSA
> 
> P.S. I recommend throwing the master in the trash. This is not pay, this is ****


Relax, the Apex costs what 2 x Master do.


----------



## metalspider

Gen. said:


> 4533 17-17-1T (3+2 DIMM) 1.510VDRAM-1.31250VCCIO-1.36250VCCSA
> 
> P.S. I recommend throwing the master in the trash. This is not pay, this is ****


idk if you have hwinfo64 running all the time but if you do monitoring the asus EC sensor causes dpc latency issues and audio crackles etc.
i got the xi hero recently and now doing 4133mhz instead of 3866mhz on the aorus pro.


----------



## stasio

F11h is out for Master.
Should be on F11e base with correct code.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Where do I find these? 



stasio said:


> F11h is out for
> Master.
> Should be on F11e base with correct code.


----------



## Medvediy

ShawnTRD said:


> Where do I find these?


https://www.mediafire.com/file/cij6yl5fp594xxn/Z390AORUSMASTER.F11h/file


----------



## oscarf

stasio said:


> F11h is out for Master.
> Should be on F11e base with correct code.



Hi stasio, 
Is there any changelog for F11h? What changes from F11e to F11h?
Can F11h be installed/flashed with Q-Flash?


----------



## GeneO

The microcode in f11h is C6:


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> The microcode in f11h is C6:


Gene, put a spoiler or something on your signature, the wall of scroll on mobile is awful. First time I tried to scroll past it on my phone I thought the website was broken and couldn't figure out why I couldn't see the next post. 

BTW, tonight I'll make the latest beta with all the RST etc. updated and the fastest BE microcode.


----------



## GeneO

OK, I downgraded the f11h microcode to fast ones, updated the RST EFI and OROM and updated the BIOS. All menus seem to be there (but CPU current limit is grayed out) and the TREFI seems OK. Will do further testing.


----------



## GeneO

Here is the f11h with the following microcode and the latest RST modules (I did not update the network modules)


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> Gene, put a spoiler or something on your signature, the wall of scroll on mobile is awful. First time I tried to scroll past it on my phone I thought the website was broken and couldn't figure out why I couldn't see the next post.


Yours does the same. Not my problem.


----------



## GeneO

f11h has outdated, vulnerable IME firmware (all Gigabyte master bios do). You may want to flash the latest.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Yours does the same. Not my problem.


The mobile site has been broken for ages.


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> Gene, put a spoiler or something on your signature, the wall of scroll on mobile is awful. First time I tried to scroll past it on my phone I thought the website was broken and couldn't figure out why I couldn't see the next post.
> 
> BTW, tonight I'll make the latest beta with all the RST etc. updated and the fastest BE microcode.


Thanks for doing "your stuff" on the latest beta


----------



## GeneO

BIOS don't include the latest IME with vulnerabilities patched, however you can flash the IME. 

Attached is the Intel Management Engine firmware 12_0_64_1551 built for the gigabyte Z390 master. I built it for the master from the Winraid site and have been running it for some time.
To flash, place the two files in a folder, open an admin command prompt and navigate to the folder, then run 

for 64bit Windows 10 
FWUpdLcl64.exe -f 12_0_64_1551_cse_image_FWU_Base.bin 

for 32bit 
FWUpdLcl.exe -f 12_0_64_1551_cse_image_FWU_Base.bin 

and reboot when done. 

Do this at your own risk


----------



## Thunder-74

I updated from F11d to F11h I lost 50 points in cinebench r15, I knew it ... I read that IME is old ... but today which recommended bios, excluded modified?
Thanks


----------



## GeneO

Thunder-74 said:


> I updated from F11d to F11h I lost 50 points in cinebench r15, I knew it ... I read that IME is old ... but today which recommended bios, excluded modified?
> Thanks


The f11d had older more performant microcode than f11h, which has newer microcode (the newer microcode has security patches that make it slower). I posted a modded f11h bios with these older, more performant microcode a few posts above (#8873). My other IME post does not affect performance, but patches some security vulnerabilities. 

So far the modded f11h is running my 5.1 and 5.2 GHz 8086k OC fine. I have a modest memory OC (some tightened timings) so I can't speak for how f11h does with memory. But barring any surprises, I will probably stick with f11h for a while.


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> I updated from F11d to F11h I lost 50 points in cinebench r15, I knew it ... I read that IME is old ... but today which recommended bios, excluded modified?
> Thanks


All microcodes newer than BE have a performance hit in Cinebench, Linpack/LinX, etc, regardless of if you have all security patches disabled in windows or not or are using a version of windows that is not security aware (e.g. 1703). I tested C6, CA and D2 and all had a hit. Someone said on win-raid that D2 was the fastest but I couldn't replicate that. I used the VMWare microcode loader to test (zero performance hit versus flashing the microcode by bios modding--they were the same penalty)


----------



## GeneO

And here is the f11h with the BE firmware and the latest RST EFI and ROM:


----------



## Smokediggity

Looks like they added 2 new options in F11h
- PCH LAN Controller - Enables/Disables onboard NIC
- CFG Lock - Configure MSR 0xE2[15], CFG Lock bit


New bug
- Pressing F12 during boot to access the Boot Menu loads to black screen and hangs.




Also, did anyone else have LAN info/menus disappear after updating the the LAN firmware to 0.0.29?


----------



## GeneO

I don't think disabling the NIC is new this release. I have disabled it in the past on 11e and I believe 11c.


----------



## sabac

hello guys, I am running F12c on my aorus pro wifi, though I can't seem to find vcore current protection setting after the bios refresh jazz, what is the equivalent setting for it? I am willing to oc my 9900k to 5ghz, which bios ver, would you recommend? thank you!


----------



## GeneO

Smokediggity said:


> Looks like they added 2 new options in F11h
> - PCH LAN Controller - Enables/Disables onboard NIC
> - CFG Lock - Configure MSR 0xE2[15], CFG Lock bit
> 
> 
> New bug
> - Pressing F12 during boot to access the Boot Menu loads to black screen and hangs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, did anyone else have LAN info/menus disappear after updating the the LAN firmware to 0.0.29?



I can confirm the black screen hang with F12 at boot. I have secure boot and fast boot enabled, but I don't know if that matters. 

I have never bothered updating the LAN EFI, since it really doesn't matter unless you are booting an image over the networking. .


----------



## Smokediggity

GeneO said:


> I can confirm the black screen hang with F12 at boot. I have secure boot and fast boot enabled, but I don't know if that matters.
> 
> I have never bothered updating the LAN EFI, since it really doesn't matter unless you are booting an image over the networking. .



Thanks for the confirmation. I've filed a bug report about it.


----------



## Dibbler

GeneO said:


> Here is the f11h with the following microcode and the latest RST modules (I did not update the network modules)


Thanks for doing this, how is this flashed to the Master motherboard...?


----------



## philhalo66

Now that the Z490 boards are out, what are the chances of the Aorus Z390 master coming back in stock?


----------



## GeneO

Dibbler said:


> Thanks for doing this, how is this flashed to the Master motherboard...?


For the BE microcode file I posted:

Since it is a modded BIOS, you have to use the EFIflash utility to flash it from a bootable USB jump drive. You can create a bootbable USB jump drive with rufus (google and download), plop the firmware file and 
EFIflash.exe on the USBdrive, boot to it, then run 

EFIFlash.exe f11h_modBE.bin /x


----------



## Dibbler

GeneO said:


> For the BE microcode file I posted:
> 
> Since it is a modded BIOS, you have to use the EFIflash utility to flash it from a bootable USB jump drive. You can create a bootbable USB jump drive with rufus (google and download), plop the firmware file and
> EFIflash.exe on the USBdrive, boot to it, then run
> 
> EFIFlash.exe f11h_modBE.bin /x


Thanks, I had prepared a stick to do that but felt that I needed confirmation.

I have just appreciated the value of the CMOS reset switch, started off in a boot loop with the blank boot menu screen causing an issue, it wouldn't allow access back into the BIOS. A CMOS reset sorted that.


----------



## oscarf

GeneO said:


> For the BE microcode file I posted:
> 
> Since it is a modded BIOS, you have to use the EFIflash utility to flash it from a bootable USB jump drive. You can create a bootbable USB jump drive with rufus (google and download), plop the firmware file and
> EFIflash.exe on the USBdrive, boot to it, then run
> 
> EFIFlash.exe f11h_modBE.bin /x



Hi GeneO, 

Im trying to flash my bios with your file, but i only get this:
!!! Fail loading BIOS file !!!

Any help pleas? Thanks


----------



## GeneO

Did you use the /X switch? It needs to come after the filename.


----------



## CommanderHK47

Disregard the previous question about the f11g bios, apparently they were based on the E/F nuked bios branch. I would also like to learn what software tools one would need to use to do these updates myself too. BTW currently running a community updated version of Z390 Master/F11e.

Thanks.


----------



## GeneO

CommanderHK47 said:


> Any chance we can get the a review of and if need be, the same treatment for for F11g beta bios? I would also like to learn what software tools one would need to use to do these updates myself too. BTW currently running a community updated version of Z390 Master/F11e.
> 
> Thanks.


Not sure what you mean by review? The f11g Master BIOS had issues. Gigabyte often applies beta bios changes to the wrong branch (branches with issues that have already been fixed in prior beta release). For instance f11g was based on a branch that had the same bugs back from f11b, though these bugs were fixed in f11c. They fixed this by releasing f11h based off of f11e branch. BIOS f11c, f11e, and f11h are fairly bug free, f11b, f11d, f11f and f11g are not IIRC.

The Winraid forum ( https://www.win-raid.com/ ) have the tools. Their "BIOS Modding Guide and Problems" and "BIOS Modules" forum have these tools (UBU tool in the former, and individual modules in the latter) for modifying the BIOS.

For updating Intel Management Engine Firmware see their "Intel Management Engine" forum. 

People in this forum and the Winraid can help you.


----------



## lsevald

I haven't seen many RAM OC results from the Aorus Pro, which is really finicky, so I'm sharing my settings for 4000CL16, in case it could be a starting point for someone. My combination of components (Pro F12f, P0 9900k, 4x8GB GSkill 3600CL15) seems to like fairly low VCCSA (1.18V set in bios), fairly high VCCIO (1.24V set in bios), fairly high tFAW (28), and aren't too fund of really high Vddr (1.45V set in bios seems to be the upper limit).


----------



## CommanderHK47

lsevald said:


> I haven't seen many RAM OC results from the Aorus Pro, which is really finicky, so I'm sharing my settings for 4000CL16, in case it could be a starting point for someone. My combination of components (Pro F12f, P0 9900k, 4x8GB GSkill 3600CL15) seems to like fairly low VCCSA (1.18V set in bios), fairly high VCCIO (1.24V set in bios), fairly high tFAW (28), and aren't too fund of really high Vddr (1.45V set in bios seems to be the upper limit).


You should be able to set your tRAS to at lest 32, also your tFAW should be set to 16.


----------



## oscarf

GeneO said:


> Did you use the /X switch? It needs to come after the filename.



Hi GenoO, yes i done that. Here is pictures of the error.
Im running F11e modded


----------



## computertechy

oscarf said:


> GeneO said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you use the /X switch? It needs to come after the filename.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi GenoO, yes i done that. Here is pictures of the error.
> Im running F11e modded
Click to expand...

Make sure you include .bin or remove .bin. Had the same problem with f11f.


----------



## oscarf

computertechy said:


> Make sure you include .bin or remove .bin. Had the same problem with f11f.



Do you mean it should be written like this?:
Efiflash.exe f11h_modBE /x


----------



## GeneO

Ah DOS file names. Type in EFIflash.exe f11h 

then hit the tab key autocomplete the file name, then add the /x.

If that doesn't work let me know. I should have used a short name. 

If it doesn't work one thing to try. I built the BE BIOS with a newer version of UBU than I built mine with because it had the BE microcode. I didn't test it. Could be a bug with the newer UBU. 

I built the BIOS BIOS with the same UBU I am using and with the BE microcode and updated RST. Have attached. Try it if you are still having issues.


----------



## CommanderHK47

GeneO said:


> Not sure what you mean by review? The f11g Master BIOS had issues. Gigabyte often applies beta bios changes to the wrong branch (branches with issues that have already been fixed in prior beta release). For instance f11g was based on a branch that had the same bugs back from f11b, though these bugs were fixed in f11c. They fixed this by releasing f11h based off of f11e branch. BIOS f11c, f11e, and f11h are fairly bug free, f11b, f11d, f11f and f11g are not IIRC.
> 
> The Winraid forum ( https://www.win-raid.com/ ) have the tools. Their "BIOS Modding Guide and Problems" and "BIOS Modules" forum have these tools (UBU tool in the former, and individual modules in the latter) for modifying the BIOS.
> 
> For updating Intel Management Engine Firmware see their "Intel Management Engine" forum.
> 
> People in this forum and the Winraid can help you.


Thanks I'll take gander and see what i can learn.


----------



## Falkentyne

oscarf said:


> Hi GenoO, yes i done that. Here is pictures of the error.
> Im running F11e modded


Try renaming the BIOS file as f11h.bin
You can type in the dos prompt "ren f11h_modBE.bin f11h.bin"

If that doesn't work, rename it in windows


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is F11h modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/21/2020.

I believe UBU Tool now mods the base EFI module and the boot module for the Ethernet firmware so updating it is wise.

Also, I always used the integrated graphics for my second non-gaming screen to take the load off my main video card and some also use the integrated graphics, hence the GOP upgrade. 

It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.

RST RAID firmware updated.

Full list of upgrades.

[Current version in BIOS file]
1 - Disk Controller
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1107
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.11h /x

Use the modded Master F11h BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## lucasfrance

Could you please be so kind to post the last Z390 Xtreme F9f modded BIOS.

Many thanks in advance.


----------



## KedarWolf

lucasfrance said:


> Could you please be so kind to post the last Z390 Xtreme F9f modded BIOS.
> 
> Many thanks in advance.


----------



## GeneO

KedarWolf said:


> Also, I always used the integrated graphics for my second non-gaming screen to take the load off my main video card and some also use the integrated graphics, hence the GOP upgrade.


You do realize once windows is booting, the EFI GOP driver is no longer used for internal graphics, the windows device driver takes over - the GOP provides graphics for the pre-boot environment only so makes no difference for your secondary display. Same for Ethernet UNDI. It is a pre-boot EFI driver intended for providing the capability to load and boot an OS image over the network. So neither matters for Windows. I think RST version is important if you are booting the windows image from the RST raid volume, as it presents the raid volume to the boot loader so it can get the windows image to boot (the volume gets handed off to the windows RST drivers at some point). 

VIDEO BIOS used to provide some OS functionality, but not the GOP.


----------



## Dibbler

Any ideas what could have happened here.....

Yesterday I had an issue with the "h" bios and my Master board. It seemed to end up in some type of bootloop at start. 
I hadn't realised about the F12 bootmenu issue and tried to use it to boot to a USB stick. I got a blank screen. I reset the PC. It then continued to just about POST but no longer boot. Pressing the DEL key invoked the message "Entering boot menu" and then a blank screen. I could not enter the BIOS. The DEL key instead would try to invoke the bootmenu for some reason. I used the CMOS reset button and at least it got me back into the BIOS. 

Now the problem.....

I have downgraded back to both the beta "e" bios and then back to the official F11c. I have loaded the defaults and even reset the CMOS but when the PC now starts to post it takes a long time before I get the keyboard to light up (tried another USB port) and then I can enter the BIOS. All is well when I do so. If I don't bother entering the BIOS the boot into Windows 10 continues as normal, keyboard goes off in the boot process, but then at the password screen for Windows I then have to wait a very long time again before the keyboard lights up and I can enter my password and run Windows as normal.

It is those delays that I have described, on POST and then at the password screen for Windows, that is very new and certainly did not happen prior to the issue I described with the F11h bios.

At the POST screen, which is a little incomplete the motherboard code displays "99". After the keyboard eventually lights up and the boot into Windows continues it changes to "A0"
not sure about the boot codes, or what they mean.

Any ideas please..?

The photo attached shows the POST screen where it pauses.

BTW Where is the bluetooth option in the BIOS...? 
The reason that I ask is that I used to get a BT symbol in my system tray, now I don't. Nothing listed that I can see in the device manager. But is that turned off if I disable the Wi-Fi, which I have done...?


----------



## Dibbler

Found the problem to my above issue, photo attached.

Finding the boot codes and understanding that code 99 refers to "Super IO config" I then noted that the Xbox controller was listed as an issue under the device manager. Removing that and all has returned to normal. It was just coincidence, probably, that it occurred at the same time as the BIOS bootmenu problem.


----------



## EarlZ

Dibbler said:


> Found the problem to my above issue, photo attached.
> 
> Finding the boot codes and understanding that code 99 refers to "Super IO config" I then noted that the Xbox controller was listed as an issue under the device manager. Removing that and all has returned to normal. It was just coincidence, probably, that it occurred at the same time as the problem BIOS bootmenu problem.


I have the exact same dongle and I never had issues with it adding boot delay with any bios upto F11e which is the one that I am using now. It is connected to one of the USB ports on my monitor and I am not sure if that is a factor.


----------



## EarlZ

I've just started venturing into memory overclock and this is what I have so far

I've left tRFC in auto and it shows 677 which sounds pretty high, what should I be shooting for on this value ?


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11h modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/21/2020.
> 
> I believe UBU Tool now mods the base EFI module and the boot module for the Ethernet firmware so updating it is wise.
> 
> Also, I always used the integrated graphics for my second non-gaming screen to take the load off my main video card and some also use the integrated graphics, hence the GOP upgrade.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> RST RAID firmware updated.
> 
> Full list of upgrades.
> 
> [Current version in BIOS file]
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1107
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.11h /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11h BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Thanks for what you continue to do, even tho you have jumped ships 

Are you enjoying your AMD build overall, enjoying performance and hopefully stability etc...?


----------



## EarlZ

Are there notable fixes/improvements on the F11h ?


----------



## ShawnTRD

I'm running the factory F10 on my Master board. I'm not overclocking as the 9600K is barely breaking a sweat pulling my GTX 970 GPU. Should I switch to a different BIOS though because of improvements like F11c says "Fix CPU Vcore and power behavior". Also been trying to figure out if I should change any settings other than enabling XMP?


----------



## Kargeras

Can you guys share a thought on why my 9900KS displays Core Effective Clocks higher than CPU ratio while testing memory with HCI MemtestPro v5.0 or v7.0?
This also happens while using M5 + extreme .cfg by anta777.cfg too.

My settings are:

_9900KS + Gigabyte Aorus Master + BIOS F11e
MCE: Disabled
CPU ratio: 1.2v Adaptive+75mv
Multiplier: 50
AVX : 1
Uncore ratio: 45 
XMP: Enabled 

VCCIO: 1.2v
VCCSA: 1.25v 

LLC: Standard 
EIST: Enabled
CSTATES: Auto_

What could cause a core to be higher than its set multiplier, marked with X in the 1st tab in the image below?


----------



## CoreyHUN

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11h modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/21/2020.
> 
> I believe UBU Tool now mods the base EFI module and the boot module for the Ethernet firmware so updating it is wise.
> 
> Also, I always used the integrated graphics for my second non-gaming screen to take the load off my main video card and some also use the integrated graphics, hence the GOP upgrade.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> RST RAID firmware updated.
> 
> Full list of upgrades.
> 
> [Current version in BIOS file]
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1107
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.11h /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11h BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


So I am quite new to overclocking / modded bioses. Can I safely install this to BIOS 1 and safely recover / reinstall stock from BIOS 2 in case anything goes wrong?


----------



## lucasfrance

KedarWolf said:


>


MANY THANKS!!! :thumb:


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

I gave falkentyne's 10900k OC guide/review a read. great guide btw, kudos for making that. For my 9900k, I decided to adopt asus's/intels 10 gen's half split for turbo frequencies that falkentyne shared in the guide. Using no additional voltage for my 5.3ghz 8c/8t OC profile, I was able to set turbo ratios 5.4ghz on 4 cores for up to 1-4core loads and 5.3ghz on 8 cores for 5-8core loads. If users are on dvid voltage mode with appropriate vcore llc, you may be able to get extra 100mhz above your all core frequency at no additional voltage cost on 1-4core workloads.


My bios settings are specific to my chip, I had to already know vMin points under load for 5.3 ht/off. This is not an overclock to stress test imo, though it got through aida/realbench before. But here are my settings incase anyone was curious

cpu clock ratio - auto
Turbo ratios
1-4c - 5.4ghz
5-8c - 5.3ghz
cache - 4.9 ghz
all cstates disabled except C3, C3 enabled
Eist enabled 
speedshift/voltage optimization/ring to core/race to halt disabled
hyperthreading disabled so I can push the cores/cache as high as possible for gaming that my 360 aio can withstand
vt-d/igpu disabled cause i don't use them
turbo per core limit control menu left on auto
enhanced multicore performance disabled
cpu internal IA AC + IA DC Loadlines - 1/1
vcore - normal - dvid mode - offset +170mv
vcore loadline calibration - medium
vcore current protection - extreme
vcore protection - 400mv
pwm phase control - extreme
pwm switchrate - 500khz
dram - 3900 14-14-14-30-2T w/ tightened subs
vdimm - 1.56v
vtraining - 1.54v
VccSA - 1.3v
VccIO - 1.3v


It's a high voltage profile. 
Single core in cbr20 was beastly.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I gave falkentyne's 10900k OC guide/review a read. great guide btw, kudos for making that. For my 9900k, I decided to adopt asus's/intels 10 gen's half split for turbo frequencies that falkentyne shared in the guide. Using no additional voltage for my 5.3ghz 8c/8t OC profile, I was able to set turbo ratios 5.4ghz on 4 cores for up to 1-4core loads and 5.3ghz on 8 cores for 5-8core loads. If users are on dvid voltage mode with appropriate vcore llc, you may be able to get extra 100mhz above your all core frequency at no additional voltage cost on 1-4core workloads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Single core in cbr20 was beastly.


You really should get an Apex 12 man. I KNOW how much you want to overclock memory.
And maximus 12 Apex holds 6600 mhz DDR4 world record set by an Asus engineer.

Trust me for once.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> You really should get an Apex 12 man. I KNOW how much you want to overclock memory.
> And maximus 12 Apex holds 6600 mhz DDR4 world record set by an Asus engineer.
> 
> Trust me for once.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5D6OAW8Pw


Sadly z490/10900k is not in the cards for me this year. I'd maybe grab a z390 apex 11 if one popped up at a good price. I'd have to sell off some extra hardware I have laying around first though.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Sadly z490/10900k is not in the cards for me this year. I'd maybe grab a z390 apex 11 if one popped up at a good price. I'd have to sell off some extra hardware I have laying around first though.


How about an Apex and a 10700k?
You should be able to sell your Master+9900k if it's a good enough bin (especially with how many people are getting ones that won't do 5g at all) and at least cover the cost of the Apex by itself plus change.
Then it's ramen and bread for awhile.

You know you want that Apex. Someone as dedicated as you can end up setting non extreme cooling world records. And people might notice...
Think about it.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> How about an Apex and a 10700k?
> You should be able to sell your Master+9900k if it's a good enough bin (especially with how many people are getting ones that won't do 5g at all) and at least cover the cost of the Apex by itself plus change.
> Then it's ramen and bread for awhile.
> 
> You know you want that Apex. Someone as dedicated as you can end up setting non extreme cooling world records. And people might notice...
> Think about it.



I weighed out some options and did some comparisons. A 10700k will only be better than my 9900k if I were to get a chip that had both a great IMC and cores/cache that scaled well with voltage. If i got a chip that scaled just like the chip I have now, i wouldn't be gaining anything except slightly lower temperatures since the die is shaved down/thicker ihs. I'm pretty sure right now my 9900k either beats or is equal to the 10700k clock for clock because of older microcodes. i'd spring for the 10900k/apex 12 but i can't afford custom watercooling. I think a z390 apex 11 is doable in the future though.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I weighed out some options and did some comparisons. A 10700k will only be better than my 9900k if I were to get a chip that had both a great IMC and cores/cache that scaled well with voltage. If i got a chip that scaled just like the chip I have now, i wouldn't be gaining anything except slightly lower temperatures since the die is shaved down/thicker ihs. I'm pretty sure right now my 9900k beats the 10700k clock for clock because of older microcodes. i'd spring for the 10900k/apex 12 but i can't afford custom watercooling. I think a z390 apex 11 is doable in the future though.


But won't the gains from 5000 mhz memory overclocking offset that loss?

In the gamersnexus video, they had a 10600k beating a 10900k in FPS just from ring + memory overclocking.

I think you spent more time with the RAM than the CPU, right?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> But won't the gains from 5000 mhz memory overclocking offset that loss?
> 
> In the gamersnexus video, they had a 10600k beating a 10900k in FPS just from ring + memory overclocking.
> 
> I think you spent more time with the RAM than the CPU, right?



I'm sure it would offset some but it would only make sense for me to upgrade to z490 from z390/9900k only if i was going for 10900k since i already own an 8c/16t cpu. I can't really justify upgrading chipsets AND cpus for the same core/thread count because then i'm just increasing my entry costs for no reason. An apex 11 z390 board makes more sense at this point for me until I can afford custom watercooling. In any case, no matter what chip i own, i'm gonna turn of hyperthreading and push the cache/cores/voltage up as high as my cooling can handle. If i had a 10900k/custom cooling, i'd be rocking 5.6ghz or higher with HT/OFF. How far do your 10900k chips go without hyperthreading? I'm guessing you can probably do 5.6ghz ht/off in cbr15 @ 1.39 load voltage?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah two core bump plus a new board does not sound very really realistic to me either.


----------



## lsevald

CommanderHK47 said:


> You should be able to set your tRAS to at lest 32, also your tFAW should be set to 16.


tRAS 32 might work, and slightly lower tFAW too, but 16, no. Do you have an Aorus Pro? My sample size is of only one, but getting my Pro board to run anything above 3733 stable has taken me many weeks of testing&tweaking. I know my numbers won't impress anybody, but I've seen plenty of posts from people with fast 4133+XMP bdie RAM having to settle for 3400-3800 on this board, and I've seen only one posting timings and results at 3866CL17, so I just wanted to share some know good settings that might help someone else struggling with this board


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I'm sure it would offset some but it would only make sense for me to upgrade to z490 from z390/9900k only if i was going for 10900k since i already own an 8c/16t cpu. I can't really justify upgrading chipsets AND cpus for the same core/thread count because then i'm just increasing my entry costs for no reason. An apex 11 z390 board makes more sense at this point for me until I can afford custom watercooling. In any case, no matter what chip i own, i'm gonna turn of hyperthreading and push the cache/cores/voltage up as high as my cooling can handle. If i had a 10900k/custom cooling, i'd be rocking 5.6ghz or higher with HT/OFF. How far do your 10900k chips go without hyperthreading? I'm guessing you can probably do 5.6ghz ht/off in cbr15 @ 1.39 load voltage?


Haven't tried that yet. Found the first chips floor 10c/20t (the ES chip) requiring 1.335v load Vout for 5.3g core/4.9 cache to pass CB R20 (97C! ouch. if it reaches 100c, the system completely hard locks from thermal protection as I have that enabled to protect the ES chip), and no problems in Battlefield 5 and Minecraft.
The retail 2nd chip I bought can't do 5.3 ghz any lower than 1.40v load voltage (tested that using Minecraft Java loading to main menu repeatedly (100% load test) to get or not get CPU Cache L0 errors---protip for a stress test) so that's a 5.2 chip. I'm using that right now in a Z490 Aorus Master (supplied by Gigabyte, thank you very much for the board, GB engineers!) to learn how to overclock memory!

I bought 4000 mhz B-die Steel Vipers (19-19-19-39 1.35v).
The 4400 mhz ones on newegg show as 19-19-19-39 1.45v) and I read that their stock TFC is 730. So I took my chances on the 4000 1.35 sticks.

I was not disappointed.
I set IO to 1.40v, SA to 1.45v, DDRV to 1.45v, RAM timings manually to 19-19-19-39 because they wanted 22-22-22 something at 4400 mhz and it seems to be stable so far!
My first decent memory overclock! TRFC is garbage at 730 though. 

BTW the Z490 master trains memory like....10 times faster than the Z390 does. I am not joking. I literally thought it skipped training....


----------



## lsevald

Whats the DRAM power limits for? And what's the recommended setting for them?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Haven't tried that yet. Found the first chips floor 10c/20t (the ES chip) requiring 1.335v load Vout for 5.3g core/4.9 cache to pass CB R20 (97C! ouch. if it reaches 100c, the system completely hard locks from thermal protection as I have that enabled to protect the ES chip), and no problems in Battlefield 5 and Minecraft.
> The retail 2nd chip I bought can't do 5.3 ghz any lower than 1.40v load voltage (tested that using Minecraft Java loading to main menu repeatedly (100% load test) to get or not get CPU Cache L0 errors---protip for a stress test) so that's a 5.2 chip. I'm using that right now in a Z490 Aorus Master (supplied by Gigabyte, thank you very much for the board, GB engineers!) to learn how to overclock memory!
> 
> I bought 4000 mhz B-die Steel Vipers (19-19-19-39 1.35v).
> The 4400 mhz ones on newegg show as 19-19-19-39 1.45v) and I read that their stock TFC is 730. So I took my chances on the 4000 1.35 sticks.
> 
> I was not disappointed.
> I set IO to 1.40v, SA to 1.45v, DDRV to 1.45v, RAM timings manually to 19-19-19-39 because they wanted 22-22-22 something at 4400 mhz and it seems to be stable so far!
> My first decent memory overclock! TRFC is garbage at 730 though.
> 
> BTW the Z490 master trains memory like....10 times faster than the Z390 does. I am not joking. I literally thought it skipped training....



If you are on 2 dimms, Try 20-20-20-42(62 tRC)@4600/4800, tcwl 18 or 20 rest on auto, 1.55v training/vdimm 1.4v-1.45v sa/io. That is assuming traces/rtls are similar to z390 master. This time around qvl list for the master on z490 shows 2 dimm configurations clocking the best to 5ghz while 4 dimm configurations top out at 4133.


gratz on the motherboard, well earned


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> If you are on 2 dimms, Try 20-20-20-42(62 tRC)@4600/4800, tcwl 18 or 20 rest on auto, 1.55v training/vdimm 1.4v-1.45v sa/io. That is assuming traces/rtls are similar to z390 master. This time around qvl list for the master on z490 shows 2 dimm configurations clocking the best to 5ghz while 4 dimm configurations top out at 4133.
> 
> 
> gratz on the motherboard, well earned


Thank you.
I have a 750 GB spinner hooked up to it so if I corrupt my OS from a bad memory overclock I lose nothing. Since I still have almost no idea what I'm doing.
I also get to use the second 10900k at high memory controller voltages long term and see just what it can take and take one for the team. The ES keeps the lower voltage for now. I wonder how hard the 2x16 GB Cl14 dual rank 3200 mhz sticks will be hard to push on these platforms. When i tried on the Z390 master with my dual ranks, I couldn't go any higher than 1T at 3333 mhz and 3600mhz 2T @ 15-15-15-36, 1.45v DDR, 1.25v SA/IO on the Z390 Master...
3733 17-17-17-39 @ 1.5v worked (had to keep training several times) but read scores were lower than 3600 @ 15. And higher timings at 3733 failed completely for some reason. So I gave up memory overclocking at that point.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you.
> I have a 750 GB spinner hooked up to it so if I corrupt my OS from a bad memory overclock I lose nothing. Since I still have almost no idea what I'm doing.
> I also get to use the second 10900k at high memory controller voltages long term and see just what it can take and take one for the team. The ES keeps the lower voltage for now. I wonder how hard the 2x16 GB Cl14 dual rank 3200 mhz sticks will be hard to push on these platforms. When i tried on the Z390 master with my dual ranks, I couldn't go any higher than 1T at 3333 mhz and 3600mhz 2T @ 15-15-15-36, 1.45v DDR, 1.25v SA/IO on the Z390 Master...
> 3733 17-17-17-39 @ 1.5v worked (had to keep training several times) but read scores were lower than 3600 @ 15. And higher timings at 3733 failed completely for some reason. So I gave up memory overclocking at that point.



I think 2x16gb dual rank sticks are just as tough on the imc as 4x8gb single ranked sticks since you are accessing the same amount of ranks in the end, the rest is up to the board topology. for me to get 1T at low cas on z390 master up to 3600mhz, [email protected] took 1.58v vdimm, [email protected] took 1.55v vdimm, 4 dimms. Both had to be trained from 3500, had rtls adjusted and then fast booted with either busclock or 3600 strap. I had to train with higher vccsa/io/vcore to get the right rtls flowing, 1.35v on each and at least +150mv vcore offset, and then bring down sa/io to 1.3v each. Maybe you can get some crazy c16 or c17 4133 with good rtls/iols out of those sticks on z490 master @ 1.5v vdimm?


----------



## Falkentyne

Once I take the red pill and figure out these RTL IOL and IOL Offset things I'll try that.
And looking at this 730 TRFC is making me want to just put it at 350.


----------



## CommanderHK47

lsevald said:


> tRAS 32 might work, and slightly lower tFAW too, but 16, no. Do you have an Aorus Pro? My sample size is of only one, but getting my Pro board to run anything above 3733 stable has taken me many weeks of testing&tweaking. I know my numbers won't impress anybody, but I've seen plenty of posts from people with fast 4133+XMP bdie RAM having to settle for 3400-3800 on this board, and I've seen only one posting timings and results at 3866CL17, so I just wanted to share some know good settings that might help someone else struggling with this board


Hmm no i have a master and these settings with 64GB of ram.


----------



## CommanderHK47

Falkentyne said:


> Once I take the red pill and figure out these RTL IOL and IOL Offset things I'll try that.
> And looking at this 730 TRFC is making me want to just put it at 350.



As far as i can tell RTLS/IOL part off the bios is bugged/doesn't work/save. Has that changed?


----------



## CommanderHK47

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I think 2x16gb dual rank sticks are just as tough on the imc as 4x8gb single ranked sticks since you are accessing the same amount of ranks in the end, the rest is up to the board topology. for me to get 1T at low cas on z390 master up to 3600mhz, [email protected] took 1.58v vdimm, [email protected] took 1.55v vdimm, 4 dimms. Both had to be trained from 3500, had rtls adjusted and then fast booted with either busclock or 3600 strap. I had to train with higher vccsa/io/vcore to get the right rtls flowing, 1.35v on each and at least +150mv vcore offset, and then bring down sa/io to 1.3v each. Maybe you can get some crazy c16 or c17 4133 with good rtls/iols out of those sticks on z490 master @ 1.5v vdimm?


Hmm is this a workaround for busted RTL and IOL settings in bios? If i fast boot, timing changes don't apply. I have to disable memory fastboot for timing changes to apply. Are you saying this is not true for memory clock frequency?


----------



## oscarf

Falkentyne said:


> Try renaming the BIOS file as f11h.bin
> You can type in the dos prompt "ren f11h_modBE.bin f11h.bin"
> 
> If that doesn't work, rename it in windows



Hi Falkentyne,
i flashed with the bios from KedarWolf and it worked perfectly fine.
Thanks for your work @KedarWolf


----------



## Falkentyne

CommanderHK47 said:


> As far as i can tell RTLS/IOL part off the bios is bugged/doesn't work/save. Has that changed?


Haven't checked because I need to work on more basic stuff yet and RTL/IOL is for advanced users. I'm a beginner.
I did find out how to unlock "PLL Filter" and "PLL Level" (Ok I forgot the second item) on the Z490 but I have absolutely no idea if they do anything.

LC Filter is supposed to reduce ripple but the frequency range is limited, while SB Filter has higher filter but a much higher range, which can be good for BCLK overclocking. That was on a Broadwell guide so I don't even know if it's hooked up.

The other option has a "high" or a "Low" level.

V/F curves are missing from the BIOS however. I hope Gigabyte adds them in the future, right now the only way to access them is with Intel XTU.
Gigabyte has the "Laptop type" Override voltage mode (that was previously only on the Z390 Aorus Xtreme 5G board) now. This allows you to override the CPU VID completely and write in a new VID, just like "override" mode on a laptop.


----------



## scaramonga

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11h modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/21/2020.


Many thx KedarWolf! I always wait for a proper, and complete, version from you


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

CommanderHK47 said:


> Hmm is this a workaround for busted RTL and IOL settings in bios? If i fast boot, timing changes don't apply. I have to disable memory fastboot for timing changes to apply. Are you saying this is not true for memory clock frequency?



Here is an example, First I train 3500 with the desired timings. Then I go back into the bios to make sure the rtls are gravy or retrain them.
For my sticks/chip, 3500 @ 13-12-12-28 1T gives 49/50/51/51 rtls. After training, I can enable memory fast boot and add a 101 busclock to get 3533 and hit f10. Or I can retrain the rtls and timings to 13-13-13-28 at 3500 and rtls to 51/51/51/51, enable memory fastboot and choose the 3600 strap and hit f10. It's a work around for getting 1T 3533/3600 since there is no official 3533 strap in the bios and 3600 1T trains inconsistently for me. Just have to make sure the rtls are on point.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> My bios settings are specific to my chip, I had to already know vMin points under load for 5.3 ht/off. This is not an overclock to stress test imo, though it got through aida/realbench before. But here are my settings incase anyone was curious
> 
> cpu clock ratio - auto
> Turbo ratios
> 1-4c - 5.4ghz
> 5-8c - 5.3ghz
> cache - 4.9 ghz
> all cstates disabled except C3, C3 enabled
> Eist enabled
> speedshift/voltage optimization/ring to core/race to halt disabled
> hyperthreading disabled so I can push the cores/cache as high as possible for gaming that my 360 aio can withstand
> vt-d/igpu disabled cause i don't use them
> turbo per core limit control menu left on auto
> enhanced multicore performance disabled
> cpu internal IA AC + IA DC Loadlines - 1/1
> vcore - normal - dvid mode - offset +170mv
> vcore loadline calibration - medium
> vcore current protection - extreme
> vcore protection - 400mv
> pwm phase control - extreme
> pwm switchrate - 500khz
> dram - 3900 14-14-14-30-2T w/ tightened subs
> vdimm - 1.56v
> vtraining - 1.54v
> VccSA - 1.3v
> VccIO - 1.3v


Thank you for sharing this.

I'm wondering about C-States because I'm rather confused about how Gigabyte chose to do this.

C3 State Support (inside C-States Control) or C3 inside the Package C State Limit (inside C-States Control) is enabled for you?
If it's the 1st one, what did you set Package C State Limit to, did you leave it on Auto?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Thank you for sharing this.
> 
> I'm wondering about C-States because I'm rather confused about how Gigabyte chose to do this.
> 
> C3 State Support (inside C-States Control) or C3 inside the Package C State Limit (inside C-States Control) is enabled for you?
> If it's the 1st one, what did you set Package C State Limit to, did you leave it on Auto?



I turn on C3 state support, I disable other c-states and I leave c-state package limit on auto.


----------



## Falkentyne

So the main and backup Bioses switched on me after I had the PSU flipped off for awhile on my Z490 Master... 
And if I have a USB flash drive plugged in when i turn the board on, it won't see the windows boot manager on the SATA HDD spinner...(although the drive does show in the SATA device 0-7 PCIE listings in another menu , but not in the boot overrides...  You have to unplug the USB flash drive first...

Flashed the "new" main BIOS from F3 to F5d...hope this Bios switching doesn't happen again, but the USB flash bug is VERY annoying...

This Bios switching bug (when you power off the PSU completely) existed on the Z390 master too but was fixed in F9....


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I turn on C3 state support, I disable other c-states and I leave c-state package limit on auto.



Thank you for your prompt answer.

I'm still struggling with my 9900KS, both on CPU and MEM side.

Despite having CPU Ratio at 50 and Uncore at 45, I have some Core Effective Clocks going 5100+ during Memtest Pro v5.0 and v7.0.
What do you think the cause is?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Thank you for your prompt answer.
> 
> I'm still struggling with my 9900KS, both on CPU and MEM side.
> 
> Despite having CPU Ratio at 50 and Uncore at 45, I have some Core Effective Clocks going 5100+ during Memtest Pro v5.0 and v7.0.
> What do you think the cause is?


I honestly have no idea.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I turn on C3 state support, I disable other c-states and I leave c-state package limit on auto.


It doesn't seem to work for me.
_I set C3 Enabled and C-State Package Limit to C3, not Auto._

I was running LinX 0.9.6 just when I was posting the question to you, with C-States Auto in BIOS.
Got 24/25 matching residuals.

Changed to C3 Enabled only and C-State Package Limit Auto and failed LinX 18/33 (with unmatching residuals in the first 18).

P.S.

With C-States Auto computer reboots sometimes while idling.
Especially some time after stress testing, be it 5 minutes or 5 hours.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> It doesn't seem to work for me.
> 
> I was running LinX 0.9.6 just when I was posting the question to you, with C-States Auto in BIOS.
> Got 24/25 matching residuals.
> 
> Changed to C3 Enabled only and C-State Package Limit Auto and failed LinX 18/33 (with unmatching residuals in the first 18).


Don't know what to tell you, i don't use linx. I use aida/realbench. i'm on f9 bios as well.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> It doesn't seem to work for me.
> 
> I was running LinX 0.9.6 just when I was posting the question to you, with C-States Auto in BIOS.
> Got 24/25 matching residuals.
> 
> Changed to C3 Enabled only and C-State Package Limit Auto and failed LinX 18/33 (with unmatching residuals in the first 18).


I have no idea what your bios settings are because you're using C-states. No idea what your idle voltage is. What your loadline calibration setting is, etc. This makes it hard to help you.
Try disabling ALL c-states, all power saving completely. Then (if this is an Aorus master), go to advanced VRM settings, set CPU VRM switch rate to 300 khz. Also Loadline Calibration=High is better than loadline calibration=turbo, even if you have to raise your bios voltage a little to compensate for the vdroop increase at LLC: High.

For a 9900KS, you should be able to use 1.35v set in BIOS (fixed vcore) with LLC: High, 300 khz switching frequency, do NOT use an AVX offset, and LinX should pass unless your RAM is unstable. Test this at x43 cache ratio first.


----------



## Kargeras

I think I became enamored with the idea of matching residuals in LinX 

I'm at a loss though, same configuration might get 10/10 matched residuals and 7/10 matched residuals after a reboot.
Or even fail, LOL.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> I have no idea what your bios settings are because you're using C-states. No idea what your idle voltage is. What your loadline calibration setting is, etc. This makes it hard to help you.
> Try disabling ALL c-states, all power saving completely. Then (if this is an Aorus master), go to advanced VRM settings, set CPU VRM switch rate to 300 khz. Also Loadline Calibration=High is better than loadline calibration=turbo, even if you have to raise your bios voltage a little to compensate for the vdroop increase at LLC: High.
> 
> For a 9900KS, you should be able to use 1.35v set in BIOS (fixed vcore) with LLC: High, 300 khz switching frequency, do NOT use an AVX offset, and LinX should pass unless your RAM is unstable. Test this at x43 cache ratio first.


These are my current settings:

9900KS + Gigabyte Aorus Master + BIOS F11e
MCE: Disabled
Switching Frequency: 300
vCore: 1.2v Adaptive+75mv
CPU ratio: 50
AVX : 1
Uncore ratio: 45
XMP: Enabled

VCCIO: 1.2v
VCCSA: 1.25v

AC Loadline: Power Saving
LLC: Standard
EIST: Enabled
CSTATES: Auto

I tried to build this following your recommendations here and elsewhere Falkentyne.
I know you don't use adaptive and C-States, I just tried to adapt your recommendations to adaptive voltage 

I have a mini-Bible of your interventions, saved quite a lot of them, LOL.
Incredibly useful stuff, thank you kind sir.

I'm going back to fixed vCore and will report back.
Guess I should've been more methodical with fixed vCore first...

But 3 questions before I do that:

1. C-States Disabled (all of them) but what to do with C-States Power Package Limit, leave it on Auto?
2. How many LinX runs, default 10, 25, 33, 50, 100? By passing LinX you mean 100% matching residuals or just simply passing?
3. What other power saving options are in BIOS, so I can disable them.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> These are my current settings:
> 
> 9900KS + Gigabyte Aorus Master + BIOS F11e
> MCE: Disabled
> Switching Frequency: 300
> vCore: 1.2v Adaptive+75mv
> CPU ratio: 50
> AVX : 1
> Uncore ratio: 45
> XMP: Enabled
> 
> VCCIO: 1.2v
> VCCSA: 1.25v
> 
> AC Loadline: Power Saving
> LLC: Standard
> EIST: Enabled
> CSTATES: Auto
> 
> I tried to build this following your recommendations here and elsewhere Falkentyne.
> I know you don't use adaptive and C-States, I just tried to adapt your recommendations to adaptive voltage
> 
> I have a mini-Bible of your interventions, saved quite a lot of them, LOL.
> Incredibly useful stuff, thank you kind sir.
> 
> I'm going back to fixed vCore and will report back.
> Guess I should've been more methodical with fixed vCore first...
> 
> But 3 questions before I do that:
> 
> 1. C-States Disabled (all of them) but what to do with C-States Power Package Limit, leave it on Auto?
> 2. How many LinX runs, default 10, 25, 33, 50, 100? By passing LinX you mean 100% matching residuals or just simply passing?
> 3. What other power saving options are in BIOS, so I can disable them.


20 runs is enough. Package Power Limit just limits the C-state, it's like a CPU Power limit. If all other c-states are disabled it can be left at auto. I disable speedshift, speedstep, EIST, etc.
You don't want anything to ruin the overclock testing so you want everything to be fully constant first, until you know what the CPU capabilities are. In fact, its suggested by some people to disable XMP and then bin your CPU, as this takes RAM and the IMC out of the picture, then enable XMP after, then re-test at XMP settings. Then you will have an "idea" if something (IMC, RAM/DDR frequency, etc) has changed the results.

I could not even run LinX on my 9900k CPU at 5 ghz. It would reach 100C or LinX would just crash mid-run. Most I could run it was at 4.9 ghz and temps would get to 105C. Be lucky you even have a chance to run it at 5 ghz. 184 amps is almost impossible to cool without a 280mm AIO.

Intel doesn't validate overclocks with Linpack. CPU Binning via VID is done by very complicated formulas at the factory. If two identical CPU's have the exact same VID (when AC LL and DC LL are both manually set to 1, or 0.01 mOhms on Asus BIOS) at a certain multiplier (example: 1.155v at x47), this means that BOTH CPU's should require the exact same "Load voltage" to be stable at x47.

So that's an easy way to bin CPU's (but you have to check all the turbo boost multipliers one by one, two CPU's can have the same exact VID at x47, but one CPU might have a much higher VID at x49 than the second CPU...)


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> In fact, its suggested by some people to disable XMP and then bin your CPU, as this takes RAM and the IMC out of the picture, then enable XMP after, then re-test at XMP settings. Then you will have an "idea" if something (IMC, RAM/DDR frequency, etc) has changed the results.


Which is this, one of your past recommendations that I saved:

_1) Enable XMP. (reboot).
2) Set VCCIO to 1.20v.
3) Set VCCSA to 1.25v.
4) Set CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration to "High"
5) Set CPU Voltage to 1.350v
6) disable c-states (you will need to "enable" c-state control (thanks, gigabyte for making this confusing) then you can disable the c-states.
7) Set ring/cache ratio to x47._

A recommendation that you ammended on the 1st step, with XMP disabled.

I followed this before moving to Adaptive Voltage.
But I guess I moved too fast.


Another recommendation you gave was this:



Falkentyne said:


> Also when you test on "Auto" Vcore, you should set AC Loadline to 1.6 mOhms, DC Loadline to 1.6 mOhms and Vcore loadline calibration to "Standard" or "Intel spec" or "Level 2", as Level 2 is 1.6 mOhms (Intel spec). Level 1 is spec for 6 core processors, not for 8 cores. You need to do this test. Again, Vcore loadline calibration should be set at "INTEL SPEC" which is Level 2 (1.6 mOhms). and AC and DC loadline should also be set to 1.6 mOhms (raw value: 1.6 in BIOS).
> 
> If this test fails (load voltage SHOULD be about 1.220v if you did this correctly, assuming you are using prime95 29.8 build 6 small FFT), then the processor MUST be RMA'd as defective.


This I didn't quite understand the tech details behind but it seemed to be in the same vein with this, an approach for adaptive voltage.

Nonetheless, if this forum will cease to exist, you don't need to be worried.
Many of your contributions will not be lost for they are kept safe. 
And I'm sure I'm not the only one safekeeping them.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> I could not even run LinX on my 9900k CPU at 5 ghz. It would reach 100C or LinX would just crash mid-run. Most I could run it was at 4.9 ghz and temps would get to 105C. Be lucky you even have a chance to run it at 5 ghz. 184 amps is almost impossible to cool without a 280mm AIO.


My CPU is a 9900KS though, not 9900K.
Hence my... _(a bit)_ higher expectations.
I do have a 280 AIO, specs are in my signature.

Reading through this very thread and the one dedicated to 9900KS, I got rather dishartened.
Seeing how people run 5.2 / AVX 0 with 1.3 in BIOS or something along those lines. 

I myself am aiming for 5.0 and load temps (with AVX2) <=90.
If that should be AVX 0, AVX 1, AVX 2, Uncore 43, 45, 47... that remains to be seen.

Hopefully with your help and others' I will finally figure it out.

:bow:


----------



## philhalo66

Okay so here's something weird i noticed. I updated to the F11 bios for the aorus pro and suddenly my cpu temps went through the roof with the same exact settings. On F10 it was around 75-80C under prime95 at 5GHz, but with F11 it was pushing 93. This was with the same exact settings. Anyone else seen this?
Also is there a reason why it wont downclock wen idle? It just stays at 5GHz 24/7


----------



## Kargeras

I don't remember what BIOS my Aorus Master was shipped with but it was "5Ghz 24/7".
Updating to F11c did not change that.

I'm on a modded F11e BIOS now and it's the same.
So, 3 BIOSes, same thing.

It doesn't matter for me though.



philhalo66 said:


> On F10 it was around 75-80C under prime95 at 5GHz, but with F11 it was pushing 93. This was with the same exact settings. Anyone else seen this?



Is that Prime95 with or without AVX, and what kind of test?


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> I don't remember what BIOS my Aorus Master was shipped with but it was "5Ghz 24/7".
> Updating to F11c did not change that.
> 
> I'm on a modded F11e BIOS now and it's the same.
> So, 3 BIOSes, same thing.
> 
> It doesn't matter for me though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that Prime95 with or without AVX, and what kind of test?


it was 26.6 without AVX it's really strange even in games im a good 10-15C cooler.


----------



## Kargeras

You're 10-15 degrees cooler in games with the new BIOS but hotter in Prime95 no AVX?

Sounds good to me unless fishing for prime numbers is your day job.


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> You're 10-15 degrees cooler in games with the new BIOS but hotter in Prime95 no AVX?
> 
> Sounds good to me unless fishing for prime numbers is your day job.


sorry i wasn't super clear, What i meant was with F11 temps in games are 10-15C hotter but with F10 temps are 10-15C Cooler.


----------



## Lurifaks

philhalo66 said:


> sorry i wasn't super clear, What i meant was with F11 temps in games are 10-15C hotter but with F10 temps are 10-15C Cooler.


Maby bad readings in one of the bioses? Or did you measure with probe ?


----------



## Kargeras

philhalo66 said:


> sorry i wasn't super clear, What i meant was with F11 temps in games are 10-15C hotter but with F10 temps are 10-15C Cooler.


Try going back to the BIOS version that gave you best results.

I'm on F11e (modded) for no particular reason, but then again I'm not using that PC since it's in the "overclock stability stress testing 24/7 counting Mhz, Celsius degrees and other fun stuff" kinda mode.
I also have the suspicion it over volts a bit more than F11c but that's just an undocumented claim on my part, for now.
I might be going back to F11c or F9 or whatever.

But once the operating system is in place and everything is in oder... switching BIOSes can become an unnecessary pain.

There's really no reason to have a particular BIOS version (including the latest) if you don't experience problems.
Like data corruption, data loss, high temperture, BSODs, OS corruption, etc.


----------



## philhalo66

Lurifaks said:


> Maby bad readings in one of the bioses? Or did you measure with probe ?


I used a few programs to monitor temps and the back of the socket was hotter as well.



Kargeras said:


> Try going back to the BIOS version that gave you best results.
> 
> I'm on F11e (modded) for no particular reason, but then again I'm not using that PC since it's in the "overclock stability stress testing 24/7 counting Mhz, Celsius degrees and other fun stuff" kinda mode.
> I also have the suspicion it over volts a bit more than F11c but that's just an undocumented claim on my part, for now.
> I might be going back to F11c or F9 or whatever.
> 
> But once the operating system is in place and everything is in oder... switching BIOSes can become an unnecessary pain.
> 
> There's really no reason to have a particular BIOS version (including the latest) if you don't experience problems.
> Like data corruption, data loss, high temperture, BSODs, OS corruption, etc.


guess ill just stick to the F10 bios. Only problem i have now is for some reason my 9900k will not underclock at idle it just sits at 4.7ghz 24/7. I got all the settings at default so im not sure whats up.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

philhalo66 said:


> I used a few programs to monitor temps and the back of the socket was hotter as well.
> 
> 
> 
> guess ill just stick to the F10 bios. Only problem i have now is for some reason my 9900k will not underclock at idle it just sits at 4.7ghz 24/7. I got all the settings at default so im not sure whats up.



Sometimes users over look this, but did you check to see if you have windows powerplan set to balanced and double check to see if minimum processor state is set to 5%? I've had times where I go into windows after applying an overclock and the powerplan will be on balanced but for some reason minimum processor state would be set to 100%(max clock) so I had to manually drop it to 5% to get clocks/voltage to drop when EIST/C3 enabled.


----------



## philhalo66

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Sometimes users over look this, but did you check to see if you have windows powerplan set to balanced and double check to see if minimum processor state is set to 5%? I've had times where I go into windows after applying an overclock and the powerplan will be on balanced but for some reason minimum processor state would be set to 100%(max clock) so I had to manually drop it to 5% to get clocks/voltage to drop when EIST/C3 enabled.


I checked that and played around with the power settings in windows and it made no difference. I also tried enabling all power settings in the bios then i disabled them and both settings made no different.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I turn on C3 state support, I disable other c-states and I leave c-state package limit on auto.


Holy crap...

So I grew a few chest hairs and decided to take my Gskill DDR4 3200 2x16GB CL14 14-14-34 1T sticks at 272 trfc, 32768 trefi and ate the red pill and set them to 3600-15-15-15-36, 1T (yes, 1T) CR, 320 trfc, 1.40v DDR4, 1.15v IO/SA in the M12E board...and was getting ready to reach for the inevitable safe boot button...

AND IT BOOTED RIGHT UP FIRST TRY AT 1T COMMAND RATE ON DUAL RANK DIMMS!
I couldnt get 1T to even POST higher than 3300 mhz on the Master....and buildzoid in his Z390 RAM video said he couldn't get any of his dual rank sticks to post at 1T higher than 3300-3466 in any of his boards...
IMC isnt fully stable as 112K in-place FFT avx disabled prime95 is dropping threads on the pentium 4 FFT, which is my go-to IMC test, but I don't really care. A certain cpu vcore/IO/SA balance is required for passing that (usually more vcore, or more or less IO/SA if you're being too stingy with the vcore---this seems to only apply to hyperthreaded enabled, as the imc controls the L0 instruction cache store...).

I'm guessing at 2T, I should be able to hit over 4000 with the right timings and voltages. I could not make these sticks POST higher than 3733 on the Master, and it took several boot loops just to get 3733 17-17-17-39 1.5v to post then)

Z490 is what Z390 should have been...
(I have 4000 mhz viper steels running at the exact same specs as the 4400 mhz vipers at 4400 mhz, using the stock 4400 timings and voltages (1.45v) in the Z490 master.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Holy crap...
> 
> So I grew a few chest hairs and decided to take my Gskill DDR4 3200 2x16GB CL14 14-14-34 1T sticks at 272 trfc, 32768 trefi and ate the red pill and set them to 3600-15-15-15-36, 1T (yes, 1T) CR, 320 trfc, 1.40v DDR4, 1.15v IO/SA in the M12E board...and was getting ready to reach for the inevitable safe boot button...
> 
> AND IT BOOTED RIGHT UP FIRST TRY AT 1T COMMAND RATE ON DUAL RANK DIMMS!
> I couldnt get 1T to even POST higher than 3300 mhz on the Master....and buildzoid in his Z390 RAM video said he couldn't get any of his dual rank sticks to post at 1T higher than 3300-3466 in any of his boards...
> IMC isnt fully stable as 112K in-place FFT avx disabled prime95 is dropping threads on the pentium 4 FFT, which is my go-to IMC test, but I don't really care. A certain cpu vcore/IO/SA balance is required for passing that (usually more vcore, or more or less IO/SA if you're being too stingy with the vcore---this seems to only apply to hyperthreaded enabled, as the imc controls the L0 instruction cache store...).
> 
> I'm guessing at 2T, I should be able to hit over 4000 with the right timings and voltages. I could not make these sticks POST higher than 3733 on the Master, and it took several boot loops just to get 3733 17-17-17-39 1.5v to post then)
> 
> Z490 is what Z390 should have been...
> (I have 4000 mhz viper steels running at the exact same specs as the 4400 mhz vipers at 4400 mhz, using the stock 4400 timings and voltages (1.45v) in the Z490 master.


Do you have a matching 4 dimm set on hand by chance? If you do, can you just jam like 1.55v vdimm into them with 1.35-1.45v sa/io and see how high they go at 1.55v vdimm? Looking to gauge imc strength on 4 dimms. I know that 2x16gb is very similar on the imc as 4x8gb but i think 4x8gb might be slightly harder to drive solely because 4 dimms have to be powered even though there are the same amount of ranks. So far z390 was capable of delivering 4133, sometimes 4200 on 4 dimms for daily stable use but with subpar rtls. What kind of rtls/iols is the z490 master giving you at 4400mhz? Is gigabyte still giving bad rtls/iols for frequencies 4000 and higher? Mind firing off an aida64 benchmark when you get the chance? I'm curious if the gigabyte team took the time to complete the memory trace layout to follow the same latency scaling as they did for frequencies up to 3900 or if everything falls off at 4000 again. man I wish I could test this platform out lol.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Do you have a matching 4 dimm set on hand by chance? If you do, can you just jam like 1.55v vdimm into them with 1.35-1.45v sa/io and see how high they go at 1.55v vdimm? Looking to gauge imc strength on 4 dimms. I know that 2x16gb is very similar on the imc as 4x8gb but i think 4x8gb might be slightly harder to drive solely because 4 dimms have to be powered even though there are the same amount of ranks. So far z390 was capable of delivering 4133, sometimes 4200 on 4 dimms for daily stable use but with subpar rtls. What kind of rtls/iols is the z490 master giving you at 4400mhz? Is gigabyte still giving bad rtls/iols for frequencies 4000 and higher? Mind firing off an aida64 benchmark when you get the chance? I'm curious if the gigabyte team took the time to complete the memory trace layout to follow the same latency scaling as they did for frequencies up to 3900 or if everything falls off at 4000 again. man I wish I could test this platform out lol.


Nope. I only have 2x16 GB of the gskill 3200 C14 b-dies, and 2x8 GB of the patriot steel viper 4000 mhz 19-19-19-39 B-dies. 

I'll look at the GB later. I only have one monitor and it's a bit awkward and I'm still in bed. I'll get those RTLs for you after i install asrock timing config 4.0.3. 4.0.4 just gives 65535 on everything...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Nope. I only have 2x16 GB of the gskill 3200 C14 b-dies, and 2x8 GB of the patriot steel viper 4000 mhz B-dies.



rats, no worries. What rtls/iols is gigabyte giving you at 4400mhz on the 4000mhz patriots? Looking to see if they improved latency for 4000 and up or if they just imported the same latency chart from z390. On gigabyte z390, once you crossed over 3900, even at the same cas, you got a latency penalty as if you had infinity fabric like an amd chip. So basically, does latency get better like it is supposed to as frequency goes up past 3900 at the same cas or are they still delivering garbage latency on 2 dimms above 3900?


EDIT: just saw your edit, sounds good. TY.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> rats, no worries. What rtls/iols is gigabyte giving you at 4400mhz on the 4000mhz patriots? Looking to see if they improved latency for 4000 and up or if they just imported the same latency chart from z390. On gigabyte z390, once you crossed over 3900, even at the same cas, you got a latency penalty as if you had infinity fabric like an amd chip. So basically, does latency get better like it is supposed to as frequency goes up past 3900 at the same cas or are they still delivering garbage latency on 2 dimms above 3900?
> 
> 
> EDIT: just saw your edit, sounds good. TY.


RTL's )


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> RTL's )



okay so it appears memory overclocking did not change at all on z490 gigabyte boards, rtls are still garbage(Those are the same rtls for 4400 i get on gigabyte z390 master). Maybe they changed the cut off point? Like maybe they give good rtls at 4000 or 4100 instead of only up to 3900? Heres to hoping they put some sort of effort into actually improving their product aside from slapping on a new chipset and changing the aesthetics. Since you have a relationship with gigabyte, Can you ask gigabyte what made them think it was a good idea to make an arbitrary cut off point on their boards to where memory performs worse regardless of ram bin/imc? Is it just a simple case of engineers being too lazy to program lower rtl numbers for 4000 and up? 

Is gigabyte at least allowing you to at least adjust rtls for higher frequencies now like we could at 3900 and below on z390? Like do rtls actually show up in the bios for 4000 and up now or do rtls still show up blank with a dash in the bios like they did in gigabyte z390? Do you know if the gigabyte z490 extreme behaves the same way or does the extreme offer good rtls at 4000 and up to justify the price tag? 

Also, since the qvl now shows 2 dimm configurations clocking the best and 4 dimm configurations topping out at 4133mhz, does this mean that the z490 master is a daisy chain board and not T-topology?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> okay so it appears memory overclocking did not change at all on z490 gigabyte boards, rtls are still garbage(Those are the same rtls for 4400 i get on gigabyte z390 master). Maybe they changed the cut off point? Like maybe they give good rtls at 4000 or 4100 instead of only up to 3900? Heres to hoping they put some sort of effort into actually improving their product aside from slapping on a new chipset and changing the aesthetics.
> 
> 
> Is gigabyte at least allowing you to at least adjust rtls for higher frequencies now like we could at 3900 and below on z390? Like do rtls actually show up in the bios for 4000 and up now or do rtls still show up blank with a dash in the bios like they did in gigabyte z390? Do you know if the gigabyte z490 extreme behaves the same way or does the extreme offer good rtls at 4000 and up to justify the price tag?
> 
> Also, since the qvl now shows 2 dimm configurations clocking the best and 4 dimm configurations topping out at 4133mhz, does this mean that the z490 master is a daisy chain board and not T-topology?


It's daisy chain.
I'll check the RTL's. I don't care if I blow up my OS because that system is a 'smoke em if you got em' system. I want to see if VCCIO/VCCSA of 1.45v/1.50v (max SA is 1.520v on the intel spec sheet) is safe long term without destroying the memory controller, since the ES chip is higher quality, I'm doing it on my own store bought chip.

Please remember I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing as I have never done RAM things before besides the basic timings. And I'm not testing with any of those weird 12 hour memory test things all you guys are using until I actually know what I'm doing. Prime95 112K in-place FFT AVX disabled for testing IMC, 256k-512K FFT @ 2048MB memory size for testing RAM is what I do.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> It's daisy chain.
> I'll check the RTL's. I don't care if I blow up my OS because that system is a 'smoke em if you got em' system. I want to see if VCCIO/VCCSA of 1.45v/1.50v (max SA is 1.520v on the intel spec sheet) is safe long term without destroying the memory controller, since the ES chip is higher quality, I'm doing it on my own store bought chip.
> 
> Please remember I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing as I have never done RAM things before besides the basic timings. And I'm not testing with any of those weird 12 hour memory test things. Prime95 112K in-place FFT AVX disabled for testing IMC, 256k-512K FFT @ 2048MB memory size for testing RAM is what I do.



Daisy chain thought so, thanks for confirming. I'm fairly certain based off the rtls alone that I have my mind made up on z490 gigabyte boards. no further tests required. was going to type a long wall of text but i think its pointless. If gigabyte didn't fix their rtls/memory oc issue after 2 years of customers complaining, then i'm just convinced they don't give a crap what their customers want. This is one example as to why the idea of "brand loyalty" is complete nonsense. It's literally as simple as programming lower numbers, that's it. They just need to follow the same rtl spacing from 3200-3900 for 4000+. If a board can do 35 ns @ cas 14 3900, it should be able to do 35 ns at a higher frequency as well because the rest is up to the imc/voltages/sticks. I feel like this has less to do with memory trace layout at this point and everything to do with bios programming because between both generations/2 different topology layouts, gigabyte is still delivering roughly the same exact latency for 4000 and up. Just seems like bad arbitrary programming. I guess bios engineers are lazy or something or were explicitly instructed NOT to improve memory OC. Sorry rant over. Was really hoping z490 gigabyte would be an option in the future for me as it will probably also support rocket lake so that I can keep my lighting synced across my whole system with rgb fusion. Maybe I should just pick up the next z390 apex I come across for memory oc and then build a new system again in 6-8 years. The upgrade path is clearly pointless with gigabyte if the products don't improve from generation to generation. Send this message to whom it may concern or if you have someone's contact information at corporate hq I can pass this to, let me know. I'd certainly like to see their products improve.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> okay so it appears memory overclocking did not change at all on z490 gigabyte boards, rtls are still garbage(Those are the same rtls for 4400 i get on gigabyte z390 master). Maybe they changed the cut off point? Like maybe they give good rtls at 4000 or 4100 instead of only up to 3900? Heres to hoping they put some sort of effort into actually improving their product aside from slapping on a new chipset and changing the aesthetics. Since you have a relationship with gigabyte, Can you ask gigabyte what made them think it was a good idea to make an arbitrary cut off point on their boards to where memory performs worse regardless of ram bin/imc? Is it just a simple case of engineers being too lazy to program lower rtl numbers for 4000 and up?
> 
> Is gigabyte at least allowing you to at least adjust rtls for higher frequencies now like we could at 3900 and below on z390? Like do rtls actually show up in the bios for 4000 and up now or do rtls still show up blank with a dash in the bios like they did in gigabyte z390? Do you know if the gigabyte z490 extreme behaves the same way or does the extreme offer good rtls at 4000 and up to justify the price tag?
> 
> Also, since the qvl now shows 2 dimm configurations clocking the best and 4 dimm configurations topping out at 4133mhz, does this mean that the z490 master is a daisy chain board and not T-topology?


I lowered the RTLs by 1 to 90 90 and 73 and the board kept boot looping at d5, then eventually said boot failure detected, and all settings were reset to stock everywhere. Was I also supposed to lower iol? As I said I dont know what Im doing.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> I lowered the RTLs by 1 to 90 90 and 73 and the board kept boot looping at d5, then eventually said boot failure detected, and all settings were reset to stock everywhere. Was I also supposed to lower iol? As I said I dont know what Im doing.



Gimme a sec, gonna look at the asrock thing and i can tell you where to push what. You could also be looping/getting boot failure due to wrong/bad tcwl. gonna give it a gander and i'll let you know what I think you should try on those 4000 sticks.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Daisy chain thought so, thanks for confirming. I'm fairly certain based off the rtls alone that I have my mind made up on z490 gigabyte boards. no further tests required. was going to type a long wall of text but i think its pointless. If gigabyte didn't fix their rtls/memory oc issue after 2 years of customers complaining, then i'm just convinced they don't give a crap what their customers want. This is one example as to why the idea of "brand loyalty" is complete nonsense. It's literally as simple as programming lower numbers, that's it. They just need to follow the same rtl spacing from 3200-3900 for 4000+. If a board can do 35 ns @ cas 14 3900, it should be able to do 35 ns at a higher frequency as well because the rest is up to the imc/voltages/sticks. I feel like this has less to do with memory trace layout at this point and everything to do with bios programming because between both generations/2 different topology layouts, gigabyte is still delivering roughly the same exact latency for 4000 and up. Just seems like bad arbitrary programming. I guess bios engineers are lazy or something or were explicitly instructed NOT to improve memory OC. Sorry rant over. Was really hoping z490 gigabyte would be an option in the future for me as it will probably also support rocket lake so that I can keep my lighting synced across my whole system with rgb fusion. Maybe I should just pick up the next z390 apex I come across for memory oc and then build a new system again in 6-8 years. The upgrade path is clearly pointless with gigabyte if the products don't improve from generation to generation. Send this message to whom it may concern or if you have someone's contact information at corporate hq I can pass this to, let me know. I'd certainly like to see their products improve.


I lowered the four RTLs by 1 and then lowered the four iol's by 1 also and the board looped and i was back in BIOS at 2133 mhz


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> I lowered the four RTLs by 1 and then lowered the four iol's by 1 also and the board looped and i was back in BIOS at 2133 mhz



Ok with 2 dimms, if you adjust channels/dimms that are blank/empty sometimes settings don't stick, at least thats how it was on z390 master with my dimms. Adjust only the rtls/iols for the channels in use. 



Train 4400 again with the volts you were using, but then when you try to lower rtls/iols by one each for used channel, increase sa/io by 50mv each and vdimm/vtraining by 50mv each. Curious if that will help rtls stick/train. I know that if I don't use 1.35v sa/io, 1.45v vcore and 1.54v vtraining while trying to train cas 14-3900, it won't train good rtls. Maybe higher values will allow you to adjust rtls better or just flat out train better rtls. Is there any memory oc feature like trace centering or anything like that in the bios? Did the rtls for 4400mhz appear in the bios after initial training or do they still show up blank with a dash? If they still show up blank with a dash at 4000mhz+, i'm fairly certain they are non-adjustable for those frequencies since on z390 they were only adjustable if they appeared in the bios(they only appeared for 3900 and under).


----------



## Falkentyne

Ok see here's my bios. I have NO idea what to do at all.

Did I tell you I hate memory overclocking?

Meanwhile in the m12e, my dual rank sticks boot 3600 1T without even trying....


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Ok see here's my bios. I have NO idea what to do at all.
> 
> Did I tell you I hate memory overclocking?
> 
> Meanwhile in the m12e, my dual rank sticks boot 3600 1T without even trying....



The line where it shows 74/76 for ch a/b, key in 72. The iol line that shows 14, key in 12. increase sa/io/vdimm/vtraining/vcore all by 50mv extra than what you initially trained with, see if it trains the adjusted rtls/iols. If it doesn't train, I think 4000+ and up is stuck with whatever you are given. For reference, in order to train [email protected] I have to use +150mv offset with low vcore llc or higher, 1.35v sa/io, and 1.54v vtraining 1.56v vdimm + enhanced multicore performance on just for ram training. it doesn't complete training for me if EMC is disabled and if I didn't have enough vcore.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> The line where it shows 74/76 for ch a/b, key in 72. The iol line that shows 14, key in 12. increase sa/io/vdimm/vtraining/vcore all by 50mv extra than what you initially trained with, see if it trains the adjusted rtls/iols. If it doesn't train, I think 4000+ and up is stuck with whatever you are given. For reference, in order to train [email protected] I have to use +150mv offset with low vcore llc or higher, 1.35v sa/io, and 1.54v vtraining 1.56v vdimm + enhanced multicore performance on just for ram training. it doesn't complete training for me if EMC is disabled and if I didn't have enough vcore.


I increased them all.

Fails on d5 then starts over until boot failure.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> I increased them all.
> 
> Fails on d5 then starts over until boot failure.



rats. Nothing else I can suggest on my end, maybe talk to iunlock, he has had decent success on the z390 master at 4000+ with slightly better than average rtls though he was using 1000 USD quality dimms. in the meantime i'll continue to scour around the web for results from new z490 owners. really curious how much better the 10th gen imc is than 9th gen for the 8c and 10c chips. Like before it was incredibly hard/rare to get a 9900k to hit 5ghz memory OC and required an apex. Now other boards claim they can do it but I wonder how common or rare a good enough imc to pull it off will be. Anywho, thank you for the testing, +1 rep.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Heads up, I don't know why it works now but it didn't in the past, but 500khz switchrate is now working extremely well for 5.3ghz ht/off. My required load voltage went from 1.38v in cbr15 to 1.36v regardless if water is 23c or 28c. I'm still on the same f9 bios. I'm still using the same exact profile minus the switchrate change. I don't know what changed but it works good now. If gigabyte people did something behind the scenes, cool and thank you. If not, well, cool anyway because my OC is now cooler, like still below 80c at 1.39v load voltage in cbr20 on just an aio and liquid metal. In the past, 500khz was just auto unstable for me but with medium llc and acdc 1/1, it's working well for pushing the limits. Other users may want to revisit 500khz switchrate if they are on dvid mode. I have not been able to verify if it behaves differently on manual vcore mode because i'm afraid to change my OC at this point since it is performing up to expectations. Just wanted to share my findings.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Heads up, I don't know why it works now but it didn't in the past, but 500khz switchrate is now working extremely well for 5.3ghz ht/off. My required load voltage went from 1.38v in cbr15 to 1.36v regardless if water is 23c or 28c. I'm still on the same f9 bios. I'm still using the same exact profile minus the switchrate change. I don't know what changed but it works good now. If gigabyte people did something behind the scenes, cool and thank you. If not, well, cool anyway because my OC is now cooler, like still below 80c at 1.39v load voltage in cbr20 on just an aio and liquid metal. In the past, 500khz was just auto unstable for me but with medium llc and acdc 1/1, it's working well for pushing the limits. Other users may want to revisit 500khz switchrate if they are on dvid mode. I have not been able to verify if it behaves differently on manual vcore mode because i'm afraid to change my OC at this point since it is performing up to expectations. Just wanted to share my findings.


What Bios version are you using? Did you shut off AC Power and re-test it? I was on F11e.

My Z390 Master is unhooked with no heatsink or power, because I have no place to hook it up, and all the parts and two PSU's are on the Z490 Master and the M12E.

Can you try to replicate this after turning off all AC power? Because if you can't, this is some sort of bug, or something strange the VRM is doing. I saw that happen myself, once or twice, after I switched profiles. It happened once after playing Battlefield 5 at 5.2 ghz, then changing to 4.7 ghz and 500hz (on purpose), running LinX at a voltage I knew was not stable in LinX, and suddenly all residuals matched (usually required 300 khz). Then later it was unstable again during LinX at 500 khz (i was using LinX 0.9.6 residual matching to determine stability). Then I saw consistent results with more residual stability when testing 300 and 500 again. I also do not know if the IR 35201 is responsible for this, or the IR 3555 power stages.

Since I don't have an oscilloscope, I have absolutely no idea what the transient voltages were doing. What i *do* know is that people on the Maximus XI Apex and Gene tested 500 khz vs 800 khz and they all found 500khz needed lower vmin voltage than 800 khz. (the Gene and Apex use an ASP controller (relabeled IR 35201) and IR 3555 power stages, and the Aorus master and Xtreme (both benefit from 300 khz) use IR 35201 and IR 3599 power stages.


----------



## EarlZ

Whats the best Prime95 settings for testing memory overclock with 32gb ram ?


----------



## AndrejB

Ive noticed that my memory settings are stable after a clear cmos, on the first training in tm5 extreme. 

Then every subsequent change causes tm5 to error pretty quickly. Even if it's loosening the timings. Master is one weird board...


----------



## scaramonga

So, this is now becoming a Z490 thread?


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Whats the best Prime95 settings for testing memory overclock with 32gb ram ?


AVX disabled 112k in place fixed FFT is good for testing if your IMC is stable. A CPU Cache L0 error or BSOD will happen on the Pentium 4 FFT if it's not stable, if small FFT was stable before, then you know it's the IMC
Just a crashed thread with no L0 errors could mean you are too close to your minimum stable voltage because even though the load (RMS) voltage is higher at 112k than small FFT (the current draw is lower), the transients (ripple) are much worse.

AVX disabled 256k-512k, with 2048MB (2 GB) memory size is good for testing memory quickly without consuming all your RAM. L0 errors or crashed threads always mean unstable RAM (sometimes IMC).

Or you can set it to 256k-8192K and 75% of your available memory (e.g. 24576 MB for 75% of 32 GB).


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> AVX disabled 112k in place fixed FFT is good for testing if your IMC is stable. A CPU Cache L0 error or BSOD will happen on the Pentium 4 FFT if it's not stable, if small FFT was stable before, then you know it's the IMC
> Just a crashed thread with no L0 errors could mean you are too close to your minimum stable voltage because even though the load (RMS) voltage is higher at 112k than small FFT (the current draw is lower), the transients (ripple) are much worse.
> 
> AVX disabled 256k-512k, with 2048MB (2 GB) memory size is good for testing memory quickly without consuming all your RAM. L0 errors or crashed threads always mean unstable RAM (sometimes IMC).
> 
> Or you can set it to 256k-8192K and 75% of your available memory (e.g. 24576 MB for 75% of 32 GB).


I am not sure what that Pentium 4 FFT is, is that achieved by setting the custom size to 112?

I havent used prime95 in a long while and I am glad to see that the disable AVX feature is now on the UI, Ideally how long should I run the in-place 112k and the 256-8192k


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I am not sure what that Pentium 4 FFT is, is that achieved by setting the custom size to 112?
> 
> I havent used prime95 in a long while and I am glad to see that the disable AVX feature is now on the UI, Ideally how long should I run the in-place 112k and the 256-8192k


It has more violent transients than the smaller FFT. If you look at buildzoid's video for AVX small FFT vs AVX 128K, he will say and show that the vcore is higher at the AVX 128k than AVX small FFT, because the current draw is lower (less vdroop), but the peak to peak transients are MUCH larger, making the dips go below the dips of small FFT's. Which can make you more unstable.

Also 112K stresses the L3 cache, which the IMC controls. Therefore it's a good test of if your IMC is stable or if you need more or less VCCIO and VCCSA. (depending on situation, raising or lowering it can improve stabilitly).


----------



## CommanderHK47

scaramonga said:


> So, this is now becoming a Z490 thread?


Yeah you guys on z490 should discuss in a z490 owners thread. Its making it very confusing when you are mixing in z490 discussions with a z390 owners thread.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> What Bios version are you using? Did you shut off AC Power and re-test it? I was on F11e.
> 
> My Z390 Master is unhooked with no heatsink or power, because I have no place to hook it up, and all the parts and two PSU's are on the Z490 Master and the M12E.
> 
> Can you try to replicate this after turning off all AC power? Because if you can't, this is some sort of bug, or something strange the VRM is doing. I saw that happen myself, once or twice, after I switched profiles. It happened once after playing Battlefield 5 at 5.2 ghz, then changing to 4.7 ghz and 500hz (on purpose), running LinX at a voltage I knew was not stable in LinX, and suddenly all residuals matched (usually required 300 khz). Then later it was unstable again during LinX at 500 khz (i was using LinX 0.9.6 residual matching to determine stability). Then I saw consistent results with more residual stability when testing 300 and 500 again. I also do not know if the IR 35201 is responsible for this, or the IR 3555 power stages.
> 
> Since I don't have an oscilloscope, I have absolutely no idea what the transient voltages were doing. What i *do* know is that people on the Maximus XI Apex and Gene tested 500 khz vs 800 khz and they all found 500khz needed lower vmin voltage than 800 khz. (the Gene and Apex use an ASP controller (relabeled IR 35201) and IR 3555 power stages, and the Aorus master and Xtreme (both benefit from 300 khz) use IR 35201 and IR 3599 power stages.



I'm on F9 stock bios from the website. It survived a breaker trip earlier and a full psu on/off. Just ran cbr15 again, vrout was 1.355v-1.361v under load. Normally i'd whea error at 1.36v/1.37v load for this oc during cbr15 and it always required 1.38v load voltage non-avx in the past. CBR20 only requires 1.39v load voltage now instead of 1.416v. Yeah i'm really curious how to replicate these results but i'm scared to mess with it now since this is the lowest load voltage i've ever had for 5.3 8c/8t, I think i'm gonna keep it calm and leave it be for now. I'll brainstorm more about it as I continue to wake. maybe it has something to do with me changing half the turbo ratios to 54 for 1-4c workloads or something. The voltage behavior kind seems/feels like it is behaving similar to when ring to core is enabled + cache increase and using different turbo ratios. I shall leave it for now since its working great.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

CommanderHK47 said:


> Yeah you guys on z490 should discuss in a z490 owners thread. Its making it very confusing when you are mixing in z490 discussions with a z390 owners thread.



Sorry guys that was my fault, I kind of got a little anxious/curious about z490 gigaboard capabilities, sorry for the derail.


----------



## EarlZ

Falkentyne said:


> It has more violent transients than the smaller FFT. If you look at buildzoid's video for AVX small FFT vs AVX 128K, he will say and show that the vcore is higher at the AVX 128k than AVX small FFT, because the current draw is lower (less vdroop), but the peak to peak transients are MUCH larger, making the dips go below the dips of small FFT's. Which can make you more unstable.
> 
> Also 112K stresses the L3 cache, which the IMC controls. Therefore it's a good test of if your IMC is stable or if you need more or less VCCIO and VCCSA. (depending on situation, raising or lowering it can improve stabilitly).


How long is the recommended test duration ?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> It survived a breaker trip earlier and a full psu on/off. Just ran cbr15 again, vrout was 1.355v-1.361v under load. Normally i'd whea error at 1.36v/1.37v load for this oc during cbr15 and it always required 1.38v load voltage non-avx in the past. Yeah i'm really curious how to replicate these results but i'm scared to mess with it now since this is the lowest load voltage i've ever had for 5.3 8c/8t, I think i'm gonna keep it calm and leave it be for now. I'll brainstorm more about it as I continue to wake. maybe it has something to do with me changing half the turbo ratios to 54 for 1-4c workloads or something. The voltage behavior kind seems/feels like it is behaving similar to when ring to core is enabled with different turbo ratios.


What BIOS version was this tested on?

I spent the whole day trying to stabilize LinX 0.9.6 on both the M12E and Z490 Master, at 4.7 ghz...


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> How long is the recommended test duration ?


One hour should be fine. Two if you are worried about RAM slowly heating up while testing.


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm absolutely in love with my MSI X570 Unify and my AMD 3950x, so much easier to stabilize CPU and memory overclocks than my quirky 9900k and Master ever was. 

And yes, I know this is a Z390 thread, just saying.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> What BIOS version was this tested on?
> 
> I spent the whole day trying to stabilize LinX 0.9.6 on both the M12E and Z490 Master, at 4.7 ghz...



F9 stock from the website


----------



## Falkentyne

Oh I couldn't replicate that. I went as far back as F4 and had the same results with 300 vs 500 khz.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Hmmmmm, I guess I better leave things be then. If its some sort of bug, i better not touch a thing and let it be since it is working nicely lol. but i'm so damn curious how to replicate it and want to tinker >><<


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Ok, couldn't resist had to tinker. I changed all turbo ratios back to 53 for 1-8c , vMIN in cbr15 went up to 1.38v again. changing 1-4c turbo ratios to 5.4ghz reduces my required load voltage for 5-8c 5.3ghz by 20mv. How does that make sense?


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> I'm absolutely in love with my MSI X570 Unify and my AMD 3950x, so much easier to stabilize CPU and memory overclocks than my quirky 9900k and Master ever was. /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> And yes, I know this is a Z390 thread, just saying. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif



Great news for you regarding your AMD rig. Just at the time I bought my Master and 9900k the Ryzens were about the launch. On reflection I wish that I had waited a little to invest into one of those. 

Don't worry about this being a Z390 thread, we seem to be mixing Z490 as well,


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Ok, couldn't resist had to tinker. I changed all turbo ratios back to 53 for 1-8c , vMIN in cbr15 went up to 1.38v again. changing 1-4c turbo ratios to 5.4ghz reduces my required load voltage for 5-8c 5.3ghz by 20mv. How does that make sense?


I think I need to read this several times to understand what happened...

And I think I found out how to increase IMC stability on Z490 (at least at 4.7 and 4.8 ghz) and increase your LinX residual stability and at least in my tests some of the things you have to do are literally the opposite....


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> I think I need to read this several times to understand what happened...
> 
> And I think I found out how to increase IMC stability on Z490 (at least at 4.7 and 4.8 ghz) and increase your LinX residual stability and at least in my tests some of the things you have to do are literally the opposite....



I don't think the voltage reduction had anything to do with switchrate. I think it has to do with turbo mode. It seems that using the same multiplier for every ratio does not actually utilize turbo velocity boost voltage reduction or w/e it is called. Only when i set different multipliers for the ratios did the voltage reduction kick in. Tested it both with 300khz switchrate and 500khz switchrate, same result regardless. maybe i'm just trying to make sense out of nothing lol, its still early for me. I just went with 5.5ghz/2c 5.4ghz/4c and 5.3ghz/8c @ +190mv offset. Going to test in cbr20 for cpu internal errors.


How did you increase stability?


----------



## Lurifaks

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I don't think the voltage reduction had anything to do with switchrate. I think it has to do with turbo mode. It seems that using the same multiplier for every ratio does not actually utilize turbo velocity boost voltage reduction or w/e it is called. Only when i set different multipliers for the ratios did the voltage reduction kick in. Tested it both with 300khz switchrate and 500khz switchrate, same result regardless. maybe i'm just trying to make sense out of nothing lol, its still early for me. I just went with 5.5ghz/2c 5.4ghz/4c and 5.3ghz/8c @ +190mv offset. Going to test in cbr20 for cpu internal errors.
> 
> 
> How did you increase stability?


When i set 5.4ghz/4c and 5.3ghz/8c HToff , and try CB20 i singel core, no core boost to 5.4ghz reffering to HWinfo. what am i doing wrong ?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Lurifaks said:


> When i set 5.4ghz/4c and 5.3ghz/8c HToff , and try CB20 i singel core, no core boost to 5.4ghz reffering to HWinfo. what am i doing wrong ?



are you running enough voltage to support the boost during workloads? Is EIST/C3 enabled? Are you using dvid voltage mode + offset? Did you raise your tjmax all the way? is there any other programs running sucking up threads? What kind of vcore loadline calibration are you using? 


Just completed this with 55/2c 54/4c 53/8c 8c/8t

This is NOT turbo per core btw, turbo per core limit control was left on auto, Just set the turbo ratios. Did not use windows affinity for any of this either or any type of core assignment either. The aida64 5.5ghz frequency register was a luck draw I suppose, it doesn't always register that high when I open/close the program to rerun the benchmark, guess it was just boosting at that specific time to 5.5.


----------



## Lurifaks

XGS-Duplicity said:


> are you running enough voltage to support the boost during workloads? Is EIST/C3 enabled? Are you using dvid voltage mode + offset? Did you raise your tjmax all the way? is there any other programs running sucking up threads? What kind of vcore loadline calibration are you using?


1.380v bios set with llc high, no dvid . Eist-3-enabled, will check for tjmax now


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I don't think the voltage reduction had anything to do with switchrate. I think it has to do with turbo mode. It seems that using the same multiplier for every ratio does not actually utilize turbo velocity boost voltage reduction or w/e it is called. Only when i set different multipliers for the ratios did the voltage reduction kick in. Tested it both with 300khz switchrate and 500khz switchrate, same result regardless. maybe i'm just trying to make sense out of nothing lol, its still early for me. I just went with 5.5ghz/2c 5.4ghz/4c and 5.3ghz/8c @ +190mv offset. Going to test in cbr20 for cpu internal errors.
> 
> 
> How did you increase stability?


It's complicated.
On 9900k, I needed to raise IO and SA voltages at 5 ghz to increase stability and be able to run prime95 avx disabled in-place 112k fft without CPU L0 errors or a BSOD, even from 1.265v all the way to 1.290v.
But on z490, very strange things are happening.
Lower IO/SA is increasing stability, not higher. If SA/IO is raised higher, you have to raise vcore or you will get more unstable when you are very close to your minimum bios/load voltage you need for stability.
And then I found out when trying to get LinX residuals stable, besides RAM timings greatly affecting gflops, you could increase residuals stability by:

1) raising RAM voltage.
2) raising CPU Vcore (if raising CPU Vcore does not help, you must do something else)
3) loosening RAM timings or dropping speed (lowers gflops, increasing stability)
and 4....
4) LOWERING IO/SA voltage!

I noticed, unlike z390, the lower I had IO and SA, the more stable prime95 112k in place (no avx) was, and the more stable LinX was. LinX was crashing at 1.25v IO/SA , at 4.7 ghz with Bios voltage at 1.220v, LLC4. Raising my RAM speed from 1.35v to 1.42v helped slightly. Setting RAM to stock (14-14-14-34 2T) made all residuals match but I wanted to avoid that, changing 2T to 1T gave +40 gflops but caused erratic residuals at 535 Gflops. So I slowly dropped SA and IO. Then Linx stopped crashing randomly. And I kept going lower on IO/SA until I was at 1.0v Io and 1.05v SA, where now 9 of 10 residuals were the same, at 535 Gflops! 

Before I did that, LinX was crashing at 535 gflops or most residuals were wrong. And it also helped 112k in-place FFT at 1.145v in bios set, at 4.7 ghz)

And then I checked the same thing on the Gigabyte board too, with the 4000 mhz sticks at 4400 mhz. I had SA at 1.45v and IO at 1.40v and residuals kept crashing. I raised RAM voltage to 1.5v which helped some, then I dropped IO and SA slowly, and each time I dropped it, more residuals matched. At 1.25v IO, 1.30v SA, I had 9 of 10 residuals pass....

That's where my day went.....


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Lurifaks said:


> 1.380v bios set with llc high, no dvid . Eist-3-enabled, will check for tjmax now



Hmmm I don't have alot of experience with manual vcore mode, i'm not sure if it behaves differently or not. What I can say is that maybe try lowering vcore LLC to medium and increasing voltage so that you still meet your vMIN underload for all core but have enough top end voltage for the non-all core workload ratios. Your voltage will be higher all the time though because you are on manual vcore, If you use dvid mode, EIST/C3 lets it drop on idle. I recommend running dvid mode + offset with eist/C3, Can run higher frequencies at higher voltages without always needing to idle at 1.4v+. For what it is worth, i'm pushing my chip to the max. medium llc, acdc-1/1, +190mv offset. Load voltage during single core goes as high as 1.47v pulling 40ish amps at roughly 70c max, All core load roughly 100mv less for something like cbr15 pulling 125ish amps at roughly 77c.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> It's complicated.
> On 9900k, I needed to raise IO and SA voltages at 5 ghz to increase stability and be able to run prime95 avx disabled in-place 112k fft without CPU L0 errors or a BSOD, even from 1.265v all the way to 1.290v.
> But on z490, very strange things are happening.
> Lower IO/SA is increasing stability, not higher. If SA/IO is raised higher, you have to raise vcore or you will get more unstable when you are very close to your minimum bios/load voltage you need for stability.
> And then I found out when trying to get LinX residuals stable, besides RAM timings greatly affecting gflops, you could increase residuals stability by:
> 
> 1) raising RAM voltage.
> 2) raising CPU Vcore (if raising CPU Vcore does not help, you must do something else)
> 3) loosening RAM timings or dropping speed (lowers gflops, increasing stability)
> and 4....
> 4) LOWERING IO/SA voltage!
> 
> I noticed, unlike z390, the lower I had IO and SA, the more stable prime95 112k in place (no avx) was, and the more stable LinX was. LinX was crashing at 1.25v IO/SA , at 4.7 ghz with Bios voltage at 1.220v, LLC4. Raising my RAM speed from 1.35v to 1.42v helped slightly. Setting RAM to stock (14-14-14-34 2T) made all residuals match but I wanted to avoid that, changing 2T to 1T gave +40 gflops but caused erratic residuals at 535 Gflops. So I slowly dropped SA and IO. Then Linx stopped crashing randomly. And I kept going lower on IO/SA until I was at 1.0v Io and 1.05v SA, where now 9 of 10 residuals were the same, at 535 Gflops!
> 
> Before I did that, LinX was crashing at 535 gflops or most residuals were wrong. And it also helped 112k in-place FFT at 1.145v in bios set, at 4.7 ghz)
> 
> And then I checked the same thing on the Gigabyte board too, with the 4000 mhz sticks at 4400 mhz. I had SA at 1.45v and IO at 1.40v and residuals kept crashing. I raised RAM voltage to 1.5v which helped some, then I dropped IO and SA slowly, and each time I dropped it, more residuals matched. At 1.25v IO, 1.30v SA, I had 9 of 10 residuals pass....
> 
> That's where my day went.....



z490 sounds fun o how i want an apex lol, low sa/io requirements, always a good thing, means your memory oc ceiling will definitely be higher. If the sticks need the extra sa/io at even higher frequencies than 4400, i would assume residuals match accordingly as long as it wasn't excess sa/io? Is that the ES chip or the retail chip btw? I wonder if sa/io levels on z490 are similar to sa/io levels on x299 or w/e.


----------



## Lurifaks

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Hmmm I don't have alot of experience with manual vcore mode, i'm not sure if it behaves differently or not. What I can say is that maybe try lowering vcore LLC to medium and increasing voltage so that you still meet your vMIN underload for all core but have enough top end voltage for the non-all core workload ratios. Your voltage will be higher all the time though because you are on manual vcore, If you use dvid mode, EIST/C3 lets it drop on idle. I recommend running dvid mode + offset with eist/C3, Can run higher frequencies at higher voltages without always needing to idle at 1.4v+. For what it is worth, i'm pushing my chip to the max. medium llc, acdc-1/1, +190mv offset. Load voltage during single core goes as high as 1.47v pulling 40ish amps at roughly 70c max, All core load roughly 100mv less for something like cbr15 pulling 125ish amps at roughly 77c.


Thanks for your help +rep


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> z490 sounds fun o how i want an apex lol, low sa/io requirements, always a good thing, means your memory oc ceiling will definitely be higher. If the sticks need the extra sa/io at even higher frequencies than 4400, i would assume residuals match accordingly as long as it wasn't excess sa/io? Is that the ES chip or the retail chip btw? I wonder if sa/io levels on z490 are similar to sa/io levels on x299 or w/e.


exact same behavior on both the retail and ES chips. Same behavior on Asus and Gigabyte. Instability gradually increases if you put IO/SA any higher than absolutely needed. you can test for it with aida64 stress FPU when very close to your minvoltage (if you BSOD, your IMC is unstable) or prime95 112K in-place fixed FFT (CPU Cache L0 error) or even prime95 small FFT (again avxdisabled), if you get a L0 error, crashed thread or BSOD on the Pentium 4 FFTs.....

I literally found VCCIO 1.0v and VCCSA 1.05v to be the most stable....at both 3200 mhz and 3600 mhz RAM.


----------



## philhalo66

What are you guys getting for VRM temps? im having trouble keeping mine below 93C when i stress test for stability.


----------



## opt33

philhalo66 said:


> What are you guys getting for VRM temps? im having trouble keeping mine below 93C when i stress test for stability.


Are you talking about VRM mos temps as in HWinfo64, just making sure comparing apples to apples. Mine on gigabyte z390 master with 9900k (5.0 ghz prime small ffts) maxed in 50's at about 20mins. Longer runs with blend were no higher. 
below is link on vrm testing on the master. Im not sure about any differences with pro, but wouldnt think that much different.
https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8812/gigabyte-z390-9th-gen-oc-guide-vrm-thermal-test/index6.html


----------



## Kargeras

philhalo66 said:


> What are you guys getting for VRM temps? im having trouble keeping mine below 93C when i stress test for stability.


I was about to ask a similar question.
What's the max VRM temps recommended for stress testing and which sensors should be monitored?

For VRM temps in HWiNFO64 I watch the following sensors:

_VRM MOS, under GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF (ITE UT8688E) tab

VR Loop1 
VR Loop2, both under GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF (IRF IR35201) tab 

VR Loop1 
VR Loop2, both under GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF (IRF IR35201) tab, the next tab which also has VROUT, IOUT and POUT values._

VR Loop1 and 2 values mimic each other in the 2 different tabs though.
I don't know if they're different or not.

But to answer your question, philhalo66 I never saw higher than 72 degrees temp for VRM MOS sensor in Prime95 - Small (AVX Enabled).
Ambient 24.4 Celsius.
In LINX 0.9.6, VRM MOS is 10 Celsius degrees lower and ambient a bit higher, 25 Celsius.
But I'm running adaptive voltage +75mv.


----------



## Voidlol

Hello there! Could you please help me clarify something with my system?
My specs are:
AORUS Z390 MASTER G2 (F11c)
i9-9900KS
G Skill TridentZ RGB F4-3600C16-8GTZRC (4x8GB, timings are 16-19-19-39 @ 1.35v)
Corsair AX1600i
ASUS Strix 1080 ti OC
Custom loop (only on CPU, GPU has default cooling system) with 360mm and 240mm rads (30mm width), D5 pump and EKWB Velocity waterblock.

So, with everything put on stock, no xmp, all bios settings are default I'm unable to pass prime95 28.6 Small FFTs with AVX. In 2-4 minutes one thread crashes with rounding exception. VR VOUT is 1.21 during this run, when I play games or smth, VR VOUT is 1.344. Without AVX its stable for at least 1 hour. With same settings I can pass Linx (20 runs) with VR VOUT 1.35 or anything else (realbench for 8 hours, cinebench r20 15 runs in a row). But sometimes, once in a couple of days i get hard lock, even reset button doesn't do anything. Sometimes system is stable for 10-12 days, sometimes it crashes on 3rd or 4th day.

When I try to enable XMP profile, I can't pass Linx even first run, but system is still stable exactly as without XMP (also crashes once in a couple of days).

I tried different settings, and found something interesting:
With 1.3v override, LLC on turbo it works same as on stock settings (without XMP). To enable XMP and pass tests (except for prime95 with AVX) I need my VR VOUT to be above 1.34v or it crashes. But also, I can pass all the same tests with 5.3 and 1.35v override BUT with xmp profile off. 

Well, despite I'm using custom loop my temps are pretty high. And when my VR VOUT is above 1.34v on Linx I'm close to 102c. On VR VOUT 1.21-1.23 temps are 90c. So I can't keep that high voltage, and Im unable to use my XMP or manual settings (it doesnt matter at all, tried both).
I can pass ANY RAM tests for ANY TIME with my XMP turned on.

Help me please understand, what this problem is? CPU? MB?


----------



## philhalo66

opt33 said:


> Are you talking about VRM mos temps as in HWinfo64, just making sure comparing apples to apples. Mine on gigabyte z390 master with 9900k (5.0 ghz prime small ffts) maxed in 50's at about 20mins. Longer runs with blend were no higher.
> below is link on vrm testing on the master. Im not sure about any differences with pro, but wouldnt think that much different.
> https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8812/gigabyte-z390-9th-gen-oc-guide-vrm-thermal-test/index6.html


yeah VR LOOP1 in HWinfo64 shows mine idle in the mid 50's and load into the low 90's even with direct airflow.


----------



## Kargeras

philhalo66 said:


> yeah VR LOOP1 in HWinfo64 shows mine idle in the mid 50's and load into the low 90's even with direct airflow.


I finally managed to upload both images, LOL.
Apparently if file name length is too long things get confused and believes it's the same file.

Check my previous post.


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> I finally managed to upload both images, LOL.
> Apparently if file name length is too long things get confused and believes it's the same file.
> 
> Check my previous post.


yeah i dont know why mine runs so hot, maybe the heatsink wasn't put on correctly when it was manufactured i never even looked at the vrm temps till last night.


----------



## opt33

philhalo66 said:


> yeah i dont know why mine runs so hot, maybe the heatsink wasn't put on correctly when it was manufactured i never even looked at the vrm temps till last night.


heatsink making poor contact would be my guess as well, especially if your load temps climb quickly. Loop1/loop2/vrm mos idle is mid 30's, normal use gaming/encoding with all cores at 5ghz never above mid 40's. Only prime will get mine into 50's after a while.


----------



## philhalo66

opt33 said:


> heatsink making poor contact would be my guess as well, especially if your load temps climb quickly. Loop1/loop2/vrm mos idle is mid 30's, normal use gaming/encoding with all cores at 5ghz never above mid 40's. Only prime will get mine into 50's after a while.


gaming mine stay around 55-60, when i was testing for stability earlier it took 7 or 8 minutes to hit 93C. I think im going to RMA it its been acting really strange past week or so anyway. Never had to RMA with gigabyte before so wish me luck lol. in the meantime ill grab a cheap used maximus x code.


----------



## Kargeras

I'm currently running a few IMC and memory stability tests and as I said earlier, I also had in mind to check what the VRM temperatures should be.

A few minutes back I successfully finished one hour of Prime95 fixed 112k + AVX Enabled and apparently it stresses the VRM a bit higher than Small + AVX Enabled.
I'm seeing 73 Celsius at max.

Your 93 Celsius seems a bit high but a bit more information about your config and settings would certainly help others diagnose your situation better than I can.

I went through my past screenshots of various stress & stability tests and noticed one where I had fixed 1.35 voltage in BIOS + LLC High.
During Prime95 Small + AVX Enabled, VRM MOS reached a max of 80 (third image below).

So 93 doesn't seem impossible with higher voltage / current draw but it may be a bit too high nonetheless.


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> I'm currently running a few IMC and memory stability tests and as I said earlier, I also had in mind to check what the VRM temperatures should be.
> 
> A few minutes back I successfully finished one hour of Prime95 fixed 112k + AVX Enabled and apparently it stresses the VRM a bit higher than Small + AVX Enabled.
> I'm seeing 73 Celsius at max.
> 
> Your 93 Celsius seems a bit high but a bit more information about your config and settings would certainly help others diagnose your situation better than I can.
> 
> I went through my past screenshots of various stress & stability tests and noticed one where I had fixed 1.35 voltage in BIOS + LLC High.
> During Prime95 Small + AVX Enabled, VRM MOS reached a max of 80 (third image below).
> 
> So 93 doesn't seem impossible with higher voltage / current draw but it may be a bit too high nonetheless.


my setup is the same as my sig rig, 9900k overclocked to 5ghz 1.3V but it pushes to 1.32V spikes during heavy loads with LLC set to turbo. highest draw i seen so far was 199W on the package. i used custom prime95 26.6 setting 12 min FFT and 12 max FFT CPU temps were okayish 88C average with spikes to 91C. I only tested for an hour because a few pro overclocker i seen said with that sort of load if it passes 1 hour there is almost no chance of instability.


----------



## opt33

philhalo66 said:


> gaming mine stay around 55-60, when i was testing for stability earlier it took 7 or 8 minutes to hit 93C. I think im going to RMA it its been acting really strange past week or so anyway. Never had to RMA with gigabyte before so wish me luck lol. in the meantime ill grab a cheap used maximus x code.


It would be helpful to compare to exact same mobo to be sure, the master apparently has one of the best vrm/cooling per few reviews like one below, so maybe not fair comparison to your pro. wonder if any screenshots in 9900k ocing thread have vrm temps showing. 
https://www.kitguru.net/components/...us-master-best-vrm-cooling-we-have-ever-seen/

edit: actually found a video on youtube review, looks like gigabyte z390 UD has much higher temps (2x) than gigabyte master. see time 15:01 in video. Ie, need to check someone with pro.


----------



## philhalo66

opt33 said:


> It would be helpful to compare to exact same mobo to be sure, the master apparently has one of the best vrm/cooling per few reviews like one below, so maybe not fair comparison to your pro. wonder if any screenshots in 9900k ocing thread have vrm temps showing.
> https://www.kitguru.net/components/...us-master-best-vrm-cooling-we-have-ever-seen/


I have the Z390 Aorus Pro. From the looks of it the heatsink is a totally different design that's probably why the large temperature difference.


----------



## opt33

philhalo66 said:


> I have the Z390 Aorus Pro. From the looks of it the heatsink is a totally different design that's probably why the large temperature difference.


yep master has better heatsink and better vrms (less likely to overheat) vs pro, found vrm list. 
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/threads/lga-1151-mainboard-vrm-liste.1175784/#z370


----------



## philhalo66

opt33 said:


> yep master has better heatsink and better vrms (less likely to overheat) vs pro, found vrm list.
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/threads/lga-1151-mainboard-vrm-liste.1175784/#z370


welp just my luck. I did manage to "solve" the problem by putting a noctua 3000RPM fan full blast on the cpu socket area which took the temps down to 62C under an AVX P95 load so there's that.


----------



## Kargeras

That's nice, that you fixed the problem.

Also must be nice living in the airport, that 3000 RPM.


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> That's nice, that you fixed the problem.
> 
> Also must be nice living in the airport, that 3000 RPM.


Yeah only downside is, no free plane trips xD


----------



## Kargeras

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11e modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/12/2020.
> ...


Thank you for your work KedarWolf.

I'm using your modded F11e BIOS and, apologies for the noob question, but which are the "fastest microcodes"?


----------



## Kargeras

GeneO said:


> 3. set the hidden power setting "Processor energy performance preference policy" to 0%. This is the least agressive power setting.
> 
> The latter setting can be made visible in the power plan by setting
> 
> Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlS et\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\36687f9e-e3a5-4dbf-b1dc-15eb381c6863
> 
> Set Attributes under this key to "2"
> 
> That will make this option visible in the power settings app.



+



Sheyster said:


> It's a good tip. I assume you could set it at something like 25% to get higher than default performance at idle but not full bore like at the 0% setting.



Hundreds of post later... default value is 33%.

That suggestion doesn't work for me though, actually the following combinations didn't work, computer reboots at idle:

1. EIST enabled + C-States enabled + Intel Speedshift disabled + Processor Energy Performance Preference policy at 0%
2. EIST enabled + C-States disabled + Intel Speedshift disabled + Processor Energy Performance Preference policy at 0%
3. EIST enabled + C-States disabled + Intel Speedshift disabled + Processor Energy Performance Preference policy at 0% + Processor Performance Autonomous Mode disabled

I'm going to disable EIST but if I do that, LOL, there's little to no point in running adaptive anymore, is it?


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=743168889352666&id=100009786841919
i found this..seems gigabyte aorus master is really capable to do 4533mhz 8g*4.


----------



## EarlZ

What would be a safe VCCIO and VCCSA for 24/7 memory overclock ?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

asdkj1740 said:


> https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=743168889352666&id=100009786841919
> i found this..seems gigabyte aorus master is really capable to do 4533mhz 8g*4.



Gotta use an engineering sample chip to achieve these results or is this possible on retail P0 and retail R0 9900k chips? Is this limited to f6d bios? Anyone know if f6d works with R0 chips?


----------



## asdkj1740

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Gotta use an engineering sample chip to achieve these results or is this possible on retail P0 and retail R0 9900k chips? Is this limited to f6d bios? Anyone know if f6d works with R0 chips?


they can do 4333 8g*4 on elite.
they said for 6 layers pcb 4533 8*4// 4 layers pcb 4333 8*4.

of course they have good binned cpu and mobo and ram, but i doubt it is a cheated version like what happened to z490 aqua, i shall ask more info about that.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

asdkj1740 said:


> they can do 4333 8g*4 on elite.
> they said for 6 layers pcb 4533 8*4// 4 layers pcb 4333 8*4.
> 
> of course they have good binned cpu and mobo and ram, but i doubt it is a cheated version like what happened to z490 aqua, i shall ask more info about that.



That's the first and only memtest(though rather short) that i've seen above 4266 that didn't error. I tried to replicate the timings, I could not.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> That's the first and only memtest(though rather short) that i've seen above 4266 that didn't error. I tried to replicate the timings, I could not.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-intel-motherboards/1748514-mobo-10900k.html#post28468262


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-intel-motherboards/1748514-mobo-10900k.html#post28468262



I should have clarified, on z390 aorus master ^^. nice job on z490 btw.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I should have clarified, on z390 aorus master ^^. nice job on z490 btw.


But why is the Z490 master limited to 1T at 3333 mhz just like the Z390 master? I thought that was a dual rank issue but the steels are 2x8 GB which means single rank....and the M12 can take the dual ranks to 3600 with 1T...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> But why is the Z490 master limited to 1T at 3333 mhz just like the Z390 master? I thought that was a dual rank issue but the steels are 2x8 GB which means single rank....and the M12 can take the dual ranks to 3600 with 1T...



Not sure, I haven't tinkered with it. I was able to get 3600 1T on the z390 master recently. Just takes a fair bit of vdimm and sa/io. I had to train with 1.35v sa/io and 1.58v vdimm/1.54v vtraining to get it off of a 3500 train + memory fastboot with 3600 strap after the timings I wanted were already trained. 


4dimm/z390 master/gskill 4x8gb CL17/4000 kit
[email protected] 1.58v vdimm/1.54v vtraining 1.35v sa/io train 3500 strap/preferred timings, retrain rtls/iols to 51/51/51/51 then memory fastboot with 3600 strap selected.

[email protected] 1.56v vdimm/1.53v vtraining 1.35v sa/io train 3500 strap/preferred timings then memory fastboot with 101 busclock 

[email protected] 1.55v vdimm/1.53v vtraining 1.35v sa/io regular 3500 memory strap


3200 12-11-11



2800 11-10-10



anything higher than 3600 was a no go on 1T with 4 dimms on the master with my kit, i stopped trying after 1.6v vdimm/vtraining. maybe the gskill 4x8gb 4133/4266 17-17-17-37/17-18-18-38 kits could deliver 3700-3933 1T on 4 dimms on z390 master, dunno.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> But why is the Z490 master limited to 1T at 3333 mhz just like the Z390 master? I thought that was a dual rank issue but the steels are 2x8 GB which means single rank....and the M12 can take the dual ranks to 3600 with 1T...



Here is [email protected] 4dimms

How i trained it:
requires large offset +150mv @ high llc, acdc-1/1. Won't train on medium llc with higher offset.
enhanced multicore performance had to be enabled
requires 1.35v SA/IO to train/reach tight/low rtls/iols
1.56v vdimm/1.54v or 1.55v vtraining
TJmax set to maximum


could not use turbo ratios for training, had to key in cpu clock ratio directly

Had to train from 3500 strap with my preferred timings aside from rtls/iols. 3500 gave 49/50/51/51 5/6/6/5 rtls/iols. Had to adjust to 51/51/51/51 7/7/6/5 after training
After rtls/iols adjusted, had to enable memory fast boot and select 3600 strap and save/exit


After training process is complete I had to go back into bios to:
Lower sa/io to 1.3v each
raise vdimm to 1.58v
disable enhanced multicore performance
remove cpu clock ratio and go back to turbo ratios
drop llc back to medium/increase offset to +170 for my 5.3ghz profile 



That's how I achieve 3600 cr1 on 4 dimms on the z390 master. 95%+ scaling


----------



## Kargeras

Given that I can't help the computer rebooting at idle with adaptive voltage (Normal+75mv, AC Loadline: Power Saving, LLC = Standard) I'm finally going back to square 1 and going to try Falkentyne's method with a fixed voltage.

I'm still struggling into understanding the AC, DC's roles. I would like to go that way + fixed voltage + LLC set at High maximum.
I understand that setting AC and DC both to 1 and booting into Windows I can read VID's value.
By reading VID's value at idle with AC=1 and DC=1 I understand that a guesstimate on the silicon quality can be made.

Though I can't find this VID anywhere in the HWiNFO64.

Can someone please help me find this VID, please?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Given that I can't help the computer rebooting at idle with adaptive voltage (Normal+75mv, AC Loadline: Power Saving, LLC = Standard) I'm finally going back to square 1 and going to try Falkentyne's method with a fixed voltage.
> 
> I'm still struggling into understanding the AC, DC's roles. I would like to go that way + fixed voltage + LLC set at High maximum.
> I understand that setting AC and DC both to 1 and booting into Windows I can read VID's value.
> By reading VID's value at idle with AC=1 and DC=1 I understand that a guesstimate on the silicon quality can be made.
> 
> Though I can't find this VID anywhere in the HWiNFO64.
> 
> Can someone please help me find this VID, please?



Restore original order or just reinstall hwinfo64. Vid is in the first column off a fresh install right below the memory section, see screenshot below.





I think I found the best 3 cores on this chip, 5.6ghz. If only I had some sick watercooling to keep the cores cool enough to use them at this frequency ><. I'm gonna guess that some of the new 10th gen chips can do 5.6ghz all core ht/off for gaming on ambient with 2 or 3 420mm rads and multiple pumps. @*Falkentyne* Have you tried highest all core frequency yet with ht off?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Restore original order or just reinstall hwinfo64. Vid is in the first column off a fresh install right below the memory section, see screenshot below.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I found the best 3 cores on this chip, 5.6ghz. If only I had some sick watercooling to keep the cores cool enough to use them at this frequency ><. I'm gonna guess that some of the new 10th gen chips can do 5.6ghz all core ht/off for gaming on ambient with 2 or 3 420mm rads and multiple pumps. @*Falkentyne* Have you tried highest all core frequency yet with ht off?



My Z390 master isn't even hooked up. Its NH-D15 heatsink and its Power supply are on the Z490 Master, and everything else (SSD's, RAM) are in the Maximus XI Extreme!
But I remember being able to play Battlefield 5 with 5.3 ghz, HT off, on the 9900k, with about 1.380v Bios voltage + LLC Turbo.


----------



## EarlZ

Kargeras said:


> Given that I can't help the computer rebooting at idle with adaptive voltage (Normal+75mv, AC Loadline: Power Saving, LLC = Standard) I'm finally going back to square 1 and going to try Falkentyne's method with a fixed voltage.
> 
> I'm still struggling into understanding the AC, DC's roles. I would like to go that way + fixed voltage + LLC set at High maximum.
> I understand that setting AC and DC both to 1 and booting into Windows I can read VID's value.
> By reading VID's value at idle with AC=1 and DC=1 I understand that a guesstimate on the silicon quality can be made.
> 
> Though I can't find this VID anywhere in the HWiNFO64.
> 
> Can someone please help me find this VID, please?



There is also a setting to use 160 on DC then start with 60 with AC, I've been using that method and I think it was Falk that advised to use those values. I cant remember or even understand why its 160 for DC while with AC it is used to give more voltage to the vCore as the value gets higher. I think it was 10mv per 'step'

EDIT:
And use Normal/Standard LLC


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> There is also a setting to use 160 on DC then start with 60 with AC, I've been using that method and I think it was Falk that advised to use those values. I cant remember or even understand why its 160 for DC while with AC it is used to give more voltage to the vCore as the value gets higher. I think it was 10mv per 'step'


DC Loadline is used to match VRM Loadline (your loadline calibration vdroop). DC Loadline is a prediction for power measurements (e.g. CPU Package Power) where it tries to "predict" VOUT via vdroop. So DC Loadline applies its own "loadline calibration" to the CPU VID reporting.

If you set DC Loadline to match loadline calibration's values, both in mOhms, this will make VR VOUT (+/- DVID) line up with CPU VID (without DVID).

Standard/Normal: 1.6 mOhms (=160)
Low: 1.3 mOhms (=130)
Medium: 1.0 mOhms , etc
High: 0.8 mOhms
Turbo: 0.4 mOhms
Extreme: 0.2 mOhms
Ultra Ex: 0 mOhms.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> If you set DC Loadline to match loadline calibration's values, both in mOhms, this will make VR VOUT (+/- DVID) line up with CPU VID (without DVID).
> 
> Standard/Normal: 1.6 mOhms (=160)
> Low: 1.3 mOhms (=130)
> Medium: 1.0 mOhms , etc
> High: 0.8 mOhms
> Turbo: 0.4 mOhms
> Extreme: 0.2 mOhms
> Ultra Ex: 0 mOhms.


Is Standard/Normal: 1.6mOhms (=160) for 4.7Ghz chips aka 9900K and 1.3mOhms (=130) for 5Ghz chips like 9900KS?

I'm asking because I also found this information from you, on reddit.


----------



## Gandyman

*vcore vs VID*

Hey guys, 

Aorus Master owner here + 9900k, quick question for you all. 

Googling and researching the topic brings up mixed results, I'd like to know once and for all. Some places say that VID is the amount of voltage that your CPU is currently requesting, and if you are in offset mode, actual voltage will be VID +/- offset. Other places say VID means nothing and the only way to see your actual voltage is to find the vcore setting lower on the HWINFO64 page under the Motherboard.
SO once and for all, if I want to know how much voltage my 9900k is actually pulling, do i watch the per core VID or vcore out?

Cheers

B


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> My Z390 master isn't even hooked up. Its NH-D15 heatsink and its Power supply are on the Z490 Master, and everything else (SSD's, RAM) are in the Maximus XI Extreme!
> But I remember being able to play Battlefield 5 with 5.3 ghz, HT off, on the 9900k, with about 1.380v Bios voltage + LLC Turbo.



Oops i should have clarified, i meant with your 10900k chips ^^


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Gandyman said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Aorus Master owner here + 9900k, quick question for you all.
> 
> Googling and researching the topic brings up mixed results, I'd like to know once and for all. Some places say that VID is the amount of voltage that your CPU is currently requesting, and if you are in offset mode, actual voltage will be VID +/- offset. Other places say VID means nothing and the only way to see your actual voltage is to find the vcore setting lower on the HWINFO64 page under the Motherboard.
> SO once and for all, if I want to know how much voltage my 9900k is actually pulling, do i watch the per core VID or vcore out?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> B



Use the "VR Out" sensor to see how much vcore you are pulling during a load at any given time for the z390 aorus master.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Oops i should have clarified, i meant with your 10900k chips ^^


Haven't tried that yet.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Haven't tried that yet.



Luumi did cbr15 all core with HT on @ 5.5ghz 1.39v load voltage on a strong custom watercooling set up. i'm guessing that'd make cbr20 draw about 1.42v-1.425v load voltage. can usually get an extra 100mhz with ht off. Definitely a golden chip but I'd so rock 5.6ghz ht/off for gaming at those voltages lol. These new chips are looking pretty fun for oc/gaming. Wish I could afford to upgrade right away, want to tinker lol.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Ok so I have a question about LLC on the z390 aorus master.


If i'm using acdc-1/1 + medium llc + offset in dvid mode, Which level of llc is this equivalent to if I was to compare this to using manual vcore + llc? Medium llc is considered level 4 in the bios if i'm not mistaken but since i've altered the acdc loadlines and use an offset, does this still mean i'm actually on lvl 4 llc or does this technically increase it or decrease it? All the ohms calculations are too confusing for me to understand. I just know i'm not supposed to pull X amount of amps beyond X voltage draw points or whatever otherwise i'm outside of intel spec(which i don't care about, i exceed the curve anyway because I want my megahertz).


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Ok so I have a question about LLC on the z390 aorus master.
> 
> 
> If i'm using acdc-1/1 + medium llc + offset in dvid mode, Which level of llc is this equivalent to if I was to compare this to using manual vcore + llc? Medium llc is considered level 4 in the bios if i'm not mistaken but since i've altered the acdc loadlines and use an offset, does this still mean i'm actually on lvl 4 llc or does this technically increase it or decrease it? All the ohms calculations are too confusing for me to understand. I just know i'm not supposed to pull X amount of amps beyond X voltage draw points or whatever otherwise i'm outside of intel spec(which i don't care about, i exceed the curve anyway because I want my megahertz).


ACLL alters the cpu voltage request not loadline (LLC). Whatever you set for LLC remains that LLC.

Vcore=vCPU + (ACLL * dI) - (LLC * I) + vOffset
or
Vcore =vTarget - (LLC * I), for fixed vcore

dI is the load step, d1-d0, where d1 is the new current load in amps, and d0 is the old current load, since ACLL needs to send a new voltage request to the VRM when load changes.
Example: d0=20A, D1=193A, then the load step is 173A.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> I have no idea what your bios settings are because you're using C-states. No idea what your idle voltage is. What your loadline calibration setting is, etc. This makes it hard to help you.
> Try disabling ALL c-states, all power saving completely. Then (if this is an Aorus master), go to advanced VRM settings, set CPU VRM switch rate to 300 khz. Also Loadline Calibration=High is better than loadline calibration=turbo, even if you have to raise your bios voltage a little to compensate for the vdroop increase at LLC: High.
> 
> For a 9900KS, you should be able to use 1.35v set in BIOS (fixed vcore) with LLC: High, 300 khz switching frequency, do NOT use an AVX offset, and LinX should pass unless your RAM is unstable. Test this at x43 cache ratio first.


Hi,

I started following your advice and disabled all power saving + set a fixed voltage.

These are my settings now for 9900KS + Aorus Master @ BIOS F11e:

CPU ratio: 50
AVX: 0
Uncore: 47

MCE: Disabled
CPU Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: 1.2
VCCSA: 1.25

IA AC Loadline: 1
IA DC Loadline: 160
LLC: Standard

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: 0

EIST: Disabled
C-States: Disabled
Intel Speedshift: Disabled

VT-d: Enabled (heard some conversation about this but didn't touch its default setting)

I hope I didn't forget anything of importance.
Everything else is on default.

The image below is for IDLE after 35 minutes.

Awaiting your instructions, thank you.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Hi,
> 
> I started following your advice and disabled all power saving + set a fixed voltage.
> 
> These are my settings now:
> 
> CPU ratio: 50
> AVX: 0
> Uncore: 47
> 
> CPU Voltage: 1.35
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> IA DC Loadline: 160
> LLC: Standard
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: 0
> 
> EIST: Disabled
> C-States: Disabled
> Intel Speedshift: Disabled
> 
> VT-d: Enabled (heard some conversation about this but didn't touch its default setting)
> 
> I hope I didn't forget anything of importance.
> Everything else is on default.
> 
> The image below is for IDLE after 35 minutes.
> 
> Awaiting your instructions, thank you.


Now run stress tests to test stable.
AIDA 64 Stress FPU only, Prime95 29.8 build 6, small FFT or 12k-12k in-place, AVX disabled, Cinebench R20 looping. Hwinfo64 to check for CPU Cache L0 errors in sensors.

If stable, reduce bios voltage by 10mv and test again.
Once unstable, raise bios voltage 10mv test, verify and save the profile.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> Now run stress tests to test stable.
> AIDA 64 Stress FPU only, Prime95 29.8 build 6, small FFT or 12k-12k in-place, AVX disabled, Cinebench R20 looping. Hwinfo64 to check for CPU Cache L0 errors in sensors.
> 
> If stable, reduce bios voltage by 10mv and test again.
> Once unstable, raise bios voltage 10mv test, verify and save the profile.


Will do.

But please be so kind as to answer my next question:

Standard/Normal: 1.6 mOhms (=160)
Low: 1.3 mOhms (=130)
Medium: 1.0 mOhms , etc
High: 0.8 mOhms
Turbo: 0.4 mOhms
Extreme: 0.2 mOhms
Ultra Ex: 0 mOhms.

Is Standard/Normal 1.6 mOhms (160) for 9900K and 130 for 9900KS?

I'm trying to understand as much as possible about technicals so I can be methodical with the approach.

There's so much information going around and I read it so many times without truly grasping it.
I'm just trying to de-confuse myself so I can approach this in a correct manner. 


P.S.

Prime95 v29.8 build 6 (AVX disabled) -> 12k-12k in place, WHEA in the first second.
That's 12k not 112k, right?

I remember running 112k to test IMC and memory stability?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Will do.
> 
> But please be so kind as to answer my next question:
> 
> Standard/Normal: 1.6 mOhms (=160)
> Low: 1.3 mOhms (=130)
> Medium: 1.0 mOhms , etc
> High: 0.8 mOhms
> Turbo: 0.4 mOhms
> Extreme: 0.2 mOhms
> Ultra Ex: 0 mOhms.
> 
> Is Standard/Normal 1.6 mOhms (160) for 9900K and 130 for 9900KS?
> 
> I'm trying to understand as much as possible about technicals so I can be methodical with the approach.
> 
> There's so much information going around and I read it so many times without truly grasping it.
> I'm just trying to de-confuse myself so I can approach this in a correct manner.


That's the base loadline, the starting value. KS=K. Its based on # of cores. on a z390 master, LLC Standard/Normal gets this value. Also LLC Auto gets this value too if MCE is disabled.
All stronger LLC's have mOhms a percentage of the base value (e.g. LLC high is 50% mOhm)

8 core=1.6 mOhm
4, 6 core=2.1 mOhm.

For 10th gen its different.
10, 8 core: 1.1 mOhm
6 core: 1.7 mOhm.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> That's the base loadline, the starting value. KS=K. Its based on # of cores. on a z390 master, LLC Standard/Normal gets this value. Also LLC Auto gets this value too if MCE is disabled.
> All stronger LLC's have mOhms a percentage of the base value (e.g. LLC high is 50% mOhm)
> 
> 8 core=1.6 mOhm
> 4, 6 core=2.1 mOhm.
> 
> For 10th gen its different.
> 10, 8 core: 1.1 mOhm
> 6 core: 1.7 mOhm.


I must've misunderstood what you said in this post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28469342-post9042.html
So you were talking about LLC here, not DC Loadline.

This is where I started from: https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...ues/ewe3o5m?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
There, you make a differentiation between 47 and 50 CPUs, namely 9900K and 9900KS?

Differentiation regarding AUTO values for the AC/DC presets.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> I must've misunderstood what you said in this post: https://www.overclock.net/forum/28469342-post9042.html
> 
> So you were talking about LLC here, not DC Loadline.


DC loadline is for power reporting. It tries to predict VOUT by the value in DC Loadline and reports that as VID. (AC Loadline also affects this, cpu on auto vcore or dvid mode gets its power from ACLL.)

VID=vCPU + (ACLL * Loadstep A) - (DCLL * A)

Vcore=vCPU + (ACLL * loadstep A) - (LLC * A) + vOffset.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> DC loadline is for power reporting. It tries to predict VOUT by the value in DC Loadline and reports that as VID. (AC Loadline also affects this, cpu on auto vcore or dvid mode gets its power from ACLL.)
> 
> VID=vCPU + (ACLL * Loadstep A) - (DCLL * A)
> 
> Vcore=vCPU + (ACLL * loadstep A) - (LLC * A) + vOffset.


I'm going to have many questions for I have read this stuff over and over and still not getting it completely.

I found VID values in the upper 1st tab of HwINFO64, as one of you guys suggested earlier to find it.

But now... vCPU is the value I set in bios for manual voltage?
vCore is the value I find in HwINFO64 as... vCore?

Apologies for the many questions.

P.S.

Currently running Prime 95 fixed 12k-12k on 1.38v.
No more WHEA in the 1st second and so far all workers well... working.


How long should this test be?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> I'm going to have many questions for I have read this stuff over and over and still not getting it completely.
> 
> I found VID values in the upper 1st tab of HwINFO64, as one of you guys suggested earlier to find it.
> 
> But now... vCPU is the value I set in bios for manual voltage?
> vCore is the value I find in HwINFO64 as... vCore?
> 
> Apologies for the many questions.


I'm a gamer, not an engineer. Just saying.
vCPU=VID when AC LL and DC LL are both set to 0.01 mOhms, which is 1 in the GB Bios. aka "Base VID". temps greatly affect base VID= higher temps=higher base.

This is all I know.

BTW if you use fixed (override) voltage, vTarget is the BIOS voltage set. (both ACLL and DCLL are ignored but still affect VID, just not vcore)


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> I'm a gamer, not an engineer. Just saying.
> vCPU=VID when AC LL and DC LL are both set to 0.01 mOhms, which is 1 in the GB Bios. aka "Base VID". temps greatly affect base VID= higher temps=higher base.
> 
> This is all I know.
> 
> BTW if you use fixed (override) voltage, vTarget is the BIOS voltage set. (both ACLL and DCLL are ignored but still affect VID, just not vcore)


The AC/DC=1/1 => vCPU=VID makes sense to me.

But in order to get the terminology right, vCPU is the value I manually set in BIOS for CPU voltage aka 1.35v?

Below is ~15 minutes of 12k-12k fixed in Prime 95, 24.3 ambient.
How long do you recommend running this?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> The AC/DC=1/1 => vCPU=VID makes sense to me.
> 
> But in order to get the terminology right, vCPU is the value I manually set in BIOS for CPU voltage aka 1.35v?
> 
> Below is ~15 minutes of 12k-12k fixed in Prime 95, 24.3 ambient.
> How long do you recommend running this?


You've been asking a lot of questions and im starting to repeat myself and it's getting annoying.
I'll say it 1 more time. I want to do other things besides answer the same questions over and over.

VCPU is BASE VID. NOT override voltage. You can (for the second time) find base VID by looking at VID when AC/DC LL is 0.01 mOhms.

Override voltage is vtarget. I gave both formulas.
base vid is important because its hardwired into each cpu multiplier and stops scaling at max turbo mp. AC Loadline needs it to know where to start.

I hope this answers all your questions. I found this out on my own by just experimenting.


----------



## asdkj1740

z490 aorus xtreme, ddr4 5000c14 1t, by hicookie


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

asdkj1740 said:


> z490 aorus xtreme, ddr4 5000c14 1t, by hicookie



sickkkkk! c14-5000 is nuts That's so cool he gets his own ram too. Any idea how people get their own ram? 



This is the best I can do that is usable in gaming with 4 dimms. 1.7v vdimm/training and 1.35v sa/io. 14-13-13-28 wasn't working out @4133/4200


----------



## Falkentyne

asdkj1740 said:


> z490 aorus xtreme, ddr4 5000c14 1t, by hicookie


So how did he get 1T to work at 5000 while all of us are struggling to get 1T above 3466 mhz? What...? 
I guess I should flash the XOC Bios even though I'm on air...and see if I can find out...?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> So how did he get 1T to work at 5000 while all of us are struggling to get 1T above 3466 mhz? What...?
> I guess I should flash the XOC Bios even though I'm on air...and see if I can find out...?



You know you want to .


----------



## asdkj1740

Falkentyne said:


> So how did he get 1T to work at 5000 while all of us are struggling to get 1T above 3466 mhz? What...?
> I guess I should flash the XOC Bios even though I'm on air...and see if I can find out...?


tyring to drag hicookie to be here but he doesnt reply me


btw i dont know whether the 4c4t shown on gpuz is software reading error or it is intented to set that and how that would affect such insane result.


----------



## Falkentyne

asdkj1740 said:


> tyring to drag hicookie to be here but he doesnt reply me
> 
> 
> btw i dont know whether the 4c4t shown on gpuz is software reading error or it is intented to set that and how that would affect such insane result.


It's fine if he wont come but please, ask him this favor for me. From the guy who helped Gigabyte fix the DVID overvoltage bug with switching to fixed voltage (Sofos sent me a Z490 board. thank you very much Gigabyte!).

Can you please ask Hicookie to have the BIOS team unlock access to the Intersil VR, so we can get "VR VOUT" (die-sense voltage) and "Current IOUT" (VRM amps monitoring) in our Aorus Master (and Xtreme and other boards)?

Martin, the guy who makes HWinfo, said that this VR should be accessible, but access to it is probably being blocked by firmware...

A LOT Of people are complaining on the overclocking forums right now because the GB boards don't support accurate voltage and current monitoring, without access to the Intersil VR (the Z390 boards allowed access to the IR and Intersil VR's).

Thank you!


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> You've been asking a lot of questions and im starting to repeat myself and it's getting annoying.


Don't feel obligated to answer though, you're everywhere and seem to be helping a lot of people.
I'm sorry for that, I know I have a lot of questions.

Speaking of questions...  
Another one popped out while running Prime95 - Small with AVX enabled.

Core Effective Clocks and Usage are not 100% while the test is running.

Anyone have any idea why? 

_These be the settings on that particular run of Prime95:

CPU ratio: 50
AVX: 0
Uncore: 43

MCE: Disabled
CPU Voltage: 1.35 (fixed voltage)
VCCIO: 1.2
VCCSA: 1.25

IA AC Loadline: 1
IA DC Loadline: 130
LLC: High

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: 0

EIST: Disabled
C-States: Disabled
Intel Speedshift: Disabled

VT-d: Enabled_


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Don't feel obligated to answer though, you're everywhere and seem to be helping a lot of people.
> I'm sorry for that, I know I have a lot of questions.
> 
> Speaking of questions...
> Another one popped out while running Prime95 - Small with AVX enabled.
> 
> Core Effective Clocks and Usage are not 100% while the test is running.
> 
> Anyone have any idea why?
> 
> _These be the settings on that particular run of Prime95:
> 
> CPU ratio: 50
> AVX: 0
> Uncore: 43
> 
> MCE: Disabled
> CPU Voltage: 1.35 (fixed voltage)
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> IA DC Loadline: 130
> LLC: High
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: 0
> 
> EIST: Disabled
> C-States: Disabled
> Intel Speedshift: Disabled
> 
> VT-d: Enabled_


It means you're not stable. Threads crashed. Expand your prime95 windows and tile them so you can see the threads.
Here is how I do it. Takes time but is worth it. Probably easier on a 4k or 2160p monitor. I'm at 1080p so less room.


----------



## Driller au

Starting to feel so old skool with my Z390 9900K


----------



## Dibbler

Driller au said:


> Starting to feel so old skool with my Z390 9900K


Your wallet thanks you, lol.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Don't feel obligated to answer though, you're everywhere and seem to be helping a lot of people.
> I'm sorry for that, I know I have a lot of questions.
> 
> Speaking of questions...
> Another one popped out while running Prime95 - Small with AVX enabled.
> 
> Core Effective Clocks and Usage are not 100% while the test is running.
> 
> Anyone have any idea why?
> 
> _These be the settings on that particular run of Prime95:
> 
> CPU ratio: 50
> AVX: 0
> Uncore: 43
> 
> MCE: Disabled
> CPU Voltage: 1.35 (fixed voltage)
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> IA DC Loadline: 130
> LLC: High
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: 0
> 
> EIST: Disabled
> C-States: Disabled
> Intel Speedshift: Disabled
> 
> VT-d: Enabled_



how are you only getting 1.2ish load voltage when you have 1.35v manual vcore set in bios with high llc?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

So ambient has been a real pain to deal with. I've come up with a temporary solution, for the rest of the summer...

Air flow from the central air vent directly to the AIO/fans. I feel like linus/jayz2cents/gamers nexus right now.


Is there some sort of in between water and ln2 cooling solution that I can use daily 24/7?


----------



## AndrejB

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Is there some sort of in between water and ln2 cooling solution


Phase change cooling, but it's not cheap.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

AndrejB said:


> Phase change cooling, but it's not cheap.



Any idea of price points? Is it doable for a 9900k? How loud is it and what kind of power consumption does it take up? Is it something that can be ran daily 24/7?


EDIT: NVM, did some research and watched a few videos. Phase change cooling is pretty loud but gets the job done. Watched a guy cinebench at 5.9ghz on a 9900k with phase change cooling on youtube. Pretty cool. may consider something like this for daily. Ambient is a *****.


----------



## computertechy

Has anyone else noticed weird core temps in HWMonitor using F11H? during idle and load mine are at least 20-30.c colder than they should be. package temperature is fine though.


----------



## GeneO

computertechy said:


> Has anyone else noticed weird core temps in HWMonitor using F11H? during idle and load mine are at least 20-30.c colder than they should be. package temperature is fine though.


I use HWInfo64, which is a better and more comprehensive monitoring tool, and the core temps are correct. Downloaded HWmonitor and compared and they are also correct.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> how are you only getting 1.2ish load voltage when you have 1.35v manual vcore set in bios with high llc?


I think I forgot to modify the specs for that run.
It was 1.335v fixed voltage with LLC Standard I believe.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> I think I forgot to modify the specs for that run.
> It was 1.335v fixed voltage with LLC Standard I believe.



That doesn't make sense either. 



Setting manual vcore of 1.335v in bios with vcore llc set to standard won't give 1.2v floor voltage either.


I know this because 1.38v manual vcore set in bios with vcore llc set to high droops to 1.27vish under full load. Vcore llc set to standard with 1.335v manual vcore set in bios would droop so far you wouldn't be stable and probably wouldn't even be able to boot. 




What are you actually using?


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> That doesn't make sense either.
> 
> 
> 
> Setting manual vcore of 1.335v in bios with vcore llc set to standard won't give 1.2v either.


You're talking about VROUT 1.2v?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> You're talking about VROUT 1.2v?



Yes. "VR OUT" is the sensor to use. That's your vcore.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Yes. "VR OUT" is the sensor to use. That's your vcore.


I will run the test again and report back.

I've been watching VR OUT for a while, in all my tests, be it adaptive voltage or fixed voltage.

Things get a bit confusing though with the terminology, some people understand vCore as... vCore.
As it is written in HWiNFO64.

There you go, fresh from the oven:

_CPU ratio: 50
AVX: 0
Uncore: 45

MCE: Disabled
CPU Voltage: 1.335 (fixed voltage)
VCCIO: 1.2
VCCSA: 1.25

IA AC Loadline: 1
IA DC Loadline: 130
LLC: High

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: 0

EIST: Disabled
C-States: Disabled
Intel Speedshift: Disabled

VT-d: Enabled_


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> I will run the test again and report back.
> 
> I've been watching VR OUT for a while, in all my tests, be it adaptive voltage or fixed voltage.
> 
> Things get a bit confusing though with the terminology, some people understand vCore as... vCore.
> As it is written in HWiNFO64.
> 
> There you go, fresh from the oven:
> 
> [/i]CPU ratio: 50
> AVX: 0
> Uncore: 45
> 
> MCE: Disabled
> CPU Voltage: 1.335 (fixed voltage)
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> IA DC Loadline: 130
> LLC: High
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: 0
> 
> EIST: Disabled
> C-States: Disabled
> Intel Speedshift: Disabled
> 
> VT-d: Enabled[/i]


 @*Falkentyne* I know you are busy right now, so maybe you could answer this later. Why is this guy's vrout so low when he says he is setting 1.335v manual vcore in bios? Shouldn't vmax be around 1.33v idle in windows? Does this have anything to do with dc loadline being set to 130?


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> @*Falkentyne*Why is this guy's vrout so low when he says he is setting 1.335v manual vcore in bios? Shouldn't vmax be around 1.33v idle in windows? Does this have anything to do with dc loadline being set to 130?


"This guy", I like that, the implication there, LEL. 
And English isn't even my native language.



XGS-Duplicity said:


> @*Falkentyne*Shouldn't vmax be around 1.33v idle in windows? Does this have anything to do with dc loadline being set to 130?


I thought DC Loadline (and AC Loadline) are ignored in fixed voltage.
Both, AC + DC Loadlines affect only VID, IOUT and POUT.


Here is LINX running now, for the following:

_CPU ratio: 50
AVX: 1
Uncore: 45

MCE: Disabled
CPU Voltage: 1.330 (fixed voltage)
VCCIO: 1.2
VCCSA: 1.25

IA AC Loadline: 1
IA DC Loadline: 130
LLC: High

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: 0

EIST: Disabled
C-States: Disabled
Intel Speedshift: Disabled

VT-d: Enabled_


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> "This guy", I like that, the implication there, LEL.
> And English isn't even my native language.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought DC Loadline (and AC Loadline) are ignored in fixed voltage.
> Both, AC + DC Loadlines affect only VID, IOUT and POUT.
> 
> 
> Here is LINX running now, for the following:
> 
> _CPU ratio: 50
> AVX: 1
> Uncore: 45
> 
> MCE: Disabled
> CPU Voltage: 1.330 (fixed voltage)
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> IA DC Loadline: 130
> LLC: High
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: 0
> 
> EIST: Disabled
> C-States: Disabled
> Intel Speedshift: Disabled
> 
> __ VT-d: Enabled_



I type like I talk, i don't give a crap about being PC and i don't care if anyone has a problem with it either.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I type like I talk, i don't give a crap about being PC and i don't care if anyone has a problem with it either.


Calm your titties though, you're going Turbo, LOL.



P.S.

Dem residuals don't match, because why should they.
*NOT very frustrating*


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Calm your titties though, you're going Turbo, LOL.



Don't provoke me with your "implication" nonsense .


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Don't provoke me with your "implication" nonsense .


I'm not offended, the implication may or may not be there and you don't care anyways.
I can turn this into a drama but I'd rather not, Smooth Talker.


I've residuals to match.
And it ain't going swell.
Best I ever did was 27 out of 33 residuals matched (on adaptive votalge - Normal+Offset).

It's... great.

:|


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> I'm not offended, the implication may or may not be there and you don't care anyways.
> I can turn this into a drama but I'd rather not, Smooth Talker.
> 
> 
> I've residuals to match.
> And it ain't going swell.
> Best I ever did was 27 out of 33 residuals matched (on adaptive votalge - Normal+Offset).
> 
> It's... great.
> 
> :|



No no, not smooth talker, It's smooth CRIMINAL . But thanks for the compliment! Time to listen to some good ol MJ.


----------



## loschack

Hello,


any chance to get F11h modded bios for the Aorus Pro (no Wifi) version? Is there any noticeable performance advantage over F10 modded by @KedarWolf?


Sorry for dumb questions, but I've spent quite a long time digging in this forum, and unfortunately I didn't find neither the bios for aorus pro, nor the information if its worth upgrade from f10:/


Thank You in advance!


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> No no, not smooth talker, It's smooth CRIMINAL . Time to listen to some good ol MJ.


No argument there.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> No no, not smooth talker, It's smooth CRIMINAL . But thanks for the compliment! Time to listen to some good ol MJ.


Look, Prime95 - Small - AVX Enabled, running now.

Config:

_CPU ratio: 50
AVX: 1
Uncore: 45

MCE: Disabled
CPU Voltage: 1.320 (fixed voltage)
VCCIO: 1.2
VCCSA: 1.25

IA AC Loadline: 1
IA DC Loadline: 130
LLC: High

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: 0

EIST: Disabled
C-States: Disabled
Intel Speedshift: Disabled

VT-d: Enabled_


If you're looking at vCore (in HWiNFO) the droop caused by LLC High (80) makes sense.
1.320v (fixed voltage) - 80mv = 1.240v

If you're looking at VR OUT, it doesn't make sense.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> @*Falkentyne* I know you are busy right now, so maybe you could answer this later. Why is this guy's vrout so low when he says he is setting 1.335v manual vcore in bios? Shouldn't vmax be around 1.33v idle in windows? Does this have anything to do with dc loadline being set to 130?





Kargeras said:


> I will run the test again and report back.
> 
> I've been watching VR OUT for a while, in all my tests, be it adaptive voltage or fixed voltage.
> 
> Things get a bit confusing though with the terminology, some people understand vCore as... vCore.
> As it is written in HWiNFO64.
> 
> There you go, fresh from the oven:
> 
> _CPU ratio: 50
> AVX: 0
> Uncore: 45
> 
> MCE: Disabled
> CPU Voltage: 1.335 (fixed voltage)
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> IA DC Loadline: 130
> LLC: High
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: 0
> 
> EIST: Disabled
> C-States: Disabled
> Intel Speedshift: Disabled
> 
> VT-d: Enabled_


No. Basic math.
He said he used LLC High right? LLC High is 0.8 mOhm.
199 Amps, 1.350v bios set=1350mv

1350 - (199 * 0.8) = 1190mv = 1.190v.

Checks out for me  LLC high is 50% reduced loadline (starting at 1.6 mOhm).

*edit* I clearly didn't read the following posts after.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Look, Prime95 - Small - AVX Enabled, running now.
> 
> Config:
> 
> _CPU ratio: 50
> AVX: 1
> Uncore: 45
> 
> MCE: Disabled
> CPU Voltage: 1.320 (fixed voltage)
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 1
> IA DC Loadline: 130
> LLC: High
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: 0
> 
> EIST: Disabled
> C-States: Disabled
> Intel Speedshift: Disabled
> 
> VT-d: Enabled_
> 
> 
> If you're looking at vCore (in HWiNFO) the droop caused by LLC High (80) makes sense.
> 1.320v (fixed voltage) - 80mv = 1.240v
> 
> If you're looking at VR OUT, it doesn't make sense.



Yeah I don't understand it but then again i never use dc [email protected] anything other than 1, which is probably why I don't understand it. O well. Whenever I used fixed vcore, I left acdc loadlines on auto and just went with turbo llc.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> No. Basic math.
> He said he used LLC High right? LLC High is 0.8 mOhm.
> 199 Amps, 1.350v bios set=1350mv
> 
> 1350 - (199 * 0.8) = 1190mv = 1.190v.
> 
> Checks out for me  LLC high is 50% reduced loadline (starting at 1.6 mOhm).
> 
> *edit* I clearly didn't read the following posts after.



Hmmmm I thought vcore llc used with manual vcore set it bios was a fixed amount of vdroop at full load. like 1.32v + turbo vcore llc, fixed 50mv droop to 1.27vish at full load always whether it be cbr15/20 or aida or realbench. When I used 1.38v manual vcore set in bios with high vcore llc, idle was about 1.38v and I would get the same load voltage as the turbo set up so I assumed high vcore llc when used with manual vcore set in bios was around a fixed 110mv droop. This all lead me to think 1.335v set in bios with standard vcore llc won't give a stable anything because of so much more droop.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Yeah I don't understand it but then again i never use dc [email protected] anything other than 1, which is probably why I don't understand it. O well. Whenever I used fixed vcore, I left acdc loadlines on auto and just went with turbo llc.


Here's 1.310v (fixed voltage) on Prime95-Small AVX Enabled running now.

_CPU ratio: 50
AVX: 1
Uncore: 45

MCE: Disabled
CPU Voltage: 1.310 (fixed voltage)
VCCIO: 1.2
VCCSA: 1.25

IA AC Loadline: 1
IA DC Loadline: 130
LLC: High

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: 0

EIST: Disabled
C-States: Disabled
Intel Speedshift: Disabled

VT-d: Enabled_

Mighty overclock you got in your signature, what are your settings for that?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Here's 1.310v (fixed voltage) on Prime95-Small AVX Enabled running now.
> 
> Mighty overclock you got in your signature, what are your settings for that?



acdc-1/1, medium llc, +170mv offset, EIST/C3 enabled, turbo ratios, 4.9 cache, 300khz switchrate, pwm phase [email protected], 400mv vcore protection, extreme vcore current protection, [email protected], 1.7v Vdimm/Vtraining, 1.35v SA/IO. full load voltage during non-avx is 1.38v, full load voltage during avx is 1.416v. cbr15/20/aida/realbench pull around 125-130 amps at full load. During idle, cores/volts drop to 800mhz/.875vish. This is NOT an overclock i would ever put into linx/p95/gsat or anything else that draws a sick amount of amps. It's also REALLY sensitive to ambient as i've found out over the last 24 hours.


BTW, I had a cpu internal error earlier when testing [email protected] with 1.3v sa/io. I purposely got the water/ambient warmer and tested again with 1.35v sa/io and no additional vcore. Ran many more runs, didn't get any cpu internal error. Based off this experience, I think cpu internal error can either mean more vcore primarily and in some cases like mine, more imc and/or system agent voltage but probably system agent. I only had to increase imc voltage in addition to system agent because my chip won't be stable unless they match.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> acdc-1/1, medium llc, +170mv offset, EIST/C3 enabled, turbo ratios, 4.9 cache, 300khz switchrate, pwm phase [email protected], 400mv vcore protection, extreme vcore current protection, [email protected], 1.7v Vdimm/Vtraining, 1.35v SA/IO. full load voltage during non-avx is 1.38v, full load voltage during avx is 1.416v. cbr15/20/aida/realbench pull around 125-130 amps at full load. During idle, cores/volts drop to 800mhz/.875vish. This is NOT an overclock i would ever put into linx/p95/gsat or anything else that draws a sick amount of amps.



Oh, so very naisu.
Gotta love adaptive, which was my 1st goal.

Le computer reboots itself though while in idle and I wasn't able to fix it.
Even with all C-States, EIST and Intel Speedshift disabled + Windows 10 Power Plans registry fixes.

I used the Power Saving (AC=40 / DC=130?) preset for AC Loadline. 
Maybe I should've used used AC/DC values instead, overwriting any preset.

Did you experience random reboots in idle or medium load?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Oh, so very naisu.
> Gotta love adaptive, which was my 1st goal.
> 
> Le computer reboots itself though while in idle and I wasn't able to fix it.
> Even with all C-States, EIST and Intel Speedshift disabled + Windows 10 Power Plans registry fixes.
> 
> I used the Power Saving (AC=40 / DC=130?) preset for AC Loadline.
> Maybe I should've used used AC/DC values instead, overwriting any preset.
> 
> Did you experience random reboots in idle or medium load?



only time i've ever experienced random reboots during idle is when I was a hair off with voltage when using acdc-1/1 with various overclocks. If it is still happening, I would try adding 10mv more vcore or try turning on the power loading feature in the bios. No issues medium load.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> only time i've ever experienced random reboots during idle is when I was a hair off with voltage when using acdc-1/1 with various overclocks. If it is still happening, I would try adding 10mv more vcore or try turning on the power loading feature in the bios. No issues medium load.


I thought I tried everything except manual AC/DC Loadlines.
What is the "power loading feature in bios"?
Never heard of it before.

I so would like to make adaptive work, for the low temps and whatnot.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> acdc-1/1, medium llc, +170mv offset, EIST/C3 enabled, turbo ratios, 4.9 cache, 300khz switchrate, pwm phase [email protected], 400mv vcore protection, extreme vcore current protection, [email protected], 1.7v Vdimm/Vtraining, 1.35v SA/IO. full load voltage during non-avx is 1.38v, full load voltage during avx is 1.416v. cbr15/20/aida/realbench pull around 125-130 amps at full load. During idle, cores/volts drop to 800mhz/.875vish. This is NOT an overclock i would ever put into linx/p95/gsat or anything else that draws a sick amount of amps. It's also REALLY sensitive to ambient as i've found out over the last 24 hours.
> 
> 
> BTW, I had a cpu internal error earlier when testing [email protected] with 1.3v sa/io. I purposely got the water/ambient warmer and tested again with 1.35v sa/io and no additional vcore. Ran many more runs, didn't get any cpu internal error. Based off this experience, I think cpu internal error can either mean more vcore primarily and in some cases like mine, more imc and/or system agent voltage but probably system agent. I only had to increase imc voltage in addition to system agent because my chip won't be stable unless they match.


What were you running/playing/benching/stress testing when you got that CPU Internal Error (I assume if you look in windows event viewer->System you will see "Internal Parity Error").


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> I thought I tried everything except manual AC/DC Loadlines.
> What is the "power loading feature in bios"?
> Never heard of it before.
> 
> I so would like to make adaptive work, for the low temps and whatnot.



It's called "power loading" in f9, not sure about other bioses. It creates a dummy load. That's all I can tell you about it. I read somewhere that users can try turning it on if experiencing random reboots during idle. 


As for dvid mode, I would start with standard vcore llc + acdc-1/1 and see how far an offset will get you. I needed +120mv or +130mv for 5g avx-2 and +190mv for 5.1g avx-1 or something like that, ht on, turbo ratios/ring to core style. For clocks higher than +190mv, I found it better off to just raise vcore llc/adjust offset as needed. I wouldn't be able to tell you if these types of OCs are "recommended" or considered "good" or not. It's just what works for me for the frequencies I want to push with my chip. I'll personally never settle for anything less than 5.3ghz 8c/8t on this chip. I couldn't do 5.3ghz 8c/8t or 5.2ghz 8c/16t on manual vcore ever regardless of vcore llc levels. This stuff passed aida/realbench/occt. 5.3 won't pass occt but will pass realbench/aida. For reference my chip doesn't scale well, you probably won't need as high of an offset for certain frequencies.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> It's called "power loading" in f9, not sure about other bioses. It creates a dummy load. That's all I can tell you about it. I read somewhere that users can try turning it on if experiencing random reboots during idle.
> 
> 
> As for adaptive, I would start with standard vcore llc + acdc-1/1 and see how far an offset will get you. I needed +120mv or +130mv for 5g avx-2 and +190mv for 5.1g avx-1, ht on, turbo ratios/ring to core style. For clocks higher than +190mv, I found it better off to just raise vcore llc/adjust offset as needed. I wouldn't be able to tell you if these types of OCs are "recommended" or considered "good" or not. It's just what works for me for the frequencies I want to push with my chip. I couldn't do 5.3ghz 8c/8t or 5.2ghz 8c/16t on manual vcore ever regardless of vcore llc levels. This stuff passed aida/realbench/occt. 5.3 won't pass occt but will pass realbench/aida. For reference my chip doesn't scale well, you probably won't need as high of an offset for certain frequencies.


Thanks for sharing.

I don't remember this kind of "power loading" setting in BIOS F11c or (modded) F11e but I'll take a 2nd look.

I don't think I've a golden chip either, or do I?
Remember the earlier 1.310v?

A worker fainted after 30+ minutes in P95-SMALL AVX Enabled.

*sad llama*


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Thanks for sharing.
> 
> I don't remember this kind of "power loading" setting in BIOS F11c or (modded) F11e but I'll take a 2nd look.
> 
> I don't think I've a golden chip either, or do I?
> Remember the earlier 1.310v?
> 
> A worker fainted after 30+ minutes in P95-SMALL AVX Enabled.
> 
> *sad llama*



I can't help you with p95 tuning.


----------



## Moparman

Kargeras said:


> Thanks for sharing.
> 
> I don't remember this kind of "power loading" setting in BIOS F11c or (modded) F11e but I'll take a 2nd look.
> 
> I don't think I've a golden chip either, or do I?
> Remember the earlier 1.310v?
> 
> A worker fainted after 30+ minutes in P95-SMALL AVX Enabled.
> 
> *sad llama*


p95 is the issue why do people still run that stupid program? Don't say for stability as it's known that you can pass P95 and still have crashes same as you can fail P95 and be stable.


----------



## GeneO

nm, already answered


----------



## shaolin95

Driller au said:


> Starting to feel so old skool with my Z390 9900K


hahaha its like we are missing all the fun even though for me the fun will be more limited since I run 4x16GB RAM but still. The only thing preventing me from upgrading is the usual Intel shortage


----------



## scaramonga

Moparman said:


> p95 is the issue why do people still run that stupid program? Don't say for stability as it's known that you can pass P95 and still have crashes same as you can fail P95 and be stable.


Yup. Laughable ain't it  Probably because they are wanting it to fail, as it gives them a chance to tweak further


----------



## Smokediggity

New D6 microcodes are available. I haven't tried them yet. https://www.win-raid.com/t3355f47-I...ode-Repositories-Discussion-29.html#msg113080


----------



## Driller au

shaolin95 said:


> hahaha its like we are missing all the fun even though for me the fun will be more limited since I run 4x16GB RAM but still. The only thing preventing me from upgrading is the usual Intel shortage


Yea would be nice to tweak and fiddle with something new but the 9900k does not even raise a sweat with most of my day to day usage i will spend my spare cash on a 3080 TI when they arrive and see how it handles that


----------



## computertechy

GeneO said:


> I use HWInfo64, which is a better and more comprehensive monitoring tool, and the core temps are correct. Downloaded HWmonitor and compared and they are also correct.



something is not right, no idea what it is.

EDIT: HWInfo is correct.


----------



## EarlZ

I just installed an ADATA SX8200 1TB pro on my system and the SSD toolbox from ADATA shows only 2X link allocation for the drive and this is probably because I have a sound card installed on the bottom PCIE slot and I also have the drive installed at the bottom M.2 slot.

I have a GPU, Sound card and 3 other drives.I removed the sound card and it gave the drive a 4X link.

I have the following questions if anyone knows the answers to them

1.) Since the link is only 2X am I getting a hit on the IOPS ?
2.) I have a Gigabyte 2080TI Gaming OC and it has an internal exhaust which directly blows hot air on its sides which means the NVME heatsink it self is very warm to the touch, would it still be recommended to install on the second M.2 slot to get a 4X link ?


----------



## shaolin95

Driller au said:


> Yea would be nice to tweak and fiddle with something new but the 9900k does not even raise a sweat with most of my day to day usage i will spend my spare cash on a 3080 TI when they arrive and see how it handles that


That is a good point about the money our towards a newer GPU


----------



## Smokediggity

EarlZ said:


> I just installed an ADATA SX8200 1TB pro on my system and the SSD toolbox from ADATA shows only 2X link allocation for the drive and this is probably because I have a sound card installed on the bottom PCIE slot and I also have the drive installed at the bottom M.2 slot.
> 
> I have a GPU, Sound card and 3 other drives.I removed the sound card and it gave the drive a 4X link.
> 
> I have the following questions if anyone knows the answers to them
> 
> 1.) Since the link is only 2X am I getting a hit on the IOPS ?
> 2.) I have a Gigabyte 2080TI Gaming OC and it has an internal exhaust which directly blows hot air on its sides which means the NVME heatsink it self is very warm to the touch, would it still be recommended to install on the second M.2 slot to get a 4X link ?


If you move your sound card up one slot into the lower most PCIE 1x slot, then the lowest M.2 slot (M2P) will run at the full 4x speed. This is what I did with my setup.


----------



## EarlZ

Smokediggity said:


> If you move your sound card up one slot into the lower most PCIE 1x slot, then the lowest M.2 slot (M2P) will run at the full 4x speed. This is what I did with my setup.


Before I went to bed, the NVME drive was showing 65,268C on its temperature and the drive info is missing from ADATA toolbox. Rebooted my PC and its no longer detectable in BIOS under the NVME stab, Windows cant also see the drive anymore in disk management. Looks like a dead on arrival drive. I've also tried to move it on another m.2 slot and did a CMOS reset.


----------



## Falkentyne

Currently testing a tool to access the Z490 Intersil 69269 VR on the Aorus Master (and Xtreme) and get VR VOUT, Current OUT, etc. I have permission to release it once I can get it working consistently (sometimes it reports 0v/0a like it can't read the VRM is even there or something). It's not from Gigabyte, btw


----------



## philhalo66

I finally solved my weird issue with not underclocking and temps being through the roof. I flashed both the primary bios with the latest F12d and it was still acting funny so i flashed both and boom problems solved. I dont know why but the backup bios was forcing some weird settings or something because now at idle its dropping down to 800Mhz like normal and its even boosting to 4.8 by itself and before it was solid 4.7 no matter what i did. and at stock (maybe undervolted? locked to 1.104V under prime95) tops out at 57C now which is a full 32C lower than before. Both at default settings in the BIOS.


----------



## Falkentyne

Gigabyte Z490 Master/Extreme Loadline calibration values

Standard/Normal: 1.1 mOhm
Low: .85 mOhm
Medium: .68
High: .55
Turbo: .28
Extreme: .185
Ultra Extreme: 0


----------



## Smokediggity

F11i bios for the Master. Comes with C6 microcodes. Fixes F12 boot menu blank screen that was introduced in F11h.


----------



## Falkentyne

HWinfo64 support for the Gigabyte Z490 boards VR VOUT should be added eventually. Shamino figured out how to access the VRM, Now Martin needs to determine what protocol is used.


----------



## ElGreco

*G2 EDITION BIOS*

Hi all!

I was wondering which is considered to be the latest and verified most stable and fast bios for the Z390 AORUS MASTER...

Will I be able to use it with my “G2 Special edition” of this board?

Thank you!


----------



## Falkentyne

ElGreco said:


> Hi all!
> 
> I was wondering which is considered to be the latest and verified most stable and fast bios for the Z390 AORUS MASTER...
> 
> Will I be able to use it with my “G2 Special edition” of this board?
> 
> Thank you!


I had no issues with T0D and F11e, but there seems to be an f11i out now...


----------



## ElGreco

Falkentyne said:


> I had no issues with T0D and F11e, but there seems to be an f11i out now...


Yes, I saw the F11i... Yu believe that F11e is compatible with my motherboard as well Z390 Aorus Master G2 edition?

Thank you!


----------



## KedarWolf

ElGreco said:


> Yes, I saw the F11i... Yu believe that F11e is compatible with my motherboard as well Z390 Aorus Master G2 edition?
> 
> Thank you!


Someone let me know if the F11i is fixed from earlier problems. If so I'll mod it with the latest microcodes, GOP, RST and Ethernet firmware. The new microcodes for peeps to test. 

I'll do a version with the latest 'fast' microcodes as well if the newest are still a performance dud. :h34r-smi


----------



## Smokediggity

KedarWolf said:


> Someone let me know if the F11i is fixed from earlier problems. If so I'll mod it with the latest microcodes, GOP, RST and Ethernet firmware. The new microcodes for peeps to test.
> 
> I'll do a version with the latest 'fast' microcodes as well if the newest are still a performance dud. :h34r-smi


F11i seems to be ok.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Someone let me know if the F11i is fixed from earlier problems. If so I'll mod it with the latest microcodes, GOP, RST and Ethernet firmware. The new microcodes for peeps to test.
> 
> I'll do a version with the latest 'fast' microcodes as well if the newest are still a performance dud. :h34r-smi


Waiting on your F11i with the fastest microcodes


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Waiting on your F11i with the fastest microcodes


where can I find the F11i, not on Gigabyte support page or beta bios website. :/


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> EarlZ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Waiting on your F11i with the fastest microcodes /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> where can I find the F11i, not on Gigabyte support page or beta bios website. :/
Click to expand...



Post 9118 has /had it attached. 

I tried to flash it twice and that worked each time, but it will not enter the BIOS screen for me when pressing the DEL key. Instead I get a blank screen. 
The END key worked to get into Q flash and the F12 also worked for the boot menu. 
But it will not enter the BIOS each time that I tried. 
Going back to either F11H or E works as expected.

The F11i at this time isn't on the beta page, seems kinda strange if it has been officially released.?

Can the EFI flash method be used safely for the beta and std releases and not only the modified versions of the BIOS...?


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is F11i modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/21/2020.

It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.

RST RAID firmware updated.

Full list of upgrades.

[Current version in BIOS file]
1 - Disk Controller
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1107
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.11i /x

Use the modded Master F11i BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## Dibbler

Even using the modified BIOS for the F11i above, thanks for doing that, I still get a blank screen when trying to enter the BIOS. Gone back to F11e.


----------



## ElGreco

*CPU FAN SPEED problem*

Guys I am getting a little frustrated here and would appreciate your guidance.

Just installed windows 10 2004 in brand new pc and Bios cpu fan speed shows 4300+ rpm while I have connected there the CORSAIR H115i rgb platinum fan header and it should show around 1000rpm (indication from icue)

Any ideas? 

Also, which of the million apps found in gigabyte site you consider useful to be installed for my motherboard?

Thank you!

NB I HAVE THE DEFAULT F9 BIOS that was preinstalled in my master G2 EDITION.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

What is different about these new z390 bioses? Did gigabyte add any new useful features or fix the RTLS/IOLS for 4000+ yet?


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11i modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 5/21/2020.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> RST RAID firmware updated.
> 
> Full list of upgrades.
> 
> [Current version in BIOS file]
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1107
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.11i /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11i BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Here's *F11i* from the Beta BIOS website.

Not sure if it's any different from the one that gives a blank screen in BIOS but worth a try.

It has updated firmware and the fastest microcodes etc.


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> Here's F11e from the Beta BIOS website.
> 
> Not sure if it's any different from the one that gives a blank screen in BIOS but worth a try.
> 
> It has updated firmware and the fastest microcodes etc.


Thanks much appreciated. The zip contains a file 1.11i. 
Did you mean to post a modified F11e...?


----------



## KedarWolf

Dibbler said:


> Thanks much appreciated. The zip contains a file 1.11i.
> Did you mean to post a modified F11e...?


That's *F11i* just renamed to work with efiflash and the instructions I included.


----------



## Smokediggity

Dibbler said:


> Even using the modified BIOS for the F11i above, thanks for doing that, I still get a blank screen when trying to enter the BIOS. Gone back to F11e.


Sorry to hear you had trouble with F11i bios I posted. It works for me, but maybe Gigabyte locked it to my motherboard's serial number since I got it to test a fix for a bug I reported.


----------



## Falkentyne

Tool to check VR VOUT on Gigabyte Z490 ISL VRM 69269 boards, courtesy of Shamino.
Must NOT be run at the same time as HWinfo64.
If you run HWInfo64 at all during that windows session, you *MUST* reboot first.
Otherwise you will get no reading.

I do NOT know if you can run MSI Afterburner with this either.


----------



## Dibbler

Thanks for the modified "official" released F11i. Sadly a very black screen when I try to use the DEL key for the BIOS setup. The DEL and END key functions fine and so changed back to F11e.

Smokediggity No worries about your release, there is no difference for me between that and any other, modified or not, of this version. Each of the others work as expected but there is something with this one that simply will not give anything other than a black screen for me when trying to enter the BIOS. The display port signal is still there for the monitor, it does not go into standby, but it remains black. A bit like the F11H version with the black Boot Menu screen.

I have reported my issues with this BIOS over at the Beta BIOS site. 

Gone back again to the F11e version. Never flashed this board so many times in a day, lol.


----------



## Alemancio

What are main gains of F11i vs other previous F9 based BIOS? (overclock and/or performance wise)

Thanks!


----------



## EarlZ

I flashed the f11i and I also get the same black screen on bios. I can tell that my monitor is getting a signal but just of a black image.


----------



## Dibbler

EarlZ said:


> I flashed the f11i and I also get the same black screen on bios. I can tell that my monitor is getting a signal but just of a black image.


Sorry that it affects you as well but at least I know that the problem isn't just with my system.


----------



## EarlZ

Dibbler said:


> Sorry that it affects you as well but at least I know that the problem isn't just with my system.


No worries, I flashed it on the second bios. Maybe the bios does not like one of my connected devices but I didnt have time to find out which one.


----------



## Pragzor

Z390 Master F11i, GTX 1080 connected via DVI Dual Link - no issues here.


----------



## Dibbler

Pragzor said:


> Z390 Master F11i, GTX 1080 connected via DVI Dual Link - no issues here.


Just tried it with my Aorus 1080Ti and it is still black using a DVI dual link cable. 

Thanks for the idea tho.


----------



## AndrejB

Pretty happy with these settings, passed hci, tm5, occt large, linx... 



Most importantly no crashes and windows errors 
40ns (aida expired, can't show)


----------



## Smokediggity

On my Master, if I save my bios to a file using Q-Flash, then try using Q-Flash to reflash that file I get an error about an invalid MAC address and it refuses to flash the bios. Efiflash flashes the same file without any issues. Anyone else have this issue? I've noticed it on both F11h and F11i, but I haven't checked other versions yet. Pretty sure this used to work.


----------



## GeneO

Smokediggity said:


> On my Master, if I save my bios to a file using Q-Flash, then try using Q-Flash to reflash that file I get an error about an invalid MAC address and it refuses to flash the bios. Efiflash flashes the same file without any issues. Anyone else have this issue? I've noticed it on both F11h and F11i, but I haven't checked other versions yet. Pretty sure this used to work.


I had it happen once, I forget which BIOS though.


----------



## GeneO

Modded f11i for microcode and RST EFI drivers and flashed. No problems with DEL or F12. Flashed ME firmware. Working fine here.


----------



## Unkzilla

Not specific to z390 but seems to be some z490 chatter in here , thought I'd post in case anyone is interested 

Picked up 10900k/gigabyte z490 aorus pro ax ( sold 9900ks and Asus xi gene , small upgrade cost )

Pretty happy with the board . Gets close to what my gene did with my bdie dual rank kit - I got 3912 c16 on the gene, 3840 with same subtimings on the pro ax. Memory latency is about 4 ns higher , assume due to 4 dimm.board vs 2 dimm 

System is stable but would not detect my GPU until I upgraded to f4 bios - was running via igpu until I worked out the issue 

Running 5.3 all core with h150i AIO , vs my old 9900ks which I would run at 5.2 . Runs about 8 degs cooler than the 9900ks during blender run which is quite impressive 

Ran some 720p game tests vs my 9900ks and seem to be about 9% faster


----------



## EarlZ

GeneO said:


> Modded f11i for microcode and RST EFI drivers and flashed. No problems with DEL or F12. Flashed ME firmware. Working fine here.


I reflashed it again today and used the other display port on my GPU, No issues now, really weird. I also reset the CMOS and went back to the other DP now it works flawlessly with no black screen.


----------



## stasio

New Beta BIOS is out.....


----------



## Thunder-74

stasio said:


> New Beta BIOS is out.....


Hi Stasio , do you have a changelog of F11j Bios for z390 Master?
Thanks


----------



## stasio

No changelog....


----------



## jojymo

Good morning all,

I have been having a nightmare of time overclocking my current 9700KF chip. Seems that it was ignoring my manual voltage and no matter what was applied it would hover around the 1.35v - 1.4v.
Seemed to have found a stable fix. I went into Bio's and changed IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline to 0.01/ This has somehow now made stable overclock.

The reason for concern is due to how little volts the CPU is pulling (1.25-1.28). This is a darn sight lower than what was last recorded. For reference, I have attached a photo of the CPU details when running OCCT bench.

Is this normal?

Cinabench r20 also shows the overclock is applied correctly (3970 all core)

Specs:
Z390 Gigabyte Auruos Elite
9700KF @5GHZ
32Gb of 3200Mhz ram
2070 Super
Kraken 52x cooler
Windows 10 Pro

Regards
Leo
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CPU Clock.PNG
Views:	3
Size:	45.7 KB
ID:	350918


----------



## Dibbler

stasio said:


> New Beta BIOS is out.....


The F11J BIOS just black screens on pressing DEL to enter the BIOS. Tried with DVI dual link, HDMI and also DV cable. Using Master board and 1080Ti Aorus GPU. Same as the previous F11i

Back to F11E


----------



## lucasfrance

KedarWolf said:


>


Hi there,

Could you once again please be SO KIND to provide the modded bios for Z390 Xtreme F9g ??

Thanks in advance


----------



## stasio

Dibbler said:


> The F11J BIOS just black screens on pressing DEL to enter the BIOS. Tried with DVI dual link, HDMI and also DV cable. Using Master board and 1080Ti Aorus GPU. Same as the previous F11i
> 
> Back to F11E


If this bug is only on Z390 Master or for all in the range...?


----------



## shaolin95

Any 64GB users willing to share RAM timings? I want to see if I can get anything else from my RAM while I wait for a 10900k to show up so I can buy it


----------



## Dibbler

stasio said:


> If this bug is only on Z390 Master or for all in the range...?


Just Z390 Master. In the beta bios forum someone mentioned that the F9k for z390m gaming is not working - black screen trying to enter bios settings.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is F11j modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 6/02/2020.

It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.

RST RAID firmware updated.

Full list of upgrades.

[Current version in BIOS file]
1 - Disk Controller
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
2 - Video OnBoard
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1107
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.11j /x

Use the modded Master F11j BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## lucasfrance

Hi there,

Could you once again please be SO KIND to provide the modded bios for Z390 Xtreme F9g ??

Thanks in advance


----------



## GeneO

stasio said:


> If this bug is only on Z390 Master or for all in the range...?


These have older microcode (AE... B4) which makes me wonder if this is built on a obsolete branch again.


----------



## KedarWolf

lucasfrance said:


> Hi there,
> 
> Could you once again please be SO KIND to provide the modded bios for Z390 Xtreme F9g ??
> 
> Thanks in advance


YW.


----------



## opt33

F11J BIOS on z390 master has trefi bug back, ie ignores what you type in and goes to max beyond certain number.
F11i bios didnt have it.


----------



## Elric2a

Hi,

i'm looking for a software to monitor dmi voltage, pll termination voltage, Pch core voltage... and what are the exact equivalent in aorus bios? I know there is an asus soft for that, Turbo Vcore but can't find anything for aorus / gigabyte

Thanks


----------



## Smokediggity

GeneO said:


> These have older microcode (AE... B4) which makes me wonder if this is built on a obsolete branch again.


 Your suspicion is correct. I just tested F11j and it is built on the wrong branch again.


Also, based on the post here[1], its highly likely that the bios' for the entire Z390 lineup are being built with the wrong branch.


[1] https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1151.html#post513462


----------



## Falkentyne

Elric2a said:


> Hi,
> 
> i'm looking for a software to monitor dmi voltage, pll termination voltage, Pch core voltage... and what are the exact equivalent in aorus bios? I know there is an asus soft for that, Turbo Vcore but can't find anything for aorus / gigabyte
> 
> Thanks





Elric2a said:


> Hi,
> 
> PCH Core is already on hwinfo64.
> 
> There's a tool you can use on the Gigabyte site that allows you to set the subzero termination values in windows , and will tell you what the current values are that were set in the BIOS already, but I only saw it for Z490. Also there are no actual monitoring sensors for these voltages. They aren't even sensors for these on Asus boards either. The Super I/O chip doesn't have sensors for monitoring PLL and trim voltages.


----------



## Elric2a

I see and what about the values

VCCPLL and VCCPLL OC

Can they help with temps? Saw some topics about it https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/ce2rq2/is_cpu_pll_oc_voltage_still_a_thing_with_9900k_it/

I tried 1.05 and 1.10 but my pc froze after few minutes. Shoud I leave it on auto or can I do something with it? 

I have done some stress test today and I would like to know if i should push it more or call it a day


5ghz, 1.24 vcore / LLC turbo
Large occt AVX 2 , 1 H 0 errors
Small occt no avx : 30m (could not do more) : 0 errors
Tried Prime 112K got one error and I stopped it.

Also would i get lower temps by rising vcore and lowering llc? 

Also i have an issue it seems with RAM temps which is at 38c idle to 52c while gaming, is that ok? It's trident Z 3466 CL16 which seems to be b die. 

Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

Elric2a said:


> I see and what about the values
> 
> VCCPLL and VCCPLL OC
> 
> Can they help with temps? Saw some topics about it https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/ce2rq2/is_cpu_pll_oc_voltage_still_a_thing_with_9900k_it/
> 
> I tried 1.05 and 1.10 but my pc froze after few minutes. Shoud I leave it on auto or can I do something with it?
> 
> I have done some stress test today and I would like to know if i should push it more or call it a day
> 
> 
> 5ghz, 1.24 vcore / LLC turbo
> Large occt AVX 2 , 1 H 0 errors
> Small occt no avx : 30m (could not do more) : 0 errors
> Tried Prime 112K got one error and I stopped it.
> 
> Also would i get lower temps by rising vcore and lowering llc?
> 
> Also i have an issue it seems with RAM temps which is at 38c idle to 52c while gaming, is that ok? It's trident Z 3466 CL16 which seems to be b die.
> 
> Thanks


Please do not mess with voltages if you dont know what they do or what you are doing! These settings do absolutely NOTHING for you on air/water cooling.

VCCPLL and VCCPLL OC are for subzero bugs and they must be at least 150mv apart from each other. Failure to do that will cause a clock watchdog timeout.
Lowering VCCPLL_OC below 1.20v skews the on-die temp sensors as the sensors use this rail, but the real temperature is not changed.


----------



## Elric2a

Oh OK I'll leave those on auto then  

And what about the other points? 

Also should I keep low vcore and turbo Llc or should I do the opposite? 

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## GeneO

Smokediggity said:


> Your suspicion is correct. I just tested F11j and it is built on the wrong branch again.
> 
> 
> Also, based on the post here[1], its highly likely that the bios' for the entire Z390 lineup are being built with the wrong branch.
> 
> 
> [1] https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-beta-bios-1151.html#post513462



Sigh, ah well, another one to skip. Thanks for the confirmation saved me from wasting time. Must be a bunch of unmanaged yahoos in the beta release "program" at Gigabyte. This happens practically every other beta release.


----------



## computertechy

GeneO said:


> Sigh, ah well, another one to skip. Thanks for the confirmation saved me from wasting time. Must be a bunch of unmanaged yahoos in the beta release "program" at Gigabyte. This happens practically every other beta release.


I honestly have never seen so many problems with a bios before, tempted to just jump ship tbh.


----------



## Kargeras

Which one do you guys find more valuabe, AVX offsets or Uncore/Ring steps?

Is 1 AVX offset = 2 Uncore/Ring steps, less, more?

This for a CPU ratio of 50.


----------



## GeneO

Kargeras said:


> Which one do you guys find more valuabe, AVX offsets or Uncore/Ring steps?
> 
> Is 1 AVX offset = 2 Uncore/Ring steps, less, more?
> 
> This for a CPU ratio of 50.


They are different beasts, but AVX offset is more important. There isn't much that doesn't use AVX instructions these days, so by using an AVX offset, you are almost always limiting your OC mulltiplier. Also, jumping back and forth in multiplier due to AVX offset can affect stability.

Ring multiplier has less impact in overall performance. If you keep within 3 of the CPU multiplier, it has pretty insignificant impact. 

You can't equate the two.


----------



## Kargeras

Thank you for your prompt answer GeneO.

Are the CPUs in your signature 9900K or KS?


----------



## GeneO

Kargeras said:


> Thank you for your prompt answer GeneO.
> 
> Are the CPUs in your signature 9900K or KS?


8086k. No different behavior.


----------



## Kargeras

Seems impossible to get AVX 0 with Uncore 43 (default) on my 9900KS and stable in Linx + Prime95 (AVX enabled).

It's either that or I'm too squeamish about temperatures.

With everything disabled, voltage AUTO, AC=130, DC=130, LLC=Standard:
IOUT = 205 amps 
POUT = 248+ watts
CPU Package Power = 261 watts
IA Cores Power = 253 watts

... in LinX 0.9.6.
CPU Package Max = 97 celsius so far and 3rd residual doesn't even match already.
_Are these temps normal?_

Growing a bit frustrated.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Seems impossible to get AVX 0 with Uncore 43 (default) on my 9900KS and stable in Linx + Prime95 (AVX enabled).
> 
> It's either that or I'm too squeamish about temperatures.
> 
> With everything disabled, voltage AUTO, AC=130, DC=130, LLC=Standard:
> IOUT = 205 amps
> POUT = 248+ watts
> CPU Package Power = 261 watts
> IA Cores Power = 253 watts
> 
> ... in LinX 0.9.6.
> CPU Package Max = 97 celsius so far and 3rd residual doesn't even match already.
> _Are these temps normal?_
> 
> Growing a bit frustrated.


Dude, you're drawing **205 amps**. And somehow staying under 100C. Of course that's normal for an unsafe current load.
This stuff doesn't come free. You're already above the max amps (IOUT) limit of 193A.

Another thing is LinX is VERY VERY VERY hard to stabilize! it is the HARDEST STRESS in existance to stabilize. Stabilizing LinX requires a perfect combination of DDR memory speed, DDR voltage, RAM timings, proper CPU Vcore and proper VCCSA and VCCIO as well. And no--I can't help you with this (I know you're going to ask me for help). you're completely on your own here. But I will tell you that your Gflops is low. At 5 ghz you should be about 510 Gflops. Command rate 1T boosts gflops a lot. Also TFAW=16 and TRRD_S=4 boosts gflops as well. Don't stress so much about failing LinX. While Intel uses Linpack to test their chips for stock operation (base clocks) they do NOT test turbo boost with LinX.

And please cut back on the current load. You're putting too much amps into that chip. And don't bother dealing with LinX at 5 ghz. I spent MONTHS trying to get LinX stable at 4.7 ghz myself. That's how I Found out that a lower VRM CPU switching frequency is more stable than a higher CPU VRM switching rate/frequency. (always use 300 khz on Aorus Master).


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> And please cut back on the current load. You're putting too much amps into that chip. And don't bother dealing with LinX at 5 ghz. I spent MONTHS trying to get LinX stable at 4.7 ghz myself. That's how I Found out that a lower VRM CPU switching frequency is more stable than a higher CPU VRM switching rate/frequency. (always use 300 khz on Aorus Master).


The switching frequency is 300 khz since I first discovered your posts regarding it, ~4 weeks back or so.

LinX is indeed a pain but not the biggest imho.
AVX 0 is my biggest pain.

I can get 31 out of 33 residuals to match (and every other AVX test possible thrown at the CPU, including any of the Prime95 tests) but that's on AVX 1 and Uncore 45.

Thank you for the hints about RAM sub timings.
I know my GFLOPS are low and because of RAM, it just wasn't my 1st priority.

AVX0 + stability in AVX2 was one of my priorities... might as well give that one up.
I don't like the temps, the amps and the current draw myself.


----------



## Kargeras

If I could just find out what's causing the computer to reboot in idle with my adaptive (Normal+0.75mv) profile.... I would've called it a day a long time ago.
AC=40, DC=130 for that profile (used Power Saving preset actually).

Raising AC to 50 doesn't fix the problem.
Temps and everything are much better with that profile and I can live with AVX 1.

But I can't determine what's causing the random reboots at idle.
And everything is disabled, VT-d, EIST, all C-STATES, Speedshift etc.

*adaptive llama is sad*

P.S.

Ran into a WHEA error with AC/DC=40/130 in LinX.
Did not have any WHEA errors in the past when I used Power Saving profile which is supposed to have the same AC/DC values.
Raising AC to 50 eliminated the WHEA error.


----------



## lucasfrance

THANK YOU!


----------



## lucasfrance

KedarWolf said:


> YW.


THANK YOU!


----------



## Driller au

Kargeras said:


> If I could just find out what's causing the computer to reboot in idle with my adaptive (Normal+0.75mv) profile.... I would've called it a day a long time ago.
> AC=40, DC=130 for that profile.
> Raising AC to 75 doesn't fix the problem.
> Temps and everything are much better with that profile and I can live with AVX 1.
> 
> But I can't determine what's causing the random reboots at idle.
> And everything is disabled, VT-d, EIST, all C-STATES, Speedshift etc.
> 
> *adaptive llama is sad*


Enable just C3 c state and see if that helps with the reboots


----------



## Kargeras

Will do, thank you for the suggestion (having ALL C-STATES enabled or disabled makes no difference, still reboots).
Will report back.

I should also mention that hibernation is off => Windows Fast Startup disabled.
Sleep disabled.

And also the hidden Power Options in Windows 10 are now visible and set as:

Processor Performance Autonomous Mode = disabled.
Processor Energy Performance Preference Policy = 0%.


----------



## mjh74

Well they need to get F11 right soon, we're already at j, not many letters left!


----------



## wholeeo

So what's the go to UEFI for the Master? I lost interest around F11D.


----------



## Falkentyne

wholeeo said:


> So what's the go to UEFI for the Master? I lost interest around F11D.


Used f11e with fast microcodes for months, no problems. Tested modded f11i, didn't have any problems. F11j uses wrong code branch.


----------



## Kargeras

Same here, been on F11e (modded, fast microcodes etc.) for ~a month no with no issue whatsoever.

I should also add that previously I was using F11c (official) for a 2-3 weeks maybe.

Both scenarios (modded F11e and official F11c) were used for stress testing _only_.
I did not use any other BIOS versions before or after so my experience is _extremely limited_.

Memory training seems somewhat faster on F11e but that itself is not very well documented observation on my part.
Just a feeling.


----------



## Kargeras

Driller au said:


> Enable just C3 c state and see if that helps with the reboots


I am happy to report that following your suggestion, using the adaptive voltage profile (Normal+75mv) the computer did not reboot in ~6 hours.

I did test this as I did before:
1. fresh reboot
2. run some stress test (usually LinX or P95 with AVX enabled) for 10-15 minutes minimum, this time was LinX 0.9.6 with 33 residuals
3. didn't touch the computer for hours

_This is the 1st time it didn't reboot (in IDLE) in all my trials with adaptive voltage (Normal+-offset) with power saving settings in BIOS either enabled or disabled._

_4. I don't know how it behaves with medium load since I have none on that computer_

So thank you very much.
I will keep on tweaking the profile, stress test and report back.


----------



## Kargeras

In case someone will be browsing this and be wondering about differences between fixed voltage and adaptive voltage data while running LinX 0.9.6 for 33 residuals.

Common settings between the 2 profiles:

*CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
VCCIO: 1.20 | VCCSA: 1.25

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz | VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: Enabled (3200Mhz 14-14-14-34|[email protected], yes 1.36v not 1.35v)

VT-d: Disabled | EIST: Disabled | Intel Speedshift: Disabled*

-------

ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE | 29/33 matching residuals | (ambient temp 24.1 Celsius, no AC running):

_BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset

IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard

C-States: only C3 enabled_







-------

FIXED VOLTAGE | 28/33 matching residuals | (ambient temp 24.0 Celsius, no AC running):

_BIOS CPU Core: 1.33v | IA AC Loadline: 80 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: High

C-States: Disabled_







-------

Idle temperatures/voltages/etc. are not recorded as the screenshots were taken 10 seconds _after_ the tests started/stopped.
Otherwise, idle temperatures for CPU are +1-2 Celsius over ambient for adaptive profile and +6-7-8 Celsius over ambient for fixed profile.
Amps/voltages/etc. are also lower for adaptive.

Will post screenshots if anyone is interested.


----------



## Elric2a

Could you explain me those IA DC loadlines value? Mine are on auto for fixed vcore and 1/1 with offset 
Also what about the vaxg pwn I left this on auto whats the used of it? I put the other one at 300 but not this one. 

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## GeneO

Kargeras said:


> In case someone will be browsing this and be wondering about differences between fixed voltage and adaptive voltage data while running LinX 0.9.6 for 33 residuals.
> 
> Common settings between the 2 profiles:
> 
> *CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
> VCCIO: 1.2 | VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz | VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: Enabled (3200Mhz 14-14-14-34|[email protected], yes 1.36v not 1.35v)
> 
> VT-d: Disabled | EIST: Disabled | Intel Speedshift: Disabled*
> 
> -------
> 
> ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE | 29/33 matching residuals | (ambient temp 24.1 Celsius, no AC running):
> 
> _BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset
> 
> IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard
> 
> C-States: only C3 enabled_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------
> 
> FIXED VOLTAGE | 28/33 matching residuals | (ambient temp 24.0 Celsius, no AC running):
> 
> _BIOS CPU Core: 1.33v | IA AC Loadline: 80 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: High
> 
> C-States: Disabled_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------
> 
> Idle temperatures/voltages/etc. are not recorded as the screenshots were taken 10 seconds _after_ the tests started/stopped.
> Otherwise, idle temperatures for CPU are +1-2 Celsius over ambient for adaptive profile and +6-7-8 Celsius over ambient for fixed profile.
> Amps/voltages/etc. are also lower for adaptive.
> 
> Will post screenshots if anyone is interested.


Those VCCIO and VCCSA seem kind of high for XMP. Have you tried lowering them?


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Those VCCIO and VCCSA seem kind of high for XMP. Have you tried lowering them?


Crashing on AVX disabled 112k-112k in place FFT in prime95 is a 100% foolproof way to determine that your VCCIO and VCCSA are set too low.
(Only if you can pass small and smallest FFT preset with AVX disabled, but 112k-112k fails, especially if it fails on random threads that do not correspond to your weakest two cores, because failing small or smallest FFT AVX disabled is almost always vcore).

(first increase vcore +10mv. If the 112k in-place FFT errors do not go away but small FFT is fully stable, then it is always IMC related)


----------



## Kargeras

Elric2a said:


> Could you explain me those IA DC loadlines value? Mine are on auto for fixed vcore and 1/1 with offset


I wish I could explain but I'm afraid I don't fully comprehend what's going on.
It's more of a trial and error and observation-like approach.

*Theoretically*, for _fixed voltage_, AC and DC loadline values are ignored.
I see them affecting VID, amps, etc. values though using _fixed_ voltage.

e.g.: lowering AC values will lower VID, amps and temps, Package Power, IA Cores Power

DC loadline is said to act as a counter-balance to LLC.
I didn't play with that much, just tried to set it between 80 and 160 because LLC High = 80 and LLC Standard = 160.
I use LLC High for fixed and Standard for adaptive.

There are people here who might be able to explain it better.




Elric2a said:


> Also what about the vaxg pwn I left this on auto whats the used of it? I put the other one at 300 but not this one.


I just followed Falkentyne's observations on the matter and he concluded that using 300 kHz improves stability when using Z390 Aorus Master from Gigabyte.


----------



## Elric2a

Oh maybe that will help me then I've only switched one of those to 300..


But for adaptive I'm curious to know because I read always to put 1 and 1

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> Crashing on AVX disabled 112k-112k in place FFT in prime95 is a 100% foolproof way to determine that your VCCIO and VCCSA are set too low.


How long do you recommend running this test for?

Very valuable information, thank you.


----------



## Kargeras

Elric2a said:


> Oh maybe that will help me then I've only switched one of those to 300..
> 
> 
> But for adaptive I'm curious to know because I read always to put 1 and 1
> 
> Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


I don't know if that's true.
I don't know if that's false either. 

What I can tell is that when using AC/DC=1/1 (that's actual values, not ratio) one can determine the exact value of the VROUT (and VID?).
Then again, my understanding is limited in this respect.

I've a compilation of thoughts and sayings in my mind of various people here and elsewhere on these matters.
Some of them are conflicting, some not.


----------



## Kargeras

Elric2a said:


> Oh maybe that will help me then I've only switched one of those to 300..
> 
> 
> But for adaptive I'm curious to know because I read always to put 1 and 1
> 
> Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


What I can tell you though is that _properly understanding how AC/DC_ works in relationship 
with LLC and BIOS CPU Core voltage (be it adaptive or fixed) is critical to obtaining stability.

*That particular type of understanding* makes things significantly faster in searching for true stability.
_That and running specific tests for various parameters_.

e.g. Falkentyne's recommendation above for 112k-112k Prime95 (AVX disabled) for testing IO & SA voltages I find to be very useful.


----------



## Kargeras

I remember playing with them values at a certain point and reached no conclusion... yet.

I raised them to max. IO/SA=1.25/1.30 and lowered them to min. IO/SA=1.10/1.15 in order to not fail or have matching residuals in either LinX 0.9.6 or various Prime95 (AVX enabled) tests.
Did not reach the desired effect so left them at IO/SA=1.20/1.25.

I don't consider any of the 2 profiles posted earlier as 100% stable yet so I might end up still playing with IO/SA in the future.

I will report back if I find anything of value.

My chip might not be golden either.

I'm also using 4x16GBs sticks of RAM.
I don't know if that influences voltages or not but I would like to know one's opinion.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> How long do you recommend running this test for?
> 
> Very valuable information, thank you.


30 minutes to 1 hour. Especially if you get CPU Cache L0 error in HWinfo WHEA sensors area, and BSOD (system service exception, IRQ_L not less or equal, etc) its usually IMC related (with respect to hyperthreading)
If you increase CPU Vcore +10mv and the 112k errors do not go away, it is always IMC/memory when it starts accessing L3 cache space. So first try +10mv vcore.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> 30 minutes to 1 hour. Especially if you get CPU Cache L0 error in HWinfo WHEA sensors area, and BSOD (system service exception, IRQ_L not less or equal, etc) its usually IMC related (with respect to hyperthreading)
> If you increase CPU Vcore +10mv and the 112k errors do not go away, it is always IMC/memory when it starts accessing L3 cache space. So first try +10mv vcore.


Thank you, I appreciate concise input.

_In that note, would you be so kind as to make a short or long list of recommended stress tests for various parameters?_
It would help a a lot.

I also used to run 12k-12k fixed in Prime95 AVX enabled but I forgot to what purpose though. 

I'm beginning to make a structured compilation of things, sort of a guide to overclocking & *stability*.


----------



## Kargeras

Found this here.



> IA AC 160 => This sets the operating point
> IA DC 1 => This disables the Vdroop on VID in HWInfo so you can see what voltage is being requested.


There's really A LOT of information around, it's a pity it is not structured & schematic so people can have a methodical approach.

I'm trying myself to build such a guide but I'm a long way from completing it.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> I remember playing with them values at a certain point and reached no conclusion... yet.
> 
> I raised them to max. IO/SA=1.25/1.30 and lowered them to min. IO/SA=1.10/1.15 in order to not fail or have matching residuals in either LinX 0.9.6 or various Prime95 (AVX enabled) tests.
> Did not reach the desired effect so left them at IO/SA=1.20/1.25.
> 
> I don't consider any of the 2 profiles posted earlier as 100% stable yet so I might end up still playing with IO/SA in the future.
> 
> I will report back if I find anything of value.
> 
> My chip might not be golden either.


Gigabyte "Auto" Vcore (and OFFSET mode +0.00mv DVID offset) formula is simple.

first find vCPU--to find vCPU, set AC and DC Loadline to 1, boot to windows, look at VID at idle (C-states, speedshift, EIST, MUST BE DISABLED--your CPU must NOT downclock).

vCPU will change from 800 mhz to highest SINGLE CORE TURBO RATIO (x50 for 9900k, etc). vCPU will also change depending on temps too. Higher temps=higher vCPU. This scaling is greatest at x50 multiplier (+1.5mv every +1C or -1.5mv every -1C), it is lower at lower multipliers, disabled at x40 and below.

If you "Disable" thermal velocity boost voltage optimizations in your BIOS, vCPU will set VID as if CPU were 100C.

Ok now that that is out of the way, the rest is easy. It's elementary school math.

in millivolts:

Vcore=vCPU + (AC Loadline mOhms * Loadstep IOUT) - (Loadline calibration mOhms * IOUT) + vOffset (DVID mv).

Loadstep iOUT is important to VRM because load changes from one point to another. Loadstep is easy: dI=loadstep. dI=d1-d0. d1="new load in amps", d0=change in amps.
Example: if you were at 20 amps and then went to 100 amps, 100-20=80. so d0 is 80. This is important because the load can go up or down. But this is only for a change in load and it is subtracted from the previous load.
If d0 is 0, then dI=current amps, or equal to IOUT

So let us say your vCPU is 1200mv @ 5 ghz @ 30C, you are idle (0 amps) then you need 100 amps. offset=0mv, and loadline calibration is "Standard"=1.6 mOhms. AC Loadline=0.5 mOhms.

Vcore= 1200 + (0.5 * 100) - ( 1.6 * 100) + 0 = 1090mv at 30C.
If your CPU were at 80C instead of 30C, vCPU must be adjusted: 1.5mv * C, 50C difference from 30C to 80C: so: +75mv higher vCPU.

So.....
Vcore = 1275mv + (0.5 * 100) - (1.6 * 100) + 0 = 1165mv at 80C.

You can verify this by looking at VR VOUT.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> So let us say your vCPU is 1200mv @ 5 ghz @ 30C, you are idle (0 amps) then you need 100 amps. offset=0mv, and loadline calibration is "Standard"=1.6 mOhms. AC Loadline=0.5 mOhms.


In Gigabyte's BIOS that "AC Loadline=0.5 mOhms" would translate in a value of 50?
1 mOhm = 100
1.6 mOhms = 160 and so on?

It would be great if Asus, Gigabyte and the other manufacturers would use exactly the same dividers so people wouldn't have to "translate" their findings from an Asus forum to a ASRock one, to a EVGA one etc.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> In Gigabyte's BIOS that "AC Loadline=0.5 mOhms" would translate in a value of 50?
> 1 mOhm = 100
> 1.6 mOhms = 160 and so on?
> 
> It would be great if Asus, Gigabyte and the other manufacturers would use exactly the same dividers so people wouldn't have to "translate" their findings from an Asus forum to a ASRock one, to a EVGA one etc.


Yes. Gigabyte's values are 1/100 mOhm.
1/100 Ohm is a milliohm.

So a value of 100 is 100/100=1 mOhm
So a value of 1 is 1/100=0.01 mOhm.

Asus uses the old text in the BIOS (going to PM shamino about this), but they use 'raw' mohm values, so you can enter 0.01 directly in the BIOS, instead of 1.
Gigabyte uses /100 divider.


----------



## Kargeras

As per Falkentyne's recommendation, I ran an hour of 112k-112k fixed in Prime95 29.8 build 6 (which I always use anyway) with AVX disabled to test if IO/SA voltages are ok.

Here be the results for the following config:

ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE | (ambient temp 23.9 Celsius, no AC running):

_BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset

CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard | VCCIO: 1.20 | VCCSA: 1.25

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz | VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: Enabled (3200Mhz 14-14-14-34|[email protected], yes 1.36v not 1.35v)

VT-d: Disabled | EIST: Disabled | C-STATES: only C3 enabled | Intel Speedshift: Disabled_


----------



## Falkentyne

I saw this PM I got from @nucl3arlion a year ago. I will quote it here.

And now I am more confused. But this was done with an Asus board, not a Gigabyte...
I was unable to find any relationship between DC Loadline and Vcore at all.

@shamino1978 , @elmor can you two help out if you have time?




> According to Elmor:
> "AC in this case means load transients and describes how quickly the output capacitors discharge when hit with a load. It will help calculate the worst case output voltage (Vmin) at a certain load transient. If the CPU requirement for Vmin is 1.100V, the AC load-line is set to 1.0mohm and the largest expected load transient is 100A (ex 0A to 100A, or 50 to 150A), the largest possible output droop is 1.0mohm*100A = 100mV. This means if the CPU requests a VID of at least 1.100V+0.1V = 1.200V, the output voltage will never go below Vmin."
> Something like this:
> VID=Vcpu+ACLL*dI (dI=I1-I0)
> I can't reveal any dI dependence on CPU current lower than max. But I've got the same result with same current every time.
> So I found next algorithm:
> 1) Set DCLL=ACLL=0 and remember Vcpu (Vcpu=VID in this case) in idle and low/high load
> 2) Set DCLL=0, ACLL=LLC and remember ACLL droops (ACLL_droop=VID-Vcpu from (1)) in idle and low/high load
> 3) Now we can calculate final VID:
> VID=Vcpu-DCLL*I+ACLL_droop
> 
> Vdroop is not linked to VID, but we can predict it:
> Vcore=VID-vdroop+offset
> or
> Vcore=Vcpu-DCLL*I+ACLL_droop-LLC*I+offset.
> 
> But there little nuance:
> On Asus mobo i've got something interesting while testing adaptive vs offset:
> 
> Offset mode:
> VID=Vcpu-DCLL*I+ACLL*dI
> Vcore=VID-LLC*I+offset
> 
> Adaptive:
> non-turbo clocks: VID=Vcpu-DCLL*I+ACLL*dI+offset
> turbo clocks: VID=Vadapt+offset (Vadapt - additional turbo mode cpu core voltage, this setting overrides real VID while turbo)
> Vcore=VID-LLC*I
> 
> Offset value applies differently.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> I saw this PM I got from @nucl3arlion a year ago. I will quote it here.
> 
> And now I am more confused. But this was done with an Asus board, not a Gigabyte...
> I was unable to find any relationship between DC Loadline and Vcore at all.
> 
> 
> @shamino1978 , @elmor can you two help out if you have time?


I am confused too but most certainly far more confused than you are.

Otherwise, I confirm your finding that I couldn't find a relationship between DC Loadline and vCore.
If by vCore we mean VROUT on Gigabyte boards.

I finished the 12k-12k fixed test you suggested to test IO/SA voltages.
When you find the time, please do suggest more tests in the same manner.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> I am confused too but most certainly far more confused than you are.
> 
> Otherwise, I confirm your finding that I couldn't find a relationship between DC Loadline and vCore.
> If by vCore we mean VROUT on Gigabyte boards.
> 
> I finished the 12k-12k fixed test you suggested to test IO/SA voltages.
> When you find the time, please do suggest more tests in the same manner.


12k-12k tests cpu and L1/L2 cache only.

112k-112k tests IMC (with respect to hyperthreaded cores L3 cache).


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> 12k-12k tests cpu and L1/L2 cache only.
> 
> 112k-112k tests IMC (with respect to hyperthreaded cores L3 cache).


That be a typo on my part, apologies.
I meant 112k test I finished.

I believe the 2nd screenshot shows this though.


----------



## EarlZ

Kargeras said:


> Found this here.
> 
> 
> 
> There's really A LOT of information around, it's a pity it is not structured & schematic so people can have a methodical approach.
> 
> I'm trying myself to build such a guide but I'm a long way from completing it.


Looking forward to that guide, the information here is all around the place and sometimes a little too complex for most.


----------



## GeneO

Kargeras said:


> I remember playing with them values at a certain point and reached no conclusion... yet.
> 
> I raised them to max. IO/SA=1.25/1.30 and lowered them to min. IO/SA=1.10/1.15 in order to not fail or have matching residuals in either LinX 0.9.6 or various Prime95 (AVX enabled) tests.
> Did not reach the desired effect so left them at IO/SA=1.20/1.25.
> 
> I don't consider any of the 2 profiles posted earlier as 100% stable yet so I might end up still playing with IO/SA in the future.
> 
> I will report back if I find anything of value.
> 
> My chip might not be golden either.
> 
> I'm also using 4x16GBs sticks of RAM.
> I don't know if that influences voltages or not but I would like to know one's opinion.


Sometimes too high SA/IO voltages result in instability.


----------



## Kargeras

EarlZ said:


> Looking forward to that guide, the information here is all around the place and sometimes a little too complex for most.


Quite so and it's rather unfortunate.
Some people's contributions are massive and incredibly useful.

Until then I'm running Prime95 - Small (AVX enabled) for the X-nth time but I don't know why, LOL.
I forgot its specific use.
I know it's "demanding" and "for stability".

That's why I started writing down stuff in a structured manner.


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Sometimes too high SA/IO voltages result in instability.


I found some interesting stuff on Z490.
(Only for hyperthreading ENABLED chips as you do NOT get CPU Cache L0 errors when hyperthreading is disabled):

If you are too close to borderline vcore:

Lower VCCIO/VCCSA tends to improve AVX/FMA3 stability (less chance of CPU Cache L0 error in AVX), but can worsen SSE2 stability.
Higher VCCIO/VCCSA tends to improve SSE2 stability, but can worsen AVX stability. (Less chance of CPU Cache L0 error in SSE2).


----------



## Kargeras

GeneO said:


> They are different beasts, but AVX offset is more important. There isn't much that doesn't use AVX instructions these days, so by using an AVX offset, you are almost always limiting your OC mulltiplier. Also, jumping back and forth in multiplier due to AVX offset can affect stability.
> 
> Ring multiplier has less impact in overall performance. If you keep within 3 of the CPU multiplier, it has pretty insignificant impact.
> 
> You can't equate the two.


My question came in the context of not only achieving stability but also keeping voltages, watts, amps and temperatures in check.

For example, using this profile:

ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE:

_BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset

CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard | VCCIO: 1.20 | VCCSA: 1.25

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz | VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: Enabled (3200Mhz 14-14-14-34|[email protected], yes 1.36v not 1.35v)

VT-d: Disabled | EIST: Disabled | C-STATES: only C3 enabled | Intel Speedshift: Disabled_

... changing the Ring/Uncore from 45 to 47 hard locks the PC in LinX in the first 30 seconds.
Otherwise, with Ring/Uncore 45 it passes LinX and Prime95 (with AVX enabled) various torture tests with no problems.

AVX and Ring/Uncore both put a strain on the system.
I feel that 1 AVX offset >= 2 Ring/Uncore steps when it comes to voltages but it's a rather undocumented feeling.

Having said that, depending on the type of applications one uses, some user may favor higher Ring/Uncore and lower AVX offsets while being able to maintain the same BIOS settings. 
_Maybe even lower them_ *a bit* for I feel the necessities for 1 AVX offset are *a abit* higher than for 2 Ring/Uncore steps.
I don't know if such applications or user scenarios exist but it's not impossible to imagine.

In other words, for my chip at least, _keeping the same BIOS settings_, I think I would remain stable in the following combinations:

CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 1 | Ring/Uncore 45
or
CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 2 | Ring/Uncore 47
or
CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 3 | Ring Uncore 49

I know for a fact that _CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 0 | Ring/Uncore 43 (default)_ requires more than any of the above, for my chip.
Which is a shame.

If I should dwell deeper into such scenarios (lower AVX for higher Ring/Uncore) and find meaningful information, I will report back.


----------



## AndrejB

I found when using auto cpu voltage, llc standard got the following after playing Apex:

Ac/Dc 100/130 = min vrout ~1.114
Ac/Dc 100/160 = min vrout ~1.096


----------



## Kargeras

Further observations on stress testing / obtaining stability via 2 different approaches, adaptive (DVID) and fixed voltage:

Test run is Prime95 v29.8 build 6 - Small with AVX enabled, for 1 hour in an ambient of ~24 Celsius with no AC running & NO window or door to outside open.
Rig configuration can be found in signature.

The purpose of these observations is to compare the 2 profiles regarding voltages, amps, watts, VID etc. while sharing many common settings in BIOS, which are:

*CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
VCCIO: 1.20 | VCCSA: 1.25

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz | VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: Enabled (3200Mhz 14-14-14-34|[email protected], yes 1.36v not 1.35v)

VT-d: Disabled | EIST: Disabled | Intel Speedshift: Disabled*
---

ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE | (ambient temp 24.4 Celsius, no AC running):

_BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset

IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard 

C-STATES: only C3 enabled_







---

FIXED VOLTAGE | (ambient temp 24.3 Celsius, no AC running):

_BIOS CPU Core: 1.330v

IA AC Loadline: 80 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: High 

C-STATES: Disabled_






---

The fixed voltage test "chose" to fail this time, 2 workers stopped at ~50 minute mark.
The same config passed LinX 0.9.6 a few hours back, as exemplified here, but that didn't seem to matter. 

The objective of this comparison is to underline the differences between adaptive and fixed.
It would've been better if both had passed as the LinX test earlier is not relevant because of the nature of how LinX runs.

---
Adaptive IOUT: 192.5 amps (within Intel specs of 193 amps)
Fixed IOUT: 199.75 amps (exceeding Intel specs)

Adaptive POUT: 222,5 watts 
Fixed POUT: 230 watts

Adaptive CPU Package Power: 229.71 watts
Fixed CPU Package Power: 251.05 watts

Adaptive IA Cores Power: 223.135 watts
Fixed IA Cores Power: 244.430 watts

Adaptive min. VR OUT: 1.156v
Fixed min. VR OUT: 1.170v

Adaptive max. temp: 91
Fixed max. temp: 95
---

Assuming the fixed voltage profile would've passed the test, *everything is higher*.
It's true however that AC loadline for adaptive is 50 and for fixed is 80. 

Whenever I will find a _truly stable_ fixed voltage profile that is able to pass all the tests that the adaptive profile passes, I will report back for other comparisons.
Changing fixed voltage from 1.330v to 1.320v yields the same fail at around ~50 minutes mark.
Same settings of course.

My guess is that the fixed voltage profile fails because of transients, which are worse as the LLC increases?
Adaptive uses Standard LLC while fixed uses High LLC.

I'm kinda bummed (wouldn't be the 1st time) that 1.330v failed SMALL AVX enabled Prime95.
It's also not the first time a config passes LinX and fails SMALL though.
I also remember going up to 1.350v and still failing SMALL.

_Hence, I feel I'm missing something of most importance.LEL._

Couldn't really find a fix for... fixed.


----------



## Kargeras

For the sake of completeness, VT-d was enabled for the fixed profile earlier and for the LinX comparison a few posts before that.
Disabling VT-d did make the SMALL AVX enabled test run for 9 minutes longer passing the 1h mark.

Test failed though after 3 minutes afterwards at 1h:03 mark because 2 workers stopped.
Count the number of "0 error, 0 warnings" and see there are only 15 instead of 16.

Might as well fooled myself by stopping the test 1 minute earlier and imagined that it passed.


----------



## Kargeras

For the fixed voltage profile above, reducing AC from 80 to 50 results in WHEA error.

The error appeared at the 1h:01s mark running Prime95 AVX enabled - SMALL test.


----------



## Elric2a

Kargeras said:


> For the fixed voltage profile above, reducing AC from 80 to 50 results in WHEA error.
> 
> 
> 
> The error appeared at the 1h:01s mark running Prime95 AVX enabled - SMALL test.


Isn't it supposed to be ignored in fixed voltage? I don't understand at all that setting its on auto for me on fixed and 1/1 on adaptive. 

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

Elric2a said:


> Isn't it supposed to be ignored in fixed voltage? I don't understand at all that setting its on auto for me on fixed and 1/1 on adaptive.
> 
> Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


AC/DC Loadlines are bypassed on fixed vcore.


----------



## Elric2a

Ok then but on offset? I always read to put 1/1 so I don't understand those values


----------



## Kargeras

Elric2a said:


> Isn't it supposed to be ignored in fixed voltage? I don't understand at all that setting its on auto for me on fixed and 1/1 on adaptive.
> 
> Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


They seem to be ignored in fixed voltage mode.

_However_, AC loadline affects VID, CPU Package Power and IA Cores Power even in *fixed voltage*, as exemplified below (all settings identical, except AC):

AC=80 | DC=130




AC=50 | DC=130




With AC=50 => VID, CPU Package Power and IA Cores Power are lower than with AC=80.
I can't seem to detect influencing other parameters.


----------



## Kargeras

I see in your signature that you have a 9900K at 5Ghz @ 1.25v.

Can you please elaborate your settings, AVX, Ring/Uncore, XMP, LLC etc. please?

Sounds like a dream compared to my chip.


----------



## Elric2a

Here are my settings but it requieres more test though. Only did large occt avx2 for 2h, didn't managed to find more time but no crashes with those settings for more than a week


----------



## Kargeras

Oh, wow, thanks for sharing.

1.240v for CPU Ratio 50 and AVX 0.

If that is stable, I am most impressed.
Congrats dude!


----------



## Elric2a

I need more long test though, it's not a 100% win. but also i'm on turbo LLC, i was trying to see if i can lower it 

Those are values after 2H occt large avx


----------



## EarlZ

Kargeras said:


> My question came in the context of not only achieving stability but also keeping voltages, watts, amps and temperatures in check.
> 
> For example, using this profile:
> 
> ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE:
> 
> _BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset
> 
> CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
> IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard | VCCIO: 1.20 | VCCSA: 1.25
> 
> CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz | VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz
> 
> XMP: Enabled (3200Mhz 14-14-14-34|[email protected], yes 1.36v not 1.35v)
> 
> VT-d: Disabled | EIST: Disabled | C-STATES: only C3 enabled | Intel Speedshift: Disabled_
> 
> ... changing the Ring/Uncore from 45 to 47 hard locks the PC in LinX in the first 30 seconds.
> Otherwise, with Ring/Uncore 45 it passes LinX and Prime95 (with AVX enabled) various torture tests with no problems.
> 
> AVX and Ring/Uncore both put a strain on the system.
> I feel that 1 AVX offset >= 2 Ring/Uncore steps when it comes to voltages but it's a rather undocumented feeling.
> 
> Having said that, depending on the type of applications one uses, some user may favor higher Ring/Uncore and lower AVX offsets while being able to maintain the same BIOS settings.
> _Maybe even lower them_ *a bit* for I feel the necessities for 1 AVX offset are *a abit* higher than for 2 Ring/Uncore steps.
> I don't know if such applications or user scenarios exist but it's not impossible to imagine.
> 
> In other words, for my chip at least, _keeping the same BIOS settings_, I think I would remain stable in the following combinations:
> 
> CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 1 | Ring/Uncore 45
> or
> CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 2 | Ring/Uncore 47
> or
> CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 3 | Ring Uncore 49
> 
> I know for a fact that _CPU Ratio 50 | AVX 0 | Ring/Uncore 43 (default)_ requires more than any of the above, for my chip.
> Which is a shame.
> 
> If I should dwell deeper into such scenarios (lower AVX for higher Ring/Uncore) and find meaningful information, I will report back.



I am going to try adaptive voltage but what do they (AC/DC) do at 50 and 130 with adaptive, I dont have a full grasp on those values and I currently use AC60 and DC160 and all I change is the AC values to get more voltage.


----------



## Kargeras

Elric2a said:


> I need more long test though, it's not a 100% win. but also i'm on turbo LLC, i was trying to see if i can lower it
> 
> Those are values after 2H occt large avx


Can you give LinX 0.9.6 (only Korean version exists) or Prime95 v29.8 build 6 - Small test with AVX enabled a try?

I will try OCCT too so I can compare results, for now I have no reference.


----------



## Kargeras

EarlZ said:


> I am going to try adaptive voltage but what do they (AC/DC) do at 50 and 130 with adaptive, I dont have a full grasp on those values and I currently use AC60 and DC160 and all I change is the AC values to get more voltage.


I don't have a very good understanding myself.
Hence the struggle. 

I'm going to quote Falkentyne, credit goes to him.
To get some perspective on things, here are the preset values for CPU (8 cores) Internal AC/DC Load Line (not sure which mainboard):



> Auto: 1.0/1.3 mOhms (4.7 ghz) | 1.3/1.3 mOhms (5 ghz)
> Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
> Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
> Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
> Extreme: 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)


Here and here are some reads on the subject.
There are many more reads to be found in this forum or reddit.

I wish I could be of more actual help but I don't want to pretend I actually know the deep intricacies of this matter.


----------



## Kargeras

EarlZ said:


> I am going to try adaptive voltage but what do they (AC/DC) do at 50 and 130 with adaptive, I dont have a full grasp on those values and I currently use AC60 and DC160 and all I change is the AC values to get more voltage.


What I can tell you though is that when one is using one of the 2 adaptive modes (DVID or SVID), LLC level should not be very high.
LLC Standard, Low or in some cases maybe Medium can be used.

DC is supposed to act as counter-LLC(?).
So whatever value your LLC has, DC has to match it somewhat.
Be it approximately or identical.

Here, another quote:



Falkentyne said:


> DC Loadline is used to match VRM Loadline (your loadline calibration vdroop). DC Loadline is a prediction for power measurements (e.g. CPU Package Power) where it tries to "predict" VOUT via vdroop. So DC Loadline applies its own "loadline calibration" to the CPU VID reporting.
> 
> If you set DC Loadline to match loadline calibration's values, both in mOhms, this will make VR VOUT (+/- DVID) line up with CPU VID (without DVID).
> 
> Standard/Normal: 1.6 mOhms (=160)
> Low: 1.3 mOhms (=130)
> Medium: 1.0 mOhms , etc
> High: 0.8 mOhms
> Turbo: 0.4 mOhms
> Extreme: 0.2 mOhms
> Ultra Ex: 0 mOhms.


----------



## EarlZ

That just goes beyond me, is there a set and forget value for using adaptive voltage?


----------



## Kargeras

EarlZ said:


> That just goes beyond me, is there a set and forget value for using adaptive voltage?


Probably Power Saving preset which has the values of AC=40 | DC=130.
That coupled with LLC Standard.

I can't stress enough the critical importance of understanding the relationship of AC|DC with LLC & Co. for a successful overclock in any of the 2 adaptive modes.
I'm not there yet either so I feel you.


----------



## EarlZ

Kargeras said:


> Probably Power Saving preset which has the values of AC=40 | DC=130.
> That coupled with LLC Standard.
> 
> I can't stress enough the critical importance of understanding the relationship of AC|DC with LLC & Co. for a successful overclock in any of the 2 adaptive modes.
> I'm not there yet either so I feel you.


Yeah, I think this is the reason why I cant do 5Ghz and my 4.9Ghz requires tons of voltage.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Hey fam. So, I was creeping on some old posts and is it true that these Aorus Z390 boards you can't manually tune RTL and IOL values? I have my memory OC'd to 4000mhz with some garbage RTLs. From what I've read here, 68/70 seems to be the values that the BIOS for these boards assign for 4000mhz. I rmb reachthesky posting before that they were able to get much better latency at 3900 than 4000, possibly because of the RTLs that the board sets for 3900mhz or less. For some reason, I can't boot at 3733-3900 with my other timings set the same. No idea why. Maybe I'll just have to set all 2ndary and 3rtiary timings to auto and try tuning like 3866 from scratch.

In short:

1) is it possible to manually set RTLs with a Z390 Aorus Ultra and the BIOS settings to actually take, or is this a known bug with the BIOS for these boards?
2) alternatively, is there any way to get an Aorus Z390 board to train 4000mhz with RTLs lower than 68/70? Any
3) if not, would it be worth it for gaming performance to try and tune 3900mhz or less just to get lower RTLs?
4) is there any reason any of y'all can think why my kit won't boot at between 3733-3900 with the same 2ndary and 3rtiary timings that I have set below? Or am I dumb and should just start tuning those timings from scratch?

P.S. the below posted settings are, I believe, fully stable. My primaries are the absolute best that I've been able to stabilize at any voltage. CR1/T1 won't boot at any voltage. I tuned tRFC a while ago, but I recall that 380 was the best that I could do at this frequency. I just kind of arbitrarily set tREFI to 25000, but it could probably do fine with better.


----------



## tikiro

*z390 aorus master Hpet*

Hi everyone
im looking for z390 aorus master bios with hpet disabled
in winraid i found this thread but the modded bios (f11e) link is expired... https://www.win-raid.com/t5969f54-REQUEST-Gigabyte-Aourus-Z-Master-Disable-HPET-1.html
bios link https://ufile.io/ne2xjyz6

i wonder if anyone can upload this or any modded bios with hpet disabled


----------



## philhalo66

Anyone know what thickness the VRM thermal pad is on the Aorus Pro? Thinking mine is messed up thats the only thing that could explain my mosfet temps.


----------



## Elric2a

What is the deal with modded bios? What are the benefits from it? I am on F11c. Thanks 

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## GeneO

Elric2a said:


> What is the deal with modded bios? What are the benefits from it? I am on F11c. Thanks
> 
> Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


Not much besides updated RST EFI drivers and older, better performance, but less secure microcodes. I mod mine for just those two items. Any other changes, like the EFI network and EFI Internal Graphics GOP drivers, only affect the pre-boot (BIOS) environment, so if they work in the BIOS, there is no reason to update them (and no reason at all for updating the GOP if you are using a graphics card and not the IGP for your boot monitor).


----------



## Kargeras

GeneO said:


> Not much besides updated RST EFI drivers and older, better performance, but less secure microcodes. I mod mine for just those two items. Any other changes, like the EFI network and EFI Internal Graphics GOP drivers, only affect the pre-boot (BIOS) environment, so if they work in the BIOS, there is no reason to update them (and no reason at all for updating the GOP if you are using a graphics card and not the IGP for your boot monitor).


How do I know if the BIOS is using the IGP or the nVidia card for example?


----------



## GeneO

Kargeras said:


> How do I know if the BIOS is using the IGP or the nVidia card for example?


Do you have your monitor that your BIOS displays on connected to a graphics card or the processor integrated graphics? If it is a graphics card, it uses the GOP that is embedded in VIDEO BIOS of the card, if it is the integrated graphics it uses the GOP driver embedded in the BIOS. 

The GOP is only used in the BIOS. As you boot to Windows, display graphics transitions to the Windows drivers (for the IGP or the video card) and the EFI GOP driver is no longer used so is not important.


----------



## computertechy

Elric2a said:


> I need more long test though, it's not a 100% win. but also i'm on turbo LLC, i was trying to see if i can lower it
> 
> Those are values after 2H occt large avx


It does look like you have a good chip on your hands.

BUT

Run a Small data set in AVX/AVX2.

Goodluck.


----------



## Elric2a

No I won't run that I already hit 90c on small without avx it will be too warm I'm sure I won't pass it and honestly I don't see what can push my cpu to yjie extend in real life situations  

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Elric2a

computertechy said:


> It does look like you have a good chip on your hands.
> 
> 
> 
> BUT
> 
> 
> 
> Run a Small data set in AVX/AVX2.
> 
> 
> 
> Goodluck.


No I won't run that I already hit 90c on small without avx it will be too warm I'm sure I won't pass it and honestly I don't see what can push my cpu to yjie extend in real life situations [emoji4]

Also should I try to rise vcore and lower llc? 

Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## computertechy

Elric2a said:


> No I won't run that I already hit 90c on small without avx it will be too warm I'm sure I won't pass it and honestly I don't see what can push my cpu to yjie extend in real life situations [emoji4]
> 
> Also should I try to rise vcore and lower llc?
> 
> Envoyé de mon SM-G973F en utilisant Tapatalk


i tried your settings last night and was able to pass occt large like you but when i got into Call of duty Warzone, it crashed after 10-20 minutes.

if your system is stable leave it as it is. All chips are different so i can't tell you what to use but you are well within safe voltage and i personally would go lower on llc as that adds heat. 

my 24/7 is ratio 50, uncore 47, 1.36v, llc high. small ffts max temp is 80.c after 1 hour with 28.c ambient.


----------



## Elric2a

I played warzone yesterday with those settings and no issue 
Small ftt for me is more 90c with those settings, why is it so high? we have same ambiant but what is your cooling?


----------



## computertechy

Elric2a said:


> I played warzone yesterday with those settings and no issue
> Small ftt for me is more 90c with those settings, why is it so high? we have same ambiant but what is your cooling?


2 x 360 rads push n pull and direct die. 90.c is damn impressive with a H150i!!!


----------



## Elric2a

Ah really it's not that bad? I thought it was awful.


----------



## computertechy

Elric2a said:


> Ah really it's not that bad? I thought it was awful.


The 9900 is a damn hot chip, the stress tests are complete overkill for them and like you said earlier, normal usage the temp is fine.


----------



## Elric2a

Allo good then i'll leave it as it is and enjoy I guess


----------



## computertechy

Elric2a said:


> Allo good then i'll leave it as it is and enjoy I guess


It's always good to get a second opinion. If 90.c worries you, you can add avx offset. Imho the main thing is keeping voltages and amp limits safe as that will keep temps down!


----------



## Elric2a

computertechy said:


> It's always good to get a second opinion. If 90.c worries you, you can add avx offset. Imho the main thing is keeping voltages and amp limits safe as that will keep temps down!


My other settings seems fine to you ? I was wondering if I should keep EIST and speed shift on.

For avx offset maybe I should buuuut i find it frustrating !

Also is there a big difference between balanced and high performance power plan in windows?


----------



## computertechy

Elric2a said:


> My other settings seems fine to you ? I was wondering if I should keep EIST and speed shift on.
> 
> For avx offset maybe I should buuuut i find it frustrating !
> 
> Also is there a big difference between balanced and high performance power plan in windows?


i just leave those settings at default, no idea whether the power plan affects performance, i just run on high performance profile.


I forgot who the person was that suggested using a 300khz switch rate, Thank you!!!!!

i just managed over 1 hour burn in prime & furmark @ 50 ratio, 47 ring, High LLC, 1.330v.... extremely happy!


----------



## Elric2a

Nice temps indeed. When I have time maybe i'll give lower LLC / higher vcore a try.


----------



## Falkentyne

computertechy said:


> i just leave those settings at default, no idea whether the power plan affects performance, i just run on high performance profile.
> 
> 
> I forgot who the person was that suggested using a 300khz switch rate, Thank you!!!!!
> 
> i just managed over 1 hour burn in prime & furmark @ 50 ratio, 47 ring, High LLC, 1.330v.... extremely happy!


Was me. You're welcome.


----------



## Elric2a

Will there be a huge temperature gap between

Max performance
Speed shift disabled
EIST disabled

Or

normal performance
Speed shift enabled
EIST enabled.

Right now i have:
Speedshift enabled
c states disabled :
Power plan windows : normal


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

KrampusKlaus said:


> Hey fam. So, I was creeping on some old posts and is it true that these Aorus Z390 boards you can't manually tune RTL and IOL values? I have my memory OC'd to 4000mhz with some garbage RTLs. From what I've read here, 68/70 seems to be the values that the BIOS for these boards assign for 4000mhz. I rmb reachthesky posting before that they were able to get much better latency at 3900 than 4000, possibly because of the RTLs that the board sets for 3900mhz or less. For some reason, I can't boot at 3733-3900 with my other timings set the same. No idea why. Maybe I'll just have to set all 2ndary and 3rtiary timings to auto and try tuning like 3866 from scratch.
> 
> In short:
> 
> 1) is it possible to manually set RTLs with a Z390 Aorus Ultra and the BIOS settings to actually take, or is this a known bug with the BIOS for these boards?
> 2) alternatively, is there any way to get an Aorus Z390 board to train 4000mhz with RTLs lower than 68/70? Any
> 3) if not, would it be worth it for gaming performance to try and tune 3900mhz or less just to get lower RTLs?
> 4) is there any reason any of y'all can think why my kit won't boot at between 3733-3900 with the same 2ndary and 3rtiary timings that I have set below? Or am I dumb and should just start tuning those timings from scratch?
> 
> P.S. the below posted settings are, I believe, fully stable. My primaries are the absolute best that I've been able to stabilize at any voltage. CR1/T1 won't boot at any voltage. I tuned tRFC a while ago, but I recall that 380 was the best that I could do at this frequency. I just kind of arbitrarily set tREFI to 25000, but it could probably do fine with better.


I can't speak for reachthesky by I can share with you what works for me. Start by setting ONLY the primary timings + tRC + tcwl. Try tcwl=CL or try tcwl= CL minus 1 or minus 2. tRC= CL+tRAS for aorus z390 boards for the most part. See what trains, then throw it in a memtest right away to see if it can be stabilized with those primaries. If you error, mess around with vccsa/vccio/dram voltage. You can also try adjusting dram training voltage if it gives you trouble training, sometimes too little isn't enough and sometimes too much causes it not to train, you have to try each tick. 

1)I'm not familiar with z390 aorus ultra so i'm not sure
2)4000mhz and higher all have subpar rtls, regardless of ramkit and primaries used. If you are gaming, 4000 and higher is a waste on z390 aorus boards for daily use due to subpar rtls/iols.
3) Yes it is worth it to tune 3900mhz for lower rtls/iols. Latency difference is 1.5ns difference between cas14-3900(35.0ns) and cas15-4133(36.4ns). Choosing 4133 here results in crappy 1% lows and crappy minimum fps compared to 3900.
4)Your kit isn't booting with the secondary tertiary timings because tWTR_S and tWTR_L are too low for a low latency 3900 configuration on 4 dimms on aorus z390 boards. Start with the instructions at the beginning of my response. Adjust voltages till stable, then do each secondary timing one by one. Memtest the lowest stable value, make sure you measure aida64 performance as well to ensure you are getting improved performance before moving onto the next timing.


----------



## JMattes

I own the Z390 Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi and I can't get it to boot with 64gb of RAM. 
Using (4) sticks of the G.Skill TridentZ 16gb DDR4 3200

The CPU on the Motherboard is the 8700k, not over clocked. 
I am running it as a server so its Win10 on a M.2 the Ram and the CPU, no video card. 

It was working for a bit then it started randomly crashing and not posting on reboot. I took out a set of 32gb and its been fine since.. but since its a server I need the 64gb..

I've tried playing with the various settings (nothing too in depth) just the profiles, what is is calls XML or something? Couldnt figure it out, eventually gave up due to server down time. Reverted the bio settings to default as well.. cant remember when I last flashed the bios with an update.. should I try that? 

Here is link to RAM
https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232413?Item=N82E16820232413

Any help is appreciated


----------



## Lurifaks

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I can't speak for reachthesky


LOL you are reachthesky


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Lurifaks said:


> LOL you are reachthesky



No sir.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> No sir.


It's obvious. Reachthesky knows more about RTL's than anyone on this thread and he put in more work on it than anyone on this thread. That being said RTLs are hopelessly broken on both Z390 and Z490 gigabyte boards.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> It's obvious. Reachthesky knows more about RTL's than anyone on this thread and he put in more work on it than anyone on this thread. That being said RTLs are hopelessly broken on both Z390 and Z490 gigabyte boards.



Sorry but I am not who you think I am. Anyone that owns one of these boards that has the will to test/tune and the will to read through this owner's club for memory overclocking tips all figure out the same thing - 3900 is optimal. Does that mean everyone is reachthesky? Of course not. There are other people who repeat similar information to what you say about loadlines falkentyne, I guess those people must be you because they know/understand loadlines? See how silly that sounds now?


----------



## GeneO

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Sorry but I am not who you think I am. Anyone that owns one of these boards that has the will to test/tune and the will to read through this owner's club for memory overclocking tips all figure out the same thing - 3900 is optimal. Does that mean everyone is reachthesky? Of course not. There are other people who repeat similar information to what you say about loadlines falkentyne, I guess those people must be you because they know/understand loadlines? See how silly that sounds now?


We all know, it's OK.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

GeneO said:


> We all know, it's OK.



Listen, I been ocing chips for 10 years. I bought this PC off craigs list in April. I'm not who you think I am.


----------



## JMattes

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Listen, I been ocing chips for 10 years. I bought this PC off craigs list in April. I'm not who you think I am.


This forum isnt what it used to be either...
Guess were all in the same boat.


----------



## Kargeras

I've been browsing this forum for a while and saw a lot of deleted messages from 2 banned users.

Why was reachthesky banned, he seemed very, very active?


----------



## KedarWolf

Kargeras said:


> I've been browsing this forum for a while and saw a lot of deleted messages from 2 banned users.
> 
> Why was reachthesky banned, he seemed very, very active?


From what I understand they were banned for wearing a fuchsia shirt with purple corduroy pants. 

Seriously though, we never find out why anyone was banned.


----------



## JMattes

What I would like to find out though....
Is why my motherboard won't boot with 64gb of ram.

If anyone is interested in helping a fellow user out, I'd appreicate.
The post was on the other page.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> . But I will tell you that your Gflops is low. At 5 ghz you should be about 510 Gflops. Command rate 1T boosts gflops a lot. Also TFAW=16 and TRRD_S=4 boosts gflops as well.


I expected 1T to boost GFLOPS and it did with ~17.

My XMP default values are TFAW=39 and TRRD_S=6. This is 2T.
Changing to TFAW=16 and TRRDS=4 the GFLOPS difference I found to be insignificant. Also 2T.
---


XMP all default & 2T; TFAW=39 | TRRD_S=6 (default values)
Apologies for lack of image showing RAM timings, wasn't my concern at the time of the test.
You'll just have to take my word for it.





XMP all default & 2T; TFAW=16 | TRRD_S=4 (the only 2 changes from default)





XMP all default except _*1T*_; TFAW=39 | TRRD_S=6 (default values)





Maybe changes to TFAW and TRRD_S will have greater influence on GFLOPS with 1T.
I'm not there yet since 1T had 8 errors in HCI Memtest v7.0 Pro after 200% at 1.37v.

Now testing 1T again at 1.38v.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I can't speak for reachthesky by I can share with you what works for me. Start by setting ONLY the primary timings + tRC + tcwl. Try tcwl=CL or try tcwl= CL minus 1 or minus 2. tRC= CL+tRAS for aorus z390 boards for the most part. See what trains, then throw it in a memtest right away to see if it can be stabilized with those primaries. If you error, mess around with vccsa/vccio/dram voltage. You can also try adjusting dram training voltage if it gives you trouble training, sometimes too little isn't enough and sometimes too much causes it not to train, you have to try each tick.
> 
> 1)I'm not familiar with z390 aorus ultra so i'm not sure
> 2)4000mhz and higher all have subpar rtls, regardless of ramkit and primaries used. If you are gaming, 4000 and higher is a waste on z390 aorus boards for daily use due to subpar rtls/iols.
> 3) Yes it is worth it to tune 3900mhz for lower rtls/iols. Latency difference is 1.5ns difference between cas14-3900(35.0ns) and cas15-4133(36.4ns). Choosing 4133 here results in crappy 1% lows and crappy minimum fps compared to 3900.
> 4)Your kit isn't booting with the secondary tertiary timings because tWTR_S and tWTR_L are too low for a low latency 3900 configuration on 4 dimms on aorus z390 boards. Start with the instructions at the beginning of my response. Adjust voltages till stable, then do each secondary timing one by one. Memtest the lowest stable value, make sure you measure aida64 performance as well to ensure you are getting improved performance before moving onto the next timing.


Thank you so much! I guess I have another week+ of memtesting ahead of me again.

Btw, I'm only using 2 dimms. I've strongly considered getting another set to improve latency, but I'm not sold on the cost of performance being worth it. Especially because Team Dark Pro 3200 CL14 are about $25 overpriced rn compared to similar kits, and I'd rather spend that extra $ on a new GPU come the end of the year.

Do you have any recommendations for tWTR_S and tWTR_L to aim for with 2x8 @ 3900hmz?


----------



## Kargeras

JMattes said:


> What I would like to find out though....
> Is why my motherboard won't boot with 64gb of ram.
> 
> If anyone is interested in helping a fellow user out, I'd appreicate.
> The post was on the other page.


I have 4x16GBs=64GB of RAM too.

Since RAM overclocking isn't my main priority I knew I could take "the risk" of having more RAM capacity than "the recommended" 16GBs or 32GBs.

There are at least 2 things that can help you:

1. DRAM voltage
2. DRAM training voltage

What are those voltages for you?


----------



## Kargeras

JMattes said:


> What I would like to find out though....
> Is why my motherboard won't boot with 64gb of ram.
> 
> If anyone is interested in helping a fellow user out, I'd appreicate.
> The post was on the other page.


My kit is that from the signature.

I should also add this:

My kit is rated at 1.35v.
I found that with XMP enabled (and nothing changed) it would fail HCI Memtest and/or TM5+Extreme Anta7 .cfg.

However, raising the DRAM voltage to 1.36 it would pass with flying colors.
My Z390 Master might undervolt a bit the DRAM side of things.

Also, raising DRAM Training Voltage to 1.36v would eliminate any boot difficulties.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Kargeras said:


> My kit is that from the signature.
> 
> I should also add this:
> 
> My kit is rated at 1.35v.
> I found that with XMP enabled (and nothing changed) it would fail HCI Memtest and/or TM5+Extreme Anta7 .cfg.
> 
> However, raising the DRAM voltage to 1.36 it would pass with flying colors.
> My Z390 Master might undervolt a bit the DRAM side of things.
> 
> Also, raising DRAM Training Voltage to 1.36v would eliminate any boot difficulties.


I had the exact same experience with my Team Dark Pro 3200mhz CL14 kit.

XMP was perfectly stable when I ran it in my old ASrock ab350 Pro 4. But on my Z390 Ultra, XMP spat out errors until I manually increased vdimm from 1.35v to 1.36v. Based on the DDR readings on HWINFO64, I also assumed that maybe the board was undervolting.


----------



## KedarWolf

GeneO said:


> You do realize once windows is booting, the EFI GOP driver is no longer used for internal graphics, the windows device driver takes over - the GOP provides graphics for the pre-boot environment only so makes no difference for your secondary display. Same for Ethernet UNDI. It is a pre-boot EFI driver intended for providing the capability to load and boot an OS image over the network. So neither matters for Windows. I think RST version is important if you are booting the windows image from the RST raid volume, as it presents the raid volume to the boot loader so it can get the windows image to boot (the volume gets handed off to the windows RST drivers at some point).
> 
> VIDEO BIOS used to provide some OS functionality, but not the GOP.


From the maker of UBU Tool.


"@KedarWolf

LAN modules I do not update. They do not make sense at all.
GOP driver is essentially VBIOS. Without it, there will be no video kernel initialization. The driver is responsible not only for stable operation in BIOS, but also in the OS."


----------



## Kargeras

KrampusKlaus said:


> I had the exact same experience with my Team Dark Pro 3200mhz CL14 kit.
> 
> XMP was perfectly stable when I ran it in my old ASrock ab350 Pro 4. But on my Z390 Ultra, XMP spat out errors until I manually increased vdimm from 1.35v to 1.36v. Based on the DDR readings on HWINFO64, I also assumed that maybe the board was undervolting.


Don't forget DRAM Training Voltage.

Inability to boot might have more to do with _DRAM Training Voltage_ than DRAM Voltage.


----------



## Kargeras

KrampusKlaus said:


> I had the exact same experience with my Team Dark Pro 3200mhz CL14 kit.
> 
> XMP was perfectly stable when I ran it in my old ASrock ab350 Pro 4. But on my Z390 Ultra, XMP spat out errors until I manually increased vdimm from 1.35v to 1.36v. Based on the DDR readings on HWINFO64, I also assumed that maybe the board was undervolting.


Also, Gigabyte's reputation on DRAM overclocking is not stellar.
Cool VRMs is said to be Gigabyte's strong point for Z390.

ASUS is the flagship in this respect, has been for a while.


----------



## JMattes

Kargeras said:


> KrampusKlaus said:
> 
> 
> 
> I had the exact same experience with my Team Dark Pro 3200mhz CL14 kit.
> 
> XMP was perfectly stable when I ran it in my old ASrock ab350 Pro 4. But on my Z390 Ultra, XMP spat out errors until I manually increased vdimm from 1.35v to 1.36v. Based on the DDR readings on HWINFO64, I also assumed that maybe the board was undervolting.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget DRAM Training Voltage.
> 
> Inability to boot might have more to do with _DRAM Training Voltage_ than DRAM Voltage.
Click to expand...

What is DRAM Training Voltage? 
Ive never heard that before


----------



## Kargeras

JMattes said:


> What is DRAM Training Voltage?
> Ive never heard that before


I don't know your mainboard but this "feature" has been around for millenia. 



It's the voltage that DRAM "trains" or registers new values, increased timings/sub-timings, voltage, whatever the user changed from the default.
You should be able to find that option in any BIOS, albeit under a different name?

DRAM Voltage is just the operating, day-to-day use of the memory.
The way I see it, DRAM Voltage is the the voltage necessary for the RAM to sustain (in idle and preferably in load too) the various settings/timings.

DRAM Training Voltage is the voltage that is required in the pre-boot phase.
This is is the voltage that is necessary to actually implement/insert the changes/settings/timings into RAM.

What would you say is more difficult, to sustain yourself to run 10km once you ran 10km many times before or to train yourself to be able to run 10km?
This may not be the perfect analogy but I hope it gets the point across.

DRAM Training Voltage can and is often higher than DRAM Voltage.
That is because the actual training is a very demanding process.
Maybe more demanding than the stress tests?

If I am mistaken, the people in the Intel-DDR4-24-7-Memory-Stability-Thread 
might offer you a better answer.

Here is an example of how the two look in Gigabyte BIOS.


----------



## JMattes

Kargeras said:


> JMattes said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is DRAM Training Voltage?
> Ive never heard that before
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know your mainboard but this "feature" has been around for millenia.
> 
> /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> It's the voltage that DRAM "trains" or registers new values, increased timings/sub-timings, voltage, whatever the user changed from the default.
> You should be able to find that option in any BIOS, albeit under a different name?
> 
> DRAM Voltage is just the operating, day-to-day use of the memory.
> DRAM Training Voltage is the voltage that is required in the pre-boot phase.
> 
> DRAM Training Voltage can and is often higher than DRAM Voltage.
> That is because the actual training is a very demanding process.
> Maybe more demanding than the stress tests?
> 
> Here is an example of how the two look in Gigabyte BIOS.
Click to expand...

Oh so i will try upping that number alittle if i am having trouble booting..

I am in this thread because i have the Z390 Aours Pro Wifi, so I am sure my bios isnt too far off from the other Z390 Aorus boards..


----------



## Kargeras

JMattes said:


> Oh so i will try upping that number alittle if i am having trouble booting..


Precisely.

One is to train the voltage and another is to pass HCI Memtest or TM5 (aka operate stable RAM).

One might as well be able to pass HCI Memtest at 1.37v but need 1.38v to train/boot.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I can't speak for reachthesky by I can share with you what works for me. Start by setting ONLY the primary timings + tRC + tcwl. Try tcwl=CL or try tcwl= CL minus 1 or minus 2. tRC= CL+tRAS for aorus z390 boards for the most part. See what trains, then throw it in a memtest right away to see if it can be stabilized with those primaries. If you error, mess around with vccsa/vccio/dram voltage. You can also try adjusting dram training voltage if it gives you trouble training, sometimes too little isn't enough and sometimes too much causes it not to train, you have to try each tick.
> 
> 1)I'm not familiar with z390 aorus ultra so i'm not sure
> 2)4000mhz and higher all have subpar rtls, regardless of ramkit and primaries used. If you are gaming, 4000 and higher is a waste on z390 aorus boards for daily use due to subpar rtls/iols.
> 3) Yes it is worth it to tune 3900mhz for lower rtls/iols. Latency difference is 1.5ns difference between cas14-3900(35.0ns) and cas15-4133(36.4ns). Choosing 4133 here results in crappy 1% lows and crappy minimum fps compared to 3900.
> 4)Your kit isn't booting with the secondary tertiary timings because tWTR_S and tWTR_L are too low for a low latency 3900 configuration on 4 dimms on aorus z390 boards. Start with the instructions at the beginning of my response. Adjust voltages till stable, then do each secondary timing one by one. Memtest the lowest stable value, make sure you measure aida64 performance as well to ensure you are getting improved performance before moving onto the next timing.


Alright, so not having much luck trying to train lower rtls on 3900mhz

For reference, the first image is my absolutely rock solid settings for 4000mhz, stable at vdimm 1.46v | training voltage 1.47v | vccio 1.23 | vccsa 1.24. My RTLs are 68/70 (only running 2 dimms)

When I bump vdimm/training voltage/vccio/vccsa to 1.5v/1.5v./1.25v/1.25v, keep the same primaries (not stable at any lower, even at these voltages), set all secondary and tertiary timings to auto, and downclock to 3900mhz, it does one of two things:

1) trains RTLs to 68/68, with overall latency being the same/slightly worse

2) trains RTLs to 59/61, with latency improving, but completely unstable (fails memtest almost immediately) these timings are the second image

I've restarted over a dozen times already, and it will only ever train these RTLs. Except once it trained horribly unstable like 59/63 (I know they're only supposed to be 0-2 apart)

Do you have any suggestions on how I can get this damn board to train RTLs lower than 68 but higher than 59/61? Thanks.

Edit: and even with RTLs at 68/68, 3900mhz still crashes with the same voltages as 4000mhz at 68/70

Is this maybe an issue with the bus speed? I use a bus speed of 133 for 4000mhz, and bus speed of 100 for 3900mhz. Would setting bus speed to 133 and shooting for 3866mhz be possibly more stable?

I am literally at my wit's end. I feel like for the last few months this board has been telling me that 4000 16 18 18 38 are the absolute best settings it will allow. No more, no less. It doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me.


----------



## Kargeras

Does anyone know what voltage is Silicon Lottery talking about in their statistics?

Is it the BIOS set fixed CPU Voltage, is it VID with AC/DC=1/1+LLC Standard at idle in Windows, is it VROUT at load with LLC applied etc.?

Data is taken from here: https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

KrampusKlaus said:


> Alright, so not having much luck trying to train lower rtls on 3900mhz
> 
> For reference, the first image is my absolutely rock solid settings for 4000mhz, stable at vdimm 1.46v | training voltage 1.47v | vccio 1.23 | vccsa 1.24. My RTLs are 68/70 (only running 2 dimms)
> 
> When I bump vdimm/training voltage/vccio/vccsa to 1.5v/1.5v./1.25v/1.25v, keep the same primaries (not stable at any lower, even at these voltages), set all secondary and tertiary timings to auto, and downclock to 3900mhz, it does one of two things:
> 
> 1) trains RTLs to 68/68, with overall latency being the same/slightly worse
> 
> 2) trains RTLs to 59/61, with latency improving, but completely unstable (fails memtest almost immediately) these timings are the second image
> 
> I've restarted over a dozen times already, and it will only ever train these RTLs. Except once it trained horribly unstable like 59/63 (I know they're only supposed to be 0-2 apart)
> 
> Do you have any suggestions on how I can get this damn board to train RTLs lower than 68 but higher than 59/61? Thanks.
> 
> Edit: and even with RTLs at 68/68, 3900mhz still crashes with the same voltages as 4000mhz at 68/70
> 
> Is this maybe an issue with the bus speed? I use a bus speed of 133 for 4000mhz, and bus speed of 100 for 3900mhz. Would setting bus speed to 133 and shooting for 3866mhz be possibly more stable?
> 
> I am literally at my wit's end. I feel like for the last few months this board has been telling me that 4000 16 18 18 38 are the absolute best settings it will allow. No more, no less. It doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me.


See if you can do 17-17-17-36 or 17-17-17-37 @ 3900 with 1.5v vdimm or less and 1.3v vccsa/vccio or less. cas 17/3900 should give you rtls higher than 59/61 but lower than 68/70. To power tighter timings/lower latency, it will require more vccio/vccsa for these boards at 3900 than it would at 4000+ because of faster rtls.


----------



## Kargeras

Alright, I've 2 situations and I don't know how to interpret them.

I pass 1h+ Prime95 112k fixed AVX disabled.
I get a WHEA error in HWiNFO64 just before 1h mark in Prime95 112k fixed AVX *enabled*. No worker failed.

Who's the culprit here, vCore, DRAM voltage (I'm running 1T), VCCIO, VCCSA?
DRAM voltage is 1.37v.

With RAM at 2T everything is fine in both kinds of tests.


----------



## JMattes

Kargeras said:


> JMattes said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh so i will try upping that number alittle if i am having trouble booting..
> 
> 
> 
> Precisely.
> 
> One is to train the voltage and another is to pass HCI Memtest or TM5 (aka operate stable RAM).
> 
> One might as well be able to pass HCI Memtest at 1.37v but need 1.38v to train/boot.
Click to expand...

I guess ive never had an issue booting before where i needed to change something when everything is set to stock.. so crazy..

I get it if i am trying to OC


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Alright, I've 2 situations and I don't know how to interpret them.
> 
> I pass 1h+ Prime95 112k fixed AVX disabled.
> I get a WHEA error in HWiNFO64 just before 1h mark in Prime95 112k fixed AVX *enabled*. No worker failed.
> 
> Who's the culprit here, vCore, DRAM voltage (I'm running 1T), VCCIO, VCCSA?
> DRAM voltage is 1.37v.
> 
> With RAM at 2T everything is fine in both kinds of tests.


I don't know the answer to this question and I doubt anyone else here does either. You have to find out your own answers by raising vcore, SA or IO or Dram voltage until you start passing it. And...

I never told you to test 112k AVX ENABLED. Passing this is 2nd in difficulty only to trying to get 20 matching LinX residuals at 35000 sample size!

you need more vcore to pass 112k AVX enabled than you do to pass small FFT AVX! The transients are terrible.
Stick to AVX disabled unless you want to raise vcore even more.

If you want to see just what you're dealing with....


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> I don't know the answer to this question and I doubt anyone else here does either. You have to find out your own answers by raising vcore, SA or IO or Dram voltage until you start passing it. And...
> 
> I never told you to test 112k AVX ENABLED. Passing this is 2nd in difficulty only to trying to get 20 matching LinX residuals at 35000 sample size!
> 
> you need more vcore to pass 112k AVX enabled than you do to pass small FFT AVX! The transients are terrible.
> Stick to AVX disabled unless you want to raise vcore even more.
> 
> If you want to see just what you're dealing with....
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGmL6b96Sk8


Since I pass the same test with AVX enabled at 2T / DRAM 1.36v, failing at 1T with 1.37v...

There's a reason (actually several) I avoid OC-ing memory.
XMP is usually fine for me on most machines.



I get 30/33 matching residuals in LinX at 1T with the same settings.
IO and SA, my favorite voltages to tinker with, mpfff.

Thank you for the input though.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> Passing this is 2nd in difficulty only to trying to get 20 matching LinX residuals at 35000 sample size!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGmL6b96Sk8


It's true that in all the years that I've been using LinX, most if not all times the 1st error would occur in the 1st 20 runs.

Interesting that you mentioned that.

Here's a recent example of 32/33 matching residuals, the unmatched one being the 16th.
This config also passes 112k with AVX enabled with RAM at 1T (but 8 errors occur during HCI Memtest v7 Pro after 150% so... no good).

DC LL = 160 fails HCI, this is DC LL = 130.
DC LL = 130 is unknown yet for HCI.


----------



## Kargeras

Kargeras said:


> This config also passes 112k with AVX enabled with RAM at 1T (but 8 errors occur during HCI Memtest v7 Pro after 150% so... no good).
> 
> DC LL = 160 fails HCI, this is DC LL = 130.
> DC LL = 130 is unknown yet for HCI.



Proof of that if anyone wondered.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> It's true that in all the years that I've been using LinX, most if not all times the 1st error would occur in the 1st 20 runs.
> 
> Interesting that you mentioned that.
> 
> Here's a recent example of 32/33 matching residuals, the unmatched one being the 16th.
> This config also passes 112k with AVX enabled with RAM at 1T (but 8 errors occur during HCI Memtest v7 Pro after 150% so... no good).
> 
> DC LL = 160 fails HCI, this is DC LL = 130.
> DC LL = 130 is unknown yet for HCI.


DC Loadline should have absolutely no relation or influence to passing or failing anything. It's supposed to be used for predicting VRM Loadline and vdroop and for calculating CPU Package power measurements (VID * IOUT). If there's some other strange dependence on it, no one here knows. You would have to ask Intel about that. I "used" to think it affected some sort of stability slightly, but after enough repeated tests, it was just pure luck and randomness happening.

I did see a slight skew to VR VOUT when DCLL was 1 than when DCLL was 160 (VR OUT was about 12mv lower or something, with a 185 amp power virus load)


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> DC Loadline should have absolutely no relation or influence to passing or failing anything.


Not even for Adaptive DVID mode?

With DC LL = 160 I get 30/33 matching residuals.
Done several tests.

With DC LL = 130 I get what you saw before, 32/33 matching residuals.
But only one test done.
To be repeated.

I changed it to 160 because LLC is Standard (160) and, as you repeatedly said, it's supposed to match VRM LLC.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Not even for Adaptive DVID mode?
> 
> With DC LL = 160 I get 30/33 matching residuals.
> Done several tests.
> 
> With DC LL = 130 I get what you saw before, 32/33 matching residuals.
> But only one test done.
> To be repeated.
> 
> I changed it to 160 because LLC is Standard (160) and, as you repeatedly said, it's supposed to match VRM LLC.


Its' completely random, dude. You are NEVER going to get the same results each time if you are marginal. (except LinX test #9 failing more often than other tests due to a drop in gflops on test #9).
One test I did I got 5 matching residuals out of 5 in a 5 test run.
Then several hours later all 5 residuals failed, exact same ambients, same windows session with nothing loaded.

Did a test once with 19 or 20 residuals passed (only residual #9 failed). Several hours later, same windows session and temps, half the residuals failed. Nothing changed. Except randomness. Sometimes just rebooting can cause you to start passing 80% of your residuals. Nothing but a reboot, even when nothing else was running. Do you how many MONTHS of repeated stupid OCD testing I did? Months and months. Almost EVERY DAY or night I was running Prime95 or LinX. literally. almost every single freaking day. (and the only thing consistent I found out was the 300 khz vs 500 khz issue...when you pass 18 or 20 residuals at 300 khz and fail 18 of 20 at 500 khz and it's actually REPEATABLE THIS TIME) then you can actually verify it and make a conclusion.

Anyway I'm done and completely sick of this. If you want to do OCD testing and dealing with half random results all due to partial stability, that's up to you. The only good any of this did me after a year of wasting my time was finding the 300 khz benefit over 500 khz (since that was like a 25mv increase in stability based on LinX; maybe 15mv in prime95).


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> Its' completely random, dude. You are NEVER going to get the same results each time if you are marginal. (except LinX test #9 failing more often than other tests due to a drop in gflops on test #9).
> One test I did I got 5 matching residuals out of 5 in a 5 test run.
> Then several hours later all 5 residuals failed, exact same ambients, same windows session with nothing loaded.
> 
> Did a test once with 19 or 20 residuals passed (only residual #9 failed). Several hours later, same windows session and temps, half the residuals failed. Nothing changed. Except randomness. Sometimes just rebooting can cause you to start passing 80% of your residuals. Nothing but a reboot, even when nothing else was running. Do you how many MONTHS of repeated stupid OCD testing I did? Months and months. Almost EVERY DAY or night I was running Prime95 or LinX. literally. almost every single freaking day. (and the only thing consistent I found out was the 300 khz vs 500 khz issue...when you pass 18 or 20 residuals at 300 khz and fail 18 of 20 at 500 khz and it's actually REPEATABLE THIS TIME) then you can actually verify it and make a conclusion.
> 
> Anyway I'm done and completely sick of this. If you want to do OCD testing and dealing with half random results all due to partial stability, that's up to you. The only good any of this did me after a year of wasting my time was finding the 300 khz benefit over 500 khz (since that was like a 25mv increase in stability based on LinX; maybe 15mv in prime95).


I've been out of touch with the overclock community for some years now. I believe that shows.
Once every few years I reconnect, that happens whenever I buy new PC(s) and I always end up overclocking them.
If I overclocked laptops I'd be around significantly more, but I don't.

About you spending months doing several test over and over and observing phenomena, you're not the only one.
I have the same approach and pretty sure many others do also.
I don't mind doing "OCD testing" for a few months in order to have a deeper understanding of things and _reach stability_.
Usually it's around 3 months max.

My reasoning is that once a system is completed, all things put up in order, OS and drivers & drives installed, apps, games and p0rn configured, everything personalized and whatnot I _totally dislike_ the idea of a BSOD, WHEA and the sorts because of a less tuned already-forgotten voltage.
I want to make sure that whenever a glitch occurs it is *always* OS/software/registry/drivers/various software settings incompatibilities/etc. related.
Unless a hardware component actually dies.

I prefer it this way for various reasons and also because I've my own definition of stability.
As everyone does.
If I had a more relaxed definition, I believe I would've finished overclocking my 9900KS in less than a weekend and ended up with much higher OC.
The subject of stability in particular is such a drama-like subject and I always avoid it.

Everyone uses their computer differently and for (a) different purpose(s).

I'd rather spend 1-2-3-whatever weeks or months obtaining what I call stability than having to troubleshoot after 1 week, 2 months, 6 months, 2 years etc.
Searching online fora, trying to remember what that BIOS setting did, how it affected other settings, how that voltage should've been in that way relative to another voltage, even what chipset is the platform using and so on months or years after buying a computer is not my thing.
One does not disrupt the flow of Spice Melange once it started.


So, once stress testing is finished, my computer(s) run 24/7 for years on end with the operating system being installed once every 4-5 years maybe, at the minimum.
This approach worked for me for many years now and it's unlikely I'll change it.
I don't want to be thinking about the fine details of Z390 and 9900KS in 2023 or 2025.
By then I'm sure there would other things/PC(s) to focus upon.

If I run into a problem once the system is stabilized, it has to be *strictly* because: 

1. software related *happy llama* 
2. hardware component died *less happy llama*

In other words, *to me*, your efforts & findings are valuable and I thank you (once again) for them.
Your "OCD testing" and constant availability to share information are greatly appreciated.

*insert thumbs up emoticon*


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Is there an eta on z390 master chipset drivers for windows 10 version 1909? I looked on the aorus website and they only have chipset drivers for windows 10 versions 1809/1903.


----------



## slickwilly

Need some help, my last Rig was built on a Gigabyte X58-UD4P, I update my mother board, CPU and ram, current rig consists of Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Pro, 9600K, Corsair DDR4 2666, still rocking the GTX1080 ti I purchased in the market place.
Primary use is gaming, I would like to OC to 4.5, maybe even see if 5 is doable but I am lost in this BIOS and 99% of the available info is for 9900K on an older BIOS, mine are F11, Both the CPU & GPU are water cooled with a 480 radiator.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Is there an eta on z390 master chipset drivers for windows 10 version 1909? I looked on the aorus website and they only have chipset drivers for windows 10 versions 1809/1903.


You don't need 1909 ones. The 1903 ones work fine. After all, nothing has changed in the chipset. Chipset drivers don't usually need to be updated unless a major windows change breaks stuff. And I've seen nothing broken.
Even the old Creative Labs "legacy" X-fi drivers for 1809 that were needed for sound to work properly again starting in 1809 work perfectly in 2004! You're fine.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> DC Loadline should have absolutely no relation or influence to passing or failing anything. It's supposed to be used for predicting VRM Loadline and vdroop and for calculating CPU Package power measurements (VID * IOUT). If there's some other strange dependence on it, no one here knows. You would have to ask Intel about that. I "used" to think it affected some sort of stability slightly, but after enough repeated tests, it was just pure luck and randomness happening.
> 
> I did see a slight skew to VR VOUT when DCLL was 1 than when DCLL was 160 (VR OUT was about 12mv lower or something, with a 185 amp power virus load)


About this DC LL.

I'm using the Adaptive DVID profile with LLC Standard.

_Given your description of things, wouldn't DC LL=160 offer a more accurate read for CPU Package Power and IA Cores Power than DC LL=130?_
With everything else kept the same, of course.

The difference between the two is noticeable in HWiNFO46.

On another note, 1T fails HCI even at 1.39v with IO=1.25 and SA=1.30.
LEL.

*pout*


----------



## tikiro

@KedarWolf can you please mod f11e bios with f7 microcodes, Intel me etc ?
For some reason I get better result (like mouse movements) in F7 bios but I need that wifi disable option
https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-master_f7_n.zip


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Are there any modded bios for the aorus ultra? I've been hesitant to update to the latest published bios from the Gigabyte website because of anecdotal reports that it reduces performance.


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> Are there any modded bios for the aorus ultra? I've been hesitant to update to the latest published bios from the Gigabyte website because of anecdotal reports that it reduces performance.


You can mod your own bios easily. Just download the latest Universal Bios Updater (UBU tool) from win-raid.com
Then go to the microcode archive and get the microcodes you want to install. 906EC is 9900k, 9700k and 9600k.

https://github.com/platomav/CPUMicrocodes/commits/master

I'm assuming the fast ones you want are either 96, A2, AE or BE. You will have to do some searching and scrolling as those are pretty old microcodes now.
For your convenience, I zipped and uploaded a bunch of the ones I had saved for various 8th and 9th gen processors.

Once you get the one you want, you need to convert it. Run the batch file "GenUSRMc.bat" to convert them,
which is in the UBU folder somewhere.

Then you can take your bios file and put it into the main UBU folder, run ubu, and replace the old microcode(s) with the new one you downloaded.
It will show you what you are replacing.

Then you will have to run efiflash 0.80 to flash it, with a USB boot freedos flash drive.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

XGS-Duplicity said:


> See if you can do 17-17-17-36 or 17-17-17-37 @ 3900 with 1.5v vdimm or less and 1.3v vccsa/vccio or less. cas 17/3900 should give you rtls higher than 59/61 but lower than 68/70. To power tighter timings/lower latency, it will require more vccio/vccsa for these boards at 3900 than it would at 4000+ because of faster rtls.


Thanks.

Also, looking back at other peoples' posts on AIDA64 benchmarks, I feel like my setup, even with RTLs of 70/68, is running abnormally slow at 44.2-44.7ns

Can this be chocked up to the fact that I'm running 2x8? I know that 4x8 can allow for overall better overclocking results with the same kits. But can running 4x8 result in lower latency than 2x8 with the same clocks and timings?


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Thanks! It's kind of intimidating, but thank you for the tools 

If I do fiddle around with this, and accidentally f*** up my bios, is there a way to flashback old bios? The Ultra has dual bios but no bios switch (it's really dumb, probably costs just a few $ to add the switch. Gigabyte probably just did this for product segmenting b/w the Ultra and Master). It will just sometimes boot to the 2nd chip after a few boot loops if settings are unstable.



Falkentyne said:


> You can mod your own bios easily. Just download the latest Universal Bios Updater (UBU tool) from win-raid.com
> Then go to the microcode archive and get the microcodes you want to install. 906EC is 9900k, 9700k and 9600k.
> 
> https://github.com/platomav/CPUMicrocodes/commits/master
> 
> I'm assuming the fast ones you want are either 96, A2, AE or BE. You will have to do some searching and scrolling as those are pretty old microcodes now.
> For your convenience, I zipped and uploaded a bunch of the ones I had saved for various 8th and 9th gen processors.
> 
> Once you get the one you want, you need to convert it. Run the batch file "GenUSRMc.bat" to convert them,
> which is in the UBU folder somewhere.
> 
> Then you can take your bios file and put it into the main UBU folder, run ubu, and replace the old microcode(s) with the new one you downloaded.
> It will show you what you are replacing.
> 
> Then you will have to run efiflash 0.80 to flash it, with a USB boot freedos flash drive.


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> Thanks! It's kind of intimidating, but thank you for the tools
> 
> If I do fiddle around with this, and accidentally f*** up my bios, is there a way to flashback old bios? The Ultra has dual bios but no bios switch (it's really dumb, probably costs just a few $ to add the switch. Gigabyte probably just did this for product segmenting b/w the Ultra and Master). It will just sometimes boot to the 2nd chip after a few boot loops if settings are unstable.


Just boot to the backup BIOS, get a bios you want to flash on USB, set the BIOS to "Dual bios mode" (this is important), and the other switch to the BIOS you want to boot on, then you can either EFIflash (version 0.80 please) with the /DB switch AND the bios switch set to 'dual bios' mode onboard, to flash both bioses at once, or Qflash will also allow you to choose to flash both bioses. This only works on the new GUI for Qflash however. (EFIflash 0.80 can flash anything, just use /DB command line switch with dual bios mode, not single bios mode).


----------



## Gandyman

Hey guys,

With 1.33 Manual vcore in my aorus master / 9900k VID shows as being anywhere up to 1.468 even on idle. On first look this seems really alarming but is this normal?

Temps were max in the 70s after a few roudns of apex.


----------



## AndrejB

Gandyman said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> With 1.33 Manual vcore in my aorus master / 9900k VID shows as being anywhere up to 1.468 even on idle. On first look this seems really alarming but is this normal?
> 
> Temps were max in the 70s after a few roudns of apex.


You overrode the vid values when you put manual vcore. If you want the vid to be lower set ia ac/dc to 1. 

Anyway vrout is the sensor you should be watching


----------



## MarkAnthony121

Hey guys, I'm seeking some advice. I'm fairly middle of the road with my knowledge and certainly not an experienced overclocker. I have a 9900K on the Z390 Pro for my video editing workstation and yesterday got a little overexcited and updated my bios to 12d. Then since everything got reset I went back online seeking to achieve a decent stable 5/5.1 overclock like I had before, but NOT doing it as some of you skilled OCers are doing it to try to squeeze every ounce of performance out of it. Upon reading some comments on YT videos it seems that updating the bios might cause an overall performance hit and people recommended flashing an older version. 6 was listed as best performance but now that I updated to 12d I think the farthest back I can go is 9. So being that I'm not skilled in making a custom or modded BIOS on my own, what's the best course of action for me? If the performance hit is minimal then I'll just stick with 12d and use a YT video to give me a basic overclock. Try a new beta version like 12h? Go back to version 9? Or something else altogether like downloading a custom BIOS if it's easy to do? Sorry if it's a newbie/basic question, I just have no where else to get this info from. In addition is there a good resource for basic OC settings?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

MarkAnthony121 said:


> Hey guys, I'm seeking some advice. I'm fairly middle of the road with my knowledge and certainly not an experienced overclocker. I have a 9900K on the Z390 Pro for my video editing workstation and yesterday got a little overexcited and updated my bios to 12d. Then since everything got reset I went back online seeking to achieve a decent stable 5/5.1 overclock like I had before, but NOT doing it as some of you skilled OCers are doing it to try to squeeze every ounce of performance out of it. Upon reading some comments on YT videos it seems that updating the bios might cause an overall performance hit and people recommended flashing an older version. 6 was listed as best performance but now that I updated to 12d I think the farthest back I can go is 9. So being that I'm not skilled in making a custom or modded BIOS on my own, what's the best course of action for me? If the performance hit is minimal then I'll just stick with 12d and use a YT video to give me a basic overclock. Try a new beta version like 12h? Go back to version 9? Or something else altogether like downloading a custom BIOS if it's easy to do? Sorry if it's a newbie/basic question, I just have no where else to get this info from. In addition is there a good resource for basic OC settings?



Beta bios are a waste of time for the z390 aorus boards because gigabyte rarely gives users a changelog about what is different or changed or improved with new beta bios versions. It would be at least helpful for gigabyte to tell users what is different about each new beta bios revision so we could at least test what was changed to verify if the changes are working as intended. 

Modded bios can be helpful for attaining a few extra benchmark points though I don't recall anyone getting any additional megahertz on cpu or ram when using modded bios compared to stock bios.


I use stock bios for the foreseeable future. F8 and F9 have worked the best for my 9900K R0 stepping chip. I think f10 had some non-negotiable bugs if I recall correctly so i didn't use it much. f11c bios performance was up to 100 cinebench points lower than F9 at the same clocks due to newer microcodes so i stopped using it. The newer stock bioses are more secure than older stock bioses but offer a bit less performance due to the microcodes used. If you want the most security, use the newer stock bios that note the cpu microcode updates in the stock bios changelog on the aorus website. If you want the most performance at the cost of security, use an older stock bios with older microcodes or use a modded bios with older microcodes.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Beta bios are a waste of time for the z390 aorus boards because gigabyte rarely gives users a changelog about what is different or changed or improved with new beta bios versions. It would be at least helpful for gigabyte to tell users what is different about each new beta bios revision so we could at least test what was changed to verify if the changes are working as intended.
> 
> Modded bios can be helpful for attaining a few extra benchmark points though I don't recall anyone getting any additional megahertz on cpu or ram when using modded bios compared to stock bios.
> 
> 
> I use stock bios for the foreseeable future.


I agree.
Latest Z490 Master Bios "changelog" posted on the Gigabyte website site says "may improve benchmarks scores in older benchmarks" but when I tested the (F5f) Bios, they added Voltage frequency point curves to Adaptive Voltage, that was not there in F5E. And I think that's more important. But nothing mentioned in the changelog...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> I agree.
> Latest Z490 Master Bios "changelog" posted on the Gigabyte website site says "may improve benchmarks scores in older benchmarks" but when I tested the (F5f) Bios, they added Voltage frequency point curves to Adaptive Voltage, that was not there in F5E. And I think that's more important. But nothing mentioned in the changelog...



It's nice they added adaptive voltage feature for the z490 master, previously this was only available for the z390 xtreme if i recall correctly.


----------



## MarkAnthony121

Thanks, it seems I'll just go back down to F9 and look for a basic OC'ing guide. If you know any resources it would be appreciated. Although there's a couple YT videos that seems to do a thorough job.


----------



## raggazam

We do not have a thread for z490 Master yet?
I have a z490 Master and Corsair dominator platinum rgb and it is not shown in icue, I don't know if it is a problem of the bios F5f or it is a problem of icue.
I have updated the LAN firmware with the driver that I launch now but in some reboot it goes offline and only the wifi remains.


----------



## Kargeras

Kargeras said:


> Does anyone know what voltage is Silicon Lottery talking about in their statistics?
> 
> Is it the BIOS set fixed CPU Voltage, is it VID with AC/DC=1/1+LLC Standard at idle in Windows, is it VROUT at load with LLC applied etc.?
> 
> Data is taken from here: https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics


Nobody?

*sad speculative llama*


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Today we get cas 15-4500 on 4 dimms on z390 aorus master.











Tuned the timings for a bit better bandwidth, had to lower cache:


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Wondering myself if my BIOS have the security updates which reduced performance.

It's my understanding that the F10 BIOS for the Z390 Aorus Master (released on 10/28/19) and later official BIOS versions have the security patch, but that the beta BIOS F10b and earlier did not.

Reviewing the BIOS history for the Z390 Aorus Ultra, it looks like the F9 BIOS has the same description and release date as the F10 BIOS for the Master. Does that mean that the F9b and earlier bios for the Ultra did not have the security patch?

I ask this because I'm currently running the F9b BIOS for my Ultra. If so, then I'll just not bother.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Anyone here running a z390 aorus master + 9900K + F4-4266C17Q-32GTZR ram kit(4dimms)? Looking to see how much dram voltage is required for [email protected]/4200/4266/4300/4400/4500 with that 4dimm kit. If you have this kit/board/chip and are willing to test this out, please do.


----------



## Kargeras

_7) BIOS VCORE IS THE VALUE TO BE ENTERED INTO THE MOTHERBOARD BIOS, TYPICALLY WITH AUTO LOAD-LINE CALIBRATION SETTINGS, AND IS NOT AN ACTUAL MEASURMENT OF VCORE SUSTAINED UNDER LOAD CONDITIONS. DIE SENSE VCORE IS A MORE PRECISE MEASUREMENT OF THE ACTUAL VOLTAGE BEING HELD UNDER FULL LOAD._

Oh and... rather important:

_5) CPUS WERE DELIDDED BEFORE BEING TESTED FOR INTEL GENERATIONS KABY LAKE, SKYLAKE-X, AND COFFEE LAKE. ALL OTHER CPUS WERE TESTED WITHOUT ANY MODIFICATIONS._

Information found at le bottom of the page, LEL.


----------



## Kargeras

Does anyone know the approximate value of 1 AC LL step equivalent in milivots?

I'm trying to "translate" my Normal+75mv | AC=50 | DC =130 profile to Normal+X | AC=1 | DC=1 profile so I can have accurate reporting of VID.


----------



## Alemancio

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Today we get cas 15-4500 on 4 dimms on z390 aorus master.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tuned the timings for a bit better bandwidth, had to lower cache:


Great results!

What vDIMM?

and why using F9 Bios? 


Thanks


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Does anyone know the approximate value of 1 AC LL step equivalent in milivots?
> 
> I'm trying to "translate" my Normal+75mv | AC=50 | DC =130 profile to Normal+X | AC=1 | DC=1 profile so I can have accurate reporting of VID.


Can't translate that because it depends on current. ACLL is a measurement of resistance. Resistance is never a flat value.

Generally speaking, Vcore=Base VID + (ACLL mOhm * Loadstep IOUT) - (LLC mOhm * IOUT) +/- vOffset. You can just replace Loadstep IOUT with IOUT if you're lazy.

For both Auto vcore and DVID mode on Gigabyte. (Auto=DVID with no offset)


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> For both Auto vcore and DVID mode on Gigabyte. (Auto=DVID with no offset)


About that, I might be near to understanding what you kindly repeated over and over here and elsewhere about these formulas.

I've these 2 distinct quotes from you:



Falkentyne said:


> Vcore=vCPU + (AC Loadline mOhms * Loadstep IOUT) - (Loadline calibration mOhms * IOUT) + vOffset (DVID mv).
> 
> Loadstep iOUT is important to VRM because load changes from one point to another. Loadstep is easy: dI=loadstep. dI=d1-d0. d1="new load in amps", d0=change in amps.
> Example: if you were at 20 amps and then went to 100 amps, 100-20=80. so d0 is 80. This is important because the load can go up or down. But this is only for a change in load and it is subtracted from the previous load.
> If d0 is 0, then dI=current amps, or equal to IOUT


... and in another post



Falkentyne said:


> dI is the load step, d1-d0, where d1 is the new current load in amps, and d0 is the old current load, since ACLL needs to send a new voltage request to the VRM when load changes.
> Example: d0=20A, D1=193A, then the load step is 173A.


In the 1st paragraph you define d0 as "change in amps" / difference between two consecutive IOUTS.
Say if one goes from (idle) 20 amps to (load) 100 amps => _d0=80 | d1=100 | dI=20_.

In the 2nd paragraph you define d0 as the initial IOUT in a consecutive two series IOUTS.
If (idle) 20 amps and (load) is 100 amps, then => _dI (not d0) = 80 | d1=100 and d0=20_.


I'm inclined to think that the 2nd paragraph is the correct one.

Are the 2 paragraphs saying different things or am I reading them both wrong?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> About that, I might be near to understanding what you kindly repeated over and over here and elsewhere about these formulas.
> 
> I've these 2 distinct quotes from you:
> 
> 
> 
> ... and in another post
> 
> 
> 
> In the 1st paragraph you define d0 as "change in amps" / difference between two consecutive IOUTS.
> Say if one goes from (idle) 20 amps to (load) 100 amps => _d0=80 | d1=100 | dI=20_.
> 
> In the 2nd paragraph you define d0 as the initial IOUT in a consecutive two series IOUTS.
> If (idle) 20 amps and (load) is 100 amps, then => _dI (not d0) = 80 | d1=100 and d0=20_.
> 
> 
> I'm inclined to think that the 2nd paragraph is the correct one.
> 
> Are the 2 paragraphs saying different things or am I reading them both wrong?


Unfortunately, this stuff is beyond my level of understanding and it confuses me. I only understand the simple one (without load step). I got this information from others.
I'm sorry I can't help you more. I did not pass calculus in college and confusing stuff confuses me. I'm sure if I sat around thinking about it it would make sense but i really can't be bothered.


----------



## Kargeras

*smiley trolled llama*

Anyways, for the record:

_BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset | XMP-1T

CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard | VCCIO: 1.24 | VCCSA: 1.29_

... passes everything, including fixed 112k AVX enabled.

_BIOS CPU Core: Normal+(150mv->190mv) offset, in +10mv increments | XMP-1T

CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
IA AC Loadline: *1* | IA DC Loadline: *1* | LLC: Standard | VCCIO: 1.24 | VCCSA: 1.29_

... doesn't pass fixed 112k AVX enabled. 

WHEA + worker(s) dying when close to +150mv. 
No more WHEA but 1 worker dying at +180mv and +190mv.

Below +150mv it's WHEA+worker(s) dying+occasional BSOD.


----------



## philhalo66

there was something wrong with my motherboard for sure, replaced it with a maximus xi hero with a significantly worse VRM and VRM temps are over 30C lower with identical clocks and voltages. What could be wrong i wonder. Any ideas? It was a Z390 Aorus Pro and i was running a 9900K stock 1.2V


----------



## Kargeras

philhalo66 said:


> there was something wrong with my motherboard for sure, replaced it with a maximus xi hero with a significantly worse VRM and VRM temps are over 30C lower with identical clocks and voltages. What could be wrong i wonder. Any ideas? It was a Z390 Aorus Pro and i was running a 9900K stock 1.2V


What were/are your VRM temps under load?


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> What were/are your VRM temps under load?


with my maximus board its 56c max with prime95, on my aorus board it was over 93C in the exact same case and fan setup.


----------



## Kargeras

Is that Prime95 with AVX enabled or disabled?

Nonetheless, the difference is there and you might have had a defective board.
Was it like that from the beginning or did it deteriorate in time?


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> Is that Prime95 with AVX enabled or disabled?
> 
> Nonetheless, the difference is there and you might have had a defective board.
> Was it like that from the beginning or did it deteriorate in time?


AVX off. i used 26.6. Im not sure i never paid attention till about 2 months ago and it was high then even. Idle was over 66C. Its still within warranty so maybe ill give gigabyte a call and see what they can do.


----------



## Kargeras

philhalo66 said:


> AVX off. i used 26.6. Im not sure i never paid attention till about 2 months ago and it was high then even. Idle was over 66C. Its still within warranty so maybe ill give gigabyte a call and see what they can do.


Idle=66 is not kosher at all indeed.

Good job taking notice of the issue and fixing it.


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> Idle=66 is not kosher at all indeed.
> 
> Good job taking notice of the issue and fixing it.


i should thank der8auer, it was his and buildzoids videos that mention vrm temps that made me go take a look.


----------



## Kargeras

Now that you mention it, I'm going to take a closer look also.
My Aorus Master VRMs run pretty high when under Prime95 - AVX enabled load.

Currently at 63 Celsius in the 4th minute of fixed 112k - AVX enabled but I've seen them go higher.
Into 80s?

Care to share some of those videos?


----------



## philhalo66

Kargeras said:


> Now that you mention it, I'm going to take a closer look also.
> My Aorus Master VRMs run pretty high when under Prime95 - AVX enabled load.
> 
> Currently at 63 Celsius in the 4th minute of fixed 112k - AVX enabled but I've seen them go higher.
> Into 80s?
> 
> Care to share some of those videos?


heres one with gamers nexus and der8aur.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Alemancio said:


> Great results!
> 
> What vDIMM?
> 
> and why using F9 Bios?
> 
> 
> Thanks


Thanks. I think it was like 1.82v to have some stability in windows for benchmarking gb3/aida64. F9 allows me to adjust all 4 rtls and iols for both channels for 3900 and below, this allows me to hit 3933 with very good latency as it requires one the rtls for the first channel to be bumped up from what is normally given for 3900, screenshot below. I think the new bioses removed the ability to adjust a single rtl in a channel and both rtls in a channel became tied together

EDIT: Here is some more info for XOC-style voltages/frequencies on this 4dimm c17-4000 gskill kit

[email protected] 1.82v, 1.4v/sa-io
[email protected] 1.79v, 1.38v/sa-io
[email protected] 1.85v 1.4v/sa-io

All of those were able to be brought down to 35.0ns latency or lower through various timings topping out at 34.8ns. Sa/io left on auto worked best and the sa-io values is what the mobo assigned.
Haven't tried [email protected] yet. 4300/4400/4600 was a no go.


----------



## lsevald

I've had an issue since I got my Aorus Pro. When I restart from Windows 10, 99 out of 100 attempts I don't get any video output until Windows comes back. I have an icon on my desktop that reboots and takes my directly into uefi BIOS, but to get any display output I have to power cycle my monitor (1080ti->Samsung C27JG50). I recently installed multiple OS's, and oddly this is not an issue restarting from Win 7 or Server 2016, but to even see the OS selector screen (using Legacy boot menu) when rebooting from Win 10 I have to power cycle my monitor. I'm testing several Win 10 builds (1709->2004), and I have the same issue with all of them. I'm tempted to try updating the BIOS gop driver, by modding it, but still haven't had the guts to do it as I'm not aware of anyone testing modded bios'es on this board...any ideas?


----------



## Driller au

lsevald said:


> I've had an issue since I got my Aorus Pro. When I restart from Windows 10, 99 out of 100 attempts I don't get any video output until Windows comes back. I have an icon on my desktop that reboots and takes my directly into uefi BIOS, but to get any display output I have to power cycle my monitor (1080ti->Samsung C27JG50). I recently installed multiple OS's, and oddly this is not an issue restarting from Win 7 or Server 2016, but to even see the OS selector screen (using Legacy boot menu) when rebooting from Win 10 I have to power cycle my monitor. I'm testing several Win 10 builds (1709->2004), and I have the same issue with all of them. I'm tempted to try updating the BIOS gop driver, by modding it, but still haven't had the guts to do it as I'm not aware of anyone testing modded bios'es on this board...any ideas?


Not sure if your monitor has this option but if it does try turning off "deep sleep" option


----------



## Alemancio

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Thanks. I think it was like 1.82v to have some stability in windows for benchmarking gb3/aida64. F9 allows me to adjust all 4 rtls and iols for both channels for 3900 and below, this allows me to hit 3933 with very good latency as it requires one the rtls for the first channel to be bumped up from what is normally given for 3900, screenshot below. I think the new bioses removed the ability to adjust a single rtl in a channel and both rtls in a channel became tied together
> 
> EDIT: Here is some more info for XOC-style voltages/frequencies on this 4dimm c17-4000 gskill kit
> 
> [email protected] 1.82v, 1.4v/sa-io
> [email protected] 1.79v, 1.38v/sa-io
> [email protected] 1.85v 1.4v/sa-io
> 
> All of those were able to be brought down to 35.0ns latency or lower through various timings topping out at 34.8ns. Sa/io left on auto worked best and the sa-io values is what the mobo assigned.
> Haven't tried [email protected] yet. 4300/4400/4600 was a no go.


Great answer!! Thank you!

What IOL/RTL rules do we have for the Aorus Master considering we can lower them with F9? Im currently on 3900 / 16-16-16-34 / 59-59-63-61 (IOL/RTL) at 1.4v


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Alemancio said:


> Great answer!! Thank you!
> 
> What IOL/RTL rules do we have for the Aorus Master considering we can lower them with F9? Im currently on 3900 / 16-16-16-34 / 59-59-63-61 (IOL/RTL) at 1.4v



I'm not 100% what the rules are. I just look for patterns and try to follow them and see what works. I think one of the rules/guidelines is that each rtl should not be more than 2 apart from another adjacent rtl. Anytime you push an rtl up or down, you must simultaneously also push up/push down the IOL for the same stick. Use EXTRA sa/io when training rtls/iols, it makes it easier, then bring down the sa/io afterwards. For example, I use anywhere between 1.35v to 1.38v sa/io when training [email protected]/3933 rtls/iols, It won't train at all at less than 1.35v. 

Here are some 4x8 rtls/iols for 3900-3933. Notice how patterns start to form. We can use this data to predict what the next cas rtls will look like. 

3933 (train 3900 with the timings + rtls/iols you want for 3933, then after ram training use 101 busclock + memory fast boot for the full 3933. It will also add about 50mhz to your core/cache so you have to tune with that in mind)
17-17-17-36/17-16-16-34 - 61/62/63/63 6/7/6/6 <----prediction based off pattern from verified c14-c16 3933 rtls/iols.
16-16-16-34/16-15-15-32 - 59/60/61/61 6/7/6/6
15-15-15-32/15-14-14-30 - 57/58/59/59 6/7/6/6
14-14-14-30 - 55/56/57/57 6/7/6/6 (unable to stabilize 14-13-13-28)

3900
17-17-17-36 - 61/61/63/63 6/6/6/6 <----prediction based off pattern from verified c14-c16 3900 rtls/iols.
16-16-16-34 - 59/59/61/61 6/6/6/6
15-15-15-32 - 57/57/59/59 6/6/6/6
14-14-14-30 - 55/55/57/57 6/6/6/6

I have no idea how to go any higher than 3933 with good rtls/iols and still be stable. As soon as I try to train 4000, rtls/iols go sky high. 

Through trial and error, Here is some cas/frequency/rtl/iol structure for this kit/board. 
[email protected] 49/50/51/51 5/6/6/5
[email protected] 54/54/56/56 6/6/6/6
[email protected] 54/55/56/56 
14-14-14
[email protected] 55/55/56/57
[email protected] 55/55/57/57


Every 200 mhz at the same cas, rtls go up by 1 so in theory, [email protected] should be 56/56/58/58 to retain the same latency. But when I train cas14 4100, I get 64/66/66/66 or 64/64/66/66 or something like that resulting in trash latency. 

Some samples and where I want to go from here...
1.56v/vdimm 1.3v/sa-io [email protected] 55/55/57/57 6/6/6/6 + 5.3ghz 8c/8t + 4.9ghz cache = 35.0ns stable
1.56v/vdimm 1.3v/sa-io [email protected] 55/56/57/57 6/7/6/6 + 5.25ghz 8c/8t + 4.85ghz cache = 35.0ns stable

For those who are curious, Aida64 Benchmark/full timings for [email protected] are viewable via the imgur link in my signature.


I want to hit 4000, 4066, 4100 and 4133 at cas 14 with 35.0ns latency just like the configurations above. I suspect if it can be done at all, it will look like 14-15-15-X or something like that in order to keep vdimm @ 1.56v. I assume it will require a busclock OC and further tuning of rtls/iols like 3933 as well. Just don't know where to go from here.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I'm not 100% what the rules are.


There's a clickable link in your signature with the AIDA64 Mem & Cache test results.

How did you configure AIDA64 to only test Memory and not CPU Cache too?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Code:







Kargeras said:


> There's a clickable link in your signature with the AIDA64 Mem & Cache test results.
> 
> How did you configure AIDA64 to only test Memory and not CPU Cache too?


Right click "start benchmark", choose memory only and it will run the memory benchmark only. At any time you can double left-click one of the boxes to run only that specific portion of the benchmark. For example, if you only want to test latency or copy, you can just double left-click the appropriate box and it will only run that specific part of the memory test.

For best results when benching aida64, I recommend the following:

End all processes that are not required.
I endtask the following:
comm surrogat
wifi lan (i don't use it)
xtu service 
game services
nzxt cam software
rgb fusion

I exit anything that adds to latency or sucks up performance during benches. Try to bench with no more than 18-25 processes running for best results. 

Run aida64 as administrator, set priority to real time. If you are using dvid voltage mode, set windows power plan to balanced and have your idle clock @ 3.6ghz for most consistent/best results.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right click "start benchmark", choose memory only and it will run the memory benchmark only.


Wow, that was a prompt and detailed answer, thank you very much.

You obviously know things about DDR4 overclocking, maybe you could share a thought on my results.

I don't know how to interpret them, are the numbers good, bad, ok?

1. XMP timings default - 2T @ 1.36v (even though they should run at 1.35v) (memory kit is the one in signature)
2. XMP timings default - 1T @ 1.37v


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Wow, that was a prompt and detailed answer, thank you very much.
> 
> You obviously know things about DDR4 overclocking, maybe you could share a thought on my results.
> 
> I don't know how to interpret them, are the numbers good, bad, ok?
> 
> 1. XMP timings default - 2T @ 1.36v (even though they should run at 1.35v) (memory kit is the one in signature)
> 2. XMP timings default - 1T @ 1.37v


I'm still very much learning about ddr4 overclocking. I know I don't fully understand it but I think i'm getting the hang of it. 

It's really hard to say what is good/bad. I think its a similar discussion to how thermaltake tries to measure temperature percentage improvements in a recent gamers nexus video blasting tt's marketing team. Like, What do we base it off of? For temperature, it has to be based off kelvin?. For latency? I have no idea. Lately i've just been basing my opinions off of the best results across the board that i can come across on the internet for any given cas/frequency for memory on boards with the same amount of dimms. Like, we don't have a chart of what X frequency with x cas latency is supposed to look like latency wise in nanoseconds but i guess that is because there are other variables that prevent something like this from being established such as default cache speeds are different for 9900k compared to 9700k etc etc etc. 

in regards to your results, I don't know what the best cas 14 3200 looks like, as in I don't know what a fully tuned out max 3200 should look like so its hard for to say whether its good or not. I always compare to the best available result with equivalent amount of dimms on same/similar motherboard and then try to beat it. Sadly I don't have any experience with cas 14 3200mhz frequency. What I can say is that for only a tad bit more voltage, you were able to reduce latency by about 3ns at the same frequency/cas by going with 1T which is a GREAT thing. In general, I think your latency can be improved alot by reducing tWR/trfc and increasing trefi. 

On a side note, Seeing as how 2T cas 14 3200 is 60/60/62/62 on rtls, I wonder if i need to be busclocking from even lower rtls/iols for 4000+ at cas 14 such as using c14 3700/3733 rtls/iols and loosen trcd/etc and lower cache speed to maintain the same 35.0ns latency/voltage requirements. I'm also wondering if maybe c14-3933 is where my 4x8GB [email protected] kit tops out at and that this where the 4x8 cl15-4000 kit resumes scaling as one of the reviewer videos on youtube showed the 2x8gb cl15-4000 kit was able to be tightened to [email protected] with the same 1.5v xmp voltage(different board though and they didn't show latency/rtls either). It's just a theory though, still waiting for 4x8gb cl15-4000 kit owners to post binning results to form a more informed opinion.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> It's really hard to say what is good/bad. I think its a similar discussion to how thermaltake tries to measure temperature percentage improvements in a recent gamers nexus video blasting tt's marketing team. Like, What do we base it off of? Lately i've just been basing my opinions off of the best results across the board that i can come across on the internet for any given cas/frequency for memory on boards with the same amount of dimms. Like, we don't have a chart of what X frequency with x cas latency is supposed to look like latency wise in nanoseconds but i guess that is because there are other variables that prevent something like this from being established such as default cache speeds are different for 9900k compared to 9700k etc etc etc.
> 
> in regards to your results, I don't know what the best cas 14 3200 looks like, as in I don't know what a fully tuned out max 3200 should look like so its hard for to say whether its good or not. I always compare to the best available result with equivalent amount of dimms on same/similar motherboard and then try to beat it. Sadly I don't have any experience with cas 14 3200mhz frequency. What I can say is that for only a tad bit more voltage, you were able to reduce latency by about 3ns at the same frequency/cas by going with 1T which is a GREAT thing. In general, I think your latency can be improved alot by reducing tWR/trfc and increasing trefi.
> 
> On a side note, Seeing as how 2T cas 14 3200 is 60/60/62/62 on rtls, I wonder if i need to be busclocking from even lower rtls/iols for 4000+ at cas 14 such as using c14 3700/3733 rtls/iols and loosen trcd/etc and lower cache speed to maintain the same 35.0ns latency/voltage requirements. I'm also wondering if maybe c14-3933 is where my 4x8GB [email protected] kit tops out at and that this where the 4x8 cl15-4000 kit resumes scaling as one of the reviewer videos on youtube showed the 2x8gb cl15-4000 kit was able to be tightened to [email protected] with the same 1.5v xmp voltage(different board though and they didn't show latency/rtls either). It's just a theory though, still waiting for 4x8gb cl15-4000 kit owners to post binning results to form a more informed opinion.


Is it even possible to run DUAL RANK 3200 mhz CL14 Gskill (f4-3200CL14-32GTZR) sticks at 3600 mhz 15/15/15/36 1T stable on a motherboard?

Obviously the Master won't do it. Even the Z490 master wont do 1T. it just fails to train and boot loops no matter what voltage you throw at it. It won't post higher than 3333-3400 mhz 1T.
However the Maximus 12 extreme acts like nothing happened and just boots. 15/15/15/36, 1T, but it isn't stable. Testmem5 Extreme1 starts throwing errors past 42C or so and it does not matter whatsoever what the voltages are. Gone up to 1.5v DDR, 1.35v IO/1.40v SA...doesn't matter.

But 2T is stable. No testmem5 errors at all even at 1.40v DDR4, 1.15v IO/SA. So why is 1T so hard? Is it because of dual rank? Is there a way to make 1T more stable? I can play videogames on it but can't stress test. But 2T is child's play.

Here I attached the timings and the changes are below.
Primaries: 15/15/15/36 1T

tRFC 320, up to 372, no help
TRDWR: 13/13/13/13
TCWL: 14
tRTP: 7, tWR=14

Up to 1.5v DDR and high IO/SA doesn't help

is 1T too much of a high ask for dual ranks?


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> On a side note, Seeing as how 2T cas 14 3200 is 60/60/62/62 on rtls, I wonder if i need to be using lower rtls/iols for 4000+ at cas 14 and loosen trcd/etc to maintain the same latency/voltage requirements.


Interesting you should mention this because this kind of hastened a rather important mention I was about to make on memory training.

For the record, if future users should wonder, this is what I experienced with Aorus Master + F4-3200C14Q-64GVK, while trying 1T (everything else on AUTO).
It may apply for 2T (but I didn't test yet).

I have 2 profiles which I believe are stable, both are Adaptive (DVID) = Normal+75mv.
By stable I mean _anything_ with AVX enabled + HCI / TM5 + extreme Anta7 config / Karhu + Cache for whatever % stable.

One profile is with memory at 2T, the other with memory at 1T.
I leave ALL other timings at AUTO.

I have multiple profiles in my BIOS but only those 2 I believe are truly stable and what happens is: 

_1. using ANY profile except Optimized Default ---> loading profile 1T results in certain timings (case A, first image)
2. using ANY profile except Optimized Default ---> loading Optimized Defaults ---> loading profile 1T results in better timings (case B, 2nd image)_

Obviously, going with case B results in ~2ns+ better latency and better AIDA64 Memory tests results.

In other words, without touching anything else, _better_ timings are automatically trained IF profile is loaded via Optimized Defaults.

This may be happening with 2T too.
I will test and report back.

I find this rather important because users for system/memory stability may pass or fail 1000% HCI for example just because le memory decided to train better or worse timings without "prior notice". Depending on how the user loaded the BIOS profile.
Hence, enhanced attention is required when checking *subtimings*.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Is it even possible to run DUAL RANK 3200 mhz CL14 Gskill (f4-3200CL14-32GTZR) sticks at 3600 mhz 15/15/15/36 1T stable on a motherboard?
> 
> Obviously the Master won't do it. Even the Z490 master wont do 1T. it just fails to train and boot loops no matter what voltage you throw at it. It won't post higher than 3333-3400 mhz 1T.
> However the Maximus 12 extreme acts like nothing happened and just boots. 15/15/15/36, 1T, but it isn't stable. Testmem5 Extreme1 starts throwing errors past 42C or so and it does not matter whatsoever what the voltages are. Gone up to 1.5v DDR, 1.35v IO/1.40v SA...doesn't matter.
> 
> But 2T is stable. No testmem5 errors at all even at 1.40v DDR4, 1.15v IO/SA. So why is 1T so hard? Is it because of dual rank? Is there a way to make 1T more stable? I can play videogames on it but can't stress test. But 2T is child's play.
> 
> Here I attached the timings and the changes are below.
> Primaries: 15/15/15/36 1T
> 
> tRFC 320, up to 372, no help
> TRDWR: 13/13/13/13
> TCWL: 14
> tRTP: 7, tWR=14
> 
> Up to 1.5v DDR and high IO/SA doesn't help
> 
> is 1T too much of a high ask for dual ranks?


1T is harder in general.
dual ranked dimms are the HARDEST to OC in general.

difficulty list for oc from easiest to hardest on the IMC. The further down the list you go, the harder it is on the IMC. I didn't list 2 dimm configs on t-top or 4 dimm configs on daisy chain because the limitations of those configurations are caused by the board.

2x8GB single ranked 2 dimm daisy chain board
2x16GB dual ranked 2 dimm daisy chain board
4x8GB single ranked 4 dimm t-top board (This is harder on the imc than 2x16gb on daisy chain even though you are using the same amount of total ranks because you actually have to physically power 2 extra dimms)
4x16GB dual ranked 4 dimm t-top board - The hardest on any IMC. Great bin B-die speeds generally top out around 3733 with fully maxed timings, somewhere between cas15-cas18. I would not worry about 1T on 4x16GB configuration, I think it is better to aim for highest frequency with best rtls/iols. Somewhere between cas15-17 @ 3733, 3933 if you are lucky. If you have a frequency at 1T, you can outperform it easily by increasing the frequency by 300mhz + going 2T. So like, if you can do 1T 3200, you can out perform it with 2T 3500.

1T is also harder to power on 4 dimms than 2 dimms. I wouldn't worry about 1T on 4 dimms, i'd worry more about raising frequency as high as 3733 or 3933 depending on how much voltage you are comfortable using. 4 dimms in general requires more voltage at the same frequencies/timings than 2 dimms.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Interesting you should mention this because this kind of hastened a rather important mention I was about to make on memory training.
> 
> For the record, if future users should wonder, this is what I experienced with Aorus Master + F4-3200C14Q-64GVK, while trying 1T (everything else on AUTO).
> It may apply for 2T (but I didn't test yet).
> 
> I have 2 profiles which I believe are stable, both are Adaptive (DVID) = Normal+75mv.
> By stable I mean _anything_ with AVX enabled + HCI / TM5 + extreme Anta7 config / Karhu + Cache for whatever % stable.
> 
> One profile is with memory at 2T, the other with memory at 1T.
> I leave ALL other timings at AUTO.
> 
> I have multiple profiles in my BIOS but only those 2 I believe are truly stable and what happens is:
> 
> _1. using ANY profile except Optimized Default ---> loading profile 1T results in certain timings (case A, first image)
> 2. using ANY profile except Optimized Default ---> loading Optimized Defaults ---> loading profile 1T results in better timings (case B, 2nd image)_
> 
> Obviously, going with case B results in ~2ns+ better latency and better AIDA64 Memory tests results.
> 
> In other words, without touching anything else, _better_ timings are automatically trained IF profile is loaded via Optimized Defaults.
> 
> This may be happening with 2T too.
> I will test and report back.
> 
> I find this rather important because users for system/memory stability may pass or fail 1000% HCI for example just because le memory decided to train better or worse timings without "prior notice". Depending on how the user loaded the BIOS profile.
> Hence, enhanced attention is required when checking *subtimings*.


Very interesting find with the rtls/iols! Please do test and report back for sure. Curious of the findings.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> 1T is harder in general.
> dual ranked dimms are the HARDEST to OC in general.
> 
> difficulty list for oc from easiest to hardest. The further down the list you go, the harder it is on the IMC. I didn't list 2 dimm configs on t-top or 4 dimm configs on daisy chain because the limitations of those configurations are caused by the board.
> 
> 2x8GB single ranked 2 dimm daisy chain board
> 2x16GB dual ranked 2 dimm daisy chain board
> 4x8GB single ranked 2 dimm t-top board (This is harder on the imc than 2x16gb on daisy chain even though you are using the same amount of total ranks because you actually have to physically power 2 extra dimms)
> 4x16GB on 4 dimm t-top board - The hardest on any IMC. Speeds generally top out around 3733 with fully maxed timings, somewhere between cas15-cas18. I would not worry about 1T on 4x16GB configuration, I think it is better to aim for highest frequency with best rtls/iols. Somewhere between cas15-17 @ 3733, 3933 if you are lucky.
> 
> 1T is also harder to power on 4 dimms than 2 dimms. I wouldn't worry about 1T on 4 dimms, i'd worry more about raising frequency as high as 3733 or 3933 depending on how much voltage you are comfortable using. 4 dimms in general requires more voltage at the same frequencies/timings than 2 dimms.


Thanks. This makes sense. 
I'm using 2 dimms though, not 4.

The other 2 dimms I have are 2x8 GB steel viper 4000 CL19's but they're installed in the Z490 Aorus Master. I was trying to get those stable at 17-17-17-39, 4400 mhz on the Z490 Master @ 1.5v but failing epically, although I had it stable FOR AWHILE if the temps were low...(I did NOT try that in the M12E yet. memory overclocking scares me).


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Very interesting find with the rtls/iols! Please do test and report back for sure. Curious of the findings.


Have no doubt about that.

I know you were addressing Falkentyne's question earlier but your mention of 4x16GB case, which less people use, is actually my case.



XGS-Duplicity said:


> 4x16GB dual ranked 4 dimm t-top board - The hardest on any IMC. Great bin B-die speeds generally top out around 3733 with fully maxed timings, somewhere between cas15-cas18. I would not worry about 1T on 4x16GB configuration, I think it is better to aim for highest frequency with best rtls/iols. Somewhere between cas15-17 @ 3733, 3933 if you are lucky. If you have a frequency at 1T, you can outperform it easily by increasing the frequency by 300mhz + going 2T. So like, if you can do 1T 3200, you can out perform it with 2T 3500.


So maybe I should go 3500+ at 2T instead of 3200 at 1T (which increased LINX by ~20 GFLOPS compared to 2T)...
How very interesting.


----------



## ElGreco

*Minimum CORE VID VOLTAGE... TOO LOW!*

Hello!

Firstly, please allow me to thank you for sharing your knowledge in this forum. Many of us try to learn silently through your experience.

Today I decided to enable XMP profile in my Trident Z RGB 3600CL16Q-32GB RAM Quad module kit and as soon as I observed Vccio and VCCSA going to 1.25v and 1.28v respectively I switched back to the default settings (disabled xmp) of my F9 bios of my Master G2 edition board. (I9-9900k stock, high performance setting in windows stays usually @4700mhz all cores all the time).

What I observed through this process was:
1. I had to hard switch off my pc (keeping pressed power button) for the bios changes to take effect otherwise via normal shutdown, only video signal was going off and rest of pc was still running?! (Fans and rgb LEDs were on)
2. At least in the default stock Bios settings as soon as I run PUBG when I close it and see the min value of core vid voltage at least 4 cores were recorded to have reached minimum 0.680volts!!! Current voltage reading when not in game is 1.19 to 1.25v in all cores while during the entire session idle, pubg, back to idle, max reading of hwinfo shows 1.318v.

I worry quite a bit if there is such a huge voltage transient down to 0.680v unless it’s a misreading by hwinfo. NoBSOD were ever observed.

Your opinion on this is highly appreciated!

Edit: All voltage, c state etc settings are in ... auto in the bios F9.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Thanks. This makes sense.
> I'm using 2 dimms though, not 4.
> 
> The other 2 dimms I have are 2x8 GB steel viper 4000 CL19's but they're installed in the Z490 Aorus Master. I was trying to get those stable at 17-17-17-39, 4400 mhz on the Z490 Master @ 1.5v but failing epically, although I had it stable FOR AWHILE if the temps were low...(I did NOT try that in the M12E yet. memory overclocking scares me).


Have you tried going for 4500+ @ c19? I've seen users experience more success clocking higher than 4400 at c18/c19 with those sticks than dropping the CL+keeping the same frequency. That was also on the apex though.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Have no doubt about that.
> 
> I know you were addressing Falkentyne's question earlier but your mention of 4x16GB case, which less people use, is actually my case.
> 
> 
> 
> So maybe I should go 3500+ at 2T instead of 3200 at 1T (which increased LINX by ~20 GFLOPS compared to 2T)...
> How very interesting.


Yes, In your specific case I would start binning each frequency at cas 14 as high as they will go and then work on cas 15/cas 16/cas 17 frequencies. Then once you have a picture of what every cas/frequency looks like latency/voltage wise, you can decide on what you want to pursue/use 24/7. I'd only worry about 1T after the 2T testing is complete and i'd only try 1T at frequencies no more than 200mhz below your highest stable frequency since 300mhz higher @2T is equal to or better than 300mhz less @ 1T latency wise. If you already have a low latency goal in mind, don't bother binning c16/17 unless it's 3733+.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Yes, In your specific case I would start binning each frequency at cas 14...
> I'd only worry about 1T after the 2T testing is complete and...


What methods/programs/settings/runs/time/etc. do you recommend for testing?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

​


Kargeras said:


> What methods/programs/settings/runs/time/etc. do you recommend for testing?


I use karhu/hci/aida64. They are very simple and easy to use. I won't use software that requires extra configuration beyond simple check boxes or software that requires a bootstick/linux. I don't use gsat/usmus.

Also, you might also be able to do 1T 3500 or 1t 3533, but you'd also have to measure that up against your best 2T frequency. 4dimms 1T 3600 takes some serious finesse to get running on these boards, at least on my kit/board.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I use karhu/hci/aida64. They are very simple and easy to use. I won't use software that requires extra configuration beyond simple check boxes or software that requires a bootstick/linux. I don't use gsat/usmus.


Sounds good to me.

Been using HCI since 1320 B.C. and never failed me once.
Got me self le latest v7.0 Pro which makes things 1 click only, literally.
Actually 2 clicks since it's recommended that threads don't run in "Low Priority" and that's checked by default.
If anyone should be reading this, I recommend the upgrade to Pro if you can spare 5$ or so.

Karhu is new to me but it seems _very fast_.
First time I ever used Karhu it passed 9000% and failed HCI in less than 30 minutes but I believe I didn't set it properly.
Can you please advise on what settings should I use the Advanced tab for "CPU cache" and "RNG"?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Sounds good to me.
> 
> Been using HCI since 1320 B.C. and never failed me once.
> Got me self le latest v7.0 Pro which makes things 1 click only, literally.
> Actually 2 clicks since it's recommended that threads don't run in "Low Priority" and that's checked by default.
> If anyone should be reading this, I recommend the upgrade to Pro if you can spare 5$ or so.
> 
> Karhu is new to me but it seems _very fast_.
> First time I ever used Karhu it passed 9000% and failed HCI in less than 30 minutes but I believe I didn't set it properly.
> Can you please advise on what settings should I use the Advanced tab for "CPU cache" and "RNG"?


I leave rng on default because I don't know what it is/does and I set "cpu cache" to enabled for heavier testing.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I leave rng on default because I don't know what it is/does and I set "cpu cache" to enabled for heavier testing.


Your input is much appreciated.

Will report back with results/temps/frustrations/screenshots... the works.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Very interesting find with the rtls/iols! Please do test and report back for sure. Curious of the findings.


Alright, as promised I made the following test with switching profiles in order to see if different subtimings are trained into RAM:

*A.* 1T to 2T (1st screenshot) | 2T DRAM Voltage 1.36v (required for stability) | DRAM Training Voltage = 1.37v | VCCIO = 1.15v; VCCSA = 1.20v
*B.* Optimized Defaults to 2T (2nd screenshot) | 2T DRAM Voltage 1.36v (required for stability) | DRAM Training Voltage = 1.37v | VCCIO = 1.15v; VCCSA = 1.20v

Optimized Default (3rd screenshot, for reference)

I detect no difference between the 2 situtions/methods of loading the 2T profile.
I should also add that I detect no struggle whatsoever with 2T, in regards to training, rebooting, booting, etc.

Whereas with 1T training takes a bit longer, sometimes it won't boot at all, sometimes I have to reset BIOS etc.
_That is when switching to 1T from 2T._ It may happen when switching from Optimized Defaults to 1T profile too, but far less often.

Training and booting are faster and usually don't fail when switching from Optimized Defaults to 1T (though difficulties appeared once or twice).
1T DRAM Voltage = 1.37v | DRAM Training Voltage = 1.38v | VCCIO = 1.24v; VCCSA = 1.29v (stable)

I usually have DRAM Training Voltage +10mv higher than DRAM Voltage.
It appears that helps a bunch.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Yes, In your specific case I would start binning each frequency at cas 14 as high as they will go and then work on cas 15/cas 16/cas 17 frequencies. Then once you have a picture of what every cas/frequency looks like latency/voltage wise, you can decide on what you want to pursue/use 24/7. I'd only worry about 1T after the 2T testing is complete and i'd only try 1T at frequencies no more than 200mhz below your highest stable frequency since 300mhz higher @2T is equal to or better than 300mhz less @ 1T latency wise. If you already have a low latency goal in mind, don't bother binning c16/17 unless it's 3733+.


I'd like to thank you for your advice.

My 2 tests for system stability is LINX (20 runs - max 2 unmatched residuals, used to be 33 - max 3 unmatched residuals) and Prime95 fixed 112k with AVX enabled.

(GFLOPS) LINX [email protected] (1st screenshot) < LINX [email protected] (2nd screenshot) < LINX [email protected] (3rd screenshot)
10-15 GFLOPS difference between 1 and 2.
3-5 GFLOPS difference between 2 and 3.

Getting rid of [email protected] and trying to get [email protected] (with manually set subtimings since auto training is sketchy) did increase performance in AIDA64 Memory Benchmark.
By quite a margin.

Still have to run 112k fixed with AVX enabled for 1h+ to check stability.

P.S. 

112k fixed with AVX enabled had a worker die after ~22 minutes with DRAM Voltage at 1.37v.
112k fixed with AVX enabled had a worker die after ~58 minutes with DRAM Voltage at 1.38v.
*sad panda*


----------



## Kargeras

*happy llama*
112k fixed with AVX enabled passed ~1h:10m with DRAM Voltage at 1.39v.

This might be a winner.

In my experience, passing 1h+ of Prime95 v29.8 build 6 - 112k fixed *AVX enabled* means everything else will pass.
Be it LINX, Prime95 Small + AVX Enabled, OCCT, HCI, Karhu+Cache, AIDA64, RealBench 2.56 etc.
Not the other way around though.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

2 questions:

1) is it just me or is this latency a bit high for 2x8 4000 16 18 18 38 with these RTLs? And, yes, I've tried downclocking below 4000, but it's been a headache. Haven't had success in getting lower frequency with tighter primary timings, aside from XMP timings. Training frequency and timings have been a nightmare, as in sometimes it boots with worse values than input into BIOS. RTL training (because Gigabyte won't let us enter their own) results in too low #s that are unstable, or so high that latency is the same as these settings with reduced bandwidth. 

But, back to my original question. I've looked at other peoples' AIDA64 results, and I can't help but think that my latency is high considering the timings, even on an Aorus Z390 board. The rest of my settings are in my sig, I have core at 5.0 and cache at 4.7. Are there any things, outside of memory timings and the inherent limitations of this board, that could be impacting my latency? Or are these numbers 

2) Currently running 2x8 Team Dark Pro 3200 14 14 14 32 @ the above timings. Would buying a second kit and upgrading from 2x8 to 4x8 improve my ability to reach tighter timings at the same frequency? I've been holding off getting a matching kit since the Team Dark Pros are pretty overpriced new, but I might be able to get a deal on some used dimms.


----------



## Kargeras

I can't help with memory overclocking but I can give you reference points from my experience with it.

These are my [email protected] results.
I ran the test 1 time with these settings yet but I always do 3 runs consecutively and screenshot only the 3rd result.
The lowest latency I've seen is 48.0 (on the 2nd run).

CPU Ratio: 50 | AVX Offset: 1
CPU Uncore/Cache: 45


----------



## Falkentyne

KrampusKlaus said:


> 2 questions:
> 
> 1) is it just me or is this latency a bit high for 2x8 4000 16 18 18 38 with these RTLs? And, yes, I've tried downclocking below 4000, but it's been a headache. Haven't had success in getting lower frequency with tighter primary timings, aside from XMP timings. Training frequency and timings have been a nightmare, as in sometimes it boots with worse values than input into BIOS. RTL training (because Gigabyte won't let us enter their own) results in too low #s that are unstable, or so high that latency is the same as these settings with reduced bandwidth.
> 
> But, back to my original question. I've looked at other peoples' AIDA64 results, and I can't help but think that my latency is high considering the timings, even on an Aorus Z390 board. The rest of my settings are in my sig, I have core at 5.0 and cache at 4.7. Are there any things, outside of memory timings and the inherent limitations of this board, that could be impacting my latency? Or are these numbers
> 
> 2) Currently running 2x8 Team Dark Pro 3200 14 14 14 32 @ the above timings. Would buying a second kit and upgrading from 2x8 to 4x8 improve my ability to reach tighter timings at the same frequency? I've been holding off getting a matching kit since the Team Dark Pros are pretty overpriced new, but I might be able to get a deal on some used dimms.


twrwr_dr and twrwr_dd could maybe bit a bit lower. Try 7. And tRTP and tWR being the exact same is probably destroying your latency too. Try lowering trtp (the lowest it can go is 1/2 tWR-1).
Even worse are your twrrd_sg and twrrd_dg values. Those are god awful, and are controlled by twtr_l and twtr_s. Lower tWTR_L and twtr_s to reduce them. Maybe try 8 and 6, and if that's stable, 7 and 5.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

If you want to decrease latency...


increase trefi as high as 65534
decrease tWR to as low as 10
decrease tRTP to as low as 6
decrease trfc to as low as you can get it stable

you might need to increase voltage for stability. You may also need a dedicated fan over the dimms to keep them cool enough as well.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> you might need to increase voltage for stability. You may also need a dedicated fan over the dimms to keep them cool enough as well.



What are the recommended temperatures for IDLE and HCI Memtest type of LOAD?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> What are the recommended temperatures for IDLE and LOAD (let's say HCI)?


b-die is sensitive to heat try to keep them under 40c at all times if you can.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> b-die is sensitive to heat try to keep them under 40c at all times if you can.


40?

Wow... that's gonna be difficult to achieve.
Running a HCI test right now and you can see how that's going, temperature-wise.

27.1 Celsius ambient + no AC running or window/door open to the outside.


----------



## oscarf

Here are my settings, do they look okay or is there anything I should change?
Tested stable


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Thanks for the suggestions on which timings to lower! I’ll take a crack at it and see what I can do.

But my other question, if I were to get 2 more dimms, what kind of benefits could I expect to see?

I’ve heard that, on these boards, 4 dimms allows for better overclocking at above 3600mhz. Does that mean tighter timings? Like, if I were to just stick with 4000, or try and tune 3900, would it be easier on 4 dimms? Silicon lottery aside.

I’ve also heard, anecdotally, that some users experience better gaming performance with 4 dimms as opposed to 2 dimms, even with the same memory timings. Has anyone encountered this?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> 40?
> 
> Wow... that's gonna be difficult to achieve.
> Running a HCI test right now and you can see how that's going, temperature-wise.
> 
> 27.1 Celsius ambient + no AC running or window/door open to the outside.


those sticks are hotttttt lol. If you plan on overclocking those sticks to anywhere close to their limits of what they are capable of, you are going to need a fan.


on a side note, Here are some kewl bios settings for anyone who wants to clock to 3533 while also maintaining a flat core/cache multiplier. If you are on 4x16GB, this one is for you.

First validate/stability test 3500. With 3500 already trained, Go back into bios, set core multiplier to 50 and cache multiplier to 47. Then change the memory strap to 3466. Then change your busclock to 102 flat. enable memory fast boot. Adjust voltages so that you have enough vcore to cover 5.1ghz all-core and 4.8ghz cache. You may need a slight dram voltage increase to handle the extra 33mhz on the ram or slight sa/io increase to handle the increased system agent clock/busclock. Then save and exit and go into windows. You will be at 5.1ghz flattttt, about 4.8ghz cache and 3533 in aida64. Then stability test. One thing that may need to be taken care of is bumping around one of the rtls to get 3533 stable. Cross that road when you get their if the ram demands it. Alternatively you can also disable hyperthreading for this profile if you want to conserve voltage or if it is too much for your cooling. You could also use 49 core multiplier if your end goal is 5ghz all core, it will come out to like 4.998ghz.

Here is an aida64 sample of the end product:


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> those sticks are hotttttt lol. If you plan on overclocking those sticks to anywhere close to their limits of what they are capable of, you are going to need a fan.
> 
> 
> on a side note, Here are some kewl bios settings for anyone who wants to clock to 3533 while also maintaining a flat core/cache multiplier. If you are on 4x16GB, this one is for you.
> 
> First validate/stability test 3500. With 3500 already trained, Go back into bios, set core multiplier to 50 and cache multiplier to 47. Then change the memory strap to 3466. Then change your busclock to 102 flat. enable memory fast boot. Adjust voltages so that you have enough vcore to cover 5.1ghz all-core and 4.8ghz cache. You may need a slight dram voltage increase to handle the extra 33mhz on the ram or slight sa/io increase to handle the increased system agent clock/busclock. Then save and exit and go into windows. You will be at 5.1ghz flattttt, about 4.8ghz cache and 3533 in aida64. Then stability test. One thing that may need to be taken care of is bumping around one of the rtls to get 3533 stable. Cross that road when you get their if the ram demands it. Alternatively you can also disable hyperthreading for this profile if you want to conserve voltage or if it is too much for your cooling. You could also use 49 core multiplier if your end goal is 5ghz all core, it will come out to like 4.998ghz.
> 
> Here is an aida64 sample of the end product:


Thank you for the detailed guide.
I agree with you, DRAM temps are high for 1.39v.
I dislike that quite a bit. 


Unfortunately I won't be able to follow your advice regarding cache because that would mean increasing my CPU voltage.
I'm already at the maximum psychological threshold temperature-wise for CPU and all previous attempts to reach Cache 47 or CPU Ratio with AVX 0 have failed.

I already validated this profile to be stable at 3500Mhz [email protected]@1.39v, given your past advice to get rid of 1T since I have 4x16GBs.
It passed all tests I put it through.

My initial goal was indeed CPU Ratio 50, AVX 0 and/or Cache 47 but it's not doable with my chip if I want to keep temps below 100 Celsius in ANY power virus test (with AVX enabled) + low noise.
Precise config is in my signature.
I kinda aimed for a max of 90 Celsius and I'm already at 97 max Celsius with the following:

ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE - DVID:

_BIOS CPU Core: Normal+75mv offset

CPU ratio: 50 | AVX: 1 | Uncore: 45 | MCE: Disabled
IA AC Loadline: 50 | IA DC Loadline: 130 | LLC: Standard | VCCIO: 1.24 | VCCSA: 1.29

CPU VCore PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz | VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300Khz

XMP: Enabled (3200Mhz 15-15-15-34|[email protected]) | DRAM Training Voltage: 1.39v

VT-d: Disabled | EIST: Disabled | C-STATES: only C3 enabled | Intel Speedshift: Disabled_

I can't even do CPU Ratio 50 + AVX 1 + Cache 47 or CPU Ratio 50 + AVX 0 + Cache 43 with what I call reasonable temps and noise.
It is what it is, I never had a golden sample CPU nor particularly looked for one for that matter.

I might try to lower VCCIO and VCCSA a bit and re-test for stability but don't hope for much.


----------



## Kargeras

To avoid any confusion and offer a reference point to anyone who might be reading this, 97 Celsius is "obtained" while running:

Prime95 29.8 build 6 - _fixed 112k with *AVX enabled*_ (I can't stress this last part enough).
Ambient was 27.1 Celsius and AC running in _another room_ for 1h+.

This particular test I found to be most demanding on CPU+CPU Cache+IMC.
2nd place is LINX, which I use as a general guideline for stability by checking if residuals match.
3rd place is Prime95 29.8 build 6 - SMALL with *AVX enabled*.

"Stress tests" like Cinebench, RealBench, AIDA64, Blender & Co. run much... much cooler.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

If you still wanted to hit 3533, you can set your cache to 1 multiplier less than what you know you can run and the busclock will bring it back up to just about what you normally run.

given that you are on 49/45, you could try 48/44 with the 102 busclock. It comes out to slightly less than 4.9/4.5 but the increased memory performance makes up for the small difference


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> If you still wanted to hit 3533, you can set your cache to 1 multiplier less than what you know you can run and the busclock will bring it back up to just about what you normally run.


I'm not sure I follow but I will try to set Cache to 44 and see what the bus clock does.

Your input is top notch nonetheless.

P.S.

Your later edit made it clear, thank you.


----------



## Kargeras

What are your thoughts for my VCCIO and VCCSA settings?

I see people claiming or actually running lower voltages on those.
But I don't know how they actually stress test.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> I'm not sure I follow but I will try to set Cache to 44 and see what the bus clock does.
> 
> Your input is top notch nonetheless.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> Your later edit made it clear, thank you.


NP. In your case to reach 4.9/4.5(ish) 3533 ram, here is the exact order of operations.

have 3500 trained already.

go back into bios.

Set core/cache to 48/44
set memory strap to 3466
set busclock to 102.00
enable memory fast boot
save and exit.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> What are your thoughts for my VCCIO and VCCSA settings?
> 
> I see people claiming or actually running lower voltages on those.
> But I don't know how they actually stress test.


Most of those people are on 2 dimms, i assume. And most guides that list recommended sa/io levels for frequency ranges are usually referring to 2x8GBconfigurations. 2 dimms requires less voltage the majority of the time and dual ranked dimms may or may not require more. It could also be somewhat dependent on the motherboard too.

SA/IO plays a role in stabilizing higher cache ratios too, if you aren't pushing enough you won't be able to stabilize higher cache.

In regards to your sa/io settings, if that's what your chip/ram needs to be stable, then feed it what it needs? Seems okay to me but do whatever you are comfortable with. If you can bring those values down and still be stable, cool, if not, no big deal imo. My chip prefers both sa/io voltages to be the same value keyed into the bios or i get bsods/instability at high frequencies and tight timings.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Most of those people are on 2 dimms. 2 dimms requires less voltage the majority of the time. It could also be somewhat dependent on the motherboard too.


Indeed.

I knew I was taking a risk by going 4x16GB DIMMS but I need that capacity and didn't really want to spend the extra money on 2x32GB kits, as the price difference was not equitable in my mind.
Plus the topology of the Aorus Master that favors 4 DIMMS instead of 2.

Testing now stability for the same config but with IO/SA=1.23v/1.28v.

Will report back.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

oscarf said:


> Here are my settings, do they look okay or is there anything I should change?
> Tested stable


Check to see if 16-16-16-34 gives better performance than 16-16-16-28. Cutting ras too short can make performance suffer but double check and compare to see if you are shooting yourself in the foot. Aside from that, i'd change tWTR-L to 8 because in prior testing, 6 would pass a memtest but crash in games no matter what. Dunno if its a dimm thing or if its a ddr4-rules thing but it had to be 8 for me. That may or may not be the case for you. See if you can lower tRDWR_timings to 12 or 13 to increase bandwidth. If you can't, consider raising tcwl by 2 or 4 and then lowering tRDWR_timings. Also try tuning the other tertiaries except tcke since I don't know what it does or what it affects.


----------



## Kargeras

Kargeras said:


> Testing now stability for the same config but with IO/SA=1.23v/1.28v.
> 
> Will report back.


Overclocking and obtaining stability with this chip has had its bizarre parts.
Lowering IO/SA voltages are the only changes.
Ambient is lower than the previous Prime95 fixed 112k AVX enabled test, at 26.7 Celsius + AC running.

CPU goes into throttle mode after 22 minutes because IOUT is higher, LOL.
I can't explain this.

P.S.

Nevermind.
I accidentally closed the front lid instead keeping it half-open as always.
Aka the albeit lower ambient air had no room to enter the case from.
"Mystery" solved.


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Overclocking and obtaining stability with this chip has had its bizarre parts.
> Lowering IO/SA voltages are the only changes.
> Ambient is lower than the previous Prime95 fixed 112k AVX enabled test, at 26.7 Celsius + AC running.
> 
> CPU goes into throttle mode after 22 minutes because IOUT is higher, LOL.
> I can't explain this.
> 
> P.S.
> 
> Nevermind.
> I accidentally closed the front lid instead keeping it half-open as always.
> Aka the albeit lower ambient air had no room to enter the case from.
> "Mystery" solved.


And I thought accidentally running FMA3 (instead of AVX1) 15K prime95 @ 5.1 ghz/4.8 cache and putting 255 amps/300W POUT--and I'm on an arctic liquid freezer II 360-- into my 10900k @ 5.1 ghz @ 1.18v @ load (which I knew would be unstable but i wasn't paying attention) was bad (got an L0 error and a crashed thread after a few minutes and 96C). 

Forgot I was supposed to use AVX1 in that test, which I know passes 15K, not AVX2 (was redoing my profiles for 3733 mhz 15/15/15/36 2T on 2x16 3200 CL14 sticks).

After seeing those temps I no longer feel so bad.


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> And I thought accidentally running FMA3 (instead of AVX1) 15K prime95 @ 5.1 ghz/4.8 cache and putting 255 amps/300W POUT--and I'm on an arctic liquid freezer II 360-- into my 10900k @ 5.1 ghz @ 1.18v @ load (which I knew would be unstable but i wasn't paying attention) was bad (got an L0 error and a crashed thread after a few minutes and 96C).
> 
> Forgot I was supposed to use AVX1 in that test, which I know passes 15K, not AVX2 (was redoing my profiles for 3733 mhz 15/15/15/36 2T on 2x16 3200 CL14 sticks).
> 
> After seeing those temps I no longer feel so bad.


Are you talking about AVX 1 and 2 as in CPU offsets or Prime95 settings?

How's 10900k, is it a hotter or colder CPU?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> Are you talking about AVX 1 and 2 as in CPU offsets or Prime95 settings?
> 
> How's 10900k, is it a hotter or colder CPU?


Was redoing my settings after moving to new RAM settings (3733 mhz @ 15/15/15/36 2T, @ 1.45v DDR, 1.15v IO, 1.20v SA), my old settings were 3200 mhz 14/14/14/34 1T and I was making sure my overclocks minimum voltages didn't get worse on the "high end" from the RAM overclock (I already knew I needed more vcore at bare minimum vmin to pass 112k-112k avx disabled, at 4.7 ghz (example, 1.145v Bios set, LLC4 before, 1.160v or 1.165v LLC4 afterwards), but looks like my realbench 2.56 and small FFT AVX1 stability didn't change.

I changed from this to this.

And I had forgotten that my 5.1 ghz/4.8 cache, 1.315v (bios set) + LLC6 test --->1.181v load was prime95 AVX1 15K, not AVX2, because AVX2 requires like 25 more mv to pass compared to AVX1 and the chip is completely uncoolable then. (determined that from my 5 ghz/4.7ghz core/cache tests...1.250v LLC6 (AVX1-->1.128v load) vs 1.275v LLC6 (AVX2-->1.146v load).

I was at 242 amps at 15k avx1, 5.1ghz/4.8 ghz, 1.181v load, 93C. 15 minute test.

So I was redoing my saved profiles and ran 5.1 ghz 1.315v Bios set LLC6 and did FMA3 15K instead of AVX 15K, which gave a L0 error and a crashed thread on the weakest core. I don't think my chip liked me very much for doing that...


----------



## Kargeras

Falkentyne said:


> So I was redoing my saved profiles and ran 5.1 ghz 1.315v Bios set LLC6 and did FMA3 15K instead of AVX 15K, which gave a L0 error and a crashed thread on the weakest core. I don't think my chip liked me very much for doing that...



What's Prime95 - fixed 15k test for, what does it stress in particular?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> What's Prime95 - fixed 15k test for, what does it stress in particular?


Heavy Core without dealing with IMC much.
You can tell if the IMC or part of RAM is being stressed. Just look at the RAM temps.
If the RAM doesn't heat up at all, then it's purely core and the hyperthreading (L0 cache) related part of the IMC.


----------



## Ajdaho pl

Hello colleagues
Could I ask you for some advice on overclocking the 9600kf processor on the z390 ultra board? 
so far I can get 5ghz at constant voltage with avx offset 3 at 1.335V 
tested with occt with avx 1 or 2 turned off to check the stability of these 5 ghz , or with avx turned on to check 4.7 ghz in this case 
but for nothing in the world I can't get 5ghz with avx offset 0 even at 1.425V (I didn't dare to set up more)
I turned off all power saving options, and others recommended to turn off in the oc guide from gigabyte , there is no option on my board for the corresponding VRM switching frequency
będę wdzięczny za pomoc
I will be grateful for your help 

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)


----------



## Kivito

Hello guys, greetings to the entire forum.
First, congratulations for your work helping users. 



I wanted to expose my problem. These are the specifications of my system:


z390 Aorus Master, bios f11c

CPU Upgrade: Gaming Profile
MCE: Auto
CPU Clock Ratio: 47
Rin Ratio: Auto
AVX Offset: 0

XMP: Profile 1 DDR4-3600
(rest Auto)

CPUVcore: Normal
DVID: -035
VCCIO: 1.150
CPU System Agent: 1.2

LLC: Normal
PWN CPU & VAX: 300 KHZ.

(rest Auto)


Case: Aerocool Phyton with two additional up fans.
AIO Nox Hummer H-240

I use the computer for games and renders. With games there is no problem but when it comes to making renders, the temperatures range, between 74 and 80 degrees. I've been reading the guides on the forum but I can't contain the temperatures or be able to increase the speed a little, for example to 48, don't need 50, i don't have adequate refrigeration. Somebody help me? im noob.



Thank's


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kivito said:


> Hello guys, greetings to the entire forum.
> First, congratulations for your work helping users.
> 
> 
> 
> I wanted to expose my problem. These are the specifications of my system:
> 
> 
> z390 Aorus Master, bios f11c
> 
> CPU Upgrade: Gaming Profile
> MCE: Auto
> CPU Clock Ratio: 47
> Rin Ratio: Auto
> AVX Offset: 0
> 
> XMP: Profile 1 DDR4-3600
> (rest Auto)
> 
> CPUVcore: Normal
> DVID: -035
> VCCIO: 1.150
> CPU System Agent: 1.2
> 
> LLC: Normal
> PWN CPU & VAX: 300 KHZ.
> 
> (rest Auto)
> 
> 
> Case: Aerocool Phyton with two additional up fans.
> AIO Nox Hummer H-240
> 
> I use the computer for games and renders. With games there is no problem but when it comes to making renders, the temperatures range, between 74 and 80 degrees. I've been reading the guides on the forum but I can't contain the temperatures or be able to increase the speed a little, for example to 48, don't need 50, i don't have adequate refrigeration. Somebody help me? im noob.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank's


 @Falkentyne this one is for you


----------



## Falkentyne

Kivito said:


> Hello guys, greetings to the entire forum.
> First, congratulations for your work helping users.
> 
> 
> 
> I wanted to expose my problem. These are the specifications of my system:
> 
> 
> z390 Aorus Master, bios f11c
> 
> CPU Upgrade: Gaming Profile
> MCE: Auto
> CPU Clock Ratio: 47
> Rin Ratio: Auto
> AVX Offset: 0
> 
> XMP: Profile 1 DDR4-3600
> (rest Auto)
> 
> CPUVcore: Normal
> DVID: -035
> VCCIO: 1.150
> CPU System Agent: 1.2
> 
> LLC: Normal
> PWN CPU & VAX: 300 KHZ.
> 
> (rest Auto)
> 
> 
> Case: Aerocool Phyton with two additional up fans.
> AIO Nox Hummer H-240
> 
> I use the computer for games and renders. With games there is no problem but when it comes to making renders, the temperatures range, between 74 and 80 degrees. I've been reading the guides on the forum but I can't contain the temperatures or be able to increase the speed a little, for example to 48, don't need 50, i don't have adequate refrigeration. Somebody help me? im noob.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank's


Make a BIOS profile with a lower vcore for your rendering jobs? And if it's unstable, reduce the CPU clock speed.
These things are not free...

Renders require more CPU core work than video games. Of course they will run hotter....
Rendering uses 100% all cpu cores and threads. Games do not.

The only games I saw put a 100% all core load is minecraft java (loading screen, briefly) and Battlefield 5 (sometimes when changing maps/joining a server, briefly).


----------



## Kivito

Tank's *Falkentyne*. 



I know, no problems when gaming. I think it would be positive apply undervolting for renders. But this motherboard is very complex for me. I have always had msi or asus, this is my first Gigabyte. 
Yesterday, update the bios with F11j modded. Time to test. Any suggestion? thank's for you help.



P.d: look the renders, free for all 


anima3d.org


----------



## Kivito

After a few days of testing, the results have been the same. Maybe a little improvement in temperatures. No problems with games or machine virtualization. In the renders the temperature ranges from 70-75 degrees. Maybe I should update my AIO, for use 4.8 or 4.9 ghz. Which one could you recommend me? Corsair, CoolerMaster, Kraken, ....


----------



## Kargeras

Kivito said:


> After a few days of testing, the results have been the same. Maybe a little improvement in temperatures. No problems with games or machine virtualization. In the renders the temperature ranges from 70-75 degrees. Maybe I should update my AIO, for use 4.8 or 4.9 ghz. Which one could you recommend me? Corsair, CoolerMaster, Kraken, ....


Having a BIOS profile for gaming, one for porn, another for rendering and yet another one for gay porn sounds... less charismatic to me.
In the same time hoping that the one active profile won't crash or have high temps if you switch from one type of activity to another sounds... less appealing to me.

The computer either works for all types of activities one feels or needs to throw at it or is malfunctioning, and/or is defective.
The exception(s) to that are benchmark competitions, experimentation, hardware testing, overclocking contests or having a computer for the sheer curiosity of how hardware innards work etc.

I can understand a "summer" BIOS profile and a "winter" BIOS profile for people that happen to live in difficult weather conditions and in places that are unable to maintain a constant low/less humid ambient temperature.

Otherwise, if temperatures are an issue, my first thought would be NOT-overclocking and buying a better cooling solution (be it case, fans, CPU cooler, GPU cooler, whichever is at fault).
If money is an issue (which for many people reasonably is) and overclocking isn't your 2nd nature or something you really enjoy doing, I would leave everything on Auto and have my economies spent in the aforementioned cooling solution.

I have a Kraken X62 AIO and my detailed configuration is in the signature.
If you're interested in how X62 fares with power viruses in 25+ Celsius (with or without AC running), search this very thread for my posts.
Temperatures vary wildly and depend on a lot of factors that reviewers or people in general either don't bother mentioning or even think about.

Here's the latest test, 27.6 ambient, no AC running and no window or door open to the exterior.
Prime95 - SMALL - AVX enabled.

For the average user overclocking is not a must.
*Stability* (preferably with low temps) is.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Having a BIOS profile for gaming, one for porn, another for rendering and yet another one for gay porn sounds... less charismatic to me.
> In the same time hoping that the one active profile won't crash or have high temps if you switch from one type of activity to another sounds... less appealing to me.
> 
> The computer either works for all types of activities one feels or needs to throw at it or is malfunctioning, and/or is defective.
> The exception(s) to that are benchmark competitions, experimentation, hardware testing, overclocking contests or having a computer for the sheer curiosity of how hardware innards work etc.
> 
> I can understand a "summer" BIOS profile and a "winter" BIOS profile for people that happen to live in difficult weather conditions and in places that are unable to maintain a constant low/less humid ambient temperature.
> 
> Otherwise, if temperatures are an issue, my first thought would be NOT-overclocking and buying a better cooling solution (be it case, fans, CPU cooler, GPU cooler, whichever is at fault).
> If money is an issue (which for many people reasonably is) and overclocking isn't your 2nd nature, I would leave everything on Auto and have my economies spent in the aforementioned cooling solution.
> 
> I have a Kraken X62 AIO and my detailed configuration is in the signature.
> If you're interested in how X62 fares with power viruses in 25+ Celsius (with or without AC running), search this very thread for my posts.
> Temperatures vary wildly and depend on a lot of factors that reviewers or people in general either don't bother mentioning or even think about.
> 
> Here's the latest test, 27.6 ambient, no AC running and no window or door open to the exterior.
> Prime95 - SMALL - AVX enabled.
> 
> Overclocking is not a must.
> *Stability* (preferably with low temps) is.


LOL.


----------



## Kargeras

Kivito said:


> Case: Aerocool Phyton with two additional up fans.
> AIO Nox Hummer H-240
> 
> I use the computer for games and renders. With games there is no problem but when it comes to making renders, the temperatures range, between 74 and 80 degrees. I've been reading the guides on the forum but I can't contain the temperatures or be able to increase the speed a little, for example to 48, don't need 50, i don't have adequate refrigeration. Somebody help me? im noob.


If I'm reading the image correctly you're having a CPU Core reach a max of 75 Celsius when 100 Amperes are being drawn.
That doesn't seem right, with an AIO.
Doesn't seem right with an air cooler either but it's been a while since I air cooled a CPU.

I don't know how NOX Hummer should perform but my guess it that it shouldn't be like this.

Did you try re-seating the cooler?
What thermal paste are you using, what's your ambient?


----------



## Kivito

Kargeras, warning for porn profiles, these bios are very sensitive 



Ambient temp 26 Celsius. I live on spain (torero, siesta, paella,....) I will test with the "default" profile to see if it improves a little. 



thank's for help


----------



## Kargeras

Kivito said:


> Kargeras, warning for porn profiles, these bios are very sensitive
> Ambient temp 26 Celsius. I live on spain (torero, siesta, paella,....) I will test with the "default" profile to see if it improves a little.
> thank's for help


Not sure I helped yet, but I do understand your frustration.

You're theoretically under-volting, since you're doing DVID minus Offset.
So Auto would give you higher temps since most boards tend to over-volt anyways.
BUT... at least you have a reference point, auto voltages, auto clocks, auto frequencies, auto timings etc.

... and Auto temperatures.
A properly seated AIO should be able to manage Auto everything IF the CPU is not being fed crazy amount of amps via power viri/viruses programs like LINX or Prime95 with AVX enabled.

Running everything on Auto + some standard tests that everybody knows, like Cinebench or AIDA helps everyone relate to their own experience.
And therefore increases the chance that someone will be able to point you in the right direction.

75 Celsius for 100 amperes drawn + AIO CPU cooler isn't right no matter how you look at it.
I would re-seat the AIO anyways, for starters.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Can someone with a 4x8gb kit on the aorus master test something?

If you train a frequency with a full set of previously validated manually(with xmp on) chosen timings @3900mhz or below *with xmp disabled*, How far can you push rtls down for a given frequency? Are you able to push down the rtls further than normal with xmp disabled than with xmp enabled and still be stable?


----------



## Alemancio

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Can someone with a 4x8gb kit on the aorus master test something?
> 
> If you train a frequency with a full set of previously validated manually(with xmp on) chosen timings @3900mhz or below *with xmp disabled*, How far can you push rtls down for a given frequency? Are you able to push down the rtls further than normal with xmp disabled than with xmp enabled and still be stable?


Doesnt that depend on the BIOS you're on?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Alemancio said:


> Doesnt that depend on the BIOS you're on?


Well, you can still shift rtls around, just not individually in a single channel on bioses after f9 if i'm not mistaken. I'm curious if xmp enabled/disabled made a difference or not when it came to pushing around rtls below 3900.


----------



## Alemancio

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Well, you can still shift rtls around, just not individually in a single channel on bioses after f9 if i'm not mistaken. I'm curious if xmp enabled/disabled made a difference or not when it came to pushing around rtls below 3900.


Sorry I cant help you, while I've got 4x8GB 4000 CL17s, to retrain them as I have them now is a god damn nightmare (even with saved BIOS'). I stopped MemoryOCing on this board, coz it sucks...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Alemancio said:


> Sorry I cant help you, while I've got 4x8GB 4000 CL17s, to retrain them as I have them now is a god damn nightmare (even with saved BIOS'). I stopped MemoryOCing on this board, coz it sucks...


Ambient and the temp of the imc makes a huge difference i've found out. It's hard as hell to train c14-3900/3933 with proper rtls right now, AC is broke lol.


----------



## cisco150

Where did you get the modded F11j bios . is it the same or better then the f113 modded on


----------



## cisco150

Kivito said:


> Tank's *Falkentyne*.
> 
> 
> 
> I know, no problems when gaming. I think it would be positive apply undervolting for renders. But this motherboard is very complex for me. I have always had msi or asus, this is my first Gigabyte.
> Yesterday, update the bios with F11j modded. Time to test. Any suggestion? thank's for you help.
> 
> 
> 
> P.d: look the renders, free for all
> 
> 
> anima3d.org


Where did you get the modded F11j bios . is it the same or better then the f113 modded on


----------



## cisco150

KedarWolf said:


> Here is F11j modded with all the latest firmware. GOP, RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 6/02/2020.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> RST RAID firmware updated.
> 
> Full list of upgrades.
> 
> [Current version in BIOS file]
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> EFI AMI NVMe Driver present
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1107
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.11j /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11j BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Thanks for this found i was asking where i should get it from. Is this better then the F11e modded you uploaded before of should i stay at the F11e Modded


----------



## dak148

Hi everyone. I just bought some Patriot Viper Steel 2x8gb 4000mhz ram and I cannot get it to run at 4000. It's running at 3600 with XMP enabled. I tried to manually input the correct timings and stuff but ti just wont post at that point. This is the ram- https://www.newegg.com/patriot-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820225142?Item=N82E16820225142.

I have 2 kits that I have tried and getting the same results so I know its not the RAM. The timings are showing correctly but frequency is not 2000. I am on a Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi-CF, i5-9600k running at stock and on the newest bios (F11) Any ideas on how to get them to run at the correct speed?


----------



## Falkentyne

dak148 said:


> Hi everyone. I just bought some Patriot Viper Steel 2x8gb 4000mhz ram and I cannot get it to run at 4000. It's running at 3600 with XMP enabled. I tried to manually input the correct timings and stuff but ti just wont post at that point. This is the ram- https://www.newegg.com/patriot-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820225142?Item=N82E16820225142.
> 
> I have 2 kits that I have tried and getting the same results so I know its not the RAM. The timings are showing correctly but frequency is not 2000. I am on a i5-9600k running at stock and on the newest bios (F11) Any ideas on how to get them to run at the correct speed?


No problems here getting them to run at default XMP timings. Used Bios F11e on Aorus Master. Don't know about your board. You also neglected to tell us what motherboard you even have...


----------



## dak148

Falkentyne said:


> No problems here getting them to run at default XMP timings. Used Bios F11e on Aorus Master. Don't know about your board. You also neglected to tell us what motherboard you even have...


Sorry, I forgot there are so many aorus boards! I am on the z390 Aorus Pro Wifi-CF.


----------



## Falkentyne

dak148 said:


> Sorry, I forgot there are so many aorus boards! I am on the z390 Aorus Pro Wifi-CF.


Try a newer BIOS.

https://www.tweaktownforum.com/foru...dors/gigabyte/28656-gigabyte-latest-beta-bios


----------



## dak148

Falkentyne said:


> Try a newer BIOS.
> 
> https://www.tweaktownforum.com/foru...dors/gigabyte/28656-gigabyte-latest-beta-bios


Just updated to the newest beta but still having the issue. What is weird is that I installed the 2nd set I have (filled all 4 dimm slots) and the memory clock reads correctly at 2000mhz but if i only have 2 sticks in, its not correct.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

F11j beta bios for z390 aorus master is showing memory OC improvements. This is [email protected] xmp. Never gotten this far in a memtest with 4266+ on 4 sticks. I still need to tune the subs as they are on auto but it is progress so far. Lets see how far it goes. EDIT: errored @ 420% almost 12 minutes in lol.


----------



## Elric2a

is there any custom bios that allow to control RGB in bios without fusion?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Elric2a said:


> is there any custom bios that allow to control RGB in bios without fusion?


Not that I am aware of. Would be a nice feature to have for sure though


----------



## Ivan I

*Falkentyne* 
HI! 
What do you think about VR_VOUT readings on z390 Master and "improved SIO voltage sense" on Asus motherboards? How does this compare?
What can be expected from this CPU on Asus with "improved SIO voltage sense":










Many thanks!


----------



## EarlZ

Can anyone confirm if this is correct;

If I populate the top and bottom NVME slot with a PCIE NVME drive, Can I still get 4X connection for both drives with the following

1 GPU installed 
Only SATA0 & 1 is used, sound card will be moved to the bottom 1X slot.


----------



## Thunder-74

Elric2a said:


> is there any custom bios that allow to control RGB in bios without fusion?



Can you see here (official bios mod Aorus Master Z390 from Gigabyte):

https://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/9408/aorus-master-bios-fusion-included


----------



## Alemancio

On Aorus Master F11J, *how can you override the tREFI Bug?* Whatever I do it resets to 15600 and in bios I can only select 65535.


----------



## Falkentyne

Alemancio said:


> On Aorus Master F11J, *how can you override the tREFI Bug?* Whatever I do it resets to 15600 and in bios I can only select 65535.


Can't. Need to use a different BIOS. F11j is bugged. Use f11e (there was a modded one posted several times, once by me, several times by Kedarwolf and maybe others. Use efiflash in a rufus installed bootable flash drive to flash it).


----------



## EarlZ

Thunder-74 said:


> Can you see here (official bios mod Aorus Master Z390 from Gigabyte):
> 
> https://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/9408/aorus-master-bios-fusion-included



Nice, Id love to be able to turn off all of the board RGB just in the bios. Can this be modded into the latest bios ?


----------



## ezveedub

dak148 said:


> Just updated to the newest beta but still having the issue. What is weird is that I installed the 2nd set I have (filled all 4 dimm slots) and the memory clock reads correctly at 2000mhz but if i only have 2 sticks in, its not correct.


Normal AFAIK on the Z390 Gigabyte mobos with T-Topology DIMM slots. Needs all 4 slot filled to run high frequency. My Master didn't want to do 4000 XMP, only 3866 until I threw in another pair of DDR4 sticks in.


----------



## Thunder-74

EarlZ said:


> Nice, Id love to be able to turn off all of the board RGB just in the bios. Can this be modded into the latest bios ?


many people asked Gigabyte to do it, but they only did this bios


----------



## Wali764

*Board-Switch*

I got a Aorus Pro Wifi two weeks ago, but it did not even boot in my system. The LED said "Dram", so I guess its a Ram-incompatibility. Tried the obvious things, like changing slots, using only one module in different slots and checking dust in the slots with no sucess. Back in my old board, the RAM worked again without a problem; well only at normal 2933Mhz, but still.... Since I did not have alternative RAM, I could not test this and went back to my old board.

Ive got (cheap) G-Skill Aegis (2x16GB) 3000Mhz-16 RAM. On the OVL of the board the RAM is not mentioned, but there only very few G-Skill modules listed and even fewer 16GB-modules. But on the RAM-QVL the MB is listed.

Since my RAM seems pretty basic, I do not unterstand, why it did not work. Problem is, that Id still would like to get a Aorus Z390 board, but since the Pro wasnt working, Im not sure, if its a wise move to buy another one. Afterall Amazon will also not be pleased, getting back opened MBs...

Intrestingly I initially wanted the Aorus-board to also get higher RAM-Stability (also for an later upgrade to 3600Mhz..) 

Anyone got a suggestion, what could be the the problem or what my chances are, that another board, like the Ultra/Elite would work?

Another question:

Is it reasonable to expect that moving from my Z370P D3 (cheapest Z370 vom Gigabyte) to a Z390Arous will give me more stable or even higher OCs? It seems, since Im only using a i5-9600K, demands on the VRM are not too high (nonAVX-prime draws some 130W max) and my board obviously can handle the CPU, that I do not plan to change. But earlier I tried a allcore 5,3GHz OC with 1,42V Vcore and the system alomost made it through Cincebench R20, but eventually crashed. Overall I think 1,42 Vcore for 24/7 is way too high anyway, but getting a 5,2GHz OC with a more moderate Vcore below 1,35V (for stable 5,2Ghz I need ~1,38 V Vcore) would be nice. But I guess, that would be too much to expect from a board-switch, is it?


----------



## computertechy

Hi all,

I decided to buy another set of vengeance pro rgb 16gig and annoyingly this set is made by Samsung while my original set is SK Hynix.

The reason i'm posting is that i'm locked at 2800mhz both on xmp & manual set to 3200, should be 3200mhz like it is with just 2 sticks, will this be because of the different manufacturers?

EDIT: have tried multiple bios's F11C, F11E, F11F & F11J

Thanks all


----------



## sygnus21

EarlZ said:


> Can anyone confirm if this is correct;
> 
> If I populate the top and bottom NVME slot with a PCIE NVME drive, Can I still get 4X connection for both drives with the following
> 
> 1 GPU installed
> Only SATA0 & 1 is used, sound card will be moved to the bottom 1X slot.


What board??? And did you look at you're owner's manual? There's matrix chart showing what slot costs what.


----------



## Xalkerro

Hey all, have been following and reading all the guides/info posted here. Thank you for the great content, it helped a beginner like me to do some tweaking on my own but not without some hiccups. I've done some OC on my 9900KF that's on Aorus Master board (BIOS F11c), ran RealBench and Cinebench R20 and passed without WHEA/BSOD. Attached is the screenshot of the settings on my BIOS and HWINFO. I mainly do gaming only and general day to day use. My goal here is to have 5ghz OC stable all the time. I can run all games without any issues with the OC done , however i recently started playing PUBG and i had 2 instances of freeze and BSOD, and i'm unsure if its maybe application related or the OC causing it. It's only on this game though... Below is my PC Spec:

CPU: 9900KF
Mobo: Aorus Master
Cooler: X73 Kraken
RAM: Corsair 3600Mhz (16GB)
GPU: 1080Ti

Attached is my BIOS settings. Any advice on my OC configurations is greatly appreciated. Cheers.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Change vcore set to 1.34v instead of 1.335v. These boards prefer full 10mv increment increases as opposed to 5mv steps. see if you still crash.


----------



## Xalkerro

Hey there, thanks for the reply. I will give it a shot.


----------



## Kivito

*Falkentyne* & forum guys, thank's for you help 

Finally, im replace my case & aio. Now, i have a Talius Cronos case with 6 fans & aio kraken x73. Adjust the values in bios (F11c) the noise & temperatures are much lower. 


greetings from Spain


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

EDIT: I WAS WRONG. A user got 4300 to be stable enough to do karhu for at least a couple hours on a 8700k. Corrected my post as promised.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Gigabyte recently changed their marketing materials provided to resellers/authorized vendors in regards to memory OC for aorus z390 master. They now say xmp support for 4266. I can confirm that xmp DOES NOT work for 4266mhz. It will train/boot but it will not be stable. I have tried several different kits(4x8gb kits and 2x 2x8GB kits) and several different bioses in attempts to attain memtest speeds 4200 and higher. My memory controller is more than capable of handling these speeds. These boards cap out at 4200mhz memory oc on 4 dimms for replicable daily memtest stable settings. Out of the entire internet, 1 video surfaced from a gigabyte employee reaching 4533mhz memtest stable @ 19-29-29-49 timings, on a special non-retail CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full listing here: https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813145089
> 
> PSA: Despite marketing saying "new z390", these are the same boards, same exact revision on the website, 1.0)
> 
> This is the only piece of evidence of a memtest stable OC across the entire internet for any speed higher than 4200mhz on 4 dimms on this board, but it was done with an ENGINEERING SAMPLE CPU.
> 
> This was done on an *engineering sample CPU*. The timings/frequency could not be replicated on a retail chip with memtest stability on higher quality dimms. It was unable to be confirmed whether or not the gigabyte employee also used an engineering sample z390 aorus motherboard and/or a special bios in addition to using a special engineering sample CPU. As of right now, There are zero verified reports and zero verified evidence of users online attaining any memtest stable results higher than 4200mhz memory OC on a *retail CPU* to date on aorus z390 motherboards. We only see people making claims that they hit this speed on various forums but when those users are asked to either run a memtest or provide tamperproof screenshots of completed memtests they go dark/silent and are never to be heard from again.
> 
> Video is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2-g4oOvoek
> 
> Why am I sharing this information? I don't want buyers to be mislead by gigabyte's marketing like I was. Back when I purchased the board, they advertised speeds up to 4400mhz. I've spent about a year on this board, 4200mhz on 4 dimms is the limit for memtest stable memory overclocks on RETAIL CPUs. They are now saying 4266 can work, my experiences show that it doesn't. I've literally tried EVERY bios from F9 till present(R0 stepping chip support starts at F9), this also includes every beta bios. I've literally tried at least 3 different 4x8gb kits and at least 3 different pairs of 2x8GB kits. I've literally spent 300 dollars in newegg restock fees over the last year just trying to get speeds higher than 4200 memtest stable. It couldn't even be done at stock cpu settings. No, it's not the 9900k's IMC, your 8086k/8700k isn't going to hit 4266+ memtest stable on these boards either despite it having a superior imc. I hope someone more knowledgeable or someone who possesses a stronger OC skillset proves me otherwise using only retail products.
> 
> I think motherboard manufacturers should be required to show proof of concept using ONLY retail products and show this proof of concept in their marketing materials.


You should have seen Hicookie's Z490 Aorus Elite(?) video of 4900 mhz with 1T command rate.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> You should have seen Hicookie's Z490 Aorus Elite(?) video of 4900 mhz with 1T command rate.


Was that also done with an engineering sample? winky face


----------



## GeneO

Here we go again.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

As of right now, This is the top end of the spectrum of what a user can expect with a high tier 4x8gb kit(gskill CL17-4000) on the z390 aorus master after learning their chip/kit/board/bios and putting in the effort to tune. Maybe you can achieve the same or similar results with a mid tier kit, i dunno, I haven't tried them to confirm it. With a better ram kit, like the 4x8gb gskill 4266 kit, one might be able to get CL15-4200 stable. 


















How I achieved 4x8GB 4200MHz 16-16-16-36-2T on the z390 Aorus Master with F9 bios....

If your ram kit is anything like mine, it either would only train 4200 memory strap at a higher CL, in my case cas 18 and only when dram/training voltages set to auto for training then re-adjusted, or won't train 4200 at all. Or it will only train certain frequencies/cas with dram voltage left on auto. Or maybe it prefers vdimm left on auto and only training voltage set to train certain frequencies. Maybe your kit/board don't like odd number tcwl at higher frequencies. You'll have to find out...

I found the solution to be this:
In this order:
1. Key in preferred memory timings, maybe just start off with setting primaries + tRC + tcwl. 
2. Select 4133 memory strap
3. change busclock to 101.5 (keep in mind this increases core/cache clock so drop your multiplier for each by 1 for now for ram training)
4. key in voltages you think/know you'll need for 4200mhz ram
5. save and exit bios to train memory
6. go back into bios immediately after memory training and do the following:
-change busclock back to 100.00 even
-select 4200 memory strap
-enable memory fast boot
-raise core/cache back up by 1 multiplier to hit your preferred clocks since the busclock is back to normal
-save and exit

Why does it train at 4133 + 101.5 busclock for me and not regular 4200 memory strap? I dunno but it is definitely ram kit related as i've had other kits train 4200 memory strap(though not stable). Why do I change the busclock back and use 4200 memory strap? Because any busclock memory overclock beyond 101.00 busclock for me was not memtest stable after rebooting/shutting down after initially passing a memtest after the first train. When swapping over to the 4200 memory strap with 100.00 busclock with memory fast boot after training 4194(4133 + 101.5 busclock), it is still memtest stable after restarts, reboots, shutdowns etc. 

That's how I got 4x8gb 16-16-16-36-2T 4200mhz memtest stable on this board. Maybe you can achieve directly by training 4200 memory strap, or maybe you have to use special tactics like above.


----------



## Ajdaho pl

Guys, I haven't changed anything, I mean the same bios, system version, hwinfo version, but I can't see the readings from vr vout , any advice?


----------



## napalmonfire

@KedarWolf, first of all thanks for all good work u've done(been using f10b modded for a long time). Is there any chance u can mod f11e bios for aorus pro wifi? It looks like I can find for master only.


----------



## KedarWolf

napalmonfire said:


> @KedarWolf, first of all thanks for all good work u've done(been using f10b modded for a long time). Is there any chance u can mod f11e bios for aorus pro wifi? It looks like I can find for master only.


Can you link the unmodded BIOS here in a zip file?


----------



## napalmonfire

KedarWolf said:


> Can you link the unmodded BIOS here in a zip file?



View attachment Z390AOPW.zip


----------



## ShawnTRD

I've not overclocked anything on my 9600K as my video card is only a GTX 970 and is my big bottleneck. But should I adjust any of my BIOS setting like voltages or others and why? My last system (Q6600) was build in 2007 and I've been out of the BIOS tweaking/overclocking scene.


----------



## Ajdaho pl

ShawnTRD said:


> I've not overclocked anything on my 9600K as my video card is only a GTX 970 and is my big bottleneck. But should I adjust any of my BIOS setting like voltages or others and why? My last system (Q6600) was build in 2007 and I've been out of the BIOS tweaking/overclocking scene.


instal hwinfo64 and check values for VCCSA and VCCIO , because on auto , this mobo can raise automaticaly this voltages too high , on mine mobo bios set it to 1,35V when recommended values is up to 1,25V and for normal use 1-1,1V

in bios this voltages is named as cpu system agent voltage , and cpu vccio


----------



## ksw1843

napalmonfire said:


> @KedarWolf, first of all thanks for all good work u've done(been using f10b modded for a long time). Is there any chance u can mod f11e bios for aorus pro wifi? It looks like I can find for master only.


I am just curious. Isn't new beta bios F12h for pro wifi??

EDIT: Grammar


----------



## ShawnTRD

Ajdaho pl said:


> instal hwinfo64 and check values for VCCSA and VCCIO , because on auto , this mobo can raise automaticaly this voltages too high , on mine mobo bios set it to 1,35V when recommended values is up to 1,25V and for normal use 1-1,1V
> 
> in bios this voltages is named as cpu system agent voltage , and cpu vccio


In hwinfo64 where am I looking for VCCSA and VCCIO.


----------



## KedarWolf

napalmonfire said:


> View attachment 358796
> [/quote
> 
> 
> F11e bios for Aorus Pro Wi-fi modded with all the latest firmware. RST, Ethernet, and the fastest microcodes. Updated 07/05/2020.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> RST RAID firmware updated.
> 
> Full list of upgrades.
> 
> [Current version in BIOS file]
> 1 - Disk Controller
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> EFI NVMe Driver present
> 
> 2 - Video OnBoard
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1108
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│0xD70090│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0xD87C90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0xD9FC90│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0xDB8090│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧════════╧════╝
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11e BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## Ajdaho pl

ShawnTRD said:


> In hwinfo64 where am I looking for VCCSA and VCCIO.


like on my screen


----------



## Ajdaho pl

Gentlemen, I repeat the question, do you have any idea what causes vr vout sensors to disappear in hwinfo?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Ajdaho pl said:


> Gentlemen, I repeat the question, do you have any idea what causes vr vout sensors to disappear in hwinfo?


I have no idea. Does the issue keep persisting or was it a happened once sort of thing?


----------



## Ajdaho pl

at the beginning hwinfo showed me all the sensors, I remember because I was wondering why vr vout is low compared to vcore, but I learned this while reading this topic, then the vr vout readings disappeared, since then I managed to call them once, after changing the bios to the old F6, but after another turn on the computer they disappeared again.
all applications from the gigabyte uninstalled, but it still doesn't help , hwinfo reinstaled few times , also checked diffrent version , still nothing


----------



## EarlZ

Ajdaho pl said:


> Gentlemen, I repeat the question, do you have any idea what causes vr vout sensors to disappear in hwinfo?


Its been happening to me with v6.22 but it gets fixed when I go to the layout page and hit restore layout.


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Its been happening to me with v6.22 but it gets fixed when I go to the layout page and hit restore layout.


Re-enable fixed order. That fixes it. The issue seems to be when you disable fixed order and start moving stuff around.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Ajdaho pl said:


> like on my screen


Thanks. I found it. So I should set it to what in the BIOS?


----------



## Ajdaho pl

VCCSA for shure in my opinion , i think if You not Overclocking memory now set VCCIO to 1V and VCCSA to 1.1V


----------



## ShawnTRD

Ajdaho pl said:


> VCCSA for shure in my opinion , i think if You not Overclocking memory now set VCCIO to 1V and VCCSA to 1.1V


My RAM running on the XMP. So it's set to 3600 for "G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GTZRC"


----------



## Ajdaho pl

ShawnTRD said:


> My RAM running on the XMP. So it's set to 3600 for "G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GTZRC"


1V AND 1,1 V will be enough , if not than You rise little


----------



## ShawnTRD

Ajdaho pl said:


> 1V AND 1,1 V will be enough , if not than You rise little


That wouldn't load windows. Then froze the first time I tried to reset it.


----------



## MVTK

Got z390 aorus master with i9900KS


If I leave everything on auto, my VR VOUT goes to 1.40+
I left everything on auto but modified the parameters below in the screenshot, plus ring to 48
Now I am getting 1.27 max on stress and 1.25-1.26 avg on stress
0.71-0.95 idle
mostly 1.22 on idle while browsing


Temps max 90 stress - avg 86-89 without avx
Since this is for gaming I will set an offset for avx



Any further changes I should make?


EDIT- LLC anything below High gives me BSOD
PWM Phase Control - there is one step higher than current, would it give me more performance?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

MVTK said:


> Got z390 aorus master with i9900KS
> 
> 
> If I leave everything on auto, my VR VOUT goes to 1.40+
> I left everything on auto but modified the parameters below in the screenshot, plus ring to 48
> Now I am getting 1.27 max on stress and 1.25-1.26 avg on stress
> 0.71-0.95 idle
> mostly 1.22 on idle while browsing
> 
> 
> Temps max 90 stress - avg 86-89 without avx
> Since this is for gaming I will set an offset for avx
> 
> 
> 
> Any further changes I should make?
> 
> 
> EDIT- LLC anything below High gives me BSOD
> PWM Phase Control - there is one step higher than current, would it give me more performance?


I recommend setting pwm phase control @ extreme. From what i've observed in stress tests, It increases memory stability at higher ocs/tighter ocs.


----------



## MVTK

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I recommend setting pwm phase control @ extreme. From what i've observed in stress tests, It increases memory stability at higher ocs/tighter ocs.


Will do that.

CPU Vcore PWM Switch Rate and VAXG PWM Switch Rate, some pages back there were mentions to change those to 300 to improve transients?, should I? Did they fix it in the last BIOS? I think this is a question for* @Falkentyne * 


Also, I never quite understood how CPU Vcore Current Protection works, at extreme it's disable or it's "protecting" more? I googled it but never found an answer. Same with CPU Vcore/VAXG Protection, how does it work? Noob question, but I never quite got an answer to this and I am done with Gigabyte's support, apparently all they do is google and give me a no answer.


Also, I see you have been testing memory configurations, I wish to run mine at 4000 for gaming.


XMP:

G Skill TridentZ RGB F4-3733C17-8GTZR 
@ 1869 MHz 17-17-17-37 (CL-RCD-RP-RAS) / 54-655-486-300-10-7-45 (RC-RFC1-RFC2-RFC4-RRDL-RRDS-FAW)
auto 1.35v
auto 1.29v IO (seems high)
auto 1.30v SA (also seems high)

It's samsung b-die
It's 4x8 single rank.

IO, SA and Vdram can be whatever I need to hit a good oc between 3800-4000, whatever is best for gaming. Currently they seem to be higher than the memory needs, it's on auto.

I would love a "recipe" of good timings. Something I can start with, test, fine tune a little and leave alone.


I found several tutorials online. Some tips and a starting point would be great.


----------



## Falkentyne

MVTK said:


> Will do that.
> 
> CPU Vcore PWM Switch Rate and VAXG PWM Switch Rate, some pages back there were mentions to change those to 300 to improve transients?, should I? Did they fix it in the last BIOS? I think this is a question for* @Falkentyne *
> 
> 
> Also, I never quite understood how CPU Vcore Current Protection works, at extreme it's disable or it's "protecting" more? I googled it but never found an answer. Same with CPU Vcore/VAXG Protection, how does it work? Noob question, but I never quite got an answer to this and I am done with Gigabyte's support, apparently all they do is google and give me a no answer.
> 
> 
> Also, I see you have been testing memory configurations, I wish to run mine at 4000 for gaming.
> 
> 
> XMP:
> 
> G Skill TridentZ RGB F4-3733C17-8GTZR
> @ 1869 MHz 17-17-17-37 (CL-RCD-RP-RAS) / 54-655-486-300-10-7-45 (RC-RFC1-RFC2-RFC4-RRDL-RRDS-FAW)
> auto 1.35v
> auto 1.29v IO (seems high)
> auto 1.30v SA (also seems high)
> 
> It's samsung b-die
> It's 4x8 single rank.
> 
> IO, SA and Vdram can be whatever I need to hit a good oc between 3800-4000, whatever is best for gaming. Currently they seem to be higher than the memory needs, it's on auto.
> 
> I would love a "recipe" of good timings. Something I can start with, test, fine tune a little and leave alone.
> 
> 
> I found several tutorials online. Some tips and a starting point would be great.


Not fixable on this platform due to power stage design. On Z490 master, 500 khz works better.


----------



## opt33

anyone else tried the two temp sensor headers on their z390 gigabye aorus mobo. I plugged the two temp sensors that came with mobo into the two headers, labeled EC_TEMP1 and EC_TEMP2 but neither are reading temps. bios just has "-" beside readings, same as in windows, same as if neither is plugged in. Either headers dont work on my mobo or some bios setting that "enables" them Im missing? I installed the app center/smart fan 5.


----------



## Thunder-74

opt33 said:


> anyone else tried the two temp sensor headers on their z390 gigabye aorus mobo. I plugged the two temp sensors that came with mobo into the two headers, labeled EC_TEMP1 and EC_TEMP2 but neither are reading temps. bios just has "-" beside readings, same as in windows, same as if neither is plugged in. Either headers dont work on my mobo or some bios setting that "enables" them Im missing? I installed the app center/smart fan 5.


I use EC_temp2 for liquid temp and It works well


----------



## computertechy

opt33 said:


> anyone else tried the two temp sensor headers on their z390 gigabye aorus mobo. I plugged the two temp sensors that came with mobo into the two headers, labeled EC_TEMP1 and EC_TEMP2 but neither are reading temps. bios just has "-" beside readings, same as in windows, same as if neither is plugged in. Either headers dont work on my mobo or some bios setting that "enables" them Im missing? I installed the app center/smart fan 5.


Have you tried HWinfo64? Just recently starting using mine and renamed them to front/rear rad ambient.

No hidden settings just plug in and that's it.


----------



## opt33

Thunder-74 said:


> I use EC_temp2 for liquid temp and It works well





computertechy said:


> Have you tried HWinfo64? Just recently starting using mine and renamed them to front/rear rad ambient.
> 
> No hidden settings just plug in and that's it.


Thank you both for feedback, that is what I thought. Looks like neither temp header works on my mobo, bios doesnt see any reading with either plugged in. Tried different temp sensors, and not surprising hwinfo and gigabyte software wont read it since bios wont. 

EDIT: just reflashed bios...and both temp probes/temps then showed up in bios...not really sure why...but works now. And good to know I can get rid of gigabyte software and just use hwinfo64


----------



## CoreyHUN

So I am struggling to achieve a stable 5ghz overclock on my Aorus Master + 9900k + Trident Z Neo (F4-3600c16d-32gtznc) combo.

CPU Vcore: 1.36
CPU VCCIO: 1.15
CPU System Agent: 1.20
AVX Offset = 0, 

HyperThreading: off 
VT-d: off
Voltage Optimization, EIST, SpeedStep, recommended stuff like these are disabled
C states Disabled
XMP Enabled. 
Enhanced multicore disabled
CPU Core to 50
Uncore set to 47
Loadline Calibration on Turbo.

I get CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT BSODs after 1-2 minutes of testing, Prime95 Small FFTs AVX off, Cinebench R15/20. Any clues what might be causing this?


----------



## Falkentyne

CoreyHUN said:


> So I am struggling to achieve a stable 5ghz overclock on my Aorus Master + 9900k + Trident Z Neo (F4-3600c16d-32gtznc) combo.
> 
> CPU Vcore: 1.36
> CPU VCCIO: 1.15
> CPU System Agent: 1.20
> AVX Offset = 0,
> 
> HyperThreading: off
> VT-d: off
> Voltage Optimization, EIST, SpeedStep, recommended stuff like these are disabled
> C states Disabled
> XMP Enabled.
> Enhanced multicore disabled
> CPU Core to 50
> Uncore set to 47
> Loadline Calibration on Turbo.
> 
> I get CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT BSODs after 1-2 minutes of testing, Prime95 Small FFTs AVX off, Cinebench R15/20. Any clues what might be causing this?


1) raise vcore 20mv higher, (1.380v), do you still get clock watchdog timeout?

2) when finished with 1, set vcore back to original (-20mv), lower uncore to 43, do you still get clock watchdog timeout?

That will give you your answer.


----------



## Medvediy

Anyone tried Z390 AORUS Master - "F11j GK" BIOS? With RGB Control from inside! Just found it on tweaktown


----------



## Thunder-74

Medvediy said:


> Anyone tried Z390 AORUS Master - "F11j GK" BIOS? With RGB Control from inside! Just found it on tweaktown


Yes put, it works even the delete key to enter the bios

LED management is basic


----------



## CoreyHUN

Falkentyne said:


> 1) raise vcore 20mv higher, (1.380v), do you still get clock watchdog timeout?
> 
> 2) when finished with 1, set vcore back to original (-20mv), lower uncore to 43, do you still get clock watchdog timeout?
> 
> That will give you your answer.


Thanks!

So I did number 1#, still clock watchdog timeout.

I did #2, Cinebench R20/R15 got through a few times, then Prime95 Blended w/ AVX for 2 minutes, KERNEL_SECURITY_CHECK_FAILURE (or similar) bsod, reboot, same settings, Prime95 Small FFTs w/ AVX, first 5-6 seconds, clock watchdog timeout again ????*♂


----------



## GeneO

Same here. F11j GK has the B4, etc. fast microcode and I think the F11j bugs (that don't really affect me so I did not test). It has an updated IME (CSME) too. I had to put the memory optimization mode to Auto (instead of Optimized For Performance) to get my memory OC to train to the same settings I had for f11i. iol/rtl were acceptable in any case. Very rudimentary RGB control - none for RAM. I am still using RGB Fusion software so I can turn off RAM LED when computer sleeps (cannot do that with g.skill software).


----------



## Thunder-74

CoreyHUN said:


> Thanks!
> 
> So I did number 1#, still clock watchdog timeout.
> 
> I did #2, Cinebench R20/R15 got through a few times, then Prime95 Blended w/ AVX for 2 minutes, KERNEL_SECURITY_CHECK_FAILURE (or similar) bsod, reboot, same settings, Prime95 Small FFTs w/ AVX, first 5-6 seconds, clock watchdog timeout again ????*♂



with the fixed voltage I had your same problems. I found this guide(link down) and now I'm happy with DVID
I have set + 0.030v and AVX 0 - 5ghz all cores - HT on
my voltage does not exceed 1.26v under CB20 . with fixed voltage 1.36v was not enough for me
some settings, they are the opposite of what I thought was correct for overclocking ..

another tip, set the PWM/VAXG Switch on 300khz

Try and tell me  :

https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/


----------



## CoreyHUN

Thunder-74 said:


> with the fixed voltage I had your same problems. I found this guide(link down) and now I'm happy with DVID
> I have set + 0.030v and AVX 0 - 5ghz all cores - HT on
> my voltage does not exceed 1.26v under CB20 . with fixed voltage 1.36v was not enough for me
> some settings, they are the opposite of what I thought was correct for overclocking ..
> 
> another tip, set the PWM/VAXG Switch on 300khz
> 
> Try and tell me  :
> 
> https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/


Well I set Vcore to normal (so I can set DVID) I set DVID to +0.030v, I reboot to bios, I see that my CPU Voltage is usually between 1.47 / 1.51 ? Im not sure if I should boot like that into the system, also my in-bios temperature is like 6-7°c higher.

I also tried with only these settings changed + default:
CPU Core to 50
Vcore: Normal
DVID: +0.030v

Same, quite high voltage / temp.

Am I doing something wrong?


----------



## Thunder-74

CoreyHUN said:


> Well I set Vcore to normal (so I can set DVID) I set DVID to +0.030v, I reboot to bios, I see that my CPU Voltage is usually between 1.47 / 1.51 ? Im not sure if I should boot like that into the system, also my in-bios temperature is like 6-7°c higher.
> 
> I also tried with only these settings changed + default:
> CPU Core to 50
> Vcore: Normal
> DVID: +0.030v
> 
> Same, quite high voltage / temp.
> 
> Am I doing something wrong?


have you set all the parameters as per the guide? especially the LLC on Low?
also when you change from a fixed to a variable Vcore and vice versa, you must always do a clean cmos. Otherwise, I noticed that in VID it remains high than normal
however it starts with an offset 0. In my case I had to give + 0.030v to be stable, you don't have to do it. do tests and then evaluate if necessary or maybe apply a negative value


----------



## CoreyHUN

Thunder-74 said:


> have you set all the parameters as per the guide? especially the LLC on Low?
> also when you change from a fixed to a variable Vcore and vice versa, you must always do a clean cmos. Otherwise, I noticed that in VID it remains high than normal
> however it starts with an offset 0. In my case I had to give + 0.030v to be stable, you don't have to do it. do tests and then evaluate if necessary or maybe apply a negative value


So I started with a CMOS reset, it actually helped the DVID not to go nuts, set all the settings from the post you mentioned, 0.000 DVID, reboot to bios, CPU voltage at 1.32-1.33, boot to the system, Cinebench R15 doesn't even start, error, Cinebench R20 gives IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL BSOD, I go back to the bios, apply +0.030 DVID, reboot to bios, 1.36 seems okay (i guess?) go back to the system, Cinebench R15, CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT., so yeah..


----------



## Thunder-74

CoreyHUN said:


> So I started with a CMOS reset, it actually helped the DVID not to go nuts, set all the settings from the post you mentioned, 0.000 DVID, reboot to bios, CPU voltage at 1.32-1.33, boot to the system, Cinebench R15 doesn't even start, error, Cinebench R20 gives IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL BSOD, I go back to the bios, apply +0.030 DVID, reboot to bios, 1.36 seems okay (i guess?) go back to the system, Cinebench R15, CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT., so yeah..


I'm afraid you weren't lucky with the silicon lottery...


----------



## AndrejB

Thunder-74 said:


> CoreyHUN said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I started with a CMOS reset, it actually helped the DVID not to go nuts, set all the settings from the post you mentioned, 0.000 DVID, reboot to bios, CPU voltage at 1.32-1.33, boot to the system, Cinebench R15 doesn't even start, error, Cinebench R20 gives IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL BSOD, I go back to the bios, apply +0.030 DVID, reboot to bios, 1.36 seems okay (i guess?) go back to the system, Cinebench R15, CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT., so yeah..
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid you weren't lucky with the silicon lottery...
Click to expand...

The first cpu I got idled at 1.27 in the bios (after a cmos reset) I promptly returned it. This one idles at 1.21

A bit of info to know what you're working with.


----------



## Thunder-74

AndrejB said:


> The first cpu I got idled at 1.27 in the bios (after a cmos reset) I promptly returned it. This one idles at 1.21
> 
> A bit of info to know what you're working with.


 with fixed voltage on AUTO and frequency at default, i have 1.20v, but if I select the DVID voltage and set the 5ghz clock, the VID factory values are automatically set (1,27v)


----------



## Falkentyne

Thunder-74 said:


> with fixed voltage on AUTO and frequency at default, i have 1.20v, but if I select the DVID voltage and set the 5ghz clock, the VID factory values are automatically set (1,27v)


Please make sure you guys are using f11e or f11i and not f10, or f11b/c. (T0d, t1d are ok too). I am not sure if f11j with the missing menus/trefi has the DVID/fixed issue or not. Probably does also.

There are DVID/fixed vcore bugs in these other versions (and going back to first release bios) which were corrected in the ones I listed.
Changing back and forth in the unfixed bioses will cause incorrect vcore/excessive vcore.

And please do *NOT* use 1.20v fixed vcore at all. Use 1.195v or 1.205v.
Using 1.20v fixed vcore and then switching to DVID afterwards prevents DVID from doing anything.
And using 1.20v fixed vcore and then enabling SVID Offset will cause blank post code, 100% fans and force clear CMOS.


----------



## CoreyHUN

So just so I can understand what is going on (because I have no actual clue) 
In the bios, right panel, CPU voltage shows 1.296 (but it changes after reboot sometimes, once it was 1.286)
These are my idle voltages when booted into windows.









So, are these good values, or not lol? Im a complete newb to all this


----------



## CoreyHUN

Falkentyne said:


> Please make sure you guys are using f11e or f11i and not f10, or f11b/c. (T0d, t1d are ok too). I am not sure if f11j with the missing menus/trefi has the DVID/fixed issue or not. Probably does also.
> 
> There are DVID/fixed vcore bugs in these other versions (and going back to first release bios) which were corrected in the ones I listed.
> Changing back and forth in the unfixed bioses will cause incorrect vcore/excessive vcore.
> 
> And please do *NOT* use 1.20v fixed vcore at all. Use 1.195v or 1.205v.
> Using 1.20v fixed vcore and then switching to DVID afterwards prevents DVID from doing anything.
> And using 1.20v fixed vcore and then enabling SVID Offset will cause blank post code, 100% fans and force clear CMOS.


Umm, would you mind sending me a link with the f11e or f11i bios? I download my bioses from gigabyte's website which only lists f11c, not sure where should I look for the ones you mentioned?


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> Please make sure you guys are using f11e or f11i and not f10, or f11b/c. (T0d, t1d are ok too). I am not sure if f11j with the missing menus/trefi has the DVID/fixed issue or not. Probably does also.
> 
> There are DVID/fixed vcore bugs in these other versions (and going back to first release bios) which were corrected in the ones I listed.
> Changing back and forth in the unfixed bioses will cause incorrect vcore/excessive vcore.
> 
> And please do *NOT* use 1.20v fixed vcore at all. Use 1.195v or 1.205v.
> Using 1.20v fixed vcore and then switching to DVID afterwards prevents DVID from doing anything.
> And using 1.20v fixed vcore and then enabling SVID Offset will cause blank post code, 100% fans and force clear CMOS.



i am using f11j GK, monitoring with hwinfo, i don't find anomalous values ​​of Vcore (all chips) or VROut. I don't know if this bios is further modified (in addition to the menu for rgb), because it has the fastest microcode


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Falkentyne

CoreyHUN said:


> Umm, would you mind sending me a link with the f11e or f11i bios? I download my bioses from gigabyte's website which only lists f11c, not sure where should I look for the ones you mentioned?


The ones modded with fastest microcodes need to be flashed with efiflash 0.80 on a USB boot drive (efiflash biosname.extension /x is the command, replace biosname.extension with the name of the BIOS). I also posted the original f11e (slow microcodes) that can be Qflashed.

The "1.20v" bug affects ALL bios versions, even the DVID fixed ones and it happens due to the "default" voltage on the right side showing as 1.20v, but there is no "default" voltage on these bioses, as they all use VID and the AC/DC Loadline values to set the "default" voltage. That's why setting 1.20v fixed, saving, exiting then changing to "DVID" mode prevents DVID mode from working at all. It's also why setting "SVID offset->Enabled" with 1.20v fixed vcore causes 0 volts to be sent to the CPU and a completely blank post code.

I did report this to Gigabyte and attempted to get them to fix it but they were busy with Z490 and that was not considered a high priority bug (the DVID overvoltage issue when changing from dvid-->fixed vcore however was serious thus fixed).


----------



## WINTENDOX

Not Bad 24/7hrs


----------



## computertechy

Quick question for Falkentyne,

I have had amazing results from the 300khz switch rate thanks to you, does having them both set at 300khz matter? (VAXG & VCORE)

Still confuses me that having switch rate @ auto means i need 1.4v+ for stable 5ghz, currently testing 1.32v.

Once again, thanks for the hard work you have put into all this!

EDIT: just as i posted i get a Cache error, back to 1.33v


----------



## Falkentyne

computertechy said:


> Quick question for Falkentyne,
> 
> I have had amazing results from the 300khz switch rate thanks to you, does having them both set at 300khz matter? (VAXG & VCORE)
> 
> Still confuses me that having switch rate @ auto means i need 1.4v+ for stable 5ghz, currently testing 1.32v.
> 
> Once again, thanks for the hard work you have put into all this!
> 
> EDIT: just as i posted i get a Cache error, back to 1.33v


300 khz allows about a 15mv voltage reduction.
VAXG (iGPU) one doesn't matter at all. Unless you're using the iGPU of course.

I dont know much about hardware on the VRM level, but I'm guessing it has something to do with the power stage design as this issue is NOT just limited to the Z390 Aorus Master or Z390 Extreme, as it happens to other boards also.

Doesn't seem to be doubler related because the Z490 Aorus master has doublers also, but 500 khz is more stable than 300 khz on the Z490 Aorus master, but on the Z390 Master, Z390 Maximus XI Apex and XI Extreme, the lower the switching frequency the more stable. The common denominator in those boards are the IR 3551/3555/3559 power stages (used on both the doubler and non doubler (e.g. teamed phase) boards.


----------



## CoreyHUN

Falkentyne said:


> The ones modded with fastest microcodes need to be flashed with efiflash 0.80 on a USB boot drive (efiflash biosname.extension /x is the command, replace biosname.extension with the name of the BIOS). I also posted the original f11e (slow microcodes) that can be Qflashed.
> 
> The "1.20v" bug affects ALL bios versions, even the DVID fixed ones and it happens due to the "default" voltage on the right side showing as 1.20v, but there is no "default" voltage on these bioses, as they all use VID and the AC/DC Loadline values to set the "default" voltage. That's why setting 1.20v fixed, saving, exiting then changing to "DVID" mode prevents DVID mode from working at all. It's also why setting "SVID offset->Enabled" with 1.20v fixed vcore causes 0 volts to be sent to the CPU and a completely blank post code.
> 
> I did report this to Gigabyte and attempted to get them to fix it but they were busy with Z490 and that was not considered a high priority bug (the DVID overvoltage issue when changing from dvid-->fixed vcore however was serious thus fixed).


Thank you.

So I have flashed the F11i modded bios, which seems more.. stable? I've been running the settings from the post below, HT off, with 0 AVX offset, and +0.015 DVID offset. 

https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/9900k-5ghz-1-2v-guide-gigabyte-z390-master.353729/

Ran Cinebench R15 and R20 several times, Prime95 Small FFTs without AVX for a few minutes, and just used the system for 6-7 hours no crash, gaming browsing etc, until like the 7 hour mark, I was like, hmm the systems seems stable gonna open up HWMonitor64 I had running in the background for some time now to see the max values, when I opened it, freeze, and MACHINE_CHECK_EXCEPTION BSOD, is that also instability related? If so, what should I change?


----------



## Anubis_offline

"what should I change?" Lower your undercore frequency. Check this video from Buildzoid on Z390 Oc 



.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

@KedarWolf @Falkentyne is there a chance I can get a modded f11e bios(fastest microcodes) that is qflashable? i can get the right rtls/iols for cl15-4200 on a modded f11e that I qflashed though I don't think it was supposed to be qflashed because after every shutdown it wants to retrain the memory even with memory fastboot enabled which is a pain in the butt for frequencies/rtls that are hard to train. pretty please with cherries on top . I would do the whole fredos rufus thing but it wants to erase my whole usb just to make the bootable drive, I have a bootable back up windows on there on its own partition that I need to keep in case of emergencies so the freedos rufus thing isn't going to work for me, gotta have the backup windows installation. Is there a chance I could get a modded f11e that is qflashable that won't require the memory to retrain after shutdowns?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> @KedarWolf @Falkentyne is there a chance I can get a modded f11e bios(fastest microcodes) that is qflashable? i can get the right rtls/iols for cl15-4200 on a modded f11e that I qflashed though I don't think it was supposed to be qflashed because after every shutdown it wants to retrain the memory even with memory fastboot enabled which is a pain in the butt for frequencies/rtls that are hard to train. pretty please with cherries on top . I would do the whole fredos rufus thing but it wants to erase my whole usb just to make the bootable drive, I have a bootable back up windows on there on its own partition that I need to keep in case of emergencies so the freedos rufus thing isn't going to work for me, gotta have the backup windows installation. Is there a chance I could get a modded f11e that is qflashable that won't require the memory to retrain after shutdowns?


You need to do a hex edit mod to make it Qflashable. Instructions are on win-raid.com. Sorry, no links as I didn't save it since I don't bother doing it.
And read my other reply with the proper clear cmos instructions.


----------



## Baam

What is the best non modded bios for Z390 Master? Currently i'm using the F11C


----------



## Wam7

Baam said:


> What is the best non modded bios for Z390 Master? Currently i'm using the F11C


Well it's definitely not 11c, it has slower microcodes. Stick with F10 or if you want better memory latitude for O/C then probably F9.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Does anyone have experience mixing different memory kits?

Been thinking of upgrading from 2x8 to 4x8 to get the most out of t-topology. Currently have 2x8 Team Dark Pro 3200 CL14. New kits are running like $130, which is a big nope because I can get some T-Force Xtreem for that price. But my local Microcenter has some G-Skill Flare X 3200 CL14 for like $85 open box. I assume since it’s a similar bin to my Team Dark Pro and also has the same A0 PCB that it should perform similar, right? Or am I crazy to think that this will let me keep the same memory settings at 4x8?


----------



## Baam

Wam7 said:


> Well it's definitely not 11c, it has slower microcodes. Stick with F10 or if you want better memory latitude for O/C then probably F9.


Thx, any F10 or one in particular? My Z390 Master dosn't digest my ram at xmp anyway, 32 gb (2x16) Corsair 4000mhz CL19, so i always have to run them at 3600 CL16 if i remember


----------



## mjh74

Baam said:


> What is the best non modded bios for Z390 Master? Currently i'm using the F11C


I've stayed with F9.


----------



## DarknightOCR

I have been using the F10b.
test the F11e and F11i
in both I can not stable OC with cache at 4.7ghz.
always gives error in aida64 for example.

with the F10b it tests for hours without problems.
now I put the F9, so far stable too.
always using the same settings.

9900K R0 5ghz @ 1.23V bios and Gskill 32Gb 4x8 3600 cl16 @ 4000Mhz 17-17-17


----------



## Driller au

Baam said:


> Thx, any F10 or one in particular? My Z390 Master dosn't digest my ram at xmp anyway, 32 gb (2x16) Corsair 4000mhz CL19, so i always have to run them at 3600 CL16 if i remember


I have 3600 mhz memory at 4K using F10b bios, in the post below the one i link Kedarwolf has a more updated F10b

page 866
post 8658


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

quick psa: Found this out recently on another forum, lowering the memory timing "tXP" can improve memory latency in aida64. I lowered mine from 8 to 6 and latency improved by .5ns. still have to compare 1% lows in gaming etc.


----------



## Alemancio

XGS-Duplicity said:


> quick psa: Found this out recently on another forum, lowering the memory timing "tXP" can improve memory latency in aida64. I lowered mine from 8 to 6 and latency improved by .5ns. still have to compare 1% lows in gaming etc.


More info on tXP


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Alemancio said:


> More info on tXP


actually lowering tXP from 8 to 6 gave me better aida64 latency but worst 1% lows in games. Maybe 8 was already the sweet spot. 1% lows in modern warfare are like 170s for me with txp @ 8, went down to 115 with txp @ 6.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> actually lowering tXP from 8 to 6 gave me better aida64 latency but worst 1% lows in games. Maybe 8 was already the sweet spot. 1% lows in modern warfare are like 170s for me with txp @ 8, went down to 115 with txp @ 6.


Did you verify this across multiple reboots and switching back and forth?

170 FPS to 115 FPS?
that's......wow....


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Did you verify this across multiple reboots and switching back and forth?
> 
> 170 FPS to 115 FPS?
> that's......wow....


Yeah i was surprised. On a side note, air conditioning is fixed. I have a makeshift cardboard box airvent going from the ceiling vent directly to my rad/aio/case. 5.2ghz hyperthreading on, 1.33v/load voltage cbr15, 80c temps. water is 20c lol, i usually need 50mv more under load for the same stability. 5.3ghz ht off same voltage, 69c in cbr15 lol. So happy to have new central air lol. time to push 5.4ghz ht off


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

can anyone tell me if the master bios(something like t1d or t0d if i recall correctly) has the ability to adjust CMD CTRL DATA...risng/falling? Or do any of the giga bioses allow for adjustment of those values?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> can anyone tell me if the master bios(something like t1d or t0d if i recall correctly) has the ability to adjust CMD CTRL DATA...risng/falling? Or do any of the giga bioses allow for adjustment of those values?


My Z390 board isn't hooked up (well the CPU and heatsink are still hooked up but its sitting next to the Z490 master) but I don't remember those values in any Gigabyte Bios. 
And T0D and T1D didn't do anything except have the "DVID" / fixed mode overvoltage vcore fixes (F11C and older didn't have them).


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> My Z390 board isn't hooked up (well the CPU and heatsink are still hooked up but its sitting next to the Z490 master) but I don't remember those values in any Gigabyte Bios.
> And T0D and T1D didn't do anything except have the "DVID" / fixed mode overvoltage vcore fixes (F11C and older didn't have them).


gotcha, thanks for the reply.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

@Falkentyne I have a question about acdc loadline calibration presets for z390 aorus master. 
I saw a user with this in his signature 









If I wanted to try out acdc @ 1.2 mohm, is there a preset for that? If so, which one? If not, what would I manually change ac and dc values to?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> @Falkentyne I have a question about acdc loadline calibration presets for z390 aorus master.
> I saw a user with this in his signature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I wanted to try out acdc @ 1.2 mohm, is there a preset for that? If so, which one? If not, what would I manually change ac and dc values to?


120.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> 120.


change both AC and DC to 120 or just AC? If just AC, do I leave DC value at zero?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> change both AC and DC to 120 or just AC? If just AC, do I leave DC value at zero?


Doesn't matter what DC is set to, since loadline calibration still has to be set manually anyway (and hopefully a lower LLC the higher the ACLL is set to). Just setting DC Loadline too low throws off the power measurements but no one cares about that.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Doesn't matter what DC is set to, since loadline calibration still has to be set manually anyway (and hopefully a lower LLC the higher the ACLL is set to). Just setting DC Loadline too low throws off the power measurements but no one cares about that.


ok understood. I waited to try out the 120 till you answered so in the meantime i set this up, will have to go back and try it with ac @ 120. This is acdc 1, turbo llc +150mv offset. Hoping this passes tm5 extreme lol


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> ok understood. I waited to try out the 120 till you answered so in the meantime i set this up, will have to go back and try it with ac @ 120. This is acdc 1, turbo llc +150mv offset. Hoping this passes tm5 extreme lol


Huh? AC Loadline affects TM5 extreme?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Huh? AC Loadline affects TM5 extreme?


I don't know thats why i wanted to try it out. chances are the dude's silicon in the signature i posted earlier is better than mine, he does have a ks and i have a k, but i wanted to try out his config voltages to see if i could get 5.4 memtest stable with c14-3900. I had just set up the acdc 1, turbo vcore llc and +150mv offset in dvid mode right before I checked back on the forum so i'll have to try out the 120 ac after this completes(or errors ).

EDIT: An we got an internal cpu error in hwinfo at around the end of the first cycle of tm5 extreme, test didn't error tho. It wants another 10mv vcore. so acdc 1, +160mv offset + turbo vcore llc + cardboard boxes goin from my central air conditioning vent in the ceiling directly funneling air to my cpu case/360mm aio to get 5.4ghz stable enough for gaming lol. This could work for the summer time since the air gets blasted anyway lol.


----------



## KaRLiToS

Hi guys. I have switched my old BIoS, the F9 for the newest, the F11C and my OC is far from being stable. Now I see some discissions here saying that F11C is bad. Is it the cause of my instability? I should get the F10???

Everything was running fine with the F9. 5ghz core /4.7ghz ring with 1.33vcore. Memory was at 3600mhz 19-20-20-40. Now same core OC gives me shutdowns. I just flashed the BIOS to be able to use adaptive vcore but doesn’t seem to work either.

I’m trying hard to overclock my memory. 

Which BIOS version do you guys suggest?

I’m trying to overclock the memory to 4000mhz. Auto gives me 21-22-22-45 timing but fails in memtest86 with 1.45v Dram, 1.26v Vccsa and vccio? Do you guys have any suggestion???. I have G Skill Royal Z 3600mhz 2 x 16GB 19-20-20-40


----------



## DrunkenLawnGnom

Does anyone know what the fastest Z390 Elite bios is?

Is there a modded bios with fastest microcode?


----------



## DrunkenLawnGnom

@*KedarWolf

Hey, thanks for all your support in this thread. It has been quite useful. Do you happen to have a dump of modded bios?

If not, are you able to update the latest Z390 Elite bios with the fastest microcode?

It'd be greatly appreciated. I've attached the bios to this post. 

Thank you! 
*


----------



## EarlZ

Im having some issues with booting from an Adata SX8200 Pro 1Tb, I am greeted with a boot failure detected scree with options to 

load optimized default and boot
load optomized default then reboot
Enter Bios

The windows installation seems to go through and its quite fast then after that I am greeted witht the same boot failure, however if I hit option 1 it goes through and loads windows but the boot failure screen happens every boot with the NVME. This is the only drive connected. 

But if I boot from my SATA drive this issue does not come up, I am using a modded F11i with the fast micro codes. 

Anyone know whats causing this?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Im having some issues with booting from an Adata SX8200 Pro 1Tb, I am greeted with a boot failure detected scree with options to
> 
> load optimized default and boot
> load optomized default then reboot
> Enter Bios
> 
> The windows installation seems to go through and its quite fast then after that I am greeted witht the same boot failure, however if I hit option 1 it goes through and loads windows but the boot failure screen happens every boot with the NVME. This is the only drive connected.
> 
> But if I boot from my SATA drive this issue does not come up, I am using a modded F11i with the fast micro codes.
> 
> Anyone know whats causing this?


Make sure the M.2 Windows boot loader is selected in the BIOS 'Boot' menu.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Make sure the M.2 Windows boot loader is selected in the BIOS 'Boot' menu.


Ive attached a screenshot, not sure if thats what you mean.


EDIT:


I've tried the following bios and it has the same error
F9
F10
F11c
F11e
F11i

If I choose to enter the bios the drive is NOT detected, it seems like Gigabyte has made a change starting with F10 that does not play nice if your booting from an ADATA SX8200 Pro. Do we have someone here in the forums where we can report this issue and have it looked into ?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Ive attached a screenshot, not sure if thats what you mean.
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> It seems like a bios issue as the problem does not come up with F9 and F9c
> 
> I've tried the following bios and it has the same error
> F10
> F11c
> F11i
> 
> If I choose to enter the bios the drive is NOT detected, it seems like Gigabyte has made a change starting with F10 that does not play nice if your booting from an ADATA SX8200 Pro. Do we have someone here in the forums where we can report this issue and have it looked into ?


I think it should say 'Windows Boot Loader' but you can try booting from the M.2 that way.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> I think it should say 'Windows Boot Loader' but you can try booting from the M.2 that way.


That is the only option I have and it is selected by default


----------



## KedarWolf

F9 bios for Aorus Master modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 07/18/2020.

It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F9 /x

Use the modded Master F9 BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## KedarWolf

Oh, and peeps, if you want a BIOS and use the integrated graphics for a second screen or anything, let me make you a new modded BIOS. I can update the GOP and GOP-VBT firmwares now, not just the GOP firmware. 

With the new modded BIOS it is more compatible if you update both. It always worked just fine without the VBT firmware updated but the tool I use suggests you do both. :h34r-smi

Let me know which board and BIOS you want. *It helps if you attach the BIOS as a .zip file here as some are hard to find. *


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> F9 bios for Aorus Master modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 07/18/2020.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F9 /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F9 BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.



I spoke too soon, F9 is also affected. This looks like a compatibility issue with the drive as a boot device on this motherboard.


----------



## KaRLiToS

KedarWolf said:


> F9 bios for Aorus Master modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 07/18/2020.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F9 /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F9 BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Like I said in my previous post earlier, I didn't have luck with F11c. OC instability and can't OC RAM much or at all without errors.

1-I need a good BIOS, should I flash yours? 

2-Is it better than the F10?

3-Can I use Q-Flash to flash your BIOS?


----------



## Kargeras

Thunder-74 said:


> I use EC_temp2 for liquid temp and It works well


That's mighty interesting.

Are you running a custom loop or an AIO?

I'd be interested in monitoring my AIO's temp outside the CAM software.


----------



## EarlZ

KaRLiToS said:


> Like I said in my previous post earlier, I didn't have luck with F11c. OC instability and can't OC RAM much or at all without errors.
> 
> 1-I need a good BIOS, should I flash yours?
> 
> 2-Is it better than the F10?
> 
> 3-Can I use Q-Flash to flash your BIOS?


I believe he posted this for my request as I initially believed that my ADATA did not play well with anything above F9, turns out I was mistaken and only the 1TB shows me with boot failure warning.


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> I believe he posted this for my request as I initially believed that my ADATA did not play well with anything above F9, turns out I was mistaken and only the 1TB shows me with boot failure warning.


I PM'd you a BIOS WITHOUT the RST updated.


----------



## Thunder-74

Kargeras said:


> That's mighty interesting.
> 
> Are you running a custom loop or an AIO?
> 
> I'd be interested in monitoring my AIO's temp outside the CAM software.



Custom loop 


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## noxyd

Hi folks, 

I have a couple of questions:

I just replaced my Z390 Gaming X by a Z390 I Aorus Pro wifi (ITX).

- The latest BIOS is F8c, which seams "lower" compared to what you have on ATX boards. I don't even see my board listed in the BETA bios list. Is this the best bios for this board or can I use a Z390 Aorus Pro wifi bios instead ?
I'm running F6 Bios because I find it more stable compared to F8c for my OC (9700K @5.1Ghz, LLC Turbo, Vcore 1.26 and PWM phase Extreme). 

- I replaced my Gskill Trident Z 3200 C16 (4x8) by 2x16 Patriot Viper 3200 C16 which is on the QVL. Something very strange is happening :
With the Patriot, I boot to Windows and everything works perfectly (gaming and all), but I cannot boot to Bios! If I press DEL, it just freezes on POST. Tried clear CMOS, didn't change anything.
The only way I can enter BIOS is to replace my RAM by the GSkill.
What I did is that I configured everything (my OC, fans and all) using the Gskill RAM, saved and replace the RAM by the Patriot.
It's working but clearly I'd like to be able to go to BIOS with my Patriot RAM. Is this a known issue ?
Any idea what I did wrong before I return the Patriot RAM?

Thanks for the support!


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

noxyd said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> I have a couple of questions:
> 
> I just replaced my Z390 Gaming X by a Z390 I Aorus Pro wifi (ITX).
> 
> - The latest BIOS is F8c, which seams "lower" compared to what you have on ATX boards. I don't even see my board listed in the BETA bios list. Is this the best bios for this board or can I use a Z390 Aorus Pro wifi bios instead ?
> I'm running F6 Bios because I find it more stable compared to F8c for my OC (9700K @5.1Ghz, LLC Turbo, Vcore 1.26 and PWM phase Extreme).
> 
> - I replaced my Gskill Trident Z 3200 C16 (4x8) by 2x16 Patriot Viper 3200 C16 which is on the QVL. Something very strange is happening :
> With the Patriot, I boot to Windows and everything works perfectly (gaming and all), but I cannot boot to Bios! If I press DEL, it just freezes on POST. Tried clear CMOS, didn't change anything.
> The only way I can enter BIOS is to replace my RAM by the GSkill.
> What I did is that I configured everything (my OC, fans and all) using the Gskill RAM, saved and replace the RAM by the Patriot.
> It's working but clearly I'd like to be able to go to BIOS with my Patriot RAM. Is this a known issue ?
> Any idea what I did wrong before I return the Patriot RAM?
> 
> Thanks for the support!


should I try them out? Does anyone know if patriot viper sticks work on these boards above 4133mhz with 4 dimms? Can someone use 4 sticks and will they run at 4400mhz at GOOD timings or would they be stuck with only xmp timings or be forced to lower frequency? Are 4 patriot sticks capable of doing [email protected], could they go even faster at the same timings? I've already got a memtest stable [email protected] 15-15-15-32-2T. Can patriot exceed this performance on 4 dimms or at least match it at the same frequency/timings on 4 dimms? anyone got a proof of concept? If someone can show me proof of concept on 4 patriot dimms @ 4266mhz or higher at 15-15-15-32-2T on any 4 dimm motherboard, i'll bite and try the sticks out.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

So earlier in this thread I had made a statement regarding gigabyte's advertising of ramspeed on newegg for their aorus z390 master. I had said that nothing above 4200 was possible as no one could provide proof of concept on a retail chip, not even gigabyte's own employees. Finally after 1 year of *****ing, A user showed proof of concept(karhu stable) on a 8700k @ 4300mhz on 4 dimms. I have crowned that user the master of the aorus master as he is the first person ever on the internet to publicly post proof of concept for memtest stable 4x8gb at 4266mhz or higher on a retail chip(several others made claims but quickly disappeared into hiding when asked for memtest stable proof of concept). I was wrong, though my stance at the time was reasonable, and i've corrected my previous post about the topic in this thread. As of right now, the z390 Aorus Master is the #1 4dimm motherboard for z390 chipset as it is the only 4 dimm motherboard that has been able to reach 4266 or higher. As of right now, the Z390 Aorus Master is the #1 4-dimm motherboard for memory overclocking on 4 dimms...... until someone proves me otherwise.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> So earlier in this thread I had made a statement regarding gigabyte's advertising of ramspeed on newegg for their aorus z390 master. I had said that nothing above 4200 was possible as no one could provide proof of concept on a retail chip, not even gigabyte's own employees. Finally after 1 year of *****ing, A user showed proof of concept(karhu stable) on a 8700k @ 4300mhz on 4 dimms. I have crowned that user the master of the aorus master as he is the first person ever on the internet to publicly post proof of concept for memtest stable 4x8gb at 4266mhz or higher on a retail chip(several others made claims but quickly disappeared into hiding when asked for memtest stable proof of concept). I was wrong, though my stance at the time was reasonable, and i've corrected my previous post about the topic in this thread. As of right now, the z390 Aorus Master is the #1 4dimm motherboard for z390 chipset as it is the only 4 dimm motherboard that has been able to reach 4266 or higher. As of right now, the Z390 Aorus Master is the #1 4-dimm motherboard for memory overclocking on 4 dimms...... until someone proves me otherwise.


But what's the point if you can't adjust IOL's and RTL's and IOL offsets without going into a boot loop?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> But what's the point if you can't adjust IOL's and RTL's and IOL offsets without going into a boot loop?


Listen, you've already manifested the desire in me to own a z390 apex xi through various marketing efforts. But unless someone is going to trade me a factory sealed brand new z390 apex xi for my corsair 4x8gb 4000mhz so-dimm kit + $110, I couldn't care less. Lets just say at this point I don't want a z390 apex xi as much as I used to.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Listen, you've already manifested the desire in me to own a z390 apex xi through various marketing efforts. But unless someone is going to trade me a factory sealed brand new z390 apex xi for my corsair 4x8gb 4000mhz so-dimm kit + $110, I couldn't care less. Lets just say at this point I don't want a z390 apex xi as much as I used to.


Well I thought people would notice your work if you posted your settings and timings on the bot, then then I see people doing 4000 CL 12 and 4600 CL 14 @ 1.95v there and I don't think you want to do that 
Guess I'll step out.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Well I thought people would notice your work if you posted your settings and timings on the bot, then then I see people doing 4000 CL 12 and 4600 CL 14 @ 1.95v there and I don't think you want to do that
> Guess I'll step out.


Mind linking me to their z390/z490 memtest stable results for these 4x8GB 4000 CL12 and 4600 CL14 configurations? Or are you referring to benchmarking results? Regardless, those results are a great achievement but i'm specifically interested in comparing memtest stable 4x8gb z390/z490 configurations at this time. I think I have the #1 performing memtest stable ddr4 non-hedt - 4x8GB full 32gb usable in windows configuration in the world right now. If I don't, I want to know who I need to defeat. Who is the next gym boss and what are their stats rofl?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Mind linking me to their z390/z490 memtest stable results for these 4x8GB 4000 CL12 and 4600 CL14 configurations? Or are you referring to benchmarking results? Regardless, those results are a great achievement but i'm specifically interested in comparing memtest stable 4x8gb z390/z490 configurations at this time. I think I have the #1 performing memtest stable ddr4 non-hedt - 4x8GB full 32gb usable in windows configuration in the world right now. If I don't, I want to know who I need to defeat. Who is the next gym boss and what are their stats rofl?


Those are at 1.95v!!
And you can't do memtest on voltages like that. B-die can't stress test at such configurations, it will crash hard or you'll destroy the entire dimm. Those aren't daily systems.
They're on hwbot.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Falkentyne said:


> Those are at 1.95v!!
> And you can't do memtest on voltages like that. B-die can't stress test at such configurations, it will crash hard or you'll destroy the entire dimm. Those aren't daily systems.
> They're on hwbot.


Understood, thank you for the heads up. Is there a website/database that holds world records for memtest stable daily configurations? I couldn't find anything on hwbot or maybe I wasn't looking in the right place.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Understood, thank you for the heads up. Is there a website/database that holds world records for memtest stable daily configurations? I couldn't find anything on hwbot or maybe I wasn't looking in the right place.


To be honest, I would check hwbot or the overclocking reddit on discord. Remember I'm not a memory guy. I don't know what the other people know. I just idle and see what other people say and do on the overclocking reddit discord group and pick up random bits of information. I have no idea about this stuff otherwise. Hopefully someone else can help more with this stuff.


----------



## ryan92084

Thread cleaned.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

This board is pretty fun, i gotta admit, I think it's the best 4 dimm board. Can't find memtest stable results that perform like this on any other z390 board using 4 dimms. Now that I think of it, most z390 2 dimm boards aren't even capable of delivering this level of performance. mmmmmm success.


----------



## EarlZ

Is there a way to have the 'high performance' power profile and still get a downclock and down volt on idle? my CPU stays on max clock and 1.270v at idle
and which C state I can leave enabled when overclocking that affect Idle stability to much that can still allow me to down clock and down volt on idle


----------



## KaRLiToS

EarlZ said:


> Is there a way to have the 'high performance' power profile and still get a downclock and down volt on idle? my CPU stays on max clock and 1.270v at idle
> and which C state I can leave enabled when overclocking that affect Idle stability to much that can still allow me to down clock and down volt on idle


I do it with my i5 10600k with Gigabyte Z490 Elite AC, it's overclocked at 5ghz and it downvolts to 0.7v and downclock to 800mhz. 

BUT, I don't know why but I have been trying with 3 different BIOS on the Z390 Master with my i9 9900k and it's not working properly. During stress testing it goes from 1.25v to 1.5v on and on. EIST and speed shift are on. 

The latest F11c BIOS says this:










But it is still not working properly with this BIOS and the F11c BIOS overclocks the memory like crap I think.


----------



## WINTENDOX

*
I don't think it will perform better on an i7, 
Despite everything, he is super stable
*


----------



## luckydead

WINTENDOX said:


> *
> I don't think it will perform better on an i7,
> Despite everything, he is super stable
> *


Hello, please help me how to make my BIOS support 4000Mhz ram, it's default 2400hz.
What settings to use and make to be stable the pc.

Intel i7-9700k
Kingston Predator 4000 Mhz 2x8GB
VGA Radeon RX 5700 XT Nitro+ 8GB GDDR6
BIOS version : F9 (I try with latest F11C) but have more problems there with default F9 when I make changes automatic shows other stuff.

My pc shows 3.6Ghz default
and Ram 2400Hz ..
I want to little boost the Ghz and ram to be 4000Mhz , but to be save not to overburn something.
Can you help ?


----------



## EarlZ

KaRLiToS said:


> I do it with my i5 10600k with Gigabyte Z490 Elite AC, it's overclocked at 5ghz and it downvolts to 0.7v and downclock to 800mhz.
> 
> BUT, I don't know why but I have been trying with 3 different BIOS on the Z390 Master with my i9 9900k and it's not working properly. During stress testing it goes from 1.25v to 1.5v on and on. EIST and speed shift are on.
> 
> The latest F11c BIOS says this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it is still not working properly with this BIOS and the F11c BIOS overclocks the memory like crap I think.


It only down clocks for me if I leave it on a medium power plan


----------



## WINTENDOX

luckydead said:


> Hello, please help me how to make my BIOS support 4000Mhz ram, it's default 2400hz.
> What settings to use and make to be stable the pc.
> 
> Intel i7-9700k
> Kingston Predator 4000 Mhz 2x8GB
> VGA Radeon RX 5700 XT Nitro+ 8GB GDDR6
> BIOS version : F9 (I try with latest F11C) but have more problems there with default F9 when I make changes automatic shows other stuff.
> 
> My pc shows 3.6Ghz default
> and Ram 2400Hz ..
> I want to little boost the Ghz and ram to be 4000Mhz , but to be save not to overburn something.
> Can you help ?



*Can you give more details of your ram? latencies and frequency or photos. and what mother mother do you have?*


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Let me know which board and BIOS you want. *It helps if you attach the BIOS as a .zip file here as some are hard to find. *


Can you please update the attached BIOS for the Z390 Pro with latest versions of everything, and use fastest microcodes? Thanks in advance Kedar!


----------



## luckydead

WINTENDOX said:


> *Can you give more details of your ram? latencies and frequency or photos. and what mother mother do you have?*


Sure, HyperX Predator RGB16GB(2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-32000 4000MHz CL17 HX440C19PB3AK2/16
Z390 Master rev1
https://www.kingston.com/dataSheets/HX440C19PB3AK2_16.pdf

I'm correctly in office now but if you need more tell me when I get back at home will make.
But if I enable X.M.P Profile1 (4000Mhz) auto or manual configurations (manual 19-21-21-42-94) voltage 1.35V and restart pc and bios failed I played around but I manage 1 time windows loads shows 4000Mhz RAM, but after again restart pc again bios failed.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

luckydead said:


> Sure, HyperX Predator RGB16GB(2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-32000 4000MHz CL17 HX440C19PB3AK2/16
> Z390 Master rev1
> https://www.kingston.com/dataSheets/HX440C19PB3AK2_16.pdf
> 
> I'm correctly in office now but if you need more tell me when I get back at home will make.
> But if I enable X.M.P Profile1 (4000Mhz) auto or manual configurations (manual 19-21-21-42-94) voltage 1.35V and restart pc and bios failed I played around but I manage 1 time windows loads shows 4000Mhz RAM, but after again restart pc again bios failed.



Try manual timings CL17 or below with tRC=tCL + tRAS


----------



## luckydead

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Try manual timings CL17 or below with tRC=tCL + tRAS


i have already try this:
X.m.p - enable profile 1 and 2 (try - result nok)
X.m.p- disable manual settings with 3600hz 1.35v with timing from the pdf like Kingston present and with 4000mhz too result is after restart pc when make changes bios give error and ask me for return defaults . Pretty strange.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

luckydead said:


> i have already try this:
> X.m.p - enable profile 1 and 2 (try - result nok)
> X.m.p- disable manual settings with 3600hz 1.35v with timing from the pdf like Kingston present and with 4000mhz too result is after restart pc when make changes bios give error and ask me for return defaults . Pretty strange.



Enable xmp 1, Set primaries to 17-18-18-38 and set tRC to 55 and tCWL 16, rest of the ram timings on auto, 4000mhz 1.45v vdimm/1.45v vdimm training, 1.3v vccsa, 1.3v vccio, Set rtt resistance settings at the bottom of memory timings screen to 60/60/60/60/40/40


----------



## luckydead

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Enable xmp 1, Set primaries to 17-18-18-38 and set tRC to 55 and tCWL 16, rest of the ram timings on auto, 4000mhz 1.45v vdimm/1.45v vdimm training, 1.3v vccsa, 1.3v vccio, Set rtt resistance settings at the bottom of memory timings screen to 60/60/60/60/40/40


Thank you will try your guide when I get home and will reply back results


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

luckydead said:


> Thank you will try your guide when I get home and will reply back results


I know you will


----------



## Alemancio

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Enable xmp 1, Set primaries to 17-18-18-38 and set tRC to 55 and tCWL 16, rest of the ram timings on auto, 4000mhz 1.45v vdimm/1.45v vdimm training, 1.3v vccsa, 1.3v vccio, Set rtt resistance settings at the bottom of memory timings screen to 60/60/60/60/40/40


I highly doubt he will get it to work. I had the same issue and its just the fact that 4000MHz 2x8GB is extremely difficult if not impossible (T-Topology). Only way for 4000MHz (with XMP) is 4x8GB. Or 2x8GB at 3600MHz CL15 is doable though.


----------



## luckydead

Alemancio said:


> I highly doubt he will get it to work. I had the same issue and its just the fact that 4000MHz 2x8GB is extremely difficult if not impossible (T-Topology). Only way for 4000MHz (with XMP) is 4x8GB. Or 2x8GB at 3600MHz CL15 is doable though.


Possible to try with settings for 3600mhz what to put on bios, so I can try both methods when I get home.
Sometimes I make it work with 4000Mhz , but after restart pc crash bios, so I think it is possible just need good configuration.

And I do not want to burn out something so even if its not 4000Mhz , only the pc to be stable with the configuration. Thank you all for the support.
Also is it more good bios version F9 or F11C , with F9 everything is automatic changed when I change something, but with F11C is bugged I need to do everything manual even if I enable X.M.P nothing is changed, so I returned to original F9 bios cause I think is better, but will need your opinion too.


----------



## opt33

4000 will work with 2x8 on master, Im on bios F13c (dont think bios matters that much), but ram has to be capable. Also make sure using ram slots 2,4. And if using F13c, if you change something that doesnt require retraining, then it wont always make the change.

I have stable profiles at 4000 16-16-16-36 at 1.45vdimm, 1.30 sa, 1.27 io. Also at 4100 at higher vdimm. over 4133 is where it becomes unstable with 2 dimms on mine, and 4133 can be finicky.

Both screenshots same settings, one passing tm5 anta and with 400% hci memtest, second is same settings passing hci memtest overnight for 7.5 hours or 1800%.


----------



## luckydead

Edit: okay i will check it out too , will report you all about the tests after 3 hours . Thank you all for supporting me.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Alemancio said:


> I highly doubt he will get it to work. I had the same issue and its just the fact that 4000MHz 2x8GB is extremely difficult if not impossible (T-Topology). Only way for 4000MHz (with XMP) is 4x8GB. Or 2x8GB at 3600MHz CL15 is doable though.



And here I thought he was on 4x8gb. @luckydead Gen. has had very good results with 2x8gb on this board, i recommend searching the thread for his results.


----------



## luckydead

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Enable xmp 1, Set primaries to 17-18-18-38 and set tRC to 55 and tCWL 16, rest of the ram timings on auto, 4000mhz 1.45v vdimm/1.45v vdimm training, 1.3v vccsa, 1.3v vccio, Set rtt resistance settings at the bottom of memory timings screen to 60/60/60/60/40/40


Hello i just try your method but when F10-Save and restart bios again crash with error message:
I have made screenshots so can help you and me too what to touch and how.
Thanks


----------



## KrampusKlaus

opt33 said:


> 4000 will work with 2x8 on master, Im on bios F13c (dont think bios matters that much), but ram has to be capable. Also make sure using ram slots 2,4. And if using F13c, if you change something that doesnt require retraining, then it wont always make the change.
> 
> I have stable profiles at 4000 16-16-16-36 at 1.45vdimm, 1.30 sa, 1.27 io. Also at 4100 at higher vdimm. over 4133 is where it becomes unstable with 2 dimms on mine, and 4133 can be finicky.
> 
> Both screenshots same settings, one passing tm5 anta and with 400% hci memtest, second is same settings passing hci memtest overnight for 7.5 hours or 1800%.


Ugh I envy your latency and bandwidth. And even with the garbage RTLs and IOLs that the Aorus boards give us at 4000mhz. With 2x8 4000 16 18 18 38 best I can get is 43ns. Maybe this weekend I’ll crank up my VCCIO and VCCSA and give it another crack.


----------



## EarlZ

Whats the current bios version that everyone is using for CPU voltage stability ?


----------



## GeneO

EarlZ said:


> Whats the current bios version that everyone is using for CPU voltage stability ?



f11c through f11j GK have all worked about the same for me (I have an 8086k at 5.2 GHz). 

I think a lot of BIOS versions just messed with the User Interface, but there are differences in memory overclocking and bug fixes.


----------



## KedarWolf

F11j GK bios for Aorus Master modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 07/25/2020.

It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F11 /x

Use the modded Master F11j GK BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## EarlZ

What does the added "GK" stand for or do ?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> What does the added "GK" stand for or do ?


It has options to change the RGB from within the BIOS.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> It has options to change the RGB from within the BIOS.


Sweet! Just what I need!!!


----------



## sebborrr

Sheyster said:


> Can you please update the attached BIOS for the Z390 Pro with latest versions of everything, and use fastest microcodes? Thanks in advance Kedar!





[URL="https://www.overclock.net/forum/members/350041-kedarwolf.html" said:


> *KedarWolf*[/URL]]


hey guys! im new in this forum but ive read a lot of threads here in the past. im really intrested in this updated bios for my Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi too (GOP ROM, GbE ROM, ME, etc). i manually updated the latest ME firmware but it takes a lot of time for me to do this and dont have enough knowledge to update the other oproms. i saw that in this 12d version the ME was from 2018 so....

is it possible to implement this GK thing ( rgb color set in bios) in this uefi too?
would be really really nice!


----------



## Padinn

Hey guys, 
Been a while since I posted - been having some issues with my 5GhZ offset overclock. If I wanted to run at just 4.7 all core, using offset voltages based on VID, what would I do? Would like to create a pure stability profile that is also lower noise/heat. I assume set AC/DC loadlines to auto/0, normal voltage, 0 offset. Does this sound correct? Or do I use auto voltage in this scenario?


----------



## opt33

just tried the f11j GK unmodded on tweaktown site...still trefi bug...and new bug it wont let me flash back to any other bios but will let me reflash same one...says wrong image/bios if try to flash back to 11c. Ill use efiflash to change...only gigabyte...


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

opt33 said:


> just tried the f11j GK unmodded on tweaktown site...still trefi bug...and new bug it wont let me flash back to any other bios but will let me reflash same one...says wrong image/bios if try to flash back to 11c. Ill use efiflash to change...only gigabyte...



Have you tried a hard cmos reset and then try qflashing the bios of your choice listed on the official aorus/giga website? Just a heads up, I can't remember if any of those bioses have the trefi bug or not or if it was just on the beta bioses. I'm on F9 though and can confirm it does not have the trefi bug, but it does have a vcore bug that sends additional voltage when switching to manual vcore mode from dvid mode. I don't really use manual vcore so the vcore bug doesn't bother me.


----------



## opt33

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Have you tried a hard cmos reset and then try qflashing the bios of your choice listed on the official aorus/giga website? Just a heads up, I can't remember if any of those bioses have the trefi bug or not or if it was just on the beta bioses. I'm on F9 though and can confirm it does not have the trefi bug, but it does have a vcore bug that sends additional voltage when switching to manual vcore mode from dvid mode. I don't really use manual vcore so the vcore bug doesn't bother me.


yep, just tried that, still wont work. efiflash gives me the same error message.. oemid mismatch. The fact that I can reflash the same f11gk bios and still have same problem, it seems as if the new GK bios is preventing prior bios flashing. Will try using secondary bios...and getting out that way. last beta bios I use from tweaktown.


----------



## KedarWolf

opt33 said:


> yep, just tried that, still wont work. efiflash gives me the same error message.. oemid mismatch. The fact that I can reflash the same f11gk bios and still have same problem, it seems as if the new GK bios is preventing prior bios flashing. Will try using secondary bios...and getting out that way. last beta bios I use from tweaktown.


Try this modded efiflash, all checks removed. Should work. Attached as .zip.

Edit: Just use


Code:


efiflash biosname.F11

 or whatever or


Code:


efiflash biosname.F11 /DB

 if you want to flash both BIOS's at the same time.

*Replace biosname.F11 with the name of the BIOS you are flashing.*

*Oh, and if the extension has like '.F11j' has four letters, rename it to three letters like 'F11'.*

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F11


----------



## GeneO

opt33 said:


> yep, just tried that, still wont work. efiflash gives me the same error message.. oemid mismatch. The fact that I can reflash the same f11gk bios and still have same problem, it seems as if the new GK bios is preventing prior bios flashing. Will try using secondary bios...and getting out that way. last beta bios I use from tweaktown.



If you can efiflash the older BIOS, then you may be able to qflash the old over that.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

I made good progress working mine up. Turns out RTFM was in order for me to figure out my memory issues. Once I put my sticks in slots 2 and 4, XMP worked great. Now I'm gradually OC'ing my 3200 14-14-14-34 B-die ram. Currently up to 3600 and 17-17-17-37. Getting 50GB/sec memory speeds and a sub 45ns latency sounds like a nice goal.


Since I switched to bare die cooling on the 9900KS, I decided to see what it could handle. It runs P95 at 5.2GHz with no AVX offset as long as I want it to. 5.3GHz was a no go at 1.3V or 1.35V. It would get to windows at 1.4V but instantly BSOD. Looks like 5.2GHz it is. I might try to do a BCLK of 102 and 50x on the CPU to get the same thing.


My GPU doesn't seem to want to do more than 2050MHz. Guess I'll need to wait for winter for cooler house temps to try to get more out of it.


----------



## opt33

GeneO said:


> If you can efiflash the older BIOS, then you may be able to qflash the old over that.


finally got out of it. I booted up with the backup bios using mobo switch, used qflash to flash backup bios to f13c and checked the option to also flash backup bios. Looks like when your in the backup bios...qflash treats the main bios as the backup, so it flashed both.

edit: before using backup bios to flash both, I did try efiflash but same error, also efiflash to GK modded bios then tried efiflash to F11c, but again same error. Seems like GB put something in GK bios that doesnt allow going back.


----------



## GeneO

opt33 said:


> finally got out of it. I booted up with the backup bios using mobo switch, used qflash to flash backup bios to f13c and checked the option to also flash backup bios. Looks like when your in the backup bios...qflash treats the main bios as the backup, so it flashed both.
> 
> edit: before using backup bios to flash both, I did try efiflash but same error, also efiflash to GK modded bios then tried efiflash to F11c, but again same error. Seems like GB put something in GK bios that doesnt allow going back.



I believe they have updated the Intel Management Firmware in f11c GK. Intel protects you from going back to a IME firmware with a lower SVN. I expect it is probably that as I know it has a newer SVN, though I would have thought efiflash would have bypassed the SVN protection that prevents going back to a lower SVN in IME firmware. This firmware resides in the chipset. Pretty bad move for Gigabyte to make in a series of beta BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

opt33 said:


> finally got out of it. I booted up with the backup bios using mobo switch, used qflash to flash backup bios to f13c and checked the option to also flash backup bios. Looks like when your in the backup bios...qflash treats the main bios as the backup, so it flashed both.
> 
> edit: before using backup bios to flash both, I did try efiflash but same error, also efiflash to GK modded bios then tried efiflash to F11c, but again same error. Seems like GB put something in GK bios that doesnt allow going back.


The modded efiflash I posted should work, it bypasses the oem error etc.


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Have you tried a hard cmos reset and then try qflashing the bios of your choice listed on the official aorus/giga website? Just a heads up, I can't remember if any of those bioses have the trefi bug or not or if it was just on the beta bioses. I'm on F9 though and can confirm it does not have the trefi bug, but it does have a vcore bug that sends additional voltage when switching to manual vcore mode from dvid mode. I don't really use manual vcore so the vcore bug doesn't bother me.





opt33 said:


> yep, just tried that, still wont work. efiflash gives me the same error message.. oemid mismatch. The fact that I can reflash the same f11gk bios and still have same problem, it seems as if the new GK bios is preventing prior bios flashing. Will try using secondary bios...and getting out that way. last beta bios I use from tweaktown.


If the BIOS has "CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv", then it does NOT have the tREFI bug and is on the new code path.
If the BIOS is completely MISSING "CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv" and starts instead with "Ring PLL Overvoltage +mv", then it has the TREFI bug and is on the old code path.


----------



## opt33

GeneO said:


> I believe they have updated the Intel Management Firmware in f11c GK. Intel protects you from going back to a IME firmware with a lower SVN. I expect it is probably that as I know it has a newer SVN, though I would have thought efiflash would have bypassed the SVN protection that prevents going back to a lower SVN in IME firmware. This firmware resides in the chipset. Pretty bad move for Gigabyte to make in a series of beta BIOS.


If thats the case, yeah that isnt a great idea on a bios that still has significant bugs, trefi one was annoying.
@KedarWolf, I tried the modded bios from post 9554 hoping it would allow me to flash over tweaktown beta, not the most recent one you posted 9569 as I already had it fixed by the time I saw that post, so that one may have worked.


----------



## KedarWolf

opt33 said:


> If thats the case, yeah that isnt a great idea on a bios that still has significant bugs, trefi one was annoying.
> 
> @KedarWolf, I tried the modded bios from post 9554 hoping it would allow me to flash over tweaktown beta, not the most recent one you posted 9569 as I already had it fixed by the time I saw that post, so that one may have worked.


I'm not talking about the modded BIOS, but the modded efiflash, all checks bypassed. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-957.html#post28550428


----------



## opt33

KedarWolf said:


> I'm not talking about the modded BIOS, but the modded efiflash, all checks bypassed.
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-957.html#post28550428


ok..gotcha, I didnt try the efiflash from that post


----------



## Padinn

So basically the issue I have with my 5GHz adaptive overclock is that it will crash under lower loads. I am testing a few things, but right now am running low LLC with a +.145 offset (My AC/DC loadline is set to 1/1). Are there any reliable ways I can try to stress test lower loads? It seems find under x264 blend test at max loads.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> So basically the issue I have with my 5GHz adaptive overclock is that it will crash under lower loads. I am testing a few things, but right now am running low LLC with a +.145 offset (My AC/DC loadline is set to 1/1). Are there any reliable ways I can try to stress test lower loads? It seems find under x264 blend test at max loads.



I have some questions...

What kind of crash? Is it a bsod? If so, which bsod? Does your PC just freeze and show no bsod? What is your ring/cache ratio set to? What cstate settings are you using? Have you tried bumping offset to +150mv? Have you tried lower offset and medium llc? Which bios are you on?


----------



## Padinn

It will bsod. I just updated tonight to f11jgk. I'm testing .16v low llc now, as .15 gave a whea error in x264 testing. I previously tried .140 medium and got a bsod randomly after a while. It seems like borderline stable - it's hard to reproduce. Vcc io is 1.15 and vvc sa is 1.20.

All c states on
Ring ratio is 43

*EDIT* So I made it through 55 loops of the custom x264 test without any errors at +160mv. Only concern there are temperatures, which peaked around 96c (h150i pro w/ push pull setup) however since that is a rather unrealistic load I'm not too concerned about it. VR Vout was around 1.28v under that load, which seems on target. Under the 8792E sensor, the max reading was 1.386v, but I know this one isn't as accurate under loads. Under basic desktop usage this one reads around .85v. 

Would it be worth trying say a much lower offset to see if I'm stable and get better temperatures? I assume since I failed at +150mv no, but am curious if heat was a potential cause of the cache error.

EDIT #2 - I decided to play around with medium llc and a lower voltage offset of 90mv. Got through 13 loops of x264 before I got an error, temperatures were notably lower. I am going to try 80mv. I imagine this won't work either, but I think the temperatures *might* be the bigger issue then the voltages. Are there any other voltages I should increase? I do run 2x16 GB sticks and I know that isn't ideal for this motherboard, though my memory runs at stock.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> F11j GK bios for Aorus Master modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 07/25/2020.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F11j GK BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


Any idea if we will get the digital wave effect controlled through the BIOS? I imagine that one requires a bit more processing. Did you add RGB fusion or is that coming in future bios?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> It will bsod. I just updated tonight to f11jgk. I'm testing .16v low llc now, as .15 gave a whea error in x264 testing. I previously tried .140 medium and got a bsod randomly after a while. It seems like borderline stable - it's hard to reproduce. Vcc io is 1.15 and vvc sa is 1.20.
> 
> All c states on
> Ring ratio is 43
> 
> *EDIT* So I made it through 55 loops of the custom x264 test without any errors at +160mv. Only concern there are temperatures, which peaked around 96c (h150i pro w/ push pull setup) however since that is a rather unrealistic load I'm not too concerned about it. VR Vout was around 1.28v under that load, which seems on target. Under the 8792E sensor, the max reading was 1.386v, but I know this one isn't as accurate under loads. Under basic desktop usage this one reads around .85v.
> 
> Would it be worth trying say a much lower offset to see if I'm stable and get better temperatures? I assume since I failed at +150mv no, but am curious if heat was a potential cause of the cache error.
> 
> EDIT #2 - I decided to play around with medium llc and a lower voltage offset of 90mv. Got through 13 loops of x264 before I got an error, temperatures were notably lower. I am going to try 80mv. I imagine this won't work either, but I think the temperatures *might* be the bigger issue then the voltages. Are there any other voltages I should increase? I do run 2x16 GB sticks and I know that isn't ideal for this motherboard, though my memory runs at stock.



Ok here is the deal. Paste sucks ass for a 9900k. Like really bad. Get yourself some conductonaut, screw what everyone says about the galium staining the coppercold plate or ihs- it doesn't matter, no one looks at that stuff when it is assembled and intel can't refuse a warranty even if the text on the ihs gets messed up since they can still see the serial number through windows. Put the conductonaut between the IHS and copper coldplate. You will drop about 10c if you use conductonaut. I can cbr20 under 80c with conductonaut and 360mm aio @ 5.3ghz ht off 1.41v load voltage, even lower if i blast the air conditioning. Paste is garbage. It's trash. When you get the conductonaut, make sure you search some youtube videos on application because there are some precautions to take. Paste is garbage, especially the pre applied trash that comes on an aio.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Ok here is the deal. Paste sucks ass for a 9900k. Like really bad. Get yourself some conductonaut, screw what everyone says about the galium staining the coppercold plate or ihs- it doesn't matter, no one looks at that stuff when it is assembled and intel can't refuse a warranty even if the text on the ihs gets messed up since they can still see the serial number through windows. Put the conductonaut between the IHS and copper coldplate. You will drop about 10c if you use conductonaut. I can cbr20 under 80c with conductonaut and 360mm aio @ 5.3ghz ht off 1.41v load voltage. Paste is garbage. It's trash. If you get the conductonaut, make sure you search some youtube videos on application because there are some precautions to take. Paste is garbage, especially the pre applied trash that comes on an aio.


I'm using Kyronaut paste, not the stock stuff. Not sure I'd feel confident switching to conductonaut. 

Little update. So 80mv BSOD. 100mv BSOD. test 110mv now. Interestingly enough, 90mv got further then 80 or 100, but mighta been dumb luck. This is testing at medium LLC.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> I'm using Kyronaut paste, not the stock stuff. Not sure I'd feel confident switching to conductonaut.
> 
> Little update. So 80mv BSOD. 100mv BSOD. test 110mv now. Interestingly enough, 90mv got further then 80 or 100, but mighta been dumb luck.



Kryonaut is trash. Used it. Threw 5 tubes in the trash. Get conductonaut. I couldn't even cbr15 under 80c at 5ghz with kryonaut lol. I'm telling you paste is trash for a 9900k.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Kryonaut is trash. Used it. Threw 5 tubes in the trash. Get conductonaut. I couldn't even cbr15 under 80c at 5ghz with kryonaut lol. I'm telling you paste is trash for a 9900k.


I get you, but I'm not willing to take the risks associated with Conductonaut. Only aiming for a 5Ghz OC and I feel like I'm pretty close to it.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> I get you, but I'm not willing to take the risks associated with Conductonaut. Only aiming for a 5Ghz OC and I feel like I'm pretty close to it.



I understand, gl with that OC.


----------



## satinghostrider

Had a lot of issues trying to get stable my ram as both pairs was 2 different batches of B-Die namely A1 and A2. This was the best I could manage while being completely stable now. Battlefront 2 used to just freeze and throw me back to the desktop at 4133 and 4200 speeds. At 4000 C16, I'm finally stable without any issues at all. 

5.2GHz Core / 4.7GHz Ring
Vcore : 1.36V
LLC : High
VDIMM : 1.45v
VCCIO/VCCSA : 1.18V/1.23V

How does my RTL/IOLs compare? Hope it is not as bad as it seems. Any ideas or tips to improve my settings as of now?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

satinghostrider said:


> Had a lot of issues trying to get stable my ram as both pairs was 2 different batches of B-Die namely A1 and A2. This was the best I could manage while being completely stable now. Battlefront 2 used to just freeze and throw me back to the desktop at 4133 and 4200 speeds. At 4000 C16, I'm finally stable without any issues at all.
> 
> 5.2GHz Core / 4.7GHz Ring
> Vcore : 1.36V
> LLC : High
> VDIMM : 1.45v
> VCCIO/VCCSA : 1.18V/1.23V
> 
> How does my RTL/IOLs compare? Hope it is not as bad as it seems. Any ideas or tips to improve my settings as of now?



If you are on 4 dimms, i recommend setting both vccsa and vccio to the same value, it'll probably stop your battlefront 2 from crashing at 4133/4200. tRTP @ 6 can sometimes actually make latency worse, see what happens if you set it to 8. In general, even if a timing can be lowered, it doesn't always mean it will give you best performance that the sticks are capable of. tWR at 10 can be fine but may require more voltage to be stable at higher frequencies. rtls/iols are fine.


----------



## Padinn

Curious how your folks AIOs do with the 9900k. Never really been happy with my h150i, my temperatures hit around 90c at 180w. I assume its also my chip, but curious what others get. Maybe redoing thermal paste is a good idea...its been about 18 months.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> Curious how your folks AIOs do with the 9900k. Never really been happy with my h150i, my temperatures hit around 90c at 180w. I assume its also my chip, but curious what others get. Maybe redoing thermal paste is a good idea...its been about 18 months.



360mm aio used as intake at the top of the case, conductonaut, only three fans on the rad(no push/pull). I can pull about 140 amps and over 200w at 5.1 all core 1.28v load in cbr15 and be under 80c. Not sure what your ring/cache ratio is at but try setting it to 43 to see if you can bring down your vmin for 5g.


----------



## satinghostrider

XGS-Duplicity said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Had a lot of issues trying to get stable my ram as both pairs was 2 different batches of B-Die namely A1 and A2. This was the best I could manage while being completely stable now. Battlefront 2 used to just freeze and throw me back to the desktop at 4133 and 4200 speeds. At 4000 C16, I'm finally stable without any issues at all.
> 
> 5.2GHz Core / 4.7GHz Ring
> Vcore : 1.36V
> LLC : High
> VDIMM : 1.45v
> VCCIO/VCCSA : 1.18V/1.23V
> 
> How does my RTL/IOLs compare? Hope it is not as bad as it seems. Any ideas or tips to improve my settings as of now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are on 4 dimms, i recommend setting both vccsa and vccio to the same value. rtls/iols are fine.
Click to expand...

1.25V/1.25V?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

satinghostrider said:


> 1.25V/1.25V?



I would recommend starting at 1.25v for both for 4000mhz+ on 4 dimms for this board with bdie + tight timings. Higher cache/ring ratio can increase vccsa/io requirements and so can hyperthreading. For example, I can 1.25v sa/io on c17 4200 with 5ghz ht on 4.5ghz cache. If i want 4.6ghz cache with that config, i have to add 50mv to both sa/io. Any 4000+ config on 4 dimms with my board/chip with every ram kit i tried always needed minimum 1.25v sa/io to be fully stable in memtests *and* BFV/MW2/BF2. with 2 dimms, you *might* be able to get away with IO being 50mv less than SA on this board for 4000+ but i wouldn't count on it since it's t-top and is really geared for 4 dimms. There also comes a certain point where you need a substantial bump in vcore to handle higher ram frequencies. For my chip/board/kit, 4 dimms 4266mhz+ ram requires +150mv offset with llc high acdc-1 no matter what the cas latency and cache is set to in order to be memtest stable.


----------



## opt33

yeah game freezing is a new thing to me, cant remember ever having it in past....Im wondering if 4133 or 4100 is actually stable on my GB master t-topo with only 2 dimms, even though pass hci memtest, gsat overnight and prime for an hour. Sucks that no stress test is helping, in past 25 yrs of overclocking, never had an issue once stress testing stable. Mostly likely either my GB t-topo mobo cant hand 4133 with 2 dimms or transients an issue on my turbo llc OC.

So down to 4000Cl16 on ram and trying 1.38 high llc instead of 1.325 turbo llc. I am stable with 1.31 turbo and 1.37 high in testing, and bumped up vcore just to be sure for 24/7, and temps not an issue 70's max cpu, 37 max ram gaming. Though am putting fan on ram as well.


----------



## TAGTRAUM

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Kryonaut is trash. Used it. Threw 5 tubes in the trash. Get conductonaut. I couldn't even cbr15 under 80c at 5ghz with kryonaut lol. I'm telling you paste is trash for a 9900k.


Kryonaut not trash, getting stable 75C on 5Ghz AVX0 9900KS with Thermaltake 360AIO and ambient temperature >+30C. Something wrong with your setup)


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

TAGTRAUM said:


> Kryonaut not trash, getting stable 75C on 5Ghz AVX0 9900KS with Thermaltake 360AIO and ambient temperature >+30C. Something wrong with your setup)


Nope, I tried it several times. Everytime over 80c at 5ghz or above with kryonaut in cbr15. Conductonaut liquid metal Literally 70c in cbr15 at 5ghz HT ON 1.23v load voltage with conductonaut. Kryonaut is a bad choice for an overclocked 9900k in my opinon. I think kryonaut is better for 10th generation chips instead of 9th generation chips because of new improved thinner factory IHS and better for amd chips since they don't run as hot. But for a 9900k kryonaut is a bad or mediocre choice.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> 360mm aio used as intake at the top of the case, conductonaut, only three fans on the rad(no push/pull). I can pull about 140 amps and over 200w at 5.1 all core 1.28v load in cbr15 and be under 80c. Not sure what your ring/cache ratio is at but try setting it to 43 to see if you can bring down your vmin for 5g.


Yeah so I'm using push pull, top as intake. For me at 1.262v VR Out it shows power of around 170w. Temp is 92c. This is running the custom x264 blender test with 32 threads. On loop 39 right now (I usually aim for 50) with a +110mv offset. This is a pretty high load, more so then cinebench if that is CBR15. Ring ratio is 43. I'm using Corsair H150i pro (original, not XT). No AVC offset.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Nope, I tried it several times. Everytime over 80c at 5ghz or above with kryonaut in cbr15. Conductonaut liquid metal Literally 70c in cbr15 at 5ghz HT ON 1.23v load voltage with conductonaut. Kryonaut is a bad choice for an overclocked 9900k in my opinon. I think kryonaut is better for 10th generation chips instead of 9th generation chips because of new improved thinner factory IHS and better for amd chips since they don't run as hot. But for a 9900k kryonaut is a bad or mediocre choice.


Worth noting my 9900k is a bit older, so perhaps manufacturing process has been refined. I know the KS chips should be binned quite a bit higher, so not sure I can compare to those.


----------



## Thunder-74

Falkentyne said:


> If the BIOS has "CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv", then it does NOT have the tREFI bug and is on the new code path.
> If the BIOS is completely MISSING "CPU PLL Overvoltage +mv" and starts instead with "Ring PLL Overvoltage +mv", then it has the TREFI bug and is on the old code path.


the bios F11j GK has "Ring PLL Overvoltage +mv", but it has fast microcodes


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Can someone tell me what "customer experience improvement program" is? I never enrolled into any program. Every time I get angry and start spitting the truth online, my internet gets cut off and this **** appears in event viewer right before it happens. S0 what i'm gonna do is hire cyber private investigator, find out who is doing this, build criminal case and then prosecute.


----------



## Sheyster

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Nope, I tried it several times. Everytime over 80c at 5ghz or above with kryonaut in cbr15. Conductonaut liquid metal Literally 70c in cbr15 at 5ghz HT ON 1.23v load voltage with conductonaut. Kryonaut is a bad choice for an overclocked 9900k in my opinon. I think kryonaut is better for 10th generation chips instead of 9th generation chips because of new improved thinner factory IHS and better for amd chips since they don't run as hot. But for a 9900k kryonaut is a bad or mediocre choice.


I have to disagree if you're referring to using it on top of the IHS. Myself and many others are using Kryonaut on top successfully with a 9900K. I have a tube of TFX (ThermalRight's newer paste) waiting for the next time I re-apply TIM. It's supposed to be better than Kryonaut. I only use LM below the IHS.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

Been using Kryonaut on my IHS's for a while now. Works as good or better than the IC7 I used before. No complaints.


Now de-lidding and running LM on the CPU die itself, that's another ball game, and a valid one.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Voodoo Rufus said:


> Been using Kryonaut on my IHS's for a while now. Works as good or better than the IC7 I used before. No complaints.
> 
> 
> Now de-lidding and running LM on the CPU die itself, that's another ball game, and a valid one.


 If on an aio with a crappy voltage scaling 9900k chip, liquid metal between IHS and coldplate is the only thing that will allow you to push the chip. Paste isn't gonna let you hit 5.3ghz ghz on a 9900K, liquid metal will allow you to hit 5.3ghz on a 9900k and you don't even need direct die, just liquid metal between ihs and aio coldplate. (i can only vouch for conductonaut liquid metal, I have not tried any other brand)


if you are on an aio with a good voltage scaling 9900k chip, liquid metal between ihs/aio coldplate gonna let you hit 5.4ghz all core on a 9900k. No expensive watercooling required, no direct die frame purchase required. 


I can prove this to you if you would like.



Vendors/resellers/shills hate that I spread this information around because it means customers spend less money and don't need to custom watercooling.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

Somehow I question this. The STIM-IHS-TIM interface to me is the primary detrimental factor in the temps on these chips. But if LM works on your IHS, go for it.



I do not harbor any fondness for AIO, either. I would have stuck with my Dark Rock Pro 4 if I wasn't on my custom loop. It handled up to 200W just fine quietly running with crappy case airflow. Only time I see 250W is with AVX P95 workloads. I would think that would make any AIO suffer badly without horrendous fan speeds and noise.


Just my opinion and experience. FWIW.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Sheyster said:


> I have to disagree if you're referring to using it on top of the IHS. Myself and many others are using Kryonaut on top successfully with a 9900K. I have a tube of TFX (ThermalRight's newer paste) waiting for the next time I re-apply TIM. It's supposed to be better than Kryonaut. I only use LM below the IHS.



I'm using LM successfully to hit 5.3ghz on a bad voltage scaling chip. It cannot be done with paste. Paste is a waste on a 9900k unless it does less than 1.2v load voltage @ 5GHz HT on during avx loads, and at that point you are just leaving performance on that table by not clocking even higher with liquid metal. 5.3ghz liquidmetal between IHS/AIO coldplate non-delid cinebench sub 80c in cbr15/20 with regular ambient temps, with only 3 fans on rad. Paste between IHS/Coldplate cannot achieve this at all, not even close. Liquid metal between IHS/Coldplate is A++++++.


----------



## Padinn

I made some progress, curious of those familiar with offset voltage can help. My chip seems more or less stable under full load at 5GHz when at around 1.26v. Passed 50 loops of blender test earlier while using +110mv, medium LLC, AC/DC loadlines at 1. However, it crashed pretty quickly when idling - I have to assume that is because at the lower loads/clocks it's unstable with C-States on - it just hard reset.

Any guidance on how I might be able to keep C-states enabled and not have to raise voltage further? I did have some success with low llc and +160mv. Is there anyway I can keep the medium LLC and somehow boost the voltages at lower loads slightly?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> I made some progress, curious of those familiar with offset voltage can help. My chip seems more or less stable under full load at 5GHz when at around 1.26v. Passed 50 loops of blender test earlier while using +110mv, medium LLC, AC/DC loadlines at 1. However, it crashed pretty quickly when idling - I have to assume that is because at the lower loads/clocks it's unstable with C-States on - it just hard reset.
> 
> Any guidance on how I might be able to keep C-states enabled and not have to raise voltage further? I did have some success with low llc and +160mv. Is there anyway I can keep the medium LLC and somehow boost the voltages at lower loads slightly?



I only enable eist + c3 so that voltage + clocks go down on idle. I tried using all cstates but when I do i get freezes no matter what. EIST + C3 enabled, all other cstates disabled, package c state limit on auto + other dumb voltage options disabled. Disable speedSHIFT(not to be confused with speedSTEP/EIST) too.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I only enable eist + c3 so that voltage + clocks go down on idle. I tried using all cstates but when I do i get freezes no matter what. EIST + C3 enabled, all other cstates disabled, package c state limit on auto + other dumb voltage options disabled. Disable speedSHIFT(not to be confused with speedSTEP/EIST) too.


Okay I'll give that a shot. Right now what I'm testing is setting the AC/DC to 0, then setting them to use the preset power saving function for the VRMs (CPU Internal AC/DC loadline) , low LLC, and an offset of +50mv. It's roughly the same voltage underload (may need to bump up to 60mv), and roughly same temperatures. 

Did they ever fix the 400khz switchrate setting bug? I remember a while back we needed to run them at 300.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> Okay I'll give that a shot. Right now what I'm testing is setting the AC/DC to 0, then setting them to use the preset power saving function for the VRMs (CPU Internal AC/DC loadline) , low LLC, and an offset of +50mv. It's roughly the same voltage underload (may need to bump up to 60mv), and roughly same temperatures.
> 
> Did they ever fix the 400khz switchrate setting bug? I remember a while back we needed to run them at 300.



I don't know how it will work with acdc 0 so I cannot vouch for that. I haven't tried much switchrate testing as of late, I just do 300khz as falkentyne instructed in the past, never had any issues with it and it seems to require the least amount of vcore.


----------



## Padinn

Falk has some.posts about it, but basically these change from the default intel spec for the ohm ratings on the ac/dc lines. 

*EDIT** Here is a link to Falkentyne's post where he went into quite a bit of depth:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...clock-results-questions-173.html#post27998984


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> Falk has some.posts about it, but basically these change from the default intel spec for the ohm ratings on the ac/dc lines.
> 
> *EDIT** Here is a link to Falkentyne's post where he went into quite a bit of depth:
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...clock-results-questions-173.html#post27998984



TY.
I'm well aware that I am out of spec. I bought the warranty so I will make sure to kill/break this chip within 2 years to ensure that it doesn't die after the oc warranty expires and they will give me another, best 20-30 dollars spent. hopefully the newer one scales better with voltage and i won't have to go out of spec to hit desired clock speeds. If they choose to refund the 20-30 dollar spent on the OC warranty instead under the guise of "we don't have any more chips", I just stop pcgaming permanently/sell the rest of my hardware(board/ram etc) and head over to console gaming.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> TY.
> I'm well aware that I am out of spec. I bought the warranty so I will make sure to kill/break this chip within 2 years to ensure that it doesn't die after the oc warranty expires and they will give me another, best 20-30 dollars spent. hopefully the newer one scales better with voltage and i won't have to go out of spec to hit desired clock speeds. If they choose to refund the 20-30 dollar spent on the OC warranty instead under the guise of "we don't have any more chips", I just stop pcgaming permanently/sell the rest of my hardware(board/ram etc) and head over to console gaming.


Oh yeah I did same, I wasn't implying you were doing something wrong. Just giving an explanation of the setting I'm using for my offset settings. This doesn't actually hurt, in fact running out of spec for the AC/DC loadlines is probably a good idea if using LLC to prevent harm from transient voltage spikes. He goes into a lot of detail in that post. I think the default for an 8 core processor is 160ohms, I am running it at 40 right now (with low llc).


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> Oh yeah I did same, I wasn't implying you were doing something wrong. Just giving an explanation of the setting I'm using for my offset settings. This doesn't actually hurt, in fact running out of spec for the AC/DC loadlines is probably a good idea if using LLC to prevent harm from transient voltage spikes. He goes into a lot of detail in that post. I think the default for an 8 core processor is 160ohms, I am running it at 40 right now (with low llc).



acdc-default _ powersaving acdc preset + vcore llc low requires +130mv offset to be stable at 5.3.


Wait, wait, So i'm not out of spec since i'm using practically no ohms?(acdc 1 is like .01 or .001 ohms or something) or do ohms not even matter if i just go off amps to volts pulled under any given load? ( aside from making sure I don't use high llc with high ohms since it makes things erratic or w/e)


So should I pump more voltage and go for 5.4 then ? i think 5.4ghz will require 1.42v or 1.43v load voltage for cbr15 and 1.46v or 1.47v load voltage for cbr20. Maybe I could do 5.4ghz non-avx and 5.3ghz avx? Or just 5.4 flat?


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> acdc-default _ powersaving acdc preset + vcore llc low requires +130mv offset to be stable at 5.3.
> 
> 
> Wait, wait, So i'm not out of spec since i'm using practically no ohms?(acdc 1 is like .01 or .001 ohms or something) or do ohms not even matter if i just go off amps to volts pulled under any given load? ( aside from making sure I don't use high llc with high ohms since it makes things erratic or w/e)
> 
> 
> So should I pump more voltage and go for 5.4 then ? i think 5.4ghz will require 1.42v or 1.43v load voltage for cbr15 and 1.46v or 1.47v load voltage for cbr20. Maybe I could do 5.4ghz non-avx and 5.3ghz avx? Or just 5.4 flat?


If you manually set your Ohms to 1, then the AC/DC loadline preset (powersaving, ect.) does nothing - those settings are disabled for any AC/DC setting that is not 0. 

It's kind of hard to explain and I wouldn't want to give you bad info. Basically, stock VRM spec for Intel for an 8 Core CPU (it varies by number of cores) is 160 ohms on the AC line. Voltage = current * resistance (ohms). So, increasing R (ohms) will increase voltage at same current. Basically the way the power delivery works (in a very oversimplified way) is that it is boosted before it gets to the CPU, and then dropped on the way to the CPU so it doesn't hurt the CPU. The advantage here is that extremely brief transient spikes/drops should be evened out and you won't accidentally over/undershoot target voltage as much. However, LLC (separate setting) counteracts VDroop - so if you mix higher LLC settings with stock VRM specs you can overvolt your CPU pretty easily. This is why you generally want to be careful about mixing LLC at stock settings when using offset voltages. As LLC also boosts voltage by reducing VDroop, the risk is that you boost too high or cause transient high spikes that will damage the CPU (and are undetectable in software, because they happen very quickly). 

I'm not an expert on this by any means, but I've previously run with AC/DC at 1 and low LLC (w/ +160mv offset) or medium LLC (w/ +120mv offset) and periodically had crashes under less than full loads. Right now I have reset the AC/DC settings to 0 and am using the build in AC/DC power saving setting, combined with low to medium llc, and a +50mv offset. My net voltage under full load is about the same, however how I am getting there has changed. It is my hope this will allow my idle voltages to be higher, and help with transient DROPS, which is why I'm crashing at idle clocks, but stable at full load. 

Be very, very careful if you are going to increase yourself above 1/1 that you have now - you will absolutely need to lower your offset voltage and retest. I dropped my offset 70mv (from 120mv) from my medium llc AC/DC 1/1 settings. 

From what Falketyne has shared before (I'd want him to verify) the corresponding AC/DC Loadline numbers for the settings we can choose from are below. The first number is AC, the second DC:

"Extreme is 2.10 mOhms / 2.10 mOhms
Turbo is 1.60 mOhms / 1.60 mOhms 
Performance is 1.30 mOhm/1.30 mOhm.
Power saving .4mOhm/1.3mOhm)"

If you wanted to manually set this in the AC/DC loadline menu it is in straight up ohms, so you multiple by 100 to get number you want. For example, 160/160 is turbo and should basically be the Intel default. Power saving is 40/130.

I would personally never use extreme with an 8 core CPU and would only use turbo if I'm not using any offset voltages (i.e., 0mv offset) and not overclocking (again, that is intel stock spec).

Hope that made at least some sense, it's a bit hard to your question.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> acdc-default _ powersaving acdc preset + vcore llc low requires +130mv offset to be stable at 5.3.
> 
> 
> Wait, wait, So i'm not out of spec since i'm using practically no ohms?(acdc 1 is like .01 or .001 ohms or something) or do ohms not even matter if i just go off amps to volts pulled under any given load? ( aside from making sure I don't use high llc with high ohms since it makes things erratic or w/e)
> 
> 
> So should I pump more voltage and go for 5.4 then ? i think 5.4ghz will require 1.42v or 1.43v load voltage for cbr15 and 1.46v or 1.47v load voltage for cbr20. Maybe I could do 5.4ghz non-avx and 5.3ghz avx? Or just 5.4 flat?


If you want to fire up HW Info to see your current settings, you can. see my pic below. Make sure you got extended CPU info shown.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

+1. I will try acdc turbo preset + standard vcore llc + offset to see if I can get lower vmin than acdc-1 + low vcore llc + offset for 5.3ghz ht off. Normally i would use acdc-1 + standard vcore llc + offset for lowest vmin but at 5.3ghz the offset is something like +250mv or +260mv which is too high. What are your thoughts about using acdc extreme preset if HT is disabled on 8 cores?


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> +1. I will try acdc turbo preset + standard vcore llc + offset to see if I can get lower vmin than acdc-1 + low vcore llc + offset for 5.3ghz ht off. Normally i would use acdc-1 + standard vcore llc + offset for lowest vmin but at 5.3ghz the offset is something like +250mv or +260mv which is too high. What are your thoughts about using acdc extreme preset if HT is disabled on 8 cores?


I would not do turbo or extreme with that offset. I personally would never use turbo or extreme and overclock. You are going to dramatically increase your voltages doing that and I think fry your chip. NEVER EVER run extreme on an 8 core chip.

If you want to see what turbo will do, set your offset to 0, disable your overclock initially, and see what your voltage is. Just be careful and dont rush it.


----------



## TAGTRAUM

XGS-Duplicity said:


> I'm using LM successfully to hit 5.3ghz on a bad voltage scaling chip. It cannot be done with paste. Paste is a waste on a 9900k unless it does less than 1.2v load voltage @ 5GHz HT on during avx loads, and at that point you are just leaving performance on that table by not clocking even higher with liquid metal. 5.3ghz liquidmetal between IHS/AIO coldplate non-delid cinebench sub 80c in cbr15/20 with regular ambient temps, with only 3 fans on rad. Paste between IHS/Coldplate cannot achieve this at all, not even close. Liquid metal between IHS/Coldplate is A++++++.


You have bad chip, i can say pretty sh#t chip, so it's your problem, please do not *****ing a good thermal solution only because of your garbage chip


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

TAGTRAUM said:


> You have bad chip, i can say pretty sh#t chip, so it's your problem, please do not *****ing a good thermal solution only because of your garbage chip



You know what you are right, i have no idea what i'm talking about.


----------



## Padinn

I'm concerned this is starting to sound a bit like conductocult 

As a heads up, I had a few WHEA errors at the 50mv offset. Tried 60mv offset and x264 blend test was stable for hours, but eventually hard reset. I am now testing with a custom VRM of 35/130 (power saving is 40/130). This has dropped voltage a tad at load, so I don't expect it to work, but it might. Temperatures were a little higher with the 60mv offset with the default power saving settings.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Padinn said:


> I'm concerned this is starting to sound a bit like conductocult
> 
> As a heads up, I had a few WHEA errors at the 50mv offset. Tried 60mv offset and x264 blend test was stable for hours, but eventually hard reset. I am now testing with a custom VRM of 35/130 (power saving is 40/150). This has dropped voltage a tad at load, so I don't expect it to work, but it might. Temperatures were a little higher with the 60mv offset with the default power saving settings.



bahaha . May want to speak with amdcult "team red" first lol. Have you ever set foot on amd themed forums on public outlets that they don't even own? That's real cult lol. like go check out amd subreddit. It's disgusting.


ACDC-1 + vcore llc low + offset will probably provide you with lower vmin under load than acdc preset powersaving + vcore llc low + offset. I shaved off about 10mv-15mv underload at 5.3ghz using it, not the greatest reduction but definitely welcome.


EDIT: NM about turbo ratios and amp draw. Just switched from acdc-1, vcore llc low, +190mv offset to acdc-1, vcore llc turbo, +90mv offset. Draws slightly more amps(about 130 now) but vrout is better during browsing/light task, 1.387v instead of 1.4v+. same vmin though which is good.


----------



## Padinn

XGS-Duplicity said:


> bahaha . May want to speak with amdcult "team red" first lol. Have you ever set foot on amd themed forums on public outlets that they don't even own? That's real cult lol. like go check out amd subreddit. It's disgusting.
> 
> 
> ACDC-1 + vcore llc low + offset will probably provide you with lower vmin under load than acdc preset powersaving + vcore llc low + offset. I shaved off about 10mv-15mv underload at 5.3ghz using it, not the greatest reduction but definitely welcome.
> 
> 
> EDIT: NM about turbo ratios and amp draw. Just switched from acdc-1, vcore llc low, +190mv offset to acdc-1, vcore llc turbo, +90mv offset. Draws slightly more amps(about 130 now) but vrout is better during browsing/light task, 1.387v instead of 1.4v+. same vmin though which is good.


Had a bad typo in my post - power saving is 40/130 (not 40/150). I am testing right now at 35/130. Since I want a slightly higher minimum voltage this seems to be working. Under max load I'm locked at 1.252-1.26v using these settings.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

HI @*Cookie_93* , professional overclocker gigabyte employee. Nice to see you visit here. I have surpassed your best 4x8gb memtest stable result on the z390 master with 1 year desktop OC experience. This is an official public challenge. I would like you to try and beat my result with a 9900k retail chip(R0 stepping preferred, but P0 is fine), any 4x8GB retail dimms(could be two 2x8gb kits or one 4x8gb kit), retail z390 aorus master, retail stock bios, non-delid, with a 360mm aio on ambient. feel free to hook up an air conditioner to blow cool air onto the rad/ram and feel free to use liquid metal between IHS and aio coldplate. Ambient must not dip below 70F and air conditioning be set no less than 70F. 6,400% karhu stable minimum. My result is in my signature. Good luck. 



I used:
retail 4x8GB Gskill tridentz rgb 17-17-17-37-2T 4000mhz ram kit (full 32gb usable in windows) - heatsinks/rgb still attached
retail z390 aorus master
retail F9 stock bios
retail kraken x72 360mm aio, 3 factory included fans on rad @ 2080rpm, pump @ 2700rpm
retail Conductonaut between IHS/AIO copper coldplate
retail 9900k R0 stepping chip, NO delid
Free windows 10
retail Karhu ramtest w/ cache enabled 6,400% error free
11 case fans total, 2 fans dedicated to blowing on ram(120mm blowing over the ram, 40mm blowing between the ram) and a 140mm dedicated to blowing over vrms
4 foot long cardboard box contraption routing from central air conditioning ceiling vent to blow cool air into top of PC case, aio fans are intake at top of case
Ambient never below 70F, central air conditioning thermostat set to 70F.

Show me why they pay you the big bucks .


----------



## KedarWolf

XGS-Duplicity said:


> bahaha . May want to speak with amdcult "team red" first lol. Have you ever set foot on amd themed forums on public outlets that they don't even own? That's real cult lol. like go check out amd subreddit. It's disgusting.
> 
> 
> ACDC-1 + vcore llc low + offset will probably provide you with lower vmin under load than acdc preset powersaving + vcore llc low + offset. I shaved off about 10mv-15mv underload at 5.3ghz using it, not the greatest reduction but definitely welcome.
> 
> 
> EDIT: NM about turbo ratios and amp draw. Just switched from acdc-1, vcore llc low, +190mv offset to acdc-1, vcore llc turbo, +90mv offset. Draws slightly more amps(about 130 now) but vrout is better during browsing/light task, 1.387v instead of 1.4v+. same vmin though which is good.


I still post updated BIOS's for you peeps, but when I couldn't get a Core i9-10980XE I went Team Red with a 3950x and it'd been pretty much the best platform I've ever had with overclocking.

And if the new RDNA video cards will be as good as the hype and don't have overheating issues water-cooled, I might go completely Team Red.


----------



## Padinn

So I've been stable now for just over 7 hours using these settings:
Passed 90 loops of the custom x264 blend stress test @ 5GHz. Using 35/130 for AC/DC loadline and a +60mv offset. SA is 1.2, VCC IO is 1.05. Low LLC. No AVX offset

Interestingly enough, 30/130 (hard reset after 30 min) and 40/130 were not stable (gave 3 WHEA errors overnight) - shows you just how finicky this can be. Now I need to test the lower/medium CPU loads to see if I run into any issues at lower clocks, but I think we can pretty clearly state my CPU is stable at 1.255v.

*EDIT* Corrected above, adding BIOS Screenshots.


----------



## Falkentyne

Hi @Cookie_93 , can you look into the 1T bug/issue with dual rank dimms on Z490 Aorus Master boards right now?

Oh Trident Z 2x16 GB CL14 sticks, both 2018 and 2020 versions, 1T command rate does not work at stock XMP settings at all. The board just repeatedly boot loops and fails to train, and either "C1's" and resets, or eventually decides to post at 2800 mhz.

It does not matter what the DDR voltages, IO or SA are set to.

2020 sticks (RAM sticker feb 2020): https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B071VRMFDQ/
2018 sticks (RAM sticker Oct 2018): https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232560?Item=N82E16820232560

These sticks have absolutely no problems at all running 1T at XMP on the Z390 Aorus Master, for example.
(the 2020 sticks are less stable at 1T with tightened subs than the 2018 sticks are, but the 2020 sticks scale MUCH better with 2T, 3733 mhz and timings of 15/15/15/36 @ 1.40v is rock solid, which the 2018 sticks could not do without loosening a lot of subs).

By comparison, the Steel Viper 4000 CL17 2x8 sticks have no problems at 1T on the Z490 Master.

Thank you!


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> Hi @Cookie_93 , can you look into the 1T bug/issue with dual rank dimms on Z490 Aorus Master boards right now?
> 
> Oh Trident Z 2x16 GB CL14 sticks, both 2018 and 2020 versions, 1T command rate does not work at stock XMP settings at all. The board just repeatedly boot loops and fails to train, and either "C1's" and resets, or eventually decides to post at 2800 mhz.
> 
> It does not matter what the DDR voltages, IO or SA are set to.
> 
> 2020 sticks (RAM sticker feb 2020): https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B071VRMFDQ/
> 2018 sticks (RAM sticker Oct 2018): https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232560?Item=N82E16820232560
> 
> These sticks have absolutely no problems at all running 1T at XMP on the Z390 Aorus Master, for example.
> (the 2020 sticks are less stable at 1T with tightened subs than the 2018 sticks are, but the 2020 sticks scale MUCH better with 2T, 3733 mhz and timings of 15/15/15/36 @ 1.40v is rock solid, which the 2018 sticks could not do without loosening a lot of subs).
> 
> By comparison, the Steel Viper 4000 CL17 2x8 sticks have no problems at 1T on the Z490 Master.
> 
> Thank you!


Are the 2020 sticks the new A die?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Sorry for calling kryonaut trash, its not, perhaps it is my chip. Sorry Der8uaer. I still buy your other products when I can.


----------



## pm1109

Hey Guys.Been away from the overcloking scene for a while and was looking to tweak my settings.Currently my 9900k is at 5Ghz @1.32 Vcore on my Z390 Aorus Motherboard.Also currently using F10b bios.Another question ...What is the best non-modded Bios?
Anyways here are some of my snapshots of my overclock.Any advice would be appreciation.Thanks in advance.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

my neck doesn't bend that far bro.


----------



## Padinn

KedarWolf said:


> I still post updated BIOS's for you peeps, but when I couldn't get a Core i9-10980XE I went Team Red with a 3950x and it'd been pretty much the best platform I've ever had with overclocking.
> 
> And if the new RDNA video cards will be as good as the hype and don't have overheating issues water-cooled, I might go completely Team Red.


I plan to join you when the 4000 Desktop CPUs launch later this year


----------



## Padinn

pm1109 said:


> Hey Guys.Been away from the overcloking scene for a while and was looking to tweak my settings.Currently my 9900k is at 5Ghz @1.32 Vcore on my Z390 Aorus Motherboard.Also currently using F10b bios.Another question ...What is the best non-modded Bios?
> Anyways here are some of my snapshots of my overclock.Any advice would be appreciation.Thanks in advance.


I didn't see if you are using manual or offset voltage, but one think that seemed odd to me was setting AC loadline to 1 and leaving DC at 0 (default). Not sure if that would have an adverse impact or not. If you are stable, voltages aren't peaking, and your temperatures are acceptable though I don't see a huge problem here. I liked F11c, but not sure it is best. You could always try lowering to high LLC if you are worried about transient voltage spikes, but you'd need to compensate for additional droop with additional VCore. I've also heard it's best to set switch rate on VRMs to 300 Khz, and not max them at 500.


----------



## Falkentyne

DC Loadline is only for package power reporting. It is a prediction of the LLC value (loadline calibration) but appears on the reported VID. The actual raw value of the VID appears if DC Loadline=1 as this prevents the VID from showing a *reported* drop (not a real drop).

The amount of the VID being dropped is simply DC Loadline mOhms * Amps, where 1=0.01 mOhms and 100=1 mOhm; this is the drop below the AC loadline boost value (which technically is "AC Loadline mOhms * loadstep iOUT") but I only found controlling vcore via ACLL to be reliable ONLY when using Cinebench and Prime95 small FFT. Using it to try to play Battlefield 5 causes massive vdroop or high VR OUT spikes because the ACLL doesn't respond very fast to mixed erratic core loads, only to constant loads.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity




----------



## Jack051

Hey folks, 

Overclocked my 9700k on the Gigabyte z390 aorus pro a while back, 4.8ghz. Everything was good, all stable and no issues. Recently bought a new NVMe and was fiddling with some of the settings in the bios, 1 in particular which I now instantly regret: Fast Boot. Long story short I couldn't get to be the bios through various methods so updated the bios via the program. It worked, all good but of course I hadn't save my settings for the previous overclock and I cannot remember what I used. Been working on this oc for the past 2/3 hours but not getting anywhere with stability etc.

Anyone have a quick guide on what I should use and I can then go off that to make sure the voltage is stable etc please. (There's guides out there but quite honestly they all go off on different options and would love to just get to the previous settings I had)

Edit: Bios version F12d


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Jack051 said:


> Hey folks,
> 
> Overclocked my 9700k on the Gigabyte z390 aorus pro a while back, 4.8ghz. Everything was good, all stable and no issues. Recently bought a new NVMe and was fiddling with some of the settings in the bios, 1 in particular which I now instantly regret: Fast Boot. Long story short I couldn't get to be the bios through various methods so updated the bios via the program. It worked, all good but of course I hadn't save my settings for the previous overclock and I cannot remember what I used. Been working on this oc for the past 2/3 hours but not getting anywhere with stability etc.
> 
> Anyone have a quick guide on what I should use and I can then go off that to make sure the voltage is stable etc please. (There's guides out there but quite honestly they all go off on different options and would love to just get to the previous settings I had)
> 
> Edit: Bios version F12d



get off of those ****ty beta bioses and newer bioses. All of them are trash and a waste of time, I tried ALL OF THEM, either old/wrong code or filled with bugs or new microcode that affects performance. I swear they just have us try this stuff because their own employees are too lazy to test **** themself. Not once has one these beta or newer bioses done a damn thing for me and they have me waste my time testing them all. I see users get best results with f9. Don't bother with any other bios, ever, unless they provide you evidence of proof of concept, otherwise you will be wasting your time.


----------



## Jack051

XGS-Duplicity said:


> get off of those ****ty beta bioses and newer bioses. All of them are trash, either old/wrong code or filled with bugs that affect performance. I see users get best results with f9 or f10b. Don't bother with anything else.


Ironically I was on F9 before the update. Any info on the rest of the main question at hand?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Jack051 said:


> Ironically I was on F9 before the update. Any info on the rest of the main question at hand?



Check out gigabyte's official z390 aorus master? OC guide on youtube.


----------



## Jack051

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Jack051 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ironically I was on F9 before the update. Any info on the rest of the main question at hand?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check out gigabyte's official z390 aorus master? OC guide on youtube.
Click to expand...

Will take a look, ty


----------



## -SE7EN-

Hey, can anyone tell me how to fix spd write on the motherboard (aorus z390 pro wifi)? I tried searching, but 'spd' 'ram' and 'rgb' are all too short to use. I need to be able to access my ram rgb so it isn't always one, but it doesn't show up in iCue, and it seems that spd write is the cause of this.


----------



## KedarWolf

-SE7EN- said:


> Hey, can anyone tell me how to fix spd write on the motherboard (aorus z390 pro wifi)? I tried searching, but 'spd' 'ram' and 'rgb' are all too short to use. I need to be able to access my ram rgb so it isn't always one, but it doesn't show up in iCue, and it seems that spd write is the cause of this.


I had to mod the BIOS with instructions from the WinRaid forum to enable SPD Write.

https://www.win-raid.com/t5202f16-Gigabyte-Z-Master-Enable-SPD-Write.html


----------



## -SE7EN-

KedarWolf said:


> I had to mod the BIOS with instructions from the WinRaid forum to enable SPD Write.
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t5202f16-Gigabyte-Z-Master-Enable-SPD-Write.html



ok, I will make a post there now. Seen that thread earlier through google searches, was hoping there was a better fix in place by now. Just upgraded from an old 2600k, this motherboard is giving me a headache so far. Thanks for the help, this will hopefully be the last of the bigger problems with this board.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

how do I prevent windows update from every activating? I literally just did a fresh wipe, disabled wuaserv, stopped the service and then as soon as I plugged in my ethernet cable and opened Microsoft edge, windows update goes off. How do I prevent this from happening on my device. I don't want any updates ever. none. please help. I don't want anything modifying my machine unless I click install myself.


Also, what is secure boot mode do in the bios?
What does CSM do in the bios?

I noticed I had a custom boot mode setup in the bios, unknown to me, I never did it. I just played with some settings and restore factory keys or something and then switch from system to set up mode or whatever it is, disabled csm and enabled secure boot mode and passworded my bios. am I protected or is this vulnerable? I don't know what any of this stuff does and the manual does not explain what these features do or how they impact my system.

Could the custom bios boot mode enable someone else to control my internet connection? Anytime I mouth off, internet gets cut for 10 minutes. How do I secure my bios and internet adaptor? Do I need to sell off my hardware or something? Do I need to exchange modem at internet service provider?


----------



## Falkentyne

XGS-Duplicity said:


> how do I prevent windows update from every activating? I literally just did a fresh wipe, disabled wuaserv, stopped the service and then as soon as I plugged in my ethernet cable and opened Microsoft edge, windows update goes off. How do I prevent this from happening on my device. I don't want any updates ever. none. please help. I don't want anything modifying my machine unless I click install myself.
> 
> 
> Also, what is secure boot mode do in the bios?
> What does CSM do in the bios?
> 
> I noticed I had a custom boot mode setup in the bios, unknown to me, I never did it. I just played with some settings and restore factory keys or something and then switch from system to set up mode or whatever it is, disabled csm and enabled secure boot mode and passworded my bios. am I protected or is this vulnerable? I don't know what any of this stuff does and the manual does not explain what these features do or how they impact my system.
> 
> Could the custom bios boot mode enable someone else to control my internet connection? Anytime I mouth off, internet gets cut for 10 minutes. How do I secure my bios and internet adaptor? Do I need to sell off my hardware or something?



https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Wait, so was this Microsoft or was this intel or was it this website controlling my internet? It's not coincidence That I get a "customer improvement program logon" followed up by "dns" event in windows event viewer right before my internet gets cut off EVERY TIME I mouth off. It's not a coincidence. I'm not stupid. So tell me, Is it Microsoft, is it intel, or is it this website? If you guys don't want me apart of this scene just tell me and i'll leave and never come back.


----------



## Kargeras

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Try manual timings CL17 or below with tRC=tCL + tRAS


Is tRC value visibile in ASRock Timing Configuration?

I can see it just fine in Master's BIOS.


----------



## GeneO

Bricked my master board so am out of here back to Asus Hero and a 1070k


Really bummed me out. I had it set for BIOS 1, Single BIOS and the BIOS 1 failed. But it failed over to BIOS 2 (F9). I wasn't expecting that since I had the switches set to single BIOS BIOS 1. So I thought I would qflash the modded f11j GK (I had done this a couple of times with no issue, but not from F9). That bricked it. Dead, no motherboard lights, fans, nothing but PCIE and LED power. POS.



Anyhow, working on 5GHz on 1070k. 5.1 doesn't seem to be in the cards - it wants a VID of 1.5v for that, though I seem to be able to get it manual mode for < 1.3v HT disabled. 5 GHz low volts though.


----------



## Intrud3r

Somehow bricked my Aorus Ultra board too ... was just running fine, till I started Taiphoon burner to check my new memory ... (Taiphoon burner worked before no problems) ... this time I started the program, and it was click and power off system. Only thing coming out of the board after that was 2 clicks and no lights. So that was my queue to switch over to a 10700K with a Z490 Aorus Master board with a new PSU (just in case). Rest came all from the old system.


----------



## GeneO

Yeah I checked out the PSU and it was fine. So reused everything. Bent a dang pin in the USB 3.0 header (I hate that ill conceived connector) so am going to get a USB3.1 to U#B3.0 internal adapter so can use my front panel USB (sigfh).


Can't really get an OC on my 64 GB 3200/C14 b-die memory with the Asus as I did on the master, but I expected that. Running at XMP and 5 GHz 1.24v vcore OK. 5.1 wants lots o volts.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Kargeras said:


> Is tRC value visibile in ASRock Timing Configuration?
> 
> I can see it just fine in Master's BIOS.



trc is not visibile in atc to my knowledge, at least not in version 4.0.4


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

nm i'm dumb, i didn't have switchrate at 300khz because everything was on auto lol


----------



## Falkentyne

GeneO said:


> Bricked my master board so am out of here back to Asus Hero and a 1070k
> 
> 
> Really bummed me out. I had it set for BIOS 1, Single BIOS and the BIOS 1 failed. But it failed over to BIOS 2 (F9). I wasn't expecting that since I had the switches set to single BIOS BIOS 1. So I thought I would qflash the modded f11j GK (I had done this a couple of times with no issue, but not from F9). That bricked it. Dead, no motherboard lights, fans, nothing but PCIE and LED power. POS.
> 
> You used the modded efiflfash 0.80 by Dsanke? I know it has a /DB bios switch option for flashing both bios chips (this requires dual bios mode being on I think), and it has an override to force flash even with wrong device ID.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyhow, working on 5GHz on 1070k. 5.1 doesn't seem to be in the cards - it wants a VID of 1.5v for that, though I seem to be able to get it manual mode for < 1.3v HT disabled. 5 GHz low volts though.


Both bios chips are bricked?
Do you have a Pomona 5250 clip, male to female jumper cables ( https://www.amazon.com/Elegoo-EL-CP-004-Multicolored-Breadboard-arduino/dp/B01EV70C78/ ) and a programmer? (I prefer a Skypro/II/III).
The first bios chip is socketed so you have to pull it and put it into the programmer with an adapter (I do not believe the Pomona 5250 clip will work on that chip), but it *WILL* work on the soldered chip.

A cheap chinese clip will not work because the bios chip is next to some cap and a too thick clip (like most cheap clips are) will be blocked by that.


----------



## GeneO

Falkentyne said:


> Both bios chips are bricked?
> Do you have a Pomona 5250 clip, male to female jumper cables ( https://www.amazon.com/Elegoo-EL-CP-004-Multicolored-Breadboard-arduino/dp/B01EV70C78/ ) and a programmer? (I prefer a Skypro/II/III).
> The first bios chip is socketed so you have to pull it and put it into the programmer with an adapter (I do not believe the Pomona 5250 clip will work on that chip), but it *WILL* work on the soldered chip.
> 
> A cheap chinese clip will not work because the bios chip is next to some cap and a too thick clip (like most cheap clips are) will be blocked by that.


Yup both. I have already written it off though. Maybe if I have some time I will try and resurrect it. Thanks.


----------



## satinghostrider

Thanks @ XGS-Duplicity for the tips on increasing my VCCIO/VCCSA.

I re-did my timings and I have managed to get this working with 6000% Kahru testing coverage.
My games runs much more stable now and that weird CTD with some games like Battlefront 2 is all gone.
I also managed to push my my ring to 4.8GHz. I can easily run 5.1Ghz and 5.2Ghz easily with 5.2Ghz needing 1.36V under High LLC and 5.1GHz needing 1.33V LLC. 5.0GHz can be done at 1.30V LLC.
For daily, I have finalized at 5.1GHz as I feel that is fast enough and games are under 70 degrees. 5.2GHz hit low 70s and felt it was not worth the added heat and voltage for something I can't feel when gaming.

VDIMM : 1.5V
VSSSA / VCCIO : 1.30V
BIOS : F11C

Think this is as far as I can go with my setup which has proved rock stable for the last 5 days of testing. All these while I think I have been running too low a VCCIO and VCCSA. These Gigabyte boards can be very frustrating to work with, sometimes you can pass Kahru and next powerup you can suddenly fail the memtest. I have rebooted my system endless of times with the new memory settings and voltages and so far none of them threw an error with repeated testing. This might just be my golden settings for now. 

P.S - I am running 1 pair on A1 PCB and another pair on A2 PCB despite both being G.Skill 3600C16. I think that is why I had so much trouble trying to get stable my memory overclocks with my earlier settings which I think could be aggressive given they were not matched pairs.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

satinghostrider said:


> Thanks @ XGS-Duplicity for the tips on increasing my VCCIO/VCCSA.
> 
> I re-did my timings and I have managed to get this working with 6000% Kahru testing coverage.
> My games runs much more stable now and that weird CTD with some games like Battlefront 2 is all gone.
> I also managed to push my my ring to 4.8GHz. I can easily run 5.1Ghz and 5.2Ghz easily with 5.2Ghz needing 1.36V under High LLC and 5.1GHz needing 1.33V LLC. 5.0GHz can be done at 1.30V LLC.
> For daily, I have finalized at 5.1GHz as I feel that is fast enough and games are under 70 degrees. 5.2GHz hit low 70s and felt it was not worth the added heat and voltage for something I can't feel when gaming.
> 
> VDIMM : 1.5V
> VSSSA / VCCIO : 1.30V
> BIOS : F11C
> 
> Think this is as far as I can go with my setup which has proved rock stable for the last 5 days of testing. All these while I think I have been running too low a VCCIO and VCCSA. These Gigabyte boards can be very frustrating to work with, sometimes you can pass Kahru and next powerup you can suddenly fail the memtest. I have rebooted my system endless of times with the new memory settings and voltages and so far none of them threw an error with repeated testing. This might just be my golden settings for now.
> 
> P.S - I am running 1 pair on A1 PCB and another pair on A2 PCB despite both being G.Skill 3600C16. I think that is why I had so much trouble trying to get stable my memory overclocks with my earlier settings which I think could be aggressive given they were not matched pairs.



Your welcome. What happens when you try to train the memory with pwm phase control extreme, 101.5 busclock, 4133mhz memory strap, 1.35v sa/io, 1.5v vdimm, 32768 trefi(rest of timings the same,with 4.7 or 4.8 cache) avx offset=auto, and then once it is done training, go back into bios, set sa/io to 1.3v, set busclock to 100.00, set memory strap to 4200 and then enable memory fast boot, save/exit.


Below are the timings I use for similar set up as yours, 5.1ghz(turbo ratios set) HT ON 4.7ghz cache acdc-1 vcore llc high, vcore=normal dvid mode +70mv offset, EIST + C3 enabled, 1.5v vdimm, 1.3v sa/io, avx offset=auto, pwm phase control extreme. Used training method shared above, slightly different timings. 

On a side note, If you want to use your configuration exactly how it is and get some extra core speed and extra cache speed for 5Core to 1Core loads- enable ring to core, set cache to 54, pwm phast control extreme, Eist + c3 enabled(all other cstates off, c-state package limit on auto)and set turbo ratios to 54/54/53/52/52/51/51/51 with acdc-1, vcore llc low, vcore normal dvid mode +200mv offset(this is assuming your 1.33v for 5.1 was 1.33v load voltage in something like aida64 fpu with avx enabled, all core would still be 1.33vish under full load in aida fpu or cbr20 still while 5core to 1core will vary depending on the load). Just know that vcore llc low is not the best for ultra tight memory overclocks at high frequencies for passing heavier memtests, you'll have to see if it gels well with your memory overclock. This is a config to use with windows balanced power plan so you downclock volts/clocks on idle, alternatively, you can also use it with maximum performance power plan with clocks boosting as high as possible at all times, could also turn on speedshift in addition to EIST + C3 for just a hair better performance with the windows maximum powerplan version. Just know you may not always see 5.4ghz single/double core if you have tons of stuff running. Cache ratio gets automatically controlled based on the core demand of the workload with this configuration when ring to core is enabled as long as cache ratio in bios is set to no less than 300mhz lower than highest turbo core ratio. This means if you are boosting to 5.4ghz on a single or double core workload, cache will boost to 5.1ghz. 1.3v SA/IO should be enough to handle 5.1ghz cache on single/double core workloads with hyperthreading enabled provided you are not on an insanely demanding memory oc. If you are boosting to 5.3ghz on on triple core workloads, the cache will boost to 5ghz. 5.2ghz 4core-5core workloads cache will boost to 4.9ghz. The higher cache ratio gained from ring to core will also improve memory bandwidth/latency for 5core-1core workloads, aida64 benchmark will reflect that.


----------



## sebborrr

i got the exact SAME behavior like ur. Thaiphoon Burner and click power off. cpu and Mb died. STAY AWAY FROM TAIPHOON BURNER


----------



## Scunner

Hello Everyone, hope you are all well?

I'm at my wits end, and hoping to gain the insight of people who know more than I do. I have a Master and am F11e bios, @KedarWolf's modded one. However much I try I cannot get my overclock to boot into windows on anything other than auto vcore, and I'm worried I'm dumping too much voltage into it. I readily admit to having little idea what I'm doing, and what I have picked up was from people here. I'm just hoping you would be kind enough to help out an old fool with his settings. Below are my bios settings, Note: all ram spd settings are on auto. I know that's terrible but I just want a stable overclock before I seek @XGS-Duplicity's help with that. I've also added a shot of HWInfo.

A little more info. Cooling is HD150i Pro. CBR 15 score 2112, Temp 75C. What else might help? I have recently been doing a lot of overnight downloading and very often the computer will crash. I think, the maximum it stayed on without a BSOD or a reboot into bios was around 36 hours. Most often there is a reboot straight back to bios. Hmm..I think that's all I can recall. Obviously, if you need further information please do ask. I will get back to you.

Just a quick final note to say how much I appreciate to work of the many contributors to this forum and all I have managed to glean. 

Many thanks for reading and looking.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Scunner said:


> Hello Everyone, hope you are all well?
> 
> I'm at my wits end, and hoping to gain the insight of people who know more than I do. I have a Master and am F11e bios, @*KedarWolf* 's modded one. However much I try I cannot get my overclock to boot into windows on anything other than auto vcore, and I'm worried I'm dumping too much voltage into it. I readily admit to having little idea what I'm doing, and what I have picked up was from people here. I'm just hoping you would be kind enough to help out an old fool with his settings. Below are my bios settings, Note: all ram spd settings are on auto. I know that's terrible but I just want a stable overclock before I seek @*XGS-Duplicity* 's help with that. I've also added a shot of HWInfo.
> 
> A little more info. Cooling is HD150i Pro. CBR 15 score 2112, Temp 75C. What else might help? I have recently been doing a lot of overnight downloading and very often the computer will crash. I think, the maximum it stayed on without a BSOD or a reboot into bios was around 36 hours. Most often there is a reboot straight back to bios. Hmm..I think that's all I can recall. Obviously, if you need further information please do ask. I will get back to you.
> 
> Just a quick final note to say how much I appreciate to work of the many contributors to this forum and all I have managed to glean.
> 
> Many thanks for reading and looking.


Falkentyne/kedarwolf are the cpu overclock experts in here.Their knowledge far surpasses mine by a large margin. Use me as a last resort if you will. Also, may want to post your bios settings, i think you may have forgotten ^^


----------



## MrE312

*Flashing wiped out my old profiles/settings, just hoping to save a little time!*



KedarWolf said:


> Try this modded efiflash, all checks removed. Should work. Attached as .zip.
> 
> Edit: Just use
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash biosname.F11
> 
> or whatever or
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash biosname.F11 /DB
> 
> if you want to flash both BIOS's at the same time.
> 
> *Replace biosname.F11 with the name of the BIOS you are flashing.*
> 
> *Oh, and if the extension has like '.F11j' has four letters, rename it to three letters like 'F11'.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11


Thank you so much for these! Would you mind sharing your OC settings with this board via some images? Also, I don't mind reading through the forum if you already have a post. Apologies I'm a newb!


----------



## MrE312

Thank you so much for these! Would you mind sharing your OC settings with this board via some images? Also, I don't mind reading through the forum if you already have a post. Apologies I'm a newb! I've already OC to 5.0 at 1.32V, disabled C-states, and changed LLC to high. I wouldn't ask, but the flash wiped all of my previous profiles for f11c!


----------



## Scunner

Thanks for the prompt reply @XGS-Duplicity.

I thought I had posted them? I dragged them over. Oh well. A I doing something wrong here. I know it's late here or am I losing the plot. Try, try again.


----------



## Scunner

Just one thing to add. Keep getting system service exception bsods. CBR 20 and Realbench unstable.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Scunner said:


> Thanks for the prompt reply @*XGS-Duplicity* .
> 
> I thought I had posted them? I dragged them over. Oh well. A I doing something wrong here. I know it's late here or am I losing the plot. Try, try again.



Definitely a job for Falkentyne, sorry buddy. wish i could help. There is also an official gigabyte z390 aorus master overclock guide on youtube.


----------



## Scunner

No problem. I appreciate you looking nontheless. Be well fella.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Scunner said:


> No problem. I appreciate you looking nontheless. Be well fella.


 i'm sure he will be around to help you eventually, hang tight.


Until then, have a listen


----------



## satinghostrider

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Your welcome. What happens when you try to train the memory with pwm phase control extreme, 101.5 busclock, 4133mhz memory strap, 1.35v sa/io, 1.5v vdimm, 32768 trefi(rest of timings the same,with 4.7 or 4.8 cache) avx offset=auto, and then once it is done training, go back into bios, set sa/io to 1.3v, set busclock to 100.00, set memory strap to 4200 and then enable memory fast boot, save/exit.
> 
> 
> Below are the timings I use for similar set up as yours, 5.1ghz(turbo ratios set) HT ON 4.7ghz cache acdc-1 vcore llc high, vcore=normal dvid mode +70mv offset, EIST + C3 enabled, 1.5v vdimm, 1.3v sa/io, avx offset=auto, pwm phase control extreme. Used training method shared above, slightly different timings.
> 
> On a side note, If you want to use your configuration exactly how it is and get some extra core speed and extra cache speed for 5Core to 1Core loads- enable ring to core, set cache to 54, pwm phast control extreme, Eist + c3 enabled(all other cstates off, c-state package limit on auto)and set turbo ratios to 54/54/53/52/52/51/51/51 with acdc-1, vcore llc low, vcore normal dvid mode +200mv offset(this is assuming your 1.33v for 5.1 was 1.33v load voltage in something like aida64 fpu with avx enabled, all core would still be 1.33vish under full load in aida fpu or cbr20 still while 5core to 1core will vary depending on the load). Just know that vcore llc low is not the best for ultra tight memory overclocks at high frequencies for passing heavier memtests, you'll have to see if it gels well with your memory overclock. This is a config to use with windows balanced power plan so you downclock volts/clocks on idle, alternatively, you can also use it with maximum performance power plan with clocks boosting as high as possible at all times, could also turn on speedshift in addition to EIST + C3 for just a hair better performance with the windows maximum powerplan version. Just know you may not always see 5.4ghz single/double core if you have tons of stuff running. Cache ratio gets automatically controlled based on the core demand of the workload with this configuration when ring to core is enabled as long as cache ratio in bios is set to no less than 300mhz lower than highest turbo core ratio. This means if you are boosting to 5.4ghz on a single or double core workload, cache will boost to 5.1ghz. 1.3v SA/IO should be enough to handle 5.1ghz cache on single/double core workloads with hyperthreading enabled provided you are not on an insanely demanding memory oc. If you are boosting to 5.3ghz on on triple core workloads, the cache will boost to 5ghz. 5.2ghz 4core-5core workloads cache will boost to 4.9ghz. The higher cache ratio gained from ring to core will also improve memory bandwidth/latency for 5core-1core workloads, aida64 benchmark will reflect that.


Wow that looks incredibly confusing to setup.
I am currently having loads of fun with the new settings thought I would love to try yours at a later time.

I did see 54/54/53/52/52/51/51/51 setup and it did remarkably well in CB20. 
I would like to try this out but am not sure where to start. Maybe I will try it over the weekend based on your post.


----------



## Driller au

Scunner said:


> Just one thing to add. Keep getting system service exception bsods. CBR 20 and Realbench unstable.


Yea Falk would be the man you want since you are using auto Vcore i use DVID myself just a question do you need the Dram voltage so high i always found 1.35V plenty for 3200mhz ?


----------



## Voidlol

Hey there! Please, help me figure out what is going on.
I've been using samsung 950 pro 512GB in M2P slot since I bought that MB (Z390 Aorus Master) and everything worked well. Couple of days ago I bought 970 Evo Plus 2TB and installed it in M2M slot - as a result, neither bios or windows recognizes new drive, but old one is still working. Swapped them so 950 pro is in M2M and 970 Evo is in M2P - both drives are now not recognized. So I removed 950 Pro, and installed only 970 evo plus in M2A slot and it worked! Then I installed 950 pro back to it's original place (M2P) and it still not recognized (in bios, in windows). I have no sata devices connected, no extension card installed except my GPU. Tried resetting bios to defaults, turn on\off secure boot. Non of these helped. Bios F11c from official site. What should I do to make both drives work?


----------



## computertechy

Voidlol said:


> Hey there! Please, help me figure out what is going on.
> I've been using samsung 950 pro 512GB in M2P slot since I bought that MB (Z390 Aorus Master) and everything worked well. Couple of days ago I bought 970 Evo Plus 2TB and installed it in M2M slot - as a result, neither bios or windows recognizes new drive, but old one is still working. Swapped them so 950 pro is in M2M and 970 Evo is in M2P - both drives are now not recognized. So I removed 950 Pro, and installed only 970 evo plus in M2A slot and it worked! Then I installed 950 pro back to it's original place (M2P) and it still not recognized (in bios, in windows). I have no sata devices connected, no extension card installed except my GPU. Tried resetting bios to defaults, turn on\off secure boot. Non of these helped. Bios F11c from official site. What should I do to make both drives work?


I would remove drives & switch main bios to backup bios(F7 if memory serves), let it boot then reset to defaults and shutdown.

Put drives in again, boot. if it works or symptoms change i would blame bios. 

If it doesn't work i would blame the new drive, my Sabrent was DOA and stopped my main system drive from booting when it was installed.


----------



## Scunner

@XGS-Duplicity.

Thanks for the video. Sadly, Taylor is not my cup of tea, though it was an interesting video. I'm more of a Jazz, Rock, Blues, Orchestral, type of bloke. Give Kind of Blue by Miles Davis. That's my type of thing. Thanks though.


----------



## Scunner

Driller au said:


> Yea Falk would be the man you want since you are using auto Vcore i use DVID myself just a question do you need the Dram voltage so high i always found 1.35V plenty for 3200mhz ?



Thanks for reading. Hopefully, @Falkentyne will be able to take a look if he has the time. I'm not necessarily invested in auto vcore, it was just the only thing that I tried that would boot windows. I did try fixed vcore at 3.70v, but no go. I would happily try anything to get a stable overclock. Any suggestions welcome.

Thanks for the info re. ram too. I'll look into that. I was trying to get 3600 out of my extremely average Hynix Gskill RGB, but I don't really know anything about tightening ram timings at all.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

can someone tell me why cpu-z is only showing x1 pcie linkwidth for graphics interface? my gpu is hooked up to the 16x slot


----------



## KedarWolf

XGS-Duplicity said:


> can someone tell me why cpu-z is only showing x1 pcie linkwidth for graphics interface? my gpu is hooked up to the 16x slot


Check GPU-Z.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

KedarWolf said:


> Check GPU-Z.


----------



## Kargeras

Driller au said:


> Yea Falk would be the man you want since you are using auto Vcore i use DVID myself just a question do you need the Dram voltage so high i always found 1.35V plenty for 3200mhz ?


Actually, that's not true, at least for my Master + RAM.
RAM is G.Skill 4x16GB (F4-3200C14Q-64GVK) stated to run at 1.35v.

In order to have HCI Memtest stable RAM with _XMP On and *everything else on Auto*_, DRAM voltage has to set at 1.36v.
Same for DRAM Training Voltage if I remember correctly.

If set at the default 1.35v most times it would not even pass training stage for default XMP.

But I do agree on his high voltage... I wonder what his temperatures are.


----------



## KedarWolf

XGS-Duplicity said:


>


Run a game, then check GPU-Z when it's running. It goes to 1.1 when sleeping and not in use. If that isn't it, reinstall drivers. My second GPU was at 1.1 until I reinstalled the drivers.

Also, check in your BIOS, see if you have it set at Gen 3 for the PCI-E slot.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

ok i just re inserted my pcie riser cable back into the motherboard. Now it is showing x16 3.0 linkspeed while gpu-z render test is going. I guess last time I took out the cable from the pcie slot i must not have inserted it all the way back in last time I put it back on or something.


----------



## KedarWolf

XGS-Duplicity said:


> ok i just re inserted my pcie riser cable back into the motherboard. Now it is showing x16 3.0 linkspeed while gpu-z render test is going


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

regardless, i appreciate you coming to help so quickly, thank you Kedar


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Can someone tell me what this cTDP power limit value is and why windows is controlling it?


----------



## satinghostrider

Just out of curiousity guys,

I currently am at 5.1GHz/4.8GHz at 1.33V for my 9900KS. Temps are like mid 60s tops for gaming.
I can do 5.2GHz/4.8GHz at 1.36V and that would bring my temps to like slightly under mid 70s. Both with LLC High.

My SA/IO Voltage is 1.3V.

Becnhmarking wise I can do 5.3GHz/4.7GHz at 1.37V on LLC Turbo.

With respect to voltage, would you guys go blazing guns at 5.2GHz at 1.36V or go for a lower 5.1GHz at 1.33V (LLC High). Since I am gaming only at 3440x1440 120Hz, I would like to know if that extra 100MHz is actually going to be of any use at the expense of a slightly higher voltage and heat output.

Thanks in Advance guys!


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

How important is hyperthreading to you?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Why is this place so magical? well, maybe why isn't the right question, more like HOW?


----------



## satinghostrider

XGS-Duplicity said:


> How important is hyperthreading to you?


Well, I'm only using my PC for games and that's it. Nothing else matters.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

satinghostrider said:


> Well, I'm only using my PC for games and that's it. Nothing else matters.









Then turn off hyperthreading and see how high you can go while staying within your comfort level when it comes to heat and voltage.

i'm testing this right now. acdc 1-1 vcore llc set to turbo and +100mv offset.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Ok whats going on? I'm on 5.3ghz 4.9ghz cache 8c/8t acdc-1 vcore llc turbo and +120mv offset now and i'm pulling LESS voltage than before when using vcore turbo llc. In the past, I had to go +200mv at vcore llc low just to get 1.365v-1.37v under load in cbr15 with water at low low temp. I don't understand this. This does not make any sense to me. i'm pulling 1.35v-1.375v now. I don't understand. I need to be able to replicate this for daily use because i'm always screwing around with my chip ocing. i'm not even using the air box. NONE OF THIS MAKES SENSE, it's NEVER behaved like this before. Can someone please explain this to me. It was never even windows stable at this low of voltage, especially with this cache ratio, not even with the air conditioning and cardboardbox jerryrig. i'm legit confused. please explain. I'm not in any shape or form complaining, i'm just legit confused.


EDIT: NEVERMIND I"M DUMB, LLC WAS LEFT ON HIGH and its not cbr15 stable at that voltage.
second edit: +130mv llc high is stable in cbr15. no stupid errors in hwinfo either. The only time I could even complete cbr15 at that low of voltage was with air conditioning cardboard box jerryrig. I don't understand. I'm afraid to even reset cmos now but i have to because memory oc needs to be adjusted for these clocks. What do I do?


What kind of voodoo is this? seriously, c15-3900 would never even make it past 10 seconds of hci with 53/49. THIS IS VOODOO I SWEAR TO GOD


----------



## Scunner

XGS-Duplicity said:


> Well well good news and bad news
> 
> 
> 
> The good news is someone texted me to buy my PC from me! Bad news is i won't be overclocking anymore, or at least not for a long time until i can afford to buy another PC. Thanks for all your help, it was fun. See you on the other side. @*ENTERPRISE* please remove this account from this website, thanks for having me.



Best of luck mate. Sorry to see you go.



Driller au said:


> Yea Falk would be the man you want since you are using auto Vcore i use DVID myself just a question do you need the Dram voltage so high i always found 1.35V plenty for 3200mhz ?



Dropped ram v down to 1.36 and upped to 3600. Windows stable it seems. Now to test. Thanks for the info.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

testing this right now. acdc 1/1 vcore llc high +140mv offset. sa/io is set to 1.35v because i didn't even think this would make it past 10 seconds of HCI because any mem oc i did in the past wouldn't make it past 10 seconds of hci with 53/49 no matter what. VOODOO THIS **** IS VOODOO. NOW I KNOW WHY THEY CALL IT INTEL ROFL


ROFL I JUST RAN CINEBENCH IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MEMTEST AND ITS FINE *** IS THISSSSSSSSSSSS LOL. VOODOO is the only explanation. damn black magic f*ckery rofl. The cbr 15 temps were 83c during the memtest but voltage never went above 1.38v lol. That **** NEVER happened in the past, especially at +140mv with vcore llc high with those temps, it would go up to like 1.39v or 1.395v if it went above 80c. WHAT IS GOING ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. lol


----------



## Scunner

Driller au said:


> Yea Falk would be the man you want since you are using auto Vcore i use DVID myself just a question do you need the Dram voltage so high i always found 1.35V plenty for 3200mhz ?



Dropped ram v down to 1.36 and upped to 3600. Windows stable it seems. Now to test. Thanks for the info.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

ok second cbr15 run through an internal cpu error so i added 10mv, now voltage is above 1.387v load in cbr while memtesting. should i have lowered cache to 4.8 instead or only added 5mv instead of 10mv?


----------



## braceyourself22

Can someone explain to me why the bios feature "intel bios guard technology" is not found in my bios? Should I be contacting corporate? I have the sale lined up for my PC, unsure if I should complete it now.

Is there an official gigabyte guide or calculator for tuning acdc loadlines with auto voltage? I know what I need under load for all my clocks, just want to try it out instead of offset mode. Then i'll be gone for good.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

uhhh, another cpu internal error.


----------



## ryan92084

Thread cleaned. I should think it obvious but keep your personal matters out of a motherboard thread.


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

hmmmmm. I dunno what to think now. 50 guests in the thread earlier, anyone have any advices? Is it just cooling at this point or something?


----------



## misteroverclock

XGS-Duplicity said:


> get off of those ****ty beta bioses and newer bioses. All of them are trash and a waste of time, I tried ALL OF THEM, either old/wrong code or filled with bugs or new microcode that affects performance. I swear they just have us try this stuff because their own employees are too lazy to test **** themself. Not once has one these beta or newer bioses done a damn thing for me and they have me waste my time testing them all. I see users get best results with f9. Don't bother with any other bios, ever, unless they provide you evidence of proof of concept, otherwise you will be wasting your time.






F9 Original or F9 Modded?


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

testing non-avx fpu now


----------



## Voidlol

computertechy said:


> I would remove drives & switch main bios to backup bios(F7 if memory serves), let it boot then reset to defaults and shutdown.
> 
> Put drives in again, boot. if it works or symptoms change i would blame bios.
> 
> If it doesn't work i would blame the new drive, my Sabrent was DOA and stopped my main system drive from booting when it was installed.


Tried this and still no work. Only one of them is recognized. Tried with maximus xi formula - both of them are recognized. Seems like aorus master is defective -_-


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

nevermind, i think i know what it is, it's water temp going beyond turbo spec or w/e so i end up chasing voltage. I guess this is where a delid and/or custom water cooling with 1 or 2 360mm rads comes in handy. am i right?


----------



## johnyy

Guys I have not read all the thread but wondering if by now there is received wisdom about simply getting 2x8gb ddr4 to boot in dual channel mode. Perhaps whether there is a preferred bios revision. I have:

Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI LGA 1151 DDR4 ATX
Intel Core i5 9600K 3.7 GHz
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 2666MHz C16 Memory Kit - Yes this is on the memory support list

I am noticing that my cpu is not on the support list because it is 12MB L3 Cache, whereas the same CPU with only 9MB cache is supported. Would that be a cause for a problem. I should note everything else works with 2xddr in slots A1/A2 except fan speed control which does not show my Noctua's


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

ehhh, i think i'll just go back to 5.1ghz with hyperthreading and c16 4200. I don't like the idea of a 9900k with ht off unless it's 5.25g or 5.3g or higher and i don't want 3900 ram at all unless it is 35ns or less.


----------



## Kha

sorry, delete this, wrong thread


----------



## XGS-Duplicity

Well well good news and bad news 



The good news is someone texted me to buy my PC from me! Bad news is i won't be overclocking anymore, or at least not for a long time until i can afford to buy another PC. Thanks for all your help, it was fun. See you on the other side. @ENTERPRISE please remove this account from this website, thanks for having me.


----------



## opt33

johnyy said:


> Guys I have not read all the thread but wondering if by now there is received wisdom about simply getting 2x8gb ddr4 to boot in dual channel mode. Perhaps whether there is a preferred bios revision. I have:
> 
> Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI LGA 1151 DDR4 ATX
> Intel Core i5 9600K 3.7 GHz
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 2666MHz C16 Memory Kit - Yes this is on the memory support list
> 
> I am noticing that my cpu is not on the support list because it is 12MB L3 Cache, whereas the same CPU with only 9MB cache is supported. Would that be a cause for a problem. I should note everything else works with 2xddr in slots A1/A2 except fan speed control which does not show my Noctua's


With 2 dimm, you want to be in A2/B2, ie slots 2 and 4. A1/B1 works but not as well. If you are in A1/A2 with 2 dimm that is your problem.


----------



## MangoMunchaa

satinghostrider said:


> Thanks @ XGS-Duplicity for the tips on increasing my VCCIO/VCCSA.
> 
> I re-did my timings and I have managed to get this working with 6000% Kahru testing coverage.
> My games runs much more stable now and that weird CTD with some games like Battlefront 2 is all gone.
> I also managed to push my my ring to 4.8GHz. I can easily run 5.1Ghz and 5.2Ghz easily with 5.2Ghz needing 1.36V under High LLC and 5.1GHz needing 1.33V LLC. 5.0GHz can be done at 1.30V LLC.
> For daily, I have finalized at 5.1GHz as I feel that is fast enough and games are under 70 degrees. 5.2GHz hit low 70s and felt it was not worth the added heat and voltage for something I can't feel when gaming.
> 
> VDIMM : 1.5V
> VSSSA / VCCIO : 1.30V
> BIOS : F11C
> 
> Think this is as far as I can go with my setup which has proved rock stable for the last 5 days of testing. All these while I think I have been running too low a VCCIO and VCCSA. These Gigabyte boards can be very frustrating to work with, sometimes you can pass Kahru and next powerup you can suddenly fail the memtest. I have rebooted my system endless of times with the new memory settings and voltages and so far none of them threw an error with repeated testing. This might just be my golden settings for now.
> 
> P.S - I am running 1 pair on A1 PCB and another pair on A2 PCB despite both being G.Skill 3600C16. I think that is why I had so much trouble trying to get stable my memory overclocks with my earlier settings which I think could be aggressive given they were not matched pairs.



Thank you so much for sharing this, I had very similar timings but at 4000mhz and with your settings I'm currently at 5700% on karhu stable, hopefully it's still working for me too in real life scenarios. Ram I'm using is the Patriot 4400 C19-19-19-38 kit with the F11c bios too 

EDIT: Hit the magic 6400%


----------



## satinghostrider

MangoMunchaa said:


> satinghostrider said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks @ XGS-Duplicity for the tips on increasing my VCCIO/VCCSA.
> 
> I re-did my timings and I have managed to get this working with 6000% Kahru testing coverage.
> My games runs much more stable now and that weird CTD with some games like Battlefront 2 is all gone.
> I also managed to push my my ring to 4.8GHz. I can easily run 5.1Ghz and 5.2Ghz easily with 5.2Ghz needing 1.36V under High LLC and 5.1GHz needing 1.33V LLC. 5.0GHz can be done at 1.30V LLC.
> For daily, I have finalized at 5.1GHz as I feel that is fast enough and games are under 70 degrees. 5.2GHz hit low 70s and felt it was not worth the added heat and voltage for something I can't feel when gaming.
> 
> VDIMM : 1.5V
> VSSSA / VCCIO : 1.30V
> BIOS : F11C
> 
> Think this is as far as I can go with my setup which has proved rock stable for the last 5 days of testing. All these while I think I have been running too low a VCCIO and VCCSA. These Gigabyte boards can be very frustrating to work with, sometimes you can pass Kahru and next powerup you can suddenly fail the memtest. I have rebooted my system endless of times with the new memory settings and voltages and so far none of them threw an error with repeated testing. This might just be my golden settings for now.
> 
> P.S - I am running 1 pair on A1 PCB and another pair on A2 PCB despite both being G.Skill 3600C16. I think that is why I had so much trouble trying to get stable my memory overclocks with my earlier settings which I think could be aggressive given they were not matched pairs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you so much for sharing this, I had very similar timings but at 4000mhz and with your settings I'm currently at 5700% on karhu stable, hopefully it's still working for me too in real life scenarios. Ram I'm using is the Patriot 4400 C19-19-19-38 kit with the F11c bios too /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> EDIT: Hit the magic 6400%
Click to expand...

Congratulations mate! Happy that it has helped you. I'm still on those settings and couldn't be happier. Best of luck and take care!


----------



## Kargeras

There's a setting in BIOS / Settings / Super IO Configuration / Serial Port (COM) with 2 options, Disabled or Enabled.
Enabled is the default value.

Where is this serial port located though and what does it do?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kargeras said:


> There's a setting in BIOS / Settings / Super IO Configuration / Serial Port (COM) with 2 options, Disabled or Enabled.
> Enabled is the default value.
> 
> Where is this serial port located though and what does it do?


The serial port is a really old legacy port on ancient computers. Like when they had printer ports (I belive they were 0x278h or 378h or something i Forgot).
The serial port is used for hardware debugging and low level access with probing tools. Just like on some computers (especially laptops), the "keyboard port" is used for communication or programming the "Embedded controller." This is all advanced chip programming access stuff completely over my head and totally off topic for this thread (you're better off finding a Linux hardware programming thread for stuff like this). That's why you see stuff like UART controls and modem protocols like BAUD and stuff still in some unlocked bioses.


----------



## lemonhazed

Hi everyone, long time lurker here!


Got myself a 9900k and an Aorus Pro Mobo, 32gb (16gb x 2) GSKILL F43200C15D-32GTZ, silverstone strider gold s 1500w PSU, Noctua NHD15 and was wondering if I could bend an ear to see what i am doing right/wrong with trying to OC this CPU to 5ghz? 



I play games and use a lot of DAW software Abelton live/Audacity etc, stream on twitch and video/photo edit/Digitally Draw with Corel Draw/Video studio



I have set: 



fixed Voltage of 1.35v idle 1.327 

ring ratio 45
AVX offset 0
HT on
XMP set (3200)
All C states off
Intel Turbo, MCE, Speed Step etc off
BCLK adaptive off
SVID offset off
dram voltage auto
VCCIO 1.2v
system agent voltage 1.2v
race to halt off
ring to core offset off
voltage optimisation off
race to halt off
energy efficient turbo off
V-TD off
active turbo ratios off
turbo power limits off
LLC high




Just trying to see if I any have options left before I say I have a dud'ish chip that cant seem to pass any P95 with AVX/AVX 2 test without BSOD/Thermal throttling then crashing, Linpack Extreme only works for a minute or 2. 

Even if i up the Vcore (1.37) and LLC to turbo still couldn't last long on LinpackEXT and P95 small worked but evenbtually hit temp limit which i set to 115c! 



I can stress test cinebench r20, realbench 2.65, OCCT etc and any P95 test as long as there is no AVX of any kind involved, and pass an hour or so in each without any problems. 



Are there any settings i have looked over?


If i cant get stable at P95 AVX/LinpackEXT is it a case of increase voltage or drop OC speed, or move on? 



I have attached HWinfo screenshots of P95 no avx and Realbench 2.56 after 40min 



Any help or advice would be appreciated, cheers


----------



## Padinn

I'd drop ring ratio to 43, that should let you drop voltage a bit. See if you can get closer to 1.35 with high LLC (Turbo is pretty rough).


----------



## lemonhazed

Padinn said:


> I'd drop ring ratio to 43, that should let you drop voltage a bit. See if you can get closer to 1.35 with high LLC (Turbo is pretty rough).



Thats what I have it set to lol, I am not stable in P95 AVX2/AVX and LinpakEXT, but am stable with realbench, cinebench, P95 small/large/blend no AVX. 



I am going to wait to get a GPU and see if I am stable with games.


But going to drop ring ratio anyway after watching a Buildzoid Vid he recommended going 40!


----------



## Padinn

lemonhazed said:


> Thats what I have it set to lol, I am not stable in P95 AVX2/AVX and LinpakEXT, but am stable with realbench, cinebench, P95 small/large/blend no AVX.
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to wait to get a GPU and see if I am stable with games.
> 
> 
> But going to drop ring ratio anyway after watching a Buildzoid Vid he recommended going 40!


Looked like you were at 45 per post, maybe a typo. It does appear to me that you are trying to high of a voltage. I know with my chip if I push it too high, its unstable at 5Ghz - basically anything over 1.27v at load. See if you can drop voltage and be more stable, my guess is those temperatures are just killing you. I also don't really think p95 is a useful stress test (I know others disagree) - try using the custom x264 blend test from the forum here. I find that to be a more realistic AVX workload.


----------



## lemonhazed

Padinn said:


> Looked like you were at 45 per post, maybe a typo. It does appear to me that you are trying to high of a voltage. I know with my chip if I push it too high, its unstable at 5Ghz - basically anything over 1.27v at load. See if you can drop voltage and be more stable, my guess is those temperatures are just killing you. I also don't really think p95 is a useful stress test (I know others disagree) - try using the custom x264 blend test from the forum here. I find that to be a more realistic AVX workload.


Sorry its my poor communication skills lol. What I originally meant Was that I am already at 1.35v, in my post I commented how even at 1.37v i was crashing/thermal limited on p95 avx tests.

Yeah I think I am right on the limit of my NHD15 coolers cooling capacity when I try small AVX at 1.37/1.38 it doesn't crash just workers stop because of temps, and I must say this all goes away when I disable HT! Also probably not helping that my case is a NZXT H440, not great airflow. 

I kind of agree with P95 AVX and AVX 2 tests, I have reduced ring to 45 anyway, and VCCIO and System Agent Voltage to 1.2v, and its all pretty much the same, Cinebench, realbench work ok, so I know their AVX workloads are stable, any P95 test small/blend is stable just as long as i dont tick AVX, LinpackEXT crashes almost straightaway. 

Also I have Active turbo ratios, turbo power limits and Turbo per core limit control disabled is that right???


I might actually re-flash Gigabytes older BIOS 6 something I believe, I am on the latest one 12.


edit - DId an AVX offset of 1 (i know its frowned upon!), did 20mins of P95 small with AVX and AVX2 enabled!! At 1.35v, temps on some cores 100c, load 1.238v average thats at 175amps, cpu package power 233w, core 3 crapped out after 10mins but looks like a small bump in voltage and i might be ok. Going to try for an hour blend with AVX/AVX2 enabled test, wish me luck!


----------



## Baam

Guys can you tell me what’s considered the best modded bios for the Z390 Master?
Currently i’m using the F11C and everything is fine but i want to overclock my 9900k a little bit more, right now is sitting at 4,8 ghz at 1,27 vcore if i remember.

I tried some F10 version like a year ago but i was unable to Q flash any other official bios anymore i had to switch to the second bios and q flash both from there.
I was reading about Kedarwolf modded F11e and F11i, can anyone pls be so kind so link the page in this discussion where you can download them? Been looking for them for a while now right here and on google and i just can’t find the download link.


----------



## CS9K

Sheyster said:


> Can you please update the attached BIOS for the Z390 Pro with latest versions of everything, and use fastest microcodes? Thanks in advance Kedar!


Howdy, everyone! Loooong time lurker and new OC'er to the Z390 Aorus Pro I nabbed used off the boyfriend during his recent rebuild.

I'm currently running a modded 10(b?) bios from one of @KedarWolf 's posts many tens/hundreds of pages back.

I wanted to re-engage Kedarwolf to see if you were available to modify the bios Sheyster requested a few weeks ago. No rush, of course :3

Thank you for the work you do, Kedarwolf!


----------



## reachthesky

can someone tell me how to switch from legacy boot mode to uefi boot mode? Windows says i'm in legacy boot mode. I want to do a full complete wipe of windows 10 and install fresh with absolutely nothing left over from any previous installs. Just a fresh new windows. I don't know why, but when I reinstall windows from a usb iso, its reinstalling windows with settings/stuff from my old laptop even though i said no to carrying anything over. Also, there is this process running called "microsoft realtime network inspection" and windows won't let me end the process. It keeps saying access denied yet i'm the administrator. I don't really understand this. Also, is there a crash course or anything on what csm mode and secure boot mode are for the z390 master? Whats the difference between system and user mode in the bios?


Where can I find chipset drivers for windows 1809? They used to be listed on the aorus website, now they only list 1903 and 2004


----------



## KedarWolf

CS9K said:


> Howdy, everyone! Loooong time lurker and new OC'er to the Z390 Aorus Pro I nabbed used off the boyfriend during his recent rebuild.
> 
> I'm currently running a modded 10(b?) bios from one of @KedarWolf 's posts many tens/hundreds of pages back.
> 
> I wanted to re-engage Kedarwolf to see if you were available to modify the bios Sheyster requested a few weeks ago. No rush, of course :3
> 
> Thank you for the work you do, Kedarwolf!


just link the BIOS you want modded here. I'll do an updated mod.


----------



## CS9K

KedarWolf said:


> just link the BIOS you want modded here. I'll do an updated mod.


Thanks! Sheyster attached it to their post, linked below.



Sheyster said:


> Can you please update the attached BIOS for the Z390 Pro with latest versions of everything, and use fastest microcodes? Thanks in advance Kedar!


----------



## KedarWolf

CS9K said:


> Thanks! Sheyster attached it to their post, linked below.


Q-Flash will not work. Search for my username for instructions on how to use efiflash.


----------



## Viktor levis

Hi, probably been asked before but can't find it. I am using F11C bios with i9900ks and I want to under-volt my cpu as on default my voltage goes up to 1.4+ and temps reach 90c while gaming. Atm I am using a guide found on aorusmaster website for oc-ing i9900k with an older version of bios and managed to get the voltage at 1.26 vcore but I get stutters in games. The pc will only be used for gaming. Thanks .


----------



## CS9K

KedarWolf said:


> Q-Flash will not work. Search for my username for instructions on how to use efiflash.


Thanks again! You're the best! cc @Sheyster


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Q-Flash will not work. Search for my username for instructions on how to use efiflash.


Thanks Kedar! And thanks to @CS9K for reminding him.


----------



## KedarWolf

F11i bios for Aorus Master modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 08/19/2020.

It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F11 /x

Use the modded Master F11i BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.


----------



## kgtuning

@KedarWolf, just curious, Can you add the RBG settings to a bios like that?


----------



## Janosi

hi i follow step by step your insturction but doenst work, error:OEMID Mismatch


----------



## Falkentyne

Janosi said:


> hi i follow step by step your insturction but doenst work, error:OEMID Mismatch


Use this modded EFIflash and use /NoOemID on the command line.


----------



## Janosi

thank you, it's work perfectly


----------



## KedarWolf

kgtuning said:


> @KedarWolf, just curious, Can you add the RBG settings to a bios like that?


No, sorry, I can't. Check on the WinRaid forums though, they may be able to help.


----------



## reachthesky

KedarWolf said:


> No, sorry, I can't. Check on the WinRaid forums though, they may be able to help.



can you make a QFLASHABLE modded F9 bios?


----------



## KedarWolf

Janosi said:


> hi i follow step by step your insturction but doenst work, error:OEMID Mismatch


Try this modded efiflash, all checks removed. Should work. Attached as .zip.

Edit: Just use


Code:


efiflash 1.F11

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F11


----------



## KedarWolf

reachthesky said:


> can you make a QFLASHABLE modded F9 bios?


No, I can't. But check with peeps on the WinRaid forums, they may be able to help. They may be able to mod the BIOS to make it work with Q-Flash. Just link them the original AND my modded BIOS.

Lost_N_BIOS has been a great help there, but don't PM him, post and mention him in the appropriate thread.

I no longer have a Gigabyte board and cannot save a Q-Flashable BIOS.


----------



## kgtuning

KedarWolf said:


> kgtuning said:
> 
> 
> 
> @KedarWolf, just curious, Can you add the RBG settings to a bios like that?
> 
> 
> 
> No, sorry, I can't. Check on the WinRaid forums though, they may be able to help. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Oh no worries. I was just curious if it could be done.


----------



## 8bitG33k

Is this thread only for the Z390 Aorus Master or is it for any Z390 Aorus boards?


----------



## reachthesky

Just a little rig update  No way i'll switch mobos, aorus RGB too stronk




https://imgur.com/a/i6hV8JH


----------



## Gandyman

Hey guys, I can't find a z490 gigabyte owners so I might ask here in case its a universal gigabyte thing:

I have z490 aorus ultra, 10700k @ 5.0, 3200xmp. (so no crazy vvcio or vvcsa or anything). I run my PC from when I start work (9 am ish) till when i finish gaming at night (midnightish) daily. Every morning when I switch it on it powers up and down 3 - 4 times before POST. This can be mildly annoying, essentially tripling my boot time, but became embarrassing recently when a client who wanted to purchase an expensive gaming rig off me witnessed my boot up and asked why it 's doing that (I have a core p-03 open air case so its very noticeable) and the best answer I could give was "eerr I dunno memory training???? maybe??? durpity durp"

Any Gigabyte veterans here know any potential causes? 

Cheers


----------



## satinghostrider

reachthesky said:


> Just a little rig update  No way i'll switch mobos, aorus RGB too stronk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/i6hV8JH


Mate, what txp setting are you currently using?
I dropped mine down to 6 from 8 and my latency reduced!
Gaming so far I do not see any difference in my 0.1% lows but I still have yet to test it thoroughly.
The other thread spoke about disabling PPD=0 but I reckon that is only for Asus boards yes? 

Thanks man!


----------



## reachthesky

satinghostrider said:


> Mate, what txp setting are you currently using?
> I dropped mine down to 6 from 8 and my latency reduced!
> Gaming so far I do not see any difference in my 0.1% lows but I still have yet to test it thoroughly.
> The other thread spoke about disabling PPD=0 but I reckon that is only for Asus boards yes?
> 
> Thanks man!



i'm on txp 6.
Yeah i dunno about ppd, i didn't see that setting in the bios


----------



## stasio

Some Z390 BIOS update on TT forum....



Falkentyne said:


> Use this modded EFIflash and use /NoOemID on the command line.


Are you still using Z490 Master ?


----------



## Dibbler

Falkentyne said:


> Use this modded EFIflash and use /NoOemID on the command line.



I thought that might help me as I have been trying to flash the latest F11K BIOS for the 390. This is the problem I reported over at the BIOS release forum....


Any ideas how to flash the latest BIOS for the Z390 Master...? 
Usually I would use QFlash without issues. If needed I would use EFI Flash from a DOS disk. But this latest BIOS gives me a warning of ID Miismatch regardless of trying the above methods.
I have downloaded it a couple of times.
The BIOS I am using has been modified by Gigabyte to include RGB lighting control. It seems to come up with that mismatch error now, not sure how to get around that one...?

....I downloaded the other EFI Flash that you linked, renamed to Efiflash.exe, and used the switch.....

efiflash bios.f11k /NoOemID

and I get an invalid command argument

I then tried, as I would have done previously....


efiflash bios.f11k /x

and I then get the ID mismatch error.

the BIOS file has been renamed to bios.f11k.

any ideas please...?


----------



## KedarWolf

Dibbler said:


> I thought that might help me as I have been trying to flash the latest F11K BIOS for the 390. This is the problem I reported over at the BIOS release forum....
> 
> 
> Any ideas how to flash the latest BIOS for the Z390 Master...?
> Usually I would use QFlash without issues. If needed I would use EFI Flash from a DOS disk. But this latest BIOS gives me a warning of ID Miismatch regardless of trying the above methods.
> I have downloaded it a couple of times.
> The BIOS I am using has been modified by Gigabyte to include RGB lighting control. It seems to come up with that mismatch error now, not sure how to get around that one...?
> 
> ....I downloaded the other EFI Flash that you linked, renamed to Efiflash.exe, and used the switch.....
> 
> efiflash bios.f11k /NoOemID
> 
> and I get an invalid command argument
> 
> I then tried, as I would have done previously....
> 
> 
> efiflash bios.f11k /x
> 
> and I then get the ID mismatch error.
> 
> the BIOS file has been renamed to bios.f11k.
> 
> any ideas please...?


https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-972.html#post28578540

Edit: Just use the name of you BIOS in the command or rename it to 1.F11

Second edit: Rename it, the last part can't have four characters like .f11k DOS can only use three, so rename the BIOS to 1.F11


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-972.html#post28578540
> 
> Edit: Just use the name of you BIOS in the command or rename it to 1.F11
> 
> Second edit: Rename it, the last part can't have four characters like .f11k DOS can only use three, so rename the BIOS to 1.F11


I'll give that a try and thanks for your reply. I'll post back 

PS Hope your AMD build is going well


----------



## KedarWolf

Dibbler said:


> I'll give that a try and thanks for your reply. I'll post back
> 
> PS Hope your AMD build is going well


I'm having a ton of fun overclocking my 3950x.

Got the below on memory stress-tested stable which is pretty much god-tier for the chip and 2x16GB! 

And a decent CCX overclock as well.


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> I'm having a ton of fun overclocking my 3950x.
> 
> Got the below on memory stress-tested stable which is pretty much god-tier for the chip and 2x16GB!
> 
> And a decent CCX overclock as well.


Somehow I think that you are enjoying it more than your previous Intel build 


I did as you suggested in renaming the file. It simply did not work. See the first jpg. I get the OEM Mismatch error that the 0.80 build of EFI Flash is supposed to resolve. Using the switch suggested previously, see jpg 2, I then get the error as noted in jpg 3.

So using any std BIOS file does no longer seem to be able to flash the BIOS as I get the mismatch error.

Any ideas please...?


----------



## KedarWolf

Dibbler said:


> Somehow I think that you are enjoying it more than your previous Intel build
> 
> 
> I did as you suggested in renaming the file. It simply did not work. See the first jpg. I get the OEM Mismatch error that the 0.80 build of EFI Flash is supposed to resolve. Using the switch suggested previously, see jpg 2, I then get the error as noted in jpg 3.
> 
> So using any std BIOS file does no longer seem to be able to flash the BIOS as I get the mismatch error.
> 
> Any ideas please...?


Did you download the efiflash from the post I linked?

And just run


Code:


efiflash 1.F11

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-972.html#post28578540


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> Did you download the efiflash from the post I linked?
> 
> And just run
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-972.html#post28578540


arrrrrg, sorry didn't notice that....!

There are two files within it....

Efiflash_v0.85_mod.exe

Efiflash_v0.85

do I rename the second to efiflash.exe....?

Just want to make sure before I use it


----------



## KedarWolf

Dibbler said:


> Somehow I think that you are enjoying it more than your previous Intel build
> 
> 
> I did as you suggested in renaming the file. It simply did not work. See the first jpg. I get the OEM Mismatch error that the 0.80 build of EFI Flash is supposed to resolve. Using the switch suggested previously, see jpg 2, I then get the error as noted in jpg 3.
> 
> So using any std BIOS file does no longer seem to be able to flash the BIOS as I get the mismatch error.
> 
> Any ideas please...?


Try this efiflash instead. Attached as .zip



Code:


efiflash 1.f11




Dibbler said:


> arrrrrg, sorry didn't notice that....!
> 
> There are two files within it....
> 
> Efiflash_v0.85_mod.exe
> 
> Efiflash_v0.85
> 
> do I rename the second to efiflash.exe....?
> 
> Just want to make sure before I use it


Just use the one in the post just above, and rename it to efifash.exe

And run


Code:


efiflash f.11

 no /oemid ar anything.


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> Try this efiflash instead. Attached as .zip
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f11


Thanks. What I have found is that version 0.80 will not work and will not get past the Mismatch error.

BUT the 0.85 that you linked for me originally worked a treat.....see attached image.

I do not know why the 0.80 would not work but at least I have been able to successfully flash the latest F11K BIOS as supplied by Gigabyte using the 0.85 that you linked.

Thanks and continue to enjoy your AMD build


----------



## Falkentyne

stasio said:


> Are you still using Z490 Master ?


Hi Stasio,
Yes I have it and a retail 10900k. I am using it as a test system.


----------



## Jokerrrrr

I can't wait to try F11k, but only the modded version!


----------



## Dibbler

F11k flashed fine, eventually - with the great help here.
Can't find the gaming or other profile that they once had, might have moved or been removed. Thankfully I can enter the BIOS without a blank screen.
Perhaps not many from here used their profiles....!


----------



## stasio

Falkentyne said:


> Hi Stasio,
> Yes I have it and a retail 10900k. I am using it as a test system.


I send you PM....

Z390 Extreme new beta F9h, seems fix tREFI setting (TT forum info).


----------



## reachthesky

Does anyone recall seeing the memory timings called PPD and/or OREFI when using the gigabyte real time memory adjustment software in windows? I don't see it in the bios, is there any way to adjust it? Users on other motherboards are getting 35.5ns latency with cas 17 4133 on other non-gigabyte boards, its kind of unreal.


----------



## Baam

Jokerrrrr said:


> I can't wait to try F11k, but only the modded version!



Is non modded F11k good compared to other non modded F11?


----------



## reachthesky

anybody?

Is there an official gigabyte employee here I can speak with? I need support here. Am i in the wrong place? Should I be using the gigabyte forums instead?

@*stasio* I need a z390 master bios that exposes PPD and OREFI memory timings in the bios. Can you make this happen please?


EDIT: please see tagged post below for clarity. cheers


----------



## Kaibosh

Longtime lurker from the deepest swamp, I strafed this thread when I first put my Auros Master / 9700k and the first time it booted up it had a modded F9 and every setting cranked till it squeaked. This thing has been a workhorse and a half of a gaming machine.


I recently stuck in 4 sticks of fast Ram and decided it was time to make the plunge onto one of the newer modded releases. I got caught in a nightmare where every version of BIOS I flashed would either lockup or simply go to the black screen of black nothingness. Every manner and combo of cable/source to my tv simply went black, and no setting on there helped either. I scraped up every tidbit there was on the forums. I disabled CSM, I disabled fast boot properly, I plunged as far down the rabbit hole as I could. It looked like the modded F11e was my only hope...



The only thing that saved me was stumbling onto this: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-805.html#post28340828


It is the QFlash save that KW made, allowing me to flash that in Windows - from the F5 backup to the other BIOS. I laughed when it loaded up, it was a flash freeze of a semi-p1mped and quite aggressive setup. Sadly I had to torch it because without loading into default settings my SATA was lost (another quirky bug in this chipset/bios, it seems). Took a bunch of pictures first, of course. 



Thank all you guys for putting in this work - this kind of min-maxing makes a HUGE difference in getting the most out of bleeding edge games.


----------



## reachthesky

Kaibosh said:


> Longtime lurker from the deepest swamp, I strafed this thread when I first put my Auros Master / 9700k and the first time it booted up it had a modded F9 and every setting cranked till it squeaked. This thing has been a workhorse and a half of a gaming machine.
> 
> 
> I recently stuck in 4 sticks of fast Ram and decided it was time to make the plunge onto one of the newer modded releases. I got caught in a nightmare where every version of BIOS I flashed would either lockup or simply go to the black screen of black nothingness. Every manner and combo of cable/source to my tv simply went black, and no setting on there helped either. I scraped up every tidbit there was on the forums. I disabled CSM, I disabled fast boot properly, I plunged as far down the rabbit hole as I could. It looked like the modded F11e was my only hope...
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing that saved me was stumbling onto this: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-805.html#post28340828
> 
> 
> It is the QFlash save that KW made, allowing me to flash that in Windows - from the F5 backup to the other BIOS. I laughed when it loaded up, it was a flash freeze of a semi-p1mped and quite aggressive setup. Sadly I had to torch it because without loading into default settings my SATA was lost (another quirky bug in this chipset/bios, it seems). Took a bunch of pictures first, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank all you guys for putting in this work - this kind of min-maxing makes a HUGE difference in getting the most out of bleeding edge games.



f11e retrains the memory from scratch every reboot for me no matter what. This is a pain in the ass for aggressive memory profiles with low rtls/iols that can only train properly when ambient is low enough. i also don't see a reason to put extra wear n tear on the imc retraining memory every boot, it's supposed to train once and then memory fast boot gets turned on to avoid retraining once the desired memory profile has been decided on. It also gets stuck on a code 50 for a few seconds during any boot or memory train. It also made my motherboard sound like a rice burner honda civic(loud with a similar noise to a civic exhaust) and boots were extremely loud as if a ton of current or voltage was being pulled through the chip. Need a bios that doesn't have those issues that is QFLASHABLE that exposes PPD and OREFI memory timings. Also, loading optimized defaults for any bios does not let me train certain profiles, such as [email protected] I have to flash and use the bios from right after the state of flash, any optimized defaults limits what I can train-regardless if cpu OC settings are keyed in or not-this goes for f8 and f9 bioses as well as any other bios. f11e also does not allow for fine tuning of rtls/iols, only allows to tune a whole channel at a time, can't adjust to 57/58/59/59 on f11e for 3933 if I wanted to. f11e forces 57/57/59/59 no matter what which means I wouldn't be able to use 3933 if i wanted to because 15-14-14-30 3933 requires 57/58/59/59 to be stable.

*We need a single z390 master bios that does all of the following*:


-is qflashable with best performing microcodes without any of the boot issues stated above. (i have an R0 stepping 9900k retail chip if this information is pertinent here)

-Full RGB control inside the bios to avoid performance loss in windows with rgb fusion software(the ability to sync everything like rgb fusion and use different color settings like rgb fusion software to control strimer rgb powercables, gskill tridentz rgb ram, aorus 2080ti extreme waterforce, aorus rgb nvme ssd, tforce delta max rgb sata ssd, aorus k9 rgb keyboard, motherboard itself)

I would like to be able to control all of this through the bios https://imgur.com/a/i6hV8JH


-full rtl/iol adjustment inside the bios for all memory channels(this means 4000+ too) for all frequencies like other enthusiast brands offer. This includes the ability to manually tune both rtls/iols for a single channel instead of both of them being locked into a single matching value like mentioned above. Also the ability to view rtls/iols in the bios for 4000+ as some older bioses won't show you those values in the bios for 4000+.


-all memory timings exposed for tuning inside the bios including PPD and OREFI


-top notch memory OC capabilities.


-adaptive voltage feature just like the z390 extreme waterforce has so that users don't have to use excess voltage at any given frequency step with offset mode. The technology exists and both motherboards are pretty much the same in components(maybe slightly better vrms/powerphases for the z390 waterforce?), could probably port this feature over to z390 master no problem.


@*stasio* Is this something you can make happen? If so, this would be amazing and i'm sure everyone here would greatly appreciate it. If you want some sort of monetary compensation via paypal for your troubles, I would be willing to paypal you 10 USD to make this happen.


----------



## Kaibosh

Look, dude - I just follow the instructions, and profit. Whatever wacky thing keeps *all* hardware/sources/cables from connecting to my 4k TCL with the majority of those releases... Yeesh. 



I pretty much cloned the pictures I took of KW's snapshot, and brazenly loaded up RDR2 @ 1440p tuned to the tits (with my 4 sticks of Ram simply banged into XMP @ 4000). I then proceeded to play the game for nearly 2 hours, just absolutely flawless locked 60 with every setting beyond cranked and a handful of new tech Reshade gizmos as well. There are people who would give their children's corneas to play the game like this. RDR2 is the most insane tuning challenge of them all. Trust me, if things purr in these conditions... This is a rock solid build. I will run a few games with extensive logging on the go, and in a few days maybe look into tightening the timing on the Ram just a weeeee bit.... 



Again, my rig would not be the p1mptastic weapon it is without a devoted community like this. /bows


----------



## reachthesky

Kaibosh said:


> Look, dude - I just follow the instructions, and profit. Whatever wacky thing keeps *all* hardware/sources/cables from connecting to my 4k TCL with the majority of those releases... Yeesh.
> 
> 
> 
> I pretty much cloned the pictures I took of KW's snapshot, and brazenly loaded up RDR2 @ 1440p tuned to the tits (with my 4 sticks of Ram simply banged into XMP @ 4000). I then proceeded to play the game for nearly 2 hours, just absolutely flawless locked 60 with every setting beyond cranked and a handful of new tech Reshade gizmos as well. There are people who would give their children's corneas to play the game like this. RDR2 is the most insane tuning challenge of them all. Trust me, if things purr in these conditions... This is a rock solid build. I will run a few games with extensive logging on the go, and in a few days maybe look into tightening the timing on the Ram just a weeeee bit....
> 
> 
> 
> Again, my rig would not be the p1mptastic weapon it is without a devoted community like this. /bows



I followed all their instructions and tried all their test bioses, no profit. Even tried the latest f11k beta, waste of time. It's always a waste of time. I have NEVER ended up with good results with these test bioses or modded bioses. Never. I don't consent to windows updates or anyone messing with my operating system or hardware. I will be the only one to make changes to my hardware or software. Gigabyte doesn't have the proper chipset drivers for the latest operating system. I don't want anything done to my PC without direct communication with me FIRST and only then I still have the last word on what happens. Last time I let these "updates" go through(updates that included unamed "intel" drivers), people on this forum were disconnecting my internet anytime I mouthed off or said anything bad about crappy american patriot ram. It's no coincidence. BTW THAT RAM SUCKS BALLS DON"T BUY IT. *GSKILL IS KING*. I wasted 60 dollars in restock fees trying out crappy american patriot 4400 ram, it's total crap. Grade A CRAPOLA. If they want me to say something good about it, tell them to give me back my 60 dollars. Same goes for team group xtreem 4500 ram, wasted 60 dollars in restock fees trying out their product too, complete trash. Neither xmp profile for any of those kits could be stabilized, even though the z390 master originally advertised 4400mhz ram capability. And yes, my IMC is good enough. Manual tuning was also worthless and a complete waste of time. Neither ram kit could even do c15-4000 at crappy slow rtls. BAD CRAP. If i ever try another ram kit out that isn't gskill and if it doesn't work, i will lie and say it is defective to avoid restock fees. Better they lose money than myself. stupid crap.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> I'm having a ton of fun overclocking my 3950x.
> 
> Got the below on memory stress-tested stable which is pretty much god-tier for the chip and 2x16GB!
> 
> And a decent CCX overclock as well.



Nice! Good chance I'll go over to AMD 4000 series (16 core) for my next build.


----------



## Kaibosh

reachthesky said:


> I followed all their instructions and tried all their test bioses, no profit. Even tried the latest f11k beta, waste of time. It's always a waste of time. I have NEVER ended up with good results with these test bioses or modded bioses. Never. I don't consent to windows updates or anyone messing with my operating system or hardware. I will be the only one to make changes to my hardware or software. Gigabyte doesn't have the proper chipset drivers for the latest operating system. I don't want anything done to my PC without direct communication with me FIRST and only then I still have the last word on what happens. Last time I let these "updates" go through(updates that included unamed "intel" drivers), people on this forum were disconnecting my internet anytime I mouthed off or said anything bad about crappy american patriot ram. It's no coincidence. BTW THAT RAM SUCKS BALLS DON"T BUY IT. *GSKILL IS KING*. I wasted 60 dollars in restock fees trying out crappy american patriot 4400 ram, it's total crap. Grade A CRAPOLA. If they want me to say something good about it, tell them to give me back my 60 dollars. Same goes for team group xtreem 4500 ram, wasted 60 dollars in restock fees trying out their product too, complete trash. Neither xmp profile for any of those kits could be stabilized, even though the z390 master originally advertised 4400mhz ram capability. And yes, my IMC is good enough. Manual tuning was also worthless and a complete waste of time. Neither ram kit could even do c15-4000 at crappy slow rtls. BAD CRAP. If i ever try another ram kit out that isn't gskill and if it doesn't work, i will lie and say it is defective to avoid restock fees. Better they lose money than myself. stupid crap.



Dude, like... Wut? My Ram is Gskill F4-4000C18-8GTZ, it seems to be doing the job. You seem a little emotionally invested in this thread, why are you even here if all these 'modded BIOS's' have been such a nightmare for you? And... There is a hidden cabal of American Patriot mercs DDOS'ing you for trying to spread the truth about their insidious plot? It's like my post went around banging on the manhole covers in 'Escape From New York' or something. Look there is this vdroop **** man, I dunno what any of that is but when I copy the funny numbers my games play WAY better. 1-800-Gangstalkers and press '#' to speak to a pharmacist. Survey says, THORAZINE!


----------



## reachthesky

Kaibosh said:


> Dude, like... Wut? My Ram is Gskill F4-4000C18-8GTZ, it seems to be doing the job. You seem a little emotionally invested in this thread, why are you even here if all these 'modded BIOS's' have been such a nightmare for you? And... There is a hidden cabal of American Patriot mercs DDOS'ing you for trying to spread the truth about their insidious plot? It's like my post went around banging on the manhole covers in 'Escape From New York' or something. Look there is this vdroop **** man, I dunno what any of that is but when I copy the funny numbers my games play WAY better. 1-800-Gangstalkers and press '#' to speak to a pharmacist. Survey says, THORAZINE!



Dude, don't make me dig up wireshark logs. Ya'll can attempt to make me sound paranoid all you want but the data doesn't lie.


----------



## lemonhazed

Random question, I have the Aorus Pro, I just realized I can use the M2A slot with a NVME drive and not loose sata ports! 



But if I have a GPU in the top slot and a Firewire Card for an Audio Interface (no power only data) in one of the small PCIEx1 slots will I be hampering performance of the NVME drive/GPU?Audio Interface?


----------



## alv-OC

Hallo guys!

It's been a while since my last post, but I've been reading you all the time but hadn't time to mesh around with my PC.

I just moved from Manual Vcore to Offset, trying to follow your advices. Previously I was running 1.360v for 5.2GHz all cores and 4.8GHz on the caches with LLC Turbo and AC/DC Turbo aswell.

Now I'm running AD/DC: Power Saving, LLC Medium and Vcore Offset +60. Readings on HWinfo are:

VR Out: 
- Max: 1.367v / Min: 1.271v

Current IOUT: 
- Max: 154.50A / Min 17.75A

Temp never exceeded 85ºC

What do you think about that? is it safe for a 24/7 OC? do you thing I can push it further?


As for the RAM I'm trying to make stable the following settings. Keep in mind theese are G.Skill 4000Cl17 2x8 GB sticks:

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=367716&thumb=1

RAMv: 1.476v
VCCSA: 1.200v
VCCIO: 1.200v

Best BIOS af all I've tryed were F9 and latest F11k

For some wierd reason my IMC doesn't like to go over 1.230v and every attemp to achieve better stability over 1.200v on SA and IO ended up with a bunch of errors on MemTest in the first seconds. Now I only get 3 or 5 errors at 100% but oviously it's not enough.

Do you see something wrong? any ideas to try?


----------



## CS9K

alv-OC said:


> Do you see something wrong? any ideas to try?


Nothing major stands out with your CPU overclock. I'm glad you're not using IA AC Load Line Turbo + LLC Turbo anymore, that's maybe too much for your processor.

Your ram is running within an inch of its life. Not a bad thing, mind you, but...

That is a VERY tight tRFC (~135ns). With tREFI maxed out, your tRFC may be your source of instability right now.

I would set your VCCSA at 1.230V, relax tRFC to 400 (190ns at 4200), and see if you are stable then. If so, lower tRFC in increments of 20 and re-test.


----------



## KedarWolf

There is new microcodes out for Z390 CPUs. I can make a BIOS with the updated microcodes if anyone wants to test them, but history has it they'll probably be slower then the 'fast' ones we normally use in our mods.

Let me know if anyone wants to test them.

Edit: They WILL have the newest security patches though.


----------



## alv-OC

Quick update 

I had a few WHEA errors on the previous Offset config, I've been testing the following:

CPU internal AC/DC Load Line: Performance
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Medium
PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf.

RING PLL Overvoltage (+mV): 15 (seems to help with the cache)

CPU Vcore: Normal
Dynamic Vcore: -0.040v (-0.45 and avobe would cause MemTest errors and WHEA errors)


HW readings:
Max Voltage: 1.465v
Min Voltage: 1.236v

Max Current: 165.350A
Min current: 25.750A

I've notice that the voltage peaks occur when the CPU is under light loads like Web browsing, gaming, etc... when running R15 it stays around 1.311v along with the current peak. Temps have raisen 6ºC up to 91ºC worst case scenario.

Somthing really interesting is that after theese changes I no longer have error on Memtest up to 300% checked, RAM is working just fine with the following settings.

VCCSA: 1.200v / VCCIO: 1.200v / DDRv: 1.476v

https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=368014&thumb=1

But one question, Isn't that voltage peak dangerous even if the current is low? on IDLE the voltage sits at 1.268v - 1.270v @ 28.750 - 33.500A... It's something that worries me tbh.

I could not achieve any stability at 5.3GHz as I'm afraid of the voltage and I'm very close to the 100ºC barrier so I guess that I could only try to push the RAM to 4300MHz and see if I can achieve the 35.# ns as I still got some margin till the 1.500v.


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> There is new microcodes out for Z390 CPUs. I can make a BIOS with the updated microcodes if anyone wants to test them, but history has it they'll probably be slower then the 'fast' ones we normally use in our mods.
> 
> Let me know if anyone wants to test them.
> 
> Edit: They WILL have the newest security patches though.



That would be generous of you to do so and I'll test it out. If the BIOS you make has later security patches then that has to be considered good.

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Dibbler said:


> That would be generous of you to do so and I'll test it out. If the BIOS you make has later security patches then that has to be considered good.
> 
> Thanks


What motherboard do you have?


----------



## Dibbler

A Z390 Aorus Master and the latest BIOS is the F11k......

https://www.tweaktownforum.com/foru...dors/gigabyte/28656-gigabyte-latest-beta-bios


many thanks for what you do.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## EarlZ

Dibbler said:


> A Z390 Aorus Master and the latest BIOS is the F11k......
> 
> https://www.tweaktownforum.com/foru...dors/gigabyte/28656-gigabyte-latest-beta-bios
> 
> 
> many thanks for what you do.


Whats new ?


----------



## computertechy

Just a quick one for anyone that can help.

I recently purchased another set of the same ram but the IC's are different.

I'm struggling to get my xmp to 3200(locks at 2800) using 4x8gb sticks no matter what bios, i'm thinking it may be down to one set being SK Hynix and the other set Samsung, both sets have same timings & speed needed for xmp.

Has anyone else had similar experiences using ram with different IC's?


----------



## Dibbler

Thanks for the updated BIOS. Flashed fine and most appreciated.

@EarlZ - you can read what the new BIOS contains in the post where it is linked, above yours.


----------



## omekone

KedarWolf said:


> What motherboard do you have?


Any chance we can get the F11k with the newest firmwares and FASTest microcodes?


----------



## computertechy

omekone said:


> Any chance we can get the F11k with the newest firmwares and FASTest microcodes?


----------



## computertechy

EarlZ said:


> Whats new ?


So far i have noticed Tref bug fixed, black screen on F12 fixed and the power draw and temperatures are also lower on this bios.... but has completely ruined my stable overclock and now need 1.36 instead of 1.33 in order to get stable. I literally copied my settings from F11J straight over ran prime and instant WHEA.

I really wish they weren't so bloody lazy and tell us what has been done, what is the point of putting in the effort to fix the bios only to not tell people what you have done.


----------



## Jokerrrrr

computertechy said:


> it was posted 4 posts above, https://www.overclock.net/forum/28586992-post9754.html


Its the newest most *secure* microcodes, but we are waiting F11k with FASTest microcodes!


----------



## computertechy

Jokerrrrr said:


> Its the newest most *secure* microcodes, but we are waiting F11k with FASTest microcodes!


ahhh my bad, apologies.


----------



## KedarWolf

Jokerrrrr said:


> Its the newest most *secure* microcodes, but we are waiting F11k with FASTest microcodes!


I'll be home from work in 90 minutes or so. I'll mod the BIOS for you. New version of the tool I use so a chance some of the modules have been updated from my post of F11k a few days back.


----------



## KedarWolf

First .zip modded Z390 Master F11k BIOS with the newest most secure microcodes and updated RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware.

Second .zip modded Z390 Master with the latest firmware and fastest older microcodes.

*IMPORTANT NOTE: If you used the more secure microcodes BIOS from yesterday's post, reflash this latest one. The tool I use was missing the MMTool files and even though it seemed the mods all worked, I can't promise you they all actually did apply.*

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash MASTER.F11


----------



## Dibbler

Thanks for the update, reflashed my BIOS from yesterday. Used the most secure version. all went well.

Appreciate your work.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> First .zip modded Z390 Master F11k BIOS with the newest most secure microcodes and updated RST, Ethernet and GOP firmware.
> 
> Second .zip modded Z390 Master with the latest firmware and fastest older microcodes.
> 
> *IMPORTANT NOTE: If you used the more secure microcodes BIOS from yesterday's post, reflash this latest one. The tool I use was missing the MMTool files and even though it seemed the mods all worked, I can't promise you they all actually did apply.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash MASTER.F11





Tantawi said:


> The MMTool is not needed anymore for the recent versions, per the info in the thread, it would fail to integrate the firmwares otherwise, so no need to worry here, the old BIOS you generated is exactly like the new one.


----------



## Dibbler

Gave me practice on flashing


----------



## AN7 OverClocker

hey guys,

Based on your experience Up until now, which bios is the most overclock friendly?

F11i /j or k ?


----------



## Shaman

Sold my Z390 Master. Was nice while it lasted guise! ... Now, is there a Z490 Master thread?

...
..
.


----------



## Baam

Is Extreme on “Cpu vcore current protection” unhealthy for my 9900k? I always tried 5ghz oc and the system always froze immediately when launching Realbench, no matter the vcore, today i tried to set that to Extreme and is running superfine on Realbench and currently i’m lowering the vcore, started from 1.45 now i’m at 1.39, the system froze if i tried 1.42 with Current Protection set to “Turbo”


----------



## alv-OC

Sorry to insist guys but can you please let me know if i'm safe with this config and readings?

CPU internal AC/DC Load Line: Performance
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Medium
PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf.

RING PLL Overvoltage (+mV): 15

CPU Vcore: Normal
Dynamic Vcore: -0.040v (-0.45 and avobe would cause MemTest errors and WHEA errors)


HW readings:
Max Voltage: 1.465v 
Min Voltage: 1.236v

Max Current: 165.350A
Min current: 25.750A

Is this Voltage with this Current safe?


----------



## WINTENDOX

z490 aorus master + i910900k 

the oc vs the previous gen is the same only that I find this processor cooler and apply a voltage of 1.3v with tension, the truth is satisfied with an AIO 360MM thermaltake ring premium


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> Sorry to insist guys but can you please let me know if i'm safe with this config and readings?
> 
> CPU internal AC/DC Load Line: Performance
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Medium
> PWM Phase Control: eXm Perf.
> 
> RING PLL Overvoltage (+mV): 15
> 
> CPU Vcore: Normal
> Dynamic Vcore: -0.040v (-0.45 and avobe would cause MemTest errors and WHEA errors)
> 
> 
> HW readings:
> Max Voltage: 1.465v
> Min Voltage: 1.236v
> 
> Max Current: 165.350A
> Min current: 25.750A
> 
> Is this Voltage with this Current safe?


Been a long time since I had my 9900k, but here are the BIOS settings I was using for 5.0GHz CPU, Uncore at 47.

IMPORTANT NOTE: This was with IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline at '1', DON'T try this with them at '0'.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...390-aorus-owners-thread-440.html#post28121456

It was RealBench, Prime95 1344 FFT's and HCI MemTest stable.


----------



## infapp

Hello. Have a problem on the Aorus Z390 Pro rev motherboard. 1.0. Yesterday the system stopped loading with an XMP profile. CPU-Z dont displaying info of all slots in SPD. AIDA64 too.. When I set the XMP profile in BIOS, after saving have the error "Boot Failure detected" pops up. If "Load opt. Def. Then boot" is selected, the system continues to boot without problems. BIOS version F11, tested with ram G.Skill F4-3600C16Q, HyperX HX432C16FB3 memory, the situation is repeated. I think that this problem is not in a memory. Try to flash a new BIOS in DOS (via rufus), reset CMOS, and the situation is the same in second BIOS.
CPU i7 9700K P0.

What to do?
Help..((


----------



## Deathtech00

infapp said:


> Hello. Have a problem on the Aorus Z390 Pro rev motherboard. 1.0. Yesterday the system stopped loading with an XMP profile. CPU-Z dont displaying info of all slots in SPD. AIDA64 too.. When I set the XMP profile in BIOS, after saving have the error "Boot Failure detected" pops up. If "Load opt. Def. Then boot" is selected, the system continues to boot without problems. BIOS version F11, tested with ram G.Skill F4-3600C16Q, HyperX HX432C16FB3 memory, the situation is repeated. I think that this problem is not in a memory. Try to flash a new BIOS in DOS (via rufus), reset CMOS, and the situation is the same in second BIOS.
> CPU i7 9700K P0.
> 
> What to do?
> Help..((



It is hard to say if you have already tried known working chips and reset everything. That makes me lean towards possibly reseating your cpu and checking for bent pins, as it could be that or your ram slots are dying on the board.

I would email gigabyte.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ezveedub

Any of the later bios after F11c offer any better memory training or compatibility on Z390 Master? 

I have tried Team group 3600 CL14 (14-15-15-35) and that would only run at 3500 at those timings or 3700 at CL17 with 4x8gb sticks on XMP settings

https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/catalog/act.php?act=2&index_id=166
(part# TF10D416G3200HC14BDC01) 

And recently Crucial Ballistix Elite 4000 CL18 (18-19-19-39) and that would only set at 3866 with 4x8gb sticks at XMP and manually setting 3866, which is odd, as I have ran T-Force DDR4000 CL18 (18-20-20-44) and it trains and runs at XMP 4000.

https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/catalog/act.php?act=2&index_id=130
(part#TF5D416G4000HC18EDC01)

Just wanting to see if any improvements are to be made and don't want to play with bios flashing right now if there is no real improvements, as I have Optane Memory 118Gb installed and don't want to unpin it and then deal with any issues with reenabling it with a later bios that may not work and also still have no DDR4 memory compatibility.


----------



## 638220

hey i need some assistance. I deleted the "microsoft uefi CA" thing from the uefi DB in the bios in the secure boot section and now I can't get into either of my bioses at all. Can i reflash the bios through windows using @ bios utility to reset everything? i already voided my warranty and can't afford a new motherboard.


already tried hard cmos resets as well as removing the cmos battery and flipping the bios switches. I get stuck on code d6 or a2 or d4 if I remove the os drive.


----------



## 638220

flashing the bios through windows did not fix anything. I don't know what to do . Someone please help


----------



## 638220

I also tried to get into the bios by restarting to uefi firmware from windows, didn't work either.


----------



## 638220

If i use command prompt to change boot mode from uefi to legacy, will I be able to get back into my bios? Will i still be able to get into windows if I do that if it doesn't let me back in my bios? This is my only means of internet usage for trouble shooting right now so I can't risk not being able to boot back into windows.


----------



## 638220

So am I just **** out of luck now? Can't overclock anymore or tweak ram . Was supposed to compete in hwbot.org competition coming up. can't do **** now.


----------



## 638220

Ok i think i need an hdmi cable to connect to the integrated gpu through the motherboard after the cmos reset. Unfortunately i don't have one. I think my friend has one. I'll have to borrow it. if that doesn't work then its time to sell my hardware and move on from oc/pc gaming because this sort of situation is BS.


----------



## 638220

I fixed it. Hopefully this information helps someone.


If you ever delete the "microsoft uefi CA" file and the microsoft authorized signatures keys from your bios in the secure boot keys section while secure boot is enabled, you won't be able to get back into either bios unless you hook up an hdmi cable to use your chip's integrated graphics. Your main gpu cannot be plugged into the pcie slot while you use the integrated graphics to do this. The reason why the back up bios won't work in this situation is because secure boot settings are ported over from one bios to another when you flip the bios switch(for obvious security reasons). After you are back in the bios, use "restore db defaults" in the secure boot section then reboot. Everything is gravy after that. I gotta say that i'm glad I bought a K chip and not a KF chip because if I didn't have integrated graphics, the motherboard would be "half bricked" though still usable for windows provided there is already a working install on a drive that secureboot is tied to and useless for OC, even after reseating the cpu/cmos resets. Hopefully this information will help someone out in the future.


----------



## SlyBear

Hi there, I was wondering if there was some estimation for a baseline vcore based on your "known" VID. I used the suggested AC/DC loadlines of 1 at 5ghz and a plenty big value for vcore of 3.6 to look at the VID. IIRC that was all that I set and my windows power settings were at performance at the time + whatever background processes load on startup.

I'm ultimately looking to set up an adaptive OC as my temps are a little higher than I'd like - haven't quite figured that out yet. At base turbo settings AIDA64 puts me in the 80's with an h150i pro AIO steady over an hour. Unfortunately I used up the last of my cryonaught reseating my AIO without checking the back plate but that was the next thing I was going to look at - would it be ignorant to scrape the paste back into the center to reuse it? It's not much more than a week old.

z390 master - i9900kf P0 stepping - h150i pro AIO - aorus 2080 waterforce AIO - lian li o11 dynamic case

Edit: bios v F11k


----------



## lpittman

Hey guys, been awhile since I've been around! Having some issues with my memory - think the overclock was too much for too long and now I'm starting to get the occasional freeze or blue screen. I can't have any down time, so must order some new memory while I RMA this stuff.

What would be the current best memory to buy for the z390 Aurus Master with the i9-9900k?

Cheers


----------



## sabac

Hey gusy, I am willing to OC my 9900k to 5ghz on my aorus pro wifi (f12c), could anybody guide me through? I can't find a recent guide with the latest bios ver. Cheers!


----------



## stasio

New Beta BIOS is out....


----------



## Alemancio

sabac said:


> Hey gusy, I am willing to OC my 9900k to 5ghz on my aorus pro wifi (f12c), could anybody guide me through? I can't find a recent guide with the latest bios ver. Cheers!


I dont think you'll get a personalized guide for your bios. Just follow regular guides of Z390.


----------



## maivorbim

@KedarWolf, could you please be so kind to mod the latest Z390 master F11L with latest firmware and fastest microcodes? Thanks 









Z390AORUSMASTER


MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.



www.mediafire.com


----------



## KedarWolf

maivorbim said:


> @KedarWolf, could you please be so kind to mod the latest Z390 master F11L with latest firmware and fastest microcodes? Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTER
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com


Have a backup BIOS named properly for USB Flashback. I modded the BIOS and replaced everything, but it gave me a weird warning message I never seen before, before it replaced anything.

So have a USB flashback USB prepared in case it's a bad flash.






ModdedMasterF11L.zip







drive.google.com





overclock.net doesn't allowed attached .zip files anymore.


----------



## maivorbim

Thank you KedarWolf. I see you are not using the Z390 MB anymore, is there a guide on how to mod bioses such as you do?


----------



## Baam

maivorbim said:


> Thank you KedarWolf. I see you are not using the Z390 MB anymore, is there a guide on how to mod bioses such as you do?


He posted his settings once but i lost them when they updated the forum recently, hope he can find it and link it again. BTW is F11L better than F11K


----------



## Jokerrrrr

Baam said:


> BTW is F11L better than F11K


What changes?


----------



## Baam

Jokerrrrr said:


> What changes?


I have absolutely now idea


----------



## KedarWolf

maivorbim said:


> Thank you KedarWolf. I see you are not using the Z390 MB anymore, is there a guide on how to mod bioses such as you do?


I did a PM to someone how to mod a Z390 BIOS but I can't find it. It's a long and complicated explanation, several steps to do it right.

I'm at work, but if I find time later, I'll PM you.


----------



## maivorbim

Based on limited testing, it appears that F11L modded is more stable with the same settings compared to F11K modded.


----------



## KedarWolf

maivorbim said:


> Based on limited testing, it appears that F11L modded is more stable with the same settings compared to F11K modded.


I'm glad the modded BIOS works, the tool I use to mod it did some weird stuff though it showed everything was replaced.


----------



## Jokerrrrr

KedarWolf said:


> I'm glad the modded BIOS works, the tool I use to mod it did some weird stuff though it showed everything was replaced.


Thanks! 
I flashed F11L, it definitely didn't get worse, no problems were found, but I haven't noticed any improvements yet (compared to F11K).


----------



## Buzzard1

KedarWolf said:


> I did a PM to someone how to mod a Z390 BIOS but I can't find it. It's a long and complicated explanation, several steps to do it right.
> 
> I'm at work, but if I find time later, I'll PM you.


*Would you also send me something also? I have a Aorus Extreme z390. Also for the past 6 months my multiplier is off by 1. Any ideas what to do about that? Any links or help would be great. *


----------



## RynoW

I'm on F11c. Did any of the more recent beta BIOSes improve the aggressive overvolting at stock settings? Feels like my 9900KS is getting roasted compared to F10 when doing any benchmarking.


----------



## Janosi

The best modded bios is F11i(Thanks
*KedarWolf*
 )
, I' tested the F11 J,K and L but not stable, lowest benchmark score and in game fps & stutter. (this is personal
experience)


----------



## Rbk_3

I upgraded my Ram and now I have a very odd issues, I have a high pitched buzzing noise coming from somewhere in my PC when I move my mouse on the desktop. I thought it was maybe my GPU but I removed it and it is still there. 


Does it matter what if I put 2 sticks in A2, B2 or A1, B1? I swapped to A2, B2 cause I was having trouble getting the ram in under my cooler. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jokerrrrr

I found an important improvement in F11L(modded)! My memory overclocking profiles are now stable at a lower voltage than on F11K! The performance is the same.


----------



## wholeeo

RynoW said:


> I'm on F11c. Did any of the more recent beta BIOSes improve the aggressive overvolting at stock settings? Feels like my 9900KS is getting roasted compared to F10 when doing any benchmarking.


Seriously, I'm still on F11E I believe. Before you know it F11 will get to Z before a F12 is released if ever.


----------



## KedarWolf

Buzzard1 said:


> *Would you also send me something also? I have a Aorus Extreme z390. Also for the past 6 months my multiplier is off by 1. Any ideas what to do about that? Any links or help would be great. *


F9i only available for the XTreme. Here it is though.






Z390XTremeModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## wholeeo

Question, on the Z390 Master does populating all of the m2 slots hinder performance in any way to the top PCIE slot?


----------



## bigfootnz

wholeeo said:


> Question, on the Z390 Master does populating all of the m2 slots hinder performance in any way to the top PCIE slot?


It does not. I've all three m2 pci-e x 4 and my GPU is working in x16


----------



## EarlZ

wholeeo said:


> Question, on the Z390 Master does populating all of the m2 slots hinder performance in any way to the top PCIE slot?


Not at all as the NVME slots are connected only to the Z390chipset and the top 16x GPU slot is directly wired to the CPU.


----------



## alexrainmk

Hello. Tell me what the post code 03 means, which appears when entering and exiting the WINDOWS 10 sleep mode, and disappears after a system reboot. Thanks. Motherboard Aorus Z-390 Master.


----------



## Aymanb

Why is the headphone amp in this motherboard so bad?

Even my 5 year older motherboard is 2x louder and yes I have plugged headphone both front, back and in every possible audio port. And yes I have tried 3+ different realtek drivers and also uninstalled realtek completely and only use default drivers, which is surprisingly much better than realtek drivers anyways.

Even in level 3 amp I have to put it to 50-60% volume when my older mobo was super loud at 15%


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

What's the impedance on your headphones? They drive the snot out of my Sennheiser HX6XX and HD360Pros.


----------



## napalmOnFires

@KedarWolf, first of all I want to thank you for all the modding stuff you for usual users like me, and this time I also hope you can help me with my request. Can you please mod new beta bios for aorus pro wifi with latest firmware and fastest microcodes?

Z390 AORUS Pro WIFI - F12j


----------



## KedarWolf

napalmOnFires said:


> @KedarWolf, first of all I want to thank you for all the modding stuff you for usual users like me, and this time I also hope you can help me with my request. Can you please mod new beta bios for aorus pro wifi with latest firmware and fastest microcodes?
> 
> Z390 AORUS Pro WIFI - F12j


I'll do it when I get home from work tonight in 9 hours or so. 

Edit: On a side note, this is my 3960x on 2x16GB Dual Rank RAM on the older AGESA 1.0.0.5 BIOS.

Second edit: I run my BLCK at 100.45 for a bit of bandwidth increase.

My IMC is pretty much golden, but I can only get 3800 MHz with THAT older BIOS.

I am really liking having going Team Red.


----------



## KedarWolf

napalmOnFires said:


> @KedarWolf, first of all I want to thank you for all the modding stuff you for usual users like me, and this time I also hope you can help me with my request. Can you please mod new beta bios for aorus pro wifi with latest firmware and fastest microcodes?
> 
> Z390 AORUS Pro WIFI - F12j





napalmOnFires said:


> @KedarWolf, first of all I want to thank you for all the modding stuff you for usual users like me, and this time I also hope you can help me with my request. Can you please mod new beta bios for aorus pro wifi with latest firmware and fastest microcodes?
> 
> Z390 AORUS Pro WIFI - F12j


Modded Z390 Pro Wifi F12j.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F12







AorusProWiFiF12jModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Canson

guys , F*uck i damaged my motherboard when i tried to remove the backplate and now slot A1 and A2 for the ram not working anymore.

I want for now to use B1 and B2 until i have bought new motherboard.

Problem is i get a message after bios that tells me that my ram are not in correct slow and performance might affect it. But after clicking ok or X or ESC my pc shuts down.

Can i somehow ignore this message and force the motherboard to run my ram in B1 and B2? (Right now can only use 1ram in either B1 or B2)

Here for some pics:

20201008-161353
20201008-161414
20201008-161632


----------



## Dannyele

Hello guys!

Which modded bios is the latest one for the Z390 Aorus Master and stable for DDR4 oc?


----------



## cano062

I recommend you stay with F10b modded. With F11 Bios, no matter if a, b, c, d, f ......., the latency is up to 2-3x higher.
Here my values with F10b modded. Thanks @KedarWolf for the mod version  (Z390 Aorus Master)


----------



## Y7kiio

Hello, guys I'm new to OC i have tried to OC my 9900k, mobo is aorus master f11c but nothing worked well tried everything.
So can anyone give me a stable bios that can help me with the OC.


----------



## alv-OC

Dannyele said:


> Hello guys!
> 
> Which modded bios is the latest one for the Z390 Aorus Master and stable for DDR4 oc?


currently using F11K and working good, but I'm gonna put the latest F11L moded to give it a try.

por cierto, buena maquina tienes


----------



## StreaMRoLLeR

Hello
I have Z390 Aorus Extreme +9900k
after i upgraded my bios to F9 from F5,I could not overclock my 9900k even 100mhz.

I could hold 1.170V 4.8 (vrout) at 4.8 all cores and now vrout drops to 1.000V ! ***
Is this bios causing and messing with my ex oc settings. I even tried cpu upgrade mode which put +1 and still crashed. All voltages were auto. Whats wrong. My chip could hold 1.27V 5.0ghz with old bios


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> Have a backup BIOS named properly for USB Flashback. I modded the BIOS and replaced everything, but it gave me a weird warning message I never seen before, before it replaced anything.
> 
> So have a USB flashback USB prepared in case it's a bad flash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ModdedMasterF11L.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> overclock.net doesn't allowed attached .zip files anymore.



I tryed to flash both of my BIOS with efiflash but after the reading step it shows me an error message "invalid BIOS image" or something like that. I also tryed remaning the BIOS file but i get same message... does anyone else have the same issue? how can I fix it?

EDIT: never mind, I already fixed it creating a new bootable DOS USB stick


----------



## jdj9

Hi. Gigabyte today or yesterday removed latest bios version (F11c) for the Z390 Aorus Master. Does anyone know why?


----------



## sayoXD

jdj9 said:


> Hi. Gigabyte today or yesterday removed latest bios version (F11c) for the Z390 Aorus Master. Does anyone know why?


They added F11l instead.


----------



## jdj9

sayoXD said:


> They added F11l instead.


awesome, thanks.
I will try it. any people who will also try it please share your comments, thanks


----------



## Qbm87

Things I've noticed so on f11i official. No auto overclocking profiles for gaming or anything. Which is a pain as 4.8 gaming prolie for 9900k was great for me abit to much vcore but was solid as a rock. Can I ask I've got a d5 pump plugged into molex and pwm pump header but I keep getting wild swings of 1000+ rpm when pwm is set to a static 40%. Anyone else experiencing anything like this or would it be PSU related. Just swapped it out to a d5 smart pump that takes no pwm header but that also keeps fluctuateing but not on the scale of the old one maybe 500rpm tops. Sorry if this is off topic just abit concerned as it give me a pump warning/beeping and can't find anything related.


----------



## Plagestonecold

Hello together,

i really need your help, because i dont know further anymore 

First of all, sorry for my english. I dont talk / write so often in english.


I bought a Gigabyte Aorus Master G2 Edition, 2 Kits of 16 GB Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 - 4400 CL19-19-19-39 (PVS416G440C9K) and i have a 8086k.
I tried a lot, but i cant get the memory stable to its XMP Profil 1 - the 4400Mhz.
Now i let the memory run @ 4266 Mhz (with 1,48 vdimm, vccio and vccsa @ 1,25v) but not with XML Profile.
My settings are:











Its stable with these settings, processor oc @ 5ghz too, but when i try benchmark in aida64, it looks like:











How can i lower the latency and rise copy?

And how could i reach the 4400Mhz (XML?) ?

Or do i have more benefit from buying other rams? like:

- G.Skill Trident Z DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK) 

- G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZRC) 

- G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR) 

- G.Skill RipJaws V schwarz DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16Q-32GVKC) 

I dont need RGB, but a litte more speed @ ram would be nice.




Edit:

I tried some other RAM Settings:










The Result:











I dont really understand this...
If i see all those other benchmarks...

Is the 4400 Viper Steel RAM so bad, or is it uncompatible with this board?

How i can get better results?




Could you help me?

Thanks and greetings


----------



## Sno

Hey all, has anyone had success with this m2 NVMe drive (SX8200 Pro M.2 NVMe) in 1TB with the Z390 Pro wifi? The 1TB version is not on their compatibility list.


----------



## wholeeo

Ive noticed that on F11L the active turbo per core limit control drop down is gone.

This is how it used to look.


----------



## Smokediggity

wholeeo said:


> Ive noticed that on F11L the active turbo per core limit control drop down is gone.
> 
> This is how it used to look.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2462359


F11l is also missing the following options, which were present in the previous F11c bios:
1) Tweaker > Advanced Voltage Settings > CPU Core PLL Overvoltage (+mV)
2) Tweaker > Advanced Voltage Settings > CPU/VRM Settings > CPU/VAXG Protection
3) Tweaker > Advanced CPU Settings > Turbo Power Limits > Core Current Limit (Amps)


----------



## thuNDa

@Plagestonecold 
Looks like it runs the RAM in some compatibility mode.
It's a drop down menu in the memory settings (i use "enhanced performance" mode there).


----------



## Nammi

Plagestonecold said:


> Hello together,
> 
> i really need your help, because i dont know further anymore
> 
> First of all, sorry for my english. I dont talk / write so often in english.
> 
> 
> I bought a Gigabyte Aorus Master G2 Edition, 2 Kits of 16 GB Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 - 4400 CL19-19-19-39 (PVS416G440C9K) and i have a 8086k.
> I tried a lot, but i cant get the memory stable to its XMP Profil 1 - the 4400Mhz.
> Now i let the memory run @ 4266 Mhz (with 1,48 vdimm, vccio and vccsa @ 1,25v) but not with XML Profile.
> My settings are:
> 
> View attachment 2462247
> 
> 
> 
> Its stable with these settings, processor oc @ 5ghz too, but when i try benchmark in aida64, it looks like:
> 
> View attachment 2462248
> 
> 
> 
> How can i lower the latency and rise copy?
> 
> And how could i reach the 4400Mhz (XML?) ?
> 
> Or do i have more benefit from buying other rams? like:
> 
> - G.Skill Trident Z DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK)
> 
> - G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZRC)
> 
> - G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR)
> 
> - G.Skill RipJaws V schwarz DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16Q-32GVKC)
> 
> I dont need RGB, but a litte more speed @ ram would be nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I tried some other RAM Settings:
> 
> View attachment 2462299
> 
> 
> The Result:
> 
> View attachment 2462300
> 
> 
> 
> I dont really understand this...
> If i see all those other benchmarks...
> 
> Is the 4400 Viper Steel RAM so bad, or is it uncompatible with this board?
> 
> How i can get better results?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you help me?
> 
> Thanks and greetings


Shut down as many background processes as you can, aida is really sensitive.
On your 4266 profile change all the _dd timings besides tRDWR_dd to as low as they'll go, most likely you'll end up with 7 or 6.

There's pretty much no hope of doing 4400 on z390 gigabyte boards... 4133 is the safe option and if you're looking for RTL/IOL tuning you'll need to drop below 4000.


----------



## MyKnock

Guys any opinions on new Z390 AORUS PRO F12k? Should i use it or use modded bios?


----------



## thuNDa

MyKnock said:


> Guys any opinions on new Z390 AORUS PRO F12k? Should i use it or use modded bios?


I get less points in cinebench with the corresponding BIOS for my Aorus Elite.


----------



## KedarWolf

Plagestonecold said:


> Hello together,
> 
> i really need your help, because i dont know further anymore
> 
> First of all, sorry for my english. I dont talk / write so often in english.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I bought a Gigabyte Aorus Master G2 Edition, 2 Kits of 16 GB Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 - 4400 CL19-19-19-39 (PVS416G440C9K) and i have a 8086k.
> I tried a lot, but i cant get the memory stable to its XMP Profil 1 - the 4400Mhz.
> Now i let the memory run @ 4266 Mhz (with 1,48 vdimm, vccio and vccsa @ 1,25v) but not with XML Profile.
> My settings are:
> 
> View attachment 2462247
> 
> 
> 
> Its stable with these settings, processor oc @ 5ghz too, but when i try benchmark in aida64, it looks like:
> 
> View attachment 2462248
> 
> 
> 
> How can i lower the latency and rise copy?
> 
> And how could i reach the 4400Mhz (XML?) ?
> 
> Or do i have more benefit from buying other rams? like:
> 
> - G.Skill Trident Z DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK)
> 
> - G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZRC)
> 
> - G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR)
> 
> - G.Skill RipJaws V schwarz DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16Q-32GVKC)
> 
> I dont need RGB, but a litte more speed @ ram would be nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I tried some other RAM Settings:
> 
> View attachment 2462299
> 
> 
> The Result:
> 
> View attachment 2462300
> 
> 
> 
> I dont really understand this...
> If i see all those other benchmarks...
> 
> Is the 4400 Viper Steel RAM so bad, or is it uncompatible with this board?
> 
> How i can get better results?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you help me?
> 
> Thanks and greetings


G.Skill Trident Z DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR4-3600, CL16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK) 

One of the best kits 4x8GBfor Z390, if not the best. Overclocked quite well for me to 4200MHz stress tested stable. It overclocks better than RGB kits.

That being said there might be some higher binned 4x8GB kits out now, maybe peeps can chime in. Been a year or so since I ran my Z390.

If you go Z490 soon, you want 2x16GB kits instead or just run two DIMMs of this kit for 16GB total. Z490 is Daisy Chain and two DIMMs work better.


----------



## noxyd

Sno said:


> Hey all, has anyone had success with this m2 NVMe drive (SX8200 Pro M.2 NVMe) in 1TB with the Z390 Pro wifi? The 1TB version is not on their compatibility list.


I have the 512 GB version which works perfectly well and I just bought the 1TB version but cannot boot with it! I got a black screen, no post...
I have a Aorus Z390I Pro wifi. Not sure if it's the disk or my mb... Tried both m2 slots without succes. 

I actually managed to boot once hot-plugging the disk while in bios and boot direct with optimal settings. The disk was seen and windows and all and fully functionnal, however, each reboot I was back to Bios error and had to load optimal settings to boot to windows.

I'm returning the drive and will try the WD750 instead...

@KedarWolf Hi there, I know that my mb is not really popular (Z390 I Aorus Pro wifi, so the ITX version), but the latest bios so far is the f8h, which seems far from F12 that I see you guys talking about. Have you seen something more recent for my mb ? Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

noxyd said:


> I have the 512 GB version which works perfectly well and I just bought the 1TB version but cannot boot with it! I got a black screen, no post...
> I have a Aorus Z390I Pro wifi. Not sure if it's the disk or my mb... Tried both m2 slots without succes.
> 
> I actually managed to boot once hot-plugging the disk while in bios and boot direct with optimal settings. The disk was seen and windows and all and fully functionnal, however, each reboot I was back to Bios error and had to load optimal settings to boot to windows.
> 
> I'm returning the drive and will try the WD750 instead...
> 
> @KedarWolf Hi there, I know that my mb is not really popular (Z390 I Aorus Pro wifi, so the ITX version), but the latest bios so far is the f8h, which seems far from F12 that I see you guys talking about. Have you seen something more recent for my mb ? Thanks!


I checked the beta BIOS website. See nothing for the board. Check the official Gigabyte website, I'll mod the latest version if you want.


----------



## noxyd

KedarWolf said:


> I checked the beta BIOS website. See nothing for the board. Check the official Gigabyte website, I'll mod the latest version if you want.


Sure I'd love that.
Here is the link to the latest F8h : https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-i-aorus-pro-wifi_f8h.zip
Many thanks!


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> I checked the beta BIOS website. See nothing for the board. Check the official Gigabyte website, I'll mod the latest version if you want.


Kedar, can you please also mod the new BIOS for Aorus Pro (non-WiFI):



https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-pro_f12k.zip



Thanks in advance!


----------



## KedarWolf

noxyd said:


> Sure I'd love that.
> Here is the link to the latest F8h : https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-i-aorus-pro-wifi_f8h.zip
> Many thanks!


Z390 I Aorus Pro WiFi F8h bios modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 10/20/2020.

It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f8h /x

Use the modded Master F8h BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.






z390IProWiFiF8hModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## noxyd

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 I Aorus Pro WiFi F8h bios modded with the latest RST, Ethernet, GOP and GOP-VBT firmware. Updated 10/20/2020.
> 
> It has the fastest BA, BE microcodes as well.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f8h /x
> 
> Use the modded Master F8h BIOS, efiflash and the Rufus in the .zip file included as an attachment with this message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> z390IProWiFiF8hModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Big thank you KedarWolf, you helped me send my 1080 Ti to the moon a few years ago, now it's my motherboard's turn! 
really appreciate your help


----------



## KedarWolf

noxyd said:


> Big thank you KedarWolf, you helped me send my 1080 Ti to the moon a few years ago, now it's my motherboard's turn!
> really appreciate your help


----------



## noxyd

Just flashed modded Bios!

I have a question : until now I was running my 9700K at 5.1Ghz @1.26V on LLC Turbo (F7 bios).

With the latest F8h bios I cannot boot anymore with those settings, I need 1.3-1.32V and LLC high (turbo triggers a reset during Windows loading...). Still have to find out my “new” stable settings.

I noticed that the highest LLC modes are no longer here in the latest bios (such as extreme) the max is now Turbo.
Gigabyte bios pages says “fix cpu vcore and power behaviour”, anybody has an idea what this means ?
I’m starting to think that my previous 1.26V wasn’t accurate but seams strange to me...


----------



## CS9K

Hey @Sheyster let me know how F12K is. I'm still holding out on F10 modded. Big thing I want to know is, is the tREFI bug still a thing? I run 60,000 tREFI with my 4 sticks of SR B-Die, and can't bring myself to use 9,999 trefi again.


----------



## xtacb4

Hi!

Would it be feasible to mod the latest Z390 AORUS MASTER bios F11l with the fastest microcode? (before all the mitigation spectre/meltdown/etc were added?)

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

xtacb4 said:


> Hi!
> 
> Would it be feasible to mod the latest Z390 AORUS MASTER bios F11l with the fastest microcode? (before all the mitigation spectre/meltdown/etc were added?)
> 
> Thanks!








ModdedMasterF11L.zip







drive.google.com





Edit: for i9 CPUs (9***) series you can't use pre-Spectre microcodes, no support for them, but this BIOS has the fastest microcodes, and you can disable Spectre with a tool, Google it. But I'd test if it actually is faster with it disabled, don't know for sure. It might not be.


----------



## sew333

Z390 AORUS PRO (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global


Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




www.gigabyte.com





What that does mean?


Fix CPU Vcore and power behavior


----------



## noxyd

sew333 said:


> Z390 AORUS PRO (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
> 
> 
> Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gigabyte.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What that does mean?
> 
> 
> Fix CPU Vcore and power behavior


I'm wondering the same...


----------



## Sheyster

CS9K said:


> Hey @Sheyster let me know how F12K is. I'm still holding out on F10 modded. Big thing I want to know is, is the tREFI bug still a thing? I run 60,000 tREFI with my 4 sticks of SR B-Die, and can't bring myself to use 9,999 trefi again.


I have not had a chance to test it yet! Been messing around with video stuff all week. I also run a high tREFI so that would be an issue for me as well. Anyone had a chance to install F12K and test? Either version, modded or stock?


----------



## CS9K

Sheyster said:


> I have not had a chance to test it yet! Been messing around with video stuff all week. I also run a high tREFI so that would be an issue for me as well. Anyone had a chance to install F12K and test? Either version, modded or stock?


I had some time so I gave Kedarwolf's modded F12K a try.

First impressions:

Same performance as my modded F10 from Kedarwolf.
Existing overclock settings from F10 work in F12K, though I input them by hand and I suggest others do the same, as there's a fundamental change in bios structure between F10 and F12K.
I couldn't get anything more out of my memory, 3800 is what it's happiest at and trains best at.
5.1GHz may be stable on this bios version (with comfortable daily-driver voltages/llc), where it wasn't on F10, with the new vcore/vrm behavior.
IA AC/DC and traditional LLC behaviors are different. Start low compared to existing settings, and work your way up.
No tREFI bug yay \o/
I'd say go for it Sheyster, it seems okay to me so far


----------



## Sheyster

CS9K said:


> I had some time so I gave Kedarwolf's modded F12K a try.
> 
> First impressions:
> 
> Same performance as my modded F10 from Kedarwolf.
> Existing overclock settings from F10 work in F12K, though I input them by hand and I suggest others do the same, as there's a fundamental change in bios structure between F10 and F12K.
> I couldn't get anything more out of my memory, 3800 is what it's happiest at and trains best at.
> 5.1GHz may be stable on this bios version (with comfortable daily-driver voltages/llc), where it wasn't on F10, with the new vcore/vrm behavior.
> IA AC/DC and traditional LLC behaviors are different. Start low compared to existing settings, and work your way up.
> No tREFI bug yay \o/
> I'd say go for it Sheyster, it seems okay to me so far


Thanks so much for taking the time to do this CS9K, you rock! I will flash it over the weekend.


----------



## CS9K

Sheyster said:


> Thanks so much for taking the time to do this CS9K, you rock! I will flash it over the weekend.


Naw, I am but a humble nerd with time to spare thanks to human malware. 

The -real- thank you goes out to @KedarWolf for modding bios images for us! Keep being awesome <3


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Hey guys, any recommendations on undervolting and underclocking a 9700k?

System specs in sig: Z390 Aorus Ultra, i7 9700k

Thinking of doing some crypto mining when I'm not gaming. Thanks to y'all's advice over the last year, I have 2 solid adaptive voltage profiles for 5.0ghz and 5.1ghz to use for gaming. But I want to also set up a 3rd BIOS profile that uses as little power as possible to improve efficiency, but that's not so awful that I can't do things like web browsing or watching Netflix.

Is there a low frequency target for low power and usable performance? 4.5ghz? 4.0ghz? 3.5ghz?
Is doing an adaptive profile with a negative offset advisable?
Which LLC setting?
Turn on all or only some C-States?

Also, I saw that y'all did a BIOS mod with the fast microcode for the Z390 Aorus Pro. By chance has anyone done a modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Ultra too? If not, that's cool.


----------



## KedarWolf

KrampusKlaus said:


> Hey guys, any recommendations on undervolting and underclocking a 9700k?
> 
> System specs in sig: Z390 Aorus Ultra, i7 9700k
> 
> Thinking of doing some crypto mining when I'm not gaming. Thanks to y'all's advice over the last year, I have 2 solid adaptive voltage profiles for 5.0ghz and 5.1ghz to use for gaming. But I want to also set up a 3rd BIOS profile that uses as little power as possible to improve efficiency, but that's not so awful that I can't do things like web browsing or watching Netflix.
> 
> Is there a low frequency target for low power and usable performance? 4.5ghz? 4.0ghz? 3.5ghz?
> Is doing an adaptive profile with a negative offset advisable?
> Which LLC setting?
> Turn on all or only some C-States?
> 
> Also, I saw that y'all did a BIOS mod with the fast microcode for the Z390 Aorus Pro. By chance has anyone done a modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Ultra too? If not, that's cool.


See posts above for flashing instructions. Flash from within BIOS will NOT work.






Z390AorusUltraF10gModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> Kedar, can you please also mod the new BIOS for Aorus Pro (non-WiFI):
> 
> 
> 
> https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-pro_f12k.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance!








Z390AorusProNOTWiFiModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Delwyn

Hey, I'm kinda new to this intricate bios stuff and terms. I flashed the latest official F11L within the bios onto my Aorus master. Works fine, performance seems ok. Now I read about some custom made bios by KedarWolf. What exactly is the difference? Less safety? What means "faster microcodes" or "latest firmware"? It should already be up to date when it comes from Gigabyte!
Also, I'm scared to use this other flash method :/ Will the warranty be void too?
EDIT1:I've prepared everything and I'm ready to flash, how much could it improve performance?
EDIT2: It worked perfectly, I'm on the latest modded bios, holy ****. Cinebench gives me the exact same score, so that's good and the voltage seems way lower. 
9700k @1.27 VROUT @4.9Ghz. Would love to go to 5Ghz, but seems to be unstable, makes system hang in a weird way... this is perfect now  
Also finally the voltage drops to like 0.88 again when idle, though the clock stays at 4.9 all core. 
This bios is a miracle.


----------



## Pauliesss

KedarWolf said:


> ModdedMasterF11L.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: for i9 CPUs (9***) series you can't use pre-Spectre microcodes, no support for them, but this BIOS has the fastest microcodes, and you can disable Spectre with a tool, Google it. But I'd test if it actually is faster with it disabled, don't know for sure. It might not be.


Can I still use this ModdedMasterF11L with i9-9900k, will it work?


----------



## Dannyele

Pauliesss said:


> Can I still use this ModdedMasterF11L with i9-9900k, will it work?


I've flashed this bios with a 9900k without any problem.


----------



## ztxone

Hi guys,

Where can I find the modded bios for Z390 AORUS XTREME (rev. 1.0) ?

Thanks.


----------



## noxyd

CS9K said:


> I had some time so I gave Kedarwolf's modded F12K a try.
> 
> First impressions:
> 
> Same performance as my modded F10 from Kedarwolf.
> Existing overclock settings from F10 work in F12K, though I input them by hand and I suggest others do the same, as there's a fundamental change in bios structure between F10 and F12K.
> I couldn't get anything more out of my memory, 3800 is what it's happiest at and trains best at.
> 5.1GHz may be stable on this bios version (with comfortable daily-driver voltages/llc), where it wasn't on F10, with the new vcore/vrm behavior.
> IA AC/DC and traditional LLC behaviors are different. Start low compared to existing settings, and work your way up.
> No tREFI bug yay \o/
> I'd say go for it Sheyster, it seems okay to me so far


I also have a 9700k.
I used to be stable at 5.1Ghz with 1.26 manual Vcore on LLC Turbo on older bioses. 
New one doesn't even get me to windows with those settings. 

I need 1.30 LLC medium or 1.29 LL High... 
What's weird is that vcore drops to 1.23-1.24 under prime95
Are you experiencing the same thing ? 
Is there a workaround?


----------



## KedarWolf

ztxone said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Where can I find the modded bios for Z390 AORUS XTREME (rev. 1.0) ?
> 
> Thanks.


See earlier posts on how to flash. From within BIOS will NOT work.






z390AorusXTremeModdedF9i.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## ztxone

KedarWolf said:


> See earlier posts on how to flash. From within BIOS will NOT work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> z390AorusXTremeModdedF9i.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thanks a lot!

This is my first time doing this. I will look through the thread somewhere on instructions on how to do so. Thanks again!


----------



## KedarWolf

ztxone said:


> Thanks a lot!
> 
> This is my first time doing this. I will look through the thread somewhere on instructions on how to do so. Thanks again!


Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f9i /x


----------



## BoldStep

KedarWolf said:


> ModdedMasterF11L.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: for i9 CPUs (9***) series you can't use pre-Spectre microcodes, no support for them, but this BIOS has the fastest microcodes, and you can disable Spectre with a tool, Google it. But I'd test if it actually is faster with it disabled, don't know for sure. It might not be.


What are the main things did you change on F11L, just out of curiosity? Do IOL and RTL work on this version?


----------



## KedarWolf

BoldStep said:


> What are the main things did you change on F11L, just out of curiosity? Do IOL and RTL work on this version?


All the BIOS's the changes are here. I don't think IOLs and RTLs have ever worked on Gigabyte Z390 but there are tricks to lower them. Not going into it but Google is your friend.


Update all from and to.


[Current version]
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404

[Available version]
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687

Video OnBoard
[Current version]
EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015

[Available version]
EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 231
-\ Requires GOP VBT 221+ or 228+ for mobile device - Force
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
-\ User GOP Driver file
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109


Network
[Current version]
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13

[Available version]
-\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16

─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xD70400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xD89400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xDA2800│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xDBB800│ No ║

To fastest microcodes.

═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ Intel ║
╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬───────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset│Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│ 0x18 │ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0x17C18│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0x2FC18│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0x48018│ No ║
╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧═══════╧════╝


----------



## BoldStep

KedarWolf said:


> All the BIOS's the changes are here. I don't think IOLs and RTLs have ever worked on Gigabyte Z390 but there are tricks to lower them. Not going into it but Google is your friend.
> 
> 
> Update all from and to.
> 
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> 
> Video OnBoard
> [Current version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 231
> -\ Requires GOP VBT 221+ or 228+ for mobile device - Force
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> -\ User GOP Driver file
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> 
> 
> Network
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13
> 
> [Available version]
> -\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xD70400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xD89400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xDA2800│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xDBB800│ No ║
> 
> To fastest microcodes.
> 
> ═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
> ║ Intel ║
> ╟─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬───────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset│Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
> ║1│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x17C00│ 0x18 │ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
> ║2│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ BE │2019-05-17│PRD │0x18000│0x17C18│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
> ║3│906EB│ 02 (1) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18400│0x2FC18│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼───────┼────╢
> ║4│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ BA │2019-04-30│PRD │0x18000│0x48018│ No ║
> ╚═╧═════╧═══════════╧════════╧══════════╧════╧═══════╧═══════╧════╝


Looks good! In regards to RTL and IOL though, even looking on Google, info on workarounds for Aorus Z390 is scarce. Do you have examples?


----------



## KedarWolf

BoldStep said:


> Looks good! In regards to RTL and IOL though, even looking on Google, info on workarounds for Aorus Z390 is scarce. Do you have examples?


Basically set a RAM divider like 3333Mhz , maybe higher, depending on what works, reboot, disable RAM training options in BIOS, set divider back on 4133MHz or whatever your RAM is stable at with trainings disabled, reboot, RTLs and IOLs will stay at the lower 3333Mhz settings, not train at 4133MHz.

I no longer own my Master so can't take screenshots to help you through it. I run an AMD 3950x now (getting a 5950x Nov. 5th)!


----------



## BoldStep

KedarWolf said:


> Basically set a RAM divider like 3333Mhz , maybe higher, depending on what works, reboot, disable RAM training options in BIOS, set divider back on 4133MHz or whatever your RAM is stable at with trainings disabled, reboot, RTLs and IOLs will stay at the lower 3333Mhz settings, not train at 4133MHz.
> 
> I no longer own my Master so can't take screenshots to help you through it. I run an AMD 3950x now (getting a 5950x Nov. 5th)!


Does it matter specifically what I set the initial RAM divider, so long as it's stable after? My ram is stable up to 4000mhz, at least before I flashed your modded BIOS (seriously, thank you so much for this!)


----------



## KedarWolf

BoldStep said:


> Does it matter specifically what I set the initial RAM divider, so long as it's stable after? My ram is stable up to 4000mhz, at least before I flashed your modded BIOS (seriously, thank you so much for this!)


The lower you set the initial RAM divider, the lower the RTLs will be. You want to go as low as you can get still TM5 stable.


----------



## CS9K

noxyd said:


> I also have a 9700k.
> I used to be stable at 5.1Ghz with 1.26 manual Vcore on LLC Turbo on older bioses.
> New one doesn't even get me to windows with those settings.
> 
> I need 1.30 LLC medium or 1.29 LL High...
> What's weird is that vcore drops to 1.23-1.24 under prime95
> Are you experiencing the same thing ?
> Is there a workaround?


I should have made it more clear in my initial feedback post: Between F10 and F12K, Gigabyte fundamentally changed the behavior of the VRM's and how they deliver power to the CPU. That means the numeric values you used before F12K mean nothing to this new firmware.

I can't tell you what voltage and LLC settings to use, but if you've been watching VR VOUT at partial and full loads on your old firmware, finding what combination of values get you the same VR VOUT on the new firmware will only be a matter of playing around with settings. Here's my observations of the new firmware so far:

VR VOUT is MUCH higher per given IA AC/DC numeric values; which is what I use to overclock (no avx offset, auto voltage/no voltage offset, only IA AC/DC and LLC changes)
VR VOUT droops less at Standard, Low, and Medium LLC's on the new firmware
VR VOUT droop at High LLC is about the same. I have not used Turbo LLC on either firmware
Where F10 (no avx offset) with a P95, non-avx, load VR VOUT of 1.280V, on High LLC, was unstable at partial loads (thanks to programs that use avx), F12K at 1.270V VR VOUT and High LLC -is- stable.

TL;DR: The VRM's are a bit spicier than they were before this update, regarding how much VR VOUT it gives per a given setting, all other things being equal.

Semi-related to 'spicy' VRM's, I swapped the VRM thermal pads to Thermal Grizzly Minus Pad 8. I bought a 100x100x1.5mm chunk and cut some off; the length was almost perfect. Before, non-avx P95 load (~173W) got the VRM's up to 82C, and avx P95 load (~230W) hit 86C and kept climbing (I never let it go higher). After the swap, non-avx load holds at 75C, and avx at 83C. A very worthy upgrade, and I have more than three quarters of the thermal pad square left for other devices!


----------



## noxyd

This is great


CS9K said:


> I should have made it more clear in my initial feedback post: Between F10 and F12K, Gigabyte fundamentally changed the behavior of the VRM's and how they deliver power to the CPU. That means the numeric values you used before F12K mean nothing to this new firmware.
> 
> I can't tell you what voltage and LLC settings to use, but if you've been watching VR VOUT at partial and full loads on your old firmware, finding what combination of values get you the same VR VOUT on the new firmware will only be a matter of playing around with settings. Here's my observations of the new firmware so far:
> 
> VR VOUT is MUCH higher per given IA AC/DC numeric values; which is what I use to overclock (no avx offset, auto voltage/no voltage offset, only IA AC/DC and LLC changes)
> VR VOUT droops less at Standard, Low, and Medium LLC's on the new firmware
> VR VOUT droop at High LLC is about the same. I have not used Turbo LLC on either firmware
> Where F10 (no avx offset) with a P95, non-avx, load VR VOUT of 1.280V, on High LLC, was unstable at partial loads (thanks to programs that use avx), F12K at 1.270V VR VOUT and High LLC -is- stable.
> TL;DR: The VRM's are a bit spicier than they were before this update, regarding how much VR VOUT it gives per a given setting, all other things being equal.
> 
> Semi-related to 'spicy' VRM's, I swapped the VRM thermal pads to Thermal Grizzly Minus Pad 8. I bought a 100x100x1.5mm chunk and cut some off; the length was almost perfect. Before, non-avx P95 load (~173W) got the VRM's up to 82C, and avx P95 load (~230W) hit 86C and kept climbing (I never let it go higher). After the swap, non-avx load holds at 75C, and avx at 83C. A very worthy upgrade, and I have more than three quarters of the thermal pad square left for other devices!


This is great feedback, thanks!

I'm surprised that all those changes are not really discussed on forums, I guess people don't want to mess around with settings working great from 2 years ago or so...

Based on what you've seen so far, do you believe that LLC levels still have the same resistance value than before ?

LLC: Standard/Normal=1.6 mOhms
LLC: Low=1.3 mOhms
LLC: medium: 1.0 mOhms
LLC: High: 0.8 mOhms
LLC: Turbo=0.4 mOhms

edit : I checked and LLC High is still 0.8 mOhms

Also would you mind sharing your OC settings (especially IA AC/DC) ?
I'm at manual voltage and would like to try yours.

Thanks


----------



## KrampusKlaus

KedarWolf said:


> See posts above for flashing instructions. Flash from within BIOS will NOT work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AorusUltraF10gModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thank you so much!!! I think like 90% of all my success at overclocking my 9700k on this board is because of y'all <3


----------



## noxyd

KrampusKlaus said:


> Thank you so much!!! I think like 90% of all my success at overclocking my 9700k on this board is because of y'all <3


I'd been interested in knowing your OC settings under this BIOS!


----------



## CS9K

noxyd said:


> Based on what you've seen so far, do you believe that LLC levels still have the same resistance value than before ?


They probably do, it likely just seems different to me based on how differently the other settings act now, compared to the old firmware.



noxyd said:


> I'm surprised that all those changes are not really discussed on forums, I guess people don't want to mess around with settings working great from 2 years ago or so...


Exactly. I'm in the same camp. I normally wouldn't change firmware unless there were a large enough change to warrant it. In my case, it paid off: 5.1GHz is stable now, compared to unstable before.

The mantra "If it aint broke, don't fark with it!" is 1000% a mantra to live by.

When I overclock, I want push-button stability; a single error in memtest86, P95 non-avx Large/Small FFT, or Intel XTU, is one error too many. While this -does- make overclocking a bit more of a chore while I am dialing in my settings, once it is stability-checked, I can then use my PC without worrying about it... and life is good :3



noxyd said:


> Also would you mind sharing your OC settings (especially IA AC/DC) ?


Sure. All voltages listed are *VR VOUT.

These are what work for me. I am not responsible for your equipment, etc.*

F12K settings used for both speeds:

Ring Ratio: 47
Speed Shift: Auto
CPU EIST: Auto
Turbo Boost: Disabled
C-States: C1E, C3, C-State Limit Auto, all others disabled
5.0Ghz:

Average voltage while idling along: 1.290V on non-avx programs, 1.335 when running AVX programs
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration "Low"
P95 non-avx small FFT: 1.235V (jumps to 1.285V when avx programs run in the background), 110A, 150W, 68C Package
P95 avx1 small FFT: 1.255Vm 145Am 200W, 79C Package
IA AC Loadline: 40
IA DC Loadline: 105
5.1GHz:

Average voltage while idling along: 1.295V on non-avx programs, 1.345 when running AVX programs
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration "High"
P95 non-avx small FFT: 1.270V (jumps to 1.315V when avx programs run in the background), 125A, 175W, 74C Package
P95 avx1 small FFT: 1.305V 160A, 235W, 88C Package
IA AC Loadline: 40
IA DC Loadline: 55
I feel comfortable running 5.1GHz as I only really game and consume content on this rig. I do not run any programs that take AVX load to the P95 "Power Virus" level. I would *NOT* run 5.1GHz if I did anything AVX compute-heavy, such as [email protected] on CPU or Video Encoding via CPU. Putting 150A+ at 1.3V+ through a CPU is not a great idea. As for video, I use my GPU for encoding/decoding (obs recording/streaming, youtube upload/viewing, etc).

Oh right, I do keep SpeedShift, SpeedStep, and C1E+C3 enabled to allow my CPU to drop clocks and voltages down while I'm idle; this PC does spend quite a bit of time idling right along. I use "Balanced" profile in Windows 10.


----------



## noxyd

Thanks for this detailed post, it's a very interesting one !

And you leave vcore on auto right ?

I'm using a very different approach disabling pretty much every C-state, speed shift/step and other power saving feature. 
I only set manual CPU Vcore at 1.30V and CPU Vcore LLC to High. 
Multiplier 51, ring ratio 47, and that's it.
Will check VR VOUT readings tomorrow.

This gives me a rock solid 5,1 Ghz on everything non-AVX (prime95, OCCT).
Doesn't pass those benchmarks with AVX on.

I have actually been running @5,1 Ghz for more than a year with Vcore at 1,26V and Vcore LLC Turbo on the previous Bios.

Like you I only use my rig for gaming (well, only flight sims actually, DCS World and more recently FS 2020), and also work (pretty standard MS Office suite, nothing fancy), so no real AVX workload involved.
I know that a few common softwares run AVX instructions but I never had a crash despite not being able to pass AVX benchmarks...

Anyways, I'll try your settings out of curiosity to see the impact on temps more specificaly.


----------



## CS9K

noxyd said:


> Thanks for this detailed post, it's a very interesting one !
> 
> And you leave vcore on auto right ?
> 
> Like you I only use my rig for gaming (well, only flight sims actually, DCS World and more recently FS 2020), and also work (pretty standard MS Office suite, nothing fancy), so no real AVX workload involved.
> I know that a few common softwares run AVX instructions but I never had a crash despite not being able to pass AVX benchmarks...


Yes, vcore is on auto.

Funny thing with AVX. I was non-avx P95 stable at a much lower voltage at 5.1GHz, but every time a program that uses AVX asserted itself while P95 non-avx was running, the avx using program (Discord, in my case) would faceplant and restart itself. You can be non-avx stable, but avx unstable, apparently. I had to keep upping the LLC so that VR VOUT was high enough under load that Discord didn't crash. For the record, during all of that, I never got any P95 errors, nor WHEA errors.

So, one way to check for AVX stability is to run P95 non-AVX small FFT, then start discord, change it off the normal home screen, and see if it resets itself. It's a bit janky of a way to do it, but it works, and this way you _don't_ have to run P95 AVX Small FFT. You'd also be surprised what programs use AVX now... Sea of Thieves and FS2020 both do, Discord and Firefox do, OBS does... Granted, none of them use it for anything that loads up your CPU to P95 'power-virus' levels, but the voltage bump is there when they use it nonetheless.

And rock on, been flight simmin' myself since MSFS 5.0 on two floppy disks... lordy, do I feel old now. FS2020 is still basically in beta, but they're knocking bugs out in a hurry to clean it up and have it ready for the XBOX release in a few weeks. Hopefully DX12 gets announced soon after that!


----------



## noxyd

CS9K said:


> Yes, vcore is on auto.
> 
> Funny thing with AVX. I was non-avx P95 stable at a much lower voltage at 5.1GHz, but every time a program that uses AVX asserted itself while P95 non-avx was running, the avx using program (Discord, in my case) would faceplant and restart itself. You can be non-avx stable, but avx unstable, apparently. I had to keep upping the LLC so that VR VOUT was high enough under load that Discord didn't crash. For the record, during all of that, I never got any P95 errors, nor WHEA errors.
> 
> So, one way to check for AVX stability is to run P95 non-AVX small FFT, then start discord, change it off the normal home screen, and see if it resets itself. It's a bit janky of a way to do it, but it works, and this way you _don't_ have to run P95 AVX Small FFT. You'd also be surprised what programs use AVX now... Sea of Thieves and FS2020 both do, Discord and Firefox do, OBS does... Granted, none of them use it for anything that loads up your CPU to P95 'power-virus' levels, but the voltage bump is there when they use it nonetheless.
> 
> And rock on, been flight simmin' myself since MSFS 5.0 on two floppy disks... lordy, do I feel old now. FS2020 is still basically in beta, but they're knocking bugs out in a hurry to clean it up and have it ready for the XBOX release in a few weeks. Hopefully DX12 gets announced soon after that!


So with my settings VR VOUT is 1.207V under load (P95 small FFT no AVX). 
Just launched P95 non-AVX small FTT and started Discord at the same time and no problem. 
My temps are quite similar to yours, what cooling do you have ? 
I'll try your settings and revert. 

FS2020 is really a slap in the face, I really can't wait for the VR support !


----------



## CS9K

noxyd said:


> So with my settings VR VOUT is 1.207V under load (P95 small FFT no AVX).
> Just launched P95 non-AVX small FTT and started Discord at the same time and no problem.
> My temps are quite similar to yours, what cooling do you have ?
> I'll try your settings and revert.
> 
> FS2020 is really a slap in the face, I really can't wait for the VR support !


For discord, leave P95 non-avx SFFT running for a while, see if discord bites it over a 10-30 minute-ish span.

And yeah, FS2020 has a ways to go. I wish they'd waited to release it. Though, I'd always wanted a head tracker for flight simming; I think FS2020 will be the reason I finally do it.

Full specs and a slightly outdated picture are listed on my Twitch page, which I need to actually use one of these days...


----------



## noxyd

Just ran P95 small FFT no-avx 35 minutes messing around with Discord, Excel, Outlook and MS Teams at the same time. No crash, no WHEA.
What cooling are you using ?


----------



## Wraxx824

Deleted. Found what I was looking for in previous replies. TY KedarWolf!


----------



## KedarWolf

Wraxx824 said:


> Deleted. Found what I was looking for in previous replies. TY KedarWolf!


----------



## CS9K

noxyd said:


> Just ran P95 small FFT no-avx 35 minutes messing around with Discord, Excel, Outlook and MS Teams at the same time. No crash, no WHEA.
> What cooling are you using ?


Sounds good. At some point you'll want to run P95 non-avx SFFT for several hours straight, as part of a larger suite of tests to ensure everything is stable.

My torture tools of preference are as follows:

P95 non-avx SFFT for 4-8 hours for core stability
For memory timings/vdimm/vccio/vccsa I let memtest86 run overnight to do its thing, then turn P95 non-avx LFFT loose for several hours to give the IMC a solid thrashing.

If all of that passes muster, then I'm satisfied my pc is stable. Everyone has their own methods of stability testing and tolerance levels for errors and voltage levels, though. It's worth looking around to see what tools and comfort levels you might want to use yourself.

For cooling, I use an EVGA CLC 240, fans replaced with a pair of Noctua iPPC 2000rpm PWM models. Full specs are in my link on the previous page.


----------



## freejak13

Hopefully questions regarding the z390i aorus pro wifi are allowed here also. I'm having an issue where my aio fans connected to the sys_fan headers will stop for a few seconds while windows is booting. I believe this is preventing me from reaching higher overclocks from the getgo due to overheating. I'm on the F7 bios. Anyone else seeing this with your z390 aorus mobos? Are there any solutions? Thanks.


----------



## CS9K

freejak13 said:


> Hopefully questions regarding the z390i aorus pro wifi are allowed here also. I'm having an issue where my aio fans connected to the sys_fan headers will stop for a few seconds while windows is booting. I believe this is preventing me from reaching higher overclocks from the getgo due to overheating. I'm on the F7 bios. Anyone else seeing this with your z390 aorus mobos? Are there any solutions? Thanks.


If I recall, when the boyfriend had the Z390 Aorus Pro in his PC on firmware F9, all of his fans would run at full speed for about 2 seconds at power-on, they would then sound like they stopped for 5ish seconds, then they could come up to speed and settle in about the time the login screen showed up. Now that I have it, I can't comment on it in my pc, as I'm using a Corsair Commander Pro for all of my fans. 

That said, if you're using an AIO, and it is getting power, your fans -should- be able to run idle for 1-2 minutes if the pump and AIO loop are working properly; that's the point of an AIO, to be able to soak up the heat much more efficiently than all but the best vapor chamber/heatpipe air coolers. If that few seconds of no fans is messing you up, then you have larger issues than your overclock.

If your pump is plugged into your mainboard, *make certain* the header that the pump is plugged into, is set to run at *full speed* all the time. The power the AIO pump is receiving should not have any curve on it at all.


----------



## Shonk

I have just picked up a Z390 Aorus Master to replace my Z390 M Gaming as it was borderline for my i9-9900KS
so decided it was now or never if i wanted a sealed master

anyway i have noticed a quirk i run 4 x 16GB 3200 Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16-18-18-36 560
I run them at 15-18-18-36 540 CR1 1.35v @ 3500 which results in 44.3ns

I clearled the bios earlier and loaded the profile in from usb stick and some sub timings that i cant change are changed resulting in 46.xns
does anyone have any idea about this?

See bottom left area

*44.3ns*








*46.xns*








I have also noticed a bug has anyone else seen this?

setting 3600 results in 3200 with my ram
no failed boot it just reboots trains and comes up at 3200
setting 3700 works
setting 3733 works


----------



## freejak13

CS9K said:


> If I recall, when the boyfriend had the Z390 Aorus Pro in his PC on firmware F9, all of his fans would run at full speed for about 2 seconds at power-on, they would then sound like they stopped for 5ish seconds, then they could come up to speed and settle in about the time the login screen showed up. Now that I have it, I can't comment on it in my pc, as I'm using a Corsair Commander Pro for all of my fans.
> 
> That said, if you're using an AIO, and it is getting power, your fans -should- be able to run idle for 1-2 minutes if the pump and AIO loop are working properly; that's the point of an AIO, to be able to soak up the heat much more efficiently than all but the best vapor chamber/heatpipe air coolers. If that few seconds of no fans is messing you up, then you have larger issues than your overclock.
> 
> If your pump is plugged into your mainboard, *make certain* the header that the pump is plugged into, is set to run at *full speed* all the time. The power the AIO pump is receiving should not have any curve on it at all.


Wasn't aware that aio's could retain temps that well. If that's the case I'll need to look into other settings that may be causing the bsod. Thanks.


----------



## CS9K

freejak13 said:


> Wasn't aware that aio's could retain temps that well. If that's the case I'll need to look into other settings that may be causing the bsod. Thanks.


If you're having temp issues in general, some AIO's from a few years ago (even the nice Asetek Gen 6 ones) had corrosion issues. The H100i V2 is notorious for clogging up the cold plate with corroded aluminum after a few years. Google it for some horror show pictures.


----------



## CS9K

Shonk said:


> I have also noticed a bug has anyone else seen this?
> 
> setting 3600 results in 3200 with my ram
> no failed boot it just reboots trains and comes up at 3200
> setting 3700 works
> setting 3733 works


My Z390 Aorus Pro misbehaves like this when it doesn't like some setting or another that I've input for ram timings. Hell, my ram won't post at all at 3600 nor 4000, but hums right along and is Memtest86/P95 LFFT 4hr stable at 3500 1N and 3800 2N. Keep clearing the CMOS, and make sure the board didn't flop over to the backup firmware too (if it does revert, it SHOULD go back to the main firmare on next power off/on, but doesn't always).


----------



## Shonk

CS9K said:


> My Z390 Aorus Pro misbehaves like this when it doesn't like some setting or another that I've input for ram timings. Hell, my ram won't post at all at 3600 nor 4000, but hums right along and is Memtest86/P95 LFFT 4hr stable at 3500 1N and 3800 2N. Keep clearing the CMOS, and make sure the board didn't flop over to the backup firmware too (if it does revert, it SHOULD go back to the main firmare on next power off/on, but doesn't always).


I have found how to fix it

enter bios
set ram from 3500 back to auto (System Memory Multiplier)
let it train
enter bios
then load profile back in from usb (if you set it back your self it will train the slow settings has to be a profile loaded in)
done..

I have it locked to bios 1 main reason i went for the master over ultra
it drove me mad switching bios every failed boot on my Z390 M Gaming


----------



## CS9K

Shonk said:


> I have found how to fix it
> 
> I have it locked to bios 1 main reason i went for the master over ultra
> it drove me mad switching bios every failed boot on my Z390 M Gaming


Interesting technique! I'll have to give that a try, myself.

I've tried some other tricks to get my Ripjaws stable at 3900/4133, but so far it tries to train it and faceplants. I've read around that the Z390 Aorus line (especially non-Master-s) could give headaches when trying to run ram north of 4000.

_edit_ No dice, my memory seems content to carry on at 3800C15. I'm not mad about that :3


----------



## Shonk

i doubt it would work for 3800 if thats what you tried 
it's a way of tricking the motherboard into still using alot of the 3200 sub timings
so it has to be already stable at the main 3200 timings on the speed you want to use in my case 3500


----------



## CS9K

Shonk said:


> i doubt it would work for 3800 if thats what you tried
> it's a way of tricking the motherboard into still using alot of the 3200 sub timings
> so it has to be already stable at the main 3200 timings on the speed you want to use in my case 3500


I figured. I tried your trick, but from my 3800's training as the baseline, but I think my memory just wasn't having it. That's okay though, I've got everything from tCL down to tCWL, tWRRD_sg/dg, and tREFI all set by hand. There's still some room for improvement, but I'm grateful for what these kits have given me so far, especially as the single-rank modules are the ideal memory for T-topology boards, and I got the memory kits when they were on sale for $95/kit, too! Can't complain at all :3


----------



## Sheyster

CS9K said:


> Interesting technique! I'll have to give that a try, myself.
> 
> I've tried some other tricks to get my Ripjaws stable at 3900/4133, but so far it tries to train it and faceplants. I've read around that the Z390 Aorus line (especially non-Master-s) could give headaches when trying to run ram north of 4000.
> 
> _edit_ No dice, my memory seems content to carry on at 3800C15. I'm not mad about that :3


FWIW, the best I was able to achieve with the 8GB x 2 kit I used to have (G.skill 4000CL18 B-die kit ) was 3866 CL18 stable. I could not get it to run at 4000 stable with this Aorus Pro no matter what I did. My friend with his ASRock Z390 Taichi had the same kit, it booted up just fine with the XMP profile on that board. Aorus Pro memory support is highly lacking, and that's the biggest downside to this board IMHO. Next month when I upgrade to a 5950X I'll probably be looking at ASUS and ASRock only.


----------



## CS9K

Sheyster said:


> FWIW, the best I was able to achieve with the 8GB x 2 kit I used to have (G.skill 4000CL18 B-die kit ) was 3866 CL18 stable. I could not get it to run at 4000 stable with this Aorus Pro no matter what I did. My friend with his ASRock Z390 Taichi had the same kit, it booted up just fine with the XMP profile on that board. Aorus Pro memory support is highly lacking, and that's the biggest downside to this board IMHO. Next month when I upgrade to a 5950X I'll probably be looking at ASUS and ASRock only.


Ah, thanks for the data point! While I'd love to get more out of my memory speed-wise, I can't really complain about how tight I can run the timings at 3800. 

My original plan was similar to yours: rock my secondhand board and a 9600k until Zen 3 is out, then swap to Zen 3, but I'm not swapping my GPU out for a few years, and it already pegs my 1440p155 monitor in just about every game, so I can't complain about sticking with the 9700k and waiting to re-do the whole system in a few years' time.


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> FWIW, the best I was able to achieve with the 8GB x 2 kit I used to have (G.skill 4000CL18 B-die kit ) was 3866 CL18 stable. I could not get it to run at 4000 stable with this Aorus Pro no matter what I did. My friend with his ASRock Z390 Taichi had the same kit, it booted up just fine with the XMP profile on that board. Aorus Pro memory support is highly lacking, and that's the biggest downside to this board IMHO. Next month when I upgrade to a 5950X I'll probably be looking at ASUS and ASRock only.


Can't go wrong with an X570 MSI board like the Unify. Peeps that use them are quite happy wth them. Even Gigabyte peeps having troiuble on X570 jumping to MSI and are pleased. 

MSI the best X570 boards right now.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Can't go wrong with an X570 MSI board like the Unify. Peeps that use them are quite happy wth them. Even Gigabyte peeps having troiuble on X570 jumping to MSI and are pleased.
> 
> *MSI the best X570 boards right now.*


I will definitely have a closer look at them, I'm not committed to anything yet. I trust your recommendation!


----------



## Shonk

Is there anything new with F11L Z390 Aorus Master / F9L for Z390 M Gaming / has anyone noticed stability issues with your normal settings

I have always run my pc as below (since 9900KS Launch Day)

The last few weeks i have been getting random bsod's when watching youtube Kernel Mode Heap Corruption
and have been pulling my hair out trying to find the issue

e.g. i fall asleep watching youtube and wake up to it rebooted

Sitting in the bios at 5ghz with my settings used to result in a Voltage of 1.296v,1.308v (usually 1.308v)
of late it has been at 1.284v

I have tried everything
VCCIO/VCSA = upto 1.3v
Dram Voltage = upto 1.4v
CPU Base Clock = 100.0
Drop cores to stock 5.0
Drop Ram to stock XMP 3200
Drop Ram to stock Non XMP 2400
Fit old Corsair HX750 PSU (Current PSU Corsair HX1200i)
Drivers for devices
Disable Devices
Wipe Drive + Reinstall Windows
etc.

It passes Linpack Xtreme / Prime95 Small FFT AVX and vrout looks what it has always been on small fft just under 1.19xx V
Its just unstable not doing alot

I have always been not quite happy with the VRM's on my Z390 M Gaming but loved my matx case as it was so good for cooling
I had to limit package power to 220w add extra vrm cooling fins and have a fan directly over the vrm to come on at 90°
not a problem as only stress tests took it that high anyway

So with this instability going on for weeks decided to replace the motherboard and case (as i wanted better anyway)
So went Aorus Z390 Master + Fractal Design Meshify S2 Dark Case

I am getting the same issue so have been trying to find out what is causing it again with the Z390 Master
wait for it to crash change a setting in bios etc..
and have found a reliable way to trigger it within an hour or so

1. Memtest Pro 16 Threads x 3500MB
2. Watch Youtube on Firefox

Memtest Pro doesnt fail btw
usually within an hour or so I will get a bsod (Kernel Mode Heap Corruption)

This last run i have made it to 220% Memory Coverage which at 64GB of ram takes a while
and its still running

What did i change this time?
UNCORE = 43

This may be a fluke good run that hasnt crashed
but i suspect not

UNCORE has always been stable at 47 and is still stable at 47 under full load

I suspect gigabyte has lowered the voltage table on newer bios's for the lower vid's
anyone else getting problems?



*PC/Bios Details*
Z390 Aorus Master / Z390 M Gaming
Core i9 9900KS
Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 3200 MHz 4 x 16GB

Core 1-5 = 5.2ghz
Core 6-7 = 5.1ghz
Core 8 = 5.0ghz
CPU Base Clock = 100.17MHz
Ring Ratio = 47
CPU Vcore = Normal
Dynamic Vcore = -0.035V
DRAM Voltage = 1.350V
CPU VCCIO = 1.050V
CPU VCCSA = 1.100V
CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line = Auto (1.3/1.3 mOhms)
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal (1.6 mOhms) (Intel Spec)

Extreme Memory Profile(X.M.P.) = Profile1 DDR4-3200 16-18-18-36-72-1.35
System Memory Multiplier = 3500
Manual Timings = 16-18-18-36-72 CR1 (otherwise it goes to 18-20-20 @ 3500)


----------



## KedarWolf

CS9K said:


> Ah, thanks for the data point! While I'd love to get more out of my memory speed-wise, I can't really complain about how tight I can run the timings at 3800.
> 
> My original plan was similar to yours: rock my secondhand board and a 9600k until Zen 3 is out, then swap to Zen 3, but I'm not swapping my GPU out for a few years, and it already pegs my 1440p155 monitor in just about every game, so I can't complain about sticking with the 9700k and waiting to re-do the whole system in a few years' time.


Deleted


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> I will definitely have a closer look at them, I'm not committed to anything yet. I trust your recommendation!


Something to consider, even a two DIMM board.









MSI Unveils AMD Ryzen 5000 CPU Ready MEG B550 Unify Motherboards - Designed For Memory Overclocking, Up To DDR4-6536 MHz Achieved


MSI has announced its brand new flagship motherboards based on the AMD B550 chipset & ready for Ryzen 5000 CPUs, the MEG B550 Unify series.




wccftech.com


----------



## Shonk

Ok it wasnt UNCORE it bsod'd at 225% it just slowed down the problem due to less strain

I think i have found the reason though *they have broken Active Turbo Ratios

Totally Stock Bios Optimized Defaults i9-9900KS Aorus Z390 Master F11L
Readouts are bios level*
Active Turbo Ratios = Auto (and never touched) Voltage = 1.356v
Active Turbo Ratios = Enabled and Core 1 set to 51 = 1.332v
Active Turbo Ratios = Enabled and Core 1 set to 52 = 1.320v

Voltage Scaling is reversed oopsy

also you have to actually set the cores back to auto
and not just Active Turbo Ratios to auto if you want stock behaviour again
so that is also broken

so
50x it was applying my 35mv undervolt
51x it was applying my 35mv undervolt and 24mv undervolt so 59mv
52x it was applying my 35mv undervolt and 36mv undervolt so 71mv

hence why all core stability tests where still stable as i run 50x allcore

Oh and 
all set to 52x one by one = 1.356 
all set ot 51x one by one = 1.356
so its when you have a mix that it gets broken


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Something to consider, even a two DIMM board.


I read up on the X570 Unify. Really solid board, not much to find fault with whatsoever. I also love the fact that it is all black with no RGB! I think I've found my next mobo. Thanks for the recommendation Kedar!


----------



## EarlZ

CS9K said:


> 5.0Ghz:
> 
> Average voltage while idling along: 1.290V on non-avx programs, 1.335 when running AVX programs
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration "Low"
> P95 non-avx small FFT: 1.235V (jumps to 1.285V when avx programs run in the background), 110A, 150W, 68C Package
> P95 avx1 small FFT: 1.255Vm 145Am 200W, 79C Package
> IA AC Loadline: 40
> IA DC Loadline: 105
> 5.1GHz:
> 
> Average voltage while idling along: 1.295V on non-avx programs, 1.345 when running AVX programs
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration "High"
> P95 non-avx small FFT: 1.270V (jumps to 1.315V when avx programs run in the background), 125A, 175W, 74C Package
> P95 avx1 small FFT: 1.305V 160A, 235W, 88C Package
> IA AC Loadline: 40
> IA DC Loadline: 55


I never really understood what the IA AC/DC loadline works, I may need a very layman's explanation for this but I just copy what people share here. Currently I am using something like 70 on AC and 160 on DC. How is this any different from the 40/105 you are using ?


----------



## AndrejB

EarlZ said:


> I never really understood what the IA AC/DC loadline works, I may need a very layman's explanation for this but I just copy what people share here. Currently I am using something like 70 on AC and 160 on DC. How is this any different from the 40/105 you are using ?


As far as I understood.

Ia ac/dc is intels standard load line calibration.
While llc is the motherboard manufacturers way to get more out of chips.

Baseline:
9900k - 100/130 ac/dc - llc standard
9900ks - 130/130 ac/dc - llc standard

Overclocking "best practices":
5.0 example on 9900k
1.
1/1 ac/dc
Vcore positive offset
LLC minimum possible

2.
1/1 ac/dc
Vcore static
LLC minimum possible

3. 
130,140/160 ac/dc
Vcore auto
LLC standard

Of course all of this is my interpretation of reading Falkentynes, Kedarwolfs and others on this sub.

I'm running more or less stock with 4133 mem with tight timings ~40ns


----------



## xtacb4

KedarWolf said:


> ModdedMasterF11L.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: for i9 CPUs (9***) series you can't use pre-Spectre microcodes, no support for them, but this BIOS has the fastest microcodes, and you can disable Spectre with a tool, Google it. But I'd test if it actually is faster with it disabled, don't know for sure. It might not be.


Thank you very much. Apologies for the late reply. II'm terrible sorry to ask, but what CPU benchmark(s) would you recommend to r un before downgrading to this modded bios and after and before/after disabling Spectre, to compare results and report back (I think it the least I can do as thanks/pay it forward).

Thanks!


----------



## danakin

hello everyone, since a week i got the following problem:

when i freshly start the pc it enters bios and tells me something isnt working. i have to disable the xmp profile and restart. than i have to enter the bios settings and enable the profile again. everything is working fine. today i started the pc and same thing happens again. im on default settings for everything but the xmp profile for my ram. got F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK, Trident Z 4*8 bios version is 10 i think. the system worked over 4 month on stock settings and xmp profile.

best regards, pete

Edit im on bios version 9, is it worth to update on 10 ?


----------



## AndrejB

danakin said:


> hello everyone, since a week i got the following problem:
> 
> when i freshly start the pc it enters bios and tells me something isnt working. i have to disable the xmp profile and restart. than i have to enter the bios settings and enable the profile again. everything is working fine. today i started the pc and same thing happens again. im on default settings for everything but the xmp profile for my ram. got F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK, Trident Z 4*8 bios version is 10 i think. the system worked over 4 month on stock settings and xmp profile.
> 
> best regards, pete
> 
> Edit im on bios version 9, is it worth to update on 10 ?


I would first try resetting cmos, maybe even taking out the battery.

If that doesn't work then yea update to the latest bios.


----------



## timmey1890

hi @KedarWolf 

Since I updated to Win 20H2, I am experiencing some random lagspikes, so I am thinking of a complete overhall.

I am currently running stock f11e on my 9900kf, stable @5,2 1.36 vcore. Do you think I might be better of using your newst Mod F11K? If so, could you provide me with a downloadlink, didnt manage to find one :/

greetings from germany


----------



## KedarWolf

timmey1890 said:


> hi @KedarWolf
> 
> Since I updated to Win 20H2, I am experiencing some random lagspikes, so I am thinking of a complete overhall.
> 
> I am currently running stock f11e on my 9900kf, stable @5,2 1.36 vcore. Do you think I might be better of using your newst Mod F11K? If so, could you provide me with a downloadlink, didnt manage to find one :/
> 
> greetings from germany


What motherboard? And I just checked, the Gigabyte Beta BIOS website not working.


----------



## timmey1890

KedarWolf said:


> What motherboard? And I just checked, the Gigabyte Beta BIOS website not working.


oh sorry... z390 aorus master


----------



## KedarWolf

timmey1890 said:


> oh sorry... z390 aorus master


I think L is the latest but I won't know until the Beta BIOS website is back online.






ModdedMasterF11L.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## stasio

KedarWolf said:


> I think L is the latest but I won't know until the Beta BIOS website is back online.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ModdedMasterF11L.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Yes, F11l is still latest for Z390 Master.
I have new final and Beta BIOS for Z490, if somebody interested,as TT forum is in repair.


----------



## timmey1890

KedarWolf said:


> I think L is the latest but I won't know until the Beta BIOS website is back online.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ModdedMasterF11L.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thank you very much , I´ll try it later and give you guys an update, fingers crossed :>


----------



## Jokerrrrr

stasio said:


> Yes, F11l is still latest for Z390 Master.


Is F11L any different from F11L_beta?


----------



## Qbm87

Hi @timmey1890 New windows 10 is full of stutters and lag spikes even after a fresh install but it can only get better. It's not a bad base to start upon though. Can you share your bios settings for 5.2ghz. I must be doing something wrong as can't keep mine from throttling if I go over 4.8ghz. even in none avx stress testing. Running it under a custom loop 360m ect


----------



## CS9K

Qbm87 said:


> Hi @timmey1890 New windows 10 is full of stutters and lag spikes even after a fresh install but it can only get better. It's not a bad base to start upon though. Can you share your bios settings for 5.2ghz. I must be doing something wrong as can't keep mine from throttling if I go over 4.8ghz. even in none avx stress testing. Running it under a custom loop 360m ect


Are you _thermal_ throttling? If not, it sounds like you haven't adjusted your power limit and power-limit-over-time settings under Advanced CPU Settings. Set those to the max values and your board will never throttle because of power-draw load.

I would change the TjMAX Temperature down to 90C though, since you shouldn't be regularly running above that anyway, and it will save you if you over-do it with one of a handfull of other overclocking settings and your cpu runs away during stress testing.


----------



## Qbm87

Yeah anything over like 4.9/4.3 uncore or 1.28v and I'm getting over 90-99c in prime even no avx workload and obviously throttling. Could most probably bring down some voltages like vccio and system agent voltage or whatever it is from 1.25 but running 4000mhz 18cl ram so don't know how much I can bring that down before that brings in stability issues of its own. Thanks for the help though 😁


----------



## CS9K

Qbm87 said:


> Yeah anything over like 4.9/4.3 uncore or 1.28v and I'm getting over 90-99c in prime even no avx workload and obviously throttling. Could most probably bring down some voltages like vccio and system agent voltage or whatever it is from 1.25 but running 4000mhz 18cl ram so don't know how much I can bring that down before that brings in stability issues of its own. Thanks for the help though 😁


Oh! I missed it the first go'round: You're running a custom loop!

Please don't take this as "You're doing it wrong", though I can't help but feel that something has gone awry with your setup.

For reference, my setup is at 5.1GHZ no avx offset, using an EVGA CLC 240 w/2x Noctua iPPC 2000rpm PWM fans & custom curve w/temp probe mounted in the radiator:

P95 SFFT non-avx settles in around 75C 1.270V with fans leveling off at 1600rpm after a few minutes
P95 SFFT AVX-1 load settles in mid 80's C 1.310V after a minute or two, fans manually set to 1800rpm. It would probably go north of 90 if I let it run for an extended period of time.

Some things to check, from least to most troublesome:

Using a meter or mainboard header w/rpm reading, make sure your pump is getting +12v for PWM, or is actually _at_ +12v for DC control when set to 100%, or just plug your pump into a "molex/sata -> fan" adapter
Alternatively, plug a fan into the pump header, go into your UEFI, and see if max RPM matches the fan's rating
Pull the block, clean & reapply TIM, re-seat
If you're de-lidded, clean then re-apply LM under the lid
Pull your CPU block apart and ensure the fins and the channels aren't blocked with debris, corrosion, or sediment from the fluid (even if your CPU block has an acrylic top, if you're using a colored fluid, you should check the fins without fluid in the block).

You'd be surprised how quickly and easily the CPU's cold plate can clog up... ask my old H100i V2 how I know...


----------



## Qbm87

Kinda hard to compare a 9700k Vs 9900k heat output without disabling hyperthreading. Can I ask still what test are you running in prime and the test ramps up after 15 mins in most of the tests but I'll give it a go and report back. Temps are the same as the first day I replaced the CPU block. Need some more info on bios settings as can't figure out what I'm doing wrong as this chip runs hot during prime but sits in the 50's in a loop with a 2080 also sitting in the mid 50's pump is a smart d5 so it's definitely not going to be the problem of that. Maybe worth checking the block for anything but need more info on maybe a baseline stock CPU temps check I guess.


----------



## CS9K

Qbm87 said:


> Kinda hard to compare a 9700k Vs 9900k heat output without disabling hyperthreading. Can I ask still what test are you running in prime and the test ramps up after 15 mins in most of the tests but I'll give it a go and report back. Temps are the same as the first day I replaced the CPU block. Need some more info on bios settings as can't figure out what I'm doing wrong as this chip runs hot during prime but sits in the 50's in a loop with a 2080 also sitting in the mid 50's pump is a smart d5 so it's definitely not going to be the problem of that. Maybe worth checking the block for anything but need more info on maybe a baseline stock CPU temps check I guess.


Thanks for the reply. Sounds like you're good on the pump-side of things, so long as pump speed is what it should be, at its current setting.

I googled around for *overclocked 9900k's on custom loops, and while I did see a few folks hitting 100C, I saw more than a few with temps in the high 70's and low 80's running non-avx P95 with gpu's in the loop too.

Let's try this: While we can try to compare numbers between us, it's easier and quicker if you test your 9900k against itself:

Save your current bios settings into a profile to come back to later
Drop your multiplier to 47 or 46 and turn down your voltage settings of choice accordingly
Boot, confirm settings, then load into windows
Ensure, don't assume, that pump speed and water flow are what they're set at, make sure if it before you start.
Fire up P95 SFFT, disable all AVX checkboxes, and turn it loose.

Do temps spike immediately? Are you back at 100C at 4.7 with lower voltages and clocks?

If so: That would point a thermal paste and/or mounting issue. Re-paste using the center-dot method and re-mount. Eensure you're using a quality paste (I prefer NT-H2, but NT-H1,Kryonaut, et al. are fine).

If temps _don't_ spike to 100C and your loop's water warms up accordingly over time, it could be a pump issue, too much voltage, or something else, assuming the mount is solid and paste is still good.


----------



## stasio

Master F11m on TT forum.
No changelog atm....


----------



## Smokediggity

stasio said:


> Master F11m on TT forum.
> No changelog atm....


It restores the missing "Core Current Limit(Amps)", "CPU Vcore/VAXG Protection", "CPU Core PLL Overvoltage(+mv)" settings and fixes the broken "Turbo Per Core Limit Control" setting. It also updates the microcode to DE.


----------



## Dibbler

Smokediggity said:


> It restores the missing "Core Current Limit(Amps)", "CPU Vcore/VAXG Protection", "CPU Core PLL Overvoltage(+mv)" settings and fixes the broken "Turbo Per Core Limit Control" setting. It also updates the microcode to DE.



Just popped here to see what has changed from the "L" release. Thanks for noting that.


----------



## timmey1890

Qbm87 said:


> Hi @timmey1890 New windows 10 is full of stutters and lag spikes even after a fresh install but it can only get better. It's not a bad base to start upon though. Can you share your bios settings for 5.2ghz. I must be doing something wrong as can't keep mine from throttling if I go over 4.8ghz. even in none avx stress testing. Running it under a custom loop 360m ect


@Qbm87 I´ve got quite a nice chip, with vcore @ ~1.4 I am stable @5,3. Unfortunately I had to work all week and wasnt able to flash the new bios yet.

Because of the aforementioned reasons, I wouldnt recommend upping Tj Max aswell. What are your temps under load? With a custom loop you should be fine honestly. You always could lap you ihs and get another degree or two of that way. A conservative ring bus can always help to get things stable, have you tried ring @4.3?

Anywho, the lags seem to be caused by 20h2 -.- quite anoying


----------



## KedarWolf

Modded Z390 Master F11m.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into FreeDOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F11 /x







Z390MasterF11mModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

Oh, I preordered my 5950x at a store locally here in Canada. A bargain at only $1242 Canadian dollars.


----------



## CS9K

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, I preordered my 5950x at a store locally here in Canada. A bargain at only $1242 Canadian dollars.


Yikes, that's a few bucks! I'm excited for you though! Should make for one helluva 'rig :3


----------



## EarlZ

AndrejB said:


> As far as I understood.
> 
> Ia ac/dc is intels standard load line calibration.
> While llc is the motherboard manufacturers way to get more out of chips.
> 
> Baseline:
> 9900k - 100/130 ac/dc - llc standard
> 9900ks - 130/130 ac/dc - llc standard
> 
> Overclocking "best practices":
> 5.0 example on 9900k
> 1.
> 1/1 ac/dc
> Vcore positive offset
> LLC minimum possible
> 
> 2.
> 1/1 ac/dc
> Vcore static
> LLC minimum possible
> 
> 3.
> 130,140/160 ac/dc
> Vcore auto
> LLC standard
> 
> Of course all of this is my interpretation of reading Falkentynes, Kedarwolfs and others on this sub.
> 
> I'm running more or less stock with 4133 mem with tight timings ~40ns


I guess this is already beyond me and I'd be better of just following settings and tweaking them a little.


----------



## sayoXD

KedarWolf said:


> Modded Z390 Master F11m.


Does this have fastest or latest microcodes? 

If the latter, would you mind doing a modded bios with fastest microcodes and latest drivers? Much appreciated.


----------



## KedarWolf

sayoXD said:


> Does this have fastest or latest microcodes?
> 
> If the latter, would you mind doing a modded bios with fastest microcodes and latest drivers? Much appreciated.


It has the fastest microcodes and latest firmwares.


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, I preordered my 5950x at a store locally here in Canada. A bargain at only $1242 Canadian dollars.


Wow, you must be well pleased and hopefully it will not be too long before it arrives. It shouldn't be like a 30x0 GPU order....!!!

Thanks for doing what you do with the Z390 bios


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

cano062 said:


> I recommend you stay with F10b modded. With F11 Bios, no matter if a, b, c, d, f ......., the latency is up to 2-3x higher.
> Here my values with F10b modded. Thanks @KedarWolf for the mod version  (Z390 Aorus Master)
> 
> View attachment 2461627
> 
> View attachment 2461628
> 
> View attachment 2461629


What are these modded bioses? Can you link a readme or a synopsis of what it offers over the stock bios and risks? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pinnacle Fit

Does anyone have both the Aorus master and the Aorus itx? I have difficulty getting more than 4.8 stable on a 9700k under 1.35V but I get 5.0 stable on my 9900k on my Aorus master. 

I’m not sure if it’s the chip or the board. The itx board definitely doesn’t have as many LLC options and less phases than the master. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mknopfler

Is there any link for f11c modded?
Thanks!!


----------



## KedarWolf

Pinnacle Fit said:


> What are these modded bioses? Can you link a readme or a synopsis of what it offers over the stock bios and risks?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Look back in the thread, I listed all the changes recently.


----------



## noxyd

Pinnacle Fit said:


> Does anyone have both the Aorus master and the Aorus itx? I have difficulty getting more than 4.8 stable on a 9700k under 1.35V but I get 5.0 stable on my 9900k on my Aorus master.
> 
> I’m not sure if it’s the chip or the board. The itx board definitely doesn’t have as many LLC options and less phases than the master.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I have the Aorus Z390 I Pro wifi (itx) and 9700K. 
I'm stable at 5.1 Ghz with 1.30 Vcore and LLC high. 

A few pages ago, KedarWolf uploaded the F8h modded bios for this mb, that's the one I'm using.

4.8 seems pretty low indeed.


----------



## darkage

hi
new here in aorus forum
using the master Z390 with a 9900k with F11L modded bios (thanks a lot @KedarWolf ) all ok with mem and cpu overclocking
just wondering if anyone has been using the new M modded bios and if it´s worth to update or just wait for a major bios update ?
thanks again
its nice to see such great support for Z390 motherboards


----------



## Delwyn

Hi, I'm using the latest F11m, after testing the F11L modded version. I set the same settings and have similar performance and stability, 4.9Ghz all core on 9700k with 1.32V core, not sure why 5Ghz never seems to work though, probably bad chip.


----------



## vredg

I'm running the latest bios F12j for my z390 aorus pro wifi. Have Gigabyte removed some options there since F9 (that I were on before upgrading to F12)? I can't for example find the phase control options or cpu vcore current protection option.. I know they did a UI refresh in F11, but I have searched and can't find many options that were in F9.


----------



## darkage

Delwyn said:


> Hi, I'm using the latest F11m, after testing the F11L modded version. I set the same settings and have similar performance and stability, 4.9Ghz all core on 9700k with 1.32V core, not sure why 5Ghz never seems to work though, probably bad chip.


thanks for the feedback
the 9900k i use does 5ghz no problem all bios, yeah maybe a bad chip
regards


----------



## sabac

Hey everyone, I am currently on F12j (z390 pro wifi). I am new to overclocking and everything, I'm just curious which settings I should change in bios to prevent my 9900k from downclocking? It's running at 800 MHZ most of the time even though the minimum processor state is set to %100.


----------



## vredg

sabac said:


> Hey everyone, I am currently on F12j (z390 pro wifi). I am new to overclocking and everything, I'm just curious which settings I should change in bios to prevent my 9900k from downclocking? It's running at 800 MHZ most of the time even though the minimum processor state is set to %100.


Hi!

Have you change the power mode i Windows to "High Performance"?


----------



## sabac

vredg said:


> Hi!
> 
> Have you change the power mode i Windows to "High Performance"?


Yes I did, I also disabled the energy-efficient turbo in bios. It still drops to 800 MHZ when idle


----------



## vredg

sabac said:


> Yes I did, I also disabled the energy-efficient turbo in bios. It still drops to 800 MHZ when idle


Disable Intel Speed Shift in bios.
* I meant Speed Shift, not SpeedStep


----------



## CS9K

vredg said:


> Disable Intel Speed Shift in bios.
> * I meant Speed Shift, not SpeedStep


TL;DR: SpeedShift is just SpeedStep but controlled at a hardware level. C1E and C3 also open the door for downclock/downvolting at idle.

All 4 of the aforementined settings (all C states, too) should be disabled if you wish to prevent downclocking/downvolting at idle via the bios. Setting Windows 10 to High Performance should accomplish the same thing via the OS.


----------



## OutlawII

Hello everyone finally getting back to overclocking. Does anyone have a good link for a guide? Also which bios should i be using ? 9900k Aurous Master


----------



## Kivito

OutlawII said:


> Hello everyone finally getting back to overclocking. Does anyone have a good link for a guide? Also which bios should i be using ? 9900k Aurous Master


overclock for Bios 11c


----------



## darkage

OutlawII said:


> Hello everyone finally getting back to overclocking. Does anyone have a good link for a guide? Also which bios should i be using ? 9900k Aurous Master


look for wizerty and der8auer in youtube
lots of technical easy explanation and know how


----------



## Stash

Just flashed F12k onto my Z390 Pro... instant regret. 😓


----------



## sabac

Hey everyone, I decided to overclock my CPU a few days back with 0 experience, and as you could expect, I was unable to get any "stable" output. Then I was like **** it, i'll revert everything back to their default settings by loading "optimized settings" on the mobo (z390 Aorus Pro Wifi [f12j]).
And changed a few settings...


> Enhanced Multi-Core Performance > Enabled





> Hyper-Threading Technology > Enabled





> No. of CPU Cores > 8





> Speed Shift Technology > Disabled





> CPU EIST Function > Disabled





> Turbo boost > Enabled





> XMP > Profile 1 (4x16GB Rampage V modules running @ 3200)


By only making these changes on bios, the CPU frequency started to read 4995~5002.1 Mhz in Bios and I managed to pass a 8 hr long Realbench stress test with no WHAE errors. Cinebench R20 score is 5111.
So as a newbie I got a few questions...

My PC used to BSOD during Realbench Stress test with my "custom overclocking settings". How come I never BSOD and managed to pass the stress test with Bios' default settings?
I have left CPU Clock Ratio (36) and Ring Ratio (43) on Auto. CPU Vcore, LLC, C-States, AVX offset and Active Turbo ratios are also set to Auto. Is it OK for me to use the PC with this settings? Would it cause me any trouble in the long run?
CPU Vcore is not stable and is constantly ranging (1.248~1.380) even during the stress test. Am I supposed to do anything about it?
I tried changing the Vcore value (say 1.350) in bios before reverting everything back to default settings and the Vcore value I saw on Hwinfo64 was lower than what I set on bios. What may be the cause of that?
My cooler is h150i pro. Ambient temp decreases when I open the window but it's usually around 22c. Would you guys have any comments on temps I got during the stress test? All 6 fans were running at 1100 RPM and the liquid temp was around 37.8c (I could've reduced the liquid temp to 33c~34c if I ran the fans at 1600 RPM but I'm not sure how it would've helped with the temps). Pump speed was 2130 RPM.


http://imgur.com/HrGw4CQ


What settings would you recommend me to change in bios to reduce the temps?
Cheers everyone, happy overclocking!


----------



## Sheyster

Stash said:


> Just flashed F12k onto my Z390 Pro... instant regret. 😓


What went wrong???


----------



## osergios

CS9K said:


> They probably do, it likely just seems different to me based on how differently the other settings act now, compared to the old firmware.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. I'm in the same camp. I normally wouldn't change firmware unless there were a large enough change to warrant it. In my case, it paid off: 5.1GHz is stable now, compared to unstable before.
> 
> The mantra "If it aint broke, don't fark with it!" is 1000% a mantra to live by.
> 
> When I overclock, I want push-button stability; a single error in memtest86, P95 non-avx Large/Small FFT, or Intel XTU, is one error too many. While this -does- make overclocking a bit more of a chore while I am dialing in my settings, once it is stability-checked, I can then use my PC without worrying about it... and life is good :3
> 
> 
> 
> Sure. All voltages listed are *VR VOUT.
> 
> These are what work for me. I am not responsible for your equipment, etc.*
> 
> F12K settings used for both speeds:
> 
> Ring Ratio: 47
> Speed Shift: Auto
> CPU EIST: Auto
> Turbo Boost: Disabled
> C-States: C1E, C3, C-State Limit Auto, all others disabled
> 5.0Ghz:
> 
> Average voltage while idling along: 1.290V on non-avx programs, 1.335 when running AVX programs
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration "Low"
> P95 non-avx small FFT: 1.235V (jumps to 1.285V when avx programs run in the background), 110A, 150W, 68C Package
> P95 avx1 small FFT: 1.255Vm 145Am 200W, 79C Package
> IA AC Loadline: 40
> IA DC Loadline: 105
> 5.1GHz:
> 
> Average voltage while idling along: 1.295V on non-avx programs, 1.345 when running AVX programs
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration "High"
> P95 non-avx small FFT: 1.270V (jumps to 1.315V when avx programs run in the background), 125A, 175W, 74C Package
> P95 avx1 small FFT: 1.305V 160A, 235W, 88C Package
> IA AC Loadline: 40
> IA DC Loadline: 55
> I feel comfortable running 5.1GHz as I only really game and consume content on this rig. I do not run any programs that take AVX load to the P95 "Power Virus" level. I would *NOT* run 5.1GHz if I did anything AVX compute-heavy, such as [email protected] on CPU or Video Encoding via CPU. Putting 150A+ at 1.3V+ through a CPU is not a great idea. As for video, I use my GPU for encoding/decoding (obs recording/streaming, youtube upload/viewing, etc).
> 
> Oh right, I do keep SpeedShift, SpeedStep, and C1E+C3 enabled to allow my CPU to drop clocks and voltages down while I'm idle; this PC does spend quite a bit of time idling right along. I use "Balanced" profile in Windows 10.


OMG I want to thank you i have created an account on this forum just to thank you i have same specs rig and your post just saved me at least 3 days of pain and agony you are my hero this was exactly what i was looking for.


----------



## shurpad

Hello, I have an aorus master zz390 and i9 9900kf, when I had the bios f9 I had it in 5ghz 1,280 vcore and llc turbo or extreme. But after updating to f10, f11, with the same configuration I cannot leave it in stable 5ghz, in prime 95 27.9 with avx. Is there a tutorial for f11m mode?


----------



## CS9K

osergios said:


> OMG I want to thank you i have created an account on this forum just to thank you i have same specs rig and your post just saved me at least 3 days of pain and agony you are my hero this was exactly what i was looking for.


Glad I could help! Just use my settings as a loose guide, not exact settings. Hardware will have minor variations.


----------



## gilor80

Someone can help me how to set the iol/rtl in aorus master? in asus we have "CHA IO_Latency_offset" how is called in aorus?
this is my oc in my mobo before the aorus, is pass tm5 and all the test, but when i shut down the pc to like 1 hour and power up the RTL going like "58/66" iol "7/14" 
I would appreciate if anyone would help me! thanks!


----------



## osergios

CS9K said:


> Glad I could help! Just use my settings as a loose guide, not exact settings. Hardware will have minor variations.


As you have correctly noticed hardware have minor variations and i have had my first whea error while browsing the web not while doing something intensive it is so weird.


----------



## CS9K

osergios said:


> As you have correctly noticed hardware have minor variations and i have had my first whea error while browsing the web not while doing something intensive it is so weird.


Probably not enough voltage when AVX instructions occasionally run. MANY programs use AVX instructions now, including web browsers and games.

One of the most effective measuring sticks I found for that particular type of instability was Discord. Just open it and let it run, if you see it resetting itself or crashing, AVX isn't getting enough voltage, up your IA AC value by 5 and try again. Just keep an eye on your VR VOUT though, you don't want regular non-load peaks above about 1.380V, and certainly don't want your full-load voltage above 1.350V.

If you are close to those voltages, it may be advised to lower your overclock 100MHz, or increase your AVX offset by 1.


----------



## shurpad

is there any guide to do oc to an i9 9900kf with modified f11m bios?


----------



## Main Frame

Been for ever since I've been on this site, and sorry if this has already been answered (so many pages on this thread)..

TLDR version: I updated BIOS from F11 to F12j and my memory read performance took a huge hit.



I have a z390 Pro Wifi and just updated the BIOS to F12j two days ago (coming from F11). First I went through my process for overclocking the CPU and things seemed to go well.. at least I _feel_ like something with the voltage is working better and I was able to achieve a slightly higher OC with lower LLC.


On to the RAM.. I had disabled XMP while working on my CPU OC (and tweaked some of the RAM voltage settings just to make it extra stable). Before I started working on the RAM I swapped it from A1/B1 to A2/B2, then all of a sudden it wouldn't boot. After swapping things around it seems like there might be an issue with the B2 slot. Okay, whatever. I put the RAM back into A1/B1 (slots 1 and 3) and before long I was able to get it stable at the previous settings I was using on F11. However, I did notice that according to HWiNFO the DDR voltage seemed to run a little higher and less stable than on F11. DDR voltage set at 1.34 in the BIOS resulted in the voltage oscillating between 1.368 and 1.380. I didn't think too much of it at first and figured it was probably an issue with what it was reading vs what the voltage actually was.

The real problem became evident when I started benchmarking the memory. My "memory read uncached" score in PerformanceTest has dropped from nearly 23,000 to less than 9,000. Several other areas also showed a huge decrease in performance (latency is terrible). What's odd is that the memory read cached speed is right around where it used to be, and so is memory write. I tested again with MaxxMem2 and saw the same thing.. memory read speeds roughly half what they were before. Benchmarking with AIDA64 is showing the same performance as before, likely to the type of read it's testing.

I've tried swapping RAM sticks/slots around, same thing every time. I cleared the CMOS and tested with and without XMP, several different settings.. same story. Every test and configuration I try seems to be getting less than half the memory read performance I would expect.


The only other thing I've changed recently was upgrading from Windows 2004 to 20H2, but I doubt that would make a difference. I figured before I try reverting to an older BIOS I'd ask if this is a known issue? And if I am going to revert, is there any consensus what the 'best' BIOS is (modded or unmodded) for overclocking on this motherboard?


----------



## CS9K

A few thoughts for you, @Main Frame

If you tried to load a saved bios profile, from the old bios into the new bios, too MANY things changed for the Aorus Pro (+wifi) from F10/F11 to F12alphabet soup.
Your uncached score looks okay, but your cached score is indeed low (at 23873/36081 Uncached/Cached, myself)
I want to say, your board is not doing a good job of training your memory, or some configuration options aren't set ideally in your bios (see point 1).

Some things to try:

Reset your bios. Don't load any profiles from the old bios, and save yourself a new profile for baseline.
Load XMP, boot into Windows, and test your memory... see if the scores are still abnormal
If they are, ensure no settings are set manually other than xmp profile, test again
If scores are still abnormal, set VDIMM & VDIMM Training manually (should be 1.35V), set VCCIO and VCCSA manually to 1.200V, test again
If scores are still abnormal, swap to the other two memory slots and start back at square 1.
If scores are still abnormal, run memtest86 off of a usb memory stick and check for errors at both JEDEC default speeds of 2133, as well as XMP speeds.
If all else fails, grab the 91% Isopropyl Alcohol and some cotton swabs and take to the contacts on your memory modules. Ensure you don't touch the contacts with your fingers. Gently put some canned air onto the bare memory slots in case dust/debris got in at some point.
If errors show up, consider RMA of the memory, or if other memory in your board results in errors too, consider RMA of the board if you're still under warranty.
*Edit: Strikethrough of stuff you've tried already. I promise I can read D:


----------



## Main Frame

CS9K said:


> A few thoughts for you, @Main Frame
> 
> If you tried to load a saved bios profile, from the old bios into the new bios, too MANY things changed for the Aorus Pro (+wifi) from F10/F11 to F12alphabet soup.
> Your uncached score looks okay, but your cached score is indeed low (at 23873/36081 Uncached/Cached, myself)
> I want to say, your board is not doing a good job of training your memory, or some configuration options aren't set ideally in your bios (see point 1).
> 
> Some things to try:
> 
> Reset your bios. Don't load any profiles from the old bios, and save yourself a new profile for baseline.
> Load XMP, boot into Windows, and test your memory... see if the scores are still abnormal
> If they are, ensure no settings are set manually other than xmp profile, test again
> If scores are still abnormal, set VDIMM & VDIMM Training manually (should be 1.35V), set VCCIO and VCCSA manually to 1.200V, test again
> If scores are still abnormal, swap to the other two memory slots and start back at square 1.
> If scores are still abnormal, run memtest86 off of a usb memory stick and check for errors at both JEDEC default speeds of 2133, as well as XMP speeds.
> If all else fails, grab the 91% Isopropyl Alcohol and some cotton swabs and take to the contacts on your memory modules. Ensure you don't touch the contacts with your fingers. Gently put some canned air onto the bare memory slots in case dust/debris got in at some point.
> If errors show up, consider RMA of the memory, or if other memory in your board results in errors too, consider RMA of the board if you're still under warranty.
> *Edit: Strikethrough of stuff you've tried already. I promise I can read D:



Thanks for the tips. A lot of these things I already tried prior to posting, but I was trying not to write a novel, lol.





> If you tried to load a saved bios profile, from the old bios into the new bios, too MANY things changed for the Aorus Pro (+wifi) from F10/F11 to F12alphabet soup.


What precipitated this was that I took one more shot at hitting 5.0 (i7-9700KF) with 0 AVX offset before I get a new video card, and it crashed almost instantly, then failed over to the backup BIOS (which is odd with just a CPU OC). At that point I lost all my settings, but had taken a few pictures in the past. I decided to go ahead and update since I saw something about a voltage fix in F12j. From there I started over from default settings and used what I had previously done to get a good CPU OC fairly quickly.. so nothing carried over really.

After I finished with the CPU and swapped my RAM to the other slots that made it fail over to the first BIOS I was working on. Probably not the brightest idea, but since I had a positive experience with the CPU overclock on F12j I decided to update the other as well, and start over from scratch on that one too (part of that decision was due to the fact that once it fails over you can't just switch back on this motherboard.. or at least I didn't _think _you could. I figured out if I try booting it with no RAM installed, or with only one stick (in the B2 slot) I can sometimes trigger it to fail over to the other BIOS).




> I want to say, your board is not doing a good job of training your memory, or some configuration options aren't set ideally in your bios (see point 1).


That was one of my first thoughts, but from what I can tell all the tertiary timings are training exactly the same as before.. at least everything it will show me in the BIOS and ASRock Timing Configuratior looks the same.




> Reset your bios. Don't load any profiles from the old bios, and save yourself a new profile for baseline.


Tried that. Even with fail safe defaults read speeds are roughly half of what the write speeds are.




> If scores are still abnormal, set VDIMM & VDIMM Training manually (should be 1.35V), set VCCIO and VCCSA manually to 1.200V, test again


I tried VDIMM/ VDIMM Training at 1.34, 1.35, 1.36, and 1.37 (which was the old voltage I used to use with my previous overclock).

I haven't tried going as high as 1.2V for VCCIO and VCCSA. I've never had to set them that high before. Before I had been running VCCSA at 1.15 and VCCIO at 1.12 and that was good enough for a semi decent overclock. I did try setting them a little higher, IIRC 1.17 and 1.15 and that didn't seem to help. I guess I will try 1.2, but I don't feel like I should have to run it that high, especially at JEDEC speeds or REALLY dialed back XMP (which I tried both).




> If scores are still abnormal, run memtest86 off of a usb memory stick and check for errors at both JEDEC default speeds of 2133, as well as XMP speeds.


But that takes sooo long on 32gb, lol. I ran it when I first bought the RAM and all was good. I feel like if there was an issue with the RAM itself it wouldn't be doing it on both sticks equally. I guess if all else fails I'll set it to run overnight and see what comes of it.




> If all else fails, grab the 91% Isopropyl Alcohol and some cotton swabs and take to the contacts on your memory modules. Ensure you don't touch the contacts with your fingers. Gently put some canned air onto the bare memory slots in case dust/debris got in at some point.


Did that too. I sprayed it all out before and after pulling the RAM out to switch slots. I feel like it's always good practice to clean the slots before plugging something into one that's been empty for a long time. After troubleshooting the RAM for a while I blew them out one more time and cleaned the contacts with ISO on a Q-tip as well, just in case.. still no dice.



It's stupid, because I can run basically the same OC that I had before, everything _seems _stable (only tested one hour on Prime95, one hour on OCCT, a bunch of runs through XTU benchmarking, maybe 15 minutes in AIDA64's stress test, and used it for a day doing random tasks with no crashing). Obviously not enough to say it's 100% stable, but good enough for me to start benchmarking and see if I can go higher. Decent overclock, stable, and all performance aspects right in line with where they should be, except for one.. which baffles me.


I found KedarWolf's modded F12j a few pages back. I think I'm going to give that a shot later tonight, then if it's still doing the same thing I'll try an older version.




Is there ANY chance this could have to do with the Windows 20H2 update? I've seen complaints about stuttering and performance issues from some people, but I don't know if anyone has ever checked to see if it was RAM read speed related. Seems like a long shot but I'm running out of ideas at this point. There's always a possibility of hardware failure, but it seems unlikely with the rather conservative voltages I've been running this whole time.


----------



## CS9K

Thanks for the detailed reply!

You've been thorough in your troubleshooting; forgive me if some of my original tips implied that you weren't. 

It sounds like the two options for now are: Flash back to the original bios (or Kedar's F12J) to cross-check your findings, or it could very well be the 20H2 update causing your issues (I too have heard about the issues folks are having, and haven't yet taken the update myself).

I know Kedar did an F10 for the non-wifi, but I have no idea how far back that was. To his credit, I do believe he did a few bios mods around the same time for the Wifi version, but I don't have page numbers on hand at the moment.


----------



## Main Frame

CS9K said:


> Thanks for the detailed reply!
> 
> You've been thorough in your troubleshooting; forgive me if some of my original tips implied that you weren't.
> 
> It sounds like the two options for now are: Flash back to the original bios (or Kedar's F12J) to cross-check your findings, or it could very well be the 20H2 update causing your issues (I too have heard about the issues folks are having, and haven't yet taken the update myself).
> 
> I know Kedar did an F10 for the non-wifi, but I have no idea how far back that was. To his credit, I do believe he did a few bios mods around the same time for the Wifi version, but I don't have page numbers on hand at the moment.



No worries. I've been overclocking for a long time so this isn't my first trip around the block. 


Anyways, I'm an idiot. Seems there were two new "Advanced CPU" settings that I wasn't familiar with, and honestly didn't even notice. Hardware Prefetcher ahd Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch. They're tucked in the middle of a long list of energy efficiency CPU settings that I run through and diasable all of without thinking. I flashed Kedar's modded F12j, saved defaults, tested, and read speed was still low of course.. but the ratio that it was lower than write speed wasn't as much as before. I ran through doing a preliminary CPU overclock setup, tested RAM, and noticed read speed had gone down a hair, but write speed had gone up quite a bit. That's when I went back to start changing settings two or three at a time and I noticed those two fields which had not been there on previous version. I left both of those on Auto and so far that seems to have fixed it.


----------



## CS9K

Likewise, you're in good company with longevity. :3

I -almost- mentioned those two settings given your initial symptoms, but I thought to myself "nah, couldn't be those".

Much like the Network Engineer's haiku of wisdom:

It's not DNS
There's no way it's DNS
It was DNS

I'm glad that you figured it out, and I'm happy that Kedar's bios is working for you! Those options were part of the non-wifi's F10 bios too, but they were tucked away on a different menu than where F12plentyoflettersinthealphabet has them.

Computers are silly things~


----------



## thuNDa

"tXP":
Reducing it from 8 to 4 lowered the latency by 1ns for me.


----------



## firthen

Hello all!

I'm using i9-9900k on Aorus Master with F11l Bios from the official site, cooled by Corsair h150i, 32gb Ram Corsair vengeance rgb pro (just XMP profile) and Asus Strix 3080 oc.

I was about to overclock the 9900k to 5Ghz and updated my old F9 bios to the F11l. Since the Bios changed a lot and time has passed I'm looking for help which settings i have to change and which way?? What software(settings) i have to use to test for stability?
Is the Cinebench R23 i fine tool? Or should i stick to R15/R20 version?
Also having the 3d mark fullversion. Is that any helpful in testing/benching cpu oc?
Read about the modded F11l/m bios version. Should i go with them to reach better oc results?

I would truly appreciate any help. Thanks in advance!


----------



## CommanderHK47

firthen said:


> Hello all!
> 
> I'm using i9-9900k on Aorus Master with F11l Bios from the official site, cooled by Corsair h150i, 32gb Ram Corsair vengeance rgb pro (just XMP profile) and Asus Strix 3080 oc.
> 
> I was about to overclock the 9900k to 5Ghz and updated my old F9 bios to the F11l. Since the Bios changed a lot and time has passed I'm looking for help which settings i have to change and which way?? What software(settings) i have to use to test for stability?
> Is the Cinebench R23 i fine tool? Or should i stick to R15/R20 version?
> Also having the 3d mark fullversion. Is that any helpful in testing/benching cpu oc?
> Read about the modded F11l/m bios version. Should i go with them to reach better oc results?
> 
> I would truly appreciate any help. Thanks in advance!


Currently running this board on a community supplied modded F11M bios with a 9900K @ 5.1Ghz with 64GB 3200 b-die @ 3800Mhz CAS15 ram. I use a number of Stress test tools to verify and monitor system stability (GSAT, Intel Burn Test, other AVX stress app test). I am always toying around with what i can do to push ram further and or pushing volts down to keep temps in check.

I can walk you through the processes i use to achieve this based on the info that was shared with me by this and other OC communities, but don't feel like writing it all out atm... Whats your discord, maybe talking would be easier, and then you can write it (lol)? Stuff like looking for silent corrected errors like WHEA, ETC.

Right now, i am still using a h115 CLC and direct die w/frame with LM for CPU cooling (MX4 bolts, washers, and nuts mounting mod from local hardware store FTW). I still want to get around to full custom loop at some point.....


----------



## firthen

CommanderHK47 said:


> Currently running this board on a community supplied modded F11M bios with a 9900K @ 5.1Ghz with 64GB 3200 b-die @ 3800Mhz CAS15 ram. I use a number of Stress test tools to verify and monitor system stability (GSAT, Intel Burn Test, other AVX stress app test). I am always toying around with what i can do to push ram further and or pushing volts down to keep temps in check.
> 
> I can walk you through the processes i use to achieve this based on the info that was shared with me by this and other OC communities, but don't feel like writing it all out atm... Whats your discord, maybe talking would be easier, and then you can write it (lol)? Stuff like looking for silent corrected errors like WHEA, ETC.
> 
> Right now, i am still using a h115 CLC and direct die w/frame with LM for CPU cooling (MX4 bolts, washers, and nuts mounting mod from local hardware store FTW). I still want to get around to full custom loop at some point.....
> 
> 
> View attachment 2465881


Thank you for your answer!
I pmed you.


----------



## Shonk

CommanderHK47 said:


> Currently running this board on a community supplied modded F11M bios with a 9900K @ 5.1Ghz with 64GB 3200 b-die @ 3800Mhz CAS15 ram


Seems a bit slow for 3800
Im Running Micron B-Die 1.35v @ 3600






























With my old Micron 16GB 3200 E-Die Sticks


----------



## genetic priest

Hello everyone!
Have a system based on Z390 Aorus Ultra (10g) with 9900K and pair of KHX4000C19D4/8GX. I've managed to reach following timings:








And result:








The only thing left to tune is RTL/IOL trainigng timings. So first question is - s there some reliable way to to it on Gigabyte motherboards?
Second question - memory throws some erros during stress tests but haven't seen any issues during gaming/work, is it ok?


----------



## minionod

Hi guys,

I have been using my computer for a little bit now and i am thinking about overclocking my CPU (would like 5.0Ghz) And i need some help info to get me going to know what i should do.

Sorry i am a total noob at this. lmao

*First some PC info to get the ball rolling :*
CPU: Intel I9 9900K
CPU Cooler : Corsair H150I Pro RBG (3x Corsair LL120mm Fans) //
Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Master (2x 8-PIN connector is used)
Power Supply: Corsair RM750x 80+ Gold
Ram: Corsair Vengeance 32Gb 3200Mhz CL16

Base temps:



http://imgur.com/a/kaGKpfa




http://imgur.com/a/u1NoeWX


(The cpu temps are on idle obv)

So When i got the pc i did a BIOS update (Now i'm on version F8), no idea if i should install the latest version or the latest custom F11m version (would it help?).

Second if i look online there are some things every is saying you should do :

Load XMP profile.

Set CPU clock ratio to 50 .

Disabled the following in my Bios :

Intel® Speed Shift Technology, CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E), C3 State Support, C6/C7 State Support, C8 State Support and C10 State Support, Enhanced Multi-Core Performance.

Change the Uncore Frequency to 47. & Disable VT-d.

CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration on Turbo.

Change Vcore to 1.300V.

Put TjMAX to 110°C

If this is true , Should i just do it?
If not please i'd like some info on this why and so.

For Benchmarks i'd use Prime95,Cinebench R20 & Realbench.

Already thank you for reading!


----------



## Sheyster

Has anyone compared the latest F12k BIOS posted on the Gigabyte support page with a BIOS featuring an older/faster microcode? I'm gaming at 4K now and thinking it's time to just go back to an official BIOS since it should have virtually 0 effect on FPS.


----------



## Wam7

KedarWolf said:


> Modded Z390 Master F11m.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into FreeDOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11mModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Many thanks KedarWolf for doing the modded bioses even though you've moved onto other platforms - did you get your hands on a 5950X?


----------



## Wam7

genetic priest said:


> Hello everyone!
> Have a system based on Z390 Aorus Ultra (10g) with 9900K and pair of KHX4000C19D4/8GX. I've managed to reach following timings:
> View attachment 2466604
> 
> And result:
> View attachment 2466606
> 
> The only thing left to tune is RTL/IOL trainigng timings. So first question is - s there some reliable way to to it on Gigabyte motherboards?
> Second question - memory throws some erros during stress tests but haven't seen any issues during gaming/work, is it ok?


Re RTL/IOL, the last time I checked the only way to tweak them was by luck. Let the board train the memory and check to see which is the lowest it will go. Then set the memory to fast boot mode where it will no longer try to train the memory, in that way locking it.

If your memory is showing errors during stress tests then it simply is not stable. Give it long enough and it will probably crash in a game or work when you least expect or want.


----------



## genetic priest

Wam7 said:


> Re RTL/IOL, the last time I checked the only way to tweak them was by luck. Let the board train the memory and check to see which is the lowest it will go. Then set the memory to fast boot mode where it will no longer try to train the memory, in that way locking it.
> 
> If your memory is showing errors during stress tests then it simply is not stable. Give it long enough and it will probably crash in a game or work when you least expect or want.


Thanks a lot. I thought I'm doing something wrong. 
Loosed primary timings by 1 to 16-17-17-35 and achieved full stability. Unfortunately lost 2ns of latency but this still pretty decent result.


----------



## 638220

genetic priest said:


> Hello everyone!
> Have a system based on Z390 Aorus Ultra (10g) with 9900K and pair of KHX4000C19D4/8GX. I've managed to reach following timings:
> View attachment 2466604
> 
> And result:
> View attachment 2466606
> 
> The only thing left to tune is RTL/IOL trainigng timings. So first question is - s there some reliable way to to it on Gigabyte motherboards?
> Second question - memory throws some erros during stress tests but haven't seen any issues during gaming/work, is it ok?


Hi,
Try training 3900 with 15-14-14-30 and tRC 45. Train till you get good rtls/iols. You can try manually training 57/57/59/59 6/6/6/6. After training go back into the bios, change rtls/iols to 57/58/59/59 6/7/6/6 and train again. After training go back into the bios, set busclock to 101.00 and enable memory fast boot. It is highest frequency with the lowest latency that the z390 aorus boards can provide as far as I know. It is technically 3939mhz but will register as hidden 3933 strap in aida64.

This is what I am using at 1.5v vdimm and 1.3v vccsa/vccio. PPD is set to zero using memtweak it to reduce latency to under 35ns. Your mileage may vary depending on the ramkit. Since you mentioned that 16-17-17-35 was stable for 4000 on your sticks, maybe you can try 16-15-15-31 or 16-15-15-33 for the 3933 strap.









Btw, what ram kit are you working with? I assumed you were on 4 dims, not sure how to make this happen on 2 dims because of the rtl/iol adjustment is only on the 2nd stick in the first channel. That is something you'd have to spend some time figuring out as a manual adjustment must be made after the first initial training in order to get it stable.


----------



## SlyBear

Hey everyone,
So I'm not able to shake the feeling my core temps aren't right as things get pretty juicy when I start to overclock. These are idle right now and my h150i is 30.5c coolant. It's currently 18c outside and the window is open. The things I'm worried about most are the deltas at max/avg as they extend out into load. Do these numbers jump out as problems to anyone?









Edit: A little more context: Bios is at default atm


----------



## KedarWolf

Wam7 said:


> Many thanks KedarWolf for doing the modded bioses even though you've moved onto other platforms - did you get your hands on a 5950X?


STILL waiting for my preorder. Best case scenario, sometime just before Xmas, worst case, a few more months.


----------



## justinyou

Hi guys, just sharing my experience on updating the mb bios version from F8 to the F11C which i downloaded from the Gigabyte website. I downloaded the F11C because seeing this statement - "Fix CPU Vcore and power behavior". The F11C bios is a total TRASH!!!
I was able to run perfectly stable with vcore 1.33, 5G in F8, but in F11C it will crash my game into the desktop after around 3-5 minutes of gaming session. So, i thought to myself, I might need to fine tune a little bit when using the F11C version, however no matter what I try, I could not get it to run stable inside a gaming session, it will always crash into the desktop after a few minutes.
I have then gave up, and reverted back to the older F8 version, and the PC has then running smooth as butter.
Today when I check the Gigabyte website, the bios F11C is no where to be found, and has been replaced by the F11L (published in Sep2020). With the bad experience from the F11C, I am not sure if I want to try flashing the bios to the F11L. Probably not worth my time.


----------



## genetic priest

blacknbigger212 said:


> Hi,
> Try training 3900 with 15-14-14-30 and tRC 45. Train till you get good rtls/iols. You can try manually training 57/57/59/59 6/6/6/6. After training go back into the bios, change rtls/iols to 57/58/59/59 6/7/6/6 and train again. After training go back into the bios, set busclock to 101.00 and enable memory fast boot. It is highest frequency with the lowest latency that the z390 aorus boards can provide as far as I know. It is technically 3939mhz but will register as hidden 3933 strap in aida64.
> 
> This is what I am using at 1.5v vdimm and 1.3v vccsa/vccio. PPD is set to zero using memtweak it to reduce latency to under 35ns. Your mileage may vary depending on the ramkit. Since you mentioned that 16-17-17-35 was stable for 4000 on your sticks, maybe you can try 16-15-15-31 or 16-15-15-33 for the 3933 strap.
> View attachment 2466905
> 
> 
> Btw, what ram kit are you working with? I assumed you were on 4 dims, not sure how to make this happen on 2 dims because of the rtl/iol adjustment is only on the 2nd stick in the first channel. That is something you'd have to spend some time figuring out as a manual adjustment must be made after the first initial training in order to get it stable.


I use pair of KHX4000C19D4/8GX, totally 16Gb, but have a plan to extend to 32.Thanks a lot for insight about training - Asus mobos bios is much easier to handle this, unlike gigabyte, but I'll try.


----------



## ezveedub

justinyou said:


> Hi guys, just sharing my experience on updating the mb bios version from F8 to the F11C which i downloaded from the Gigabyte website. I downloaded the F11C because seeing this statement - "Fix CPU Vcore and power behavior". The F11C bios is a total TRASH!!!
> I was able to run perfectly stable with vcore 1.33, 5G in F8, but in F11C it will crash my game into the desktop after around 3-5 minutes of gaming session. So, i thought to myself, I might need to fine tune a little bit when using the F11C version, however no matter what I try, I could not get it to run stable inside a gaming session, it will always crash into the desktop after a few minutes.
> I have then gave up, and reverted back to the older F8 version, and the PC has then running smooth as butter.
> Today when I check the Gigabyte website, the bios F11C is no where to be found, and has been replaced by the F11L (published in Sep2020). With the bad experience from the F11C, I am not sure if I want to try flashing the bios to the F11L. Probably not worth my time.


I didn’t have any issues with overclocking on F11c coming from F10, but it had issues with memory training. Using modded F11l now with no issues noticed, both CPU & memory overclocked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Stash

Lads, looking to move from XMP to manual RAM timings; what's the play here for Corsair LPX on a Z390 Pro?


----------



## KedarWolf

Modded Z390 Master F11m BIOS, Updated firmwares, fastest microcodes.






Z390MasterF11M_Modded.zip







drive.google.com





Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F11 /x

Update all from and to.


[Current version]
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404

[Available version]
EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687

Video OnBoard
[Current version]
EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015

[Available version]
EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 231
-\ Requires GOP VBT 221+ or 228+ for mobile device - Force
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
-\ User GOP Driver file
EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109


Network
[Current version]
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13

[Available version]
-\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16

─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xD70400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xD89400│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xDA2800│ No ║
╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xDBB800│ No ║


----------



## voidzito

Hi. If someone could help.
I have a Z390 Aorus pro + i7 9700k. Bios F11.
I was trying to update to f12k, as since installed f11 bios is acting weird. if i save and exit it just stucks there forever and i need to reboot manually.

But @BIOS doesnt install, gives "failed to load library" or something like that error. and if i manage to install if fails to load the FBIOS.DLL...
I tried to update from bios with q-flash, o placed the file "Z390AOPR.12k" in my c folder and tried from there but it says the file is not correct or something similar.

Any help? thanks


----------



## justinyou

KedarWolf said:


> Modded Z390 Master F11m BIOS, Updated firmwares, fastest microcodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11M_Modded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /x
> 
> Update all from and to.
> 
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> 
> Video OnBoard
> [Current version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 231
> -\ Requires GOP VBT 221+ or 228+ for mobile device - Force
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> -\ User GOP Driver file
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> 
> 
> Network
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13
> 
> [Available version]
> -\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xD70400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xD89400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xDA2800│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xDBB800│ No ║


Can someone explain to me what is the specialty of the modded bios as compare to the non-modded, and what is it mean by "fastest microcodes"?
Sorry to have ask noob question.


----------



## AndrejB

justinyou said:


> Can someone explain to me what is the specialty of the modded bios as compare to the non-modded, and what is it mean by "fastest microcodes"?
> Sorry to have ask noob question.


Updated firmwares for lan, audio etc.
Microcodes affect the performance, so these would provide higher benchmark results at the same frequency compared to newer microcodes.

@KedarWolf thank you for sticking around for this long with us


----------



## TrebleTA

Hello,
I overclocked my Z390 Master with a Intel i7 9700k and I'm after some advice, if I have done anything wrong or am missing anything recommended...

All settings are optimized defaults unless I have listed below.

*Tweaker*
Enhanced Multi Core Performance(EMCP) = Disable
CPU Core Ratio 49
Ring Ratio = 46
AVX Offset = 0
Extreme Memory Profile (XMP) = Profile 1
CPU VCore = Normal
Dynamic VCore (DVID) = -0.035v
Advance CPU Settings-->
VT-d = Disable yet enable when or if you want to use windows VirtualBox.
Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology = Enable
Ring To Core Offset (Down Bin) = Disable
CPU EIST Function = Enable
Energy Effective Turbo = Enable
Voltage Optimization = Disable
Intel(R) Turbo Boost Technology = Enable

Active Turbo Ratios = Enable
Turbo Ratio (1 Core Active) = 51
Turbo Ratio (2 Core Active) = 51
Turbo Ratio (3 Core Active) = 50
Turbo Ratio (4 Core Active) = 50
Turbo Ratio (5 Core Active) = 50
Turbo Ratio (6 Core Active) = 49
Turbo Ratio (7 Core Active) =49
Turbo Ratio (8 Core Active) =49

C-State Control = Enable
CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) = Enable
C3 State Support = Enable
C6/C7 State Support = Enable
C8 State Support = Enable

Advance Voltage Settings -->
CPU/VRM Settings-->
CPU VCore Loadline Calibration = Normal

*Settings*
IO Ports--->
Initial Display Output = PCIe 1 Slot
Integrated Graphics = Disable
Aperture Size = 128
Above 4G Decoding = Enable
Miscellaneous -->
Intel Platform Trust Technology (PTT) = Enable
Software Guard Extensions (SGX) = Enable

*Boot*
Security Option = Setup
Fast Boot = Ultra Fast
Mouse Speed 2x
Windows 8/10 Features = Windows 8/10 WHQL
CSM Support = Disable
Secure Boot = User

Thanks


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> Hello,
> I overclocked my Z390 Master with a Intel i7 9700k and I'm after some advice, if I have done anything wrong or am missing anything recommended...


There's no one option to overclock.

If your settings are realbench stable and stable for your everyday usage then you're good.

(For me the negative dvid without changing the ia ac/dc would crash on any stress test, but that's my cpu/mem combination, yours might be better)


----------



## TrebleTA

For me prime worked at - 0.50v but on games would restart or crash now stable at -0.35. What about VCCIO and VCCSA. Mine seem high by default. Will link some Hwinfo, just not at the pc now?
Also my ram is unstable at 1.35v yet fine at 1.36. I have 32gb, 4 sticks of ram 3200mhz same G.skill brand different period for 2 of the sticks.
Thanks for the help my old board was a GA-X58A-UD3R rev2.0 a bit has changed since then.


----------



## Dailycat

MyKnock said:


> Guys any opinions on new Z390 AORUS PRO F12k? Should i use it or use modded bios?


Hey my specs :

Aorus Pro Z390
i7 9700k @ 5ghz all cores / 1.35 vcore in bios / turbo lcc
32g ram @ 3600mhz CAS 17
RTX 3090 : fixed clock and vcore (via curve)

Actual bios : f9 CPU score Timespy extrem : 4489
With F12k bios : i got around 4000 cpu score 

After i saw that i loosed score on CPU, i rolled back f9 bios and got around 4400 again. For my case this bios not so good


----------



## TrebleTA

Sorry for slow reply here is some pictures from HWInfo. Everything look ok?
As you can see I have now set VCCSA and VCCIO voltages


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> Sorry for slow reply here is some pictures from HWInfo. Everything look ok?
> As you can see I have now set VCCSA and VCCIO voltages


Not really sure how your IMC quality is, but at those memory speeds you should be able to go lower. Keep in mind the CPU OC does affect those voltages marginally.

Here's mine at stock cpu and 4133 mem.


----------



## Stash

TrebleTA said:


> For me prime worked at - 0.50v but on games would restart or crash now stable at -0.35. What about VCCIO and VCCSA. Mine seem high by default. Will link some Hwinfo, just not at the pc now?
> Also my ram is unstable at 1.35v yet fine at 1.36. I have 32gb, 4 sticks of ram 3200mhz same G.skill brand different period for 2 of the sticks.
> Thanks for the help my old board was a GA-X58A-UD3R rev2.0 a bit has changed since then.


VCCIO/VCCSA goes a bit crazy if you leave it on automatic w/ XMP, glad you spotted it and lowered it - you could probably get it down to 1.1v each. 1.36v for DDR4 is fine, mine isn't fully stable at 1.35v either due to raising uncore ratio above stock.


----------



## Naastradamus

delete


----------



## Emmanuel

Hey everyone.

Last year I upgraded to the Z390 Aorus and a 9900KS. At the time all I wanted was 5GHz and the Gigabyte BIOS was quite buggy so I decided to leave most of the CPU settings on auto. I already have my RAM and memory controller fine tuned.

I just flashed my BIOS to the optimized F11m that was posted here and I'm thinking of tuning my CPU at this point. Here are a couple questions:
1) what's the preferred and reliable method for overclocking using an adaptive voltage so that the CPU can downclock and downvolt when idle? I see DVID, SVID, BCLK adaptive voltage.
2) can any C-State be disabled without compromising downclocking when idle?
3) should any of the following be disabled without compromising downclocking when idle: Speed Shift, CPU Thermal Monitor, EIST, RTH, frequency clipping TVB, voltage reduction initiated TVB?
4) max safe vCore for Intel 9th gen? My 9900KS on auto sometimes spikes at 1.332v and I'm pretty sure I could do more than 5GHz at that voltage.
5) is 300KHz still the best PWM switch rate?
6) loadline calibration setting that maintains adequate voltage without crazy fluctuations that lead to instability?
7) CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line setting, or manually set the Internal VR Control?

Thanks to whoever takes the time to answer these questions!


----------



## TrebleTA

Emmanuel said:


> Hey everyone.
> 
> Last year I upgraded to the Z390 Aorus and a 9900KS. At the time all I wanted was 5GHz and the Gigabyte BIOS was quite buggy so I decided to leave most of the CPU settings on auto. I already have my RAM and memory controller fine tuned.
> 
> I just flashed my BIOS to the optimized F11m that was posted here and I'm thinking of tuning my CPU at this point. Here are a couple questions:
> 1) what's the preferred and reliable method for overclocking using an adaptive voltage so that the CPU can downclock and downvolt when idle? I see DVID, SVID, BCLK adaptive voltage.
> 2) can any C-State be disabled without compromising downclocking when idle?
> 3) should any of the following be disabled without compromising downclocking when idle: Speed Shift, CPU Thermal Monitor, EIST, RTH, frequency clipping TVB, voltage reduction initiated TVB?
> 4) max safe vCore for Intel 9th gen? My 9900KS on auto sometimes spikes at 1.332v and I'm pretty sure I could do more than 5GHz at that voltage.
> 5) is 300KHz still the best PWM switch rate?
> 6) loadline calibration setting that maintains adequate voltage without crazy fluctuations that lead to instability?
> 7) CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line setting, or manually set the Internal VR Control?
> 
> Thanks to whoever takes the time to answer these questions!


If you use my settings above, You should be fine, You May be able to decrease DVID a bit more depends on your speed. Also windows power plan on balance to use c state else high power plan and will stay at 4.9ghz for me.
PWN gigabyte said leave on auto when I asked about 2 weeks ago. LLC set to turbo once you get a ok overclock set normal and tweak dvid. Just keep a eye on you cpu package temp and keep eye on the VROut voltage for close cpu voltage. I can go to 5.1 easy just everything get to hot. U may get lucky on your cpu.

P.s If you don't want to use CPU turbo, then you can just change CPU Clock Ratio to say 51 that be 5.1ghz and disable turbo features. 
so it kinds of depends on the type of overclock you after


----------



## EarlZ

I am currently using adaptive voltage with an IA AC/DC values of 70/160 however on 5Ghz I am getting a BSOD on low loads, increasing IA AC to 80 makes it stable however the peak voltage that can be detected with HWinfo becomes 1.370+ which I feel is very high, is there a setting that I can use to just increase the low load voltage and not make it shoot up past 1.360v ?

EDIT: I am currently using F11k GK, is F11M worth the upgrade?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> I am currently using adaptive voltage with an IA AC/DC values of 70/160 however on 5Ghz I am getting a BSOD on low loads, increasing IA AC to 80 makes it stable however the peak voltage that can be detected with HWinfo becomes 1.370+ which I feel is very high, is there a setting that I can use to just increase the low load voltage and not make it shoot up past 1.360v ?
> 
> EDIT: I am currently using F11k GK, is F11M worth the upgrade?


Yes, there is an option that increases load on idle in the BIOS, I don't recall exactly what it is called, I no longer have my Z390 board. Can someone else chip in, tell them where and what it is?


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, there is an option that increases load on idle in the BIOS, I don't recall exactly what it is called, I no longer have my Z390 board. Can someone else chip in, tell them where and what it is?


I cant recall seeing that option existed if there is then I am not sure what its called


----------



## Hawkjoss

Interesting observation - I have obnoxious coil whine on my Z390 aorus master. The only way to avoid it was to turn all C-states off. 
I recently updated the bios from F11I to modded F11M (Thanks @KedarWolf !), and not only the benchmark scores went up, but the coil whine is completely gone with C0/C1 enabled and all deeper C states disabled. 
If you had the issue with whining VRMs, give it a try.


----------



## Sheyster

@KedarWolf - do you happen to know what version the last "good" official BIOS was before microcodes went to sh!t? For both the Master and the Pro boards?


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> @KedarWolf - do you happen to know what version the last "good" official BIOS was before microcodes went to sh!t? For both the Master and the Pro boards?


I think it was back when they only supported the 8700k etc., not the 9900k and 9900ks. But not exactly sure which BIOS version though.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> I think it was back when they only supported the 8700k etc., not the 9900k and 9900ks. But not exactly sure which BIOS version though.


I think for the Pro/Pro WiFi it was F9. Don't know for sure though.

Maybe @Falkentyne remembers for the Master?


----------



## KedarWolf

Sheyster said:


> I think for the Pro/Pro WiFi it was F9. Don't know for sure though.
> 
> Maybe @Falkentyne remembers for the Master?


Oh, my bad. The BIOS's that only supported the 8700k etc. were the pre-Spectre vulnerability fix BIOS's. But the ones with still the fast 9900k microcodes, I dunno.


----------



## Sheyster

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, my bad. The BIOS's that only supported the 8700k etc. were the pre-Spectre vulnerability fix BIOS's. But the ones with still the fast 9900k microcodes, I dunno.


From what I remember the F10 version for the Pro/Pro Wifi was the first "bad" microcode BIOS where IPC dropped in benchmarks.


----------



## Driller au

EarlZ said:


> I am currently using adaptive voltage with an IA AC/DC values of 70/160 however on 5Ghz I am getting a BSOD on low loads, increasing IA AC to 80 makes it stable however the peak voltage that can be detected with HWinfo becomes 1.370+ which I feel is very high, is there a setting that I can use to just increase the low load voltage and not make it shoot up past 1.360v ?
> 
> EDIT: I am currently using F11k GK, is F11M worth the upgrade?


Power loading under the power tab in bios is what @KedarWolf is talking about. I would try first just enable C3 in states that fixed low load crash for me and others here


----------



## escape2k

Any good settings for me to undervolt i9-9900ks? Want to keep it on low temp, as my country is humid and hot. I give up on overclocking it lol.


----------



## Hawkjoss

escape2k said:


> Any good settings for me to undervolt i9-9900ks? Want to keep it on low temp, as my country is humid and hot. I give up on overclocking it lol.


you can try setting I am running with my 9900k stock undervolt profile. You definitely can go lower on voltage offset as you have 9900 KS.
I have C states disabled but you can have them enabled for extra T reduction at idle.


----------



## EarlZ

Driller au said:


> Power loading under the power tab in bios is what @KedarWolf is talking about. I would try first just enable C3 in states that fixed low load crash for me and others here


That is the only power state I have enabled, the rest are set to disabled ang C-State limit is set to auto.


----------



## Driller au

EarlZ said:


> That is the only power state I have enabled, the rest are set to disabled ang C-State limit is set to auto.


Yea that's the same as i have mine set, pretty sure when i was mucking around with the IA AC/DC i had the same trouble voltage going to low at idle and high some times i just ended up setting them both at 1 and going from there. I know it's a lot to search but Falkentyne had what the presets are somewhere in this thread


----------



## justinyou

Huh, I hear Intel developing their version of the AMD SAM (Smart Access Memory), and is going to be released to the Z490 motherboard.
I wonder if the Z390 motherboard will be getting the same treatment?


----------



## Hawkjoss

justinyou said:


> Huh, I hear Intel developing their version of the AMD SAM (Smart Access Memory), and is going to be released to the Z490 motherboard.
> I wonder if the Z390 motherboard will be getting the same treatment?


I think no, as we are plebs on outdated platform )


----------



## Emmanuel

On my configuration, F11m is bugged. The CPU multiplier setting does not work (it always behaves as 40x). I downgraded to F11i and this is no longer a problem. I'll do more testing tomorrow and report if I notice any additional improvements.


----------



## TrebleTA

Someone said to me, ask gigabyte for them to apply modern standby fixes (when C10 Enabled) on the PCIE 1x ports for NVME drives. anyone here have any more info on this. Board in reference is the Z390 Master rev1.0. as gigabyte are playing dum as normal and want me to spell it out to them?

also I did not notice anything with the CPU multiplier but with the Enhanced Multi-core Performance not Disabling unless you enabled turbo ratios.


----------



## Nammi

justinyou said:


> Huh, I hear Intel developing their version of the AMD SAM (Smart Access Memory), and is going to be released to the Z490 motherboard.
> I wonder if the Z390 motherboard will be getting the same treatment?


Intel has had this feature since haswell, all we should need is a bios update from gigabyte that adds the option to toggle it on/off.









AMD Ryzen 3000 and Older Zen Chips Don't Support SAM Due to Hardware Limitation, Intel Chips Since Haswell Support it


AMD Ryzen 3000 "Matisse" processors based on the "Zen 2" microarchitecture, as well as older AMD processors based on "Zen+" and "Zen" microarchitectures, do not support the company's Smart Access Memory (SAM) feature being introduced with Radeon RX 6000 series graphics cards. SAM is essentially...




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## ezveedub

KedarWolf said:


> Modded Z390 Master F11m BIOS, Updated firmwares, fastest microcodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11M_Modded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /x
> 
> Update all from and to.
> 
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> 
> Video OnBoard
> [Current version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 231
> -\ Requires GOP VBT 221+ or 228+ for mobile device - Force
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> -\ User GOP Driver file
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> 
> 
> Network
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13
> 
> [Available version]
> -\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xD70400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xD89400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xDA2800│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xDBB800│ No ║


I just noticed the "XMP" section of RGB on my Aorus Master does not light up with this bios. I never checked the non modded version, BUT I have old F10 bios and the top right section of the mobo lights up with that bios, but doesn't with F11m version. Will have to try other bios on Gigabyte site to see.


----------



## Hawkjoss

ezveedub said:


> I just noticed the "XMP" section of RGB on my Aorus Master does not light up with this bios. I never checked the non modded version, BUT I have old F10 bios and the top right section of the mobo lights up with that bios, but doesn't with F11m version. Will have to try other bios on Gigabyte site to see.


did you use RGB Fusion 2.0 to light it up? usually when you flash your bios RGB on mobo goes to default


----------



## Ptakx

Jokerrrrr said:


> I found an important improvement in F11L(modded)! My memory overclocking profiles are now stable at a lower voltage than on F11K! The performance is the same.


Where to download ?


----------



## t1mch3

KedarWolf said:


> Modded Z390 Master F11m BIOS, Updated firmwares, fastest microcodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11M_Modded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /x
> 
> Update all from and to.
> 
> 
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.7.0.4404
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> OROM Intel RST for SATA - 17.8.3.4687
> 
> Video OnBoard
> [Current version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 212
> OROM VBIOS CoffeeLake - 1015
> 
> [Available version]
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML - 9.0.1080
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE - 231
> -\ Requires GOP VBT 221+ or 228+ for mobile device - Force
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> -\ User GOP Driver file
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-CML - 9.0.1109
> 
> 
> Network
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13
> 
> [Available version]
> -\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> 
> ─┬─────┬───────────┬────────┬──────────┬────┬───────┬────────┬────╢
> ║#│CPUID│Platform ID│Revision│ Date │Type│ Size │ Offset │Last║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║1│906EA│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xD70400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║2│906EB│ 02 (1) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xD89400│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║3│906EC│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-27│PRD │0x19000│0xDA2800│ No ║
> ╟─┼─────┼───────────┼────────┼──────────┼────┼───────┼────────┼────╢
> ║4│906ED│ 22 (1,5) │ D6 │2020-04-23│PRD │0x19400│0xDBB800│ No ║


Thanks for keep doing this! Would it be possible to compile one for Pro WiFi please?


----------



## Ptakx

*Z390MasterF11M_Modded.zip Is not working on my Aorus Master*.

I try with native bios updater as with rufus and I received the same error message "BIOS file is incorrect"

Please, someone who can help, please?


----------



## Hawkjoss

Ptakx said:


> Is the*  Z390MasterF11M_Modded.zip supporting the 9900k?*
> 
> Is it the latest mod after official F11L Bios?


it does support 9900K


----------



## 638220

Santa came early this year. Quick OC Report for Two kits of GSkill Ripjaws F4-4266C17D-16GVKB on the z390 aorus master. Very good dimms.

[email protected]


----------



## ezveedub

Hawkjoss said:


> did you use RGB Fusion 2.0 to light it up? usually when you flash your bios RGB on mobo goes to default


Yes, but you don't need RGB Fusion. The mobo lights those areas up normally just when on and the "XMP" is not lit at all during boot up or using RGB Fusion. Switch to F10 bios and it lights up, switch back to F11m modded and nothing.


----------



## 638220

Can someone please train 4x8GB 4400 @c17 on f11L bios please and post a screenshot of the IOLs with asrock timing configurator? unable to get IOLs to line up properly for 4400 or higher at c17, I keep getting 14/14/14/13 when I need 14/14/14/14, not sure if its the bios i'm on or if i've already found the frequency limit for the dimms i'm using. I tried f10, still got 14/14/14/13. Maybe 4333 is the limit for 4x8gb on this board though since the motherboard's qvl list tops out at 4333.


----------



## Hawkjoss

ezveedub said:


> Yes, but you don't need RGB Fusion. The mobo lights those areas up normally just when on and the "XMP" is not lit at all during boot up or using RGB Fusion. Switch to F10 bios and it lights up, switch back to F11m modded and nothing.


i have F11m bios - I didn't pay attention to XMP lights - will have a look if it works for me in the evening

EDIT: xmp light works as intended.


----------



## hickelpickle

I'm still on the modded F10b bios from last year. Any good reason/s to upgrade to one of these newer ones?


----------



## ezveedub

Hawkjoss said:


> i have F11m bios - I didn't pay attention to XMP lights - will have a look if it works for me in the evening
> 
> EDIT: xmp light works as intended.


F11m from Gigabyte site or modded one here in the thread? I might try flashing it again just to see if something is a miss. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Hawkjoss

ezveedub said:


> F11m from Gigabyte site or modded one here in the thread? I might try flashing it again just to see if something is a miss.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


modded by KedarWolf


----------



## Morteen199

Hello. I just got the aorus pro Z390 and i was wondering if my VRM is getting to hoot ? its gets to 86C on realbench and about 98C on prime95 non avx2 load and about 60-70C while gaming. i am running 5ghz at 1.260V at llc turbo.. 1.1V vccio and 1.15V vccsa.. romtemperatur is about 20C. is this normal? thoug the pro had dissent vrm heatsink? 


Realbench test 2 hour Max temperatures:
HWinfo64:
VR Loop 1. 71C
VR Vin 11.924v

VR Loop 1. 86C
VR VOUT 1.254V

VR VCC Temperature (SVID) 86C

VRM MOS 63C

CPU max temp 81C

I have dissent airflow...


----------



## ezveedub

ezveedub said:


> F11m from Gigabyte site or modded one here in the thread? I might try flashing it again just to see if something is a miss.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro





Hawkjoss said:


> modded by KedarWolf


I cleared CMOS and tried flashing F11m modded again and still no XMP lighting. Flashed F11l from Gigabyte site and the XMP RGB now lit up, so cleared CMOS again and flashed back F11m modded and now the XMP will light up....too much USBs thumb drives and bios setting backups this morning, lol


----------



## dpap

So, I have a problem. I have the aorus xtreme and a 9900k

I was running F4 bios up to today and everything was mostly fine. Otherwise system is stable: I get 72c on realbench, 86c on occt. I would get one WHEA error on idle every two weeks but the system would not crash. 

I updated to F9i and now I get freezes when idle. My settings:

IA AC 80
IA DC 80
DVID +0.02
VCCIO 1.22
VCCSA 1.29
LLC High

CPU ratio 51
uncore 47

mem is on xmp

intel speed shift and c states enabled.

VRVOUT is 1.23 on idle but bumps to 1.34 or so under load (occt).

I spent quite a bit of time fine tuning everything on F4, and honestly I forgot why I had messed with the IA AC/DC llc. 

Does anyone have any thoughts? I guess I could always revert to setting the vcore manually to 1.31 or so, but any ideas would be appreciated.


----------



## dpap

an update: I tried setting manual voltage but I get errors in realbench. I went as high as extreme llc + 1.34 vid on the bios. During realbench vrvout is at 1.30/1.31 By contrast, in the settings below I can run realbench for hours, with vrvout in the 1.26/1.29 range. SA and VCCIO voltage at 1.29/1.22 in both cases.

I'm confused...the cpu is definitetely getting enough voltage (more so it seems in the manual setting than the one below) yet it hangs. Temps are below 80c in both cases.




dpap said:


> So, I have a problem. I have the aorus xtreme and a 9900k
> 
> I was running F4 bios up to today and everything was mostly fine. Otherwise system is stable: I get 72c on realbench, 86c on occt. I would get one WHEA error on idle every two weeks but the system would not crash.
> 
> I updated to F9i and now I get freezes when idle. My settings:
> 
> IA AC 80
> IA DC 80
> DVID +0.02
> VCCIO 1.22
> VCCSA 1.29
> LLC High
> 
> CPU ratio 51
> uncore 47
> 
> mem is on xmp
> 
> intel speed shift and c states enabled.
> 
> VRVOUT is 1.23 on idle but bumps to 1.34 or so under load (occt).
> 
> I spent quite a bit of time fine tuning everything on F4, and honestly I forgot why I had messed with the IA AC/DC llc.
> 
> Does anyone have any thoughts? I guess I could always revert to setting the vcore manually to 1.31 or so, but any ideas would be appreciated.


----------



## BoldStep

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, there is an option that increases load on idle in the BIOS, I don't recall exactly what it is called, I no longer have my Z390 board. Can someone else chip in, tell them where and what it is?


Is there still no way for you to expose IOL offset and ppd controls?


----------



## Hawkjoss

dpap said:


> So, I have a problem. I have the aorus xtreme and a 9900k
> 
> I was running F4 bios up to today and everything was mostly fine. Otherwise system is stable: I get 72c on realbench, 86c on occt. I would get one WHEA error on idle every two weeks but the system would not crash.
> 
> I updated to F9i and now I get freezes when idle. My settings:
> 
> IA AC 80
> IA DC 80
> DVID +0.02
> VCCIO 1.22
> VCCSA 1.29
> LLC High
> 
> CPU ratio 51
> uncore 47
> 
> mem is on xmp
> 
> intel speed shift and c states enabled.
> 
> VRVOUT is 1.23 on idle but bumps to 1.34 or so under load (occt).
> 
> I spent quite a bit of time fine tuning everything on F4, and honestly I forgot why I had messed with the IA AC/DC llc.
> 
> Does anyone have any thoughts? I guess I could always revert to setting the vcore manually to 1.31 or so, but any ideas would be appreciated.


Do not run high llc with adaptive voltage. Your idle voltage is lover then load, which is not normal. 

My 9900k is stable at 5.1/4.7 at following settings:
Llc - medium,
Voltage - normal
Dvid - +0.050

I didn’t touch AC/DC

My chip is mediocre. Give a try on yours


----------



## Stash

Think my RAM's becoming unstable, getting a (3x) boot loop on my usual BIOS settings which I suspect is due to memory training failing. Gonna try clearing the CMOS and seeing if that helps, otherwise is VCCSA worth looking at before loosening timings/increasing DRAM voltage?


----------



## 638220

BoldStep said:


> Is there still no way for you to expose IOL offset and ppd controls?


I don't believe so, however, asus memtweakit software allows for control of PPD. It does not work with all versions of windows though. Real time memory training must be enabled in the bios and ppd would need to be set on each boot/restart.


----------



## 638220

Stash said:


> Think my RAM's becoming unstable, getting a (3x) boot loop on my usual BIOS settings which I suspect is due to memory training failing. Gonna try clearing the CMOS and seeing if that helps, otherwise is VCCSA worth looking at before loosening timings/increasing DRAM voltage?


It is worth a try. If you are using a profile that you have already validated and are happy with, you can enable a feature in the memory boot mode section called memory fast boot so that you don't retrain on every boot/restart.


----------



## dpap

Hawkjoss said:


> Do not run high llc with adaptive voltage. Your idle voltage is lover then load, which is not normal.
> 
> My 9900k is stable at 5.1/4.7 at following settings:
> Llc - medium,
> Voltage - normal
> Dvid - +0.050
> 
> I didn’t touch AC/DC
> 
> My chip is mediocre. Give a try on yours


thanks will give it a shot!


----------



## TrebleTA

Just noticed something on my Z390 Master, under the Turbo per core limit control. For most of them there set at 127 limit, yet core 1 is set by default 49. should this not be 127 limit like the others. This is with a I7 9700k bios F11m RGB


----------



## iunlock

*Main Gaming Rig Z390 Master: 9900KS @ 53x (Daily and Stable*)

I just did a full cleaning of the rads and water blocks, but the CPU is just running on a single 360 rad since the system is in maintenance mode with the 3080 on the stock blower. I'm still debating on how I want to run the tubing this time around.

Decided to fire up CB R20 and R15 for the fun of it... not too shabby for a primary gaming rig running on a single 360 rad. I'll take it.







Imagine this 9900KS on the cooler...
















* Quickest @ 53x... I'll take a stab at 54x once I get all three rads hooked up.

















* I think I can top the 53x category as it's not too far off... This was just a few runs...


----------



## KedarWolf

BoldStep said:


> Is there still no way for you to expose IOL offset and ppd controls?


I'll check with my guy on WinRaid forums.


----------



## Benzema11

hello what bios do you recommend for z390 aorus pro? (no wifi)
I currently have official f10 with i7-9700k @ 4.8ghz v1.28 llc turbo, thanks!


----------



## Likecookies

Hello all. I have a z390 aorus pro wifi and got a pair of HyperX Predator Black 32GB kit 3600MHz DDR4 CL17 DIMM XMP Desktop PC Memory (HX436C17PB3K2/32) and I cannot get them to run at 3600mhz. I try the XMP and it shows it at 3600mhz but when the pc boots it is running 3200mhz. I have a i9-9900K and a 2080 ti.

Anyone have any ideas? I am on the f12j I believe bios.


----------



## 638220

Likecookies said:


> Hello all. I have a z390 aorus pro wifi and got a pair of HyperX Predator Black 32GB kit 3600MHz DDR4 CL17 DIMM XMP Desktop PC Memory (HX436C17PB3K2/32) and I cannot get them to run at 3600mhz. I try the XMP and it shows it at 3600mhz but when the pc boots it is running 3200mhz. I have a i9-9900K and a 2080 ti.
> 
> Anyone have any ideas? I am on the f12j I believe bios.


What are the xmp timings and the voltage listed for the ram kit?


----------



## Likecookies

blacknbigger212 said:


> What are the xmp timings and the voltage listed for the ram kit?


Volt says 1.35 and timmingbis 17,18,18,39.


----------



## 638220

Likecookies said:


> Volt says 1.35 and timmingbis 17,18,18,39.


Lets try these primary timings: 17-19-19-39. These are timings found on the hyperx website for the 32gb kit but with a slightly different serial number, lets try it out.

Try the following. Enable XMP, set dram/vccio/vccsa voltages to auto. Type in the primary timings manually, 17-19-19-39, then type in 56 for tRC and type in 16 for tCWL. Try to train and boot into windows. What does it give you?


----------



## Likecookies

blacknbigger212 said:


> Lets try these primary timings: 17-19-19-39. These are timings found on the hyperx website for the 32gb kit but with a slightly different serial number, lets try it out.
> 
> Try the following. Enable XMP, set dram/vccio/vccsa voltages to auto. Type in the primary timings manually, 17-19-19-39, then type in 56 for tRC and type in 16 for tCWL. Try to train and boot into windows. What does it give you?


Yes sorry 17-19-19-39 are the timings. I did as you mentioned and it still boots at 3200mhz. The sticks are samsung b-die if that helps any.


----------



## 638220

Likecookies said:


> Yes sorry 17-19-19-39 are the timings. I did as you mentioned and it still boots at 3200mhz. The sticks are samsung b-die if that helps any.


Np. Ok From experienceo on that board when I try timings it doesn't like for certain frequencies it defaults to 3200mhz. Try the following? What happens if you try 17-19-19-40 with tRC 57 and tcwl 16? What about 17-19-19-38 with tRC 55 and tcwl 16? What you try 17-17-17-36 with tRC 53 and tcwl 16?
hicookie


----------



## 638220

Also, Do you have CSM mode enabled?


----------



## Likecookies

blacknbigger212 said:


> Also, Do you have CSM mode enabled?


Not sure about CSM will check. Tried your first set and now the PC turns on but no video displayed and mouse and keyboard not on.


----------



## 638220

Likecookies said:


> Not sure about CSM will check. Tried your first set and now the PC turns on but no video displayed and mouse and keyboard not on.


Reset cmos, make sure csm is enabled. Try the first set again but with tcwl 18 instead of tcwl 16. If that doesn't work try the next set and then the third set. First with tcwl 16 and then with tcwl 18.


If no success on the first three sets, try [email protected] tRC 50, tCWL 16 1.5v/dram voltage and dram training voltage, 1.25v VccSA/VccIO

Can also try [email protected], tRC 54,TCWL 16, 1.4v/dram voltage and dram training voltage, 1.15v-1.20v VccSA/VccIO


----------



## Likecookies

blacknbigger212 said:


> Reset cmos, make sure csm is enabled. Try the first set again but with tcwl 18 instead of tcwl 16. If that doesn't work try the next set and then the third set. First with tcwl 16 and then with tcwl 18.
> 
> 
> If no success on the first three sets, try [email protected] tRC 50, tCWL 16 1.5v/dram voltage and dram training voltage, 1.25v VccSA/VccIO
> 
> Can also try [email protected], tRC 54,TCWL 16, 1.4v/dram voltage and dram training voltage, 1.15v-1.20v VccSA/VccIO


CMS is enabled. Tried the set of 3 with 16 then 18 still went to 3200mhz.

Do I leave XMP on when trying the 3800?


----------



## 638220

Likecookies said:


> CMS is enabled. Tried the set of 3 with 16 then 18 still went to 3200mhz.
> 
> Do I leave XMP on when trying the 3800?


Try it with both xmp on and off. also be sure to try [email protected] with tRC 54 and tcwl 16 is at 1.4v/vdimm and 1.15v-1.2v vccsa/io is probably going to be your best bet. Usually for gigabyte z390 boards tRC=tCL + tras but there is a chance you may be able to try tRC=tCL + tras + X, where X could be anywhere from 1 to 8 for stability. 

Also, if you were to boot into windows with XMP disabled, what does hwinfo64 show in the summary mode in the section called memory? What does it say for timings and tRC?

You can also try checking out this guide: https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md


----------



## Likecookies

blacknbigger212 said:


> Try it with both xmp on and off. also be sure to try [email protected] with tRC 54 and tcwl 16 is at 1.4v/vdimm and 1.15v-1.2v vccsa/io is probably going to be your best bet.


Tried the 3600 with and without XMP with it boots the fastets but still comes in at 3200mhz. Without it, it boots but still at 3200mhz.

I will try the @3800 in a few and see what happens. Thanks for all your suggestions.


----------



## 638220

Likecookies said:


> Tried the 3600 with and without XMP with it boots the fastets but still comes in at 3200mhz. Without it, it boots but still at 3200mhz.
> 
> I will try the @3800 in a few and see what happens. Thanks for all your suggestions.


Np. If you are unable to find success, perhaps try a different bios. I have a question for you, after a cmos reset do memory power time limits show a dash(-) or a number next to them?


----------



## Likecookies

blacknbigger212 said:


> Np. If you are unable to find success, perhaps try a different bios. I have a question for you, after a cmos reset do memory power time limits show a dash(-) or a number next to them?


I am not sure but I think they showed a number by them. Couldn't get any of them to work might just might end up taking it to the local PC shop and see if they can get it to at least got the 3600mhz.

Edit the F12j is said to have support for Kingston i believe i also tried it on the version before F11.


----------



## Likecookies

I am able to get it to boot into windows at 3400mhz 16-17-17-39 tRC 56 tCWL 16 with 1.37v/vdimm vccio @ 1.25 but when I run a mem test I get errors right off the bat.

Edit: changed tRC to 57 and tCWL to 18 and took almost 3 mins for first error to show.


----------



## 638220

@Wirerat any chance you can help out likecookies on the aorus pro? Having some trouble with a hyperx kit.
@Likecookies is that a 2x16gb kit or 4x8gb kit?


----------



## Likecookies

blacknbigger212 said:


> @Wirerat any chance you can help out likecookies on the aorus pro? Having some trouble with a hyperx kit.
> @Likecookies is that a 2x16gb kit or 4x8gb kit?


Its 2x16gb


----------



## 050

I've currently been on the f12c bios for a while on my z390 aorus pro wifi, with an R0 stepping 9900k currently running 5ghz all core (50-51(7)-52(5)-53(2)) at a manual 1.36v and high LLC, giving me 1.223v VR Vout under load. this pulls right about 200w at full load and hits 86c on my custom loop (at about 32-34c liquid temp). This also gets a 13165 multi-core score in cinebench r23 at "high" process priority. 

I am debating switching to the f11 bios, as it seems the f12 may include extra mitigations that cut performance (or perhaps I have mis-read or misunderstood?). Do i need to use a modified efiflash for that or can I simply flash the f11 bios from the support page as the f12(letter) version is still sort of a "beta"?

Any advice on if the f11 version is actually better/faster/more stable? I have had good stability with my current settings so far, but I would like to push the all core to 51. (The reasoning is dumb but I dislike how 50 results in 4.97ghz in the windows task manager, and can't find a way to disable spread spectrum bclk).


----------



## Sheyster

050 said:


> I've currently been on the f12c bios for a while on my z390 aorus pro wifi, with an R0 stepping 9900k currently running 5ghz all core (50-51(7)-52(5)-53(2)) at a manual 1.36v and high LLC, giving me 1.223v VR Vout under load. this pulls right about 200w at full load and hits 86c on my custom loop (at about 32-34c liquid temp). This also gets a 13165 multi-core score in cinebench r23 at "high" process priority.
> 
> I am debating switching to the f11 bios, as it seems the f12 may include extra mitigations that cut performance (or perhaps I have mis-read or misunderstood?). Do i need to use a modified efiflash for that or can I simply flash the f11 bios from the support page as the f12(letter) version is still sort of a "beta"?
> 
> Any advice on if the f11 version is actually better/faster/more stable? I have had good stability with my current settings so far, but I would like to push the all core to 51. (The reasoning is dumb but I dislike how 50 results in 4.97ghz in the windows task manager, and can't find a way to disable spread spectrum bclk).


If the version numbers line up with the Aorus Pro (no Wi-Fi) board, I believe the fastest unmodified version is F9, and is stable as well. It's possible the Wi-Fi model uses different BIOS version numbers, check the release dates and notes.


----------



## 050

Sheyster said:


> If the version numbers line up with the Aorus Pro (no Wi-Fi) board, I believe the fastest unmodified version is F9, and is stable as well. It's possible the Wi-Fi model uses different BIOS version numbers, check the release dates and notes.


So on both boards, versions f10 and f12 both have "Update CPU microcode SA-00295 to solve potential security vulnerabilities in CPU" as part of them, so I would suspect that the F9 version is likely the fastest, that's consistent with what I have heard (earlier in the thread, I think.) I have read that the R0 stepping 9900k has some of the security vulnerability hardware fixes, so I do not know if it would benefit from the F11->F9 speed up or not. Interesting. I may have to test F9 and then F11 and see if I see any differences, and see if the "bios structure refresh" is useful. I think that is just a gui change.

Edit: specific microcode patch note is only on the F12


----------



## greasemonky89

Been lurking threw this whole thread reading but still have many pages to go threw. Anyway managed to finally upgrade from as haswell. Current setup:

I9 9900 SRELS P0
Aorus pro non wifi
Cl14 ddr4 3200 2x8gb
Dark rock pro4
Bios f11 stock out of the box.

Whats a better oc approach going with static voltage settings or finally messing with adaptive type settings. Something tells me this time around going static is not as easy as haswell or maybe im wrong.


----------



## genetic priest

Have a questiob regarding memory subtimings on Z390 Aorus Ultra. How correctly setup Rtt Nom/Wr/Park values - there are many posts proposing set it to RZQ 7/0/5, but MB does not allow to set 0. Is it Intel or this vendor specific?


----------



## Canson

Can someone tell me why my read , copy and maybe latency is low? especially read. no matter what i do it keeps on 58 000MB/s lol.


----------



## 638220

Canson said:


> Can someone tell me why my read , copy and maybe latency is low? especially read. no matter what i do it keeps on 58 000MB/s lol.


Try lowering the 4 tRDRD timings and twRRD dr/dd timings. If you haven't already, check out the github ddr4 tuning guide. It is well written, easy to follow and yields pretty good results.


----------



## ShrewLlama

050 said:


> So on both boards, versions f10 and f12 both have "Update CPU microcode SA-00295 to solve potential security vulnerabilities in CPU" as part of them, so I would suspect that the F9 version is likely the fastest, that's consistent with what I have heard (earlier in the thread, I think.) I have read that the R0 stepping 9900k has some of the security vulnerability hardware fixes, so I do not know if it would benefit from the F11->F9 speed up or not. Interesting. I may have to test F9 and then F11 and see if I see any differences, and see if the "bios structure refresh" is useful. I think that is just a gui change.
> 
> Edit: specific microcode patch note is only on the F12


Did you end up testing this - is the performance/stability difference between BIOS versions significant?

I have a P0 stepping 9900K, using the latest F12j BIOS.


----------



## Sheyster

ShrewLlama said:


> Did you end up testing this - is the performance/stability difference between BIOS versions significant?
> 
> I have a P0 stepping 9900K, using the latest F12j BIOS.


You'll gain a little IPC (few percent) if you use one of Kedarwolf's modded BIOS files earlier in this thread or fall back to an older official BIOS. Kedar rebuilds the BIOS with the older/faster microcodes but still uses the upgraded component firmware, so you retain the speed and get the new firmware. It's usually easy to see the difference in SuperPI and other CPU benchmarks. Keep in mind that the newer microcode has been patched and is generally more secure. If you're gaming at 4K you probably won't notice any difference in FPS.


----------



## 050

ShrewLlama said:


> Did you end up testing this - is the performance/stability difference between BIOS versions significant?
> 
> I have a P0 stepping 9900K, using the latest F12j BIOS.


I hadn't yet tested as I was running my current overclock settings for a few days to see if any odd issues cropped up.
Currently i'm on f12c, running my 9900k at 50-51(7)-52(5)-53(2) with 1.37v, "performance" internal LL, "Medium" LLC. Under a full load (so, 5 ghz) in cinebench r23, I get around 195w package power (in hwinfo64) and a cinebench score of 13037-13149. I am running the cinebench a few times to establish the score variation and then will test the f11 and f9 bios as well and post my results. This won't really show if there's a stability increase but I am curious if the score varies. These are just the gigabyte bioses, so I don't know about the cedar edit: Kedar (autocorrect) custom rebuilt ones. I think I have seen his posts for them for the aorus master, are those cross-compatible with the pro wifi?

On an unrelated note, since I figured out that I had (cinebench r23) stability at 5ghz all core at 1.212v VR Vout, I wanted to try "normal" vcore plus an offset to see if that provides cooler idle temps or any other benefits. I have heard that after switching from static to normal vcore it may take another f10 to apply so I keyed in normal, +.02v, hit f10 to apply my settings, the system restarted, hit del to get in to the bios and check the settings and hit f10 again (no changes). When I got into windows however, the vr vout shot up as high as 1.394v, and more perplexingly when I loaded the cpu it sent 1.356v vr vout. Did I need to boot to windows _then_ reboot to get the "normal + offset" to apply correctly?

Does anyone have a table for what voltages "normal" applies for each turbo ratio? I would like to look at that table and then dial in my offset based on my tested droop that I see with a given load line cal. Is that not the appropriate way to do "normal" vcore? It seems like a complete shot in the dark.


----------



## 638220

050 said:


> I hadn't yet tested as I was running my current overclock settings for a few days to see if any odd issues cropped up.
> Currently i'm on f12c, running my 9900k at 50-51(7)-52(5)-53(2) with 1.37v, "performance" internal LL, "Medium" LLC. Under a full load (so, 5 ghz) in cinebench r23, I get around 195w package power (in hwinfo64) and a cinebench score of 13037-13149. I am running the cinebench a few times to establish the score variation and then will test the f11 and f9 bios as well and post my results. This won't really show if there's a stability increase but I am curious if the score varies. These are just the gigabyte bioses, so I don't know about the cedar edit: Kedar (autocorrect) custom rebuilt ones. I think I have seen his posts for them for the aorus master, are those cross-compatible with the pro wifi?
> 
> On an unrelated note, since I figured out that I had (cinebench r23) stability at 5ghz all core at 1.212v VR Vout, I wanted to try "normal" vcore plus an offset to see if that provides cooler idle temps or any other benefits. I have heard that after switching from static to normal vcore it may take another f10 to apply so I keyed in normal, +.02v, hit f10 to apply my settings, the system restarted, hit del to get in to the bios and check the settings and hit f10 again (no changes). When I got into windows however, the vr vout shot up as high as 1.394v, and more perplexingly when I loaded the cpu it sent 1.356v vr vout. Did I need to boot to windows _then_ reboot to get the "normal + offset" to apply correctly?
> 
> Does anyone have a table for what voltages "normal" applies for each turbo ratio? I would like to look at that table and then dial in my offset based on my tested droop that I see with a given load line cal. Is that not the appropriate way to do "normal" vcore? It seems like a complete shot in the dark.



When switching from manual vcore to dynamic vcore("normal"), you need to save and exit do 2 restarts depending on the bios version as some of the older bioses are bugged. If you want dynamic vcore to pull as little voltage as possible at all times, try out ac/dc loadline powersaving preset + medium vcore loadline calibration or low vcore loadline calibration + 0 offset. Usually low vcore llc is enough to remain stable in gaming but if you want to be stable in all stress tests you will probably have to go with medium vcore llc or low vcore llc with a positive offset. You may be able to do medium vcore llc with a negative offset as well. I believe that dynamic ("normal")vcore is applied based off the vid tables but i could be wrong haha. It's about a 40mv difference between low vcore llc and medium vcore llc when using the ac/dc powersaving preset. I have not tested other ac/dc presets so I can't really guide you there. I generally use EIST + C3 state enabled with windows balanced power plan with link state power management set to off or for more demanding memory overclocks I use EIST + C3 state enabled with windows high performance power plan set to 5% minimum cpu. High performance power plan utilizes speedshift by default but i've noticed on my system during idle even with cpu performance minimum set to 5% voltage still bounces around from .8 or .9 to the full amount + offset. I was advised to only use vcore loadline calibration medium or less in combination with ac/dc powersaving preset but right now i'm using custom low ac/dc loadline values with high vcore llc for memory oc memtest stability because i'm really pushing the memory clocks.

As far as different bios revisions goes, I'm on the z390 aorus master and I've tried f8, f9, f10, f11e, f11i, f11L as well as Kedar's modded f11e. I have found that modded f11e provides .2ns better memory latency/about 10-20 points better in cinebench r20/r15 compared to all the other bios revisions that i've tried, however I did have an issue that it would try to retrain my memory no matter what every reboot/restart even with memory fast boot enabled but i chalk that up to happening because I qflashed it instead of using a rufus freedos or w/e. I decided to stay with stock F9 bios as it is better at memory OC than F8 bios and I find the bios layout more intuitive and easier/faster to navigate compared to F10 onward. Stock F9 bios and earlier bios revisions also allow you the option to adjust a single ram stick rtl/iol per channel while f10 and onward only allows for manual adjustment of both ram sticks' rtls/iols per channel together. This will come in handy if you are trying to hit an offbeat ram frequency like 3533, 3633, 3933 or if you are having trouble auto training the correct rtls/iols for a memory frequency that requires 2 sticks in a single channel to have 2 different rtls/iols. I can't speak much about bios revisions earlier than F8 other than they kept failing windows installs but i think they were not designed to work with a 9900K R0 stepping chip. I'm fairly certain that the z390 aorus master bios revisions are not cross compatable with the z390 aorus pro as they have different bios options/memory oc capability but Kedar probably knows best when it comes to bios cross compatability.

Cheers


----------



## Sheyster

blacknbigger212 said:


> I'm fairly certain that the z390 aorus master bios revisions are not cross compatable with the z390 aorus pro as they have different bios options/memory oc capability but Kedar probably knows best when it comes to bios cross compatability.


For the Pro/Pro Wi-Fi board, anyone staying with an unmodded BIOS and wanting the best IPC performance should probably stay on either F8 or F9. Everything F10+ has slower microcode and newer UI.


----------



## 050

Here are the results of my testing (limited) to validate this slow down. I tested three times for single core and three times for multi-core with the same settings on f9 and f12c.









It seems that the impact (at least in cinebench r23 on my system/settings) is roughly .5% drop in single core performance, with a more notable almost 3% drop in multi core, comparable to about a 100-200 mhz all core clock drop (though due to IPC as the all core clock is the same.) There were no notable differences in how the two bioses handled a static vcore with the same LLC, and no notable differences in power usage or estimated current draw(s). The differences in package temperature were minor and within a reasonable margin of error in my opinion.

Given these minor differences I will likely skip testing F11 as it (I would suspect) is not higher performance than F9. Custom variants may be.


----------



## 638220

050 said:


> Here are the results of my testing (limited) to validate this slow down. I tested three times for single core and three times for multi-core with the same settings on f9 and f12c.
> View attachment 2471191
> 
> 
> It seems that the impact (at least in cinebench r23 on my system/settings) is roughly .5% drop in single core performance, with a more notable almost 3% drop in multi core, comparable to about a 100-200 mhz all core clock drop (though due to IPC as the all core clock is the same.) There were no notable differences in how the two bioses handled a static vcore with the same LLC, and no notable differences in power usage or estimated current draw(s). The differences in package temperature were minor and within a reasonable margin of error in my opinion.
> 
> Given these minor differences I will likely skip testing F11 as it (I would suspect) is not higher performance than F9. Custom variants may be.


Nice test data mate. Interesting to see F9 pull slightly less current/power while still performing better. Vrout low/high seems to be more consistent on f12c so i assume this the improved vcore behavior that the engineers worked on, kudos to them. Looks like you got a pretty good chip on your hands too, 1.213v load volts at 5ghz all core in cinebench r23 is pretty good.


----------



## 638220

050 said:


> Here are the results of my testing (limited) to validate this slow down. I tested three times for single core and three times for multi-core with the same settings on f9 and f12c.
> View attachment 2471191
> 
> 
> It seems that the impact (at least in cinebench r23 on my system/settings) is roughly .5% drop in single core performance, with a more notable almost 3% drop in multi core, comparable to about a 100-200 mhz all core clock drop (though due to IPC as the all core clock is the same.) There were no notable differences in how the two bioses handled a static vcore with the same LLC, and no notable differences in power usage or estimated current draw(s). The differences in package temperature were minor and within a reasonable margin of error in my opinion.
> 
> Given these minor differences I will likely skip testing F11 as it (I would suspect) is not higher performance than F9. Custom variants may be.


Want to improve your single core by a good margin?


----------



## 050

blacknbigger212 said:


> Looks like you got a pretty good chip on your hands too, 1.213v load volts at 5ghz all core in cinebench r23 is pretty good.


Thanks! I have 3 9900k in my computers and based on my tests (in which I always seem to find new info I wish I had previously recorded) I think this is my best chip of the 3. Curiously, it is also my R0 9900k, while I would expect that the P0 chips would generally do better due to not having the binning for the KS variant happening yet. 
Regardless I am really happy with the 5ghz at 1.212 vr Vout. I tested with a static 1.36 previously and it passed r23 at 1.204 vr vout but I gave it a little more voltage to ensure any odd transients wouldn't crop up. So far so good! As a curious note I just updated to F12J and ran a singe R23 with all the same settings and it hit 13202, a 1.1% boost over the average F12c runs. My highest previous F12c run (prior to the 3 for the testing above) with these same settings was 13149, however, so I suspect that this is just indicative of the variations due to unsquishable background process variations.

I have found it seems like as good as this chip is it hits a bit of a wall trying to run 5.1ghz all core instead of 5 ghz. I have tested up to 1.445 vcore (1.274 vr vout under a 5.1 ghz all core load with medium/performance LLC settings) and it still throws cache L0 errors. It may be that I need to drop the uncore or up vccio or... something, but I am not sure what. I have also tried 1.42v vcore/high LLC/performance which gave a similar 1.273v vr vout under load, but that resulted in clock watchdog BSODs. I may need ~1.28+ vr vout to be stable at 5.1 all core on this chip which is a big boost in heat. I have a full liquid loop so I can cool a lot but without deluding and such it only exits the chip so fast.



blacknbigger212 said:


> Want to improve your single core by a good margin?


Oh yes, that would be interesting, single core performance under a "low all core" load (playing games that load all the cores enough to sit at the 8 core turbo level) would be very helpful, but also just raw single core is interesting.


----------



## 638220

050 said:


> Thanks! I have 3 9900k in my computers and based on my tests (in which I always seem to find new info I wish I had previously recorded) I think this is my best chip of the 3. Curiously, it is also my R0 9900k, while I would expect that the P0 chips would generally do better due to not having the binning for the KS variant happening yet.
> Regardless I am really happy with the 5ghz at 1.212 vr Vout. I tested with a static 1.36 previously and it passed r23 at 1.204 vr vout but I gave it a little more voltage to ensure any odd transients wouldn't crop up. So far so good! As a curious note I just updated to F12J and ran a singe R23 with all the same settings and it hit 13202, a 1.1% boost over the average F12c runs. My highest previous F12c run (prior to the 3 for the testing above) with these same settings was 13149, however, so I suspect that this is just indicative of the variations due to unsquishable background process variations.
> 
> I have found it seems like as good as this chip is it hits a bit of a wall trying to run 5.1ghz all core instead of 5 ghz. I have tested up to 1.445 vcore (1.274 vr vout under a 5.1 ghz all core load with medium/performance LLC settings) and it still throws cache L0 errors. It may be that I need to drop the uncore or up vccio or... something, but I am not sure what. I have also tried 1.42v vcore/high LLC/performance which gave a similar 1.273v vr vout under load, but that resulted in clock watchdog BSODs. I may need ~1.28+ vr vout to be stable at 5.1 all core on this chip which is a big boost in heat. I have a full liquid loop so I can cool a lot but without deluding and such it only exits the chip so fast.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yes, that would be interesting, single core performance under a "low all core" load (playing games that load all the cores enough to sit at the 8 core turbo level) would be very helpful, but also just raw single core is interesting.


I can improve your raw single core in lightly threaded loads, but not stuff like p95. This won't impact 8core gaming loads but you may see an extra 100mz-200mhz on games that use less cores. You'll see the full 5.3ghz while browsing. If you set windows balanced power plan to maximum while using this your cores will always be 5.0-5.3 with cache between 4.7-5.0. This will improve lightly threaded memory performance too. If you are running anything like cam software, aio monitoring software or any rgb software, it'll suck up boost potential. Run hwinfo64 minimized when you run cbr20 single core. 

Try this:
Turbo ratios 53/53/52/51/51/50/50/50(from 1c to 8c), set your cache to 50, ac/dc powersaving preset, vcore llc normal, Enable dynamic vcore offset mode, +100mv offset, 300khz switchrate, pwm phase control extreme, enable ring to core, enable EIST and C3 state. If +100mv offset isn't enough, try +150mv or 160mv. You must have ring to core enabled for this to work or you will freeze up guaranteed. You should still be able to hit your vmin for all core while still having enough volts for the turbo ratios with the higher adaptive cache. Load up cinebench r20 and do single core under high priority, don't do r23. These ratios probably aren't gonna pass p95 by any means but you'll get extra performance every so often and it'll be stable enough to use, while your all core will still be p95 stable as long as the vmin still lines up. Highest single core score i've gotten with similar settings(bench-style settings) in cbr20 is 561 @ 5.3ghz single core. Let me know how it goes.


----------



## 050

blacknbigger212 said:


> Try this:
> Turbo ratios 53/53/52/51/51/50/50/50(from 1c to 8c), set your cache to 50, ac/dc powersaving preset, vcore llc normal, Enable dynamic vcore offset mode, +100mv offset, 300khz switchrate, pwm phase control extreme, enable ring to core, enable EIST and C3 state. If +100mv offset isn't enough, try +150mv or 160mv. You must have ring to core enabled for this to work or you will freeze up guaranteed. You should still be able to hit your vmin for all core while still having enough volts for the turbo ratios with the higher adaptive cache.


Ok interesting... Yeah I will have to check that out and play around with various options. On the pro wifi I don't think I get the option to configure the switch rate but that is a good jumping off point of config info. Thanks!


----------



## 638220

050 said:


> Ok interesting... Yeah I will have to check that out and play around with various options. On the pro wifi I don't think I get the option to configure the switch rate but that is a good jumping off point of config info. Thanks!


Ok don't worry about setting the switchrate then. Load it up and try it out . My chip takes 50mv more than yours, so if you are worried about voltage, don't. The max volts you are gonna see on vrout is 1.38v during single core with these settings which is pretty much what you are using with static vcore currently.


----------



## Canson

blacknbigger212 said:


> Try lowering the 4 tRDRD timings and twRRD dr/dd timings. If you haven't already, check out the github ddr4 tuning guide. It is well written, easy to follow and yields pretty good results.


Thanks bro, i did tweak some of the timings you mentioned. now looks like this, good right? Will run OCCT 1hour and see if memory is stable.


----------



## Giaanc

@KedarWolf can you please also mod BIOS f10g for aorus elite with Updated firmwares / fastest microcodes.

mb_bios_z390-aorus-elite_f10g.zip

Thanks in advance!


----------



## KedarWolf

Giaanc said:


> @KedarWolf can you please also mod BIOS f10g for aorus elite with Updated firmwares / fastest microcodes.
> 
> mb_bios_z390-aorus-elite_f10g.zip
> 
> Thanks in advance!








Z390AorusEliteModded.zip







drive.google.com





You know how to flash with FreeDOS and efiflash, right?


----------



## Giaanc

@KedarWolf Exactly, in fact I just flashed the bios, and everything perfect, eternally grateful


----------



## 638220

Canson said:


> Thanks bro, i did tweak some of the timings you mentioned. now looks like this, good right? Will run OCCT 1hour and see if memory is stable.


Something seems off, like way off. i'm pretty sure that your copy bandwidth should be around 60-61k with those timings/core/ring and 4 dimms/rank interleaving. Not sure what to tell you though, maybe go back to the ddr4 stability thread and see if they have any idea whats going on. You are on 4 dimms right?


----------



## Main Frame

Am I the only one having difficulty getting a decent RAM overclock on this board?

First I started out with G.Skill Ripjaws V (2x16gb) 3600 16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16D-32GVKC). Hynix chips and crap timings, but I've always had good luck overclocking RAM so I figured it would be fine. I was hoping to at least get 3800 with the factory XMP timing, or 3600 with tighter timing. After a ton of trial and error the best I was ever able to get out of it was 3500 with the timing tweaked a little bit (IIRC I settled at 15-18-18-36-T2). Even factory XMP at 3600 wasn't stable unless I increased tCCDL to 8 and increased the voltage. It wouldn't even POST at anything over 3600 regardless of timing/voltage).


I figured it was luck of the draw and I just happened to get a bad batch, so after a ton of frustration I decided to go ahead and spring for some good Samsung B-die. Last week I pulled the trigger on G.Skill Flare X Series (2 x 16GB) 3200 14-14-14-34 (F4-3200C14D-32GFX). Looking around online I saw some really incredible overclocking results from several people. After all, they're legit B-die with B1 PCB.. what could go wrong? Well after a couple days playing with different settings I am greatly disappointed. I've finally settled on 3466 14-13-13-29-T2. At 3466 what I can get out of the secondary timings is great (and tertiary timing isn't awful).. no complaints there. Even so, looking at other people's results I would have expected to be able to tighten up the primary timings a little more at this speed (and I'm having to run 1.48v DDR and 1.2 VCCIO and VCCSA to get it stable at these settings). It runs a little faster than the Ripjaws in terms of performance, but not near enough to justify the cost.

Here's the kicker. No matter what settings I try I can not get it stable at 3600, let alone anything above. I've gone as far as 22-24-24-60-T2 with 1.55v DDR and 1.25 VCCIO/VCCSA and it still throws errors within the first 20 seconds of an OCCT memory stability test. I know the silicone lottery is luck of the draw, but twice in a row.. and B-die on a B1 PCB that can't even do 3600? I know I can't expect quite as much out of the high density 16gb sticks, but I can't help but think something must be wrong with my motherboard, or something else is going on that's causing issues with the RAM.


Now I'm considering sending this Flare X back and paying the premium for the Trident Z 3600 16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16D-32GTZR).. maybe even give up on 16gb sticks and go with 4x8gb. I'm just worried that I'll do that and end up with it barely hitting factory XMP and negligible gains over the cheap Ripjaws hynix chips I started out with.



Here's a shot of the best I could do with the Flare X (I didn't bother dialing tRFC in all the way, but I know it wasn't stable at 520).


----------



## alv-OC

Hi guys.

I found that the F11L moded its more stable than the F11M on the RAM OC for my 4 dimms G.Skill 4000MHz CL17 overcloked at 4200MHz timings 16 17 17 37 | tRFC 300 | However the latest one its a little more stable on the CPU side allowing lower voltages on Dynamic VCore...










When I was using just 2 dimms I could achieve 4200MHz 16 16 30 | tRFC 320 | but for some reason with all 4 dimms its not stable and needs way more VCCIO and VCCSA, 1.210v for 2 dimms and 1.340 for 4 dimms... isnt it wierd? its soppusoed that the Master Z390 due to the memory slots design should do better on 4 RAM sticks right?


----------



## 638220

alv-OC said:


> Hi guys.
> 
> I found that the F11L moded its more stable than the F11M on the RAM OC for my 4 dimms G.Skill 4000MHz CL17 overcloked at 4200MHz timings 16 17 17 37 | tRFC 300 | However the latest one its a little more stable on the CPU side allowing lower voltages on Dynamic VCore...
> 
> View attachment 2471523
> 
> 
> When I was using just 2 dimms I could achieve 4200MHz 16 16 30 | tRFC 320 | but for some reason with all 4 dimms its not stable and needs way more VCCIO and VCCSA, 1.210v for 2 dimms and 1.340 for 4 dimms... isnt it wierd? its soppusoed that the Master Z390 due to the memory slots design should do better on 4 RAM sticks right?


 I think 4 sticks might want more sa/io in general compared to 2 sticks. I also think ram/pcb could possibly play a role because For c17 4257 on my old kit I needed 1.35v sa/io, but for c17 4266 on my new kit it needs 1.3v sa/io, this makes me think higher binned dimms may not need as much io/sa but i only have this one experience so i don't know. or perhaps it was because on my old kit i had to use 103 busclock to hit 4257 and the busclock increased the system agent clock so maybe the system agent clock increase is why i needed more volts i dunno.


----------



## The Pook

alv-OC said:


> When I was using just 2 dimms I could achieve 4200MHz 16 16 30 | tRFC 320 | but for some reason with all 4 dimms its not stable and needs way more VCCIO and VCCSA, 1.210v for 2 dimms and 1.340 for 4 dimms... isnt it wierd? its soppusoed that the Master Z390 due to the memory slots design should do better on 4 RAM sticks right?


I'm running 4133 on 4 DIMMs with 1.25v VCCIO/SA on an Aorus Ultra just fine here. With 2 sticks I was running 1.2v but I was on a different motherboard (Taichi) and it couldn't handle 4 sticks >3600.

Both my kits will do 4133 15-16-16 1T when running 8x2 but when 8x4 things get unhappy tighter than 4133 16-18-18 2T.

How do you know the motherboard specifically is what's holding things back?


----------



## 638220

The Pook said:


> I'm running 4133 on 4 DIMMs with 1.25v VCCIO/SA on an Aorus Ultra just fine here. With 2 sticks I was running 1.2v but I was on a different motherboard (Taichi) and it couldn't handle 4 sticks >3600.
> 
> Both my kits will do 4133 15-16-16 1T when running 8x2 but when 8x4 things get unhappy tighter than 4133 16-18-18 2T.
> 
> How do you know the motherboard specifically is what's holding things back?


EDIT nvm i totally misread that silly me.


----------



## Sheyster

Main Frame said:


> Am I the only one having difficulty getting a decent RAM overclock on this board?
> 
> First I started out with G.Skill Ripjaws V (2x16gb) 3600 16-19-19-39 (F4-3600C16D-32GVKC). Hynix chips and crap timings, but I've always had good luck overclocking RAM so I figured it would be fine. I was hoping to at least get 3800 with the factory XMP timing, or 3600 with tighter timing. After a ton of trial and error the best I was ever able to get out of it was 3500 with the timing tweaked a little bit (IIRC I settled at 15-18-18-36-T2). Even factory XMP at 3600 wasn't stable unless I increased tCCDL to 8 and increased the voltage. It wouldn't even POST at anything over 3600 regardless of timing/voltage).
> 
> 
> I figured it was luck of the draw and I just happened to get a bad batch, so after a ton of frustration I decided to go ahead and spring for some good Samsung B-die. Last week I pulled the trigger on G.Skill Flare X Series (2 x 16GB) 3200 14-14-14-34 (F4-3200C14D-32GFX). Looking around online I saw some really incredible overclocking results from several people. After all, they're legit B-die with B1 PCB.. what could go wrong? Well after a couple days playing with different settings I am greatly disappointed. I've finally settled on 3466 14-13-13-29-T2. At 3466 what I can get out of the secondary timings is great (and tertiary timing isn't awful).. no complaints there. Even so, looking at other people's results I would have expected to be able to tighten up the primary timings a little more at this speed (and I'm having to run 1.48v DDR and 1.2 VCCIO and VCCSA to get it stable at these settings). It runs a little faster than the Ripjaws in terms of performance, but not near enough to justify the cost.
> 
> Here's the kicker. No matter what settings I try I can not get it stable at 3600, let alone anything above. I've gone as far as 22-24-24-60-T2 with 1.55v DDR and 1.25 VCCIO/VCCSA and it still throws errors within the first 20 seconds of an OCCT memory stability test. I know the silicone lottery is luck of the draw, but twice in a row.. and B-die on a B1 PCB that can't even do 3600? I know I can't expect quite as much out of the high density 16gb sticks, but I can't help but think something must be wrong with my motherboard, or something else is going on that's causing issues with the RAM.
> 
> 
> Now I'm considering sending this Flare X back and paying the premium for the Trident Z 3600 16-16-16-36 (F4-3600C16D-32GTZR).. maybe even give up on 16gb sticks and go with 4x8gb. I'm just worried that I'll do that and end up with it barely hitting factory XMP and negligible gains over the cheap Ripjaws hynix chips I started out with.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a shot of the best I could do with the Flare X (I didn't bother dialing tRFC in all the way, but I know it wasn't stable at 520).
> View attachment 2471339


The Aorus Pro/Pro Wi-Fi are notoriously bad for memory OC. Best I could do was 3866 with a good 2x8GB 4000 kit. I eventually upgraded to 32GB b-die and settled on 3600 CL15. Good enough for gaming! The Master is much better for memory OC and support in general.


----------



## 050

After following black's advice on changing over to normal+offset voltage instead of fixed manual voltage, I have actually had fairly good sucesses with a 5.1ghz all core that downclocks to cap at 180w under sustained loads, which is nice. I have however run into a new (odd) issue. My core 0 is occasionally (frequently?) dropping to 800mhz. This does happen mostly at idle, but it seems to flicker fast so it is difficult to tell if it is happening in games.
For some reason, for the first 1 min or so after boot, my clock multipliers are correctly 51-53. After about a minute, core 0 (and only core 0) drops occasionally to 800mhz. This seems to have the effect of causing the windows task manager to report the speed as sub-5ghz (I suspect as an average speed, due to these occasional flickers down to 800mhz.)
I tried disabling EIST but that didn't fix it, my windows power plan is on high performance and I haven't seen this behavior before. I suspect there's something I mis-configured slightly but I'm unsure what would cause this. If I fully disable all c-states that seems to prevent this downclocking, but it also seems that prevents the cpu from seeing some cores as "idle" and clocking up the others to 5.2 or 5.3ghz. Not entirely ideal.
I Have previously run my system with a manual static vcore, but have been testing with a "normal + offset" voltage. I'm using a Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wifi, and this is an R0 stepping 9900k. With the normal+ offset I tested a windows balanced power plan, and it correctly allowed all of the cores to down-clock at idle, but after switching back to a high performance power plan, it seems somehow like core 0 is still behaving like it should clock down. Not to intermediate frequencies either, just straight to 800mhz. 

Any tips or suggestions for missed settings? Thanks!


----------



## 638220

Higher quality dimms = higher chances of hitting max advertised motherboard speeds.


050 said:


> View attachment 2471642
> 
> 
> After following black's advice on changing over to normal+offset voltage instead of fixed manual voltage, I have actually had fairly good sucesses with a 5.1ghz all core that downclocks to cap at 180w under sustained loads, which is nice. I have however run into a new (odd) issue. My core 0 is occasionally (frequently?) dropping to 800mhz. This does happen mostly at idle, but it seems to flicker fast so it is difficult to tell if it is happening in games.
> For some reason, for the first 1 min or so after boot, my clock multipliers are correctly 51-53. After about a minute, core 0 (and only core 0) drops occasionally to 800mhz. This seems to have the effect of causing the windows task manager to report the speed as sub-5ghz (I suspect as an average speed, due to these occasional flickers down to 800mhz.)
> I tried disabling EIST but that didn't fix it, my windows power plan is on high performance and I haven't seen this behavior before. I suspect there's something I mis-configured slightly but I'm unsure what would cause this. If I fully disable all c-states that seems to prevent this downclocking, but it also seems that prevents the cpu from seeing some cores as "idle" and clocking up the others to 5.2 or 5.3ghz. Not entirely ideal.
> I Have previously run my system with a manual static vcore, but have been testing with a "normal + offset" voltage. I'm using a Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wifi, and this is an R0 stepping 9900k. With the normal+ offset I tested a windows balanced power plan, and it correctly allowed all of the cores to down-clock at idle, but after switching back to a high performance power plan, it seems somehow like core 0 is still behaving like it should clock down. Not to intermediate frequencies either, just straight to 800mhz.
> 
> Any tips or suggestions for missed settings? Thanks!


You need C3 enabled or EIST + C3 enabled for the different turbo ratios/ring to core adaptive cache ratio to work. As far as the one core downclocking, i have no idea. You can also try enabling speedshift + C3 instead of EIST. I haven't messed around with those types of configurations in awhile but If i recall correctly, I used the program throttlestop to set speedshift EPP to zero + disabled all memory mapped turbo/power limits + used windows maximum performance plan at 100% cpu minimum, this gave the highest performance in benchmarks and always kept every single core boosting as much as possible(this kept all the cores boosted at the max single core ratio set in bios during idle and boost would adjust based on the load demands of the cpu to match the set turbo boost multipliers. I think general consensus these days is to not use throttlestop though because of plundervolt or w/e. Just one thing to remind you of is that extra programs like cam or rgb software or even msi afterburner being open may prevent you from seeing your cores hit the maximum boost ratio.

Also, if you want an extra 100mhz on single core and an extra 100mhz on the adaptive ring/cache, 5.4ghz singlecore/5.1ghz ring/cache, disable hyperthreading. ratios would look something like 54/54/53/52/52/51/51/51 with cache ratio set to 51 with ring to core enabled. It took me a +160mv offset for this configuration to be occtlarge avx2 stable at 51x all core/4.8ghz adaptive ring/cache on my chip which still allowed me to meet the vmin perfectly for occtlarge avx2 for 51x all core. Single core score topped out at 571 for 5.4ghz with 5.1ghz adaptive ring/cache in cbr20 set to high priority at 72c or 74c ambient with this configuration and was stable in all lightly threaded workloads as well as throttlestop's single core benchmarks/stress tests without any whea/internal cpu errors or cache hierarchy errors in hwinfo64/windows event viewer , however was unstable in p95 or occtlarge avx2 single core stress tests(which is fine because it was only intended for light workloads anyway). Same ratios for 5.5ghz single core were doable but required up to 1.52v load volts on my chip during cbr20 single core test and was extremely sensitive to ambient.

The singlecore/adaptive ring/cache latency/bandwidth boost is rather strong in aida64/geekbench3 with these types of configurations. It makes it easier to hit 95% scaling on aida64 copy bandwidth for daily memory OCs. On average, an extra 100mhz on the cores/cache translated to .3ns lower latency during my testing.
Seems like you got a pretty good chip on your hands, nice low vrout.


----------



## Sheyster

050 said:


> View attachment 2471642
> 
> 
> After following black's advice on changing over to normal+offset voltage instead of fixed manual voltage, I have actually had fairly good sucesses with a 5.1ghz all core that downclocks to cap at 180w under sustained loads, which is nice. I have however run into a new (odd) issue. My core 0 is occasionally (frequently?) dropping to 800mhz. This does happen mostly at idle, but it seems to flicker fast so it is difficult to tell if it is happening in games.
> For some reason, for the first 1 min or so after boot, my clock multipliers are correctly 51-53. After about a minute, core 0 (and only core 0) drops occasionally to 800mhz. This seems to have the effect of causing the windows task manager to report the speed as sub-5ghz (I suspect as an average speed, due to these occasional flickers down to 800mhz.)
> I tried disabling EIST but that didn't fix it, my windows power plan is on high performance and I haven't seen this behavior before. I suspect there's something I mis-configured slightly but I'm unsure what would cause this. If I fully disable all c-states that seems to prevent this downclocking, but it also seems that prevents the cpu from seeing some cores as "idle" and clocking up the others to 5.2 or 5.3ghz. Not entirely ideal.
> I Have previously run my system with a manual static vcore, but have been testing with a "normal + offset" voltage. I'm using a Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wifi, and this is an R0 stepping 9900k. With the normal+ offset I tested a windows balanced power plan, and it correctly allowed all of the cores to down-clock at idle, but after switching back to a high performance power plan, it seems somehow like core 0 is still behaving like it should clock down. Not to intermediate frequencies either, just straight to 800mhz.
> 
> Any tips or suggestions for missed settings? Thanks!


If you think the OC is stable, run a CPU heavy game and/or Realbench for an hour, then make sure you have no WHEA errors in the Windows event viewer.


----------



## alv-OC

The Pook said:


> How do you know the motherboard specifically is what's holding things back?


Basically the tipology on the MoBo, it could be either Daysichain or T-tipology, I never remember wich is wich, but im pretty sure that the Aorus Master Z390 is the one that likes 4 dimms more than 2, so in theory, as long as the IMC of the chip its at least "just fine", it should do better with 4.


----------



## The Pook

that's not what I'm asking, I'm asking you how you know the _motherboard_ is what's holding you back.

I guess more directly: how do you know your IMC doesn't suck?

Gigabyte's Aorus line Z390 boards should all be t-topology, fwiw.


----------



## alv-OC

The Pook said:


> that's not what I'm asking, I'm asking you how you know the _motherboard_ is what's holding you back.
> 
> I guess more directly: how do you know your IMC doesn't suck?
> 
> Gigabyte's Aorus line Z390 boards should all be t-topology, fwiw.


I dont really know, but the fact that it does do better on 2 dimms than 4 leads me to think that, maybe its not even the MoBo.I have in mind trying one of the previous Bios moded like F9 or F10, but last week I already spent so much time tunning the OC on the RAM that i'm just on the mood for playing a bit, this **** its so time consuming 😒


----------



## 050

050 said:


> View attachment 2471642
> 
> 
> After following black's advice on changing over to normal+offset voltage instead of fixed manual voltage, I have actually had fairly good sucesses with a 5.1ghz all core that downclocks to cap at 180w under sustained loads, which is nice. I have however run into a new (odd) issue. My core 0 is occasionally (frequently?) dropping to 800mhz. This does happen mostly at idle, but it seems to flicker fast so it is difficult to tell if it is happening in games.
> For some reason, for the first 1 min or so after boot, my clock multipliers are correctly 51-53. After about a minute, core 0 (and only core 0) drops occasionally to 800mhz. This seems to have the effect of causing the windows task manager to report the speed as sub-5ghz (I suspect as an average speed, due to these occasional flickers down to 800mhz.)
> I tried disabling EIST but that didn't fix it, my windows power plan is on high performance and I haven't seen this behavior before. I suspect there's something I mis-configured slightly but I'm unsure what would cause this. If I fully disable all c-states that seems to prevent this downclocking, but it also seems that prevents the cpu from seeing some cores as "idle" and clocking up the others to 5.2 or 5.3ghz. Not entirely ideal.
> I Have previously run my system with a manual static vcore, but have been testing with a "normal + offset" voltage. I'm using a Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wifi, and this is an R0 stepping 9900k. With the normal+ offset I tested a windows balanced power plan, and it correctly allowed all of the cores to down-clock at idle, but after switching back to a high performance power plan, it seems somehow like core 0 is still behaving like it should clock down. Not to intermediate frequencies either, just straight to 800mhz.
> 
> Any tips or suggestions for missed settings? Thanks!


I have tested with a manual static vcore, and the issue goes away. When I switch no settings other than changing to Normal vcore+offset, I see this behavior. This seems to happen on both performance LL and power save, so it isn't a hidden setting on the LL presets. Odd, but I guess I'll stick to a static vcore for now then.


----------



## 638220

I'm currently revisiting switchrate testing on the z390 aorus master with memory overclocking in p95 large fft 320k-4096k, 90% ram under load(about 30gb). I usually use 300khz but this time i'm trying auto, which i'm pretty sure defaults to 400khz. I've got 5ghz all core, 4.6ghz cache with c17-4400 on the chopping block right now.

EDIT: we passed, yay.


----------



## EarlZ

I am currently on F11j GK, is F11m the latest/best bios out there? I am not doing any extreme overclocking, Just wanted to see if there is something worth while to upgrade


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> I am currently on F11j GK, is F11m the latest/best bios out there? I am not doing any extreme overclocking, Just wanted to see if there is something worth while to upgrade











GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums


Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...




www.tweaktownforum.com


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums
> 
> 
> Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tweaktownforum.com


Thanks looks like F11M is still the most recent bios, Is your F11M modded bios only flashable via Rufus and not Qflash ?

EDIT: Flashed via Rufus and it was giving me a warning of OEMID MISMATCH but I guess that is 100% fine ?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Thanks looks like F11M is still the most recent bios, Is your F11M modded bios only flashable via Rufus and not Qflash ?
> 
> EDIT: Flashed via Rufus and it was giving me a warning of OEMID MISMATCH but I guess that is 100% fine ?


Your board a Master?


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Your board a Master?


Yes Z390 Auros Master


I downloaded it here - (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


----------



## EarlZ

Driller au said:


> Power loading under the power tab in bios is what @KedarWolf is talking about. I would try first just enable C3 in states that fixed low load crash for me and others here


I only have C3 enabled. I saw the power loading option so this helps CPU stability under low load? The description is something related to the PSU.


----------



## TrebleTA

050 said:


> View attachment 2471642
> 
> 
> After following black's advice on changing over to normal+offset voltage instead of fixed manual voltage, I have actually had fairly good sucesses with a 5.1ghz all core that downclocks to cap at 180w under sustained loads, which is nice. I have however run into a new (odd) issue. My core 0 is occasionally (frequently?) dropping to 800mhz. This does happen mostly at idle, but it seems to flicker fast so it is difficult to tell if it is happening in games.
> For some reason, for the first 1 min or so after boot, my clock multipliers are correctly 51-53. After about a minute, core 0 (and only core 0) drops occasionally to 800mhz. This seems to have the effect of causing the windows task manager to report the speed as sub-5ghz (I suspect as an average speed, due to these occasional flickers down to 800mhz.)
> I tried disabling EIST but that didn't fix it, my windows power plan is on high performance and I haven't seen this behavior before. I suspect there's something I mis-configured slightly but I'm unsure what would cause this. If I fully disable all c-states that seems to prevent this downclocking, but it also seems that prevents the cpu from seeing some cores as "idle" and clocking up the others to 5.2 or 5.3ghz. Not entirely ideal.
> I Have previously run my system with a manual static vcore, but have been testing with a "normal + offset" voltage. I'm using a Gigabyte z390 Aorus Pro Wifi, and this is an R0 stepping 9900k. With the normal+ offset I tested a windows balanced power plan, and it correctly allowed all of the cores to down-clock at idle, but after switching back to a high performance power plan, it seems somehow like core 0 is still behaving like it should clock down. Not to intermediate frequencies either, just straight to 800mhz.
> 
> Any tips or suggestions for missed settings? Thanks!


This is windows trying to power down to a C state, if you go to windows settings and change power profile to balance you see them all down clock. don't worrie about it



EarlZ said:


> Yes Z390 Aorus Master
> 
> 
> I downloaded it here - (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


I have a Official Z390 Master F11M GK here. Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master Rev(1.0) Overclocking i7 9700k - TweakTown Forums

2nd post. is the newest.


yet have noticed that active turbo per core limit control ratio default is 127 on all cores but 1 is set at 49 that can't be right, should it not be 127?


----------



## TrebleTA

Also something I have just come across. I using Win-rar to compress some files doing so the CPU will not go past 4.6ghz. yet pause or end all fine. yet minimum should be 4.9ghz. on all cores. My setting are linked above in the tweaktown link


----------



## Main Frame

Sheyster said:


> The Aorus Pro/Pro Wi-Fi are notoriously bad for memory OC. Best I could do was 3866 with a good 2x8GB 4000 kit. I eventually upgraded to 32GB b-die and settled on 3600 CL15. Good enough for gaming! The Master is much better for memory OC and support in general.



Ugh.. that's what I was afraid of. Makes me wonder if I should try swapping it out with the z370 Gaming 5 I was using previously. I know when I tried putting the RAM I had in the Gaming 5 in this motherboard it wasn't able to run as fast as I had it before. I pretty much chaulked that up to needing to be dialed back in from the start rather than running the same settings I had on the Gaming 5.

I don't supposed anyone has noticed one BIOS overclocking better than another? Right now I'm using the modded F12j since it _seemed_ to OC the CPU a little easier.


----------



## EarlZ

TrebleTA said:


> This is windows trying to power down to a C state, if you go to windows settings and change power profile to balance you see them all down clock. don't worrie about it
> 
> 
> 
> I have a Official Z390 Master F11M GK here. Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master Rev(1.0) Overclocking i7 9700k - TweakTown Forums
> 
> 2nd post. is the newest.
> 
> 
> yet have noticed that active turbo per core limit control ratio default is 127 on all cores but 1 is set at 49 that can't be right, should it not be 127?


Thanks but I would prefer the version that Kedarmakes, the GK only adds RGB options to the bios, correct ?


----------



## KedarWolf

MasterF11mGKModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> MasterF11mGKModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com



Thanks!


----------



## TrebleTA

EarlZ said:


> Thanks but I would prefer the version that Kedarmakes, the GK only adds RGB options to the bios, correct ?


Yes it just adds RGB

anyone with a answer to my one of my questions above.
worked out win-rar, If on balance windows power profile its capping CPU to 4.6ghz in high performance or ultimate performance it don't. what's windows up to!.

Also KedarWolf thanks for the bios, is it ok to link this file on my tweaktown post?


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> Yes it just adds RGB
> 
> anyone with a answer to my one of my questions above.
> worked out win-rar, If on balance windows power profile its capping CPU to 4.6ghz in high performance or ultimate performance it don't. what's windows up to!.
> 
> Also KedarWolf thanks for the bios, is it ok to link this file on my tweaktown post?


I'm not sure they want modded BIOS's there, usually only for unmodded beta etc.


----------



## TrebleTA

yea your prob right, just its hard to keep up with your mod version over all these pages. Thanks for them


----------



## mmcneil

KedarWolf said:


> MasterF11mGKModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Does this have the RGB fusion option ? Thanks for all that you do KedarWolf


----------



## Dannyele

Thank you so much @KedarWolf for your time modding the BIOS for the Z390 Aorus Master. Appreciate it!


----------



## KedarWolf

Dannyele said:


> Thank you so much @KedarWolf for your time modding the BIOS for the Z390 Aorus Master. Appreciate it!


----------



## Dibbler

I have had the Z390 board for a while now and overall it has been great but recently when running it will give three rapid short double beeps. It doesn't have to be in games it can be at the desktop, like just now when I'm typing this.
Nothing special on the OC (5ghz all core but with speedstep etc enabled still). Been rock stable.
Sensors (HW info) and temps seem all right.
Memory been installed for a while now 2x16GB DDR4 3200 Corsair XMS ran at stock.

No errors as such seen or issues but these three double beeps every minute or two, not game or heat related. Can't find much to relate tha tto an Award BIOS board whilst it is actually running. It isn't as tho it does not boot, it runs fine.

Thanks


----------



## TrebleTA

Dibbler said:


> I have had the Z390 board for a while now and overall it has been great but recently when running it will give three rapid short double beeps. It doesn't have to be in games it can be at the desktop, like just now when I'm typing this.
> Nothing special on the OC (5ghz all core but with speedstep etc enabled still). Been rock stable.
> Sensors (HW info) and temps seem all right.
> Memory been installed for a while now 2x16GB DDR4 3200 Corsair XMS ran at stock.
> 
> No errors as such seen or issues but these three double beeps every minute or two, not game or heat related. Can't find much to relate tha tto an Award BIOS board whilst it is actually running. It isn't as tho it does not boot, it runs fine.
> 
> Thanks


Strange in my book for beep codes normally when pc starts after post tests. I have 1 Short system boots successfully, 2 Short CMOS setting Error, 1 Long 1 Short Memory or motherboard error same for 1 Long a 2 Short. 1 Long and 3 short keyboard error, 1 long 9 short Bios rom error, Continuous long beeps Graphics card not inserted properly and continuous short beeps power error.

But beeping as windows is running sounds like a warning of some kind you got all smart fan set correctly is it from the MB speaker or from your monitor speakers?


----------



## Dibbler

TrebleTA said:


> Strange in my book for beep codes normally when pc starts after post tests. I have 1 Short system boots successfully, 2 Short CMOS setting Error, 1 Long 1 Short Memory or motherboard error same for 1 Long a 2 Short. 1 Long and 3 short keyboard error, 1 long 9 short Bios rom error, Continuous long beeps Graphics card not inserted properly and continuous short beeps power error.
> 
> But beeping as windows is running sounds like a warning of some kind you got all smart fan set correctly is it from the MB speaker or from your monitor speakers?



If I could have got back to my post and deleted it I would have done. Instead I'll provide some entertainment for free 

It was bugging me for a while so at first I returned the PC back to std speeds, no OC.

Then I started testing memory.

But I have some spare RAM and so decided to change it out as a quicker way to determine if it was the issue. I had 2 x 8GB DDR 4 3600 Corsair XMS to swap to....

PC off and memory removed, and about to put new sticks in " beep beep..............beep beep.................beep beep............." Both me and my wife had one of those "what the" moments. But then my wife, better hearing than me, suggested that it was coming from the smart meter display thingy that we have from EDF energy supplier warning us that we had gone over on our daily budget for gas and electricity.....!!!!

Huh..............!!!!! 

In my defence I didn't know that it made a sound, apparently it beeps, and as it is stood next to the tower PC I didn't think of it being the source of the beeps...!

I have now put the PC back together and changed the budget on the display unit......









I am now convinced that EDF has purposely made the unit sound as tho it is a BIOS beep code.

oh hum


----------



## TrebleTA

rofl, it happens


----------



## mmcneil

Hi everyone. I apologize if this has been covered before, but I need some assistance with downgrading the BIOS on my Aorus Master z390. I was running KedarWolf's F11E and then decided to use his F11mGK version. I tried flashing back to the F11E, but got the OEM ID Mismatch error. I then tried using efiflash.exe 1.11e /x /NoOemID, as recommended earlier in this thread, but got the 'INVALID COMMAND' error message. Would someone be kind enough to tell me how to get back to F11E ? Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

mmcneil said:


> Hi everyone. I apologize if this has been covered before, but I need some assistance with downgrading the BIOS on my Aorus Master z390. I was running KedarWolf's F11E and then decided to use his F11mGK version. I tried flashing back to the F11E, but got the OEM ID Mismatch error. I then tried using efiflash.exe 1.11e /x /NoOemID, as recommended earlier in this thread, but got the 'INVALID COMMAND' error message. Would someone be kind enough to tell me how to get back to F11E ? Thanks!


I'll help you with that. You need to use this efiflash.






Efiflash.zip







drive.google.com







Code:


Efiflash biosfilename.F11 /C

Replace biosfilename.F11 with the actual filename of the BIOS you're trying to flash. If it doesn't work, let me know. There is another version you may need.

Switch options for Efiflash.exe:
/C - Clear DMI data. (default: Keep DMI data) << Use this
/S - Save Original BIOS Image to Disk
/R - Reboot System after BIOS Update
/DB- Update both main & backup BIOS << Use on second reflash, if/when you want to flash both

You can use stock BIOS name.extension, you do not need to rename >>
Usage : efiflash [Input or Output File Name] [Command]..


----------



## mmcneil

KedarWolf said:


> I'll help you with that. You need to use this efiflash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Efiflash.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Efiflash biosfilename.F11 /C
> 
> Replace biosfilename.F11 with the actual filename of the BIOS you're trying to flash. If it doesn't work, let me know. There is another version you may need.
> 
> Switch options for Efiflash.exe:
> /C - Clear DMI data. (default: Keep DMI data) << Use this
> /S - Save Original BIOS Image to Disk
> /R - Reboot System after BIOS Update
> /DB- Update both main & backup BIOS << Use on second reflash, if/when you want to flash both
> 
> You can use stock BIOS name.extension, you do not need to rename >>
> Usage : efiflash [Input or Output File Name] [Command]..


Thank you so much sir! Worked like a charm. Much appreciated.


----------



## Mevunky

Long time Z390 master user, the threads on this forum have served me extremely well over the years!

I have been running unmodded F11c BIOS and previous versions without issue on the master using a dynamic 4.8ghz (4.5ghz ring) overclock (ram @ 4000), HCI Memtest for 40 hours+ and Prime95 12 hour+ stable, zero issues. I was running an IA AC Loadline value of 50 to bring the dynamic voltage down further (no other changes), any lower wasn't stable but this meant I could run minimum voltage/heat for the 4.8 all core dynamic OC.

Upgraded to F11l and subsequently F11m to find the system crashing after a full BIOS reset and entering of all my settings/timings manually, it seems as per the notes in the release the voltage 'fixes' or changes have rendered my machine unstable. I upped the IA AC Loadline to 60/70/80/90 (all failed prime but each additional step/increased voltage is more stable), which is obviously running a much higher voltage than at the previously stable 50. I have been using the VRM voltage control in this way as its a great way to bring down a dynamic overclock to the lowest voltage you require without running into idle voltage issues when using the more traditional offset method. I didn't write down previous voltages but from memory it was around 1.22/1.24 under load and when it locks up it seems its dropping far too low on the new BIOS!?

What gives? What else has changed? I could roll back but that's not a good long term fix, wonder what Gigabyte has done in this 'Voltage fix' as per the release notes.

Update: Rolled back to 11c, and no better/same problems/no idea whats gone wrong here now.


----------



## Vladimir54

Mevunky said:


> What gives? What else has changed? I could roll back but that's not a good long term fix, wonder what Gigabyte has done in this 'Voltage fix' as per the release notes.



Hi, I've been testing F11 for a long time.

*F11m* causes a spontaneous reboot when switching from load mode to standby mode, but F11L does not cause such problems.

I am currently using NOW Release F11L - AND AUTO MODE FOR VCORE and IVR REGULATOR AC/DC AUTO, which gives 1.248V for my at 9900k for frequencies of 4700mhz.

Experimentally, I found out that if you forcibly disable c-state or do certain combinations of power managment settings, reboots on F*11M* become more frequent. it's hard to tell where this bug is or just low voltage error - or something deep bug in powermanagment code in Gigabyte frimware.

At the moment, I recommend everyone to stay on oficial release *F11L*, it is stable -at least on auto vcore and auto c-stae, does not cause any perfomance problems- no any degradation in Cinebench score, at least were same like on my old Second Asrock board Pgx,and overclocking memory different,better than on F11M.

on *11M* I got higher frequencies, but with higher timings- slower overall, and the board behaved strangely on beta bios. Memory training was more difficult - the initialization with training memory took longer on *M*, and the RTL block was worse more often - at the same frequencies, voltages and timings.

For your problem, add a voltage to IVR regulator, to Ac section -a couple of steps, or use auto, by default on IVR WITH C-STATE AUTO- for me it stable scenario- no restarts no bsod-all great, now the board works well on Auto, the voltage is not too high and the temperature to cool.


For me, there are no advantages, and it is not worth it to update to 11m, the beta version now is raw, let they in Gigabyte test it more thoroughly.

It is a pity that such a great motherboard with solid design, a good overclocking potential and great vrm, have a such raw frimware code))).


----------



## Mevunky

Vladimir54 said:


> Hi, I've been testing F11 for a long time.
> 
> *F11m* causes a spontaneous reboot when switching from load mode to standby mode, but F11L does not cause such problems.
> 
> I am currently using NOW Release F11L - AND AUTO MODE FOR VCORE and IVR REGULATOR AC/DC AUTO, which gives 1.248V for my at 9900k for frequencies of 4700mhz.
> 
> Experimentally, I found out that if you forcibly disable c-state or do certain combinations of power managment settings, reboots on F*11M* become more frequent. it's hard to tell where this bug is or just low voltage error - or something deep bug in powermanagment code in Gigabyte frimware.
> 
> At the moment, I recommend everyone to stay on oficial release *F11L*, it is stable -at least on auto vcore and auto c-stae, does not cause any perfomance problems- no any degradation in Cinebench score, at least were same like on my old Second Asrock board Pgx,and overclocking memory different,better than on F11M.
> 
> on *11M* I got higher frequencies, but with higher timings- slower overall, and the board behaved strangely on beta bios. Memory training was more difficult - the initialization with training memory took longer on *M*, and the RTL block was worse more often - at the same frequencies, voltages and timings.
> 
> For your problem, add a voltage to IVR regulator, to Ac section -a couple of steps, or use auto, by default on IVR WITH C-STATE AUTO- for me it stable scenario- no restarts no bsod-all great, now the board works well on Auto, the voltage is not too high and the temperature to cool.


These problems started on F11L and I only upgraded to F11M to see if it was better than L but it did not solve any issues. A full downgrade back to F11C to exactly the settings I had before was also no better which makes no sense to me! Even on full auto, stock, LinX is throwing variable results so something is going very wrong.


----------



## Vladimir54

Mevunky said:


> LinX is throwing variable results so something is going very wrong


Try like that:

Use EFIFLASH in dos, with key /C - Clear dmi

Efiflash biosfile.f10c /C - For example

After succesfull reflashed-did all restarts for finalized, clear cmos, load defaults for first, and then set up all YOUR settings Fully manual by hands - include memory voltages,vccio/sa, timings and etc ALL other things.

-do not use profiles FROM F10C SAVED BEFORE-,do it all manual - before final save and restart settings: change: "MemoryBOOT to = "Disable fast boot" -restart few times 2-3, and enter to bios every restart, for good memory fresh training RTL and ODT AUTO values ,- and THEN, revert back Memory boot option to auto.AND THEN CHECK TESTS.

If all this doesnt help - maybe cpu degradation or something happend else on YOUR hardware or memory.

Linx also very sensitive to software enviroment- Hwinfo monitors or AV software...


----------



## Mevunky

Vladimir54 said:


> Try like that:
> 
> Use EFIFLASH in dos, with key /C - Clear dmi
> 
> Efiflash biosfile.f10c /C - For example
> 
> After succesfull reflashed-did all restarts for finalized, clear cmos, load defaults for first, and then set up all YOUR settings Fully manual by hands - include memory voltages,vccio/sa, timings and etc ALL other things.
> 
> -do not use profiles FROM F10C SAVED BEFORE-,do it all manual - before final save and restart settings: change: "MemoryBOOT to = "Disable fast boot" -restart few times 2-3, and enter to bios every restart, for good memory fresh training RTL and ODT AUTO values ,- and THEN, revert back Memory boot option to auto.AND THEN CHECK TESTS.
> 
> If all this doesnt help - maybe cpu degradation or something happend else on YOUR hardware or memory.
> 
> Linx also very sensitive to software enviroment- Hwinfo monitors or AV software...


Thanks for your help, happily running F11L now, as it turns out the BIOS issues were a red herring, it was just lack of thermal headroom and it had become apparent at roughly the same time. Turns out the thermal paste had been mostly pumped away from the D15 in a nice CPU core shape and the sink also needed remounting.


----------



## Vladimir54

Mevunky said:


> Thanks for your help, happily running F11L now, as it turns out the BIOS issues were a red herring, it was just lack of thermal headroom and it had become apparent at roughly the same time. Turns out the thermal paste had been mostly pumped away from the D15 in a nice CPU core shape and the sink also needed remounting.


Ah i see,got it

You are wellcome.


----------



## 638220

@ gigabyte/Kedar/stasio/whoever it was - thank you for the bios, you are awesome(appreciate that it still uses F9 interface too). Was able to get c16-4333 LinX stable 20 Loops (XMP Disabled). Thank you again.


----------



## hickelpickle

So I've pretty much reach my end game overclock, after getting 2 team group 18-18-18 4133mhz kits. Some observations are that while good binned ram and full slots can easily boot 4400-4600, getting anything tight stable past 4133 is near impossible, though this could be an imc issue as well, but I lean towards pinning it on the board. 16-16-16-32 is ezpz @ 4133, but 17-19-19-38 @ 4400 is hard to get stable. 4300 can do 17-19-19 but not 17-17-17 with upping voltage having little impact. Even if near stable at the higher speeds there is always an error 30min-2hr in.








I was using f10c but upgraded to f11m. Both had the exact same voltage behavior, though f11m let me drop my trtp to 6, f10c would error. Speed wise and pretty much everything else they were identical. Slight performance uplift on f11m in geekbench, cinebench stayed the same, leaving me to believe memory behavior is ever so slightly different on the f11 bios. F11m gk bios was **** IMO, error prone, lower scores and my write speeds would randomly dip 10000MB/s.

Overall IMO if you are chasing bioses you are doing it wrong ,as the behavior in stable releases seemingly unaltered for over a year. You may see the smallest of memory improvement on stability, but not ability, and cpu voltage behavior is the exact same.

I run adaptive on my set up with ac loadline @ 40 and dc loadline set to 1 with a +0.070 offset medium llc. Setting my ac/dc loadlines to that lets me get better offset behavior which allowed me to hit 5.1ghz. To run a static voltage and hit 5.1ghz with turbo llc I'd need 1.37-1.38. With my set up I never break 1.34-1.35v. I idle at 1.28-1.32, gamming stays around 1.3-1.32, and I'm around 1.28-1.3 when running 160-175amp loads which is the max I test for. This is with TVB enabled.


----------



## 638220

You want top speeds(4200-4400) with 4 dimms on the z390 aorus master? You need highly binned ram sticks, a good IMC, the right bios and a lot of testing/tuning. I finally hit 4400/c17 after almost 2 years and 5 different ram kits. Dimm quality matters A LOT for t-topology, more than most people think. It wasn't until I was gifted for x-mas some new gskill ripjaws c17/4266 that I was able to hit 4400 stable in HCImemtest/karhu/linX. Even on the other good z390 t-topology boards from other brands, users needed top quality dimms to exceed 4133 on 4 dimms with good timings. One example of this is on a maximus code xi, someone needed c15-4000 gskill sticks to get c16-4266. T-topology/4 dimms is a different beast. If you are always erroring between 30 minutes to 2 hours at higher frequencies, try a different bios or readjust timings, or get a better ram kit(s).

It's not near impossible. You just need to position yourself for success.


----------



## treestar

Hello guys, I have some problems with timings on the Elite. It ignores RTL and IOL values. Also I can't adjust tREFI, once I enter my value it switches to 65xxx. And clear cmos dots don't seem to work. Any benefits for running latest beta?


----------



## 638220

@KedarWolf @stasio Which bios revision was remoted into my motherboard? Is it a beta bios or is it a modded bios or is it newer than f9 stock release bios? The bios interface still looks like f9, while in the bios it says it is f9, aida64/hwinfo say its f9 with the same microcode as f9 but I am 100% confident it is not the same stock f9 bios available for download that I've been using for a long time from the gigabyte/aorus for a couple reasons that i'd rather not disclose at this time. Also, Which microcode is this bios actually using? Can I please have a clean link to the bios file so I can save it to a usb to Qflash it myself if need be in the future? I want the option to go back to original F9(I have it on usb still) at any time as well as the option to go back to whatever mystery bios that was remoted into my system(i don't have this mystery bios file and need it).

Also, a long time ago my bios/motherboard used to say Owner for user access level, Like maybe over a year ago. Now user level states administrator instead of owner. Why do I no longer have Owner user access for the motherboard that I own? Am i misinterpreting something?

@treestar It sounds like you are on one of the bioses that had the trefi bug, i'm not sure which bios had it and I forget which bios fixed it, i'm sorry i couldn't be of much help. I'm not versed in any of the beta bioses for the Aorus Elite so i'm not sure if it would be an improvement or not but you could give it a shot to see. Just make sure you read the bios testing disclaimer before doing it because i'm not responsible if anything goes wrong. Or just go back to one of the earlier stock bios releases available on the gigabyte/aorus website to see which one will let you set trefi to your desired value.


----------



## treestar

blacknbigger212 said:


> It sounds like you are on one of the bioses that had the trefi bug


Thanks, should be it. Also I can't seem to adjust IOL and RTL, guess it's part of the bug. Will wait for Elite owners to recommend best bios to use then.


----------



## 638220

treestar said:


> Thanks, should be it. Also I can't seem to adjust IOL and RTL, guess it's part of the bug. Will wait for Elite owners to recommend best bios to use then.


To my knowledge, No one has been able to adjust iol rtl above 3933 on these z390 aorus boards. I looked everywhere for information and spoke to probably 50 or so z390 aorus owners on various different forums/social media platforms, no one was able to get them to adjust for 4000mhz memory strap or higher. When someone contacted gigabyte support by email, gigabyte said it could be done yet they wouldn't provide instructions on how it could be done. If you aren't able to adjust them from 3933 and below, then that could be an entirely different issue than what I'm referring to to which I have no solution to. 0 for 2 baha.

Anywho, i'm tired, gonna go back to bed while I wait on a response from kedar or stasio.


----------



## 638220

I tried my hand at manually tuning rtls/iols at 4000+ again. I decided to turn on the advanced memory tuning feature for the dram channels and manually set the rtls/iols after initial rtl/iol training. The good news is that the rtls changed. The bad news is that instead of both rtls/iols for both channels going down, the first channel rtls stayed the same and the second channel rtls went up by 2 for a spacing of 4 between both channels instead of the typical spacing of 2. (From 68/68/70/70 to 68/68/72/72) Usually when trying to adjust them at 4000+ there is no change at all so while they did increase, seeing that there was a change is still a good thing. Not really sure where to go from here. If anyone has any inkling on how to get all of them to go down instead of up, please let me know. I hope i'm getting warmer lol.


----------



## scrigface

Hello!


I have been trying to figure out the best way to overclock this CPU without using multi-core enhancement. When enabled it will bring my i7-9700k to 4.9ghz and with my Corsair H100i I get good temps (high 50s/low60s) when playing games like Warzone or Cyberpunk.
The thing is that Gigabyte's OC guide and videos like tweak town are using an old BIOS whereas I am using F11 (just downgraded from F12j).
I can't follow these steps because Gigabyte in all their wisdome completely changed the layout.
Right now my voltages idle are like 1.33v but will go over 1.44 when gaming. I know this is because of the multicore setting and I want to go lower and also up to 5ghz. Can anyone give me a rundown or some screenshots of their F11 or higher BIOS so I can just set my voltages and whatever else I need to set? I don't want to miss settings I cant find and then be stumped when all i do is get BSOD.

thanks!


----------



## Dannyele

One question guys, when WHEA Errors appear on HWinfo, it's related to CPU OC or RAM OC (timmings, secondaries, voltages...) or both of them?

Asking because its appearing WHEA only in one game (Escape from Tarkov) and i've already raised the voltage to 1.43 bios (~1.32 cinebench/realbench) x50 core x47 ratio and LLC high.

For the ram, actually 1.45 in bios, 1.32 ia/sa 4266 to 4000 XMP dual channel (waiting another 2 modules for quadchannel - F4-4266C19D-16GTZR)


----------



## 638220

Dannyele said:


> One question guys, when WHEA Errors appear on HWinfo, it's related to CPU OC or RAM OC (timmings, secondaries, voltages...) or both of them?
> 
> Asking because its appearing WHEA only in one game (Escape from Tarkov) and i've already raised the voltage to 1.43 bios (~1.32 cinebench/realbench) x50 core x47 ratio and LLC high.
> 
> For the ram, actually 1.45 in bios, 1.32 ia/sa 4266 to 4000 XMP dual channel (waiting another 2 modules for quadchannel - F4-4266C19D-16GTZR)


Well, from my experience, a more intense ram overclock CAN increase vcore requirements from what you would normally need to run your cpu multiplier at but i don't think that's what is happening in your case. But whea errors in general just means add more vcore anyway. How much bios set vcore were you running when whea errors started appearing in escape from tarkov? Did raising the vcore to 1.43v bios set vcore fix the issue? I wouldn't spend too much time on it since you may have to make more adjustments once the other 2 ram sticks arrive for 2dpc dual channel mode.


----------



## Dannyele

blacknbigger212 said:


> Well, from my experience, a more intense ram overclock CAN increase vcore requirements from what you would normally need to run your cpu multiplier at but i don't think that's what is happening in your case. But whea errors in general just means add more vcore anyway. How much bios set vcore were you running when whea errors started appearing in escape from tarkov? Did raising the vcore to 1.43v bios set vcore fix the issue? I wouldn't spend too much time on it since you may have to make more adjustments once the other 2 ram sticks arrive for 2dpc dual channel mode.


Hello buddy!

Well, i've been palying like 3 hours so far with no more WHEA errors on hwinfo. Right now i've set the vcore to 1.43 fixed in bios and seems that the WHEAs are gone, so I will check during these days if errors appear.

Regarding the RAM, yea, i've read that for the topology of the aorus master is recommended to run 4 dimm slots for higher frequencies, so I will recheck once amazon get stock on this model.

Temps are actually not that bad, on gaming never exceeds 60º (for example CP2077 that it's the biggest CPU demmanding game that im playing atm) but if I stress the cpu it reach the 100º on realbench/p95 (no avx). On Cinebench around 80-85º. Anyway, i won't push the cpu that far as it will be used purely for gaming.

The only concern for me is IDLEing at 1.40~1.41 vcore (LLC high), but I guess that it's just fine and the only one that matters is the voltage on full load (and afaik recommended to be 1.35v under full load).


----------



## cisco150

Hawkjoss said:


> you can try setting I am running with my 9900k stock undervolt profile. You definitely can go lower on voltage offset as you have 9900 KS.
> I have C states disabled but you can have them enabled for extra T reduction at idle.
> View attachment 2468037
> View attachment 2468038
> View attachment 2468039
> View attachment 2468040
> View attachment 2468041
> View attachment 2468042


Does anyone or Do have any 5ghz setting for this cpu 9900k z390 master i tried your setting for low power working ok so far but would love to get 5.0ghz I Im on the F1.11M Modded water cooled.


----------



## Hawkjoss

cisco150 said:


> Does anyone or Do have any 5ghz setting for this cpu 9900k z390 master i tried your setting for low power working ok so far but would love to get 5.0ghz I Im on the F1.11M Modded water cooled.


Here you go. Play with offset until stable. If you don't want CPU to downclock to 800mhz when idle, disable C-States and set "Maximum Performance" power plan in windows


----------



## cisco150

Hawkjoss said:


> Here you go. Play with offset until stable. If you don't want CPU to downclock to 800mhz when idle, disable C-States and set "Maximum Performance" power plan in windows


Where do i go to offset voltage or settings etc


----------



## Hawkjoss

cisco150 said:


> Where do i go to offset voltage or settings etc


dynamic Vcore(dvid). Start with 0 offset and see if stable. If yes, decrese by 0.005mv and test again. Repeat untill failure, then once test fails add 0.005mv and you are good to go.
If not stable with 0 offset, increase by 0.005mv respectively.


----------



## cisco150

Hawkjoss said:


> dynamic Vcore(dvid). Start with 0 offset and see if stable. If yes, decrese by 0.005mv and test again. Repeat untill failure, then once test fails add 0.005mv and you are good to go.
> If not stable with 0 offset, increase by 0.005mv respectively.


Start there and go - then plus till its stable


----------



## cisco150

Hawkjoss said:


> dynamic Vcore(dvid). Start with 0 offset and see if stable. If yes, decrese by 0.005mv and test again. Repeat untill failure, then once test fails add 0.005mv and you are good to go.
> If not stable with 0 offset, increase by 0.005mv respectively.


And are there any settings from the pics you posted I can change to get it to 5ghz really appreciated you helping


----------



## Hawkjoss

cisco150 said:


> And are there any settings from the pics you posted I can change to get it to 5ghz really appreciated you helping


here you go


----------



## cisco150

Hawkjoss said:


> here you go


Thanks will try that


----------



## xmrdevi1ishx

Hawkjoss said:


> here you go


Hi there im new to overclocking i followed the steps i hit a BSOD at -0.025V then i went to -0.020V and everything is stable i did it in steps until i got a BSOD is this fine? I also own the 9900K running z390 master F11m Modded. Also is my temps ok with a H115i Pro


----------



## cisco150

xmrdevi1ishx said:


> Hi there im new to overclocking i followed the steps i hit a BSOD at -0.025V then i went to -0.020V and everything is stable i did it in steps until i got a BSOD is this fine? I also own the 9900K running z390 master F11m Modded. Also is my temps ok with a H115i Pro
> 
> View attachment 2474015


The pic is not working


----------



## xmrdevi1ishx

cisco150 said:


> The pic is not working


Fixed is it working now?


----------



## Hawkjoss

xmrdevi1ishx said:


> Hi there im new to overclocking i followed the steps i hit a BSOD at -0.025V then i went to -0.020V and everything is stable i did it in steps until i got a BSOD is this fine? I also own the 9900K running z390 master F11m Modded. Also is my temps ok with a H115i Pro
> 
> View attachment 2474020


in short - yes, but cinebench is not the program you want to test the reliability of your overclock with. 
use realbench in stress test mode, with 1/2 of your ram capacity. Run it for at least 4hrs (longer the better) andsee if you have WHEA errors in hwinfo


----------



## xmrdevi1ishx

Hawkjoss said:


> in short - yes, but cinebench is not the program you want to test the reliability of your overclock with.
> use realbench in stress test mode, with 1/2 of your ram capacity. Run it for at least 4hrs (longer the better) andsee if you have WHEA errors in hwinfo


Thank you. 👍


----------



## Hawkjoss

xmrdevi1ishx said:


> Thank you. 👍


your welcome!
Please make a screenshot of CB15 with HWinfo running, specifically the voltage readout (example attached)







voltage


----------



## genetic priest

whoaaaa!!! MSI Brings Resizable-BAR to Intel 300-series and AMD 400-series Motherboards


----------



## CS9K

genetic priest said:


> whoaaaa!!! MSI Brings Resizable-BAR to Intel 300-series and AMD 400-series Motherboards


This gives me hope that Gigabyte will follow suit <3


----------



## sayoXD

genetic priest said:


> whoaaaa!!! MSI Brings Resizable-BAR to Intel 300-series and AMD 400-series Motherboards


Resizable BAR Support



> "Additionally, NVIDIA has been working closely with Intel, AMD and major motherboard manufacturers, including ASUS, ASRock, EVGA, GIGABYTE, and MSI, to bring Resizable BAR support to a wide range of motherboards."


So yeah, let's hope we can get it to this board aswell.


----------



## stasio

CS9K said:


> This gives me hope that Gigabyte will follow suit <3


Yes, GB working on it....with Resize BAR


----------



## TrebleTA

I think I'd report some bits to gigabyte about f11m beta 


Question:Noticed problems with f11m beta bios. If memory is set to xmp 3200 then manual set to 3600. On saving exiting bios it will always show that setting on exit. If you go back in to bios then save and exit.Smart fan I set 4 fans all the same settings. Yet the rpm on the fans are quite different.If I select windows 10 power plan to balance, then say use winrar my cpu is throttled back to 4.6 yet and locks up after some time, yet I have set the cpu to 4.9 ghz in bios. If power profile is on high performance, winrar will now run at 4.9ghz and will not lock up the pc.If windows profile is set to high performance, for some reason on idle 1 core will throttle back to 800ghz for a split second then back to 4.9ghz. Other users have experenced this also.Also on pc start general posts are long. No problems just think it should be more instant. also fast boot seems no different. I get 8-9 secs boot time in windows?1/12/2021 3:25 AMAnswer:Hello,
You may download and update the latest F11l BIOS with QFlash.
BIOS F11l: Z390 AORUS MASTER (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
BIOS update user guide: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/global/WebPage/20/images/utiltiy_qflash_uefi.pdf1/13/2021 3:44 AM


Not sure what to make of it?


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> I think I'd report some bits to gigabyte about f11m beta
> 
> 
> Question:Noticed problems with f11m beta bios. If memory is set to xmp 3200 then manual set to 3600. On saving exiting bios it will always show that setting on exit. If you go back in to bios then save and exit.Smart fan I set 4 fans all the same settings. Yet the rpm on the fans are quite different.If I select windows 10 power plan to balance, then say use winrar my cpu is throttled back to 4.6 yet and locks up after some time, yet I have set the cpu to 4.9 ghz in bios. If power profile is on high performance, winrar will now run at 4.9ghz and will not lock up the pc.If windows profile is set to high performance, for some reason on idle 1 core will throttle back to 800ghz for a split second then back to 4.9ghz. Other users have experenced this also.Also on pc start general posts are long. No problems just think it should be more instant. also fast boot seems no different. I get 8-9 secs boot time in windows?1/12/2021 3:25 AMAnswer:Hello,
> You may download and update the latest F11l BIOS with QFlash.
> BIOS F11l: Z390 AORUS MASTER (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
> BIOS update user guide: https://www.gigabyte.com/FileUpload/global/WebPage/20/images/utiltiy_qflash_uefi.pdf1/13/2021 3:44 AM
> 
> 
> Not sure what to make of it?


You got a generic support reply, I'm presuming if you explain that you're on a newer bios they might forward it to the devs or they'll ask you to change to the official bios and recreate.

The only thing I see here as a bios issue is the 3600 bug that has been a thing from inception. The bug is related to not training memory at 3600 rather going to 3733 even if you set 3600 in bios. (If that's even what you were thinking, it's not totally clear).

The other issue seems you want 4.9 all the time. Just disable the cstates.

I think it's better to raise one issue per ticket as it'll help support actually get it to the dev team.


----------



## TrebleTA

AndrejB said:


> The other issue seems you want 4.9 all the time. Just disable the cstates.


 
well when gaming so cpu should not be idle when i exit the game look at hwinfo and says 1 core had gone to 800mhz core 0










Also I have 3 running tickets with them, yet made a new one to show some of what I found and the reply was a bit basic yes


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> well when gaming so cpu should not be idle when i exit the game look at hwinfo and says 1 core had gone to 800mhz core 0
> 
> View attachment 2474567
> 
> 
> Also I have 3 running tickets with them, yet made a new one to show some of what I found and the reply was a bit basic yes


It seems you are using per core turbo, with cstates. I've noticed that same behavior where some cores drop to 800mhz for a brief moment.

The only way I found to avoid this is disabling all the cstates


----------



## tokoam

Z390 Ultra Owner here looking for F9 modded bios with RGB options built in . F9 seems to work better for me as with F10 I cant get stable clocks open to feedback or suggestions .


----------



## KedarWolf

tokoam said:


> Z390 Ultra Owner here looking for F9 modded bios with RGB options built in . F9 seems to work better for me as with F10 I cant get stable clocks open to feedback or suggestions .


There is no F9 BIOS with RGB, only a few of the newer ones.


----------



## alv-OC

Hello gentlemen!

Just wanted to share with you that there is a formal request going on Change.org in order to push Gigabyte to release BIOS update allowing Resizable BAR in Z390 MoBos. The more people sign in the request the better.

Link --> *HERE* <--

Cheers!


----------



## TrebleTA

But they have already said they are!


----------



## firthen

Hello all! I need your advice 
I´m running i9-9900k cooled with Corsair H150i Pro with QL120 fans, Aorus Master z390, 32GB Ram Corsair 3200Mhz (just XMP on) and Asus Rog Strix 3080 OCed

Since i´ve now more time to play i tried to OC my CPU to 5Ghz which i though i have achieved. I ran cinebench 10 minutes test several times and also 3D Mark and it seemed fine.
I´m playing WoW, Assassins Creed, Cyberpunk and Rainbow six siege at maxed out setting at 2k. In the last few days i started getting pc crashed while playing rainbow. So i started tracking the voltages/temps and they seem to be pretty high, atleast for me.
You can see the Bios settings i´m using and temps in the pictures below. I just followed some youtube videos to get this settings.

Are there any settings that are terribly wrong or can i improve something by changing some of them?
Thanks in advance!


----------



## The Pook

TrebleTA said:


> But they have already said they are!


link?


----------



## Hawkjoss

firthen said:


> Hello all! I need your advice
> I´m running i9-9900k cooled with Corsair H150i Pro with QL120 fans, Aorus Master z390, 32GB Ram Corsair 3200Mhz (just XMP on) and Asus Rog Strix 3080 OCed
> 
> Since i´ve now more time to play i tried to OC my CPU to 5Ghz which i though i have achieved. I ran cinebench 10 minutes test several times and also 3D Mark and it seemed fine.
> I´m playing WoW, Assassins Creed, Cyberpunk and Rainbow six siege at maxed out setting at 2k. In the last few days i started getting pc crashed while playing rainbow. So i started tracking the voltages/temps and they seem to be pretty high, atleast for me.
> You can see the Bios settings i´m using and temps in the pictures below. I just followed some youtube videos to get this settings.
> 
> Are there any settings that are terribly wrong or can i improve something by changing some of them?
> Thanks in advance!


Cinebench is not good for testing stability. i mentioned in this thread few posts above:


Hawkjoss said:


> in short - yes, but cinebench is not the program you want to test the reliability of your overclock with.
> use realbench in stress test mode, with 1/2 of your ram capacity. Run it for at least 4hrs (longer the better) andsee if you have WHEA errors in hwinfo


Regarding your screenshots of HWInfo - are those during CB runs or after gaming sessions?


----------



## Smokediggity

The Pook said:


> link?











(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Does anyone or Do have any 5ghz setting for this cpu 9900k z390 master i tried your setting for low power working ok so far but would love to get 5.0ghz I Im on the F1.11M Modded water cooled. Here you go. Play with offset until stable. If you don't want CPU to downclock to 800mhz when idle...




www.overclock.net


----------



## CS9K

Smokediggity said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> Does anyone or Do have any 5ghz setting for this cpu 9900k z390 master i tried your setting for low power working ok so far but would love to get 5.0ghz I Im on the F1.11M Modded water cooled. Here you go. Play with offset until stable. If you don't want CPU to downclock to 800mhz when idle...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Without a citation, his comment has no substance. The most anyone has right now is "Nvidia is working with Gigabyte and others on bringing Resizable BAR to older/other platforms".


----------



## firthen

Regarding your screenshots of HWInfo - are those during CB runs or after gaming sessions?
[/QUOTE]

its after 2 hours of playing siege. After 10 minutes of cinebench the temps spikes at 90-95 degree, depending on core.


----------



## stasio

BIOS update on TT forum.....


----------



## CS9K

stasio said:


> BIOS update on TT forum.....


A bios update that was not there this morning... Neat! Mind taking a look at this, and if you have time, loading in the 'fast' microcode into it for Z390 Pro (non-wifi), @KedarWolf ? 

You'd be the besttttt :3

Direct link to bios file: Z390AORUSPRO

Link to forum post: GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums


----------



## TrebleTA

Anyone tried z390 mater f11n beta yet? Will try in the morning. Yet for my display card resize bar is only supported on rtx 30** series I think. I have a rtx 2070 8gb


----------



## KedarWolf

Z390MasterF11n.zip







drive.google.com





Z390 Master F11n modded with newest RST, Intel Ethernet and GOP firmware, last two newer than my earlier mods.

Fastest microcodes.






Z390MasterF11n.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

Off-topic I know, but wanted to share my most awesome new build I'm working on.

I'm buying this with my tax refund in March.

EVGA GeForce RTX 3090 FTW3 ULTRA GAMING







Welcome - Canada Computers & Electronics


Canadacomputers.com offers the best prices on Computers, Computer Parts, Laptops, Hard Drives, PC Hardware & Accessories with fast shipping and top-rated customer service.




www.canadacomputers.com














And a class-action lawsuit here in Canada I am eligible for just passed and I'll get $20,000 from it. And no, it's not a phishing scam, actual class-action lawsuit.

I pre-ordered and paid in full already a 5950x, 3090 in March with my tax refund. I pre-ordered and paid for an MSI B550 Unify-X already.

Only two things I want with the lawsuit money are these.









49 inch CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor Monitors - LC49RG90SSNXZA | Samsung US


Discover the latest features and innovations available in the 49 inches CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor. Find the perfect Monitors for you!




www.samsung.com














and









F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB - Specification - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z RGB DDR4-4266 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)




www.gskill.com





Trident Z RGB
DDR4-4266MHz CL17-18-18-38 1.50V
32GB (2x16GB)


----------



## CS9K

stasio said:


> BIOS update on TT forum.....





CS9K said:


> A bios update that was not there this morning... Neat! Mind taking a look at this, and if you have time, loading in the 'fast' microcode into it for Z390 Pro (non-wifi), @KedarWolf ?
> 
> You'd be the besttttt :3


I can confirm that the TT F12L beta bios for the Z390 Aorus Pro non-wifi has ReSize BAR available and it does indeed work properly with my RX 6800 XT on Adrenalin 20.12.1. Excite! cc @KedarWolf


----------



## ezveedub

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11n.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390 Master F11n modded with newest RST, Intel Ethernet and GOP firmware, last two newer than my earlier mods.
> 
> Fastest microcodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11n.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


I assume you loose RGB Fusion in bios settings with these modded bios?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## KedarWolf

CS9K said:


> I can confirm that the TT F12L beta bios for the Z390 Aorus Pro non-wifi has ReSize BAR available and it does indeed work properly with my RX 6800 XT on Adrenalin 20.12.1. Excite! cc @KedarWolf
> 
> View attachment 2474908
> View attachment 2474909








AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Shonk

Z390 Aorus Master F11N + RTX 3090 FE
Unsure if it's setup for when nvidia drop the drivers


----------



## QTQ

KedarWolf said:


> AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hi, can you make mod for the aorus z390 elite whith latest microcodes? Firmware f10h. Thank you


----------



## KedarWolf

QTQ said:


> Hi, can you make mod for the aorus z390 elite whith latest microcodes? Firmware f10h. Thank you


The latest microcodes or the fastest microcodes?


----------



## OleMortenF

Shonk said:


> Z390 Aorus Master F11N + RTX 3090 FE
> Unsure if it's setup for when nvidia drop the drivers


I tried the same version with my Z390 Aorous Master and 9900k + RTX 3080 but I dont see the Re-Size bar in the menu. Does anyone else has this problem?


----------



## alv-OC

firthen said:


> Hello all! I need your advice
> I´m running i9-9900k cooled with Corsair H150i Pro with QL120 fans, Aorus Master z390, 32GB Ram Corsair 3200Mhz (just XMP on) and Asus Rog Strix 3080 OCed
> 
> Since i´ve now more time to play i tried to OC my CPU to 5Ghz which i though i have achieved. I ran cinebench 10 minutes test several times and also 3D Mark and it seemed fine.
> I´m playing WoW, Assassins Creed, Cyberpunk and Rainbow six siege at maxed out setting at 2k. In the last few days i started getting pc crashed while playing rainbow. So i started tracking the voltages/temps and they seem to be pretty high, atleast for me.
> You can see the Bios settings i´m using and temps in the pictures below. I just followed some youtube videos to get this settings.
> 
> Are there any settings that are terribly wrong or can i improve something by changing some of them?
> Thanks in advance!


Hi man.... where you should track the woltage in HW-Info is on VROut as the other votage measures are actually quite off, that 1.5v that you can see on the "Core VID" max values ist just not right, that reading is done in a different spot. Go find VRout, around the "GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF (IRF-IR3352)" section.

As for the configuration on the BIOS, I would use Dinamic VCore instead of Static/Manual), for that little extra OC at 5.0GHz its going to be better for your temps along with that AIO.

Either way, for both Dinamic and Manual VCore I would disable all C-States except C3, And I would max out all "Turbo Power Limits". Also Disable:

Intel(R) Turbo Boost
Frequency Clipping TVB
Volt Reduction initiated TVB
Active Turbo Ratios. You already have the Clock Ratio at 50, there is no need to acativate this Turbo per core functionality.

As fo the VRM settings, I would use:

CPU Vcore & VAXG loadline Calibration: High
CPU Vcore & VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300KHz (set it manually)
PWM and VAXG Phase Control: eXm Perf.

Worths to mention that even when using XMP you should pass some RAM stability test, just to make sure, perhaps your chip needs some extra VCCIO/SA.


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> Off-topic I know, but wanted to share my most awesome new build I'm working on.
> 
> I'm buying this with my tax refund in March.
> 
> EVGA GeForce RTX 3090 FTW3 ULTRA GAMING
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome - Canada Computers & Electronics
> 
> 
> Canadacomputers.com offers the best prices on Computers, Computer Parts, Laptops, Hard Drives, PC Hardware & Accessories with fast shipping and top-rated customer service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.canadacomputers.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2474903
> 
> 
> And a class-action lawsuit here in Canada I am eligible for just passed and I'll get $20,000 from it. And no, it's not a phishing scam, actual class-action lawsuit.
> 
> I pre-ordered and paid in full already a 5950x, 3090 in March with my tax refund. I pre-ordered and paid for an MSI B550 Unify-X already.
> 
> Only two things I want with the lawsuit money are these.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 49 inch CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor Monitors - LC49RG90SSNXZA | Samsung US
> 
> 
> Discover the latest features and innovations available in the 49 inches CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor. Find the perfect Monitors for you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.samsung.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2474904
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB - Specification - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z RGB DDR4-4266 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trident Z RGB
> DDR4-4266MHz CL17-18-18-38 1.50V
> 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> View attachment 2474906


I Just saw this RAM Kit you might prefer theese ones at timigs 15 16 16, I think theese willd perform better on Ryzen platform as timings have more impact on Ryzen.









G. Skill Trident Z RGB f4-4000c15q -32 gtzr - 32 gb - 4 x 8 gb-ddr4 - 4000 MHz | eBay


Las mejores ofertas para G. Skill Trident Z RGB f4-4000c15q -32 gtzr - 32 gb - 4 x 8 gb-ddr4 - 4000 MHz están en eBay ✓ Compara precios y características de productos nuevos y usados ✓ Muchos artículos con envío gratis!



www.ebay.es





Only if I had the money 🤤🤤


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> I Just saw this RAM Kit you might prefer theese ones at timigs 15 16 16, I think theese willd perform better on Ryzen platform as timings have more impact on Ryzen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G. Skill Trident Z RGB f4-4000c15q -32 gtzr - 32 gb - 4 x 8 gb-ddr4 - 4000 MHz | eBay
> 
> 
> Las mejores ofertas para G. Skill Trident Z RGB f4-4000c15q -32 gtzr - 32 gb - 4 x 8 gb-ddr4 - 4000 MHz están en eBay ✓ Compara precios y características de productos nuevos y usados ✓ Muchos artículos con envío gratis!
> 
> 
> 
> www.ebay.es
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only if I had the money 🤤🤤


I bought a two DIMM slot motherboard with the Unify-X and X570 and B550 are daisy chain, you WANT two dual-rank DIMM's, not four, so 2x16GB b-die the way to go.


----------



## QTQ

KedarWolf said:


> The latest microcodes or the fastest microcodes?


the fastest ofcourse
And another question,
my motherboard does not train memory at a frequency higher than 3200. Why can it be and how to fix it?
Memory - Gskill TZ 3200CL14 (2 * 8) september 2019


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> I bought a two DIMM slot motherboard with the Unify-X and X570 and B550 are daisy chain, you WANT two dual-rank DIMM's, not four, so 2x16GB b-die the way to go.


Ah ok ok i didnt know that the MoBO was 2 DIMMs, then finding that kit on 2x8 would be ideial for you




QTQ said:


> the fastest ofcourse
> And another question,
> my motherboard does not train memory at a frequency higher than 3200. Why can it be and how to fix it?
> Memory - Gskill TZ 3200CL14 (2 * 8) september 2019


Without more info its literaly imposible to tell. What VCCIO/SA do you use? RAM voltage? CPU Vcore? timings and subtimings? have you placed the two RAM sticks on DIMMs 2 and 4? (counting from the CPU Socket)...


----------



## QTQ

alv-OC said:


> Ah ok ok i didnt know that the MoBO was 2 DIMMs, then finding that kit on 2x8 would be ideial for you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without more info its literaly imposible to tell. What VCCIO/SA do you use? RAM voltage? CPU Vcore? timings and subtimings? have you placed the two RAM sticks on DIMMs 2 and 4? (counting from the CPU Socket)...


io-1.200,sa-1.250, DramVoltage--1.450, sticks in 2 and 4 slots. cpu vcore - normal + offset (+0.090)
timings and subtimings doesn't matter, for any value, nothing happens. At 3200 iol 5-6, at 3300 and higher it is already 13-14, whatever I do. Just believe me, I've tried a lot, really worked on it for a long time, but all in vain.


----------



## TrebleTA

KedarWolf said:


> Off-topic I know, but wanted to share my most awesome new build I'm working on.
> 
> I'm buying this with my tax refund in March.
> 
> EVGA GeForce RTX 3090 FTW3 ULTRA GAMING
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome - Canada Computers & Electronics
> 
> 
> Canadacomputers.com offers the best prices on Computers, Computer Parts, Laptops, Hard Drives, PC Hardware & Accessories with fast shipping and top-rated customer service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.canadacomputers.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2474903
> 
> 
> And a class-action lawsuit here in Canada I am eligible for just passed and I'll get $20,000 from it. And no, it's not a phishing scam, actual class-action lawsuit.
> 
> I pre-ordered and paid in full already a 5950x, 3090 in March with my tax refund. I pre-ordered and paid for an MSI B550 Unify-X already.
> 
> Only two things I want with the lawsuit money are these.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 49 inch CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor Monitors - LC49RG90SSNXZA | Samsung US
> 
> 
> Discover the latest features and innovations available in the 49 inches CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor. Find the perfect Monitors for you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.samsung.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2474904
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB - Specification - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z RGB DDR4-4266 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trident Z RGB
> DDR4-4266MHz CL17-18-18-38 1.50V
> 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> View attachment 2474906


Stuff I can only dream off. Let alone that's some tax rebate


----------



## TrebleTA

From what I read the rtx 30** series, many will need a vbios update from there GPU supplyer. For resizable bar to work


----------



## alv-OC

QTQ said:


> io-1.200,sa-1.250, DramVoltage--1.450, sticks in 2 and 4 slots. cpu vcore - normal + offset (+0.090)
> timings and subtimings doesn't matter, for any value, nothing happens. At 3200 iol 5-6, at 3300 and higher it is already 13-14, whatever I do. Just believe me, I've tried a lot, really worked on it for a long time, but all in vain.


well yeah, thats pretty wierd, perhaps you have a buggy BIOS installed? try flashing both BIOS to the latest official release with efiflash/rufus, if that doesnt wokr I would suggest you to try another RAM kit (from a friend or so), just to start troubleshooting your PC components.

Have you tried to set loose primary timings to see if you can crank up the speed?



TrebleTA said:


> From what I read the rtx 30** series, many will need a vbios update from there GPU supplyer. For resizable bar to work


Yeah we would need vBIOS updates, that only will come for the RTX 30xx series.

What about Nvidia RTX IO? has anyone heard anything? this was presented along with the last line of GPUs but haven't seen much since then, and for what I recall it was like Resizeable BAR but on steroids.


----------



## OleMortenF

alv-OC said:


> well yeah, thats pretty wierd, perhaps you have a buggy BIOS installed? try flashing both BIOS to the latest official release with efiflash/rufus, if that doesnt wokr I would suggest you to try another RAM kit (from a friend or so), just to start troubleshooting your PC components.
> 
> Have you tried to set loose primary timings to see if you can crank up the speed?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah we would need vBIOS updates, that only will come for the RTX 30xx series.
> 
> What about Nvidia RTX IO? has anyone heard anything? this was presented along with the last line of GPUs but haven't seen much since then, and for what I recall it was like Resizeable BAR but on steroids.


I installed F11N on my Z390 Aorus master and the Re-Size Bar is not showing up in the BIOS for me.
I have a 9900k and a 3080 Suprim X. So the bios on the GPU might have too be updated for the Re-Size bar to show in the BIOS?


----------



## TrebleTA

Need to start a partition for all rtx cards to get resizeable bar. My cards like just 2 years old, and if they can do it to the motherboard that's the same age. Why not the GPUs too


----------



## CS9K

KedarWolf said:


> AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


You are actually the best! Thank you so much for the quick turnaround! <3

_edit_ It works great! Thank you SO much! ReSize BAR is working properly in W10 20H2, Radeon Adrenalin 20.12.1, reference RX 6800 XT. 2% improvement in Heaven, 4.8% improvement in 4k Optimized Superposition. Excited for Nvidia to get their bios'es sorted and rolled out!


----------



## alv-OC

OleMortenF said:


> I installed F11N on my Z390 Aorus master and the Re-Size Bar is not showing up in the BIOS for me.
> I have a 9900k and a 3080 Suprim X. So the bios on the GPU might have too be updated for the Re-Size bar to show in the BIOS?


Im totally new when it comes to this new feature, so can not answer your question. I will be instaling and trying that new BIOS later today and I will have a look to it althoug I'm still on GTX 1080Ti 



TrebleTA said:


> Need to start a partition for all rtx cards to get resizeable bar. My cards like just 2 years old, and if they can do it to the motherboard that's the same age. Why not the GPUs too


I guess that you should ask it to Mr. Jen-Hsun Huang, but for me it's pretty straightforward... You want it? then pay for it.

I bet that if AMD does make it compatible with their previous cards Nvidia would be "forced" to do it as well, and that's why competition is so needed.


----------



## TrebleTA

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11n.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390 Master F11n modded with newest RST, Intel Ethernet and GOP firmware, last two newer than my earlier mods.
> 
> Fastest microcodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11n.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Noticed you have listed 2 here are they the same file?


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> Ah ok ok i didnt know that the MoBO was 2 DIMMs, then finding that kit on 2x8 would be ideial for you


I want 32GB and with Ryzen, dual-rank RAM is better than single rank due to how the memory controller works. Dual-rank actually offers advantages over single rank, so dual rank 2x16GB b-die better than single rank 2x8GB b-die. It's something to do with how the X570 and B550 access the memory, dual-rank being better that way.

Ryzen Above: Best Memory Settings for AMD's 3000 CPUs, Tested Same for Ryzen 5000 series.


----------



## genetic priest

Any ideas why AIDA mem bench may suffer from huge performance drop? Did not change any settings and on my 4000 cl15 memory performance dropped from 61 gb/s to 55 gb/s. I use Aorus Ultra 10g BIOS.


----------



## firthen

alv-OC said:


> Hi man.... where you should track the woltage in HW-Info is on VROut as the other votage measures are actually quite off, that 1.5v that you can see on the "Core VID" max values ist just not right, that reading is done in a different spot. Go find VRout, around the "GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF (IRF-IR3352)" section.
> 
> As for the configuration on the BIOS, I would use Dinamic VCore instead of Static/Manual), for that little extra OC at 5.0GHz its going to be better for your temps along with that AIO.
> 
> Either way, for both Dinamic and Manual VCore I would disable all C-States except C3, And I would max out all "Turbo Power Limits". Also Disable:
> 
> Intel(R) Turbo Boost
> Frequency Clipping TVB
> Volt Reduction initiated TVB
> Active Turbo Ratios. You already have the Clock Ratio at 50, there is no need to acativate this Turbo per core functionality.
> 
> As fo the VRM settings, I would use:
> 
> CPU Vcore & VAXG loadline Calibration: High
> CPU Vcore & VAXG PWM Switch Rate: 300KHz (set it manually)
> PWM and VAXG Phase Control: eXm Perf.
> 
> Worths to mention that even when using XMP you should pass some RAM stability test, just to make sure, perhaps your chip needs some extra VCCIO/SA.


First of all thanks for the answer. VRVOUT i tracked on the first picture on the bottom side. Peak was at 1.324V
Never used this setting, so dont really know which numbers i start with testing. Can you propably share your setting or give some numbers to try out?
Would be there any notable stability/performance increase by applying oc to RAM?


----------



## KedarWolf

QTQ said:


> Hi, can you make mod for the aorus z390 elite whith latest microcodes? Firmware f10h. Thank you








Z390EliteModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## QTQ

KedarWolf said:


> Z390EliteModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thank you so much You are the best. Works perfect.


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> I want 32GB and with Ryzen, dual-rank RAM is better than single rank due to how the memory controller works. Dual-rank actually offers advantages over single rank, so dual rank 2x16GB b-die better than single rank 2x8GB b-die. It's something to do with how the X570 and B550 access the memory, dual-rank being better that way.
> 
> Ryzen Above: Best Memory Settings for AMD's 3000 CPUs, Tested Same for Ryzen 5000 series.


Very interesting....I've been following the videos and tests of Bulzzoid about the DualRank and looks like there is a good increase in performance, even on Intel platform if you manage to get a chip with a good IMC and a proper MoBo its currently the best option. The thing is that for DualRank RAM sticks a MoBo with Daisychain tipology memory layout its more suitable as you can populate just 2 DIMM slots, otherwise with T-Tipology you would end up populating the 4 DIMMs and having 64GB of RAM, way to expensive and overkill in my humble opinion. Us being with the Z390 Aorus Master, should stick to 4x8 or 4x4 configuration (in theory, of course, with many airquotes)



firthen said:


> First of all thanks for the answer. VRVOUT i tracked on the first picture on the bottom side. Peak was at 1.324V
> Never used this setting, so dont really know which numbers i start with testing. Can you propably share your setting or give some numbers to try out?
> Would be there any notable stability/performance increase by applying oc to RAM?


You mean like you would like to have a look to my BIOS settings? yeah sure, I need to get home, take the pics and tomorrow at work I'll post them for you, (sorry but currently I have no internet at home so I can't make it earlier)



OleMortenF said:


> I tried the same version with my Z390 Aorous Master and 9900k + RTX 3080 but I dont see the Re-Size bar in the menu. Does anyone else has this problem?


I confirm that the Resizeable BAR option is there, you need to get into the "Settings" section, then find "Above 4G Decoding" -> Enable this function, and the Resizeable BAR will pop-up just under. Options for it are either "Disable" or "Auto", so I guess that Auto will activate it when a compatible GPU is detected.


----------



## CS9K

alv-OC said:


> I confirm that the Resizeable BAR option is there, you need to get into the "Settings" section, then find "Above 4G Decoding" -> Enable this function, and the Resizeable BAR will pop-up just under. Options for it are either "Disable" or "Auto",_* so I guess that Auto will activate it when a compatible GPU is detected.*_


This was my experience, yes. Once ReSize BAR was enabled, Windows 10 showed "Large Memory Range" on the next restart, with Adrenalin 20.12.1 installed with the card a few weeks ago.


----------



## davidm71

Hi guys,

Couple years ago someone on this thread helped me configure Memtest Pro to run on different platforms wether it be Z390 or X99. Think it was Kedarwolf but not sure been so long.

Lost those files if anyone can help..

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Couple years ago someone on this thread helped me configure Memtest Pro to run on different platforms wether it be Z390 or X99. Think it was Kedarwolf but not sure been so long.
> 
> Lost those files if anyone can help..
> 
> Thanks


Need to know your current CPU and how much RAM you have. I still have the files for MemTest Pro 7.0. Have compiled exe's and the raw AutoHotkey files.


----------



## davidm71

KedarWolf said:


> Need to know your current CPU and how much RAM you have. I still have the files for MemTest Pro 7.0. Have compiled exe's and the raw AutoHotkey files.


Have three different platforms. X99 with 32gb ram, 2 different Z390s (9900K/9700K) with 32gb ram (4x8 and 2x16gb), and Z270 2x8gb. Right now just running Memtest Pro executable by itself on autopilot more or less.

Thanks appreciate the reply.

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

davidm71 said:


> Have three different platforms. X99 with 32gb ram, 2 different Z390s (9900K/9700K) with 32gb ram (4x8 and 2x16gb), and Z270 2x8gb. Right now just running Memtest Pro executable by itself on autopilot more or less.
> 
> Thanks appreciate the reply.
> 
> Thanks


I'll be home from in about six hours. Will get them then. Which X99 CPU?


----------



## Smokediggity

@KedarWolf what are the steps you use to update the VBT in the bios?


----------



## KedarWolf

Smokediggity said:


> @KedarWolf what are the steps you use to update the VBT in the bios?


I use a tool from WinRaid forums called UBU Tool and I download the files to update the VBT, GOP, microcodes, RST and Ethernet firmwares from threads there as well. I use the same version as in the BIOS or a known compatible version for Z390 boards.


----------



## genetic priest

KedarWolf said:


> Z390EliteModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Is it possible in future to get RBAR modded bios for Ultra?


----------



## EarlZ

Currently using the modified F11M from Kedar, is the F11N currently okay to use ?


----------



## Smokediggity

KedarWolf said:


> I use a tool from WinRaid forums called UBU Tool and I download the files to update the VBT, GOP, microcodes, RST and Ethernet firmwares from threads there as well. I use the same version as in the BIOS or a known compatible version for Z390 boards.


I wasn't aware UBU could do VBT. I must have missed the announcement, thanks for pointing that out!



EarlZ said:


> Currently using the modified F11M from Kedar, is the F11N currently okay to use ?


It adds support for the Resizable Bar feature, however, the "CPU Core PLL Overvoltage (+mv)", "CPU Vcore/VAXG Protection", and "Core Current Limit (Amps)" options seem to have disappeared again and the Turbo Per Core Limit Control menu is broken again. Apart from those few things, it seems identical to F11M.


----------



## alv-OC

davidm71 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Couple years ago someone on this thread helped me configure Memtest Pro to run on different platforms wether it be Z390 or X99. Think it was Kedarwolf but not sure been so long.
> 
> Lost those files if anyone can help..
> 
> Thanks


does not MemTest Pro only need the number of threads and it calculates the amount of memory to be testes by itselft? I got a version from last year, PM me if you want and we can see how I can send you it.



EarlZ said:


> Currently using the modified F11M from Kedar, is the F11N currently okay to use ?


For me so far so good, I would say that it got buggy yesterday when I was mesing arround with the RAM overclock, it suddenly stoped appliying the settings I introduced manually regardles "Fast Boot" was "Disabled", but I swaped BIOS from main one to the buck-up and then back to main bios again and worked fine... One thing I've noticed is that is a little bit slower (same config with the F11L on Aida Cache & Memory test was 37.6ns and now with F11N is 38.1ns) however, I was able to thighten the latencies a bit with good outcome... so I need to spend more time, but so far I would say that its fine to use it.


----------



## Slayer23

Hi,

Any chance to get the modded version of the new Bios for z390 Aorus pro Wifi (F12K) with the fastest microcode ? 

I attached the link to the file!






Z390APRW.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> does not MemTest Pro only need the number of threads and it calculates the amount of memory to be testes by itselft? I got a version from last year, PM me if you want and we can see how I can send you it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> For me so far so good, I would say that it got buggy yesterday when I was mesing arround with the RAM overclock, it suddenly stoped appliying the settings I introduced manually regardles "Fast Boot" was "Disabled", but I swaped BIOS from main one to the buck-up and then back to main bios again and worked fine... One thing I've noticed is that is a little bit slower (same config with the F11L on Aida Cache & Memory test was 37.6ns and now with F11N is 38.1ns) however, I was able to thighten the latencies a bit with good outcome... so I need to spend more time, but so far I would say that its fine to use it.


The scripts I provide open MemTest evenly spaced, but with each running MemTest on it's own logical core, so like the first running MemTest one Core/thread 1, second on Core/thread 2 etc. The absolute best way to run HCI MemTest. 

Without the script each Memtest is running on every core at once and doesn't test as thoroughly.

Edit: I never wrote the scripts, just modified them for our uses.


----------



## GravBar

@KedarWolf is it possible for you to make a bios with the fastest microcodes, latest drivers and so on based on the new xtreme f9j? https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-xtreme_f9j.zip

Best Regards!


----------



## firthen

alv-OC said:


> You mean like you would like to have a look to my BIOS settings? yeah sure, I need to get home, take the pics and tomorrow at work I'll post them for you, (sorry but currently I have no internet at home so I can't make it earlier)


Would great. You can also PM me for that as soon as you are able to 
Thanks in advance!


----------



## KedarWolf

GravBar said:


> @KedarWolf is it possible for you to make a bios with the fastest microcodes, latest drivers and so on based on the new xtreme f9j? https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-xtreme_f9j.zip
> 
> Best Regards!








Z390XtremeF9jModded.zip







drive.google.com





New link, onboard video fixed.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> The scripts I provide open MemTest evenly spaced, but with each running MemTest on it's own logical core, so like the first running MemTest one Core/thread 1, second on Core/thread 2 etc. The absolute best way to run HCI MemTest.
> 
> Without the script each Memtest is running on every core at once and doesn't test as thoroughly.
> 
> Edit: I never wrote the scripts, just modified them for our uses.



HCI Memtest? Can I get a copy of the script please


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> HCI Memtest? Can I get a copy of the script please


The scripts are for HCI MemTest 7.0, the latest version. It only costs $5 USD to buy it.

You put the HCI MTPclassic.exe file in the same folder as the scripts, install AutoHotKey, right-click on the script, then Run Script.






HCIMemTestScripts.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> The scripts are for HCI MemTest 7.0, the latest version. It only costs $5 USD to buy it.
> 
> You put the HCI MTPclassic.exe file in the same folder as the scripts, install AutoHotKey, right-click on the script, then Run Script.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HCIMemTestScripts.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Sorry for any confusion, I mean the script. I already have HCI memtest. Thanks for the script!

EDIT:

The 8Thread32GB script opens 16 instances instead of just 8 instances like the 8Thread16gb


----------



## Skunk0001

@KedarWolf could you please create a modded version of the z390 Pro Wifi F12k BIOS with the fastest microcodes when you have a chance. Thanks.
Link: https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-pro-wifi_f12k.zip

I appreciate your work, been using your modded F10 forever and its been ideal until now.


----------



## The Pook

genetic priest said:


> Is it possible in future to get RBAR modded bios for Ultra?


2nd? 

would be nice to play with, curious if there's any actual gains to be had. 

was under the assumption people only bothered to modify the Master BIOSes. ... @KedarWolf ?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Sorry for any confusion, I mean the script. I already have HCI memtest. Thanks for the script!
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> The 8Thread32GB script opens 16 instances instead of just 8 instances like the 8Thread16gb


Yes, that is because MemTest can't allocate enough memory each instance to fill up 90% of 32GB with 8 instances, so you double it to 16 instances.


----------



## KedarWolf

The Pook said:


> 2nd?
> 
> would be nice to play with, curious if there's any actual gains to be had.
> 
> was under the assumption people only bothered to modify the Master BIOSes. ... @KedarWolf ?


That's beyond what I can do. Check with Lost_N_Bios on WinRaid forums, he might be able to. Don't PM them though, make a new thread in the BIOS modding forum and @ him there.


----------



## KedarWolf

Skunk0001 said:


> @KedarWolf could you please create a modded version of the z390 Pro Wifi F12k BIOS with the fastest microcodes when you have a chance. Thanks.
> Link: https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-pro-wifi_f12k.zip
> 
> I appreciate your work, been using your modded F10 forever and its been ideal until now.








Z390ProWiFiModded.zip







drive.google.com





New link, onboard video fixed.


----------



## GravBar

KedarWolf said:


> z390AorusXTremeModdedF9i.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you test the onboard video for me. I used a newer VBT file that should work but not 100% sure.
> 
> *DON'T flash this BIOS if you don't have a dedicated video card and are only using the onboard video. I can't 100% be sure the onboard video is working.*


Thanks for your work, but I am unsure if it is the F9i or F9j you have made. It appears as F9i, but thats maybe just a visual, as "i" and "j" are close on the keyboard


----------



## KedarWolf

GravBar said:


> Thanks for your work, but I am unsure if it is the F9i or F9j you have made. It appears as F9i, but thats maybe just a visual, as "i" and "j" are close on the keyboard


I linked the wrong file I think.

This is F9j.

New link, onboard video fixed.






Z390XtremeF9jModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Skunk0001

KedarWolf said:


> Z390ProWifiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It has a new VBT firmware and can't promise the onboard video will work.
> 
> *DON'T flash it if you don't have a dedicated video card and are not using the onboard graphics.*
> 
> If you can flash it, can you check and make sure the onboard video works for me? Be nice to know so I can keep using this VBT firmware.


*EDIT: Everything below is no longer relevant. KedarWolf fixed the issue and updated the linked file.*



Thanks very much, and apologies for the delay, was 3am in the UK when I got your reply.

Flashed the modded BIOS with FreeDOS, everything went smoothly but I don't think the IGP is working.

IGP showed up in device manager as 'Video Controller' but with no drivers (I'd never had it enabled before in this installation of windows), I ran windows update and it installed a driver, but it bluescreened on install, and continues to do it every boot:
SYSTEM_THREAD_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED
igdkmd64.sys

This is with a P0 stepping 9900k purchased in July 2019. All BIOS settings default except CSM disabled and IGP set to Enabled

Not a big deal for me, as I don't need the IGP, I'll DDU the drivers off and try again with a driver from the Intel site, and let you know if it works, if you don't hear back from me on that on that, its because it didn't (see EDIT).

If you would like me to test anything else let me know and I'll do it first chance I get.

EDIT: Tried it with 27.20.100.9168 from the Intel site, doesn't BSOD any more, windows seems to think all is well, but doesn't output a picture to the screen. Can't even get the BIOS to display on it if I set the IGP to be the initial output in the BIOS and unplug all displays from the 3080. Can VNC to windows and from there it thinks its working, but yea, no display at any point.
Might be a hardware issue with the port on my board (never used it in the past) but that seems unlikely.


----------



## Ajdaho pl

guys do you have a "cpu vcore pwm swithing rate" option on your z390 ultra?
I'm very disappointed with this board, on a cheaper msi z390 gaming edge ac I can easily overclock 9600k to 5ghz as long as I set the swithing rate to over 500khz, and on z390 ultra I don't have this option and it can barely handle 4800mhz


----------



## Qbm87

So now I'm confused at -0.180 on dynamic vcore 9900kf just completed intelburntest and Bmw blender 4k render. Got at VRout max of 1.268 and vcore of 1.309 and no whea errors reported in hwinfo. I'm confused because I've been trying to find the bottom of stability using -0.020 mv each test and has laughed each time and passed. Am I do something wrong and will I run into stability issues stopping here or do I keep pushing forward with dropping the vcore more. I'm on the master latest stock bios.


----------



## Slayer23

KedarWolf said:


> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New link, onboard video fixed.


Thanks KedarWolf, much appreciated.
Pretty admirable work you're doing there


----------



## KiparisD

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11n.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390 Master F11n modded with newest RST, Intel Ethernet and GOP firmware, last two newer than my earlier mods.
> 
> Fastest microcodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11n.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Can't download this Bios, is it still ok to use, can you reupload it? Thanks


----------



## Sheyster

stasio said:


> BIOS update on TT forum.....


@stasio - Can you please confirm that the newest BIOS posted on the support page for Z390 Aorus Pro (no Wi-Fi) is identical to the one posted last week on the Tweaktown forum:






Z390 AORUS PRO (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE U.S.A.


Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




www.gigabyte.com





F12l
6‎.81 MB
2‎021/01/19

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

KiparisD said:


> Can't download this Bios, is it still ok to use, can you reupload it? Thanks


I can do it say in eight hours when I'm home from work.


----------



## EarlZ

F11m seems to make my 5Ghz OC more stable, I've never had more than 2days of stable 5Ghz at low loads but now its been over a week of stability!


----------



## KedarWolf

KiparisD said:


> Can't download this Bios, is it still ok to use, can you reupload it? Thanks








Z390MasterF11nModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Ajdaho pl

Is there any gigabyte z390ultra owner here?

"guys do you have a "cpu vcore pwm swithing rate" option on your z390 ultra?
I'm very disappointed with this board, on a cheaper msi z390 gaming edge ac I can easily overclock 9600k to 5ghz as long as I set the swithing rate to over 500khz, and on z390 ultra I don't have this option and it can barely handle 4800mhz "


----------



## Tyler Dalton

I too would love if KedarWolf could do a modded BIOS for the Z390 Ultra with the fastest microcodes. I want to try out the BAR update but I don't want the slow microcodes, it's why I'm still on BIOS F9.


----------



## KedarWolf

Tyler Dalton said:


> I too would love if KedarWolf could do a modded BIOS for the Z390 Ultra with the fastest microcodes. I want to try out the BAR update but I don't want the slow microcodes, it's why I'm still on BIOS F9.








Z390UltraF10hModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

Ajdaho pl said:


> Is there any gigabyte z390ultra owner here?
> 
> "guys do you have a "cpu vcore pwm swithing rate" option on your z390 ultra?
> I'm very disappointed with this board, on a cheaper msi z390 gaming edge ac I can easily overclock 9600k to 5ghz as long as I set the swithing rate to over 500khz, and on z390 ultra I don't have this option and it can barely handle 4800mhz "


Lost_N_BIOS on WinRaid forums might unlock that for you. DON'T PM them, make a new thread in the BIOS modding forum.


----------



## BoldStep

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11nModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hi Kedar, thank you for continuing to mod these!
I'm having a problem. After I type efiflash 1.F11, it identifies the file as f11n, but calls it an invalid bios image. I'm currently using your modded f11l bios. Got any idea?


----------



## KedarWolf

BoldStep said:


> Hi Kedar, thank you for continuing to mod these!
> I'm having a problem. After I type efiflash 1.F11, it identifies the file as f11n, but calls it an invalid bios image. I'm currently using your modded f11l bios. Got any idea?


Try this efiflash.

Edit: And this is the proper command for efiflash.



Code:


efiflash 1.f11 /x







Efiflash.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## BoldStep

KedarWolf said:


> Try this efiflash.
> 
> Edit: And this is the proper command for efiflash.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f11 /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Efiflash.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thank you! It worked now. Where can I find the resizable bar option if you are aware of it, or is it not available yet for nvidia gpus?


----------



## KedarWolf

BoldStep said:


> Thank you! It worked now. Where can I find the resizable bar option if you are aware of it, or is it not available yet for nvidia gpus?




__
https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabyte/comments/l32m30


----------



## alv-OC

firthen said:


> Would great. You can also PM me for that as soon as you are able to
> Thanks in advance!


Sure man, no problem, here are the pictures of my BIOS settings:










































































Feel free to ask me anything you like.


----------



## BoldStep

alv-OC said:


> Sure man, no problem, here are the pictures of my BIOS settings:
> 
> View attachment 2475858
> View attachment 2475859
> 
> 
> View attachment 2475860
> View attachment 2475861
> 
> 
> View attachment 2475862
> View attachment 2475863
> 
> 
> View attachment 2475864
> View attachment 2475865
> 
> 
> View attachment 2475866
> 
> 
> Feel free to ask me anything you like.


Can I ask what PLL overvoltage and flex ratio does?


----------



## alv-OC

BoldStep said:


> Can I ask what PLL overvoltage and flex ratio does?



PLL Overvoltage for "RING", "SA" and "MC" stands for the extra voltage feeded to the powerrails for the Ring, the System Agent and the Memory Controller,

Usually in the HDET platform those power rails feed the different parts of the chip independently, so VCore feeds only the cores and the BCLK, the Cache memories have their own power rail wich usually is the System Agent, and the memory controler too. However, in the main stream platform (not HDET), the cores share the power rail with Caches L1 and L2 wich are beeing feeded by the Ring. L3 cache shares power rail with SA (If I still recall ok) and MC still does have its own rail.

Keep in mind that this is a very simplified explanation, HDET uses a Mesh construction rather than a Ring and for that reason it performs differently across different tasks like productivity or gaming. But long story short, feeding those power rails with some extra voltage "may" be usefull in certain onvercloking configurations (t is not a Magic wand).

Regarding the "CPU Flex Ratio" I don't have much clue to be honest, but since I have the "CPU Flex Ratio Override" dissabled, the next one "CPU Felx Ratio Settings" is doing nothing.


----------



## BoldStep

alv-OC said:


> PLL Overvoltage for "RING", "SA" and "MC" stands for the extra voltage feeded to the powerrails for the Ring, the System Agent and the Memory Controller,
> 
> Usually in the HDET platform those power rails feed the different parts of the chip independently, so VCore feeds only the cores and the BCLK, the Cache memories have their own power rail wich usually is the System Agent, and the memory controler too. However, in the main stream platform (not HDET), the cores share the power rail with Caches L1 and L2 wich are beeing feeded by the Ring. L3 cache shares power rail with SA (If I still recall ok) and MC still does have its own rail.
> 
> Keep in mind that this is a very simplified explanation, HDET uses a Mesh construction rather than a Ring and for that reason it performs differently across different tasks like productivity or gaming. But long story short, feeding those power rails with some extra voltage "may" be usefull in certain onvercloking configurations (t is not a Magic wand).


So increasing each by +45 wouldn't hurt then? Or is it only useful because you have a dynamic offset on vcore?


----------



## alv-OC

BoldStep said:


> So increasing each by +45 wouldn't hurt then?


It will depend on how does your chip behaves, perhaps it will like it or it won't, it will be more stable or maby don't, they are more setings to play with and see the outcome. Have in mind that theese are milivolts, and that theese rails doesn't pull much current at all, so you wont even notice an increment in the temperature on the chip.

So far I've notice that at +60 it causes more memory errors, so thats my red line, and on +30 it does just fine, but since I've been trying to drop the latencies and push the caches a bit more I was testing +45, but I will likely be setting them at +30.


----------



## civi_

@KedarWolf Any chance for modded f8i for z490i z390 i aorus pro wifi (itx one) ?


----------



## Ajdaho pl

KedarWolf said:


> Lost_N_BIOS on WinRaid forums might unlock that for you. DON'T PM them, make a new thread in the BIOS modding forum.


ok I'll leave it as it is, I've just learned my lesson to stay away from crappy gigabyte boards , when I've spent over 250 euros on a board that doesn't have the same basic overclocking features as a 150 euro MSI board ,and limits CPU overclocking 
crap gigabyte


----------



## SoaringStar

Hello guys,

i´m pretty new in using modded bios versions and have a questions. Please excuse me if this one is sounding a little silly to you.

I got a Z390 Master and downloaded the "N" modbios from Kedarwolf. How deeply tested are these modded bios versions and is there really no problem with side effects switching the hardware-rom versions and cpu-microcodes? The release nodes are sounding fantastic about the updated roms and i agree why slowing down the cpu with microcode security fixes for some rare "maybe conditions".....


----------



## KedarWolf

SoaringStar said:


> Hello guys,
> 
> i´m pretty new in using modded bios versions and have a questions. Please excuse me if this one is sounding a little silly to you.
> 
> I got a Z390 Master and downloaded the "N" modbios from Kedarwolf. How deeply tested are these modded bios versions and is there really no problem with side effects switching the hardware-rom versions and cpu-microcodes? The release nodes are sounding fantastic about the updated roms and i agree why slowing down the cpu with microcode security fixes for some rare "maybe conditions".....


To be honest, they is maybe only a few FPS to gain in games and benchmarks apps etc. with the modded BIOS's and if you think security is an issue, than a BIOS with the newest microcodes would be preferred.

However, there is very little chance of anyone being hacked from using these modded BIOS's and this IS overclock.net and peeps prefer them, so I keep cranking then out.

I can do the newest microcode as well at a minor performance loss for the best security and it is very rare even a newly released BIOS has the newest microcodes. If anyone wants a BIOS like that, let me know.

I also update the RST RAID firmware, the Intel Ethernet and Wireless firmwares and the on-board video VBT and GOP firmwares.


----------



## KedarWolf

Hey, what do you peeps think of this? 'gasp'


Resolution
5,120 x 1,440 HDR 1000R 240Hz, G-sync









49” Samsung’s largest 1000R gaming monitor - LC49G95TSSNXZA | Samsung US


At 49”, and arced to match the curvature of the human eye, the G9 marries unmatched immersion, with unbelievable performance, pixel perfect image quality and incredible visual design.




www.samsung.com





I'm getting one of these later in the year to go with the RTX 3090 I'm getting in March.


----------



## EarlZ

I am getting this on my device manager, anyone familiar what this is and how to fix it ?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> I am getting this on my device manager, anyone familiar what this is and how to fix it ?
> 
> View attachment 2476026
> View attachment 2476027


Go here, on top click on Sort By Submit Date, download the newest driver, install, see if it's fixed.






Serial IO Driver


Serial IO Driver




www.station-drivers.com


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Go here, on top click on Sort By Submit Date, download the newest driver, install, see if it's fixed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serial IO Driver
> 
> 
> Serial IO Driver
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.station-drivers.com


----------



## Smokediggity

EarlZ said:


> View attachment 2476029


Version 30.100.2020.7 is the latest Serial IO driver that doesn't give me the unsupported platform error.


----------



## KedarWolf

civi_ said:


> @KedarWolf Any chance for modded f8i for z490i aorus pro wifi (itx one) ?


I don't know anything about the microcodes for Z490 but can use the latest microcodes if you want. Let me know.

Can you link the BIOS?


----------



## EarlZ

Smokediggity said:


> Version 30.100.2020.7 is the latest Serial IO driver that doesn't give me the unsupported platform error.


I tried this version and it does not resolve the issue and even added more to the issue.

EDIT:

I loaded up my secondary bios which is F9 and it did not have this issue, I then went back to F11M and cleared my CMOS and the issue with the Serial IO controllers are now gone, Only that lone PCI device is present.


----------



## civi_

KedarWolf said:


> I don't know anything about the microcodes for Z490 but can use the latest microcodes if you want. Let me know.
> 
> Can you link the BIOS?


Eh sorry that was a typo.. I ment Z390 and the bios is this one from 19/01/2021. As for microcodes, fastest please


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> Hey, what do you peeps think of this? 'gasp'
> 
> 
> Resolution
> 5,120 x 1,440 HDR 1000R 240Hz, G-sync
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 49” Samsung’s largest 1000R gaming monitor - LC49G95TSSNXZA | Samsung US
> 
> 
> At 49”, and arced to match the curvature of the human eye, the G9 marries unmatched immersion, with unbelievable performance, pixel perfect image quality and incredible visual design.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.samsung.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm getting one of these later in the year to go with the RTX 3090 I'm getting in March.



That monitor is my wet dream, but im pretty sure that even a 3080 would strugle to move such amount of pixels at ultra-high settings over 100 FPS in latest AAA games.


----------



## civi_

alv-OC said:


> That monitor is my wet dream, but im pretty sure that even a 3080 would strugle to move such amount of pixels at ultra-high settings over 100 FPS in latest AAA games.


You can pretty much look at 4K benchmarks and add few fps. This resolution has12% _less_ pixels than regular 4k.


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> I am getting this on my device manager, anyone familiar what this is and how to fix it ?
> 
> View attachment 2476026
> View attachment 2476027


What BIOS did you flash?

Try this one. It might be, but I doubt it, the Ethernet firmware I used, this is just the normal firmware used.






Z390MasterF11n.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

alv-OC said:


> That monitor is my wet dream, but im pretty sure that even a 3080 would strugle to move such amount of pixels at ultra-high settings over 100 FPS in latest AAA games.


The pixels are about 7/8's the number of pixels of a 4K screen. 240Hz though, that might be hard to drive with a 3080, but I'm not sure if refresh rate slows things down, I've never Googled it or read about it. And I'm for sure getting a 3090 with my tax refund in March. 

The monitor likely not until maybe the end of the year when my lawsuit that's been certified and passed finally pays out. I'm just getting the records I need to make the claim and they are awarding 20k in damages. It'll be the largest lump sum of money I've ever had, and no, not a scam, an actual really large class action here in Canada.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> What BIOS did you flash?
> 
> Try this one. It might be, but I doubt it, the Ethernet firmware I used, this is just the normal firmware used.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11n.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


I used the F11M you've modded, I Cleared the CMOS and it has fixed it self.

@KedarWolf
Is this F11N you have based the official release and modded with fast microcodes?


----------



## alv-OC

KedarWolf said:


> The pixels are about 7/8's the number of pixels of a 4K screen. 240Hz though, that might be hard to drive with a 3080, but I'm not sure if refresh rate slows things down, I've never Googled it or read about it. And I'm for sure getting a 3090 with my tax refund in March.
> 
> The monitor likely not until maybe the end of the year when my lawsuit that's been certified and passed finally pays out. I'm just getting the records I need to make the claim and they are awarding 20k in damages. It'll be the largest lump sum of money I've ever had, and no, not a scam, an actual really large class action here in Canada.


Yeah I know that in terms of pixels amount it should perform 4K like, but having in mind the RTX and DLSS and how new games perform, 240Hz sounds like Mission Impossible. On the other hand monitors are meant to last at least 4 or years, and next gen GPUs will have a very huge jump imperformance, so maybe next year 240Hz will have more sense.


----------



## db87

KedarWolf said:


> AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


James,

I can't download the file. Can you reupload it?
Z390 Aorus PRO F12l with the fastest microcode.
Thanks!


----------



## Driller au

Hi guys, the people that have enabled BAR have you seen any real world benefits ? on my master M/B i went back to F10b bios when i started OCing my memory and haven't bothered to update if BAR is of benefit i will


----------



## KedarWolf

Bar hasn't been enabled yet in the Nvidia drivers I don't think.









NVIDIA's Resizable BAR will require new BIOS updates for both GPUs and motherboards


NVIDIA announced that its latest graphics cards will be able to support Resizable BAR in late February, and that it will require new BIOS updates for both GPUs and motherboards.




www.dsogaming.com





"NVIDIA’s Game Ready Driver with Resizable BAR support will be out in late February.'


----------



## CS9K

Driller au said:


> Hi guys, the people that have enabled BAR have you seen any real world benefits ? on my master M/B i went back to F10b bios when i started OCing my memory and haven't bothered to update if BAR is of benefit i will


I'm one of the unicorns that managed to get hold of a 6000 series, that is also running an Intel setup.

The only objective numbers I have were 2% increase in Heaven, and 5.8% increase in Superposition 4k. I expect that if you look at any reviews around the 'net, the % improvements seen on AMD systems will be similar-ish to Intel systems.

I don't have a -lot- of games, but if you throw a few names out there, I can see what I can do for getting you some benchmark #'s, at least for my AMD card.

_edit_ Also WHOO! 100 posts! Only took me 15 years


----------



## Driller au

@KedarWolf and @CS9K thanks for the answers i had forgotten about the GPU bios update so i might not even get one for my 2080Ti
@CS9K congrats on cracking a ton


----------



## Sheyster

CS9K said:


> The only objective numbers I have were 2% increase in Heaven, and *5.8% increase in Superposition 4k*.


I heard SP4K was around 4.8% improvement with a 6800XT on intel. Not that a 1% difference matters much, but I think SP4K will be a best case scenario for R-BAR on intel. It remains to be seen which if any games will improve in 4K. Still waiting for the new Nvidia driver and BIOS updates from AIB's and Nvidia.


----------



## KedarWolf

db87 said:


> James,
> 
> I can't download the file. Can you reupload it?
> Z390 Aorus PRO F12l with the fastest microcode.
> Thanks!


The link should work again.


----------



## AndrejB

Anyone notice lan takes a while to connect after restart on 20h2 Windows or is it just me?


----------



## Sheyster

AndrejB said:


> Anyone notice lan takes a while to connect after restart on 20h2 Windows or is it just me?


Yes, I have noticed a delay being able to access the Internet on start-up since upgrading to 20H2 a few weeks ago. Maybe a future intel driver update or Windows update will take care of it.


----------



## AV334

@KedarWolf Hello! i have z390 aorus master! im try to efiflash your F11n but i have error "invalid bios image" what can i do? (from q-flash - same error!)


----------



## alv-OC

AV334 said:


> @KedarWolf Hello! i have z390 aorus master! im try to efiflash your F11n but i have error "invalid bios image" what can i do? (from q-flash - same error!)


I would suggest you to start the whole process again: Format the USB stick, download again the BIOS file, make the Bootable unit with Rufus, put the BIOS file inside and name it F.11N. that worked for me the times I had that problem. Also don't forget to press CMOS button and make sure that deafult settings are loaded on your current BIOS before flashing.


----------



## EarlZ

alv-OC said:


> I would suggest you to start the whole process again: Format the USB stick, download again the BIOS file, make the Bootable unit with Rufus, put the BIOS file inside and name it F.11N. that worked for me the times I had that problem. Also don't forget to press CMOS button and make sure that deafult settings are loaded on your current BIOS before flashing.



I get the same error with F11M and F11N via QFlash and I used the EFIflash instead.


----------



## alv-OC

EarlZ said:


> I get the same error with F11M and F11N via QFlash and I used the EFIflash instead.


Just try a fresh formated USB stick, and rename the BIOS file, something like F11.N or F.11N should work, Also try to flash both BIOS chips on efiflash with command "-DB", for exaple:


> efiflash [biosname] -DB


note that dual bios switch on the MoBo should be on "dual bios" instead on "sigle" mode.


----------



## TrebleTA

With the resize bar, you will not see much improvements in games until games support it, there coding of memory need to be updated in games I think too.


----------



## Dyse

alv-OC said:


> Just try a fresh formated USB stick, and rename the BIOS file, something like F11.N or F.11N should work, Also try to flash both BIOS chips on efiflash with command "-DB", for exaple:
> 
> note that dual bios switch on the MoBo should be on "dual bios" instead on "sigle" mode.


I recommend single mode that you have a backup bios if the update fails.


----------



## EarlZ

alv-OC said:


> Just try a fresh formated USB stick, and rename the BIOS file, something like F11.N or F.11N should work, Also try to flash both BIOS chips on efiflash with command "-DB", for exaple:
> 
> note that dual bios switch on the MoBo should be on "dual bios" instead on "sigle" mode.


I'll try that on the next update, I just used Efiflash instead.


----------



## Wam7

Dyse said:


> I recommend single mode that you have a backup bios if the update fails.


Yes, I would only advise flashing both bioses at the same time if the backup bios is corrupt and you are flashing an official bios.


----------



## sambakza

hi... just updated bios from F11m to F11n (both are modded ver.)
I have z390 aorus master & 9700k oc'ed stable to 5.1ghz using F11m bios. When using F11n I have blue screens with same settings...
tried to raise voltage still no luck.
can someone help me? I wanna try _resize bar _when nvidia is ready next month... thank you


----------



## Wam7

sambakza said:


> hi... just updated bios from F11m to F11n (both are modded ver.)
> I have z390 aorus master & 9700k oc'ed stable to 5.1ghz using F11m bios. When using F11n I have blue screens with same settings...
> tried to raise voltage still no luck.
> can someone help me? I wanna try _resize bar _when nvidia is ready next month... thank you


This is what you can find going between bioses. If you want to keep F11n then you will have to bring down your overclock, though as you've not shared any of your settings then it's going to hard for anybody to help you.

The F11m modded (thanks @KedarWolf ) is the best bios I've used on the Master so I'll be sticking with it it for a good while yet.


----------



## civi_

I'm, for example, at current F8h bios (with z390i mb), unable to change ram timings manually. I have 2x16 3200cl14 b-die set and memory training sets super high arbitrary timings even if I try something as loose as 3600CL20 with 1.45 dram voltage. CPU is ok-ish (9600k 4.8 all core with no avx offset).

I have some small hope f8i is better for this hence I'm rooting for @KedarWolf to make modded f8i bios too.


----------



## sambakza

Wam7 said:


> This is what you can find going between bioses. If you want to keep F11n then you will have to bring down your overclock, though as you've not shared any of your settings then it's going to hard for anybody to help you.
> 
> The F11m modded (thanks @KedarWolf ) is the best bios I've used on the Master so I'll be sticking with it it for a good while yet.


here is my settings with_ F11m modded... _I agree with you F11m its a great one, I can managed to lower the _cpu Vcore -0.015v_ before my previous bios the F10c

_




























_


----------



## Kaibosh

Dropped in to see if there was still action in this thread, as usual I am amazed at the determination and work ethic from the usual heroes. I noticed that there was support for the resizable BAR nonsense in the latest beta bios, took all of one minute to find the links to the modded F11n and the supporting tweaked flashing tools. My system is currently absolutely rock solid with a modded F11e (from KW of course), I am very leery to jump into another BIOS as my rig has been so stable that I have once again forgotten everything I need to know to deal with any issues that arise. I still find the whole methodology around this dual BIOS setup baffling, especially the bizarre importance of loading default settings before, after, every time you poop, etc. 

What do people do when they update their BIOS? I guess just take snapshots of every single screen in the setup before jumping in? I've culled the general advice from the last handful of pages as usual, why does a person need to "press the CMOS button" before flashing? I don't remember that, my foggy memory recalls making the rufus thumb drive, booting into the BIOS to load defaults and then booting to the thumb drive DOS prompt to do a 'efiflash 1.f11 /x' (making sure to have the toggle set to primary BIOS, right?). And, of course, loading defaults again after flashing, before going in and making everything the same as it was? Does that sound right? Should a person try to save your settings and then load them again, or is that considered bad form when going from one revision to another?

Sorry for the dumb questions, any tips are very welcome. Once again, THANK YOU to everyone who maintains this sorcery so that I can stay ahead of the Langoliers and get three more frames per second in World of Goo. This Aorus Master has served me very well, not because it is flawless hardware but because of the work done here to squeeze every last drop out of it.


----------



## AndrejB

@Kaibosh you should have the efiflash instructions on at least a few kedarwolfs posts, if you want to confirm but you got it right.

Regarding the process, I do:

take screenshots of each screen I touched
upload them to gdrive
load optimized defaults
go into freedos and flash the bios
after booting into Windows, shutdown
turn off PSU, hold the clear Cmos for 5,10s
power on, let it boot, restart, set settings.

On a side note:
I do the above as my memory settings are only rock solid after a clear cmos and only with setting xmp and all timings at the same time. Killed a psu with constantly clearing cmos (maybe not the cause), good thing for a 10y warranty.


----------



## Kaibosh

Awesome, this is exactly what I needed. One thing I _always_ run into when I mess around with this stuff is that I end up with a black screen on bootup with no normal way to fix it. It doesn't matter what kind of cable I use, what kind of port I try to output from (or to), onboard or not along with every possible BIOS setting related to such... In the end, the ONLY thing I have found that can 'fix' this situation is to clear the CMOS repeatedly and do a complete power drain of the power supply/board with the power switch. Needless to say, murder/suicide sprees have been triggered by far less.


----------



## bass junkie xl

hey guys im new here my asus xi code z390 board died on me so i bought a gigabyte z390 pro wifi ( 199 $ cad ) . i got my 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz and 
32 gb ( 8 gb x 4 ) of team group 4133 mhz 17-17-17-37 @ 1.45 v , 1.25 / 1.25 vccio / vcssa with tuned timingsadia scores are 

61.4 k read 63.1 k write 59.5 k copy and 38.7 ns ( rtl iol dont train or align and there is no round trip latency option or rtl iol offset like my asus ) 

anyways im running stable with the same settings as my xi code asus z390 pretty happy test prime 95 / tm5 anta extreme / occt . 

current bios is f`11 from 2019 . ands im stable and happy ( ish ) . 


MY Questions 

- how do i flash the moded f11 gigabyte z390 pro wifi with fastest micro code bios update posted a page back ( f11 somthing ) . 

- i put it on my usb stick ( the one i used to flash this one ) and it didnt want to read it when i was in ez flash in the bios . 

- is it worth using the moded bios vs the onei have now f11 ? 

-whats different in the bios is there any more memory options like rtl iol or round trip latency ?

explain like im 5 how i can flash that moded f11 with resize bar for the gigabyte z390 pro wifi lol


----------



## Kaibosh

bass junkie xl said:


> how do i flash the moded f11 gigabyte z390 pro wifi with fastest micro code bios update posted a page back


Dude... The answers are literally in the couple of posts directly above yours. Copy and paste the tips out from there, as well as the stuff found in the last couple of pages. Modded BIOS builds require you to manually flash from a command prompt, hence making the thumb drive with rufus and such - everything is right there in the Gdrive .zip files posted in the last couple of days. Make sure you follow the tips I begged for a few minutes ago. If you have previously tweaked your BIOS to push Minesweeper to a rock solid 240Hz @ 8K use your phone to snap pix of the settings on all 47,000 screens in the BIOS before you start. Also, you already know this I am sure but you will need to wait for a Firmware update for your 3xxx card and whatever garbage drivers specifically 'support' resizing your BAR to get two more frames per second in Fortnight (although 461.40 supposedly already kinda support it).


----------



## kabelarne

I recently updated my Z390 Aorus Pro(Non-Wifi) to the official "F12l" Bios version, and since then my mechanical harddrive has been acting up.

It seems to act as if it thinks it's a Solid State Drive. It instantly shuts itself off after I access it, and will then have to spin up again I want to access another file or folder. My Windows power settings are set to shut off the drive after 20 minutes of inactivity, yet this seems to get ignored.

Posting in this thread because the BIOS upgrade is the only thing I can think of that has changed, am I alone in this experience? I've googled a fair bit and I can't seem to fix it in windows' power settings and I see the same behavior under Linux.

Edit: For some reason I never tried BIOS defaults. It now works as expected, still no clue which setting did this or why. Gotta remember the basics sometimes.


----------



## Wam7

sambakza said:


> here is my settings with_ F11m modded... _I agree with you F11m its a great one, I can managed to lower the _cpu Vcore -0.015v_ before my previous bios the F10c
> 
> _
> View attachment 2476382
> View attachment 2476383
> View attachment 2476384
> View attachment 2476385
> _


For the Master I believe these are the recommended settings... though I don't know if they will give your f11n the stability of F11m


----------



## Wam7

bass junkie xl said:


> hey guys im new here my asus xi code z390 board died on me so i bought a gigabyte z390 pro wifi ( 199 $ cad ) . i got my 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz and
> 32 gb ( 8 gb x 4 ) of team group 4133 mhz 17-17-17-37 @ 1.45 v , 1.25 / 1.25 vccio / vcssa with tuned timingsadia scores are
> 
> 61.4 k read 63.1 k write 59.5 k copy and 38.7 ns ( rtl iol dont train or align and there is no round trip latency option or rtl iol offset like my asus )
> 
> anyways im running stable with the same settings as my xi code asus z390 pretty happy test prime 95 / tm5 anta extreme / occt .
> 
> current bios is f`11 from 2019 . ands im stable and happy ( ish ) .
> 
> 
> MY Questions
> 
> - how do i flash the moded f11 gigabyte z390 pro wifi with fastest micro code bios update posted a page back ( f11 somthing ) .
> 
> - i put it on my usb stick ( the one i used to flash this one ) and it didnt want to read it when i was in ez flash in the bios .
> 
> - is it worth using the moded bios vs the onei have now f11 ?
> 
> -whats different in the bios is there any more memory options like rtl iol or round trip latency ?
> 
> explain like im 5 how i can flash that moded f11 with resize bar for the gigabyte z390 pro wifi lol


4133C17 seems pretty good. Could you possibly post up your Asrock Timing Configuration for your RAM timings? You can download it from this page where it is called "Timing Configurator ver:4.0.4 "








ASRock X299 OC Formula


Supports Intel Core™ X-Series Processor Family for the LGA 2066 Socket; 13 Phase CPU Power Design + 2 Phase Memory Power Design, Dr. MOS; Supports Quad Channel DDR4 4600+(OC) Memory; 5 PCIe 3.0 x16, 1 PCIe 3.0 x4, 1 PCIe 2.0 x1; NVIDIA 4-Way SLI™, AMD 4-Way CrossFireX™; 7.1 CH HD Audio (Realtek...




www.asrock.com





Also to answer some of your questions:

The modded bios does not give any more memory options than standard. I also had the Code motherboard and you don't have the wealth of options that are on the Asus. The Asus was better for memory overclocking but much worse for CPU overclocking for me, the VRM's on the Asus are not really up to it for getting maximum overclocks.
The modded bios does give a quite noticeable CPU speed improvement as the microcodes introduced in official F10 slowed things down noticeably in the software I use.


----------



## AndrejB

Wam7 said:


> For the Master I believe these are the recommended settings... though I don't know if they will give your f11n the stability of F11m


This is by no means recommended!

CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration should be the lowest possible value, here your chip can go into 1.5v territory without you knowing (worst transients possible).


----------



## Wam7

AndrejB said:


> This is by no means recommended!
> 
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration should be the lowest possible value, here your chip can go into 1.5v territory without you knowing (worst transients possible).


Yes if you are using DVID for the voltage but for constant voltage I found I have the least margin in high voltage fluctuation is when using
Extreme LLC, which also gave me the most stable overclock with lowest constant voltage. Though for DVID and offset I would definitely agree that LLC should be as low as possible, so for me when using DVID mine is set to Medium/High LLC as the maximum. (The person I replied to is using Constant voltage)


----------



## AndrejB

Wam7 said:


> Yes if you are using DVID for the voltage but for constant voltage I found I have the least margin in high voltage fluctuation is when using
> Extreme LLC, which also gave me the most stable overclock with lowest constant voltage. Though for DVID and offset I would definitely agree that LLC should be as low as possible, so for me when using DVID mine is set to Medium/High LLC as the maximum. (The person I replied to is using Constant voltage)


Look up buildzoids video about the master and lookup falkentynes comments around here and reddit. Turbo is max recommended for static voltage.


----------



## Wam7

AndrejB said:


> Look up buildzoids video about the master and lookup falkentynes comments around here and reddit. Turbo is max recommended.


IIRC the settings were taken from Buildzoids Z390 overclocking video (don't remember him saying not to use Extreme and Switch Rate is from Falkentyne) and Falkentyne was referring to DVID.

You should not be getting any high voltage transient spikes when using constant fixed voltage.


----------



## Qbm87

Can't seem to get anything over 4000mhz stable on master anybody got a tips please. Even all set back to default with XML enabled it still throws up errors and crashes trying to run 4299 17-18-18-36


----------



## Wam7

Qbm87 said:


> Can't seem to get anything over 4000mhz stable on master anybody got a tips please. Even all set back to default with XML enabled it still throws up errors and crashes trying to run 4299 17-18-18-36


You'll need to post up more info: What bios are you on? What memory? What voltage? IO and SA voltages? etc


----------



## Qbm87

Wam7 said:


> You'll need to post up more info: What bios are you on? What memory? What voltage? IO and SA voltages? etc


I'm on the latest official from GB website. It's gskills 4299 cl 17 4x8gb sticks tried everything from 1.2- 1.35 Io and sa and 1.4-1.5 voltage. Can't seem to get it stable but dropping it to 4000 is rock solid stable at 1.4 volts with 1.26 Io and 1.3 sa


----------



## bass junkie xl

Wam7 said:


> 4133C17 seems pretty good. Could you possibly post up your Asrock Timing Configuration for your RAM timings? You can download it from this page where it is called "Timing Configurator ver:4.0.4 "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASRock X299 OC Formula
> 
> 
> Supports Intel Core™ X-Series Processor Family for the LGA 2066 Socket; 13 Phase CPU Power Design + 2 Phase Memory Power Design, Dr. MOS; Supports Quad Channel DDR4 4600+(OC) Memory; 5 PCIe 3.0 x16, 1 PCIe 3.0 x4, 1 PCIe 2.0 x1; NVIDIA 4-Way SLI™, AMD 4-Way CrossFireX™; 7.1 CH HD Audio (Realtek...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.asrock.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also to answer some of your questions:
> 
> The modded bios does not give any more memory options than standard. I also had the Code motherboard and you don't have the wealth of options that are on the Asus. The Asus was better for memory overclocking but much worse for CPU overclocking for me, the VRM's on the Asus are not really up to it for getting maximum overclocks.
> The modded bios does give a quite noticeable CPU speed improvement as the microcodes introduced in official F10 slowed things down noticeably in the software I use.


Yeah them.group extreme 32 GB 8gb x 4 sticks no boot issues or nothing tuned 2nd and 3rd timings 4133 c 18 18 18 38 @ 4133 c17 17 17 37 1.45v 1.25 vccio 1.25vcssa. Passed 9 cycles of tm5 extreme anta preset. 9900 ks @ 5.2 GHz @ 1.36v 
( 1.27 vrout ). 

Ya my adia 64 scores are the same as my xi code z390 profile just. 2ns higher latency 
( Rtl iol not touched as I can't on this board )

You bet when Im off work I'll upload my asrock ss. 

My Asus xi code z390 did 5.2 GHz @ 1.33v where this board is 1.365 v. The Asus xi code had zero issues with vrms . I ran prime 95 pulling 190 amps 270 watts for 24 hrs and occt for 24 hrs. 

.
This board is doing everything the aus xi code was doing for me just less bios goodies and no rtl iol offset or round trip latency option 
( Makes board pull it pants up and work hard on right rtl iol ) 

What's 2 Ns latency ..... 200$ gigabyte z390 pro wifi or 670$ for my Asus xi code . I might just stick with this


----------



## bass junkie xl

Qbm87 said:


> Can't seem to get anything over 4000mhz stable on master anybody got a tips please. Even all set back to default with XML enabled it still throws up errors and crashes trying to run 4299 17-18-18-36


thats odd your on a master arnt you ? did you try 1.45 v dram and 1.30 - 1.35 vccio / vcssa ? 
got 32gb 8gb x 4 of 4133 17-17-17-37 on a cheap 200 $ gigabyte z390 pro wifi i posted my pics of the tm5 passing 9 hrs and my timings


----------



## bass junkie xl

Wam7 said:


> 4133C17 seems pretty good. Could you possibly post up your Asrock Timing Configuration for your RAM timings? You can download it from this page where it is called "Timing Configurator ver:4.0.4 "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASRock X299 OC Formula
> 
> 
> Supports Intel Core™ X-Series Processor Family for the LGA 2066 Socket; 13 Phase CPU Power Design + 2 Phase Memory Power Design, Dr. MOS; Supports Quad Channel DDR4 4600+(OC) Memory; 5 PCIe 3.0 x16, 1 PCIe 3.0 x4, 1 PCIe 2.0 x1; NVIDIA 4-Way SLI™, AMD 4-Way CrossFireX™; 7.1 CH HD Audio (Realtek...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.asrock.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also to answer some of your questions:
> 
> The modded bios does not give any more memory options than standard. I also had the Code motherboard and you don't have the wealth of options that are on the Asus. The Asus was better for memory overclocking but much worse for CPU overclocking for me, the VRM's on the Asus are not really up to it for getting maximum overclocks.
> The modded bios does give a quite noticeable CPU speed improvement as the microcodes introduced in official F10 slowed things down noticeably in the software I use.



here ya go tm5 extreme preset anta 9 cycles over night 9 hrs or so

im pretty impressed with my 9900 ks imc its strong as i tried a friends 9900 k and4133 on this board was a insta nope 4000 c18 18 18 38 was stable that's about it ! 

remember guys this is 200 $ board and i haven't and can not train my rtl / iol or use rtl iol offset to tighten rtls ect . nor do i have round trip latency on this board . 

my asus xi code z390 with rtl offset of 18 and round trip latency with same timings here i got the same scores in adia just 36 - 37 ns latency ( 1 - 1.5 ns latency big deal... ) 

but ya im pretty happy with 32 gb 8gb x 4 with these settings with the 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz @ 1.36 v bios ( 1.29 v rout ) ht on . 

i might not even replace my asus xi code z390 it will cost me 670 $ Canadian to get one from covid prices . the only diffrence is i got 2 ns less latency on that board rest is the same really


----------



## TrebleTA

When I ask gigabyte about the above settings for pwm switching and setting control they told me to use auto. Yet told them 300 is what people are using also exm parf. They said was not advised for general use.


----------



## genetic priest

Hello everyone! Got a problem with my setup. Left picture - old one - taken on default CPU settings and XMP 4000 enabled in BIOS. Right picture is recent whows huge drop in CPU cache and memory performance despite having set more aggressive timings. Which software or hardware can affect performance in such a bad way, any ideas?
Same Winndows 10 20H2.


----------



## genetic priest

Solved - Virtual Machine Platfrom on Windows destroys CPU performance, even when nothing is running in background.


----------



## SoaringStar

Hello KedarWolf,

i read the last pages here and i´m a bit confused. Could you please post the latest F11m and F11n shots with small notices whats changed inside and how stable it performs? I saw that you made some small changes here and there and the files inside the archives has diffrent time stamps. So i don´t understand which is the latest vs. the most stable shot.

People reporting that your "m" works rock solid, does this still count for "n"? I really like and honor your work but it´s a little hard for me to understand the trails without having a general page with a version listing.


----------



## Qbm87

bass junkie xl said:


> here ya go tm5 extreme preset anta 9 cycles over night 9 hrs or so
> 
> im pretty impressed with my 9900 ks imc its strong as i tried a friends 9900 k and4133 on this board was a insta nope 4000 c18 18 18 38 was stable that's about it !
> 
> remember guys this is 200 $ board and i haven't and can not train my rtl / iol or use rtl iol offset to tighten rtls ect . nor do i have round trip latency on this board .
> 
> my asus xi code z390 with rtl offset of 18 and round trip latency with same timings here i got the same scores in adia just 36 - 37 ns latency ( 1 - 1.5 ns latency big deal... )
> 
> but ya im pretty happy with 32 gb 8gb x 4 with these settings with the 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz @ 1.36 v bios ( 1.29 v rout ) ht on .
> 
> i might not even replace my asus xi code z390 it will cost me 670 $ Canadian to get one from covid prices . the only diffrence is i got 2 ns less latency on that board rest is the same really
> 
> View attachment 2476662


Could this be the issue why my 4 stick would fail before setting these?


----------



## sambakza

SoaringStar said:


> Hello KedarWolf,
> 
> i read the last pages here and i´m a bit confused. Could you please post the latest F11m and F11n shots with small notices whats changed inside and how stable it performs? I saw that you made some small changes here and there and the files inside the archives has diffrent time stamps. So i don´t understand which is the latest vs. the most stable shot.
> 
> People reporting that your "m" works rock solid, does this still count for "n"? I really like and honor your work but it´s a little hard for me to understand the trails without having a general page with a version listing.


yea... I don't know anything about modding a bios and for my last hope who wants to try a stable _F11n_ with _resizeable bar_ lies in KedarWolf works. I have a feeling that _F11n_ maybe the last bios for aorus master and gigabyte won't bother anymore with z390.

They are going too busy with the upcoming z590


----------



## bass junkie xl

Yeah don't set rtl iol 


Qbm87 said:


> Could this be the issue why my 4 stick would fail before setting these?


Ya don't set rtl iol manualy... That insta fails to boot on mine to. Let all auto. Except for your primary timings get it to boot . Then stress test it loose. Then move to tightening

Try 4000 17 17 17 37 @ 1.45 v and 1.25 - 1.30v for both vcssa / vccio. 
If not try 18s then 19s then move to other timings to tighten


----------



## steffmeisteren

Hey guys! What BIOS would you recommend me for my Z390 Aorus Pro? I'm running I7 9700k on 5ghz @ all cores, and I'm a big fan of tweaking. I'm reading there may be a custom BIOS for my to try? Thanks!


----------



## CS9K

steffmeisteren said:


> Hey guys! What BIOS would you recommend me for my Z390 Aorus Pro? I'm running I7 9700k on 5ghz @ all cores, and I'm a big fan of tweaking. I'm reading there may be a custom BIOS for my to try? Thanks!


Our Hero Kedarwolf modified the F12L beta bios from TweakTown for the Z390 Aorus Pro (non-wifi) in this post. Go back a page or three from this link to find instructions on how to flash this bios. Keep in mind that profiles do not transfer between bioses, so screenshot all of your settings and save the images to a usb drive.

And evidence from me that ReSize BAR does indeed work in said beta bios with my RX 6800 XT.


----------



## EarlZ

Whats the best performing memory configuration for a Z390 Master, I am looking at changing into a low profile ram and I am lost in all of this single/dual/quad rank DIMMs. I am looking at still keeping 32GB or moving to 64GB.


----------



## TrebleTA

The master supports dual. So two mem sticks run in sync. Quad, not supported.
Best would be 2x16gb dual sticks. Don't think you can get 2x32gb. So if you wanted 64gb just get two more dual sticks. 
Also a note if you got two sticks then thinked in 2 years you wanted more the sticks die would prob change so Overclocking from stock would be more unstable.


----------



## EarlZ

TrebleTA said:


> The master supports dual. So two mem sticks run in sync. Quad, not supported.
> Best would be 2x16gb dual sticks. Don't think you can get 2x32gb. So if you wanted 64gb just get two more dual sticks.
> Also a note if you got two sticks then thinked in 2 years you wanted more the sticks die would prob change so Overclocking from stock would be more unstable.


When you say quad not supported, do you mean quad RANK memory or quad channel ?


----------



## [email protected]

Hello everyone, a question about IO-L . At frequencies above 4000 and above IO-L at best 13-14 , to reduce to acceptable 7 fails ,in BIOS changing parameters taking into account data asrock timing configurator as a result does not start . I don't want to believe that for gigabytes IO-L 13 at a frequency of 4000 and higher, the best or there are settings in the BIOS that allow you to reduce IO-L up to 7


----------



## AndrejB

EarlZ said:


> When you say quad not supported, do you mean quad RANK memory or quad channel ?


I think he meant quad channel, not sure what quad rank would be.

Anyway if you're going to be overclocking 4x8 is the easiest for master (t-topology). Other combinations may not allow you too much wiggle room.
I had 2x16 and switched to 4x8 and now am at 4133 c17 - 39ns


----------



## steffmeisteren

CS9K said:


> Our Hero Kedarwolf modified the F12L beta bios from TweakTown for the Z390 Aorus Pro (non-wifi) in this post. Go back a page or three from this link to find instructions on how to flash this bios. Keep in mind that profiles do not transfer between bioses, so screenshot all of your settings and save the images to a usb drive.
> 
> And evidence from me that ReSize BAR does indeed work in said beta bios with my RX 6800 XT.


Great, thank you so much! Can't I flash it like I would flash an official BIOS? And where can I find the changelog for this modded BIOS?


----------



## CS9K

steffmeisteren said:


> Great, thank you so much! Can't I flash it like I would flash an official BIOS? And where can I find the changelog for this modded BIOS?


For modded bios'es, you must use the flash tool that I believe Kedarwolf included in the zip file. 

Changelog is on Gigabyte's site for each board model, on the bios download page.


----------



## Qbm87

bass junkie xl said:


> Yeah don't set rtl iol
> 
> 
> Ya don't set rtl iol manualy... That insta fails to boot on mine to. Let all auto. Except for your primary timings get it to boot . Then stress test it loose. Then move to tightening
> 
> Try 4000 17 17 17 37 @ 1.45 v and 1.25 - 1.30v for both vcssa / vccio.
> If not try 18s then 19s then move to other timings to tighten


 So managed 16 16 16 32 on 1.45 and 1.3 both. Stable problem i think I'm having that is holding me back could be that they are running high to low 50-60c is that normal or should I add a fan pointing at them.


----------



## AndrejB

Hey guys, does the below look ok?
Wondering what the average VROUT is for 150A (on the 9900k @ 5Ghz)


----------



## Qbm87

AndrejB said:


> Hey guys, does the below look ok?
> Wondering what the average VROUT is for 150A (on the 9900k @ 5Ghz)


Looks about right compared to mine but I'm no expert


----------



## TrebleTA

Ring llc clock should be 3 less to cpu so 4.8 also temps seem high my 4.9ghz hits 84c. In my sweet box. But that's a 9700k. What other bios settings u have for voltages?
Not sure on if VROUT 150A is any good or not tho?
VROUT for cpu looks good tho


----------



## AndrejB

I can't find the post in this thread (there's a graph) but thought of sharing max Intel recommended limits. Here's falkentyne's explanation.

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/dso1b8/_/f6qr7md

Oh and the above isn't p95 Small FFT stable, got a BSOD.

@TrebleTA no settings touched except turbo ratios, trying to mimic the 9900ks.

Edit, down to two workers failing by removing manual ac/dc 130/130 and letting the mb set them exactly the same... I just remembered why I didn't oc this thing previously...


----------



## TrebleTA

By that 150a is on the limit?


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> By that 150a is on the limit?


Per the above, for 150a max safe is 1.28v.

My p95 run was 195a and 1.22, meaning degradation territory (1.21 max safe).

This is all on the official 11n, going to try the modded one now

Edit: wow my imc is bad, can't get into Windows at 47 ring and can't start apex at 45...

Edit 2: seems it was the core clock not the ring. 49/47 looks better





9900k benefits very much from Cache overclocking (my results)


since my 9900k is a bad overclocker i tested (again) working with cache overclocks. and the results are against the ideological "CACHE OC DOES NOT DO ANYTHING" phrases at the internet. Cache overclocking did not change the power draw and temperature nor did it need a higher voltage (except when c...




linustechtips.com


----------



## TrebleTA

Just a rule If your cpu is 4.9 then ring 3 less so 4.6.


----------



## Dannyele

Well, after buying 2 more sets of *F4-4266C19D-16GTZR* for a total of 4 dual rank config and thinking that could achieve 4266 at least with XMP and forgeting this world... I've finished wtih this:

XMP OFF
SA 1.25
IO 1.25
DDR 1.4

And manual timmings with a little of tweak of secondaries/etc:




















unfortuntelly, 4266 is not stable as appear errors on TM5 anta past 15 mins... maybe I can lower a bit the sa/io or thight a little bit the timmings, but I guess that doesn't matter for just gaming...

9900K stock 47/43 1.26 set in BIOS... thought?


----------



## TrebleTA

Got a question for ya all....
What tools are people using to test and set up there system now days. e.g HWinfo, Asrock timing configurator, Realbench Etc.


----------



## Dyse

Dannyele said:


> Well, after buying 2 more sets of *F4-4266C19D-16GTZR* for a total of 4 dual rank config and thinking that could achieve 4266 at least with XMP and forgeting this world... I've finished wtih this:
> 
> XMP OFF
> SA 1.25
> IO 1.25
> DDR 1.4
> 
> And manual timmings with a little of tweak of secondaries/etc:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unfortuntelly, 4266 is not stable as appear errors on TM5 anta past 15 mins... maybe I can lower a bit the sa/io or thight a little bit the timmings, but I guess that doesn't matter for just gaming...
> 
> 9900K stock 47/43 1.26 set in BIOS... thought?


Maybe 4266 is not stable after 15 mins because your dimms temp seems little bit high. You could try adding a fan over dimms and maybe loosen trfc, if the temperature cannot be dropped. Also consider 3900MHz mem clock with tighter timings, because then you get rtls and iols trained right and probably better performance than your current settings. Gigabyte Z390 Master's memory training is not working at 4000MHz and beyond, because bios still needs fixing.


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> Got a question for ya all....
> What tools are people using to test and set up there system now days. e.g HWinfo, Asrock timing configurator, Realbench Etc.


Stress:
Cpu: LinX with equal residuals (I couldn't get anything above 48/45 to pass), OCCT, Realbench, etc.
Imc: 112k-112k p95
Ram: tm5 anta777 extreme config

Ram performance: aida64

Info:
General: hwinfo64
Memory timings: Asrock timing configurator


----------



## TrebleTA

Have you tried coping someone else's bios settings would be just cpu voltage to change? ( 2 pages back)
When I say ring should be 3 less to cpu. It can be less than that.
Have you linked your bios settings?
With prime95 my tests would pass yet pc would crash on 1-2 games so I increased cpu voltage by 0.010 and was fine. Memory I run men test etc runs fine. Load a game memory would crash so left my ram timing for now. Am not to sure what to do. I have 3200 sticks overclock more to 3600 default motherboard timings.


----------



## Dannyele

Dyse said:


> Maybe 4266 is not stable after 15 mins because your dimms temp seems little bit high. You could try adding a fan over dimms and maybe loosen trfc, if the temperature cannot be dropped. Also consider 3900MHz mem clock with tighter timings, because then you get rtls and iols trained right and probably better performance than your current settings. Gigabyte Z390 Master's memory training is not working at 4000MHz and beyond, because bios still needs fixing.


what about someting like this?










same voltages, 1.4 ddr, 1.25 sa/io bios

on aida, 3900 is ~1.5ns slower (~45.5 4133 CL19)


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> Have you tried coping someone else's bios settings would be just cpu voltage to change? ( 2 pages back)
> When I say ring should be 3 less to cpu. It can be less than that.
> Have you linked your bios settings?
> With prime95 my tests would pass yet pc would crash on 1-2 games so I increased cpu voltage by 0.010 and was fine. Memory I run men test etc runs fine. Load a game memory would crash so left my ram timing for now. Am not to sure what to do. I have 3200 sticks overclock more to 3600 default motherboard timings.


Nah didn't try anyone else's settings. Been here for two years so have enough info. Not a lot meat on this bone (9900k) for safe/stable oc.
I'll share my settings in a few days once I validate.

For your memory issue, I would try:
-reset cmos (turn off psu, hold reset cmos button for 5s)
-leave cpu at default, set fans etc., save & close
-activate xmp, set speed and primaries, save & close
-test with tm5 anta777 for at least 1 cycle - integralfx/MemTestHelper

From my experience this board will only train stable tm5 once after clear cmos and xmp enabled. Any subsequent changes would require a clear cmos.

I used the guide above for secondaries and achieved 39.5ns (not great but not bad)


----------



## OleMortenF

Not sure if this has been asked before, but does anyone know if
Trident Z Neo
DDR4-3800MHz CL14-16-16-36 1.50V
16GB (2x8GB)
F4-3800C14D-16GTZN-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.

Will work on a Z390 Aorus Master 9900k with XMP?


----------



## Qbm87

OleMortenF said:


> Not sure if this has been asked before, but does anyone know if
> Trident Z Neo
> DDR4-3800MHz CL14-16-16-36 1.50V
> 16GB (2x8GB)
> F4-3800C14D-16GTZN-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> Will work on a Z390 Aorus Master 9900k with XMP?


Yes they will stright out of the box. It seems to be only 4000+ that struggles to train properly.


----------



## OleMortenF

Thanks for answering  I noticed a post on reddit were a guy with the same setup as me had bought the 
Trident Z Neo
DDR4-3800MHz CL14-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (4x8GB) 

And he said the system wouldn't boot with XMP
I am not sure if that could be because of Quad? Or doesn't it matter if its Quad or Dual as I have purchased.


----------



## Qbm87

AndrejB said:


> Nah didn't try anyone else's settings. Been here for two years so have enough info. Not a lot meat on this bone (9900k) for safe/stable oc.
> I'll share my settings in a few days once I validate.
> 
> For your memory issue, I would try:
> -reset cmos (turn off psu, hold reset cmos button for 5s)
> -leave cpu at default, set fans etc., save & close
> -activate xmp, set speed and primaries, save & close
> -test with tm5 anta777 for at least 1 cycle - integralfx/MemTestHelper
> 
> From my experience this board will only train stable tm5 once after clear cmos and xmp enabled. Any subsequent changes would require a clear cmos.
> 
> I used the guide above for secondaries and achieved 39.5ns (not great but not bad)


Is that any different to resetting CMOS with the power on when not posting? If so sounds promising. If not then no dice over 4000mhz for me.


----------



## Qbm87

OleMortenF said:


> Thanks for answering  I noticed a post on reddit were a guy with the same setup as me had bought the
> Trident Z Neo
> DDR4-3800MHz CL14-16-16-36 1.50V
> 32GB (4x8GB)
> 
> And he said the system wouldn't boot with XMP
> I am not sure if that could be because of Quad? Or doesn't it matter if its Quad or Dual as I have purchased.


Quad channel is a whole different beast and can change based on CPU. Will still have to set some voltages sa/io to 1.30 then work them down but would say it doesn't seem difficult under 4000mhz to find stability on my board anyways (master) It is worth the time setting and testing yourself regardless tbh. Think there's something to do with the termination voltages that I have to get my head around that makes pushing past the 4000mhz wall a breeze.


----------



## OleMortenF

Qbm87 said:


> Quad channel is a whole different beast and can change based on CPU. Will still have to set some voltages sa/io to 1.30 then work them down but would say it doesn't seem difficult under 4000mhz to find stability on my board anyways (master) It is worth the time setting and testing yourself regardless tbh. Think there's something to do with the termination voltages that I have to get my head around that makes pushing past the 4000mhz wall a breeze.


I see  So you think I will be able to just enable XMP with mine and no need for adjusting anything manually since its only dual?


----------



## AndrejB

OleMortenF said:


> Not sure if this has been asked before, but does anyone know if
> Trident Z Neo
> DDR4-3800MHz CL14-16-16-36 1.50V
> 16GB (2x8GB)
> F4-3800C14D-16GTZN-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> Will work on a Z390 Aorus Master 9900k with XMP?


Not garanteed to work. Neither gskill nor gigabyte tested it for our board (not on their qvl lists).



Qbm87 said:


> Is that any different to resetting CMOS with the power on when not posting? If so sounds promising. If not then no dice over 4000mhz for me.


Per the instruction manual, psu power should be off when resetting cmos.

When the psu is on and you press the clear cmos the pc will turn on, which might not clear everything properly.

I found having xmp activated and tuning the timings all at once then training to yield the best results


----------



## Qbm87

OleMortenF said:


> I see  So you think I will be able to just enable XMP with mine and no need for adjusting anything manually since its only dual?


You will definitely have to set these two and adjust them as a minimum and the qvl list means nothing really just that it did work as expected on the board/s they tested.


----------



## OleMortenF

Qbm87 said:


> You will definitely have to set these two and adjust them as a minimum and the qvl list means nothing really just that it did work as expected on the board/s they tested.


Okay thanks, I'll try installing them tomorrow and post here how it goes


----------



## Qbm87

Any help with these timings please. More to the point can anyone see anything overly wrong. These are tm5 stable. 0 errors 9 cycles


----------



## Alemancio

Qbm87 said:


> Any help with these timings please. More to the point can anyone see anything overly wrong. These are tm5 stable. 0 errors 9 cycles
> View attachment 2477140


You can still improve:
tWR, tRFC, TRRDs and tWTRs, tFaw, tREFI, tRDWRs and tWWRDs.

Check this guide here.

Good luck!


----------



## CS9K

Qbm87 said:


> Any help with these timings please. More to the point can anyone see anything overly wrong. These are tm5 stable. 0 errors 9 cycles
> View attachment 2477140











I'm running two 2x8GB G.Skill Flare X 3200C14 B-Die kits; four dimms total at 1.47V. I recommend active cooling while stress testing at that voltage.

My settings are only a data point, and should not be copied exactly, especially if you have memory other than Samsung B-Die. If you do have B-die, my thoughts are as follows:

Everything in the rightmost column looks good
Except tREFI, which can go up to 65535 if you keep dimm temps in check (<50C)
tFAW only needs to be "4 x tRRD_S", or "(4 x tRRD_S) + 2" for good measure
tRFC can usually go much lower; B-Die can usually do around 160ns; some even lower
To modify tWTR_L and _S's values, change tWRRD_SG and _DG, respectively
tWR and tRTP can be lowered. tWR needs to be exactly 2x tRTP

Everything else looks okay.


----------



## Dannyele

With the RTLS/IOS bios bug (anuthing higher than 4000 doesnt traing) it is much better to go something like 3900 with tight timmings... (at least for gaming)

1.4v DDR
1.25 SA/IO


----------



## Qbm87

So I manged to get the timings down bar the tRFC/tREFI which wont budge without a bump in voltage to 1.5v which means running in the 60c + range. Is it worth it or will I be best to Drop the frequency to 3900/3800? What benefit will I get from tRFC/tREFI or should I just call it stable at tm5 3 cycles so far and test overnight as is.


----------



## CS9K

Qbm87 said:


> So I manged to get the timings down bar the tRFC/tREFI which wont budge without a bump in voltage to 1.5v which means running in the 60c + range. Is it worth it or will I be best to Drop the frequency to 3900/3800? What benefit will I get from tRFC/tREFI or should I just call it stable at tm5 3 cycles so far and test overnight as is.
> 
> View attachment 2477215


What memory kits are you running? Anything other than B-Die, I wouldn't personally run over 1.45V daily. B-Die is the only thing I'd be comfortable running at/near 1.5V daily. 

I ask because B-die should have no problem doing tRFC 320 and tREFI 65535. Since your kits won't, I wouldn't run more than 1.45V, and DIMM temps should ideally be <50C at all times, even during stress testing (which is why I recommended active cooling, even for B-Die).


----------



## TrebleTA

I have at last got a better version of the f11n z390 master bios with RGB also 1-2 other fixes dated 3-2-21. 
I have added it to my Tweaktown thread.
Click here


----------



## Qbm87

TrebleTA said:


> I have at last got a better version of the f11n z390 master bios with RGB also 1-2 other fixes dated 3-2-21.
> I have added it to my Tweaktown thread.
> Click here


Nice!! What fixes? System fan 3 going rogue by any chance?


----------



## OleMortenF

I booted my 9900k @5GHz and aorus master with the G-Skill Trident Z Neo
DDR4-3800MHz CL14-16-16-36 1.50V
16GB XMP today  I haven’t tested much yet, but it seems to be stable.


----------



## Kaibosh

TrebleTA said:


> I have at last got a better version of the f11n z390 master bios with RGB also 1-2 other fixes dated 3-2-21.
> I have added it to my Tweaktown thread.


In your thread, you state "This Bios is a Official Bios from Gigabyte e-Support". It is newer/better than what a person would be grabbing off the official site? How does this compare with the F11N that KedarWolf has posted for the Master? Also, looking over your settings, why are you running with C States enabled? If there is one thing that has become clear from 500+ pages of this thread, it is that a person should disable those for top end stability/speed. They are about fallback clock speeds in order to save energy, right?


----------



## TrebleTA

Kaibosh said:


> In your thread, you state "This Bios is a Official Bios from Gigabyte e-Support". It is newer/better than what a person would be grabbing off the official site? How does this compare with the F11N that KedarWolf has posted for the Master? Also, looking over your settings, why are you running with C States enabled? If there is one thing that has become clear from 500+ pages of this thread, it is that a person should disable those for top end stability/speed. They are about fallback clock speeds in order to save energy, right?


Its so if i use balance windows profile clocks will drops to 800 and lower voltage, then if i put power plan on high performance it then get a over clock of 4.9ghz and turbo of 5.1 depends on usage. so its like how my cpu would be by default just i've increased it.



Qbm87 said:


> Nice!! What fixes? System fan 3 going rogue by any chance?


Not sure how it compares with others I only just got it my self. Fix's wise noting about fan header 3


----------



## Qbm87

Abit off topic but riddle me this. Just done overclocking. Now have no internet but I do! I'll explain. Internet won't work after a few seconds of windows login, through WiFi or usb tether from phone. Well kind of not work. uTorrent runs and is uploading and downloading but no other program can connect and it keeps throwing me no internet connection in the taskbar every few minutes maybe it's intermittent at best. Any ideas could I have possibly killed something on the board or is it a window 10 strange bug I have no idea what to ask Google to find a fix 🤣 EDIT just as I typed this eating dinner came back up and all is working again


----------



## SoaringStar

Tested around a couple of days and the best shot for me: modded 11mGK
Runs like a charm and i loved to hit the uninstall button of RGB Fusion. Thanks a lot for this one!

(Modded) 11n still misses "Core current limit" option again and the drop down menu of "Turbo per core limit control" is disappeared.


----------



## Kaibosh

TrebleTA said:


> Its so if i use balance windows profile clocks will drops to 800 and lower voltage, then if i put power plan on high performance it then get a over clock of 4.9ghz and turbo of 5.1 depends on usage. so its like how my cpu would be by default just i've increased it.


I don't think the power plan profiles work quite that way, but beyond that... We don't disable things like the C State stuff, fast boot and a dozen other things simply to avoid features we don't plan to use. When you are pushing your hardware until it squeaks these features being enabled _at all_ cause instability, and inconsistency where it counts. I'm not talking about crashes, I'm talking about hardcore gaming. Features like fast boot or virtualization support hurt gaming in a big way, by disrupting the holy grail of sweet, buttery, frametime pacing. With the introduction of DX12, screen drawing is prioritized in a way that made for all new kinds of hitching, stuttering, or juddering. These can be mitigated and controlled, through v-sync (and variants thereof). The bigger war is unseen - battling the cursed enemy of input lag. Capping and controlling maximum frame-rate is the key to all of this, and while doing so seems like it should be a trifling matter... It is not. Games most often do a very poor job of it, with Nvidia kit you are always going to be way, WAY better off capping things in the control panel (along with AF, scaling, and most critically TAA sharpening). Capping with RTSS is better yet, and for true weapons grade autism intensifies sperglordian edgelord gaming you use custom rolled Special K. 

I digress, but this stuff _does_ matter. Sure, a lot of triple A titles aren't fussy over this stuff, but most of the important ones are. Want to play RDR2 with everything tweaked to 11, including a Reshade so juicy that Continuity of Government aircraft are scrambled? Yes, a custom KW Bios stripped to the marrow is the first critical step down that tragic, lonely road. Trust me. Disabling these things is necessary, because anything that makes your CPU flicker her attention sideways hurts you where it counts - those noscope 180 snap card drops in Slay the Spire. Whether one grows turgid over Prime95 stats, or mom's best chicken tendies slide down the wall at anything less than rock 240 in Cookie Clicker, our needs and solutions bring up together as one.


----------



## MangoMunchaa

Hi everyone, just thought I'd share my final RAM overclock with the patriot viper 4400s, voltages in BIOS are -

VCCSA - 1.3v
VCCIO - 1.3v
DRAM - 1.49v
VCore - High LLC, 5.1ghz +0.100v


----------



## HyperC

oops i keep coming to intel thread


----------



## TrebleTA

Well if I wanted a solid 5.1ghz overclock I can but I wanted a stock overclock so lowered the cpu etc. I get no problems and can use my bios profile go swap. Nvidia gpu have there own overclock. If unstable from it u need to underclock the card so nvidia boost 3 will not take it so far.
But do get what you mean. For now tho the cpu I think is still kind of new so should manage, In most games cpu usage is like 50% GPU is 120%. Only time I got 100% cpu is when decompressing or running realbench.
But have a 5.1ghz profile with c states off turbo etc off.


----------



## stasio

Kaibosh said:


> In your thread, you state "This Bios is a Official Bios from Gigabyte e-Support". It is newer/better than what a person would be grabbing off the official site? How does this compare with the F11N that KedarWolf has posted for the Master?


It's custom BIOS and I beleive KedarWolf should mod again.....


----------



## ezveedub

stasio said:


> It's custom BIOS and I beleive KedarWolf should mod again.....


+1...If KedarWolf gets a chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## AndrejB

TrebleTA said:


> I have at last got a better version of the f11n z390 master bios with RGB also 1-2 other fixes dated 3-2-21.
> I have added it to my Tweaktown thread.
> Click here


@KedarWolf hey, sorry for bothering but seems like there's an interest for your magic 

Could you mod the below with fastest microcodes, latest firmware etc.



https://www.mediafire.com/file/0p63n...n-RGB.zip/file


----------



## KedarWolf

stasio said:


> It's custom BIOS and I beleive KedarWolf should mod again.....


Which BIOS are you taking about? Can you link it again here?


----------



## KedarWolf

AndrejB said:


> @KedarWolf hey, sorry for bothering but seems like there's an interest for your magic
> 
> Could you mod the below with fastest microcodes, latest firmware etc.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/0p63n...n-RGB.zip/file


Oh, just saw this. Did you peeps mean mod this BIOS?


----------



## OleMortenF

KedarWolf, yes please that one


----------



## KedarWolf

OleMortenF said:


> KedarWolf, yes please that one


Can do when I'm home from work in eight hours.


----------



## TrebleTA

Guess the bios is a custom as I got the RGB added.
So far for me it's working great.
@KedarWolf My link is below.
My post link
@stasio You think it be ok for me to link kedarwolf's work on my TT topic?


----------



## OleMortenF

Have u guys noticed any difference in performance with the new microcodes vs the fast ones on 9900k?


----------



## SoaringStar

Guys, the bios link is down

Edit: This one works: Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11n-RGB


----------



## TrebleTA

SoaringStar said:


> Guys, the bios link is down


Click my post link above


----------



## stasio

TrebleTA said:


> Guess the bios is a custom as I got the RGB added.
> So far for me it's working great.
> @KedarWolf My link is below.
> My post link
> @stasio You think it be ok for me to link kedarwolf's work on my TT topic?


Yea, why not.


----------



## CS9K

This is interesting. 

Over the 8 months or so of flashing stock and modded bioses to my Z390 Aorus Pro, I've noticed that, with each different bios version, there were always certain memory frequencies that refused to work at all, others that would boot but not set the correct speed, and yet others that would train and work fantastically with no fiddling. I found no pattern to the frequency settings that didn't work; no amount of fiddling with vcore, vdimm, training, VCCIO, VCCSA, nom/park/off, and others, would get those particular frequencies to work. 

I also could -never- get the board to train anything properly at or above DDR4 4000, and no amount of massaging with anything would make the bootable speeds at/above DDR4 4000 stable.

Until F12L Beta, modded as usual by KedarWolf. F12L refuses to run DDR4 3800, which is what my memory was set at until now. I figured, since I had to go and futz with the memory anyway, I'd see how far I could push it. Up and up the speeds with, some booted, some refused, until I selected DDR4 4133 @ 1.48V. It trained, booted, and after relaxing my secondary timings slightly, it made it through 4 passes of Memtest86 (test 5,6,7,8). 

I would say that I was impressed with the modules, but I knew some people had pushed FlareX 3200C14 kits further. What I'm *more* impressed with is that 4133 is stable (so far), especially after reading in this thread about how poorly the Z390 Aorus boards work with fast memory (other than the Master). I'll give it a full pass of Memtest86 overnight and a few hours of P95 LFFT this weekend some time. For the record, the modules are actively cooled with a pair of NF-A4x20 FLX fans, and average 40C in P95 LFFT.


----------



## KedarWolf

CS9K said:


> This is interesting.
> 
> Over the 8 months or so of flashing stock and modded bioses to my Z390 Aorus Pro, I've noticed that, with each different bios version, there were always certain memory frequencies that refused to work at all, others that would boot but not set the correct speed, and yet others that would train and work fantastically with no fiddling. I found no pattern to the frequency settings that didn't work; no amount of fiddling with vcore, vdimm, training, VCCIO, VCCSA, nom/park/off, and others, would get those particular frequencies to work.
> 
> I also could -never- get the board to train anything properly at or above DDR4 4000, and no amount of massaging with anything would make the bootable speeds at/above DDR4 4000 stable.
> 
> Until F12L Beta, modded as usual by KedarWolf. F12L refuses to run DDR4 3800, which is what my memory was set at until now. I figured, since I had to go and futz with the memory anyway, I'd see how far I could push it. Up and up the speeds with, some booted, some refused, until I selected DDR4 4133 @ 1.48V. It trained, booted, and after relaxing my secondary timings slightly, it made it through 4 passes of Memtest86 (test 5,6,7,8).
> 
> I would say that I was impressed with the modules, but I knew some people had pushed FlareX 3200C14 kits further. What I'm *more* impressed with is that 4133 is stable (so far), especially after reading in this thread about how poorly the Z390 Aorus boards work with fast memory (other than the Master). I'll give it a full pass of Memtest86 overnight and a few hours of P95 LFFT this weekend some time. For the record, the modules are actively cooled with a pair of NF-A4x20 FLX fans, and average 40C in P95 LFFT.
> 
> View attachment 2477451


Check out TM5, it's by far the best memory testing program and the go-to one now.









Memory Testing with TestMem5 TM5 with custom configs


Hello everybody I am just making a very light tutorial with a collection of custom config files and a DOWNLOAD LINK for TM5 v0.12 anta777 absolut config *Official* Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread None of the work is mine but it seems like a pretty good and fast testing app




www.overclock.net


----------



## ezveedub

Did they ever do a “GK” RGB Fusion bios for z390 Ultra?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## CS9K

KedarWolf said:


> Check out TM5, it's by far the best memory testing program and the go-to one now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Memory Testing with TestMem5 TM5 with custom configs
> 
> 
> Hello everybody I am just making a very light tutorial with a collection of custom config files and a DOWNLOAD LINK for TM5 v0.12 anta777 absolut config *Official* Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread None of the work is mine but it seems like a pretty good and fast testing app
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Oh hey, thanks! I'd seen this mentioned before but never sought it out, myself. I'll give it a whirl to see if I'm stable. (I tune for push-button stability; one error is one too many. I don't want to have to think about it once I'm done overclocking) :3

Passed a single cycle of 1usmus's file. I'll leave it running for a few hours this weekend to see if it can take the abuse.


----------



## Smokediggity

I have found some additional issues while testing the F11n BIOS and have reported them to Gigabyte.

*Issue #1*

Boot Override Menu doesn't work after changing System Memory Multiplier

Steps to reproduce:
1) Insert a USB flash drive.
2) Enter BIOS.
3) Change System Memory Multiplier to something other than the default. (I used DDR4-3400).
4) Save and exit BIOS.
5) Enter BIOS.
6) Go to Save&Exit tab and select the USB flash drive as the boot override.

You will find that instead of booting to the USB flash drive, the BIOS instead prompts you to save your changes. Upon answering Yes, the board reboots and proceeds to boot from the default boot device.

*Issue #2

** WARNING ** - Potential to brick your board. Do not attempt without a chip programmer and a saved BIOS dump!*
When the Serial Port is Disabled and Above 4G Decoding is Enabled, flashing the BIOS using the EFIFlash EFI utility slows down to a point where it will take more than a day to flash the BIOS.

Steps to reproduce:
1) Place the EFI shell and EFIflash utility from the Z590 [1] BIOS on a USB flash drive, along with a BIOS file to flash. (I used the F11n BIOS to test)
2) Enter BIOS.
3) Disable the Serial Port.
4) Enable Above 4G decoding.
5) Save and Exit BIOS.
6) Boot into the EFI shell on the USB flash drive
7) Use the EFIFlash utility to flash the BIOS.

The actual flashing process moves at an insanely slow pace (less than 1% progress per hour). This will make someone power off their computer in the middle of the flash process, bricking the board.

*Issue #3*

The main BIOS navigation menu gets messed up when returning to the BIOS after using the Boot Override Menu.

Steps to reproduce:
1) Insert a non-bootable USB flash drive.
2) Enter BIOS.
3) Select the USB flash drive as the boot override device.

After being sent back to the BIOS you will notice that the main BIOS navigation menu has been enlarged and is shifted down and to the right causing it to extend beyond the edge of the screen.

*Issue #4 *

Cannot enter BIOS from F12 Boot Menu after failing to boot from a device twice.

Steps to reproduce:
1) Insert a non-bootable USB flash drive.
2) Press F12 to access the Boot Menu during POST.
3) Attempt to boot from the non-bootable flash drive twice.
4) Select Enter Setup.

You will find that upon selecting Enter Setup, the BIOS hangs at a blank screen.

[1] https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z590-aorus-master_f3.zip


----------



## TrebleTA

The link is for a z590 also you should always load bios defaults or cosmos reset before a bios update??


----------



## Smokediggity

TrebleTA said:


> The link is for a z590 also you should always load bios defaults or cosmos reset before a bios update??


Yeah, I usually do load defaults before updating bios, but forgot this time, since I didn't have to disable CSM to boot to dos. I was curious to find out if the newer efi version of efiflash, as opposed to the dos version, would work with the Z390. It does work to my surprise, just not with that particular settings combination. Since Gigabyte only distributes the efi shell and efi version of efiflash with newer boards like B550 or Z490, I decided to use the one supplied with the Z590 BIOS, which is why that one is linked.


----------



## KedarWolf

MasterGK_F11nModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## TrebleTA

KedarWolf said:


> MasterGK_F11nModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Could you link what you've added etc please also I will link it on tweaktown later if cool,
And last of all thank you @KedarWolf


----------



## TrebleTA

Smokediggity said:


> Yeah, I usually do load defaults before updating bios, but forgot this time, since I didn't have to disable CSM to boot to dos. I was curious to find out if the newer efi version of efiflash, as opposed to the dos version, would work with the Z390. It does work to my surprise, just not with that particular settings combination. Since Gigabyte only distributes the efi shell and efi version of efiflash with newer boards like B550 or Z490, I decided to use the one supplied with the Z590 BIOS, which is why that one is linked.


So are you saying if we use the efiflash from the z590 to load a z390 bios were get a updated EFI shell?


----------



## OleMortenF

Hey guys. When I tried updating my Z390 Aorus Master with the F11n from Gigabyte it froze while updating via Efiflash. Now my computer wont boot at all, the only lights that come on the motherboard is the cmos button and start button at the back panel, also the led’s blinks white for a second and turns off. The cmos and start button on the back panel is on all the time, but nothing happens when clicking them. I tried removing the battery, unplugging all power for an hour. I also tried the bios switch but nothing happens. Is my board dead?  I thought the backup bios should be there when things like this happens, but there is no difference when I switch it.


----------



## TrebleTA

What efiflash did you use, and did you reset cosmos before flashing?
But very strange. Sure 1 of the other may know. I myself would think the backup would kick in


----------



## OleMortenF

No I didnt reset cosmos. I used the modded Efiflash 0.85. I have used it before and something like this has never happened. When I power the PC on the cmos light and start button on the IO panel lights up. But nothing else happens


----------



## SoaringStar

Thanks alot KedarWolf!

*OleMortenF*
I hope you didnt use the /db switch on command line while operating Efiflash. If yes your board is dead now. Which bios did you exactly use? the "official" or Kedars?


----------



## OleMortenF

I used Kedars with efiflash 1.f11 command. I didnt add anything else


----------



## sambakza

OleMortenF said:


> Hey guys. When I tried updating my Z390 Aorus Master with the F11n from Gigabyte it froze while updating via Efiflash. Now my computer wont boot at all, the only lights that come on the motherboard is the cmos button and start button at the back panel, also the led’s blinks white for a second and turns off. The cmos and start button on the back panel is on all the time, but nothing happens when clicking them. I tried removing the battery, unplugging all power for an hour. I also tried the bios switch but nothing happens. Is my board dead?  I thought the backup bios should be there when things like this happens, but there is no difference when I switch it.


This is something happened a year to me before when I tried to update from F9 to F10 bios...
Pressing power button but PC won't boot, only led lights on at power & clear cmos button backpanel.

yes I'm afraid your motherboard is dead  
In my case thankfully, gigabyte accepted to repair my motherboard and they didn't tell me anything what parts were broken though... 

I suspect something happened with anykind of voltages, because a few days before my motherboard was dead when I enter bios some variable voltage numbers are red.
this is somehow happens because not clearing cmos or sets to default after overclocking your pc while changing bioses perhaps...?


----------



## OleMortenF

Damn, thats what I was afraid had happened  I really dont wanna go buy a new Z390 Motherboard when the 11900k is coming soon. My Motherboard warranty also expired in December


----------



## sambakza

just try to contact gigabyte first, maybe they accept to repair your motherboard even your warranty already expired...

I had MSI z77 motherboard which got cpu socket bent pins before... and they still accept to repair it even after 7 years for free


----------



## TrebleTA

Is it not 3 year warranty, so would not be December 2022?
I always at least load bios defaults before flashing. some time ago i noticed with secure boot enabled the bios tock some time to flash, so since then I've played safe. that's to say it was that. there may of been failing hardware and flashing just push it to the limits.


----------



## SoaringStar

Did you use another Efiflash version instead using the version which is packed together with 11n by Kedar?


----------



## OleMortenF

Yes I used the one provided in the Forums - TweakTown Forums a little while back. But something like this never happened before. And You are right TrebleTA, I found out its still under warranty


----------



## SoaringStar

What happens if you switch manually to bios #2 and push the cmos reset button and try firing it up again?


----------



## OleMortenF

Nothing, it’s not responding to anything. I thought the second bios could be used when things like this happens.


----------



## TrebleTA

still using a different EFIflash you think it pop up a error if it was that. as think you can only flash the modified bios with the modified EFIflash?


----------



## SoaringStar

This is one indication that the bios rom didn´t done that, it seems like a conflict/bug between bios settings and the Efiflash procedure. Anyway - i´m very sorry that this happened. I saw on Gigabyte page that this is a socketed bios and should be repaireable with an external eprom writer.

Edit: Did you saw that you need to use 2 switches on the mobo?

Turn off the computer.
Adjust SB switch to Single BIOS mode. 
Adjust BIOS switch (BIOS_SW) to the functional BIOS.
Boot up the computer and enter BIOS mode to load BIOS default setting.
Adjust BIOS Switch (BIOS_SW) to the non-working BIOS.
Flash the BIOS by using Q-Flash.
Reboot and confirm if BIOS is working.
Shut down the computer and adjust BIOS Switch (BIOS_SW) to original BIOS.
Boot up the computer and confirm BIOS are working properly.


----------



## OleMortenF

Yeah I tried that. But it’s not responding to anything. The computer wont boot up either. It seems like the card is dead except for the lights on the IO panel. I have no idea how this could go so wrong


----------



## Gregix

To z390 aorus pro users.
Is there any hampering scores settings in bios I can turn off in memory overclocking? I have nowhere near scores for my 4000Mhz c15 4x8 setup. On z370taichi one option was intels virtualization, that was setting my scores/performance from 4100Mhz to 3200Mhz area. Can't find in this bios second option for Vd so far.


----------



## Lancer645

First post here. Trying to get my i9900k stable at 5.0hz. I'm in stock F11N (I lost my stablility after the update).
Biggest issue is instant BSOD in OCCT/Prime 95 if I do any small FFTs. Will pass real bench, OCCT large/medium and intel burn test no problem.
I have an 850 Watt PSU/Aorus 2070 super.
Thanks for your help!









Good morning all.


----------



## Smokediggity

TrebleTA said:


> So are you saying if we use the efiflash from the z590 to load a z390 bios were get a updated EFI shell?


Nothing about the bios itself changes. It's just a more modern way of doing the flash. The EFI shell is a command line tool that can be accessed in UEFI mode, which means you don't need to enable the CSM compatibility mode in the bios and don't need a bootable version of dos.


----------



## Gregix

Well
Thx to KedarWolf modded bios(latest) I was able to boot 4133c16 on my z390 a pro board. Flash went flawlessly.
Now time to tune...
Thank you again, I was on edge of returning this MB after 1 day.
Welp...
Just managed to get 4200c16, so I think I will search for max, then tune...^^

OK, 4266c16 so far is max. 4300c17 won't boot. So...success I might say. Now get rid of errors and tune.
No joy. 4200c16 is max. Need to find proper Vdram for starting point.


----------



## blueline64

I've been a long-time lurker in these forums and appreciate all of your inputs for helping me overclock my motherboard (namely @Falkentyne ). I have read this thread front to back and the insight has been invaluable. @KedarWolf wondering if you could please upload the latest micro-codes for the ITX Z390 I AORUS PRO WIFI bios F8i? It would be greatly appreciated, and I'm sure others are looking for the same. Regardless if you're able to, you're a legend for the work you do. THANK YOU!



https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-i-aorus-pro-wifi_f8i.zip


----------



## Gregix

Ok, I am out of ideas. When I touch RTL/IOL got boot loop/crash, at least do not have to clear cmos, but still it sucks.
Managed to get to this point, now, without RTL tweaks, performance still suck.









VDRAM is 1.488v SA/IO 1.25V/1.22V. And kinda can't touch them, manipulating them causes sooner or later errors in TM5, or even bsods sometimes.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

Alright, so it turns out that my samsung b-die 3200 CL14 kit (Team Dark Pro) has degraded. My observations:


I previously ran it at XMP with 1.35v in my old ASRock b350 Pro4 without any issues for nearly 2 years.
Then in about October of 2019 I put this kit in my current system: 9700k + Gigabyte Aorus z390 Ultra. It used to run at XMP settings with 1.36v (not stable at 1.35, I assumed because t-topology from the mobo).
Then I overclocked it to 4000 16 18 18 38 at 1.46v, and it ran stable for about 6-8 months. By stable, we're talking long memtest HCI tests with more than 400% passes.
There was one instance during summer 2020 that I started to get memory errors, but then I installed better front intake fans, and was able to get it to run stable with better ambient airflow. No memory errors at with memtest HCI. I assumed that it was just on the edge of stability when overclocked in the winter, and I know that samsung can be temp sensitive, so maybe the summer temps were warming it up and causing memory errors.
In September of 2020 I put this kit back in the b350 board. At XMP settings with 1.35v (previously rock solid 100% stable), the memory errors were so bad that, in less than 12 hours, it corrupted my fresh windows install so hard that it failed to boot. I did some tests and it would not run stable at XMP timings unless I set memory voltage to 1.38v. I assumed that maybe it was an issue with a mobo bios update/agesa causing issues, because there's no way that the kit could have degraded so much.
I recently returned the kit to the 9700k + z390 build and am now immediately getting memory errors at the XMP settings with 1.36v, and with the 4000 overclock with 1.46v that used to run stable.

So it is all but confirmed that this kit degraded from what was some very modest overclocking over less than 1 year. This surprised me because people regularly state that they run samsung b-die at close to 1.5v without any noticeable degradation.

Because this is now worthless degraded B-Die that can't even run at XMP, I'm just going to retire it to be used in mining rigs. But I want to make sure that this doesn't happen to the next kit of memory that I buy. So:

1) what are safe voltages for operating B-Die? Apparently even as low as 1.46v can cause degradation
2) what are safe temps for operating B-Die? I am worried that this was running too much current and heat, since my memory kit sits under a Dark Rock Pro 4 tower cooler. This kit doesn't have temp sensors, but a motherboard thermal probe on the heatsink reads sometimes 40C. If I have to, I will stick a fan in my case to blow between the memory sticks to at least reduce temps by a little bit.
3) are there any known bugs with aorus z390 boards that can cause degradation with DRAM?


----------



## AndrejB

Gregix said:


> Ok, I am out of ideas. When I touch RTL/IOL got boot loop/crash, at least do not have to clear cmos, but still it sucks.
> Managed to get to this point, now, without RTL tweaks, performance still suck.
> View attachment 2477630
> 
> 
> VDRAM is 1.488v SA/IO 1.25V/1.22V. And kinda can't touch them, manipulating them causes sooner or later errors in TM5, or even bsods sometimes.


Something seems off, my less aggressive settings are producing better results. Hint - I enable XMP and set all timings at once after cmos reset (this is the only way to get stable)
@KrampusKlaus as far as I know 1.45v is safe daily even 1.5 (new kits have 1.5 as xmp), maybe the pcb was lower quality so the traces degraded (I run mine 1.4 as you may notice my settings are extra safe, hopefully)


----------



## KrampusKlaus

AndrejB said:


> Something seems off, my less aggressive settings are producing better results. Hint - I enable XMP and set all timings at once after cmos reset (this is the only way to get stable)
> @KrampusKlaus as far as I know 1.45v is safe daily even 1.5 (new kits have 1.5 as xmp), maybe the pcb was lower quality so the traces degraded (I run mine 1.4 as you may notice my settings are extra safe, hopefully)


Perhaps. I'm just trying to plan for the next kit so that they don't degrade. Memory OC so exhausting (I literally put in months OCing this kit, with the help from a lot of people from this thread lol) that I almost just want to get some crucial ballistix 3600 kits.


----------



## KedarWolf

blueline64 said:


> I've been a long-time lurker in these forums and appreciate all of your inputs for helping me overclock my motherboard (namely @Falkentyne ). I have read this thread front to back and the insight has been invaluable. @KedarWolf wondering if you could please upload the latest micro-codes for the ITX Z390 I AORUS PRO WIFI bios F8i? It would be greatly appreciated, and I'm sure others are looking for the same. Regardless if you're able to, you're a legend for the work you do. THANK YOU!
> 
> 
> 
> https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-i-aorus-pro-wifi_f8i.zip








z390iAorus-ProWifi_f8i.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## TrebleTA

I know for full extreme overclocking people they disable C States, but this is not recommended for 24/7 use as it puts more pressure on CPU and system as a Intel guide stated some where, it should be on auto once a stable overclock was found.
But my question is this C States have come along way and I think some are more for laptops batteries. So what would you say for a desktop PC C State, I want to use sleep, hibernate etc on windows. Would C0 to C3 be enough?


----------



## TrebleTA

@Lancer645 
VCCIO voltage needs to be changed same for CPU System agent voltage. Your CPU may need more juice, also turbo per core limit I would leave on auto.


----------



## ezveedub

KrampusKlaus said:


> Perhaps. I'm just trying to plan for the next kit so that they don't degrade. Memory OC so exhausting (I literally put in months OCing this kit, with the help from a lot of people from this thread lol) that I almost just want to get some crucial ballistix 3600 kits.


Aren’t this Team Group B-Dies still under warranty? I used some Ballistix 3600 for minimal time, about a month. They were O-K for the price, but not going to crank them like B-Die. I have Team Group 4000 CL18 at CL16 at same speed not for a few months and have no issues 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Lancer645

@TrebleTA 
Thank you, I'll give that a try. Do you have any recommendations for settings?


----------



## blueline64

KedarWolf said:


> z390iAorus-ProWifi_f8i.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hi, sorry to bother you again. When attempting to flash I am getting invalid bios image. This is, of course, using rufus to a bootable drive under DOS


----------



## KedarWolf

blueline64 said:


> Hi, sorry to bother you again. When attempting to flash I am getting invalid bios image. This is, of course, using rufus to a bootable drive under DOS


Are you absolutely sure your board is the Z390i Pro Wifi, the 'i' version?

If you use this Efiflash it'll flash even a wrong BIOS and brick your board.






Efiflash.zip







drive.google.com







Code:


efiflash 1.f8i


----------



## TrebleTA

Lancer645 said:


> @TrebleTA
> Thank you, I'll give that a try. Do you have any recommendations for settings?


I would set Dram volt 1.36v also Dram training voltage the same, Would then disable memory fast boot for 2-3 starts then put enable. For faster and better memory training. Your C State if your using C3 your need C1H, as it works backwards. VCCIO set 1.15v system agent 1.20v, Most for them is recommend 1.25v or lower. 
If you don't then get and use HWinfo to monitor your settings.
CPU try increasing voltage, yet it is quite high already.
I do have a guide of more less your setting but I use the cpu turbo features, and lock cpu to 4.9-5.1ghz.
My CPU peak voltage is 1.35v. In Hwinfo under Vrout. So it has increased in f11m/n from 1.29v

Also anyone with advice on C States?


----------



## AndrejB

@TrebleTA After the post a few pages back, I decided to give disabling cstates and all other voltage optimization a shot.

All micro stuttering is gone across the board, mouse in windows and apex feels much smoother, but there's a 20w increase in power consumption at idle (from the ups).

I doubt that this will cause any degradation but sleep, hibernation probably is gone (I don't use these, don't even use windows fast startup, so in my case overall positive)


----------



## SoaringStar

Yes, this is something i can confirm. OC-setups with all c-states enabled caused massive microlags in my setup. Best to proof in Apex like you said. Due my dynamic oc setup, all I have enabled is C1E, all other stuff disabled. I run a very mild OC on my system with a good balance between performance and idle power consumption. I dont see any reason to run highest OC settings during normal office sessions. Power bills are insane here in Germany!

Here are some quick shots. Please never forget to set AC and DC loadlines to value 1 in a dynamic voltage setup! If not set, your cpu will be fired up to 1.5V!!!


----------



## Gregix

It was "fun" to have z390 GB mb, but I guess I will look at MSI now, as they have BAR functionality too.
Must say, z370 taichi runs better 4x8Gb3200c14 TG sticks better than z390 A PRO. Sad Asrock wont update bios for me.


----------



## TrebleTA

SoaringStar said:


> Here are some quick shots. Please never forget to set AC and DC loadlines to value 1 in a dynamic voltage setup! If not set, your cpu will be fired up to 1.5V!!!


Think that was due to load line calib, if was too high, then you need changed the value. If set them to 1 I get bluescreen on win load, think its as I have load line calib on normal?


----------



## SoaringStar

I dont know that exactly, but i guess it´s independend to all LLC levels. This setup runs unchanged over all bios releases without any trouble since 2018. I aways choose lower LLC in combination with a higher voltage to avoid the hammering spikes to cpu to increase lifespan -> could be wrong but i read this recommandation somewere else and made sence for me.

How is your experience tweaking the uncore ratio? Does this make some benefits in any way?


----------



## TrebleTA

I have set it to C3 state and lower e.g C1H. disabled the others, I left package on auto. sure strange stuff happened with me keyboard changing packets to max C3.
Turbo wise, I just wanted a bit of a boost here an there just like how the CPU was made. yet don't really notice it that much. as when gaming its full loads so all 4.9 its more when idling and doing general tasks.

So do you think i should increase Load line calib to say turbo then change Loadline AC/DC to one then settle the vcore?


----------



## SoaringStar

Gregix said:


> It was "fun" to have z390 GB mb, but I guess I will look at MSI now, as they have BAR functionality too.
> Must say, z370 taichi runs better 4x8Gb3200c14 TG sticks better than z390 A PRO. Sad Asrock wont update bios for me.


Memory model combinations has nothing to do with the quality of a mobo. This is why every company is providing compatibility lists. Some faulty ram sticks are another case... I came always back to Gigabyte. This is absolutly top notch what Gigabyte ships today.


----------



## SoaringStar

TrebleTA said:


> So do you think i should increase Load line calib to say turbo then change Loadline AC/DC to one then settle the vcore?


I dont know if I understand you right, but if you choose a dynamic vcore setup, then all settings has been done at the same time before hitting F10

Edit: Oh sorry - totaly forgot. I´m running a handpicked 8700K. It got prime tested 5,3 Ghz on 1.39V by my delid service guy, but I never pushed it over 5.1 Ghz.


----------



## TrebleTA

well by changing loadline calib from what I have normal to turbo will change my Dynamic Vcore voltage. so I would need less as Loadline Calib is giving more.

Aye 1.39v is a lot i dont like taking this more than 1.35v why i'm only at 4.9ghz that and cooling.


----------



## SoaringStar

Yes, and the last few percents of performance always cost a way more energy. 1.39V is clearly inside Intel specs, so no worries at all but it isnt the sweetspot as you said.


----------



## Lancer645

TrebleTA said:


> I would set Dram volt 1.36v also Dram training voltage the same, Would then disable memory fast boot for 2-3 starts then put enable. For faster and better memory training. Your C State if your using C3 your need C1H, as it works backwards. VCCIO set 1.15v system agent 1.20v, Most for them is recommend 1.25v or lower.
> If you don't then get and use HWinfo to monitor your settings.
> CPU try increasing voltage, yet it is quite high already.
> I do have a guide of more less your setting but I use the cpu turbo features, and lock cpu to 4.9-5.1ghz.
> My CPU peak voltage is 1.35v. In Hwinfo under Vrout. So it has increased in f11m/n from 1.29v
> 
> Also anyone with advice on C States?


Thank you, I'll give these a shot. Good to know the switch to f11n and the power change isn't just me.

I looked at my logs yesterday and my VCCIO is 1.221v and my VCCSA is 1.296v in auto, so I need to lower them? If they need more power should I be raising them?


----------



## blueline64

KedarWolf said:


> Are you absolutely sure your board is the Z390i Pro Wifi, the 'i' version?
> 
> If you use this Efiflash it'll flash even a wrong BIOS and brick your board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Efiflash.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f8i


Hi again, Kedar. Thankfully, this efiflash chose to work, albeit taking some time. Not sure why it was failing the other time...

Looks like everything is good to go now. Thanks for your help!


----------



## TrebleTA

Lancer645 said:


> Thank you, I'll give these a shot. Good to know the switch to f11n and the power change isn't just me.
> I looked at my logs yesterday and my VCCIO is 1.221v and my VCCSA is 1.296v in auto, so I need to lower them? If they need more power should I be raising them?


I set my VCCSA at 1.20v and my VCCIO at 1.15v as you see from the picture the voltage still changes but you should not need more, i can even lower them more. 1.15 and 1.10v


----------



## TrebleTA

After I said it I think I give it a quick go so.. VCCSA 1.150v VCCIO 1.100v set in bios, This is what I got after 5 min doing a quick test.


----------



## The Pook

Ajdaho pl said:


> Is there any gigabyte z390ultra owner here?
> 
> "guys do you have a "cpu vcore pwm swithing rate" option on your z390 ultra?
> I'm very disappointed with this board, on a cheaper msi z390 gaming edge ac I can easily overclock 9600k to 5ghz as long as I set the swithing rate to over 500khz, and on z390 ultra I don't have this option and it can barely handle 4800mhz "


I'll check next time I go in the BIOS but I'm in the middle of a render. 



Tyler Dalton said:


> I too would love if KedarWolf could do a modded BIOS for the Z390 Ultra with the fastest microcodes. I want to try out the BAR update but I don't want the slow microcodes, it's why I'm still on BIOS F9.


he doesn't like us enough


----------



## KedarWolf

The Pook said:


> I'll check next time I go in the BIOS but I'm in the middle of a render.
> 
> 
> 
> he doesn't like us enough


I did the latest Ultra I think.

Yes, I did, but I'll post it again.






Z390UltraF10hModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## AndrejB

Here are my settings, with cpu/ram validation (I pressed ok on tm5... so showing the log). Had an error after 2.5h in tm5, decreased txp from 4 to 6 and passed (lost 0.3ns, oh well).
I'm done tweaking for a while (scratched that itch).


----------



## Lancer645

TrebleTA said:


> After I said it I think I give it a quick go so.. VCCSA 1.150v VCCIO 1.100v set in bios, This is what I got after 5 min doing a quick test.
> View attachment 2477783


Awesome, thank you, didn't realize we were trying to drop power. I had it backwards.


----------



## KrampusKlaus

ezveedub said:


> Aren’t this Team Group B-Dies still under warranty? I used some Ballistix 3600 for minimal time, about a month. They were O-K for the price, but not going to crank them like B-Die. I have Team Group 4000 CL18 at CL16 at same speed not for a few months and have no issues
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


They are. I looked into it and I could RMA them but Teamgroup charges for freight to and from Taiwan. I also don't know if I want more of their ****ty Team Dark Pro if it degrades so severely in what was about 8 months at 1.46v. So words of warning: do not buy the Team Dark Pro 3200 CL14 kit for overclocking. If you own this kit, DO NOT overclock it. It will seem great at first, and then degrade into C-Die in less than a year.

I have no doubt that your Team Group 4000 kit can probably handle high voltages. I'm guessing XMP is at like 1.4v, right?

But I am just exhausted at trying to overclock memory when, after months of effort, I finally got a phenomenal OC only for it to degrade the damn dimms. Like I said, it now won't run XMP stable with under 1.38v. Ridiculous. Nobody on here has ever experienced B-Die degrading at such a low voltage. It's pretty common knowledge that B-Die can handle up to 1.5v 24/7. Memory is just too expensive right now for me to go on balls-to-the-wall overclocking adventures again, especially now with the very real risk of breaking it.


----------



## SoaringStar

What does "Rank Interleaving, Channel Interleaving and Memory Enhancement Setting" mean exactly?


----------



## Gregix

KrampusKlaus said:


> r ****ty Team Dark Pro if it degrades so severely in what was about 8 months at 1.46v. So words of warning: do not buy the Team Dark Pro 3200 CL14 kit for overclocking. If you own this kit, DO NOT overclock it. It will seem great at first, and then degrade into C-Die in less than a year.
> ....
> Like I said, it now won't run XMP stable with under 1.38v. Ridiculous.....


Dunno man, my sons 8pack, 3200c14 was running for more than 2 years with 1.48V no problem at 3800c15. Thing is, it was always ventilated good case.
Maybe ur stick was fkd from beginning somehow.
I am now using my sons sticks, with some newer batch that was used in AMD setup for 1 year with 3600c16 1.45v and on my damn z370 taichi, they actually work 4x8gb 3800c15. At 1.536V. Was working 3800c14 too, but had one error after 3hs TM5. Probably some setting, or not enough voltage somewhere.


----------



## TrebleTA

So for C States we want C1E so we're not fully loading the CPU all the time, C3 if we want the pc to sleep, Also needed for turbo core ratio(disable core's will not turbo). C6 to C10 is more advance power saving at the cost of CPU latency. More for laptops??


----------



## SoaringStar

What tools do you use for stability testing? Is OCCT a good choice?


----------



## ezveedub

KrampusKlaus said:


> They are. I looked into it and I could RMA them but Teamgroup charges for freight to and from Taiwan. I also don't know if I want more of their ****ty Team Dark Pro if it degrades so severely in what was about 8 months at 1.46v. So words of warning: do not buy the Team Dark Pro 3200 CL14 kit for overclocking. If you own this kit, DO NOT overclock it. It will seem great at first, and then degrade into C-Die in less than a year.
> 
> I have no doubt that your Team Group 4000 kit can probably handle high voltages. I'm guessing XMP is at like 1.4v, right?
> 
> But I am just exhausted at trying to overclock memory when, after months of effort, I finally got a phenomenal OC only for it to degrade the damn dimms. Like I said, it now won't run XMP stable with under 1.38v. Ridiculous. Nobody on here has ever experienced B-Die degrading at such a low voltage. It's pretty common knowledge that B-Die can handle up to 1.5v 24/7. Memory is just too expensive right now for me to go on balls-to-the-wall overclocking adventures again, especially now with the very real risk of breaking it.


The Teamgroup 4000 Cl18 kit I have are 1.35v XMP, but just bumped them to 1.4v for 18-18-18-34 for now. I have run them 16-16-16-36, 16-17-17-36, 17-17-17-36 also, but that needs more testing and I know I ran 1.45v at those settings, not going to 1.5v. But with flashing mobo bios updates lately, I just used more relaxed timings for now. Just got some XPG 3600 CL14 2x8Gb recently for a older Z370 system, and that wants 1.45v XMP II setting for 14-15-15-35, but those don't even seem to have metal heatspreaders, so not cranking those much at all.


----------



## Word_Up71

SoaringStar said:


> What tools do you use for stability testing? Is OCCT a good choice?


In my opinion the fastest Tool for finding stability issues is Linpack under Linux (Ubuntu) or GSAT..

Download Ubuntu from MS-Store and install & run Linpack as described.


----------



## steffmeisteren

CS9K said:


> Our Hero Kedarwolf modified the F12L beta bios from TweakTown for the Z390 Aorus Pro (non-wifi) in this post. Go back a page or three from this link to find instructions on how to flash this bios. Keep in mind that profiles do not transfer between bioses, so screenshot all of your settings and save the images to a usb drive.
> 
> And evidence from me that ReSize BAR does indeed work in said beta bios with my RX 6800 XT.


I can't seem to find the BIOS flashing instructions. Can anyone help?


----------



## KedarWolf

steffmeisteren said:


> I can't seem to find the BIOS flashing instructions. Can anyone help?


Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f11 /x

 1.f** name of modded BIOS you are flashing.


----------



## TrebleTA

Where all the tech heads at, sure others have messed with C States, or guess the above is correct?


----------



## steffmeisteren

KedarWolf said:


> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f11 /x
> 
> 1.f** name of modded BIOS you are flashing.


Awesome, thanks so much!  If something were to happen, can I just flash my last BIOS version back again?

Also, where can I read about all the changes done to the modded BIOS?


----------



## GiantAssPanda

What's the best (non-modded) BIOS for memory OC and overall performance (Z390 Master)?


----------



## KedarWolf

steffmeisteren said:


> Awesome, thanks so much!  If something were to happen, can I just flash my last BIOS version back again?
> 
> Also, where can I read about all the changes done to the modded BIOS?


Do an Advanced search, Username KedarWolf, sort by date, you'll find what you need.


----------



## Kaibosh

GiantAssPanda said:


> What's the best (non-modded) BIOS for memory OC and overall performance (Z390 Master)?


That is an odd question, considering that all of the 'modding' is done in the name of making overclocking and performance much better and more stable than the official releases. I would say if you are dead set against using modded firmware, than F9 would be what was considered a good baseline, stable release for this board. Anything before that had bugs and issues, and anything after that introduced new things that some people had problems with. Again, since you seem to _want_ to overclock and such.... Why not go with a proven release that others here have sworn by?


----------



## GiantAssPanda

Kaibosh said:


> That is an odd question, considering that all of the 'modding' is done in the name of making overclocking and performance much better and more stable than the official releases. I would say if you are dead set against using modded firmware, than F9 would be what was considered a good baseline, stable release for this board. Anything before that had bugs and issues, and anything after that introduced new things that some people had problems with. Again, since you seem to _want_ to overclock and such.... Why not go with a proven release that others here have sworn by?


Alright, then how do I go about installing the latest modded BIOS for Z390 Aorus Master, and where do I DL it?


----------



## TrebleTA

GiantAssPanda said:


> Alright, then how do I go about installing the latest modded BIOS for Z390 Aorus Master, and where do I DL it?


Try this


KedarWolf said:


> Do an Advanced search, Username KedarWolf, sort by date, you'll find what you need.


----------



## GiantAssPanda

Has anyone benchmarked the modded bios vs the regular bios with the security microcodes? Would be interested to see how much performance you gain.


----------



## ezveedub

GiantAssPanda said:


> Has anyone benchmarked the modded bios vs the regular bios with the security microcodes? Would be interested to see how much performance you gain.


Easiest way to see this is running CPU-Z bench. You’ll see with the security MCs, your score will drop. Then use the modded bios with fastest MCs and the score goes back up to pre-security MCs. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## DonRedhorse

Hi, perhaps somebody can help me here because you are quite experienced with the hardware 😀
I have since the beginning (March last year) an existing issue that during boot I have BIOS issues and get the message there was an issue. I just enter the bios, load my profile and try again. This normally works after 1 - 6 times. Sometimes I don't have any issues, sometimes it takes an hour. Sometimes I have those issues when I reboot (Switching from Windows to Hackintosh and vice versa) and sometimes not. After boot the system runs stable even under stress for days.

I already removed the GPU and replaced RAM. The system is atm not overclocked, more details on hardware here: https://dredhorse.gitbook.io/snowwhite-a-hackintosh-story/

The bios codes are too fast to read but it looks like it is circling around C2 - C5 with a 20? 7F in there. ( I could take a video next time).

I opened a case with Gigabyte but they are slow in response. They also suggested checking GPU (I did), memory (I tried 2 different manufacturers, with or without XMP), PSU (not really possible) and CPU (neither really possible).

Atm I can't find the board in stock anywhere so I wonder if Gigabyte would even replace the board. I just ordered an aorus z390 pro and wonder if I also need a CPU to swap? As this is a watercooled system replacing the components just for troubleshooting isn't that easy 😞

Does somebody has an idea if the symptoms are more mainboard, cpu or psu focussed? All the LEDs and fans are behind splitters which are powered by themself not the board. Could there be too much load on one of the PSU lines?


----------



## TrebleTA

DonRedhorse said:


> Hi, perhaps somebody can help me here because you are quite experienced with the hardware 😀
> I have since the beginning (March last year) an existing issue that during boot I have BIOS issues and get the message there was an issue. I just enter the bios, load my profile and try again. This normally works after 1 - 6 times. Sometimes I don't have any issues, sometimes it takes an hour. Sometimes I have those issues when I reboot (Switching from Windows to Hackintosh and vice versa) and sometimes not. After boot the system runs stable even under stress for days.
> 
> I already removed the GPU and replaced RAM. The system is atm not overclocked, more details on hardware here: SnowWhite, a hackintosh story
> 
> The bios codes are too fast to read but it looks like it is circling around C2 - C5 with a 20? 7F in there. ( I could take a video next time).
> 
> I opened a case with Gigabyte but they are slow in response. They also suggested checking GPU (I did), memory (I tried 2 different manufacturers, with or without XMP), PSU (not really possible) and CPU (neither really possible).
> 
> Atm I can't find the board in stock anywhere so I wonder if Gigabyte would even replace the board. I just ordered an aorus z390 pro and wonder if I also need a CPU to swap? As this is a watercooled system replacing the components just for troubleshooting isn't that easy 😞
> 
> Does somebody has an idea if the symptoms are more mainboard, cpu or psu focussed? All the LEDs and fans are behind splitters which are powered by themself not the board. Could there be too much load on one of the PSU lines?


What motherboard-CPU?
I would recommend resetting cosmos then load defaults then manually enter your settings again. Did you update the bios and then use the same profile?
Lastly if that dont work can you link your bios settings?

P.s had a look at your link so you have a master z390 and a I9 900k. also the orginal master z390 there is a rev 2.0 i think now.


----------



## DonRedhorse

TrebleTA said:


> What motherboard-CPU?
> I would recommend resetting cosmos then load defaults then manually enter your settings again. Did you update the bios and then use the same profile?
> Lastly if that dont work can you link your bios settings?
> 
> P.s had a look at your link so you have a master z390 and a I9 900k. also the orginal master z390 there is a rev 2.0 i think now.


I think it is the original, any idea on where to look for the revision number?
I use the latest BIOS now, several in between but no changes.
Also did reset bios, load defaults, etc... no difference

Bios Settings:

*BIOS SETTINGS (Bios Revision F11L)*


• Boot -> CFG Lock -> *Disabled*
• Boot -> Windows 8/10 Features -> *Win 8/10 WHQL*
• Boot -> CSM Support -> *Disabled *(Can be set to Enabled if need be but try to have it set to Disabled first)
• Favourites -> Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) -> *Profile1*
• Favourites -> VT-d -> *Disabled *(Can be set to Enabled or Disabled, Your choice)
• Settings -> IO Ports -> Internal Display Output -> *PCIe 1 Slot*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> Internal Graphics -> *Enabled *(Disabled If Using SMBios 1,1)
• Settings -> IO Ports -> DVMT Pre-Allocated -> *64M*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> DVMT Total GFX0-Allocated -> *256M*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> Aperture Size -> *256MB*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> Wifi -> *Disabled*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> Audio Controller -> *Enabled*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> Above 4G Decoding -> *Enabled*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> Super IO Configuration -> Serial Port -> *Disabled*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> USB Configuration -> Legacy USB Support -> *Auto*
• Settings -> IO Ports -> USB Configuration -> XHCI Hands-off -> *Enabled*
• Settings -> Miscellaneous -> Software Guard Extensions (SGX) -> *Disabled*
• Settings -> Platform Power -> Platform Power Management ->* Enabled*
• Settings -> Platform Power -> ErP -> *Enabled*
• Settings -> Platform Power -> RC6(Render Standby) -> *Enabled*


----------



## TrebleTA

DonRedhorse said:


> I think it is the original, any idea on where to look for the revision number?
> I use the latest BIOS now, several in between but no changes.
> Also did reset bios, load defaults, etc... no difference
> 
> Bios Settings:
> 
> *BIOS SETTINGS (Bios Revision F11L)*
> 
> 
> • Boot -> CFG Lock -> *Disabled*
> • Boot -> Windows 8/10 Features -> *Win 8/10 WHQL*
> • Boot -> CSM Support -> *Disabled *(Can be set to Enabled if need be but try to have it set to Disabled first)
> • Favourites -> Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) -> *Profile1*
> • Favourites -> VT-d -> *Disabled *(Can be set to Enabled or Disabled, Your choice)
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> Internal Display Output -> *PCIe 1 Slot*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> Internal Graphics -> *Enabled *(Disabled If Using SMBios 1,1)
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> DVMT Pre-Allocated -> *64M*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> DVMT Total GFX0-Allocated -> *256M*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> Aperture Size -> *256MB*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> Wifi -> *Disabled*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> Audio Controller -> *Enabled*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> Above 4G Decoding -> *Enabled*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> Super IO Configuration -> Serial Port -> *Disabled*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> USB Configuration -> Legacy USB Support -> *Auto*
> • Settings -> IO Ports -> USB Configuration -> XHCI Hands-off -> *Enabled*
> • Settings -> Miscellaneous -> Software Guard Extensions (SGX) -> *Disabled*
> • Settings -> Platform Power -> Platform Power Management ->* Enabled*
> • Settings -> Platform Power -> ErP -> *Enabled*
> • Settings -> Platform Power -> RC6(Render Standby) -> *Enabled*


Have you tried with just loading defaults change xmp to profile 1 leave the rest on default, an see what happens?


----------



## GiantAssPanda

Anyone here actually bricked their mobo flashing modded Bios? I'm already a bit nervous installing a regular bios and installing one without qflash makes me doubly so..


----------



## KedarWolf

GiantAssPanda said:


> Anyone here actually bricked their mobo flashing modded Bios? I'm already a bit nervous installing a regular bios and installing one without qflash makes me doubly so..


If your board has USB Flashback pretty much 100% you can recover from a bad flash.

But I've never known anyone that has bricked their board with my modded BIOS's and I've done probably 100 of them here.

One person used a modified efiflash and had trouble, but I doubt it was a bad BIOS because they couldn't boot into the backup BIOS they never flashed and bricking one BIOS would NOT brick the second one.


----------



## TrebleTA

There has been problems flashing if the bios is not on defaults before doing a flash. People have said it's like it's hung and taking a day to flash and some tried restarting, with out waiting that has bricked the pc. Only the back power and cosmos lites up. This Happened to someone 2-3 pages back. I also had a very slow flash when secure boot was enabled. So always load defaults or reset cosmos before flashing...
But if your on f11l and get problems another bios will not change this. Also ask gigabyte for the ITE usb device firmware, if you've never updated the controller.
Also is the z390 aorus master a board that has USB Flashback. So no cpu put usb an it flash??


----------



## KiparisD

KedarWolf said:


> If your board has USB Flashback pretty much 100% you can recover from a bad flash.
> 
> But I've never known anyone that has bricked their board with my modded BIOS's and I've done probably 100 of them here.
> 
> One person used a modified efiflash and had trouble, but I doubt it was a bad BIOS because they couldn't boot into the backup BIOS they never flashed and bricking one BIOS would NOT brick the second one.


KedarWolf, i've flashed your modded F11N with included efiflash without any troubles, and couple pages back there was people that can't flash it, so i think it's not a problem, btw any chance to make HPET mode switch or make bios with disabled HPET?


----------



## GiantAssPanda

TrebleTA said:


> Also is the z390 aorus master a board that has USB Flashback. So no cpu put usb an it flash??


No, mine doesn't seem to have it. Which makes me very reluctant to try it. Gotta make sure my next board has that feature so I can play with custom BIOSes without worries.


----------



## TrebleTA

But being duel bios it should run the backup if problems detected. So it's making sure only the main bios is flashed not both. I still have f4 as backup bios I think.
Yet on my old GA-X58A-UD3R I flashed the marvel controller and power cut!! Midway, Of all the things. My board would go to load and hang pree post, and would not load. Unless I forced a bios start then disabled the controller I was fine. I never did get the marvel controller working again. But that was due to how the bios loaded the controller, even the backup bios use to cut in and reflash yet would not work. My point being there is always a chance something can go wrong as soon as u press that power on button.
I still have that pc running after 12years or more. Give to my kids so there keep there hands of this one


----------



## KedarWolf

KiparisD said:


> KedarWolf, i've flashed your modded F11N with included efiflash without any troubles, and couple pages back there was people that can't flash it, so i think it's not a problem, btw any chance to make HPET mode switch or make bios with disabled HPET?


No, it's beyond what I can do. Lost_N_BIOS on Winraid forums does that stuff be he hasn't been around lately.


----------



## TrebleTA

Pc is idle then restarts with 4 short beeps, anyone know what it could be?
Think it's to low dynamic vcore, Just were it's when idle?


----------



## EarlZ

Gigabyte has made some changes with the F11N that allows my CPU to run more stable on 5Ghz with dynamic voltage, previously I needed to run with 60/160 on IA AC/DC loadline to even boot into windows and now I can boot into windows and no BSOD yet with just 40/160, Its a huge drop in voltage from 1.360V down to 1.320V.

EDIT:
Now testing 30/160, this would not even post on F9 and some version of F10
EDIT2: 
Got a watchdog timer BSOD after my 2nd run on Cinebench R23


----------



## TrebleTA

For me it was what I thought, I was lowering the voltages, i increased by 0.010v and it don't happen now, so from f11m to f11n. so from -0.030v to -0.040v. Yet f9 I could run -0.055
Strange when it was idle would just bsod, reset 4 beeps and load back to windows would run prime95 etc no crash. Maybe I need help with other voltages. Also when this happen entering bios. My keyboard would lite up yet f1-f12 was dead.


----------



## Dibbler

@KedarWolf I reckon that you have already made a modified BIOS for the F11n flavour, that is a plain modified BIOS from here...



https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/BIOS/mb_bios_z390-aorus-master_f11n.zip



with just sprinkles on top - your own magic.

I have seen one a page or so back but I'm not sure if that is one that has your sprinkles on top of a modified RGB one, I want to definitely steer away from that if it does. The last time I tried a BIOS with RGB within it I had some issues until a different flashing tool revision allowed it to be re-flashed with a more conventional / typical BIOS.

So could you please link me to the vanilla with sprinkles only please..?

Many thanks yet again for what you continue to do


----------



## TrebleTA

There is two that I know off, First is the one from gigabytes site with his mod, then the second one I got with Bios fix's and RGB then his mod.
I would ask gigabyte for the f11n With the fix's I stated but with out the RGB, If that's what you wanted
P.S you have updated the RGB controller FW, If not your need to ask gigabyte for the file. I never kept mine.


----------



## Dibbler

Thanks, think I found the vanilla with sprinkles only....









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


HCI Memtest? Can I get a copy of the script please The scripts are for HCI MemTest 7.0, the latest version. It only costs $5 USD to buy it. You put the HCI MTPclassic.exe file in the same folder as the scripts, install AutoHotKey, right-click on the script, then Run Script...




www.overclock.net





hopefully


----------



## radeon1992

I searching bios mod where I can set 2gb VRAM on UHD 630. Can you help me?


----------



## SineMatiks

@KedarWolf 

Hey mate I have some questions, after reading some couple of posts of yours. 

What are the fastest Microcodes u always using and whats the difference between the fastest and newest microcodes? 
Is there an performance difference? 

And what is this 
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - OROM Intel Boot Agent CLEFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - OROM Intel Boot Agent CL? 
I saw some Gigabit Undi with 0.0.19 and 0.0.26 but what are the differences and where do u get the newest version of this? 

And last question... Where can I see those informations which cpu microcode and EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - OROM Intel Boot Agent CL are the basic Bios Versions used? 
As an example.... I searched for the F10b but I didn't find anything about it. Not which cpu microcodes or Intel Gigabit Undi it uses.


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Hey mate I have some questions, after reading some couple of posts of yours.
> 
> What are the fastest Microcodes u always using and whats the difference between the fastest and newest microcodes?
> Is there an performance difference?
> 
> And what is this
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - OROM Intel Boot Agent CLEFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - OROM Intel Boot Agent CL?
> I saw some Gigabit Undi with 0.0.19 and 0.0.26 but what are the differences and where do u get the newest version of this?
> 
> And last question... Where can I see those informations which cpu microcode and EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - OROM Intel Boot Agent CL are the basic Bios Versions used?
> As an example.... I searched for the F10b but I didn't find anything about it. Not which cpu microcodes or Intel Gigabit Undi it uses.


The microcodes I use are the last ones you can use that don't cause performance degradation.

If you want the most security instead and lose some performance, I'd need to make you a BIOS with the latest microcodes.

The network, RST, and GOP modules I download from WinRaid forums and use the UBU Tool there to update the BIOS. The firmwares just have added security and performance fixes etc.


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> The microcodes I use are the last ones you can use that don't cause performance degradation.
> 
> If you want the most security instead and lose some performance, I'd need to make you a BIOS with the latest microcodes.
> 
> The network, RST, and GOP modules I download from WinRaid forums and use the UBU Tool there to update the BIOS. The firmwares just have added security and performance fixes etc.


alright thx for the infos =D

one last question, could u make an f9 final bios with fast microcodes but with this unchanged setting
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13 
is this possible?


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> alright thx for the infos =D
> 
> one last question, could u make an f9 final bios with fast microcodes but with this unchanged setting
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13
> is this possible?


Sorry, are you asking me to NOT update the Gigabit Undi etc.?


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> Sorry, are you asking me to NOT update the Gigabit Undi etc.?


yeah i know that sounds stupid, but there is something i would like to test.....its like an little expirement


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> yeah i know that sounds stupid, but there is something i would like to test.....its like an little expirement


The F9 BIOS you mean, or a newer one?


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> The F9 BIOS you mean, or a newer one?


right now the F9, yes.


----------



## KedarWolf

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f9 /x

.






Z390MasterF9ModdedGigabyteUNDI_Unmodded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2478877
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f9 /x
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF9ModdedGigabyteUNDI_Unmodded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


aight thx man =)


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2478877
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f9 /x
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF9ModdedGigabyteUNDI_Unmodded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Alright, can u tell me which microcodes u used? I would like to know which one are the fastest right now


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> Alright, can u tell me which microcodes u used? I would like to know which one are the fastest right now


906ED USR_mCode\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin
906EC USR_mCode\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
906EB USR_mCode\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
906EA USR_mCode\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin


----------



## SoaringStar

Looks good, thanks Kedar!


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> 906ED USR_mCode\cpu906ED_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_C24FCF05.bin
> 906EC USR_mCode\cpu906EC_plat22_ver000000BE_2019-05-17_PRD_524214E5.bin
> 906EB USR_mCode\cpu906EB_plat02_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_D690DE6C.bin
> 906EA USR_mCode\cpu906EA_plat22_ver000000BA_2019-04-30_PRD_4BEBC386.bin


Hey man, thanks again for the modded F9 Bios 
There is just one last request I would like to ask you for.

Could u make an another Final F9 Mod by just only changing the Network?
So, EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
and the EFI Intel RST for SATA 
OROM Intel RST for SATA,
EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML 
RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE 
OROM VBIOS Coffee Lake and microcodes should be untouched. 

I know my requests are stupid but it would mean a lot to me if u just could this last one


> <


----------



## digix

Hello 9900k and z390 aorus master,
very satisfied with the bios f12n from gigabyte site. 5.0 ghz - 4x8gb crucial 3600 to 4200mhz 18-20-20-40
overclock adaptive voltage 1.20v
It would be interesting to try the modded version. Where can I find the link of the modded gigabyte version?


----------



## SineMatiks

digix said:


> Hello 9900k and z390 aorus master,
> very satisfied with the bios f12n from gigabyte site. 5.0 ghz - 4x8gb crucial 3600 to 4200mhz 18-20-20-40
> overclock adaptive voltage 1.20v
> It would be interesting to try the modded version. Where can I find the link of the modded gigabyte version?
> 
> View attachment 2478960


Go to search and type F11N and research "In this discussion" after that change the results to Recent post and look for the post of KedarWolf


----------



## digix

SineMatiks said:


> Go to search and type F11N and research "In this discussion" after that change the results to Recent post and look for the post of KedarWolf


yes but I did not understand if there are 2 versions of KedarWolf one from gigabyte and one totally modded always KedarWolf I'm interested in the first one


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> Hey man, thanks again for the modded F9 Bios
> There is just one last request I would like to ask you for.
> 
> Could u make an another Final F9 Mod by just only changing the Network?
> So, EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> and the EFI Intel RST for SATA
> OROM Intel RST for SATA,
> EFI GOP Driver SKL-AML
> RAW GOP VBT SKYLAKE
> OROM VBIOS Coffee Lake and microcodes should be untouched.
> 
> I know my requests are stupid but it would mean a lot to me if u just could this last one








Z390MasterF9OnlyNetworkModded.zip
 






drive.google.com


----------



## SineMatiks

digix said:


> yes but I did not understand if there are 2 versions of KedarWolf one from gigabyte and one totally modded always KedarWolf I'm interested in the first one


Well are you looking for the F11N mod with the fastest Microcodes or with the newest one?


----------



## KedarWolf

digix said:


> Hello 9900k and z390 aorus master,
> very satisfied with the bios f12n from gigabyte site. 5.0 ghz - 4x8gb crucial 3600 to 4200mhz 18-20-20-40
> overclock adaptive voltage 1.20v
> It would be interesting to try the modded version. Where can I find the link of the modded gigabyte version?
> 
> View attachment 2478960


Advanced Search, search KedarWolf under Username, Sort By Date.


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF9OnlyNetworkModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thanks again KedarWolf =D.... in the mobo EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI shows me 0.1.00....this isnt the 0.0.29 or?


----------



## digix

KedarWolf said:


> Advanced Search, search KedarWolf under Username, Sort By Date.


the faster microcode is better for adaptive overclock low voltage? But I could try them both. I found a link but how do I know if the link is the fastest microcode or the most recent microcode?


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> Thanks again KedarWolf =D.... in the mobo EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI shows me 0.1.00....this isnt the 0.0.29 or?


You asked for the network drivers updated, they are the latest.


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> You asked for the network drivers updated, they are the latest.


Oh ok sry my bad, i meant the 0.0.29 network driver and not the latest one 0.1.00, sry


----------



## SineMatiks

digix said:


> the faster microcode is better for adaptive overclock low voltage? But I could try them both. I found a link but how do I know if the link is the fastest microcode or the most recent microcode?


the first one is with the newest and the second one with the fastest


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> Oh ok sry my bad, i meant the 0.0.29 network driver and not the latest one 0.1.00, sry


I can leave the network untouched or updated to the below. Not mix them.

3 - Network
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.1.00
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> I can leave the network untouched or updated to the below. Not mix them.
> 
> 3 - Network
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.1.00
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16


so its not possible to update the Bios with this one

EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16 
?


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> so its not possible to update the Bios with this one
> 
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16
> ?


No, no option to update only one of them, either both or none at all.


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> No, no option to update only one of them, either both or none at all.


ok i think i just misunderstood something .... the network driver with EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29 comes with the OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16 or not? but nvm, the most important part for me is to have the EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI 0.0.29 on the bios


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> ok i think i just misunderstood something .... the network driver with EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.29 comes with the OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16 or not? but nvm, the most important part for me is to have the EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI 0.0.29 on the bios


These are the two options you have, not updated or second, updated.

Network
[Current version]
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13

[Available version]
-\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.1.00
OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16


----------



## digix

SineMatiks said:


> the first one is with the newest and the second one with the fastest


Many thanks


----------



## SineMatiks

KedarWolf said:


> These are the two options you have, not updated or second, updated.
> 
> Network
> [Current version]
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.0.19
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.13
> 
> [Available version]
> -\ for i82579/i217/i218/i219 chips
> EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.1.00
> OROM Intel Boot Agent CL - 0.1.16


ok so does this mean u dont use the *Intel UEFI x64 Gigabit Driver 0.0.29* anymore and now only the *EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.1.00 ?*


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks said:


> ok so does this mean u dont use the *Intel UEFI x64 Gigabit Driver 0.0.29* anymore and now only the *EFI Intel Gigabit UNDI - 0.1.00 ?*


 Yes.


----------



## DonRedhorse

TrebleTA said:


> Have you tried with just loading defaults change xmp to profile 1 leave the rest on default, an see what happens?


hmm could give it a try, would need to go to Windows then though as MacOS requires some weeks, installed the latest Bios f11n, still same issue.

Stupid question, as long as I stay inside Bios and begin of boot (max 2 seconds) could I run the CPU without a cooler without causing harm to it? Otherwise I need to get myself a cheap cooler for it to run it without the watercooling.


----------



## stasio

New BIOS...
Xtreme - F9k
Master - F11o









GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums


Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...




www.tweaktownforum.com


----------



## AV334

stasio said:


> New BIOS...
> Xtreme - F9k
> Master - F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums
> 
> 
> Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tweaktownforum.com


whats new in master f11o bios? why in official site f11n still newest one?
where you take this new bios from?


----------



## stasio

AV334 said:


> whats new in master f11o bios? why in official site f11n still newest one?
> where you take this new bios from?


To many questions from new member.......


----------



## Dibbler

@KedarWolf Any chance you can do your magic please with the newly released Z390 Master BIOS....?









Z390AORUSMASTER


MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.



www.mediafire.com





F11o - hopefully we have enough letters left 

Thanks for the heads up @stasio


----------



## AV334

stasio said:


> To many questions from new member.......


 3 small questions - too many? ok understand you


----------



## EarlZ

Waiting for Kedar to do his magic on the f11o with fastest microcodes and updated stuff


----------



## KedarWolf

Z390MasterF11oModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## stasio

AV334 said:


> 3 small questions - too many? ok understand you


Answered numerous time....how about you to read previous posts..?


----------



## Dibbler

AV334 said:


> whats new in master f11o bios? why in official site f11n still newest one?
> where you take this new bios from?


The BETA BIOS's that are posted over at Tweaktown rarely have any change logs posted with them. If they are available then stasio will note them. The point about them is for people to test them out and if there is anything problematic, or has been fixed, noted then feedback can be provided. 
Over time either several more BETA BIOS's may then follow and sometimes that will lead to an final release which only then gets pushed to the official motherboard page for all to use.
The good thing about the Master board is at least it has a dual BIOS feature, I have needed that at times. But that doesn't mean you should use a BETA BIOS unless you are aware of potential issues in doing so.

I understand that it is a little vague but that is how it is. If you are uncomfortable with using an unknown BETA then remain on an official release.



@KedarWolf thanks for what you have done with the F11o BIOS.


----------



## EarlZ

Dibbler said:


> The BETA BIOS's that are posted over at Tweaktown rarely have any change logs posted with them. If they are available then stasio will note them. The point about them is for people to test them out and if there is anything problematic, or has been fixed, noted then feedback can be provided.
> Over time either several more BETA BIOS's may then follow and sometimes that will lead to an final release which only then gets pushed to the official motherboard page for all to use.
> The good thing about the Master board is at least it has a dual BIOS feature, I have needed that at times. But that doesn't mean you should use a BETA BIOS unless you are aware of potential issues in doing so.
> 
> I understand that it is a little vague but that is how it is. If you are uncomfortable with using an unknown BETA then remain on an official release.
> 
> 
> 
> @KedarWolf thanks for what you have done with the F11o BIOS.



What have you found out about F11o so far ?


----------



## Dibbler

EarlZ said:


> What have you found out about F11o so far ?



I just received my 3070 GPU and so, as yet, my time has been spent changing over to that card and testing it out.

I will probably test that BIOS out soon. I'm still running a modified F11m version, that works fine, with a 9900k and 5Ghz and a memory overclock.
I will also need to retake several screenshots as you can't restore settings between BIOS's.

You did well I note on being able to get a rev 2 Master 3080, kinda sad for those who have been sold a version 1.


----------



## EarlZ

Dibbler said:


> I just received my 3070 GPU and so, as yet, my time has been spent changing over to that card and testing it out.
> 
> I will probably test that BIOS out soon. I'm still running a modified F11m version, that works fine, with a 9900k and 5Ghz and a memory overclock.
> I will also need to retake several screenshots as you can't restore settings between BIOS's.
> 
> You did well I note on being able to get a rev 2 Master 3080, kinda sad for those who have been sold a version 1.


Looking forward to your finding with F11O, I was super lucky with the Rev2 as the original customer did not go through with this purchase at all.


----------



## radeon1992

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11oModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


hhmm Why i have on this version only 1080p? I don't have 4K.


----------



## Dibbler

EarlZ said:


> Looking forward to your finding with F11O, I was super lucky with the Rev2 as the original customer did not go through with this purchase at all.



Indeed you were. For a premium card like the Master is it was a little shocking to see that it was released with the two 8 pin ports. To then change it so very soon after it being available without not swap out choices is pretty grim.
Then again the whole GPU market is pretty grim in terms of pricing and availability.


----------



## Kstyles69

Been away for awhile. So glad to see KendarWolf is still keeping this thread alive. I just installed the F11O modded from F9 modded. Memory training seemed better then F9. Wish I can say specific details but all I can say is my PC booted and Timespy and Port Royal scores look the same. My Memory and CPU overclocks seems the same. I hope my 3090 supports this so called "BAR" everyone is talking about. I looked at every setting in BIOS and cannot find anything related to BAR. HOWEVER, the upcoming NIVIDA driver rumored in March says it will become enabled.


----------



## AndrejB

Coming from f11nGk modded to f11o modded and got OEMID mismatch, but the flash went through. Reflashed just in case, no error.

After first clear cmos, memory training hung (maybe user error, might have missed something)

Second clear cmos, memory properly trained


----------



## kiberman545

AV334 said:


> 3 small questions - too many? ok understand you


Не задавайте человеку сходу "слишком прямые вопросы", есть причины по которым он может не ответить публично), биосы эти с Твиктауна, ветки "Гигабайт бета биос", там они выкладываются для тестирования, источник их официальные сервера гигабайт, пока они не пройдут тестирование, в релиз ссылку не откроют, это может быть o версия,а может быть p или да же 12-ая в конце месяца или позже. В любом случае это официальные прошивки.

F11o - новее чем n,n-январский, а o- билд от 8 февраля. Чем отличаются они я частично знаю.

Если нужны детали, пишите на ру оверах в ветке z390 Gigabyte master в разделе материнские платы.


----------



## EarlZ

I can see on Amazon that Corsair LPX has a 16GB kit (2x8GB) 4000Mhz CL16, I cant find any other sub timing details on this CL16 kit. Can the Z390 Master handle 4 sticks of 8GB at 4000Mhz CL16 ?


----------



## ezveedub

EarlZ said:


> I can see on Amazon that Corsair LPX has a 16GB kit (2x8GB) 4000Mhz CL16, I cant find any other sub timing details on this CL16 kit. Can the Z390 Master handle 4 sticks of 8GB at 4000Mhz CL16 ?


I'm going on a limb here, but I'm sure I took my Team Group 4000 CL18 4x8gb set and ran down to CL16 timings and it trained and worked. But not 100% sure it was always stable...with stable I mean temperature wise, as with gaming, once its been hammered by my son for several hours gaming, it may game crash to desktop only. Never recall any BSOD or OS instability. At the time, I was testing memory timings overclock on F11C I believe though. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## TrebleTA

DonRedhorse said:


> hmm could give it a try, would need to go to Windows then though as MacOS requires some weeks, installed the latest Bios f11n, still same issue.
> 
> Stupid question, as long as I stay inside Bios and begin of boot (max 2 seconds) could I run the CPU without a cooler without causing harm to it? Otherwise I need to get myself a cheap cooler for it to run it without the watercooling.


I would not run the CPU without some sort of heatsink/cooling.

Also bit cheesed with f11o date being under a week of the f11n gk. Tbh it seems like its f11n gk. With out the rgb but with fixes I requested.
Off to hassle e support for added RGB now. Anyone noticed any problem with f11o is fan header 3 more stable, is wake on lan still twice in bios?

Also why is this bios not passed to f12 yet, Were almost out of letters?


----------



## radeon1992

Where i can find setting bios to overclock without turbo? I had f9 and in f11 there are new options.


----------



## Shonk

Anyone noticed anything different with F11O ?


----------



## digix

ezveedub said:


> I'm going on a limb here, but I'm sure I took my Team Group 4000 CL18 4x8gb set and ran down to CL16 timings and it trained and worked. But not 100% sure it was always stable...with stable I mean temperature wise, as with gaming, once its been hammered by my son for several hours gaming, it may game crash to desktop only. Never recall any BSOD or OS instability. At the time, I was testing memory timings overclock on F11C I believe though.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


With bios f11n offical z390 master 9900k overclock 5.0 ghz adaptive voltage 1.20v, my Crucial Ballistix 3600 mhz (4x8gb) work fine on my system, with stock voltage at 1.35v and 4000mhz 16-19-19-39 and with stock 16-18-18 38, however, bringing the voltage to 1.4v- setting vccio 1.05v sa 1.14v,, or at 4200mhz 18-20-20-40 at 1.35v setting vccio 1.08v and sa 1.16v..
Obviously you have to turn up a little bit and then it depends on the quality of the ram, processor and the motherboard


----------



## ezveedub

digix said:


> With bios f11n offical z390 master 9900k overclock 5.0 ghz adaptive voltage 1.20v, my Crucial Ballistix 3600 mhz (4x8gb) work fine on my system, with stock voltage at 1.35v and 4000mhz 16-19-19-39 and with stock 16-18-18 38, however, bringing the voltage to 1.4v- setting vccio 1.05v sa 1.14v,, or at 4200mhz 18-20-20-40 at 1.35v setting vccio 1.08v and sa 1.16v..
> Obviously you have to turn up a little bit and then it depends on the quality of the ram, processor and the motherboard


I actually have similar settings on later bios. Currently on F11n modded and I'm sure the saved timings I have will train, but haven't tried testing them and actual use long term. I believe I'm running them at CL17 right now actually at 4000, but have to check. When I was on F10c(actually it was F11c) bios, that wrecked several DDR4 sets as far as training. QVL listed memory wouldn't train XMP and speeds all over the place. I literally sent back 4 or more sets of different DDR4 memory kits over that one bios before flashing a newer one and finding out it was all that bio causing me issues. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## digix

ezveedub said:


> I actually have similar settings on later bios. Currently on F11n modded and I'm sure the saved timings I have will train, but haven't tried testing them and actual use long term. I believe I'm running them at CL17 right now actually at 4000, but have to check. When I was on F10c bios, that wrecked several DDR4 sets as far as training. QVL listed memory wouldn't train XMP and speeds all over the place. I literally sent back 4 or more sets of different DDR4 memory kits over that one bios before flashing a newer one and finding out it was all that bio causing me issues.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yes with the previous bios even I could not train the memory for cas16 but only on cas17. It is an excellent card but for the ram I do not understand why it has these training difficulties and they do not solve with a bios that improves this


----------



## TrebleTA

Silly reply as sure you probably do but you do manually set training voltage for the ram?


----------



## Dibbler

@TrebleTA Noticed in your guide you mention...

CPU VCCIO = 1.050v Default is too high. 1.25v max.
CPU System Agent Voltage (VCCSA ) = 1.150v Default is too high. 1.25v max.


Even tho mine had those default values noted they needed to be manually applied as the voltage for each value was much higher when noted. 
VCCSA was at 1.308v max
VCCIO was at 1.232v max

Now reduced with manual settings.

Thanks


----------



## digix

Dibbler said:


> @TrebleTA Noticed in your guide you mention...
> 
> CPU VCCIO = 1.050v Default is too high. 1.25v max.
> CPU System Agent Voltage (VCCSA ) = 1.150v Default is too high. 1.25v max.
> 
> would that also apply for the 9900k, something that I've never bothered or known to change....?
> 
> Thanks


hello what are you referring to?


----------



## digix

TrebleTA said:


> Silly reply as sure you probably do but you do manually set training voltage for the ram?


sorry but who are you answering and what do you mean?


----------



## TrebleTA

@digix I was saying for them having memory training problems, more so at higher speed. I had some problems before I set the training voltage.

@Dibbler Yes that would affect the 9900k too. At mo I'm now using VCCIO 1.100 and VCCSA 1.200 for mine. Can go lower but in hwinfo it looks better yet the board still takes the VCCSA 1.200 abit higher under memory load. But the CPU VCCIO 1.100 is stable and in bios VCCSA is 0.100v more so stuck to that rule.

@digix his looking at my link below. In my signature.


----------



## Dibbler

@TrebleTA Thanks.
Seems my 5Ghz 9900k remains just as stable, altho time will tell. At least it is not using as much voltages as previously within those two settings.


----------



## Shonk

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11oModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thanks whats changed exactly

Microcode is rolled back from 0xDE to 0xBE (04/2019)
what else and the revisions


----------



## Jimmy Kheredin

Hey guys ,
I've updated Z390 aorus pro Bios yesterday (*F12d modded --> **F12l modded) , 
A huge performance drop with memory/cache speeds & latency










So If there anyone else with Z390 aorus pro can confirm this pls.

_*F12d modded - KedarWolf's.
**F12l modded - KedarWolf's + SPD write disable (modded by me).

Thanks , _


----------



## stasio

Jimmy Kheredin said:


> Hey guys ,
> I've updated Z390 aorus pro Bios yesterday (*F12d modded --> **F12l modded) ,
> A huge performance drop with memory/cache speeds & latency
> 
> So If there anyone else with Z390 aorus pro can confirm this pls.
> 
> _*F12d modded - KedarWolf's.
> **F12l modded - KedarWolf's + SPD write disable (modded by me).
> 
> Thanks , _


Do this with same Aida64 version (North bridge clock also different and maybe something else).


----------



## Jimmy Kheredin

stasio said:


> Do this with same Aida64 version (North bridge clock also different and maybe something else).


Hi @stasio , 
I did re-test on same Aida64 build with Uncore ratio = 45x , usually I don't change my stable OC settings specially Memory related .
The only change I did is installing a macOS alongside windows 10 using OpenCore .(which I couldn't figure if it's related to this issue) .
If no one else can confirm this issue , I will re-flash F12d Bios without the macOS drive to confirm this .
Regards ,


----------



## noobieboobie

Hello!

Has anyone good overclock advices on 3200 cl14 kit at this board?

I have 9900ks 5.1ghz, 4.8 cache full stable at games not sure avx prime tho. I can boot my kits 4000 16-16-16-36 and 4100-4000 17-17-17 @1.46v, but i get errors with Karhu's effective ram tester.

I have no clue what kind off settings I should try to overclock my rams to get maxium cpu bottleneck off. I play fps games like Valorant at 1080p 240hz.

I have tried 1.4-1.5v dram voltage and vccio/vccsa 1.2-1.3v.


EDIT: Motherboard Z390 Aorus Master


----------



## TrebleTA

Have you try a different memory teseter like testmem5. From what I believe your mem test is old and out dated unless there has been a update?


----------



## noobieboobie

TrebleTA said:


> Have you try a different memory teseter like testmem5. From what I believe your mem test is old and out dated unless there has been a update?


No i haven't. Finnish overclockers believe that karhus ram test is still best (fastest to find errors). But yeah maybe i should try other ram tests too. Or maybe i have just bad silicon lottery kits. I can boot almost anything but nothing is 100% stable..


----------



## AndrejB

@noobieboobie the master is t-topology, so it likes 4x8.
Try lower speeds like 3600,3733 cl 14 or smth
(No memory test should catch any errors)


----------



## noobieboobie

AndrejB said:


> @noobieboobie the master is t-topology, so it likes 4x8.
> Try lower speeds like 3600,3733 cl 14 or smth
> (No memory test should catch any errors)


Ok thank you. So maybe i just should upgrade to 11700k + asus hero or something to get good oc also on memory and sell this grab gigabyte board


----------



## Jimmy Kheredin

@stasio I figure it out .
Hyper-v and Sandbox were the cause of all the issues related to memory and cache performance ( latency & speed ) ,even though Virtualization was turned off in bios .
Thanks ,


----------



## TrebleTA

noobieboobie said:


> Ok thank you. So maybe i just should upgrade to 11700k + asus hero or something to get good oc also on memory and sell this grab gigabyte board


Last thing, you are disabling memory fast boot when doing all this?

Also that is a big jump from the original overclock for them sticks from what was originally tested. Shocked you can get them over 4000. They must get real hot too.


----------



## AndrejB

noobieboobie said:


> Ok thank you. So maybe i just should upgrade to 11700k + asus hero or something to get good oc also on memory and sell this grab gigabyte board


If you're serious about getting every last bit of performance and have the money, sure why not.

I went the cheaper route, sold my 2x16 and got 4x8, now I'm at 4133c17 1.4v ~39ns


----------



## Shonk

AndrejB said:


> If you're serious about getting every last bit of performance and have the money, sure why not.
> 
> I went the cheaper route, sold my 2x16 and got 4x8, now I'm at 4133c17 1.4v ~39ns



Thats not really that good for 4133 also for 4 sticks you have to pump much more voltage into a 9900K/9900KS
im running 2 x 32GB Crucial Ballistix 3600 (BL2K32G36C16U4B) @ 15-17-17-34 560 CR1 1.35v for 39.3ns with a 9900KS Uncore 47

I was running 2 x 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 3200 @ 3500 16-18-18-36 560 CR1 1.35V Uncore 47 for about a year and it was 100% stable
I ordered 2 more
and even though i would pass memory tests i always had random crashes at 5ghz LLC Normal DVID -0.035mv with 4 sticks
if i pulled either set of 2 out it was 100% fine
if i Bumped DVID to +0.00 it was much better but still not 100%
if i dropped to CR2 it was much better but still not 100%
if i dropped the uncore to 43 it was much better but still not 100%
adding vccsa or vccio or memory voltage did nothing

If you are serious about the best latency and performance even on t topology boards you need to keep to 2 sticks
no matter what people tell you

I Had a Z390 M Gaming and just couldnt get it 100% stable with 4 sticks at my stable timings and voltage for 2 sticks
Replaced it for a Z390 Aorus Master as i put it down to the board and it was still the same

Crucial Ballistix 64GB 3600 Kit came into stock and thought f it and replaced my
4 x 16GB Duel Rank 3200 for 2 x 32GB Duel Rank 3600

and its been 100% fine ever since 4 sticks was a nightmare for stability with tight timings and low voltage

also going from 2 x 16GB Duel Rank to 4 x 16GB Duel rank or 2 x 32GB Duel Rank to 4 x 32GB Duel rank
looses you around 2ns at the exact same timings

now with 4 x Single rank i have no idea if its the same or not single rank may well be fine

but if i ever want to go 4 x 32GB 15-17-17-34 560 CR1 1.35v Duel rank i will have to bump my Vcore about 0.045mv
which im not willing to do as with a prime 95 avx small fft load that becomes uncoolable to keep below tj max


*It will do 39.3 ns if i keep trying
Cores 1-5 52, Cores 6-7 51, Cores 8 50, Vcore Normal,DVID -0.035mv, LLC Normal*


----------



## digix

I confirm what you say, on aorus master I have 4 x8gb ram crucial 3600 if you remove 2stick the latency value is better
so it's weird they say t-topology cards work better at 4 ram also tested on z390 ultra same result 2 ram better than 4 stick
e it doesn't matter at what frequency and at what voltage. What I noticed, however, is that from the bios f11 the ram performance has
slightly decreased so it could be a question of bios and not just the motherboard,


----------



## noobieboobie

TrebleTA said:


> Last thing, you are disabling memory fast boot when doing all this?
> 
> Also that is a big jump from the original overclock for them sticks from what was originally tested. Shocked you can get them over 4000. They must get real hot too.


Havent tried disabling memory fast boot... My max dimm temps are 48C at gaming sessions for example @ 4000 16-16-16-36 1.47v. But yeah its not 100% stable so using xmp profile :3



AndrejB said:


> If you're serious about getting every last bit of performance and have the money, sure why not.
> 
> I went the cheaper route, sold my 2x16 and got 4x8, now I'm at 4133c17 1.4v ~39ns


Could try 4x8 but 32gb is overkill in my case  never hit over 10gb at my usage


----------



## TrebleTA

Well if you haven't disabled memory fast boot, memory training my be skipped and new setting may not be set. You must disable it until you've tweaked ya memory. Then once tweaked boot 2-3times then you can enable memory fast boot. That will then disable memory training and keep the set timings.

Also if you play games like anno 1800 it will munch 32gb ram


----------



## Dannyele

In my case, I cannot get 4266mhz stable even with very high dram voltage sa/io (+1.50v - 1.4 sa/io)

With dual rank 2x8, this is the best that I can get:










1.45 DRAM
1.25 SA/IO

9900k 5ghz/4.7ghz cache

Tried 3900 with lower latency like CL17 (anything below isn't stable) but for gaming I prefier higher frequency for higher minimum fps.


----------



## DonRedhorse

TrebleTA said:


> I would not run the CPU without some sort of heatsink/cooling.


got a basic aircooler, will test it soon


----------



## Wam7

noobieboobie said:


> Hello!
> 
> Has anyone good overclock advices on 3200 cl14 kit at this board?
> 
> I have 9900ks 5.1ghz, 4.8 cache full stable at games not sure avx prime tho. I can boot my kits 4000 16-16-16-36 and 4100-4000 17-17-17 @1.46v, but i get errors with Karhu's effective ram tester.
> 
> I have no clue what kind off settings I should try to overclock my rams to get maxium cpu bottleneck off. I play fps games like Valorant at 1080p 240hz.
> 
> I have tried 1.4-1.5v dram voltage and vccio/vccsa 1.2-1.3v.
> 
> 
> EDIT: Motherboard Z390 Aorus Master


For my memory I found that 3900C15 gave the best overall performance with lowest latencies. That is the highest I would aim on your 3200 C14 kit. I also strongly suggest to use the Modded F11m bios as I found that one to be rock stable with decent speeds. Apparently the F9 bios was best for memory overclocking but I wouldn't recommend going back that far for small increase you might get overall.

There is also a github memory overclocking info sheet that is quite useful in getting to understand the basics and rules of memory overclocking but it was a while back I used it and can't seem to find a link for it now but maybe some other kind users will.


----------



## AndrejB

Wam7 said:


> There is also a github memory overclocking info sheet that is quite useful in getting to understand the basics and rules of memory overclocking but it was a while back I used it and can't seem to find a link for it now but maybe some other kind users will.











integralfx/MemTestHelper


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




github.com


----------



## Dibbler

Since revision F11n of the Z390 BIOS it is supposed to support the resizable BAR options, along with other factors needing support. If that is the case (I'm using F11o) where is that option in the BIOS to enable it, I just can't see that...?

Hopefully it will work, if and when MSI update the VBIOS (for me), and that'll also support to the 9900k. 

Thanks


----------



## AndrejB

Dibbler said:


> Since revision F11n of the Z390 BIOS it is supposed to support the resizable BAR options, along with other factors needing support. If that is the case (I'm using F11o) where is that option in the BIOS to enable it, I just can't see that...?
> 
> Hopefully it will work, if and when MSI update the VBIOS (for me), and that'll also support to the 9900k.
> 
> Thanks


Enable: *Above 4G Decoding *in the bios


----------



## Dibbler

AndrejB said:


> Enable: *Above 4G Decoding *in the bios



Thanks - by doing that I then get the option to enable "Re-Size BAR Support"


----------



## Rbk_3

I am thinking about buying some B-die for my Arous Elite/9900KS, is it still worth it if I am only going 2x 8GB? I read this doesn't support daisy chaining so having all 4 slots populated is best. 

What kind of speed and timings can I realistically expect with out too much messing around on this board? I will be buying the 4400 Patriot Viper.


----------



## Shonk

Rbk_3 said:


> I am thinking about buying some B-die for my Arous Elite/9900KS, is it still worth it if I am only going 2x 8GB? I read this doesn't support daisy chaining so having all 4 slots populated is best.
> 
> What kind of speed and timings can I realistically expect with out too much messing around on this board? I will be buying the 4400 Patriot Viper.


Dont run 4 sticks unless you want to have to put more juice into the 9900KS for equal timings as 2 sticks ignore all that junk about daisy chain / t topology
all t topology means is both channels are extended to the same lengh to match trace lenghs it doesnt make the imc suddenly able to push 4 sticks easier
it just makes the lengh equal

you have 24gb on your gpu and are running 16gb on the cpu i dont understand it you should be running like 64GB or atlest 32GB

Crucial Ballistix BL2K32G36C16U4B 3600 MHz 64GB (32GB x2), CL16 is a good compromise between speed and size

Mine run at 15-17-17-540-CR1 just fine dont try overvolting they dont like a single mv over 1.35v
they get 39.3ns which is as good as most people get with 4200 samsung ram

also important my ram is memtestpro / karhu stable
i can also run 15-16-16-540-CR1 but it fails memtestpro / karhu which alot of people wouldnt notice

15-17-17









15-16-16


----------



## Oasis

Was anyone able to get "Resizable BAR" working with an RTX3080? 
I'm running: 

RTX3080 FE with the latest Nvidia drivers (461.72)
Z390 Aorus Pro with the latest F12l bios, I enabled "Above 4G decoding" and turn "Resizable BAR" to auto.
On Nvidia's control panel, I don't see "Resizable BAR" enabled.


----------



## Dibbler

Oasis said:


> Was anyone able to get "Resizable BAR" working with an RTX3080?
> I'm running:
> 
> RTX3080 FE with the latest Nvidia drivers (461.72)
> Z390 Aorus Pro with the latest F12l bios, I enabled "Above 4G decoding" and turn "Resizable BAR" to auto.
> On Nvidia's control panel, I don't see "Resizable BAR" enabled.



You will need a vBIOS update for your GPU......

This is what I have read.....

*VBIOS Update*
GeForce RTX 3060 desktop graphics cards launched February 25th, 2021, with a pre-installed Resizable BAR-ready VBIOS. If you purchase one, all you need is a compatible motherboard and motherboard SBIOS, described above, and our newest Game Ready Driver, detailed below.
Late March, NVIDIA will release downloadable VBIOS updates for all Founders Edition GeForce RTX 30 Series GPUs to enable Resizable BAR, and likewise, partners will release VBIOS updates for their custom models, too. 

whenever they get released the bottom line is your GPU will need a vBIOS update


----------



## Oasis

Dibbler said:


> You will need a vBIOS update for your GPU......
> 
> This is what I have read.....
> 
> *VBIOS Update*
> GeForce RTX 3060 desktop graphics cards launched February 25th, 2021, with a pre-installed Resizable BAR-ready VBIOS. If you purchase one, all you need is a compatible motherboard and motherboard SBIOS, described above, and our newest Game Ready Driver, detailed below.
> Late March, NVIDIA will release downloadable VBIOS updates for all Founders Edition GeForce RTX 30 Series GPUs to enable Resizable BAR, and likewise, partners will release VBIOS updates for their custom models, too.
> 
> whenever they get released the bottom line is your GPU will need a vBIOS update


That makes sense, thanks!


----------



## Rbk_3

Am I blind or is there no VCCSA setting on this board? I cannot find it anywhere 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CommanderHK47

Rbk_3 said:


> Am I blind or is there no VCCSA setting on this board? I cannot find it anywhere
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah it's called CPU System Agent Voltage, and should be twords the bottom of the option list under Tweaker tab.


----------



## Rbk_3

CommanderHK47 said:


> Yeah it's called CPU System Agent Voltage, and should be twords the bottom of the option list under Tweaker tab.


Thanks


So, I can’t get my b-die 4400 to even run at 3800 or even 3600. 

3800 won’t boot, it just eventually turns by pc off and loads in at 2133. 3600 and 3733 boots and works fine but my ram is only running at 3200mhz for some reason. 3500 works fine and can get it down to CL14. Any ideas? Z390 Aorus Elite board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CS9K

Rbk_3 said:


> Thanks
> 
> So, I can’t get my b-die 4400 to even run at 3800 or even 3600.
> 
> 3800 won’t boot, it just eventually turns by pc off and loads in at 2133. 3600 and 3733 boots and works fine but my ram is only running at 3200mhz for some reason. 3500 works fine and can get it down to CL14. Any ideas? Z390 Aorus Elite board.


Boards that aren't the Aorus Extreme are notorious for being bad a training memory; my Aorus Pro is no exception to that. With bios versions before the current F12L, I couldn't reliably get my 4x8GB 3200C14 kit to train past 3800. It ran just fine and dandy at 3800, but everything higher was unstable. With F12L, for whatever reason, 4133 was suddenly able to train properly, and it is what I am running at currently.

When you're trying to get your board to train the memory, keep an eye on what it gives you for your four tRDWR values, and your tWRWR DR and DD. I've noticed that on speeds that the board doesn't like, it'll raise tRDWR very high, and/or raise tWRWR DR/DD very high compared to a speed at which it trains properly. 

Also consider giving one of the newer beta bios versions a try.


----------



## Rbk_3

CS9K said:


> Boards that aren't the Aorus Extreme are notorious for being bad a training memory; my Aorus Pro is no exception to that. With bios versions before the current F12L, I couldn't reliably get my 4x8GB 3200C14 kit to train past 3800. It ran just fine and dandy at 3800, but everything higher was unstable. With F12L, for whatever reason, 4133 was suddenly able to train properly, and it is what I am running at currently.
> 
> When you're trying to get your board to train the memory, keep an eye on what it gives you for your four tRDWR values, and your tWRWR DR and DD. I've noticed that on speeds that the board doesn't like, it'll raise tRDWR very high, and/or raise tWRWR DR/DD very high compared to a speed at which it trains properly.
> 
> Also consider giving one of the newer beta bios versions a try.


I am on the latest bios for my board. F10g from Sep 2020. Looks like F12L came out recently with Bar support so hopefully I go one soon for my board. 

Edit : just downloaded the beta bios from Tweektown to give a try 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CS9K

Rbk_3 said:


> I am on the latest bios for my board. F10g from Sep 2020. Looks like F12L came out recently with Bar support so hopefully I go one soon for my board.
> 
> Edit : just downloaded the beta bios from Tweektown to give a try
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Awesome! It's worth a shot to see if some other configurations will work out for you!


----------



## Rbk_3

CS9K said:


> Awesome! It's worth a shot to see if some other configurations will work out for you!


What were you running at 3800? I think I have 3800-16-16-16-38 stable.

Passed an hour of OCCT Memory testing and now working on the CPU test to confirm. 

The beta bios got me to be able to boot in with 4000 now at least, but I had to loosen timings more than 3800 so it wasn’t worth it. I think minimum I’d be CL18


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CS9K

Rbk_3 said:


> What were you running at 3800? I think I have 3800-16-16-16-38 stable.
> 
> Passed an hour of OCCT Memory testing and now working on the CPU test to confirm.
> 
> The beta bios got me to be able to boot in with 4000 now at least, but I had to loosen timings more than 3800 so it wasn’t worth it. I think minimum I’d be CL18
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Best I can remember, it was something like this with my 4x8gb Flare X 3200C14 B-die and 9700K:
3800 @ 1.46V (both vdimm and vdimm-training voltage)
15-15-15-32
tRFC 300, tREFI 35564
VCCSA 1.230V; VCCIO 1.200V

Keep in mind that tCL,tRFC, tREFI are voltage-sensetive, tRP and tRCD are speed sensetive.


----------



## gabeomatic

Hey there pretty new to RAM OCing wondering if you guys had some tips to fiddle with these chips as everything I'm finding is for ryzen setups.
2x16Gb Hynix C die 3600mhz C16 8700k 5.0ghz 0avx on a gigabyte z390m gaming, and I'm running 2x16gb (dual rank?) on a *T-topology board*. Am I screwed? ( I was told boards like these prefer 4 sticks when I purposely was on the hunt for a 2 stick set, smh)

Not too sure where to start.. any basic settings to try? Push for higher mhz (4000+?) or tighter timings etc @ 1.4 -1.45v from a stock 1.35v



http://imgur.com/a/rBifDeP

 Ram Serial for reference



http://imgur.com/a/MZxvHIY

 Thaiphoon burner readings

https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Memory/mb_memory_z390-m-gaming_20191108.pdf QVL


----------



## CS9K

Howdy @gabeomatic. I had that kit when I initially started my Z390 adventure middle of last year. I could never get that kit to work quite right on my Z390 Aorus Pro (non-wifi). Coming from a 3770K/Z68, I did some research before returning that kit, and because I can't help but fiddle, I sprung for two kits of F4-3200C14D-16GFX. At the time, they were $95/kit, though, like all things since start of the year, prices have gone up somewhat since then (seeing $129/kit on Newegg/Amazon/Micro Center right now).

As for your kit, you're right in that T-topology boards prefer four single-rank memory modules for ideal overclocking conditions. You -may- be able to get that kit up to 3800 C16 with a modest voltage bump, but I wouldn't push that kit past 1.400V; hynix and Micron chips of mid & low range can't take voltage like Samsung B-die can. 

You fortunately still have two ranks per channel, and two channels populated, which is the ideal setup, so you're not leaving any performance on the table. However, those memory modules aren't great overclockers and you will have to relax the timings/increase the voltage for modest, if any, tangible performance gain. 

TL;DR: Those aren't bad modules, but they're not great overclockers. If I were you, I would set XMP and not worry about it, unless you spring for four single-rank Samsung B-Die modules as I did, which are ONLY worth it if you plan to tune them.


----------



## gabeomatic

CS9K said:


> Howdy @gabeomatic. I had that kit when I initially started my Z390 adventure middle of last year. I could never get that kit to work quite right on my Z390 Aorus Pro (non-wifi). Coming from a 3770K/Z68, I did some research before returning that kit, and because I can't help but fiddle, I sprung for two kits of F4-3200C14D-16GFX. At the time, they were $95/kit, though, like all things since start of the year, prices have gone up somewhat since then (seeing $129/kit on Newegg/Amazon/Micro Center right now).
> 
> As for your kit, you're right in that T-topology boards prefer four single-rank memory modules for ideal overclocking conditions. You -may- be able to get that kit up to 3800 C16 with a modest voltage bump, but I wouldn't push that kit past 1.400V; hynix and Micron chips of mid & low range can't take voltage like Samsung B-die can.
> 
> You fortunately still have two ranks per channel, and two channels populated, which is the ideal setup, so you're not leaving any performance on the table. However, those memory modules aren't great overclockers and you will have to relax the timings/increase the voltage for modest, if any, tangible performance gain.
> 
> TL;DR: Those aren't bad modules, but they're not great overclockers. If I were you, I would set XMP and not worry about it, unless you spring for four single-rank Samsung B-Die modules as I did, which are ONLY worth it if you plan to tune them.


Appreciate the response man! I wasn't able to accurately determine if it was worth even trying to bump the voltage and tighen the timings, aim for 3733-3800 etc or that wouldn't be noticeable on a daily setup like mine, as some people it seems had success with Cjrs


----------



## ezveedub

Rbk_3 said:


> What were you running at 3800? I think I have 3800-16-16-16-38 stable.
> 
> Passed an hour of OCCT Memory testing and now working on the CPU test to confirm.
> 
> The beta bios got me to be able to boot in with 4000 now at least, but I had to loosen timings more than 3800 so it wasn’t worth it. I think minimum I’d be CL18
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


One of the things I check is CAS latency of the stock ram. If you bump speed up, you can somewhat know what timings to try and tweak. 3600 CL16 is 8.888 latency. Going to 3800 at CL16 is slightly better at 8.4210 latency. Going to 4000 at CL16 is a solid 8 latency. That's going to be quite a bit IMO for memory to clock that tight unless you move to a next tier of better ram. Memory companies sell you memory at price point on latency capability for the most part. Search memory and as the latency gets lower for the same type, but at various speeds, the price increases. Lower latency, higher frequency, more money. Anything in the 7ns range is going cost money. 4000 CL17 seems more doable IMO on your ram with OCing. Running 4000 CL18 is actually 9ns, so it's higher than stock, but this a balance of what you want or need the memory to do. You can possibly try 4133 at CL18 and with high voltage and see what happens. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## sygnus21

Dibbler said:


> Thanks - by doing that I then get the option to enable "Re-Size BAR Support"


Anyone know if this option will work with an AMD Radeon VII?


----------



## TrebleTA

sygnus21 said:


> Anyone know if this option will work with an AMD Radeon VII?


This is Intel thread not a crappy AMD thread. But try it you never know


----------



## sayoXD

sygnus21 said:


> Anyone know if this option will work with an AMD Radeon VII?


I think so far its only for RX 6000 and RTX 3000 series


----------



## AndrejB

sygnus21 said:


> Anyone know if this option will work with an AMD Radeon VII?


I think someone mentioned a few pages back that it worked.


----------



## TrebleTA

AndrejB said:


> I think someone mentioned a few pages back that it worked.


Yea they have full support, were nvidia need new vbios


----------



## Rbk_3

ezveedub said:


> One of the things I check is CAS latency of the stock ram. If you bump speed up, you can somewhat know what timings to try and tweak. 3600 CL16 is 8.888 latency. Going to 3800 at CL16 is slightly better at 8.4210 latency. Going to 4000 at CL16 is a solid 8 latency. That's going to be quite a bit IMO for memory to clock that tight unless you move to a next tier of better ram. Memory companies sell you memory at price point on latency capability for the most part. Search memory and as the latency gets lower for the same type, but at various speeds, the price increases. Lower latency, higher frequency, more money. Anything in the 7ns range is going cost money. 4000 CL17 seems more doable IMO on your ram with OCing. Running 4000 CL18 is actually 9ns, so it's higher than stock, but this a balance of what you want or need the memory to do. You can possibly try 4133 at CL18 and with high voltage and see what happens.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I ended up grabbing a Z490 and 10900K actually yesterday and I think I have 4000 16-16-16-38 stable on my new board. Passed an hour of OCCT memory test, Linepak medium and CPU test with no errors.


----------



## Kstyles69

Z390 Master owner. Using b die Dominator Platinum stock settings 16-18-18-36 3600. Using newest modded F11o bios. Easiest way I got my OC settings to stick of 15-16-16-33 3600 with 42ns latency low 57 rtl's with tons of sub timing changes without constant fail/retry reset cmos... is to simply reset cmos save/reboot. Apply XMP save/reboot. Do all your settings all at once save/reboot. The idea of doing one setting at a time with constant retraining the memory after each setting was a huge waste of time and always resulted in high rtl's or failed training. This is my experience for me personally. Once you successfully do your all-in-one settings with successful post...aida64 benchmark test to verify correct speeds, stress test with occt for 30min large data, and lastly memtest for an hour using 80% available memory for an hour with zero errors.


----------



## Anulu

Did some Testing with latest Beta Bios [email protected] with 4x8GB Gskill 4133C17 Kit.Need to tune subtimings more and check if i can lower vDimm/VCCIO/VCCSA.
Latency is better than 4133 because of the bad Training at higher Speed.Not sure if 4700mhz Ring is stable,
it passes several Hours P95 112k and OCCT but sometimes Gaming is a different Story.










This was Cpu Stability Test with Bios F11nGK:







Strange thing tWR 12 doesnt work with F11o [email protected]


----------



## sygnus21

TrebleTA said:


> Yea they have full support, were nvidia need new vbios


Thanks. BTW, is there a way to tell if if works. I do have it enabled in the BIOS, so....


----------



## Qbm87

Shonk said:


> Dont run 4 sticks unless you want to have to put more juice into the 9900KS for equal timings as 2 sticks ignore all that junk about daisy chain / t topology
> all t topology means is both channels are extended to the same lengh to match trace lenghs it doesnt make the imc suddenly able to push 4 sticks easier
> it just makes the lengh equal
> 
> you have 24gb on your gpu and are running 16gb on the cpu i dont understand it you should be running like 64GB or atlest 32GB
> 
> Crucial Ballistix BL2K32G36C16U4B 3600 MHz 64GB (32GB x2), CL16 is a good compromise between speed and size
> 
> Mine run at 15-17-17-540-CR1 just fine dont try overvolting they dont like a single mv over 1.35v
> they get 39.3ns which is as good as most people get with 4200 samsung ram
> 
> also important my ram is memtestpro / karhu stable
> i can also run 15-16-16-540-CR1 but it fails memtestpro / karhu which alot of people wouldnt notice
> 
> 15-17-17
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15-16-16


What voltages you running on your 9900ks at 5.2ghz etc. Got high speed b-die. So should be able to run at the same settings as you. If I could give them a try please. Got 4 dimms though but should get me close enough fingers crossed.


----------



## Shonk

Qbm87 said:


> What voltages you running on your 9900ks at 5.2ghz etc. Got high speed b-die. So should be able to run at the same settings as you. If I could give them a try please. Got 4 dimms though but should get me close enough fingers crossed.



I want 100% stability at the worst load (prime 95 small fft avx 260w load at 5ghz)
5.2ghz is not coolable with less than a large custom loop
I dont want game stable i want 100% stable under all scenario's 
which took me a long time to get
i also dont want to be degrading the chip with stupid voltages
tbh intel are already pushing it with the 9900KS

I Run 

52 Cores 1-5
51 Cores 6-7
50 Cores 8


----------



## Anulu

Shonk said:


> I want 100% stability at the worst load (prime 95 small fft avx 260w load at 5ghz)
> 5.2ghz is not coolable with less than a large custom loop
> I dont want game stable i want 100% stable under all scenario's
> which took me a long time to get
> i also dont want to be degrading the chip with stupid voltages
> tbh intel are already pushing it with the 9900KS
> 
> I Run
> 
> 52 Cores 1-5
> 51 Cores 6-7
> 50 Cores 8


Can you show me a Screenshot of your Advanced Voltage Settings?
I can get my 9900KF P95 small fft avx stable with manual Voltage and High LLC but with offset Voltage Standard LLC and 160/160IA LLC,
VrOut/Vcore drops too much with P95 AVX small fft.
Have this Board 6 Months now and still cant figure it out


----------



## Shonk

My advanced voltage is there in favorites the very first image


----------



## noobieboobie

Wam7 said:


> For my memory I found that 3900C15 gave the best overall performance with lowest latencies. That is the highest I would aim on your 3200 C14 kit. I also strongly suggest to use the Modded F11m bios as I found that one to be rock stable with decent speeds. Apparently the F9 bios was best for memory overclocking but I wouldn't recommend going back that far for small increase you might get overall.
> 
> There is also a github memory overclocking info sheet that is quite useful in getting to understand the basics and rules of memory overclocking but it was a while back I used it and can't seem to find a link for it now but maybe some other kind users will.


Where I can download this modded f11m bios? I have now F11n


----------



## Anulu

Shonk said:


> My advanced voltage is there in favorites the very first image


Sorry i mean Cpu/Vrm Setting in UEFI








Do you use Internal VR Control ? I use this Setting for Manual VCore but with Adaptive [email protected] i use Internal VR control AC/DC 160/160 and Standard VCore LLC.
Im gonna try Your Setting on my 9900KF thanks for the Screenshots


----------



## Shonk

Anulu said:


> Sorry i mean Cpu/Vrm Setting in UEFI
> 
> Do you use Internal VR Control ? I use this Setting for Manual VCore but with Adaptive [email protected] i use Internal VR control AC/DC 160/160 and Standard VCore LLC.
> Im gonna try Your Setting on my 9900KF thanks for the Screenshots


Nope i dont use internal VR Control or PWM Switch Rate 

CPU Vcore = Normal
DVID -0.035V

CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line = Auto (1.300 / 1.300 mOhm)
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal (1.600 mOhm)


----------



## [email protected]

Strange overclocking on this site - when X.M.P is activated, you cannot change the parameters.


----------



## Shonk

[email protected] said:


> Strange overclocking on this site - when X.M.P is activated, you cannot change the parameters.


umm when xmp is activated you can change anything you like


----------



## [email protected]

Shonk said:


> umm when xmp is activated you can change anything you like


This is a child's overclocking, the system will hang unpredictably even when passing tests in reality such overclocking is not for everyday tasks.


----------



## Anulu

It seems the 9900KS has a different Internal AC/DC LLC (130/130) than my 9900KF (160/160).
However i can run P95 small FFTs AVX with your setting and VRout drops to [email protected] with all cores at 5ghz.

I found out LLC(VID?) for AVX/non AVX is different with Offset VCore.
With CB20 or Blender,VRout only drops to 1.25v while CB15 without AVX is running with 1.2v.
Thats the Reason why my Temps are higher in BFV with offset Voltage vs manual.

Maybe Prime95 small with AVX is not very Realistic since i have to add unnecessary 30-40mv just to prevent the VDroop for a Scenario i never see in any Application


----------



## Shonk

[email protected] said:


> This is a child's overclocking, the system will hang unpredictably even when passing tests in reality such overclocking is not for everyday tasks.


I have been overclocking for over 30 years dont tell me what overclocking is or what xmp is
i was around when xmp first came out its not some magic its just a guide profile to use
you are free to change anything you like if you have instability you have pushed things too far
that has nothing to do with the xmp spec just you pushing things too far / not knowing what you are doing

as you say a childs overclock


----------



## Shonk

Anulu said:


> It seems the 9900KS has a different Internal AC/DC LLC (130/130) than my 9900KF (160/160).
> However i can run P95 small FFTs AVX with your setting and VRout drops to [email protected] with all cores at 5ghz.
> 
> I found out LLC(VID?) for AVX/non AVX is different with Offset VCore.
> With CB20 or Blender,VRout only drops to 1.25v while CB15 without AVX is running with 1.2v.
> Thats the Reason why my Temps are higher in BFV with offset Voltage vs manual.
> 
> Maybe Prime95 small with AVX is not very Realistic since i have to add unnecessary 30-40mv just to prevent the VDroop for a Scenario i never see in any Application



Its a motherboard feature not cpu

Here's Gigabyte's Z390 values
If you want to try 130/130 just set Performance
I think you have forgot to zero Internal VR control (it overrides the setting)
This can then be checked with hwinfo

160/160 is also fine it just results in higher idle voltages i used to use it on my Z390 M Gaming as the vrm's
wernt as good as my Z390 Master reglulating the voltages so 1.6 mOhms was needed

I believe Intel Spec is as follows
Z370/8 Series 2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms
Z390/9 Series 1.6 mOhms / 1.6 mOhms
as intel push cpu's more they tighten up the AC/DC loadline spec's to keep 
the cpu in a tighter voltage range i believe the spec is even lower on Z590
Im sure Falkentyne will know


*CPU Internal AC/DC loadline (AC / DC raw values-> mOhms)*
Extreme: 210/210 (2.1 mOhms / 2.1 mOhms)
Turbo: 160/160 (1.6 mOhms)
Performance: 130/130 (1.3 mOhms)
Power Saving: 40/130 (0.4 mohms/1.3 mOhms)
Auto: 1.0/1.3 mOhms (4.7 ghz), 1.3/1.3 mOhms (5 ghz).


----------



## Anulu

Wow thank you for all that Information.Just did 90min of small FFT (not smallest) now i have to check out the Behaviour in Games like BFV 













I turned off some CStates because i had Reboots in Idle and i disabled manual Internal AC/DC and use "Performance"


----------



## Shonk

Anulu said:


> Wow thank you for all that Information.Just did 90min of small FFT (not smallest) now i have to check out the Behaviour in Games like BFV
> View attachment 2481431
> View attachment 2481432
> 
> I turned off some CStates because i had Reboots in Idle and i disabled manual Internal AC/DC and use "Performance"



What cooling do you have
You seem to be about 4°C lower than me all around with about 6w more power use
So i presume custom loop?
Your hottest cores are the same as mine 2 + 4


Mine























*Edit seems its a cold day today and i can match your temps but with slightly less power*


----------



## Anulu

Shonk said:


> What cooling do you have
> You seem to be about 4°C lower than me all around with about 6w more power use
> So i presume custom loop?
> Your hottest cores are the same as mine 2 + 4


Yes its a Custom "ghetto" Loop
Two 360mm Radiators in a Big Tower with D5 Pump,Flowmeter and Aquero5. 
A lot of the Parts are second Hand,Gpu Block had a broken o-Ring no leaks but i put some white silicone.
Could be done better but i dont care too much about looks.

Tubing went wrong after last Block cleaning few Month ago


----------



## Shonk

Nice i generally dont care about looks that much either
but when i swapped from a Z390 M Gaming to Z390 Aorus Master
I had to change the case and such so tried to keep it clean

Cant you get a new seal that rtv silicone sealant scares me for you


----------



## Anulu

Shonk said:


> Cant you get a new seal that rtv silicone sealant scares me for you


Its actually a very thin Layer of High temp Silicon (up to 200c!) only between the Plexi and the Block.
O-ring still does its Job it was very Dry and was cut at some Points when i bought it secondhand.
I use the Block two Years now.
EVGA1080ti FTW3 Elite i could sell that Card for a good Price now if i install the unused Original Cooler  

btw i just had AIDA Stress Test Running and Temp Peaks got higher than Prime.(86-88c on all Cores! at 192w max)
BFV had good avg Temp low 60s but with some short Spikes to 81c at ~170w


----------



## Shonk

Anulu said:


> Its actually a very thin Layer of High temp Silicon (up to 200c!) only between the Plexi and the Block.
> O-ring still does its Job it was very Dry and was cut at some Points when i bought it secondhand.
> I use the Block two Years now.
> EVGA1080ti FTW3 Elite i could sell that Card for a good Price now if i install the unused Original Cooler
> 
> btw i just had AIDA Stress Test Running and Temp Peaks got higher than Prime.(86-88c on all Cores! at 192w max)
> BFV had good avg Temp low 60s but with some short Spikes to 81c at ~170w


Mine seems fine just ran it for 30 mins


----------



## Qbm87

Will these be good enough to tidy up the messy cables or should I not risk it.


----------



## Anulu

Shonk said:


> Mine seems fine just ran it for 30 mins


My Cpu`s VID goes up to 1.41V and Vrout goes up to 1.35v.I think you just have a better binned CPU.
Lower VCCIO and VCSAA didnt help and maybe Memcontroller gets more Stress with [email protected] 15-15-15
However the Spikes are very short and average Temps are good


----------



## Shonk

Anulu said:


> My Cpu`s VID goes up to 1.41V and Vrout goes up to 1.35v.I think you just have a better binned CPU.
> Lower VCCIO and VCSAA didnt help and maybe Memcontroller gets more Stress with [email protected] 15-15-15
> However the Spikes are very short and average Temps are good


Well your not doing that bad i think its very close to a KS

I have a 9900KF Coming today from amazon £242 OEM Tray New
to go with my old Z390 M Gaming + Noctua NH-D15S + 4 x 16 GB Crucial LT Sport 3200
gona upgrade the other pc from Ivy Bridge

Gona be fighting an uphill battle with that i think
Much worse voltage regulation on the Motherboard
Much worse cooling
Most prob much worse CPU Bin


----------



## Doolie

@KedarWolf In your experience which Bios is best when coupling a 9900k and a z390 Aorus pro wifi? Currently on stock F11 @ 5.0ghz stable @ 1.33 but could use all the performance I can get, microcodes etc.. Thank you fellow canadian!


----------



## KedarWolf

Doolie said:


> @KedarWolf In your experience which Bios is best when coupling a 9900k and a z390 Aorus pro wifi? Currently on stock F11 @ 5.0ghz stable @ 1.33 but could use all the performance I can get, microcodes etc.. Thank you fellow canadian!


Likely the latest BIOS I modded with the fastest microcodes, or some like the the version that came just before the latest one I read,


----------



## Doolie

KedarWolf said:


> Likely the latest BIOS I modded with the fastest microcodes, or some like the the version that came just before the latest one I read,


Wonderful, can I trouble you to link me to your modded F12L bios for Pro + Wifi ? I've looked and i cant find it in the thread. Thanks again


----------



## KedarWolf

Doolie said:


> Wonderful, can I trouble you to link me to your modded F12L bios for Pro + Wifi ? I've looked and i cant find it in the thread. Thanks again


deleted


----------



## KedarWolf

Doolie said:


> Wonderful, can I trouble you to link me to your modded F12L bios for Pro + Wifi ? I've looked and i cant find it in the thread. Thanks again


Latest Pro WiFi is F12k. 






Z390ProWiFiModded.zip







drive.google.com













GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums


Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...




www.tweaktownforum.com


----------



## Doolie

KedarWolf said:


> Latest Pro WiFi is F12k.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums
> 
> 
> Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tweaktownforum.com


Flashed and back to OC settings, seems just as stable as before and scores higher than before! Thank you for the time you spend on this.


----------



## satinghostrider

I am currently on F11n official for my Z390 Aorus Master. Is it worth to move to F11o modded BIOS by Kedar? TIA!
CPU overclock stability and memory running at 4133Mhz currently with F11n. B-Die kit.

Also when EFI Flashing, you use the command as follows : *efiflash 1.f11 /x*
Do you need to clear DMI Data with the */c* command as well?

First time running a modded bios so I just wanna be careful.


----------



## satinghostrider

Main Frame said:


> No worries. I've been overclocking for a long time so this isn't my first trip around the block.
> 
> 
> Anyways, I'm an idiot. Seems there were two new "Advanced CPU" settings that I wasn't familiar with, and honestly didn't even notice. Hardware Prefetcher ahd Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch. They're tucked in the middle of a long list of energy efficiency CPU settings that I run through and diasable all of without thinking. I flashed Kedar's modded F12j, saved defaults, tested, and read speed was still low of course.. but the ratio that it was lower than write speed wasn't as much as before. I ran through doing a preliminary CPU overclock setup, tested RAM, and noticed read speed had gone down a hair, but write speed had gone up quite a bit. That's when I went back to start changing settings two or three at a time and I noticed those two fields which had not been there on previous version. I left both of those on Auto and so far that seems to have fixed it.
> 
> View attachment 2465578


I've also noticed this on the official F11n and disabled those stuff. For some reason, platform power management is disabled by default now and I was getting random reboots and bsods during idle. I enabled it and enabled (Auto) the Hardware Prefetcher + Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch and all is working well now.


----------



## TrebleTA

satinghostrider said:


> I've also noticed this on the official F11n and disabled those stuff. For some reason, platform power management is disabled by default now and I was getting random reboots and bsods during idle. I enabled it and enabled (Auto) the Hardware Prefetcher + Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch and all is working well now.


when the pc booted random did you get any pc beeps?


----------



## bass junkie xl

I got my 5.2 9900 ks @ 1.29v rout with 32vb 4133 c17 on gigabyte z390 pro wifi


----------



## bass junkie xl

I got my 5.2 9900 ks @ 1.29v rout with 32 GB 4133 c17 on gigabyte z390 pro wifi no issues so far


----------



## satinghostrider

TrebleTA said:


> when the pc booted random did you get any pc beeps?


I do not have a beep speaker on my motherboard so I am not sure if I got any beeps.
I went ahead to try F11o Kedar modded with the fast microcodes and they seem to be working very well so far.
Oddly, I find this bios alot better than the f11n official where I was getting random crashes and reboots.
I've not had a single issue since F11o was flashed last night and I basically have been using the same memory and CPU overclock settings since F11c.

I just wish they would bake RGB control into the BIOS. The RGB Fusion is hot pile of crap.


----------



## KiparisD

Picked up Z590 Aorus Master today for 11900K, but Z390/9900KS still here and beast, interested in future comparing of two systems


----------



## ezveedub

satinghostrider said:


> I do not have a beep speaker on my motherboard so I am not sure if I got any beeps.
> I went ahead to try F11o Kedar modded with the fast microcodes and they seem to be working very well so far.
> Oddly, I find this bios alot better than the f11n official where I was getting random crashes and reboots.
> I've not had a single issue since F11o was flashed last night and I basically have been using the same memory and CPU overclock settings since F11c.
> 
> I just wish they would bake RGB control into the BIOS. The RGB Fusion is hot pile of crap.


The bios RGB Fusion is just basic color and on or off. Not much else. Haven't tried OpenRGB yet on z390 Master, but it didn't work on my z370 Aorus Gaming 5 when I tried, but it's supposed to. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## HBizzle

Is the new Master bios trash? Updated a few weeks ago and my 5.0 all core OC has become incredibly unstable. Had same power/voltage settings etc.. and I have been BSODing every day now. Have set everything back to auto besides my XMP profile now to see if it stabilizes or if there is something wrong with windows etc...

Previous stable overclock settings:

9900k
1.31 VCORE
50 all core
47 uncore
LLC at Medium
VCCIO/SA @ 1.26
ram voltage at 1.45 - Gskill 4000 17-17-17-37 kit that was QVL for the board. Model F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR 

Have had BSODs at startup when a windows update service is running and my nvme drive is running like crazy. Wondering if something with Windows is wrong or if the settings above are just unstable. The last two days I have had random BSODs pop up while watching Twitch of all things on Chrome. Have also had some BSODs with an IRQ call out so maybe a bad driver issue? Any ideas appreciated, as this overclock was stable for over 2 years now until recently.


----------



## TrebleTA

What bios version, if f11o ya be the first I think


----------



## satinghostrider

HBizzle said:


> Is the new Master bios trash? Updated a few weeks ago and my 5.0 all core OC has become incredibly unstable. Had same power/voltage settings etc.. and I have been BSODing every day now. Have set everything back to auto besides my XMP profile now to see if it stabilizes or if there is something wrong with windows etc...
> 
> Previous stable overclock settings:
> 
> 9900k
> 1.31 VCORE
> 50 all core
> 47 uncore
> LLC at Medium
> VCCIO/SA @ 1.26
> ram voltage at 1.45 - Gskill 4000 17-17-17-37 kit that was QVL for the board. Model F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR
> 
> Have had BSODs at startup when a windows update service is running and my nvme drive is running like crazy. Wondering if something with Windows is wrong or if the settings above are just unstable. The last two days I have had random BSODs pop up while watching Twitch of all things on Chrome. Have also had some BSODs with an IRQ call out so maybe a bad driver issue? Any ideas appreciated, as this overclock was stable for over 2 years now until recently.


If you're talking about F11n official from Gigabyte site, yes it's thrash. Even I was randomly getting BSODs and random reboots. You getting IRQL BSODs as well probably confirms F11n is botched because I was getting that too. I also thought something else was failing on my system. Got sick of that 5hit and used Kedar's F11o modded BIOS and it's been golden ever since. I'm also running abit faster due to the fast microcodes. Do give it a try it's well worth the shot for your peace of mind. DM me if you're unsure I'll help you out.


----------



## TrebleTA

That due to me getting f11n RGB with some fixs included, am waiting on a f11o with some fixs + RGB too, but its taken over 2 weeks so far. Then I'll hope @KedarWolf can work his magic


----------



## HBizzle

satinghostrider said:


> If you're talking about F11n official from Gigabyte site, yes it's thrash. Even I was randomly getting BSODs and random reboots. You getting IRQL BSODs as well probably confirms F11n is botched because I was getting that too. I also thought something else was failing on my system. Got sick of that 5hit and used Kedar's F11o modded BIOS and it's been golden ever since. I'm also running abit faster due to the fast microcodes. Do give it a try it's well worth the shot for your peace of mind. DM me if you're unsure I'll help you out.


Where do I download this bios?

I am using F11N. Good to know it is the bios and not what used to be a stable setup.


----------



## Deathtech00

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11oModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hey Kedar, been stable for a while now. I was curious, is the latest hotness bios from you for the Z390 Master the one that includes Resizable-Bar?


----------



## HBizzle

If I wanted to use official release bios as a roll-back option instead of this F11n garbage which one would folks recommend? I downloaded F11C back in march of last year and had few issues with it. Wondering if I should just go back to that?


----------



## KedarWolf

Deathtech00 said:


> Hey Kedar, been stable for a while now. I was curious, is the latest hotness bios from you for the Z390 Master the one that includes Resizable-Bar?


Yes, it is and does.









GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums


Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...




www.tweaktownforum.com


----------



## satinghostrider

HBizzle said:


> If I wanted to use official release bios as a roll-back option instead of this F11n garbage which one would folks recommend? I downloaded F11C back in march of last year and had few issues with it. Wondering if I should just go back to that?


I've also been on F11C for the longest time and moved to F11n for the resize bar option and it was the worst mistake. Very unstable as mentioned earlier. I feel if you like F11C stability and don't go too crazy on memory overclocks, the F11o is the closest to that. F11C have also been pulled from the official Gigabyte page. I'd much honestly just efiflash Kedar's F11o fast microcodes because they are really stable and really fast. Not to mention you have resize bar option as well. You'll definitely have no issues with these including running your prior settings on F11C as I'm practically using the same bios settings in F11C for F11o modded.

Hope this helps...


----------



## TrebleTA

If you want a official f11n with fixs not on the gigabyte web site use my link below, latest beta f11o with tweaks is above or orginal on tweaktown beta bios


----------



## Shonk

KedarWolf did you do a bios for Z390 M Gaming?

I run your mod on my Z390 Master and would like to use it on my other pc also if poss


----------



## xmrdevi1ishx

When you guys flash the bios do you use efiflash 1.F11xx /C command to flash to a different bios cause I use to get BSOD when I missed out the /C


----------



## wirefox

nevermind not going to cheap out here  

my board stopped posting. just a boot loop ... no red error code, reset all components, cmos etc.

Has anyone done this with gigabyte? 

I have an RMA# but the OG box is sooo HEAVY. and I pay shipping.

Will they accept RMA in a non-factory box?


----------



## The Pook

the vast majority of manufacturers specially tell you _not_ to return the original box because chances are you're not going to get it back.

I RMAed my Z390 Taichi board in the OG box (because I didn't have anything else) and it got shipped back to me in a B450 Pro4 box.


----------



## tango bango

Sorry didn't read through 500 pages. Will a Samsung 980 PRO PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD work in a aorus elite MB?


----------



## ezveedub

tango bango said:


> Sorry didn't read through 500 pages. Will a Samsung 980 PRO PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD work in a aorus elite MB?


It should work fine. Just won't be running at 4.0 speed. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## darkage

HI @KedarWolf 
with your latest F11o mod the igpu is not working in uefi
bad flash from me ?
z390 master / 9900K
thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

OH< I think you got the wrong one. 


darkage said:


> HI @KedarWolf
> with your latest F11o mod the igpu is not working in uefi
> bad flash from me ?
> z390 master / 9900K
> thanks


I think you got the wrong link. I updated it with working iGPU.


----------



## darkage

lol


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> OH< I think you got the wrong one.
> 
> 
> I think you got the wrong link. I updated it with working iGPU.


lol
thanks
will look for it then
thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Z390MasterF11oModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11oModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


thanks a lot man !!
best regards from azores


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> thanks a lot man !!
> best regards from azores


Sorry, I'm from Canada, and I'm sorry for being sorry, eh?


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Sorry, I'm from Canada, and I'm sorry for being sorry, eh?


i am from azores not you  
the sorry part i cant get it, sorry english not my native language


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11oModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


hi again @KedarWolf 
igpu its not working in uefi with your mod
flashed gigabyte F11o beta and its working in uefi
sorry to bother
regards


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> hi again @KedarWolf
> igpu its not working in uefi with your mod
> flashed gigabyte F11o beta and its working in uefi
> sorry to bother
> regards








Z390MasterF11oGOPFixed.rar







drive.google.com


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11oGOPFixed.rar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


again - thank you for all the trouble
will try asap

@KedarWolf 
all working !!
thank you for your time
best regards


----------



## orpheu_uehpro

Hi ppl anyone got a good bios for Z390 aorus ultra? i have F10H , just bought the mb ,and updated from site, but the problem is that i cant run my 9900kf not even 4.9oc stable, considering that i made an "upgrade" from z390 strix e gaming , with the old mb i had my cpu stable on 1.28v @5GHZ avx 0, and with this one i cant get it even on 4.9, i folowed the guide oc from gigabyte and also some other guides but same result...(nothing changed in the pc except mb)


----------



## cisco150

KedarWolf said:


> Z390MasterF11oGOPFixed.rar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hi and thanks for your work. what is the difference in this bios Z390MasterF11oModded.zip and this *Z390MasterF11oGOPFixed.rar. which one should i use on my z390 master with i9990k with 2080ti*


----------



## Padinn

Hey @KedarWolf I'm getting an oemid mismatch trying to flash the molded aorus master f11o bios over f11m. Using the /x command any idea what's up?


----------



## darkage

Padinn said:


> Hey @KedarWolf I'm getting an oemid mismatch trying to flash the molded aorus master f11o bios over f11m. Using the /x command any idea what's up?


just reflash the bios and all is good


----------



## Padinn

darkage said:


> just reflash the bios and all is good


I got it, just had to use a different efiflash.


----------



## Peds2023

Padinn said:


> I got it, just had to use a different efiflash.


I had that message as well. Which version efiflash did you use?


----------



## cisco150

Peds2023 said:


> I had that message as well. Which version efiflash did you use?


Im use the 0.87 version mod one if you need let me know


----------



## kikng

orpheu_uehpro said:


> Hi ppl anyone got a good bios for Z390 aorus ultra? i have F10H , just bought the mb ,and updated from site, but the problem is that i cant run my 9900kf not even 4.9oc stable, considering that i made an "upgrade" from z390 strix e gaming , with the old mb i had my cpu stable on 1.28v @5GHZ avx 0, and with this one i cant get it even on 4.9, i folowed the guide oc from gigabyte and also some other guides but same result...(nothing changed in the pc except mb)


I'm in the same boat, I had the previous bios (Aorus Ultra) and updated to F10h, now all I can do is run the cpu with Auto settings so I don't crash or BSOD in games (particularly Tarkov). Was running at 5.1Ghz with x47 Cache. At this point I'm willing to try a modded BIOS, I want my power back...


----------



## satinghostrider

kikng said:


> I'm in the same boat, I had the previous bios (Aorus Ultra) and updated to F10h, now all I can do is run the cpu with Auto settings so I don't crash or BSOD in games (particularly Tarkov). Was running at 5.1Ghz with x47 Cache. At this point I'm willing to try a modded BIOS, I want my power back...


I do not know why the recent official BIOS from Gigabyte seems to be very flaky. Even I had instability issues and was desperate and flashed Kedar's f11o modded for my Z390 Master. Extremely happy with it now. You should do the same for your board.


----------



## kikng

satinghostrider said:


> I do not know why the recent official BIOS from Gigabyte seems to be very flaky. Even I had instability issues and was desperate and flashed Kedar's f11o modded for my Z390 Master. Extremely happy with it now. You should do the same for your board.


After taking a fresh stab at a default BIOS, I got 5.0 (-1 AVX) running with ~1.19v. Still can't shake that AVX offset though, could you tell me the best way to find the BIOS for my z390 Ultra from Kedar?


----------



## satinghostrider

kikng said:


> After taking a fresh stab at a default BIOS, I got 5.0 (-1 AVX) running with ~1.19v. Still can't shake that AVX offset though, could you tell me the best way to find the BIOS for my z390 Ultra from Kedar?


I am not sure which is the latest modded bios for Z390 Ultra which Kedar has done. He should be able to advise you better.
If you can search, under his nick and you should be able to see the BIOS he has baked for most of the Z390 Aorus boards.
Hope this helps.


----------



## darkage

@KedarWolf 
sorry to bother you, but do you mod other brand bios ? (intel Z390 also)
thanks


----------



## Kaibosh

cisco150 said:


> Im use the 0.87 version mod one if you need let me know


I would like a link to this version, plz. I haven't seen one posted for quite a few pages now, the last one I grabbed was from Jan. 29th.


----------



## cisco150

Kaibosh said:


> I would like a link to this version, plz. I haven't seen one posted for quite a few pages now, the last one I grabbed was from Jan. 29th.


Here you go hope this helps. you need to be login to download it [Tool] EFIFLASH v0.80/v0.85/v0.87 FOR GIGABYTE MOTHERBOARDS 

https://www.win-raid.com/file.php?url=http://files.homepagemodules.de/b602300/f16t5496p95877n7_nhAzXEZx.zip&r=1&content=[Tool]_EFIFLASH_v0.80/v0.85/v0.87_FOR_GIGABYTE_MOTHERBOARDS


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> @KedarWolf
> sorry to bother you, but do you mod other brand bios ? (intel Z390 also)
> thanks


Yes, I do.


----------



## HBizzle

My ongoing saga appears to have resulted in my AIO pump going bad, but now it looks like the PSU has died as well. Replace AIO with a Corsair h150i hooked everything back up, turn powersupply on and the lights on the mobo and connected to the LED fans just blink about every second or so. Followed CMOS reset procedure and battery removal and no dice. Removed my 3080 and tried to start without, still blinking. I am think the PSU died but wondering if anyone has a clue on what that blinking light means. I hand tightened the new cooler down, didnt tighten it too much I thought so I dont think the chip is bad, and the chip booted previously to bios right before I replaced this AIO, it would start in BIOS and the temp idling in BIOS would rise up to 90, which is why I thought the pump was bad. Current PSU Is a Rosewill Lightning 1000W, but its about 6-7 years old now. Any thoughts appreciated.


----------



## kikng

satinghostrider said:


> I am not sure which is the latest modded bios for Z390 Ultra which Kedar has done. He should be able to advise you better.
> If you can search, under his nick and you should be able to see the BIOS he has baked for most of the Z390 Aorus boards.
> Hope this helps.


Found Kedarwolfs bios for my board, and sure enough I gained about 300 points in cinebench r20 and I'm back to pre-offical bios update status. Still can't get a solid 5Ghz, but its running 4.9Ghz with a x46 cache. I must be missing something though since at this voltage there's just so much available overhead and none of it makes 5Ghz stable. I must be missing a setting.

Disabled C-States, voltage is Normal with a -.50v offset, LLC Normal, Internal LLC Performance.

Edit: Thank you @KedarWolf for all you do and have done!


----------



## kikng

HBizzle said:


> My ongoing saga appears to have resulted in my AIO pump going bad, but now it looks like the PSU has died as well. Replace AIO with a Corsair h150i hooked everything back up, turn powersupply on and the lights on the mobo and connected to the LED fans just blink about every second or so. Followed CMOS reset procedure and battery removal and no dice. Removed my 3080 and tried to start without, still blinking. I am think the PSU died but wondering if anyone has a clue on what that blinking light means. I hand tightened the new cooler down, didnt tighten it too much I thought so I dont think the chip is bad, and the chip booted previously to bios right before I replaced this AIO, it would start in BIOS and the temp idling in BIOS would rise up to 90, which is why I thought the pump was bad. Current PSU Is a Rosewill Lightning 1000W, but its about 6-7 years old now. Any thoughts appreciated.


If it were me, I would unplug the computer, remove the memory and anything plugged into the PCIE slots, the hold power button for a few seconds to drain whatever capacitors there are to drain. Plug the power back in and see if you can boot into the bios. Also tighten that cooler with a screwdriver, until the screws stop (not a huge amount of force, but it should tighten up to a stop), it's gotta be tight. To check if the AIO pump is working, check the tubes by holding them with your hand. It's gotta be warmed up, kind of like checking your car radiator hoses to make sure the water pump in it is working.

Edit: the cooler being loose and cpu getting to hot during post might also cause the boot loop, but in my experience it's been some messed up bios command or a instability that caused it. Bad memory training maybe as well?


----------



## HBizzle

kikng said:


> If it were me, I would unplug the computer, remove the memory and anything plugged into the PCIE slots, the hold power button for a few seconds to drain whatever capacitors there are to drain. Plug the power back in and see if you can boot into the bios. Also tighten that cooler with a screwdriver, until the screws stop (not a huge amount of force, but it should tighten up to a stop), it's gotta be tight. To check if the AIO pump is working, check the tubes by holding them with your hand. It's gotta be warmed up, kind of like checking your car radiator hoses to make sure the water pump in it is working.
> 
> Edit: the cooler being loose and cpu getting to hot during post might also cause the boot loop, but in my experience it's been some messed up bios command or a instability that caused it. Bad memory training maybe as well?


Before I started taking stuff apart I disabled the xmp profile for the memory. Don't think its that. Well after a 4 hour round trip to Best Buy got a new 850W PSU. Going to plug it in tonight and see if it works.

EDIT: Well it looks like it was the PSU. Computer now boots to bios, but windows is BSODing with an Inaccessible Boot Device error. It has gone into a Windows Repair mode, so its reading the drive, but then won't get past this. Thinking I just need to do a full reinstall of Windows 10 Pro at this point. Whats odd is it sees the drive in bios. I switched to IRST management when i first booted in and set it to on, then it didnt see the other two drives, so I am now wondering if its something with that.


----------



## [email protected]

I have z390 ultra in bios from the site gigabyte no settings CH Hash Support , Pwr Down Idle Timer . Where to get the modified bios z390 ultra to improve memory overclocking .


----------



## KedarWolf

Can someone test the on-board video with this Master file?

I think I fixed it but need someone to test it. It has GOP VBT 221 and the latest GOP v9.0.1111.






Z390MasterF11oGOPTest.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Can someone test the on-board video with this Master file?
> 
> I think I fixed it but need someone to test it. It has GOP VBT 221 and the latest GOP v9.0.1111.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11oGOPTest.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


is this a new version from the one you out above for me ?
if so i can test it, but the previous was all ok


----------



## darkage

@KedarWolf 
just flashed it
not working in uefi mode (csm disabled)
the previous was all ok


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> @KedarWolf
> just flashed it
> not working in uefi mode (csm disabled)
> the previous was all ok


Okay, thank you. I need to tell the developer of the app I use to mod the BIOS's that it's bugged.


----------



## fellcbr1

Someone could shed some insight on a* BIOS Option*?

I am on a Z390 Aorus Pro

*I have two sticks of dual rank memory, running on dual channel*

In the BIOS there are the options to enable Rank Interleaving; which from what i understood since i have dual rank memory sticks it is something i should enable, i even heard about gains in some gaming scenarios even if the board is T-topology, is that right?



But my question is the other option.. *Channel Interleaving* , i remember reading about this option on server boards or boards that allowed for Triple Channel or different setups, and you could configure how you wanted it

But on the Aorus board there isn't any customization on this option, should i enable *Channel Interleaving* on my Dual Channel setup?


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> @KedarWolf
> just flashed it
> not working in uefi mode (csm disabled)
> the previous was all ok


Thank you for testing these.
Can you try this one?






Z390MasterGOPTest2.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Thank you for testing these.
> Can you try this one?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterGOPTest2.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


hi
csm disabled not working
efiflash version gives mismatch error


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Can someone test the on-board video with this Master file?
> 
> I think I fixed it but need someone to test it. It has GOP VBT 221 and the latest GOP v9.0.1111.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterF11oGOPTest.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Is the RGB Fusion at the bios just an on/off toggle or can it be used to set my RGB on boot ?


----------



## darkage

EarlZ said:


> Is the RGB Fusion at the bios just an on/off toggle or can it be used to set my RGB on boot ?


only the GK bios have rgb control built in i think
this version has it 
Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master Rev(1.0) Overclocking i7 9700k - TweakTown Forums


----------



## EarlZ

darkage said:


> only the GK bios have rgb control built in i think
> this version has it
> Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master Rev(1.0) Overclocking i7 9700k - TweakTown Forums


I remember incorrectly that a GK suffix was needed, I am unable to recall if F11L allowed me to use a lower Vcore to have a 5Ghz stability, I am currently using F11o


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> hi
> csm disabled not working
> efiflash version gives mismatch error


Lots of posts in this thread on how to fix that. Search is your friend.


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Lots of posts in this thread on how to fix that. Search is your friend.


i know 
just letting you know
maybe you should send the modded efiflash version with the bios


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> i know
> just letting you know
> maybe you should send the modded efiflash version with the bios


No, it can flash even a wrong model BIOS and brick peeps boards, why I don't.


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> No, it can flash even a wrong model BIOS and brick peeps boards, why I don't.


ah
ok then


----------



## orpheu_uehpro

kikng said:


> Found Kedarwolfs bios for my board, and sure enough I gained about 300 points in cinebench r20 and I'm back to pre-offical bios update status. Still can't get a solid 5Ghz, but its running 4.9Ghz with a x46 cache. I must be missing something though since at this voltage there's just so much available overhead and none of it makes 5Ghz stable. I must be missing a setting.
> 
> Disabled C-States, voltage is Normal with a -.50v offset, LLC Normal, Internal LLC Performance.
> 
> Edit: Thank you @KedarWolf for all you do and have done!


@kikng can you help me with a link of that?
Thank you!

Sent from my CLT-L29 using Tapatalk


----------



## Padinn

@KedarWolf how would I flash back to the retail bios if desired? I think it gives an OEM mismatch.


----------



## TrebleTA

Just got hold of F11o RGB.








Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB


MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.



www.mediafire.com


----------



## ezveedub

TrebleTA said:


> Just got hold of F11o RGB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com


@KedarWolf...modded version if possible. TIA


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## darkage

TrebleTA said:


> Just got hold of F11o RGB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com


have you tested it, any new thing from the site O version besides rgb ?
thanks for the help


----------



## TrebleTA

Rom dated 18-3-21 my setting from f11n all work, testing as we speak, not done any benchmarks tho


----------



## EarlZ

TrebleTA said:


> Just got hold of F11o RGB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com


What RGB settings does the bios offer, is it similar to RGB fusion where I can load up my RBG profiles on boot instead of Windows?


----------



## ezveedub

EarlZ said:


> What RGB settings does the bios offer, is it similar to RGB fusion where I can load up my RBG profiles on boot instead of Windows?


It's like the 370 and earlier mobos that just have the basic RGB Fusion color functions or turn it off in the bios. No profiles or special functions like RGB Fusion 2.0 does. You're not stuck with Aorus orange only as base color. Fine for those who just want to have one simple color or color cycle and not have to use RGB Fusion in OS.


----------



## EarlZ

ezveedub said:


> It's like the 370 and earlier mobos that just have the basic RGB Fusion color functions or turn it off in the bios. No profiles or special functions like RGB Fusion 2.0 does. You're not stuck with Aorus orange only as base color. Fine for those who just want to have one simple color or color cycle and not have to use RGB Fusion in OS.


Sounds perfect for my use case, I only run with a single color and a static preset. I hope it can also control my G.Skill memory like RGB fusion. Gonna wait for @KedarWolf modded version with fast micro and other updates


----------



## TrebleTA

It dont control the memory RGB, why I do not know


----------



## frtz

KedarWolf said:


> Thank you for testing these.
> Can you try this one?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterGOPTest2.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Didnt worked for me. IGFX enable on bios but not recognized by OS.


----------



## KedarWolf

frtz said:


> Didnt worked for me. IGFX enable on bios but not recognized by OS.


Thank you.


----------



## Shonk

You know you dont have to install RGBfusion right?
it will run just fine portable if you have the required C++ Redistributable installed









23.08 MB file on MEGA







mega.nz





Just run it set your colour and reboot or kill the background process


----------



## EarlZ

Shonk said:


> You know you dont have to install RGBfusion right?
> it will run just fine portable if you have the required C++ Redistributable installed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 23.08 MB file on MEGA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mega.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just run it set your colour and reboot or kill the background process


You mean this version you've uploaded can keep the settings from a reboot/power off with no need for RGB Fusion to be installed or constantly running ? Not sure which C++ is required, can you link us to that ?


----------



## fellcbr1

Hmmm.. does the Z390 doesn't have MCE control?


----------



## frtz

KedarWolf said:


> Thank you.


What is the latest bios for master with your mods?


----------



## Shonk

EarlZ said:


> You mean this version you've uploaded can keep the settings from a reboot/power off with no need for RGB Fusion to be installed or constantly running ? Not sure which C++ is required, can you link us to that ?


It will keep settings from a reboot/power off with no need to be installed or running yes (on the motherboard)

you most prob already have it
just unrar to C:\Program Files (x86)\Gigabyte\ and run rgbfusion.exe
if it moans about side by side just run vcredist_x86.exe that is also in the folder

the main reason i did this is the gigabyte installer is a joke
it installed about 20 msi's and doesnt even uninstall 90% of them when you uninstall
there's no way im ever installing that joke again


----------



## EarlZ

Shonk said:


> It will keep settings from a reboot/power off with no need to be installed or running yes (on the motherboard)
> 
> you most prob already have it
> just unrar to C:\Program Files (x86)\Gigabyte\ and run rgbfusion.exe
> if it moans about side by side just run vcredist_x86.exe that is also in the folder
> 
> the main reason i did this is the gigabyte installer is a joke
> it installed about 20 msi's and doesnt even uninstall 90% of them when you uninstall
> there's no way im ever installing that joke again


Placed it on the folder you've suggested, keyed in my LED settings and rebooted. Doesnt work for me.


----------



## Shonk

it can only control the motherbooard rgb and anything plugged into the motherboard rgb headers after a reboot
you need a background process to sync other devices, ram etc.

there is no way around that


----------



## EarlZ

Shonk said:


> it can only control the motherbooard rgb and anything plugged into the motherboard rgb headers after a reboot
> you need a background process to sync other devices, ram etc.
> 
> there is no way around that


Its not even controlling my motherboard after reboot, it remains off.


----------



## kikng

orpheu_uehpro said:


> @kikng can you help me with a link of that?
> Thank you!
> 
> Sent from my CLT-L29 using Tapatalk





KedarWolf said:


> I did the latest Ultra I think.
> 
> Yes, I did, but I'll post it again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390UltraF10hModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


I think that was the one I used.


----------



## BoldStep

How’s the f11o bios? I downloaded the modded beta of it and it’s the most stable bios I experienced on my z390 master, so I’m reluctant to change it


----------



## satinghostrider

BoldStep said:


> How’s the f11o bios? I downloaded the modded beta of it and it’s the most stable bios I experienced on my z390 master, so I’m reluctant to change it


Same here mate. The official F11n sucks. Random reboots and overclocks can't hold. So glad I used Kedar's modded F11o BIOS and it's heaven. Rock stable and I actually find my temps lower for some reason with the same settings I was on F11c official.


----------



## BoldStep

satinghostrider said:


> Same here mate. The official F11n sucks. Random reboots and overclocks can't hold. So glad I used Kedar's molded F11o BIOS and it's heaven. Rock stable and I actually find my temps lower for some reason with the same settings I was on F11c official.


Absolutely. I've had no issues with his modded f11o beta bios. I went through hoops trying to figure out why my ram and cpu oc was suddenly unstable after going to F11l and F11n. Once I went on F11o, all my problems went away and I'm content with sticking to this version. Pure bliss now


----------



## wilsonb

OK guys.. After being on official 12f Bios and nothing but unstable when changing settings, ready to try recent posted modded Bios 11.
Is this compatible? 
Tanx
GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO Wi-Fi (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2


https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07HRZKPXM/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_fabc_25ESSJG90XK8XWP9NKC7?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1



K9700 cpu 

*Patriot Viper Gaming RGB Series DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz 16GB*


----------



## sudouser

Is anyone can get stable 5ggz on 9900K with Kedar's molded F11o bios (i take bios from this post - (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread))? Can you share your bios settings?


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> Is anyone can get stable 5ggz on 9900K with Kedar's molded F11o bios (i take bios from this post - (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread))? Can you share your bios settings?











(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Does anyone or Do have any 5ghz setting for this cpu 9900k z390 master i tried your setting for low power working ok so far but would love to get 5.0ghz I Im on the F1.11M Modded water cooled. Here you go. Play with offset until stable. If you don't want CPU to downclock to 800mhz when idle...




www.overclock.net


----------



## fellcbr1

People, does the option *Aperture Size *only applies to the integrated GPU?


----------



## TrebleTA

fellcbr1 said:


> People, does the option *Aperture Size *only applies to the integrated GPU?


Yes


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> Does anyone or Do have any 5ghz setting for this cpu 9900k z390 master i tried your setting for low power working ok so far but would love to get 5.0ghz I Im on the F1.11M Modded water cooled. Here you go. Play with offset until stable. If you don't want CPU to downclock to 800mhz when idle...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


What stability tests do you use for these settings?


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> What stability tests do you use for these settings?


occt small fft’s AVX 30 min;
Realbench 2.54 with 50% ram, 4+ hours
AIDA 64 FPU only - 30 min
Aida 64 CPU/FPU/CACHE/RAM - 4+hrs
Once did prime 95 in place ffts no AVX for 12 hrs, but it is useless tbh.

I didn’t have a single reboot/freeze/bsod/whea error since i dialed this OC in.


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> occt small fft’s AVX 30 min;
> Realbench 2.54 with 50% ram, 4+ hours
> Once did prime 95 in plage ffts no AVX for 12 hrs, but it useless tbh.
> 
> I didn’t have a single reboot/freeze/bsod/whea error since i dialed this OC in.


thank you!


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> thank you!


Your welcome!
Also, you can throw in BF5 as a test - it is very sensitive to unstable overclocks, and uses AVX.


----------



## Associated

Z390MasterF11oGOPFixed not booting with above 4g decoding enabled and the new Bios from EVGA to support re-size bar (error code 62). Boots normal if you disable above 4g decoding. Did not check if it works with official Gigabyte bios.


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> Your welcome!
> Also, you can throw in BF5 as a test - it is very sensitive to unstable overclocks, and uses AVX.


your setup uses throttling as i see, but i got very good score at 3d mark with these settings, and has no errors in small OCCT, just some throttling on 2 cores, but its good, on F11c i cant get stable with throttling with small ffts


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> your setup uses throttling as i see, but i got very good score at 3d mark with these settings, and has no errors in small OCCT, just some throttling on 2 cores, but its good, on F11c i cant get stable with throttling with small ffts


it is not throttling - I have C-states enabled ( cpu downclocks to 800mhz when idle ) . When any type of load is applied it is 5.0/4.7 flat with no dips.

You can turn it off by disabling all C-states in bios and using a maximum performance power plan in Windows.

What are your temps during OCCT? Maybe you are thermal throttling>?


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> it is not throttling - I have C-states enabled ( cpu downclocks to 800mhz when idle ) . When any type of load is applied it is 5.0/4.7 flat with no dips.
> 
> You can turn it off by disabling all C-states in bios and using a maximum performance power plan in Windows.
> 
> What are your temps during OCCT? Maybe you are thermal throttling>?


yes, it a thermal throttling, i got 100 degrees at 1-2 cores


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> yes, it a thermal throttling, i got 100 degrees at 1-2 cores


How is your cooling setup look like? could you please send the picture of HWinfo, all sections, at the time OCCT is running?


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> it is not throttling - I have C-states enabled ( cpu downclocks to 800mhz when idle ) . When any type of load is applied it is 5.0/4.7 flat with no dips.
> 
> You can turn it off by disabling all C-states in bios and using a maximum performance power plan in Windows.
> 
> What are your temps during OCCT? Maybe you are thermal throttling>?


i use Liquid Freezer II 360 | Multi-Compatible AiO CPU Water Cooler | ARCTIC for cooling


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> i use Liquid Freezer II 360 | Multi-Compatible AiO CPU Water Cooler | ARCTIC for cooling
> View attachment 2484422


could you please send the whole HWinfo tabs at the time of OCCT run (you have two blue arrows pointing opposite directions on the left bottom corner of HWinfo - please click it until it expands. I am most interested to see power draw, amps and VRVOUT)

and what is your ambient temp?


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> could you please send the whole HWinfo tabs at the time of OCCT run (you have two blue arrows pointing opposite directions on the left bottom corner of HWinfo - please click it until it expands. I am most interested to see power draw, amps and VRVOUT)
> 
> and what is your ambient temp?


----------



## sudouser

ambient temperature 24 degrees celsius


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> View attachment 2484423


it seems you didn't change the LLC settings in bios - VRVOUT shouldn't jump THAT high

make sure you have "power saving" and "low" LCC in tweaker tab


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> View attachment 2484423


your VCCIO and VCCSA are also through the roof - make sure that you changed all settings in bios according to the guide I shared.


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> it seems you didn't change the LLC settings in bios - VRVOUT shouldn't jump THAT high
> 
> make sure you have "power saving" and "low" LCC in tweaker tab
> View attachment 2484424


yes, a have Turbo value, with Power saving a have immediately reboot


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> yes, a have Turbo value, with Power saving a have immediately reboot


you will degrade your CPU pretty quickly with having the settings you have now.
again, make sure to change everything according to the pictures I shared previously. 
Start testing with less intensive soft - like CB R15 or R20. Now you were pushing 210A and 280W through the chip and had a voltage spike to 1.500V - it is not safe, to say the least.


----------



## Dannyele

Same problem with ASUS Strix 3080 OC.

After updating to last NVidia driver, and flashing the vBIOS for the re-BAR, the PC won't boot at all if enabling BAR. I mean, it boots as per the mobo code it's "A0" and also loads into Windows as I can see the RGB leds for the mobo changing once the RGBFusion loads, but it won't show image for Displayport nor HDMI.


----------



## Hawkjoss

ehm, so resizable bar is not supported on Z390 and 9-gen CPUs for Founder cards, or am I missing something?








GeForce RTX 30 Series Performance Accelerates With Resizable BAR Support | GeForce News | NVIDIA


Support available now for all GeForce RTX 30 Series Founders Edition graphics cards, and select GeForce RTX 30 Series laptops.<br/>



www.nvidia.com


----------



## wilsonb

One request. To the bios level gurus.. Could someone make the Global option to change temperature to Fahrenheit for those on "the other side of the pond"? 
Not high priority, but a nice to have.
Thanks


----------



## satinghostrider

Dannyele said:


> Same problem with ASUS Strix 3080 OC.
> 
> After updating to last NVidia driver, and flashing the vBIOS for the re-BAR, the PC won't boot at all if enabling BAR. I mean, it boots as per the mobo code it's "A0" and also loads into Windows as I can see the RGB leds for the mobo changing once the RGBFusion loads, but it won't show image for Displayport nor HDMI.


What BIOS are you on?


----------



## Dannyele

satinghostrider said:


> What BIOS are you on?


F11o modded from KedarWolf


----------



## satinghostrider

Dannyele said:


> F11o modded from KedarWolf


Same.
I'm gonna flash mine later and update here.


----------



## Dannyele

Ok, it seems that you must have disabled the CSM Support in order to make re-BAR working in our mobo. Now it's working fine, Strix 3080 + Z390 Master F11o (modded from KedarWolf).









Screenshot


Captured with Lightshot




prnt.sc


----------



## satinghostrider

Dannyele said:


> Ok, it seems that you must have disabled the CSM Support in order to make re-BAR working in our mobo. Now it's working fine, Strix 3080 + Z390 Master F11o (modded from KedarWolf).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screenshot
> 
> 
> Captured with Lightshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> prnt.sc


Yes I had problems with blank screen and saw your post and disabled CSM and resizable bar works now as reported under GPU-Z! 

Thanks so much! 

What does CSM do and disabling it do you lose out anything?


----------



## Dannyele

satinghostrider said:


> Yes I had problems with blank screen and saw your post and disabled CSM and resizable bar works now as reported under GPU-Z!
> 
> Thanks so much!
> 
> What does CSM do and disabling it do you lose out anything?


AFAIK it's basically for booting legacy drives for Windows.









Unified Extensible Firmware Interface - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## ezveedub

Disable CSM support is known for using Nvidia 3000 GPUs. If you have a PC speaker connected to the mobo, it usually gives 3 beeps that people complain about before booting to OS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Dibbler

ezveedub said:


> Disable CSM support is known for using Nvidia 3000 GPUs. If you have a PC speaker connected to the mobo, it usually gives 3 beeps that people complain about before booting to OS.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro



Could that be why I get a series of beeps with my Z390 Master and the 3070 with vBIOS BAR support when I enable Above 4G and BAR..?

No screen.

Do I need CSM...?

I have CSM enabled


----------



## ezveedub

Dibbler said:


> Could that be why I get a series of beeps with my Z390 Master and the 3070 with vBIOS BAR support when I enable Above 4G and BAR..?
> 
> No screen.
> 
> Do I need CSM...?
> 
> I have CSM enabled


Disable CSM support in bios, save and reboot.


----------



## Dibbler

ezveedub said:


> Disable CSM support in bios, save and reboot.


Spent ages trying to figure that one out....!
Works a treat now with BAR enabled and no more beeps or black screens.

Wish that I had read that over at MSI or Nvidia.


----------



## wilsonb

After being on official F12K Bios and nothing but unstable when changing settings from default, ready to try recent posted 
modded Bios Z390AORUSMASTERGK.F11o
Is the below compatible?

GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO Wi-Fi (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2








Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI (rev. 1.0) Key Features | Motherboard - GIGABYTE U.S.A.


Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




www.gigabyte.com





i7-9700K - CPU

Patriot Viper Gaming RGB Series DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz 16GB

Nvidia RTX-2080 Gaming OC - GPU

If anyone has i7-9700k , please post screenshots or at least your finalized overclocked changed settings.

Thanks so much


----------



## ezveedub

wilsonb said:


> After being on official F12K Bios and nothing but unstable when changing settings from default, ready to try recent posted
> modded Bios Z390AORUSMASTERGK.F11o
> Is the below compatible?
> 
> GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO Wi-Fi (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI (rev. 1.0) Key Features | Motherboard - GIGABYTE U.S.A.
> 
> 
> Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gigabyte.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i7-9700K - CPU
> 
> Patriot Viper Gaming RGB Series DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz 16GB
> 
> Nvidia RTX-2080 Gaming OC - GPU
> 
> If anyone has i7-9700k , please post screenshots or at least your finalized overclocked changed settings.
> 
> Thanks so much


You can't use a bios for the Master on the Pro and vice-versa. Has to be the bios for your model mobo or you will brick it trying to use EFIflash tool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## wilsonb

ezveedub said:


> You can't use a bios for the Master on the Pro and vice-versa. Has to be the bios for your model mobo or you will brick it trying to use EFIflash tool.


Thank you for the important response..


----------



## 0rphic

Is there a list of KedarWolf's modded BIOS links? I am looking for one for my Z390 Aorus Pro (non wifi) that has resizable BAR support but with the fast microcode. From the last few pages it looks like some people got that using a modded F11 but I thought they only added bar support in F12? Once I get that I use a modded efiflash exe + freedos bootable to install it? I think? =) I have 9700k and a 3080. Any pointing in the right direction would be helpful so I don't brick my mobo!


----------



## wilsonb

Same question as above. Is there a repository of the latest modded bios somewhere?
Very time consuming and hit/miss finding via message threads.

Thanks @*KedarWolf

GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO Wi-Fi (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2 
i9700k*


----------



## Kaibosh

wilsonb said:


> Same question as above. Is there a repository of the latest modded bios somewhere?
> Very time consuming and hit/miss finding via message threads.


You can either just browse KW's posts exclusively, or better yet simply scan the pages going backwards from the newest. Within ten pages you will without a doubt find the link you are looking for, as well as critical tidbits that a person really needs to know. There are also specific versions of EFIFlash you need to run, and they are quite dangerous because you are overriding the official checks - if you don't have the right firmware for your model you will most definitely corrupt your BIOS. That by itself 'shouldn't' brick your board, as we have a dual bios setup (with a switch), but there are ways a person could corrupt both firmwares at the same time - which unless you have the means to hotswap a working chip _will_ brick your board. All of this info will be found by simply glancing over the posts of the last few weeks.


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> you will degrade your CPU pretty quickly with having the settings you have now.
> again, make sure to change everything according to the pictures I shared previously.
> Start testing with less intensive soft - like CB R15 or R20. Now you were pushing 210A and 280W through the chip and had a voltage spike to 1.500V - it is not safe, to say the least.


so, i cant get small occt run stable with Power saving, but i can with Performance, and -0.010 dvid and your vcco and sys agent voltages


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> so, i cant get small occt run stable with Power saving, but i can with Performance, and -0.010 dvid and your vcco and sys agent voltages
> View attachment 2484484


Something is not right. Please take photos of all bios pages - i cant help you from there.


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> Something is not right. Please take photos of all bios pages - i cant help you from there.


You are using modded Kedar's bios, or stock F11o?


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> Something is not right. Please take photos of all bios pages - i cant help you from there.


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> View attachment 2484524
> View attachment 2484525
> View attachment 2484526
> View attachment 2484527
> View attachment 2484528
> View attachment 2484529
> View attachment 2484530
> View attachment 2484531
> View attachment 2484532
> View attachment 2484533
> View attachment 2484534
> View attachment 2484535


even in bios your temp is 50C....
Change AC/DC to power saving
Dynamic Vcore +0.030V - it 2will be your starting point

If crashing - increase Vcore by 0.005V
If stable - decrease by 0.005V

Kepp testing 

Though don't think your cooler will be able to adequately cool 5.0/4.7 9900K with 0 AVX offset.


----------



## Hawkjoss

sudouser said:


> You are using modded Kedar's bios, or stock F11o?


Modded f11o


----------



## wilsonb

Kaibosh said:


> You can either just browse KW's posts exclusively, or better yet simply scan the pages going backwards from the newest. Within ten pages you will without a doubt find the link you are looking for, as well as critical tidbits that a person really needs to know. There are also specific versions of EFIFlash you need to run, and they are quite dangerous because you are overriding the official checks - if you don't have the right firmware for your model you will most definitely corrupt your BIOS. That by itself 'shouldn't' brick your board, as we have a dual bios setup (with a switch), but there are ways a person could corrupt both firmwares at the same time - which unless you have the means to hotswap a working chip _will_ brick your board. All of this info will be found by simply glancing over the posts of the last few weeks.


Thanks for the reply and the heads up. The sensitivity and risk in bypassing the official check during a flash is another reason why it would be helpful / safer to have files organized on Github or similar w/ details.
I have gone back 10+ pages and have not found a z390 AORUS Pro modded firmware.


----------



## The Pook

wilsonb said:


> Thanks for the reply and the heads up. The sensitivity and risk in bypassing the official check during a flash is another reason why it would be helpful / safer to have files organized on Github or similar w/ details.
> I have gone back 10+ pages and have not found a z390 AORUS Pro modded firmware.


post #10436


----------



## ezveedub

TrebleTA said:


> Just got hold of F11o RGB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com





ezveedub said:


> @KedarWolf...modded version if possible. TIA


@KedarWolf, were you able to do a modded version of the F11o RGB from TrebleTA? I know you were testing the iGPU on the nonRGB bios and didn't see one posted for the one with RGB.


----------



## sudouser

Hawkjoss said:


> even in bios your temp is 50C....
> Change AC/DC to power saving
> Dynamic Vcore +0.030V - it 2will be your starting point
> 
> If crashing - increase Vcore by 0.005V
> If stable - decrease by 0.005V
> 
> Kepp testing
> 
> Though don't think your cooler will be able to adequately cool 5.0/4.7 9900K with 0 AVX offset.



In power saving mode, small occt test runs for about 30 seconds - 1 minute without error with dvid +0.090 and then crashes with +- same voltages
For cooling - I turned off the coolers at idle, and it starts from 60 degrees at 30%, fixed it to start at 45 degrees and 30%, to 90 degrees and 100% 
So, I think that I have not the best sample of 9900k, by the way, now it has normal voltages and does not crash during tests


----------



## fellcbr1

Dibbler said:


> Could that be why I get a series of beeps with my Z390 Master and the 3070 with vBIOS BAR support when I enable Above 4G and BAR..?
> 
> No screen.
> 
> Do I need CSM...?
> 
> I have CSM enabled



You won't lose anything by disabling it, it offers legacy features for older devices, afaik it doesn't change performance or boot times.

By older devices i can mean not just mice and keyboard, but GPU too.. download GPU-Z and see if it haves the UEFI module, otherwise you will need CSM enabled.


Bear in mind, my GPU doesn't support BAR


----------



## fellcbr1

Hawkjoss said:


> your VCCIO and VCCSA are also through the roof - make sure that you changed all settings in bios according to the guide I shared.


where can i find your guide friend? i have been using a negative offset voltage with LLC on Low and the other Load Line Settings on performance, i can't really get to 5.0 but i think cooling is my issue.

What cooler do you use?


----------



## Qbm87

So on gigabytes f11n bio master. Updated vbios and set csm to disabled but keeps throwing me back to the bios whenever I have the GPU installed even with above 4g decoding etc turned off. Updated bio's maybe?


----------



## Hawkjoss

fellcbr1 said:


> where can i find your guide friend? i have been using a negative offset voltage with LLC on Low and the other Load Line Settings on performance, i can't really get to 5.0 but i think cooling is my issue.
> 
> What cooler do you use?


Hi!

Post #10146 in this topic - those are the settings I use 24/7 for the past 6 months or so without a single glitch/whea error/BSOD, in any testing I did so far (I did quite a lot )
That will be a good starting point. Play with a voltage if not stable, do not touch LLC or AC/DC calibration. VCCSA and IO are based more on your RAM speeds, so those might be different. As with any chip, your mileage can vary.

I have a custom loop with 2 360 rads, Optimus CPU block. I have direct die cooling and recently lapped the die itself. I don't think I can squeeze out more from this chip. 
Below are CBR15 runs for stock 4.7/4.3 speeds with slight undervolt and 5.0/4.7 with bios settings that I shared. (fans at 700RPM, 22C ambient, the loop is not heat soaked - but max it will rise another 5 C during prolonged 40+ minutes run )


----------



## EarlZ

I keep seeing on different forums and on reddit that we need to disable CSM for ReBar to work, where is this option located on the Z390 Aorus Master?

EDIT: Found it, under boot options


----------



## 0rphic

wilsonb said:


> Thanks for the reply and the heads up. The sensitivity and risk in bypassing the official check during a flash is another reason why it would be helpful / safer to have files organized on Github or similar w/ details.
> I have gone back 10+ pages and have not found a z390 AORUS Pro modded firmware.


Yeah I couldn't agree more. He is using google drive already he just needs a folder structure like \Z390\Pro\F11\<files> and it would be infinitely more useful. I know it is his work, his time, he can certainly do whatever he wants! Appreciate it all the same. But simply saying "look back 10 pages" is highly disingenuous. I did that, read only his posts in this forum, etc and I still didn't feel comfortable moving forward with it. Guess I am dumb


----------



## sudouser

EarlZ said:


> I keep seeing on different forums and on reddit that we need to disable CSM for ReBar to work, where is this option located on the Z390 Aorus Master?


In Boot tab


----------



## Qbm87

Dannyele said:


> F11o modded from KedarWolf


This is getting far to confusing sorry to be a pain but which beta bio as i can see 3 for f11o and which tool to flash it with? Is itEfiflash_v0.87_mod.zip


----------



## sudouser

Qbm87 said:


> This is getting far to confusing sorry to be a pain but which beta bio as i can see 3 for f11o and which tool to flash it with? Is itEfiflash_v0.87_mod.zip


Yes, i used this version of Efiflash
Use GOPfixed bios from this POST, its latest


----------



## kati

I got one problem and question towards that, got the Z390 Master with F9(9700K on it), it took me very long to find a stable and balanced slight UC low power settings for the bios so i always hesitated to upgrade it, and so here i am still on F9.

Now windows update gave me KB4589211 (microcode update mainly regarding spectre)... and my problem is nearly every game crashes constantly, as soon i uninstall this everythings fine. Sure WAU now always installs this update to annoy me. Is it possible the microcode update is not the reason for the crashes but just an effect of my old bios, cause new bios got themself microcode updates regarding spectre...so my old bios is rather the reason?


----------



## cano062

Hello guys. One question. I just got an vga bios update for ReBar but i dont see the enable option in my bios. Im using f11o for z390 aorus master


----------



## shalafi

cano062 said:


> Hello guys. One question. I just got an vga bios update for ReBar but i dont see the enable option in my bios. Im using f11o for z390 aorus master


Are you looking in the "Settings->IO Ports" submenu?

















"Above 4G Decoding" needs to be Enabled as well, and you need to disable CSM.

Edit: using Aorus Pro, but assuming there shouldn't be a difference as to where this is located.


----------



## wilsonb

Ok, this is getting carelessly scary. I'm out. I'll check back to see when things are more organized enough to do unofficial flashing.`


----------



## Sheyster

wilsonb said:


> Ok, this is getting carelessly scary. I'm out. I'll check back to see when things are more organized enough to do unofficial flashing.`


This thread will never be organized, mainly because Kedarwolf isn't the OP. If you can't handle it then flash an official Gigabyte BIOS. The latest one they published supports Re-Bar.


----------



## satinghostrider

wilsonb said:


> Ok, this is getting carelessly scary. I'm out. I'll check back to see when things are more organized enough to do unofficial flashing.`


Just look for F11o modded and flash it. It's simple and doing a search, get the file and follow the instructions to efiflash it.

Sure you can get the F11n official but everyone else that has used it had severe instabilities and crashing with that bios which forced me to use these modded bioses which worked far better than anything else I've used.


----------



## jamieafterlife

satinghostrider said:


> Just look for F11o modded and flash it. It's simple and doing a search, get the file and follow the instructions to efiflash it.
> 
> Sure you can get the F11n official but everyone else that has used it had severe instabilities and crashing with that bios which forced me to use these modded bioses which worked far better than anything else I've used.


I'm currently on F11n as I've seen a few people mentioning a version of F11o modded with RGB support - that will hopefully be the god tier one for me if it ends up being done. So far I haven't had any issues with F11n, but I am running completely stock settings (9900k) with XMP.


----------



## KedarWolf

jamieafterlife said:


> I'm currently on F11n as I've seen a few people mentioning a version of F11o modded with RGB support - that will hopefully be the god tier one for me if it ends up being done. So far I haven't had any issues with F11n, but I am running completely stock settings (9900k) with XMP.


Sorry peeps, been really burnt out from work and have modded the latest RGB BIOS yet.

I have the next five days off and I'll get to it, have some other stuff I need to get done like getting the water cooling stuff on my RTX 3090.


----------



## jamieafterlife

KedarWolf said:


> Sorry peeps, been really burnt out from work and have modded the latest RGB BIOS yet.
> 
> I have the next five days off and I'll get to it, have some other stuff I need to get done like getting the water cooling stuff on my RTX 3090.


You don't need to be sorry about anything. I've only been here a day or two but it looks like 90% of us are only here cause of the work you do. You're allowed as much time off as you want haha.


----------



## KedarWolf

jamieafterlife said:


> You don't need to be sorry about anything. I've only been here a day or two but it looks like 90% of us are only here cause of the work you do. You're allowed as much time off as you want haha.


Your kind words motivated me. 

Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f11 /c /x

.






Z390MasterRGBModded.zip







drive.google.com





I think the /c /x switches are okay, clear DMI is needed new BIOS's. Let me know if anyone has trouble flashing it.


----------



## satinghostrider

@KedarWolf Is this the same as f11o you modded previously only with RGB baked in?

TIA!


----------



## satinghostrider

KedarWolf said:


> Your kind words motivated me.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2484700
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterRGBModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the /c /x switches are okay, clear DMI is needed new BIOS's. Let me know if anyone has trouble flashing it.


@KedarWolf Is this the same as f11o you modded previously only with RGB baked in?

TIA!


----------



## KedarWolf

satinghostrider said:


> @KedarWolf Is this the same as f11o you modded previously only with RGB baked in?
> 
> TIA!


Yes, it is.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Sorry peeps, been really burnt out from work and have modded the latest RGB BIOS yet.
> 
> I have the next five days off and I'll get to it, have some other stuff I need to get done like getting the water cooling stuff on my RTX 3090.


Really love your work with this modded bios, You do not need to apologize to us, instead we are very lucky that you continue to do this for the community even if you've been using a different motherboard. 

Again, Thank you so much for taking the time to do this!


----------



## Qbm87

So turns out with csm disabled motherboard doesn't detect any of my ssd's hence keeps throwing me back to the bios on boot. Anyway to fix this?


----------



## KedarWolf

Qbm87 said:


> So turns out with csm disabled motherboard doesn't detect any of my ssd's hence keeps throwing me back to the bios on boot. Anyway to fix this?


See if you can have CSM enabled but UEFI on the video card and


Qbm87 said:


> So turns out with csm disabled motherboard doesn't detect any of my ssd's hence keeps throwing me back to the bios on boot. Anyway to fix this?


Try CSM enabled, put hard drives non-UEFI, everything else in BIOS like video cards etc. UEFI. Might be in the BIOS Boot menu. I don't have a Gigabyte Z390 board anymore though, so can't screenshot.


----------



## KedarWolf

Oh, and it might be Windows on your hard drive was installed as MBR. Either install Windows using a RUFUS GPT install USB or figure out how to convert the master boot records to UEFI.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, and it might be Windows on your hard drive was installed as MBR. Either install Windows using a RUFUS GPT install USB or figure out how to convert the master boot records to UEFI.


Still using BIOS? It's time to switch to UEFI — here's how on Windows 10. It's complicated.


----------



## Dibbler

It is going back some time since I did that but using either diskmgmt / EaseUS Partition Master helped.

How to Change Legacy to UEFI Without Reinstalling Windows 10 - wintips.org - Windows Tips & How-tos

backup with Reflect or something first but for me on all of my drives it was straight forward enough and I lost no data.

With an AMD card I did not need to disable CSM for BAR support. With an Nvidia card I had to do this.



EaseUS Partition Master is very good and easy to use.....





> Partition Master...
> 
> 
> *MBR/GPT Disk Converter*
> 
> Change disk style from MBR to GPT without data loss, and vice versa.


all of my drives are GPT type and not MBR.


----------



## Qbm87

KedarWolf said:


> Still using BIOS? It's time to switch to UEFI — here's how on Windows 10. It's complicated.





Dibbler said:


> It is going back some time since I did that but using either diskmgmt / EaseUS Partition Master helped.
> 
> How to Change Legacy to UEFI Without Reinstalling Windows 10 - wintips.org - Windows Tips & How-tos
> 
> backup with Reflect or something first but for me on all of my drives it was straight forward enough and I lost no data.
> 
> With an AMD card I did not need to disable CSM for BAR support. With an Nvidia card I had to do this.
> 
> 
> 
> EaseUS Partition Master is very good and easy to use.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> all of my drives are GPT type and not MBR.


Thanks guys gotta covert them tonight and hopefully all will go well as all are MBR. I'm sure I used EaseUS Partition Master on my old build to do the same but can't recall why now but worked flawlessly. 4133 ram seema to be stable as a rock on latest bios. Thanks for all your hard work @KedarWolf


----------



## sudouser

So, just in case we now have CSM disabled for the nvidia Resize bar, how can I use efiflash to update the BIOS?


----------



## Smokediggity

sudouser said:


> So, just in case we now have CSM disabled for the nvidia Resize bar, how can I use efiflash to update the BIOS?


The best/easiest thing to do would be to reset the bios to default settings before flashing the bios, which will re-enable CSM, allowing you to use efiflash in DOS.


The experimental way:

Gigabyte does offer a UEFI compatible efiflash, which they distribute with newer boards like the Z490. So, If you wanted to go this route, you would need to download a BIOS zip for a newer board and take the Efiflash.efi file and BOOT folder from it. There will be a PDF in the BIOS zip with some basic instructions on how to perform the flashing process. I have successfully flashed a number of bios' using the EFI efiflash tool on my Master, but your mileage may vary.

*** WARNING *** - TL;DR; Make sure that the Serial IO Port is enabled in the BIOS before doing this. (See the warning in my previous post with more details for Issue #2 from when I initially experimented with this)

The instructions are basically:

Place Efiflash.efi and the bios file you are flashing on the USB drive
Create a EFI folder on the USB drive, and place the BOOT folder inside of it. (The BOOT folder contains the EFI shell)
Boot to your USB drive
In the EFI shell, type "FS0:" (note the colon after the number). (FS0 stands for File System #0 and represents your USB drive. You can access all your other drives as well by changing the number after FS).
Do your usual thing with efiflash
The computer should automatically reboot after the flash process
You can type "help" in the EFI shell and it will show you all the built-in commands. Pressing Page Up or Page Down will let you scroll in the shell if the information is longer than your screen.


----------



## sudouser

Smokediggity said:


> The best/easiest thing to do would be to reset the bios to default settings before flashing the bios, which will re-enable CSM, allowing you to use efiflash in DOS.
> 
> 
> The experimental way:
> 
> Gigabyte does offer a UEFI compatible efiflash, which they distribute with newer boards like the Z490. So, If you wanted to go this route, you would need to download a BIOS zip for a newer board and take the Efiflash.efi file and BOOT folder from it. There will be a PDF in the BIOS zip with some basic instructions on how to perform the flashing process. I have successfully flashed a number of bios' using the EFI efiflash tool on my Master, but your mileage may vary.
> 
> *** WARNING *** - TL;DR; Make sure that the Serial IO Port is enabled in the BIOS before doing this. (See the warning in my previous post with more details for Issue #2 from when I initially experimented with this)
> 
> The instructions are basically:
> 
> Place Efiflash.efi and the bios file you are flashing on the USB drive
> Create a EFI folder on the USB drive, and place the BOOT folder inside of it. (The BOOT folder contains the EFI shell)
> Boot to your USB drive
> In the EFI shell, type "FS0:" (note the colon after the number). (FS0 stands for File System #0 and represents your USB drive. You can access all your other drives as well by changing the number after FS).
> Do your usual thing with efiflash
> The computer should automatically reboot after the flash process
> You can type "help" in the EFI shell and it will show you all the built-in commands. Pressing Page Up or Page Down will let you scroll in the shell if the information is longer than your screen.


something tells me that the efi version of efiflash has a check of the oem code and BIOS compatibility, and it will not flash the modified BIOS


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

Hey guys. I need some guidance or reassurance for my Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi on F12K BIOS. 

I had a 9900k with a 240 AIO. Ran stable 4.9G core, 4.6G ring at 1.265V. Got bdie 3200 14-14-14-34 RAM stable to 3600 15-15-15-36 at 1.4V

I upgraded to custom loop along with 9900KS from a friend. 720mm for CPU while I wait for a GPU block. He said he ran the KS at 5.1G stable at 1.26V on an AsRock ITX board. I got it stable at 5.1G core, 4.6 ring at 1.3V. That’s fine, but hard to believe my board is worse than his ITX. Also now my RAM isn’t stable past XMP 3200 CL14. I had imagined the better KS would also have a better memory controller. On top of all that, my effective clocks show 0 MHz despite running 100% load 15 minutes into stress tests on HWInfo.

I cleared CMOS after installing the KS and set everything pretty much the same except for the voltages and ratios. I’m okay with the CPU overclock, but the RAM and the 0 MHz effective clock is giving me a headache.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Smokediggity

sudouser said:


> something tells me that the efi version of efiflash has a check of the oem code and BIOS compatibility, and it will not flash the modified BIOS


It works fine on the average modded bios. You'll still run into issues if you try to flash a bios with the GK suffix (i.e. the ones with RGB Fusion), but thats the case with the DOS version as well. There is a modded version of the efiflash over on win-raid, which removes all OEM checks, but comes with the usual warnings that it can flash any bios from any manufacturer making it dangerous if you're not careful.


----------



## CommanderHK47

Qbm87 said:


> Thanks guys gotta covert them tonight and hopefully all will go well as all are MBR. I'm sure I used EaseUS Partition Master on my old build to do the same but can't recall why now but worked flawlessly. 4133 ram seema to be stable as a rock on latest bios. Thanks for all your hard work @KedarWolf


Windows 10 (1703 and later) has a built in MBR to GPT partition conversion utilitiy that you can run without needing to reformat/reinstall Windows 10.








Still using BIOS? It's time to switch to UEFI — here's how on Windows 10


In this guide, we'll show you the steps to use the MBR2GPT tool to convert a drive using MBR to GPT to properly switch from BIOS to UEFI without reinstalling Windows 10 or losing your data.




www.windowscentral.com


----------



## jamieafterlife

KedarWolf said:


> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f11 /c /x
> 
> .
> I think the /c /x switches are okay, clear DMI is needed new BIOS's. Let me know if anyone has trouble flashing it.


Unfortunately I got a "!!! Invalid BIOS image !!!" error while following these instructions.



Smokediggity said:


> It works fine on the average modded bios. You'll still run into issues if you try to flash a bios with the GK suffix (i.e. the ones with RGB Fusion), but thats the case with the DOS version as well. There is a modded version of the efiflash over on win-raid, which removes all OEM checks, but comes with the usual warnings that it can flash any bios from any manufacturer making it dangerous if you're not careful.


Perhaps this explains the error above, as I was using the efiflash in KedarWolf's download, not the one from win-raid.


Update: I sorted this out by using the modded efiflash, then had a massive scare when I couldn't boot for half an hour. Turns out I was forgetting to turn Intel RST on for one of my drives haha. 

So far, working great, thank you!


----------



## Qbm87

Does it matter if I'm getting 1 error in 6 cycles of tm5 extreme1 anta777. Like isn't the test beyond the scope of most users needs?


----------



## justinyou

KedarWolf said:


> Your kind words motivated me.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2484700
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390MasterRGBModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the /c /x switches are okay, clear DMI is needed new BIOS's. Let me know if anyone has trouble flashing it.


Hi all, i will be trying to flash the modded bios soon.
However, can someone tell me if i want to revert back to the Gigabyte official bios, do i use the above same steps to flash back to the official bios? Or, are there some other steps?


----------



## Qbm87

justinyou said:


> Hi all, i will be trying to flash the modded bios soon.
> However, can someone tell me if i want to revert back to the Gigabyte official bios, do i use the above same steps to flash back to the official bios? Or, are there some other steps?


Just use the built in q-flash in the bios to revert back to official bios as you would a normal bios update


----------



## justinyou

Qbm87 said:


> Just use the built in q-flash in the bios to revert back to official bios as you would a normal bios update


Thank you for the answer.

I have just finished flashing to the KedarWolf's modded bios - F11o, then enabled the "Re-size Bar" in the mb bios.
I have entered the old bios settings and the previous used voltage, and so far so good.
Now I guess I will just have to monitor the stability, and keep my fingers crossed.


----------



## justinyou

Finally able to enable the Risizable BAR after flashing both the mb bios and the display card bios.
Thank you to *KedarWolf*.


----------



## KedarWolf

So this happened. I put the waterblock and backplate on my Strix OC RTX 3090. Put the two fittings and hoses on it, attached it to my loop. Start my PC few seconds to get coolant in the block, top the rad of with coolant. Start my PC.

Welp, I forgot to put the two plugs into the backside of the waterblock and got coolant all over my motherboard. My MB is mounted horizontally.

I've done something like that once before though.

I soaked up the excess water and now am letting a hair dryer blow on low speed on the motherboard overnight to evaporate the water.

Need low speed because it is 2 a.m. and I live in an apartment, no noise for my neighbours.

So, in the morning I'll find out if my PC is borked.

Edit: Hey peeps, my PC is fine. The blow dryer worked.

The only issue I had was my pump started dying, Was getting 90C temps running benchmarks and it was grinding bad after a while.

I had a spare, now idle temps are 26C on one 360 rad and 50C while running Port Royal.

Pump at 60%.


----------



## Hawkjoss

KedarWolf said:


> So this happened. I put the waterblock and backplate on my Strix OC RTX 3090. Put the two fittings and hoses on it, attached it to my loop. Start my PC few seconds to get coolant in the block, top the rad of with coolant. Start my PC.
> 
> Welp, I forgot to put the two plugs into the backside of the waterblock and got coolant all over my motherboard. My MB is mounted horizontally.
> 
> I've done something like that once before though.
> 
> I soaked up the excess water and now am letting a hair dryer blow on low speed on the motherboard overnight to evaporate the water.
> 
> Need low speed because it is 2 a.m. and I live in an apartment, no noise for my neighbours.
> 
> So, in the morning I'll find out if my PC is borked.
> 
> Edit: Hey peeps, my PC is fine. The blow dryer worked.
> 
> The only issue I had was my pump started dying, Was getting 90C temps running benchmarks and it was grinding bad after a while.
> 
> I had a spare, now idle temps are 26C on one 360 rad and 50C while running Port Royal.
> 
> Pump at 60%.


Glad it worked out without major damage!


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> So this happened. I put the waterblock and backplate on my Strix OC RTX 3090. Put the two fittings and hoses on it, attached it to my loop. Start my PC few seconds to get coolant in the block, top the rad of with coolant. Start my PC.
> 
> Welp, I forgot to put the two plugs into the backside of the waterblock and got coolant all over my motherboard. My MB is mounted horizontally.
> 
> I've done something like that once before though.
> 
> I soaked up the excess water and now am letting a hair dryer blow on low speed on the motherboard overnight to evaporate the water.
> 
> Need low speed because it is 2 a.m. and I live in an apartment, no noise for my neighbours.
> 
> So, in the morning I'll find out if my PC is borked.
> 
> Edit: Hey peeps, my PC is fine. The blow dryer worked.
> 
> The only issue I had was my pump started dying, Was getting 90C temps running benchmarks and it was grinding bad after a while.
> 
> I had a spare, now idle temps are 26C on one 360 rad and 50C while running Port Royal.
> 
> Pump at 60%.


glad all is ok


----------



## CommanderHK47

Any one know off hand if the z390 auros master supports disabling the HPET? If not, would it be possible for some one to mod the bios so that option was exposed?


----------



## Kaibosh

Well, now that Rebar support is finally out, I took the plunge. Figured I would do it all at once - _gulp_. Used Rufus to make a bootable USB drive to toss the newest F11O Modded from KW, along with the newest EFIFlash (I think it is 0.87, either way it is the one from Jan 29th). My USB stick is 128 Gig, which triggered various 'errors' along the way but still worked fine (it only recognizes the first 8 gig, no prob, either way I have never been able to save screenshots from the BIOS no matter what size/port/etc stick I try so I just take 11 Trillion pictures with my phone so there).

- Rebooted into the Bios, hit F7, then F10 to save and reboot.
- Hammered F12 until the boot menu came up, made sure to choose the legacy BIOS version of my stick on the list.
- Entered 'efiflash 1.f11 /c /x', flashed with zero issues.
- Rebooted back into BIOS, hit F7 again, and changed the few things that I needed to (set XMP on, disabled CSM, disabled fast boot, made sure my boot stuff was correct).
- Rebooted into Windows, with no problem. As soon as I was in, initiated a total shutdown.
- With computer down, flicked off power supply and then held the CMOS clear button for a minute. Then flicked power back on and powered up.
- It acted a little cranky on power-up, did a few wheezy beeps/whirs and gave me a pouty error about needing to setup my BIOS, but that's normal.
- Hit F7 again, and then went and set everything more or less the way it was before (disabling all the usual stuff, setting voltages and all that).
- There were the two new power management settings in the menu, left those enabled, and otherwise just set 4G to enabled and then ReBar to 'auto'.
- Booted up into Windows, no issues.

After this I flashed the BIOS on my Asus 3080 TUF/OC. Holy crap people, be careful when doing this. Asus dropped the ball BIG TIME, and their V3 Updater has been happily soft-bricking people's BIOS (well, the one you are on, anyway) for 'reasons'. Basically, they ****ed up the checks on what exact model you have (again) as well as whether you had flashed the Bios the two other times it was available (the quiet dB one and the other one for voltage limits). What you really, really want to do (with any 3xxx Bios flash really, but a MUST with an Asus card) is to use GPU-Z /Advanced/Nvidia Bios to get the _exact_ current Bios version of your card. Then, extract the V3 Updater executable into a directory and browse the .ini file to find your exact matching Bios in the 'from' to find the exact right .rom to flash to in the 'to'. Then just use NVFlash manually to flash the right one. Oh, and use either NVFlash or the built in GPU-Z feature to make a backup of your existing Bios first. If things go terribly wrong - don't panic. You can fix a soft brick by either remote logging in to your onboard GPU or making an auto-flash bootable batch file, either way it is do-able. After I flashed the card (I did it from a Powershell, which has an annoying side effect and isn't necessary), I rebooted and then installed a cleaned version of the new drivers that support Re-Bar (no need for DDU, but the 'clean install' checkbox can't hurt). After rebooting again, I checked in the Nvidia .cpl and Re-Bar was shown as being enabled/supported. Side note, I was expecting to see a 'per game' setting for toggling use of this, there isn't one and in fact no way to control it at all without using hex codes in the Inspector, but... I have HAGS enabled and tested a few games, primarily RDR2 which worked perfectly and had a rock solid framerate with everything cranked and a heavy reshade on top of that. The Re-Bar stuff is legit, and they should add more games as they go (right now it is about a dozen, wish they would have a toggle). 

Anyway... Thanks to everyone on this forum, and special thanks to KedarWolf - who keeps things fresh for these 'outdated' boards. Without this thread keeping up with cutting edge features simply would not be possible. So far this F11O is rock solid with my usual OC, I haven't torture tested anything yet but if RDR2 runs like buttah that is pretty much a sign that this modded Bios is THE TITS.


----------



## Kaibosh

CommanderHK47 said:


> Any one know off hand if the z390 auros master supports disabling the HPET? If not, would it be possible for some one to mod the bios so that option was exposed?


I haven't seen an option for that. Dare I ask, why would you want to do that? Hasn't that been beaten to death already? Last I checked, all that timing stuff was meaningless now because Windows properly handed off control to games for a while now.


----------



## CommanderHK47

Kaibosh said:


> I haven't seen an option for that. Dare I ask, why would you want to do that? Hasn't that been beaten to death already? Last I checked, all that timing stuff was meaningless now because Windows properly handed off control to games for a while now.


Looks like it not enabled, as a bcdedit /enum show no useplatformclock in the printout list. So don't need to worry about it i guess.


----------



## darkage

hi
i noticed a lot higher VID values with the F11o bios (modded /official /rgb) than previous versions 
anyone else or its just me ?
Z390 Master /9900K /[email protected] /[email protected] all stable


----------



## justinyou

justinyou said:


> Thank you for the answer.
> 
> I have just finished flashing to the KedarWolf's modded bios - F11o, then enabled the "Re-size Bar" in the mb bios.
> I have entered the old bios settings and the previous used voltage, and so far so good.
> Now I guess I will just have to monitor the stability, and keep my fingers crossed.


Coming from the F8 bios version, and updated to the modded F11o bios version, i have spent 1 day using it.
My observation is, in this F11o version, i found the _AVX offset_ is being triggered almost all the time, like in 1 minute, it will be triggered for 58 seconds.
Whilst in the F8 version, the _AVX Offset_ will only be triggered occasionally, like in 1 minute, it will be triggered for 2 or 4 seconds.

I am not sure why this is happening, however, i suspect the algorithm to trigger or to activate the _AVX Offset_ is different for the F8 and the F11o.
To counter this, i have to set the _AVX Offset_ to 0.
Will continue monitor on things.


----------



## Qbm87

G drive is showing active and system when there's only downloads and a few games on. shouldn't have any connection to windows other than that. C drive contains windows. will it still boot and work correctly if i reformat G drive to gpt. in the process of backing up the G drive atm otherwise would pull all other drives apart from C to check. Edit Don't know if this helps pic 2


----------



## Qbm87

So that didn't work think I found a fix https://superuser.com/questions/1564640/system-partition-and-boot-partition-on-different-drives


----------



## Kaibosh

Qbm87 said:


> So that didn't work think I found a fix https://superuser.com/questions/1564640/system-partition-and-boot-partition-on-different-drives


That is a good link to keep kicking around regardless. The Window disk management interface is an absolute joke, and it is baffling as to why they haven't refreshed it so that it does everything that all these other free little apps do. Fer fussake, it is pretty damned cringe to use even if all you want to do is check to see if a drive is MBR or GPT!


----------



## Dibbler

KedarWolf said:


> So this happened. I put the waterblock and backplate on my Strix OC RTX 3090. Put the two fittings and hoses on it, attached it to my loop. Start my PC few seconds to get coolant in the block, top the rad of with coolant. Start my PC.
> 
> Welp, I forgot to put the two plugs into the backside of the waterblock and got coolant all over my motherboard. My MB is mounted horizontally.
> 
> I've done something like that once before though.
> 
> I soaked up the excess water and now am letting a hair dryer blow on low speed on the motherboard overnight to evaporate the water.
> 
> Need low speed because it is 2 a.m. and I live in an apartment, no noise for my neighbours.
> 
> So, in the morning I'll find out if my PC is borked.
> 
> Edit: Hey peeps, my PC is fine. The blow dryer worked.
> 
> The only issue I had was my pump started dying, Was getting 90C temps running benchmarks and it was grinding bad after a while.
> 
> I had a spare, now idle temps are 26C on one 360 rad and 50C while running Port Royal.
> 
> Pump at 60%.



You did well to recover that. Glad for you. I have never had the confidence to go to water cooling in all the decades of PC ownership.

The worse that has happened with my Noctua air cooler is that the fans would occasionally fail to spin on boot or from sleep. Nocuta replied to me and stated that it was due to the way that Gigabyte implemented PWM on their boards, being out of spec. I did change them to two black Thermaltake fans and all good, PWM control with no issues.


----------



## EarlZ

Looking at moving my current G.Skill to a different PC at home (3200Mhz CL16 stock speeds) I am looking at getting a Gskill 4000Mhz CL18 kit 2x8GB (2 kits) I suppose this is relatively easy for a 9700K to run ?


----------



## Qbm87

EarlZ said:


> Looking at moving my current G.Skill to a different PC at home (3200Mhz CL16 stock speeds) I am looking at getting a 4000Mhz kit 2x8GB (2 kits) I suppose this is relatively easy for a 9700K to run ?


Yeah shouldn't imagine having any issues. Maybe best considering 3600 with tight timings though as performance doesn't really change at all for gaming or much else for that matter. It's a touch snappier at 4000 but not necessarily worth the effort of finding stability if it's not stable out of the box.


----------



## zayd

I updated my Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra to the F10h bios a couple of months ago, as it advertised upgraded cpu microcode, as well as RBAR support. My i9 9900k is stable at 5ghz with 1.32 Vcore and its powering my RTX 3090 great. This cpu was a mid life upgrade as I previously had an i7 9700k in the system, but I wasn't happy at how much it was getting bullied by the 3090. This should hopefully last until, I upgrade to Zen 4 when it comes our way.


----------



## Giaanc

@KedarWolf can you please also mod BIOS f10h (with bar resize) for aorus elite with Updated firmwares / fastest microcodes.

mb_bios_z390-aorus-elite_f10h.zip

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Sheyster

Qbm87 said:


> Yeah shouldn't imagine having any issues. Maybe best considering 3600 with tight timings though as performance doesn't really change at all for gaming or much else for that matter. It's a touch snappier at 4000 but not necessarily worth the effort of finding stability if it's not stable out of the box.


If you have a Pro or Ultra GB Z390 board try 3600/CL15. The Master is much easier for 4000+ memory speeds.


----------



## Smokediggity

Looks like there are new microcodes, dated 2021-01-05, available on win-raid. No idea what the changes are, though.


----------



## Sheyster

Smokediggity said:


> Looks like there are new microcodes, dated 2021-01-05, available on win-raid. No idea what the changes are, though.


New microcode = bad, typically.  Well, for IPC it's bad.


----------



## Smokediggity

So, I flashed the new microcodes just after posting and they seem like a winner for me. Cinebench went from 8700 to 10100. I was previously using the latest DE microcodes, so I don't know how it stacks up against the older faster BA microcodes.


----------



## thuNDa

Giaanc said:


> @KedarWolf can you please also mod BIOS f10h (with bar resize) for aorus elite with Updated firmwares / fastest microcodes.
> 
> mb_bios_z390-aorus-elite_f10h.zip
> 
> Thanks in advance!


He did: (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


----------



## danakin

hello everyone, i recently updated to kedars modded f11o,

today i recognized a random shutdown/restart while browsing on twitch.

was on f10 and never had this before. i dont run any overclocks or stuff. just disabled ctsats.

any recommandations?

best regards,

pete


----------



## AndrejB

danakin said:


> hello everyone, i recently updated to kedars modded f11o,
> 
> today i recognized a random shutdown/restart while browsing on twitch.
> 
> was on f10 and never had this before. i dont run any overclocks or stuff. just disabled ctsats.
> 
> any recommandations?
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete


Turn off psu, hold reset cmos button, test again.


----------



## IMeantToLearn

How have your guys experience being with *Hardware Prefetcher *and *Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch *disabled and enabled ? which is the "best" setting?


----------



## danakin

AndrejB said:


> Turn off psu, hold reset cmos button, test again.



thanks buddy, will try that and report if it happens any time soon again.

best regards,

pete


----------



## AndrejB

danakin said:


> thanks buddy, will try that and report if it happens any time soon again.
> 
> best regards,
> 
> pete


I found I need to do this after any bios flash.

It seems that something rolls over.


----------



## Hawkjoss

So i am on modded f10o now - is it still recommend to run pwm switch rate at 300mhz on Master or it was fixed by gigabyte?


----------



## EarlZ

Hawkjoss said:


> So i am on modded f10o now - is it still recommend to run pwm switch rate at 300mhz on Master or it was fixed by gigabyte?


Was there an issue with the auto switch rate?


----------



## KedarWolf

I swear by this PWM fan controller. It uses a SATA power connector, not a crappy Molex one, has a cable to a single PWM header for fan speed control.

You can add up to eight fans, it's cheap, it's tiny and it has a sticky pad on the bottom of it for placing it in a convenient spot in your case.

Silverstone 8-Port PWM Fan Hub/Splitter for 4-Pin & 3-Pin Fans in Black SST-CPF04-USA (Newest Version)



https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B07N3HP8S5/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## Hawkjoss

EarlZ said:


> Was there an issue with the auto switch rate?


Yup - 400/500 performed worse than 300 in term of transient voltage spikes ( which should be the opposite ). 

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/e7lgk0


----------



## IMeantToLearn

Hawkjoss said:


> Yup - 400/500 performed worse than 300 in term of transient voltage spikes ( which should be the opposite ).
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/e7lgk0


are those settings only on Master? can't seem to find them on Pro


----------



## Hawkjoss

IMeantToLearn said:


> are those settings only on Master? can't seem to find them on Pro


Not sure about pro, but definitely on master


----------



## zayd

KedarWolf said:


> Z390EliteModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hello, will this bios also work on the Z390 Aorus Ultra. Thank you for your help.


----------



## thuNDa

zayd said:


> Hello, will this bios also work on the Z390 Aorus Ultra. Thank you for your help.


No!


----------



## xtacb4

Hi!

¿What's the best & latest modded bios for the Z390 AORUS MASTER?

Where can I read and learn about what's been modded in that bios, so I can understand what I'd be flashing?


Thanks!


----------



## Dibbler

xtacb4 said:


> Hi!
> 
> ¿What's the best & latest modded bios for the Z390 AORUS MASTER?
> 
> Where can I read and learn about what's been modded in that bios, so I can understand what I'd be flashing?
> 
> 
> Thanks!



The F11o is the latest *beta *BIOS for the Master, the latest official can be found on Gigabytes website for the board.
The best is kinda subjective to your needs, some preferring a much older BIOS.
I am using the F11o, with BAR support, and it is "ok" at meeting my needs. There are some boot issues I'm having with BAR enabled, but I have reported those. Then again I no longer overclock my 9900k and so I expect little.

You can read within this thread what changes within the BIOS. Just search for the user "Kedarwolf" and his posts. When there has been a release it usually gets asked what has changed and often posted. I can't remember exactly.
Trawling through this thread, just grab a cup of tea or something, isn't too difficult and you might find information that helps you.


----------



## zayd

I found the modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Ultra that Kedarwolf posted a while back.


----------



## xtacb4

Dibbler said:


> You can read within this thread what changes within the BIOS. Just search for the user "Kedarwolf" and his posts. When there has been a release it usually gets asked what has changed and often posted. I can't remember exactly.
> Trawling through this thread, just grab a cup of tea or something, isn't too difficult and you might find information that helps you.


Will do, thank you very much for taking the time to reply my inquiry.

To keep on topic, I have a 9900k and and samsung b-die ram and I'm looking to overclock to 5ghz all core stable without increasing the voltage too much, and a BIOS with good fatest microcode. Usually I have to use around 1.35v but its not 100% stable. Perhaps the PMW/VAGX newly (at least to me) found issue is related.




zayd said:


> I found the modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Ultra that Kedarwolf posted a while back.


Thank you as well for taking the time to reply.

Cheers! my fellow human beings.


----------



## kiberman545

Hawkjoss said:


> Yup - 400/500 performed worse than 300 in term of transient voltage spikes ( which should be the opposite ).


Hello
That post is more than a year old, and the information was relevant for the early December's firmwares of 2019 - F11B - And not the fact that falkentyne used the latest firmware at that time, it could be any, F11A/B - F10 - F9 or earlier - better to ask him personal what firmware version did he use.

Now it is already 2021.

Seems for me, F11O-everything looks fine 400-500 -KHZ WORKING GREAT. At least for me. If you have any other data, or strange behavior VRM personally on your PC- big spikes hw monitors strange data, or you have a osscilograms from hardware measure - from current F11O BIOS, provide the information, I will send it to the engineers. Or will give them a link, on your post.

All the best Vlad.


----------



## bass junkie xl

hello i have question 

i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website 

all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080 

my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same as 5.0 ghz did witholder bios .... 

im assuming the micro codes are slowing the cpu down . 

is there a moded gigabyte z390 pro wifi bios ( F12K MODED WITH FASTEST MICRO CODE ) around some where ? 

if so how would i flash it like normal ? i have flashed this board 3 times its pretty easy , just add to usb and flash ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Can someone flash this Master BIOS with efiflash and test to see if the onboard motherboard video output is working?






Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o







drive.google.com


----------



## KedarWolf

Here the latest efiflash master with the newest microcodes if anyone wants to test them compared to the fast ones or if security is a priority on your PC, you want this BIOS.

Remains to be seen if the integrated video is working though.






Z390AORUSMASTER.F11







drive.google.com


----------



## EarlZ

I seem to be getting a strange behavior on my ram speed with this mobo between 2 vs 4 sticks. My system runs fine at 3800Mhz CL16-20-20 on 4 sticks but by removing two sticks and redoing the same settings the DRAM freq is stuck on 3333Mhz, reinstalled the other 2 sticks I've taken out and it runs on 3800Mhz.


----------



## Hawkjoss

EarlZ said:


> I seem to be getting a strange behavior on my ram speed with this mobo between 2 vs 4 sticks. My system runs fine at 3800Mhz CL16-20-20 on 4 sticks but by removing two sticks and redoing the same settings the DRAM freq is stuck on 3333Mhz, reinstalled the other 2 sticks I've taken out and it runs on 3800Mhz.


Z390 is _allegedly _is t-topology, not the daisy chain, so it favors 4 dimms to be populated for highest RAM speeds. Do you experience this problem on certain bios or in general?


----------



## EarlZ

Hawkjoss said:


> Z390 is _allegedly _is t-topology, not the daisy chain, so it favors 4 dimms to be populated for highest RAM speeds. Do you experience this problem on certain bios or in general?


So it being a T-Topology allows for higher memory overclocking when all DIMM's are populated vs just two ?

I've not tried this with any other bios version as this would be the first time I've removed two sticks on my system to move to a different one.


----------



## ezveedub

EarlZ said:


> So it being a T-Topology allows for higher memory overclocking when all DIMM's are populated vs just two ?
> 
> I've not tried this with any other bios version as this would be the first time I've removed two sticks on my system to move to a different one.


The z390 Master likes 4 sticks. I think when you get close to 3866 or so, that's about the limit on two sticks. I would think 3800 should be fine on 2 sticks though. Maybe clear CMOS pulling the battery and power and then retry it again. Sometimes it trains like crap and get stuck in a cycle until it's cleared. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## EarlZ

ezveedub said:


> The z390 Master likes 4 sticks. I think when you get close to 3866 or so, that's about the limit on two sticks. I would think 3800 should be fine on 2 sticks though. Maybe clear CMOS pulling the battery and power and then retry it again. Sometimes it trains like crap and get stuck in a cycle until it's cleared.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I've cleared the CMOS a few times, setting it to 3800Mhz makes it POST longer than normal but only runs to 3333Mhz, adding extra 2 sticks gives me the normal POST speed and 3800Mhz. I'll try pulling the power and removed CMOS some other time.


----------



## ezveedub

EarlZ said:


> I've cleared the CMOS a few times, setting it to 3800Mhz makes it POST longer than normal but only runs to 3333Mhz, adding extra 2 sticks gives me the normal POST speed and 3800Mhz. I'll try pulling the power and removed CMOS some other time.


First time trying 4000 CL18 2x8gb, I could only get 3700-3866 or so, but on older F10 bios. Got another set of 4000 2x8gb and it booted on XMP. Those same sticks now on latest F11o GK modded I have them at 4133 CL18. They can do 17-18-18-38, but I have to watch temps I believe after 2.5hrs of testing under AIda 64 or possibly bump DDR4 voltage a little maybe. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## EarlZ

ezveedub said:


> First time trying 4000 CL18 2x8gb, I could only get 3700-3866 or so, but on older F10 bios. Got another set of 4000 2x8gb and it booted on XMP. Those same sticks now on latest F11o GK modded I have them at 4133 CL18. They can do 17-18-18-38, but I have to watch temps I believe after 2.5hrs of testing under AIda 64 or possibly bump DDR4 voltage a little maybe.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I've put in an order for these sticks F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (2kits) Hoping they can do 17-18-18-38 too. What voltage are you using and di you tune the other sub-timings ?


----------



## ezveedub

EarlZ said:


> I've put in an order for these sticks F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (2kits) Hoping they can do 17-18-18-38 too. What voltage are you using and di you tune the other sub-timings ?


I'm using 1.46v or so on VDimms. What ever is the next tick up from 1.45v. The set is Team Group 4000 CL18 B-Die 18-20-20-44 XMP. I normally ran them 18-18-18-36 @4K but decided to try 4133 lately with slightly looser timing only. TRef I run 400, but 425 at 4133. Still haven't played perhaps other timings, but latency is just around 41-42ns or so currently. I sure I can jam 1.5c into and tight things up, but just have to make sure they stay stable under load for a few hours. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## EarlZ

ezveedub said:


> I'm using 1.46v or so on VDimms. What ever is the next tick up from 1.45v. The set is Team Group 4000 CL18 B-Die 18-20-20-44 XMP. I normally ran them 18-18-18-36 @4K but decided to try 4133 lately with slightly looser timing only. TRef I run 400, but 425 at 4133. Still haven't played perhaps other timings, but latency is just around 41-42ns or so currently. I sure I can jam 1.5c into and tight things up, but just have to make sure they stay stable under load for a few hours.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


I'll revisit this when I get my ram, I have no clue what G.Skill uses on their 18-22-22 4000Mhz. Maybe Hynix.


----------



## Skunk0001

bass junkie xl said:


> hello i have question
> 
> i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website
> 
> all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080
> 
> my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same as 5.0 ghz did witholder bios ....
> 
> im assuming the micro codes are slowing the cpu down .
> 
> is there a moded gigabyte z390 pro wifi bios ( F12K MODED WITH FASTEST MICRO CODE ) around some where ?
> 
> if so how would i flash it like normal ? i have flashed this board 3 times its pretty easy , just add to usb and flash ?











(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


HCI Memtest? Can I get a copy of the script please The scripts are for HCI MemTest 7.0, the latest version. It only costs $5 USD to buy it. You put the HCI MTPclassic.exe file in the same folder as the scripts, install AutoHotKey, right-click on the script, then Run Script...




www.overclock.net





Make sure you don't have Windows 10 update KB4589212 installed though, otherwise Windows will force you to use the slow DE microcode, not the faster BE





KB4589212: Intel microcode updates for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2 - Microsoft Support


Describes the latest microcode updates from Intel for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2.




support.microsoft.com





I'm curious, what voltages (VRVOUT/VCCSA/VCCIO) are you running for those clocks?


----------



## bass junkie xl

Skunk0001 said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> HCI Memtest? Can I get a copy of the script please The scripts are for HCI MemTest 7.0, the latest version. It only costs $5 USD to buy it. You put the HCI MTPclassic.exe file in the same folder as the scripts, install AutoHotKey, right-click on the script, then Run Script...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure you don't have Windows 10 update KB4589212 installed though, otherwise Windows will force you to use the slow DE microcode, not the faster BE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KB4589212: Intel microcode updates for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2 - Microsoft Support
> 
> 
> Describes the latest microcode updates from Intel for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.microsoft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious, what voltages (VRVOUT/VCCSA/VCCIO) are you running for those clocks?


I'll see if I have that update. 

I got 8gb x 4 of team group 4133 c 18-18-18-38 @ 4133 c 16-17-17-37 @ 1.48v / 1.27vccio / 1.27 vcssa passed 8 hrs of tm5 extreme anta , 9900 ks @ 5.2 GHz @ 1.32v hr on with 4.9 GHz ring . 

So geting the custom bios with fast microcode isn't worth it just delete the windows KB update you mentioned ?


----------



## EarlZ

Skunk0001 said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> HCI Memtest? Can I get a copy of the script please The scripts are for HCI MemTest 7.0, the latest version. It only costs $5 USD to buy it. You put the HCI MTPclassic.exe file in the same folder as the scripts, install AutoHotKey, right-click on the script, then Run Script...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure you don't have Windows 10 update KB4589212 installed though, otherwise Windows will force you to use the slow DE microcode, not the faster BE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KB4589212: Intel microcode updates for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2 - Microsoft Support
> 
> 
> Describes the latest microcode updates from Intel for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.microsoft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious, what voltages (VRVOUT/VCCSA/VCCIO) are you running for those clocks?


Even if you have the fast microcode, this update still forces the slower ones ?


----------



## Janosi

hi, where the latest modded f11o bios?


----------



## KedarWolf

Janosi said:


> hi, where the latest modded f11o bios?











(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


hello i have question i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080 my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same...




www.overclock.net





Let me know if the integrated video isn't working.

Direct link.






Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o







drive.google.com


----------



## Skunk0001

bass junkie xl said:


> I'll see if I have that update.
> 
> I got 8gb x 4 of team group 4133 c 18-18-18-38 @ 4133 c 16-17-17-37 @ 1.48v / 1.27vccio / 1.27 vcssa passed 8 hrs of tm5 extreme anta , 9900 ks @ 5.2 GHz @ 1.32v hr on with 4.9 GHz ring .
> 
> So geting the custom bios with fast microcode isn't worth it just delete the windows KB update you mentioned ?


Thanks. You want the modded BIOS with the fastest microcode (since its faster than the one Gigabyte baked into it), and you also want to make sure you don't have that Windows update installed, since that also forced a newer/slower version.

Not sure if the one that comes with the windows update is slower than the one in the original BIOS or not. Possibly it is and just deinstalling that will be an improvement even with the unmodded BIOS, but the unmodded BIOS and the lack of that update (or any others listed here) would give best performance.
KB4589198: Intel microcode updates for Windows 10, version 1507 (microsoft.com)



EarlZ said:


> Even if you have the fast microcode, this update still forces the slower ones ?


For me it does, yea. Without it installed HWiNFO (summary page) shows me as running the BE Microcode that KedarWolf put in his modded BIOS, with KB4589212 installed HWiNFO shows me as running the DE microcode, and my performance is quite a bit worse.

If you have that update installed, you'd want to deinstall it, then block it from reinstalling using "wushowhide.diagcab". But in future versions of windows it might get more tricky, in the latest Windows Insider Dev build I have on dual boot, there is no update to deinstall and it shows me on the DE microcode.


----------



## Kaibosh

From everything I have seen through-out this massive thread, while the Z390 certainly is a T-Topology setup and _should_ be at peak performance/stability potential when filling all 4 slots... In the real world, the craziest numbers are always gained with 2 sticks. The discussion was above my head and doesn't matter - I trust the gurus. I have 4 sticks of expensive ram and I am more than happy to just let it run at XMP speeds, with zero issues. 

As to the person who asked "what do these custom BIOS do?". Well, that is a loaded question, which is why no one wants to answer. The bottom line is, trust the gurus. Snippets of micro-code are updated on a regular basis, but newer is NOT necessarily better. Forever updating 'drivers' are usually about compatibility and stability, not a push for the 'best'. These custom BIOS releases are based on _proven_ code, which in every scenario means more overhead for overclocking/tuning, more stability at the hairy edge, and most importantly the best performance in Minecraft. 

Part of all this, is knowing what to disable in the BIOS if you want a truly well tuned rig. Whether it is advice from threads like this or 'official' overclocking guides, you will see the same theme. A lot of stuff in the BIOS is all about 'energy saving', for example. Save energy?! This ain't no Greenpeace mission, I need every damned frame per second in RDR2 I can get. Do the homework, make sure you know what you are doing when using unleashed EFIFlash flags, and understand your safety measures (dual BIOS stuff) when tinkering under the hood.


----------



## Kaibosh

Skunk0001 said:


> For me it does, yea. Without it installed HWiNFO (summary page) shows me as running the BE Microcode that KedarWolf put in his modded BIOS, with KB4589212 installed HWiNFO shows me as running the DE microcode, and my performance is quite a bit worse.


Gak, that is the stuff of nightmares. I don't need the hassle of fighting Microsoft on yet _another_ front. When you say your performance is quite a bit worse, what are we talking about? Benchmarks? Specific types of processing? Will this hurt a typical AAA title game that mostly relies on single thread stuff and the GPU?


----------



## EarlZ

Skunk0001 said:


> Thanks. You want the modded BIOS with the fastest microcode (since its faster than the one Gigabyte baked into it), and you also want to make sure you don't have that Windows update installed, since that also forced a newer/slower version.
> 
> Not sure if the one that comes with the windows update is slower than the one in the original BIOS or not. Possibly it is and just deinstalling that will be an improvement even with the unmodded BIOS, but the unmodded BIOS and the lack of that update (or any others listed here) would give best performance.
> KB4589198: Intel microcode updates for Windows 10, version 1507 (microsoft.com)
> 
> 
> 
> For me it does, yea. Without it installed HWiNFO (summary page) shows me as running the BE Microcode that KedarWolf put in his modded BIOS, with KB4589212 installed HWiNFO shows me as running the DE microcode, and my performance is quite a bit worse.
> 
> If you have that update installed, you'd want to deinstall it, then block it from reinstalling using "wushowhide.diagcab". But in future versions of windows it might get more tricky, in the latest Windows Insider Dev build I have on dual boot, there is no update to deinstall and it shows me on the DE microcode.


Do you have an official link for this wushowhide.diagcab ?


----------



## Skunk0001

Kaibosh said:


> Gak, that is the stuff of nightmares. I don't need the hassle of fighting Microsoft on yet _another_ front. When you say your performance is quite a bit worse, what are we talking about? Benchmarks? Specific types of processing? Will this hurt a typical AAA title game that mostly relies on single thread stuff and the GPU?


I don't have any solid numbers, I use my PC mostly for sim racing in VR. Trying to do 12.5million pixels at 90hz is asking a lot, and with just 11ms of time between vsync'd frames it becomes quite apparent when things are not performing the same. I probably had about 5% more CPU usage on the most heavily loaded core, but that was enough for me to notice when I started dropping frames.

I believe in general the difference between the fastest and slowest microcodes can be up to the equivalent of 200mhz on the core, but will depend on the task. And the _really _slow microcodes are hopefully a thing of the past, so the current/latest versions may not be so bad.



EarlZ said:


> Do you have an official link for this wushowhide.diagcab ?


I don't, I just happen to have an old copy from years ago, Microsoft still mention it, but their links are dead:
How to temporarily prevent a Windows Update from reinstalling in Windows 10 (microsoft.com)

Its not changed in years, pretty sure you should be good with this version (the version I have is from 2017):
Download wushowhide - MajorGeeks
EDIT: Yea, SHA256 hash of that version matches the one I have.


----------



## ezveedub

One of the easiest ways to see what the micro codes do between newest and fastest is run CPU-Z bench on the CPU and look at the multi and single CPU score. Now this is dependent also on how many background apps are running also, so close them all and check the score runs. Usually you can get a 600 score up or down a few points with fastest micro codes at 5.1GHz. On my 10900k at 5.1Ghz, I can get closer to 620-625 on single core score. Running stock, it's around 550-560 on the 9900K. These results vary much so it all's depends on what you have running and what speed your CPU is running at. This is what I mainly use to check my setup and overclocks with. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## bass junkie xl

Skunk0001 said:


> Thanks. You want the modded BIOS with the fastest microcode (since its faster than the one Gigabyte baked into it), and you also want to make sure you don't have that Windows update installed, since that also forced a newer/slower version.
> 
> Not sure if the one that comes with the windows update is slower than the one in the original BIOS or not. Possibly it is and just deinstalling that will be an improvement even with the unmodded BIOS, but the unmodded BIOS and the lack of that update (or any others listed here) would give best performance.
> KB4589198: Intel microcode updates for Windows 10, version 1507 (microsoft.com)
> 
> 
> 
> For me it does, yea. Without it installed HWiNFO (summary page) shows me as running the BE Microcode that KedarWolf put in his modded BIOS, with KB4589212 installed HWiNFO shows me as running the DE microcode, and my performance is quite a bit worse.
> 
> If you have that update installed, you'd want to deinstall it, then block it from reinstalling using "wushowhide.diagcab". But in future versions of windows it might get more tricky, in the latest Windows Insider Dev build I have on dual boot, there is no update to deinstall and it shows me on the DE microcode.


ok im on windows 10 20H2 latest i found this update installed under add remove programs / windows updates

-
*KB4589212 - was installed and i uninstalled it . 
KB4589198 - didnt find in the installed windows updates . *


----------



## sayoXD

KedarWolf said:


> Can someone flash this Master BIOS with efiflash and test to see if the onboard motherboard video output is working?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Works fine on my end with csm enabled/disabled


----------



## KedarWolf

sayoXD said:


> Works fine on my end with csm enabled/disabled


Good!! I can now use the latest GOP firmware in all your BIOS's. Thank to the peeps at Winraid forums.


----------



## Kaibosh

Skunk0001 said:


> I don't have any solid numbers, I use my PC mostly for sim racing in VR. Trying to do 12.5million pixels at 90hz is asking a lot, and with just 11ms of time between vsync'd frames it becomes quite apparent when things are not performing the same.


Thanks, exactly what I was looking for. As if we don't have enough problems dealing with Nvidia seemingly 'unable' to fix SteamVR issues for the last six months now. Also, thanks for the links!


----------



## AndrejB

So given that MS is updating microcodes and I'm lazy to fight them. What's the difference between DE and AE in performance?


----------



## Janosi

KedarWolf said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> hello i have question i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080 my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know if the integrated video isn't working.
> 
> Direct link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


the integrated video is work perfectly


----------



## bass junkie xl

update with gigabyte z-390 gigabyte pro wifi with bios F 12k ( non moded ) with 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz with 4.9 ghz ring with 32 gb of 4133 mhz cl -16-17-17-37 

cine bench r15 with *KB4589212 installed = 2200 - 2210 points no back ground apps 
cinebench r15 with KB4589212 uninstalled = 2220 - 2240 points 

asus xi code z390 same cpu / ram timings exactly = 2280 - 2302 points 

should i go to moded bios f12 k with fastest microcode or would it only be maybe 10 - 60 points more ? *


----------



## darkage

@KedarWolf 
sorry for not helping with the test you asked before, had to turn off the master for some days
is it possible to have a bios with the latest micro codes from intel and the fixed igpu please?
thank you for all the help


----------



## KedarWolf

Do you want the latest, most secure microcodes or the fastest ones?

Latest.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


hello i have question i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080 my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same...




www.overclock.net





Fastest.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


hello i have question i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080 my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same...




www.overclock.net


----------



## darkage

@KedarWolf 
thank you so much for all the time and help
will test both


----------



## bass junkie xl

KedarWolf said:


> Do you want the latest, most secure microcodes or the fastest ones?
> 
> Latest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> hello i have question i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080 my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fastest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> hello i have question i have gigabyte z390 pro wifi with bios f12 k from website all is stable 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz all core / 4.9 ring / 32 gb @ 4133 c 16 / tripple m.2 / rtx 3080 my issue is this bios f12 k is stable with bar all is good but cpu @ 5.2 ghzall core is scoring about the same...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net



Fastest microcode with resizable bar support f12k moded with fastest microcodes if that's possible ?

Z390 pro wifi ihave now on f12k non moded


----------



## KedarWolf

Z390ProWiFi_F12kModded.zip







drive.google.com





Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.











Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type



Code:


efiflash 1.f12 /c /x


----------



## KedarWolf

My best result. Very happy with this. 









I scored 15 492 in Port Royal


AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}




www.3dmark.com


----------



## bass junkie xl

KedarWolf said:


> Z390ProWiFi_F12kModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f12 /c /x


This won't brick my board it does have dual bios and I have f11 non moded as my back up bios. 

So if I follow this to a T it should work ? I do use Rufus so I'll copy paste the picture settings. 

Anything else besides your directions no extra spaces or anything

Thanks again once u confirm this message I'll go ahead and attempt to flash this moded bios ( first time mode


----------



## KedarWolf

Peeps have been flashing my BIOS's for years and of the 100 or more people that have, only one has bricked their BIOS and it was probably user error as they used an efiflash that I never provided that had all safeties bypassed. :/

And following the instructions will work just fine.


----------



## bass junkie xl

KedarWolf said:


> Peeps have been flashing my BIOS's for years and of the 100 or more people that have, only one has bricked their BIOS and it was probably user error as they used an efiflash that I never provided that had all safeties bypassed. :/
> 
> And following the instructions will work just fine.


roger that , i got my phone incase somthign happens ill message ya on here thanks again


----------



## bass junkie xl

Updated fine in dos, said need to power cycle to finish update . It shut off PC . I turned it on in t failed to boot 4 times turns on for 6 seconds then off repeat x 4. Unplugged power cables repluged it in same thing.

Pulled battery out for 3 0 seconds and put back in booted up fine .

My bios says bios is f12
Bios id = 8A1FAG0W

Did my board go back to my back up bios ( non moded f12 k from website ) ? Or did the moded f12k work I posted the picture. I know if it fails to boot so many times in t reverts to the last bios on the 2nd bios. Just want to know if it m on my normal non moded f12k bios right now or the moded own from the post .

Thanks 👍


----------



## KedarWolf

bass junkie xl said:


> Updated fine in dos, said need to power cycle to finish update . It shut off PC . I turned it on in t failed to boot 4 times turns on for 6 seconds then off repeat x 4. Unplugged power cables repluged it in same thing.
> 
> Pulled battery out for 3 0 seconds and put back in booted up fine .
> 
> My bios says bios is f12
> Bios id = 8A1FAG0W
> 
> Did my board go back to my back up bios ( non moded f12 k from website ) ? Or did the moded f12k work I posted the picture. I know if it fails to boot so many times in t reverts to the last bios on the 2nd bios. Just want to know if it m on my normal non moded f12k bios right now or the moded own from the post .
> 
> Thanks 👍
> View attachment 2487128


I unzipped the file.

Please wait...
Manufacturer - Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.
Model - Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI-CF
BIOS release - F12k 01/19/2021
BIOS platform - AMI Aptio 5

Did you boot from the RUFUS USB and run the correct command?


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I unzipped the file.
> 
> Please wait...
> Manufacturer - Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.
> Model - Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI-CF
> BIOS release - F12k 01/19/2021
> BIOS platform - AMI Aptio 5
> 
> Did you boot from the RUFUS USB and run the correct command?


Try booting into Windows, running HWInfo in Summary Only mode and tell me the Microcode revision.

The highlighted black part.


----------



## bass junkie xl

KedarWolf said:


> Try booting into Windows, running HWInfo in Summary Only mode and tell me the Microcode revision.
> 
> The highlighted black part.
> 
> View attachment 2487131


I think I'm ok I'm on the one u have me sec let me reload my backed up bios OC profiles 

I save my 5 GHz , 5.1 , 5.2 , 5.3 and 4000 c15 , 4133 c17 , 4133 c16 to usb with custom fan profiles for each so since there both f12k the bios lets me load them up Shabam ! Easy . 

K give me a few I'll let ya know thanks for the fast replys man. 👍😊


----------



## KedarWolf

bass junkie xl said:


> I think I'm ok I'm on the one u have me sec let me reload my backed up bios OC profiles
> 
> I save my 5 GHz , 5.1 , 5.2 , 5.3 and 4000 c15 , 4133 c17 , 4133 c16 to usb with custom fan profiles for each so since there both f12k the bios lets me load them up Shabam ! Easy .
> 
> K give me a few I'll let ya know thanks for the fast replys man. 👍😊


*Uninstall this or you'll be using the wrong microcodes.*

ok im on windows 10 20H2 latest i found this update installed under add remove programs / windows updates 

-
*KB4589212 - was installed and i uninstalled it .
KB4589198 - didnt find in the installed windows updates .*


----------



## bass junkie xl

3D


KedarWolf said:


> *Uninstall this or you'll be using the wrong microcodes.*
> 
> ok im on windows 10 20H2 latest i found this update installed under add remove programs / windows updates
> 
> -
> *KB4589212 - was installed and i uninstalled it .
> KB4589198 - didnt find in the installed windows updates .*


Yup I uninstalled kb4589212 yesterday and blocked it for re downloading with the windows update block app . 

Kb4589198 I couldn't find anywhere


----------



## bass junkie xl

KedarWolf said:


> Try booting into Windows, running HWInfo in Summary Only mode and tell me the Microcode revision.
> 
> The highlighted black part.
> 
> View attachment 2487131


Ucu= BE


----------



## KedarWolf

bass junkie xl said:


> Ucu= BE
> View attachment 2487132


Yes, it's the modded BIOS.


----------



## bass junkie xl

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, it's the modded BIOS.


Hell's yeah , sweet thanks for your time and patience . Evrything is great loaded and saved all 8 of my OC profiles and everything like it was before I started the switch . 

Going to test cone bench and some benchmarks. 

The removal of that kB ending in 212 windows update was 25 - 35 points by it self on the non moded f12k 

This gigabyte forums is great so far nice helpful ppl . 

I came from Asus forum's but after I killed my Asus xi code z390 I bought this board gigabyte z390 pro wif as a board to use till I buy a 2nd Asus xi code z390 but after testing this board with my 9900 ks ( binned the binned took 8 get this one ) with 32gb @ 4133 c16 this board is doing evrything my Asus did but with out rtl iol training past 3900 MHz I decided for 190$ this board is unbeatable in terms of vrm and ram over clockig with dual m.2 heat syncs to boot so I'm staying on this build for a while with my rtx 3080 EVGA xc3 ( payed 2400$ for it ) ..... 

Again thanks 😃


----------



## bass junkie xl

bass junkie xl said:


> Hell's yeah , sweet thanks for your time and patience . Evrything is great loaded and saved all 8 of my OC profiles and everything like it was before I started the switch .
> 
> Going to test cone bench and some benchmarks.
> 
> The removal of that kB ending in 212 windows update was 25 - 35 points by it self on the non moded f12k
> 
> This gigabyte forums is great so far nice helpful ppl .
> 
> I came from Asus forum's but after I killed my Asus xi code z390 I bought this board gigabyte z390 pro wif as a board to use till I buy a 2nd Asus xi code z390 but after testing this board with my 9900 ks ( binned the binned took 8 get this one ) with 32gb @ 4133 c16 this board is doing evrything my Asus did but with out rtl iol training past 3900 MHz I decided for 190$ this board is unbeatable in terms of vrm and ram over clockig with dual m.2 heat syncs to boot so I'm staying on this build for a while with my rtx 3080 EVGA xc3 ( payed 2400$ for it ) .....
> 
> Again thanks 😃


Back to 5.0 GHz / 4.7 ring / 4133 c16
With score of 2221 points in cinebench r15

Before it was 2100 ish

Will test my 5.2 / 5.3 profiles now 👌👍


----------



## bass junkie xl

broke my new record in cine bench r15 with moded f12k bios with 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz / 4.9 ring / 32 gb 4133 c16 this bios is great so far sorry for the spam posts 2300 points + before i was 2200


----------



## [email protected]

Is it possible to somehow control RTL and IO-L timings on Aorus Z390 boards, including Master?
I try to change them, but without effect
IO-L Offset is missing in BIOS


----------



## alv-OC

Hi guys,

Yesterday I triyed last BIOS from @KedarWolf, the F11o. Dind't notice much difference, I couldn't push anything, also triyed the 400Khz and 500KHz on the VRMs but is still broken, with the exact same settings at 300KHz I was able to post but crashed when loading windows, adding some extra VCore (+0.15) I could get into Windows but since I prefer to run less VCore I didn't perform any bench or stability test.

What was interesting is that the IOL's and RTL's trained perfectly every time so I guess that its a win for me.


----------



## alexrainmk

Guys, tell me what post code 25 means on AORUS MASTER Z-390 and how to remove it.


----------



## alv-OC

alexrainmk said:


> Guys, tell me what post code 25 means on AORUS MASTER Z-390 and how to remove it.


Post code 25 is not defined into the User's Maual, and its not defined as an 'Error Code', altough following the logic of the postig process and the secuence of the numbers, I would say that your MoBo gets stucked in the Boot secuence, RAM memory related very likely as Post code 19 stands for ''Pre-memory South-Bridge initialization is started" and next defined code is 31 that stands for "Memory installed". So your PC fails to boot in that particular phase of the Boot secuence... I would:

- Try to force Boot from the other BIOS.

->If it pass Post: Means that the error is not hardware related, so its BIOS problem, proced as follow:


Once in the other BIOS load default settings, save and exit.
Reflash both BIOS to an official BIOS from Gigabyte's web site.
Go on the frist BIOS and try to boot normaly.
If it does work you can either leavet it or try again one of the moded BIOS.

-> If if does not pass Post either: its hardware related so try usual troubleshoot process.

- Try to boot only with one RAM stick., then try 2 sticks, try different slots...
[...]


----------



## cisco150

KedarWolf said:


> Can someone flash this Master BIOS with efiflash and test to see if the onboard motherboard video output is working?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Is this the fastest or newest. looking for the fastest for my z390 master


----------



## KedarWolf

cisco150 said:


> Is this the fastest or newest. looking for the fastest for my z390 master


It's the fastest and onboard video is working.


----------



## bass junkie xl

SlayersBoner said:


> Greetings from USA. Today we exceed the Z390 Aorus Masters's maximum advertised specification for memory OC using the github ddr4 OC guide and some knowledge I learned through tinkering.
> 
> [email protected] [email protected]
> View attachment 2487485
> 
> View attachment 2487486


Nice 

Adia 64 mem benchmark screen shot with timings ?


----------



## EarlZ

SlayersBoner said:


> Greetings from USA. Today we exceed the Z390 Aorus Masters's maximum advertised specification for memory OC using the github ddr4 OC guide and some knowledge I learned through tinkering.
> 
> [email protected] [email protected]
> View attachment 2487485
> 
> View attachment 2487486



Which brand/model of ddr4 did you use ?


----------



## alv-OC

SlayersBoner said:


> Ram Timings are in the second screenshot of my original post. I'd run a benchmark but i'm away from that specific PC at the moment but i recall the numbers last time I ran the benchmark, here they are. When i get back to my PC i can run some benches for you but for the time being this will have to suffice.
> 
> Aida bandwidth:
> 65.X reads
> 69.X writes
> 64.X copy
> 37.2ns Latency (ppd left at 1, if I reduce ppd to 0 using asus software in windows latency goes down to 35.Xns with 4.95ghz cores 4.55 ring).



Wow... 35ns...I got very very intrigued buy your resoults... I got higer Oc (except for the RAM Freq. that im at 4200MHz) and I get 38.0ns... would you mind to share a AsRock Timing Configurator screenshot please? I would like to try your settings. And one last question, Whats 'ppd' ??


----------



## radeon1992

Hi, I have code 21 when I run computer. Two times reboot and work.


----------



## alv-OC

SlayersBoner said:


> I don't use asrock timing configurator because anyone can type whatever timings they want into it and there is no way to verify if those are the actual timings being used. This is why I posted the aida64 timings in the second screenshot to show the actual timings being tested while HCI was still running. Look at the second screenshot of the original post, the timings are shown in aida64, those are the timings.
> 
> PPD default is 1. The bios does not give access to it. However, you can gain access to altering ppd through windows via asus memtweakit software however some versions of windows automatically flag the software as malware and the driver doesn't load. Reducing ppd from 1 to 0 improves latency by a good bit. PPD is pre-charged power down mode. I have no idea what that means. I just know if you drop ppd to 0 from 1, latency improves in synthetic latency tests such as aida64 as well as minimum fps in gaming.


yeah thats actually waht I look for, to improve minimun FPS, so far my best resoults were 38ns with 4x8GB of G.Skill Tridentz 4000-cl17 overcloked at 4200MHZ 1.470v timings:

CAS: 16
tRCD: 16
tRP:16
tRAS:32

tRC Auto
tWR 12
tCWL 16
tRRD_S 4
tRRD_L 6
tWTR_S Auto
tWTR_L Auto
tCCD_S Auto (controled from tWRRD_sg)
tCCD_L Auto (controled from tWRRD_dg)
tRFC 300
tRTP: 8
tFAW: 16
CR: 2

tREFI: 65534
tRDRD_sg 7
tRDRD_dg 4
tRDRD_dr 7
tRDRD_dd 7
tRDWR_sg 16
tRDWR_dg 16
tRDWR_dr 16
tRDWR_dd 16
tWRWR_sg 7
tWRWR_dg 4
tWRWR_dr 7
tWRWR_dd 7
tWRRD_sg 32
tWRRD_dg 32
tWRRD_dr 7
tWRRD_dd 7

CPU is 9900K 5.2 all core 4.8 Uncore, but maybe I will try 5.1GHz and see if I can get more stable RAM overcloking. I tryewd Asus Mem Tweak in the past but i wasnt able to make it run, but I will give it try again nd see it it does work noe on my PC.


----------



## alv-OC

radeon1992 said:


> Hi, I have code 21 when I run computer. Two times reboot and work.


Bios code 21 is not defined in the User's manual, please have a look to the answer I gave yersterday to another user, your case is pretty much the same I see. Looks like your PC tries to boot from one BIOS chip, fails and then boots from the other BIOS chip.

My previous answer: (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


----------



## radeon1992

alv-OC said:


> Bios code 21 is not defined in the User's manual, please have a look to the answer I gave yersterday to another user, your case is pretty much the same I see. Looks like your PC tries to boot from one BIOS chip, fails and then boots from the other BIOS chip.
> 
> My previous answer: (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


I do it and still when run computer two times reboot. I noticed that when I turn off the computer but do not unplug the power plug then it boots the first time.


----------



## EarlZ

-delete double post-


----------



## EarlZ

I am having a hard time with getting my G.Skill (4000Mhz CL18, 4x8GB sticks) to reliably boot after a CMOS is cleared with XMP profile loaded. It would attempt memory training and would fail maybe after 2mins and prompt me with bios screen. My VCCIO is 1.15v and VCCSA is 1.20v. What I've found out is that by setting the memory training voltage to 1.370v it can reliably boot even if the vDIMM is left on auto (1.35v) and has passed a 400% HCI memtest.


Is this a normal/expected behavior that these cant boot/train on 1.35v and will this have any stability implications if decide to leave its operating voltage at 1.35v while leaving the training voltage at 1.370 ?

Once I've made a successful boot, I can revert the training voltage back to auto and it just reboots and trains fine, seems pretty weird ?

Bios version is F11o modded with fast microcodes by KedarWolf.


----------



## alv-OC

radeon1992 said:


> I do it and still when run computer two times reboot. I noticed that when I turn off the computer but do not unplug the power plug then it boots the first time.


Then I dont not what else to say... some people have been having some troubles when both resizable BAR and CMS are enabled, try first disbling CMS support and if it does not work dissable R-BAR aswel. If your computer can Boot then the issue is software/configuration related, not hardware, but at the end, if the MoBo is new I would suggest you to send it back to RMA.



EarlZ said:


> I am having a hard time with getting my G.Skill (4000Mhz CL18, 4x8GB sticks) to reliably boot after a CMOS is cleared with XMP profile loaded. It would attempt memory training and would fail maybe after 2mins and prompt me with bios screen. My VCCIO is 1.15v and VCCSA is 1.20v. What I've found out is that by setting the memory training voltage to 1.370v it can reliably boot even if the vDIMM is left on auto (1.35v) and has passed a 400% HCI memtest.
> 
> 
> Is this a normal/expected behavior that these cant boot/train on 1.35v and will this have any stability implications if decide to leave its operating voltage at 1.35v while leaving the training voltage at 1.370 ?
> 
> Once I've made a successful boot, I can revert the training voltage back to auto and it just reboots and trains fine, seems pretty weird ?
> 
> Bios version is F11o modded with fast microcodes by KedarWolf.


Well... if you can Boot at 4000MHz only with 1.370v on Mem training its pretty good actually, for waht you say your IMC its pretty good. Mine wouldn't post below 1.420v with XMP settings dialed manually. One more thing I would suggest you is to not use XMP at all, specially because of the voltages that the profile sets on VCCSA and VCCIO... usually are way too high, try staying below 1.300v (being 1.35v the absolute maximun for and 24/7 overcloking and above 1.400v the No-go zone). Instead, introduce all lthe settings manually.


----------



## alv-OC

SlayersBoner said:


> I don't use asrock timing configurator because anyone can type whatever timings they want into it and there is no way to verify if those are the actual timings being used. This is why I posted the aida64 timings in the second screenshot to show the actual timings being tested while HCI was still running. Look at the second screenshot of the original post, the timings are shown in aida64, those are the timings.
> 
> PPD default is 1. The bios does not give access to it. However, you can gain access to altering ppd through windows via asus memtweakit software however some versions of windows automatically flag the software as malware and the driver doesn't load. Reducing ppd from 1 to 0 improves latency by a good bit. PPD is pre-charged power down mode. I have no idea what that means. I just know if you drop ppd to 0 from 1, latency improves in synthetic latency tests such as aida64 as well as minimum fps in gaming.


Yesterday I was messing arround with your settings on my BIOS with no succed at all, I manage to instal Asus Mem TweakIT but the PPD section was blocked (Timing on real time feature was enabled) every hour I spend with this motherboard im more convinced that my next MoBo is going to be an Asus Apex or a Formula, RAM overcloking with Gigabyte BIOS is a masive headhache.


----------



## alv-OC

SlayersBoner said:


> It takes serious skill and finesse to reach the highest frequencies for daily use. I spent much time learning the ins and out of every single bios, their bugs and how to take advantage/leverage the bugs. Also, 4 dimm overclocking requires higher quality dimms overall to reach than 2 dimms on a 2 dimm board at the same frequencies. That isn't just for t-topology z390 gigabyte boards either, same goes for asus t-topology boards (code/formula). If i recall correctly, you are on c17 4000 1.35v binned gskill dimms right? They top out at c16/c17 4200/4242/4257 on t-topology for memtest stable daily use and top out at 4600 32gb usable for benching. You want the last 42mhz or 57mhz or so? You gotta [...]


Ahh good to know, always thought that the Apex, due to being a Xoc board could get better RAM oc as well, and yes im aware that Asus VRM is not like it used to be, they jave droped the quiality quite a lot and have rised the price... I went for the Aorus Master specially for its VRM, in my opinion the best one on Z390 chipset at a good pricetag.


The thing is that I was able to OC better with 2 RAM sticks than with 4, and I've seen people with my exact same confing getting better resoults but for some reason I can't Post over 4200 MHz regardles the timings and voltages, I feel like my set up does wierd things like for example, only tRFC 300 seems to do fine, every atempt to loos it up a bit (320,350, 360, 370, 400, 450... and many others inbetween) always causes way more unestability, same goes for tREFI, maxing it out is the best way to get it stable... its somthing that makes no sense to me and I'm not really sure if its because the ICs or the BIOS/MoBo...

I've notice same behaviour runing only 2 Dimms, and try to binning them... no resoult, and just to mention, I've have had 2 9900k, 2 Aorus Master... always more or less the same


----------



## EarlZ

alv-OC said:


> Then I dont not what else to say... some people have been having some troubles when both resizable BAR and CMS are enabled, try first disbling CMS support and if it does not work dissable R-BAR aswel. If your computer can Boot then the issue is software/configuration related, not hardware, but at the end, if the MoBo is new I would suggest you to send it back to RMA.
> 
> 
> 
> Well... if you can Boot at 4000MHz only with 1.370v on Mem training its pretty good actually, for waht you say your IMC its pretty good. Mine wouldn't post below 1.420v with XMP settings dialed manually. One more thing I would suggest you is to not use XMP at all, specially because of the voltages that the profile sets on VCCSA and VCCIO... usually are way too high, try staying below 1.300v (being 1.35v the absolute maximun for and 24/7 overcloking and above 1.400v the No-go zone). Instead, introduce all lthe settings manually.


I was actually expecting it to be able to boot even at 1.35 as the rated voltage but hey thanks for the vote of confidence that 1.370v is actually good ( after further testing it even trains on 1.360v). I am using 1.15v for IO and 1.20v for SA as indicated on my post.

I've tried 4000Mhz with 16-20-20-40 1.45v with XMP turned off and it does not train


----------



## alv-OC

EarlZ said:


> I was actually expecting it to be able to boot even at 1.35 as the rated voltage but hey thanks for the vote of confidence that 1.370v is actually good ( after further testing it even trains on 1.360v). I am using 1.15v for IO and 1.20v for SA as indicated on my post.
> 
> I've tried 4000Mhz with 16-20-20-40 1.45v with XMP turned off and it does not train


As fas as I've seen on this thread, when you jump in to the 4000MHz range CL16 is the absolute minimun, dont ask me why, but when you are below that mark yo could even go as low as CL13 (if you manage to do so) but when you surpass 4000MHz there is like a thin red line that no one can cross, if I still recall it was because of how the MoBo trains RTLs and IOLs so dont worry to much. If you want to keep going up in MHz CL16 is going to be your limit. My system was more stable at 4200CL16 (2x8GB) than 4000CL16....🤷‍♂️

That said, I would like to add that I never have had good resoults when the latencies are so off from echaother, try to keep them in a +/-2 range (ie: 16-18-18, 19-20-20) and for any OC attempt that you wanto make fix the RAM voltage at 1.450v as your minimun, and 1.250 on VCCSA/OI, then you can lower them if you like or push them a little bit more to see if that make any susbtantial difference.


----------



## EarlZ

alv-OC said:


> As fas as I've seen on this thread, when you jump in to the 4000MHz range CL16 is the absolute minimun, dont ask me why, but when you are below that mark yo could even go as low as CL13 (if you manage to do so) but when you surpass 4000MHz there is like a thin red line that no one can cross, if I still recall it was because of how the MoBo trains RTLs and IOLs so dont worry to much. If you want to keep going up in MHz CL16 is going to be your limit. My system was more stable at 4200CL16 (2x8GB) than 4000CL16....🤷‍♂️
> 
> That said, I would like to add that I never have had good resoults when the latencies are so off from echaother, try to keep them in a +/-2 range (ie: 16-18-18, 19-20-20) and for any OC attempt that you wanto make fix the RAM voltage at 1.450v as your minimun, and 1.250 on VCCSA/OI, then you can lower them if you like or push them a little bit more to see if that make any susbtantial difference.


I'll give those timing suggestion and voltages a try, I was following this guide MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at master · integralfx/MemTestHelper · GitHub

EDIT:

Wont do 16-18-18 at 1.45v vDIMM, 1.25VCCIO,1.25VCCSA.


----------



## Smokediggity

Question for those with Windows Subsystem for Linux installed. If you put your computer to sleep, then wake it back up, then run a stress test, does hwinfo's "Core Effective Clocks" sensors read a value that is roughly 300 Mhz below where it should be during the stress test?


----------



## alexrainmk

alv-OC said:


> Post code 25 не определен в Maual пользователя, и он не определен как "Код ошибки", хотя, следуя логике процесса postig и безопасности чисел, я бы сказал, что ваш MoBo застрял в безопасности загрузки, связанной с оперативной памятью, очень вероятно, поскольку Post code 19 означает "Инициализация Pre-memory South-Bridge запущена", а следующий определенный код-31, который означает "Установленная память". Таким образом, ваш компьютер не загружается в этой конкретной фазе защиты загрузки... Я бы:
> 
> - Попробуйте принудительно загрузиться из другого BIOS.
> 
> ->Если он проходит Post: Означает, что ошибка не связана с аппаратным обеспечением, поэтому ее проблема с BIOS обрабатывается следующим образом:
> 
> 
> Как только в другом BIOS загрузятся настройки по умолчанию, сохраните их и выйдите.
> Перепрошейте оба BIOS на официальный BIOS с веб-сайта Gigabyte.
> Зайдите в БИОС фриста и попробуйте загрузиться нормально.
> Если он действительно работает, вы можете либо оставить его, либо попробовать еще раз один из модированных BIOS.
> 
> -> Если if тоже не проходит Post: его аппаратное обеспечение связано, так что попробуйте обычный процесс устранения неполадок.
> 
> - Попробуйте загрузиться только с одной палочкой RAM., затем попробуйте 2 палочки, попробуйте разные слоты...
> [...]


 Thanks


----------



## davidm71

Deleted


----------



## einsachtsieben

KedarWolf said:


> It's the fastest and onboard video is working.


Sorry to bother, but when I flash this BIOS the microcode doesn't change in HWiNFO, always stays at DE (what I had before flashing). I don't know why, it flashed successfully.


----------



## KedarWolf

einsachtsieben said:


> Sorry to bother, but when I flash this BIOS the microcode doesn't change in HWiNFO, always stays at DE (what I had before flashing). I don't know why, it flashed successfully.


Read back, you need to uninstall a few Windows updates.


----------



## einsachtsieben

KedarWolf said:


> Read back, you need to uninstall a few Windows updates.


Thank you so much for your reply. I think it fixed it, the microcode now says BE. Is this correct?


----------



## KedarWolf

einsachtsieben said:


> Thank you so much for your reply. I think it fixed it, the microcode now says BE. Is this correct?


Yes, it is.


----------



## davidm71

Anyone get Resizable BAR going on the Z390 Master with latest beta bios and Nvidia 3000 series GPU?

Having difficulty.

Thanks


----------



## Kaibosh

davidm71 said:


> Anyone get Resizable BAR going on the Z390 Master with latest beta bios and Nvidia 3000 series GPU?
> 
> Having difficulty.
> 
> Thanks


Yup. What part are you having a problem with? I assume your BIOS flash is going properly. You need to have 'Above 4G Decoding ' enabled, probably CSM disabled, and of course you need to be booting up to UEFI with a matching boot drive. If you have Re-Bar enabled in the Bios, then you need to flash the vBIOS of your 3xxx (unless you have a 3060), and of course have the newest drivers. Of course, Windows needs to be up to date. You may need to check WU and then do a hard shutdown and check again. You can see if Re-Bar is 'working' either in the Nvidia drivers etc stuff or using GPU-Z (?). 

WARNING: If you have an ASUS Tuf 3080 do NOT just merrily run the flasher. Find your _exact_ vBIOS revision and manually flash the matching upgrade. The info is out there.


----------



## davidm71

I did all that. Updated bios to the latest version and turned on Above 4G decoding and set R-Bar to Auto. Update or rather installed latest Nvidia driver after DDU cleanup. Personally I think the limiting factor is the gpu or vbios on the MSI Ventus 3080 OC. Would have chose Evga however I guess I won the Microcenter lottery and that was the only model available in a 3080 flavor. Anyhow both nvidia system information and gpuz are saying its not on. I have a Gigabyte Z390M gaming board with a Sapphire 5700 XT and that one works! So I'm pretty sure its the vbios. Emailed tech support and they told me to run Liveupdate which didnt do a thing. To make things worse MSI removed all my reward points! Wish I went Evga..

thanks


----------



## ezveedub

alexrainmk said:


> Guys, tell me what post code 25 means on AORUS MASTER Z-390 and how to remove it.


Post code 25 IIRC is from AppCenter detecting update available. If you're running AppCenter, set it not to run on start up, save and reboot. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Dibbler

resizable BAR seems fine on my Z390 Master and 3070 MSI Gaming X. But I MUST have the monitor powered on first before the tower PC. If I don't I get 5 beeps and it will not boot, blank screen as I then switch on the monitor. If I power on the "correct" sequence then all is good.
Took me a while to figure that one as I generally would press the power button on the PC and then power on the monitor.


----------



## luckydead

Hello people, please help me because i'm not professional with this stuff.

I'm using z390 auros master r1.0
Intel core i7-9700k
Predator 2x8 GB 4000mhz ram
Be quiet 850W power supply
GPU: rx 57000 xt nitro+

And currectly i'm using F11n bios updated from APP Center program.

I need help, let me try to describe each problem one by one.
After some times when i turn on computer, black screen showing but computer was running, but nothing worked, needed a few times to shut down manually and start again until start work.
After some times when i trun on computer i have message "Please load default settings or enter bios" i need to click defaults and reboot a few times until loads correct.

I didn't do anything in bios changes, no options everything is default.
Also if i enable X.M.P profile 1, i cannot boost my RAM to use full force because again will crash bios with reload default stuff.

I see some people writed F11m modded file works for them , but i cannot find it. I do not know how to mode my bios at all, thats why i do not touch it.
Also i would ask how to make correct bios change, video or good tutorial what to do to make clean and correct bios update.

Thank you


----------



## EarlZ

luckydead said:


> Hello people, please help me because i'm not professional with this stuff.
> 
> I'm using z390 auros master r1.0
> Intel core i7-9700k
> Predator 2x8 GB 4000mhz ram
> Be quiet 850W power supply
> GPU: rx 57000 xt nitro+
> 
> And currectly i'm using F11n bios updated from APP Center program.
> 
> I need help, let me try to describe each problem one by one.
> After some times when i turn on computer, black screen showing but computer was running, but nothing worked, needed a few times to shut down manually and start again until start work.
> After some times when i trun on computer i have message "Please load default settings or enter bios" i need to click defaults and reboot a few times until loads correct.
> 
> I didn't do anything in bios changes, no options everything is default.
> Also if i enable X.M.P profile 1, i cannot boost my RAM to use full force because again will crash bios with reload default stuff.
> 
> I see some people writed F11m modded file works for them , but i cannot find it. I do not know how to mode my bios at all, thats why i do not touch it.
> Also i would ask how to make correct bios change, video or good tutorial what to do to make clean and correct bios update.
> 
> Thank you


Since you are using 4000Mhz kit, you might need to manually increase the voltages. On my system my 4000Mhz kit will not post unless I give it 1.370v (1.360v is possible but only a 50-50 chance) once you've loaded up XMP you may also want to use manual voltages for VCCSA and VCCIO as auto sets them at a very high value.

A good baseline would be 1.15v for VCCIO and 1.200V for VCCSA and you can even start with 1.40V on your RAM.


----------



## luckydead

EarlZ said:


> Since you are using 4000Mhz kit, you might need to manually increase the voltages. On my system my 4000Mhz kit will not post unless I give it 1.370v (1.360v is possible but only a 50-50 chance) once you've loaded up XMP you may also want to use manual voltages for VCCSA and VCCIO as auto sets them at a very high value.
> 
> A good baseline would be 1.15v for VCCIO and 1.200V for VCCSA and you can even start with 1.40V on your RAM.


Hello, i would appriciate if you can show me with screenshots what exactly to touch, not to mess it up.
But would mind first to check the problems that i have first so i can clear 1 by 1 everything.
Let's first start with the problems when i turn on computer:
After some times when i turn on computer, black screen showing but computer was running, but nothing worked, needed a few times to shut down manually and start again until start work.
After some times when i trun on computer i have message "Please load default settings or enter bios" i need to click defaults and reboot a few times until loads correct. 

- About RAM even if its not 4000Mhz to be even 3600 is good enough not to load it to the end, because by default windows shows 2400mhz using.
What may be the cause of the pc to show bios error and wants to return default settings ?


----------



## luckydead

luckydead said:


> Hello, i would appriciate if you can show me with screenshots what exactly to touch, not to mess it up.
> But would mind first to check the problems that i have first so i can clear 1 by 1 everything.
> Let's first start with the problems when i turn on computer:
> After some times when i turn on computer, black screen showing but computer was running, but nothing worked, needed a few times to shut down manually and start again until start work.
> After some times when i trun on computer i have message "Please load default settings or enter bios" i need to click defaults and reboot a few times until loads correct.
> 
> - About RAM even if its not 4000Mhz to be even 3600 is good enough not to load it to the end, because by default windows shows 2400mhz using.
> What may be the cause of the pc to show bios error and wants to return default settings ?


if it's required someone to chat with on facebook to help me out by showing the video how to touch what to touch, i would appriciate it, like i say i'm not good with this stuff of settings ;(


----------



## AndrejB

@luckydead 

Here are steps:
1. Shutdown your computer
2. Turn off the PSU (power supply)
3. Hold clear CMOS button (located on the back of the motherboard)
4. Turn on PSU
5. Turn on PC and wait for it to reboot 3,4 times
6. Once back in Windows, restart and go into the bios
7. Turn on XMP and set the voltage values per below (key them in)








8. Go to the bottom of the above page and go to Advanced CPU settings (or something, last entry on this page) and set the following value









9. Save and Exit

This will put relatively safe values to everything while giving a bit more headroom for stability.


----------



## luckydead

AndrejB said:


> @luckydead
> 
> Here are steps:
> 1. Shutdown your computer
> 2. Turn off the PSU (power supply)
> 3. Hold clear CMOS button (located on the back of the motherboard)
> 4. Turn on PSU
> 5. Turn on PC and wait for it to reboot 3,4 times
> 6. Once back in Windows, restart and go into the bios
> 7. Turn on XMP and set the voltage values per below (key them in)
> View attachment 2488405
> 
> 8. Go to the bottom of the above page and go to Advanced CPU settings (or something, last entry on this page) and set the following value
> View attachment 2488406
> 
> 
> 9. Save and Exit
> 
> This will put relatively safe values to everything while giving a bit more headroom for stability.


Thank you for so nice guide, question after i do this do i need to install again bios but from BIOS itself or that i used APP Center software that comes with the board ? . Because i update it until now by the software.
Any information about sometimes when i run the pc i got black screen and bios failed to restore defaults any ideas what may be the problem ?

Also question about the RAM
i see here this values :








HyperX | High Quality Gaming Gear


HyperX is a brand committed to making sure every gamer feels they are included. No matter who you are, or what you play, WE'RE ALL GAMERS.




www.hyperxgaming.com




and mine is this : *Predator DDR4 RGB*








HyperX Predator DDR4 RGB 16GB Kit of 2 (2 x 8GB) 4000MHz CL19 DIMM XMP RAM Memory with Infrared Sync Technology (HX440C19PB3AK2/16) at Amazon.com


Buy HyperX Predator DDR4 RGB 16GB Kit of 2 (2 x 8GB) 4000MHz CL19 DIMM XMP RAM Memory with Infrared Sync Technology (HX440C19PB3AK2/16): Memory - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases



www.amazon.com





because on your screenshot is 17-17-17 i just wondering what is correct?


----------



## AndrejB

You updated your bios through app center to the latest version, that's all you need app center for.

The above is to clear all the settings (not version, you'll still be on 11n after the above) in the bios and start over, this should resolve the black screen.

The above steps should be repeated everytime you update your bios.


----------



## luckydead

can you tell me about the link that i sended about the values of the RAM, what is better configuration because it says 1.35V and different values than 17-17-17 , sorry to ask so much but somehow i try to understand this.


----------



## AndrejB

You'll need to learn a bit before going into ram tuning, start here:








integralfx/MemTestHelper


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




github.com





For now just activate xmp and put the voltages as instructed.
Your memory is rated for 1.35v but I suspect that the board doesn't like that and that's causing the boot failure.


----------



## luckydead

Okay i will try now with screenshots from you and will write back. Thank you


----------



## luckydead

Okay i managed by your pictures to do it the same, after i do it the same save and exit bios, pc restarted and directly showed crash return to default settings, so i entered again bios and i go to Windows 8/10 and change it to Windows 8/10 WSQL ( i dont know what is the difference) , again save restart error, i go back and changed CSM or GSM i do not remember now to be Enabled and were UEFI both and windows started. Make a few restarts no error until now.
What else can you suggest me to do to make it stable and not to overheat or burn something?


----------



## AndrejB

So is your xmp now enabled?
Also did you have these issues before the bios update?


----------



## luckydead

AndrejB said:


> So is your xmp now enabled?
> Also did you have these issues before the bios update?


Yes X.M.P now is working with profile 1 and windows task manager shows 4000mhz using.
Before i changed the options with the screenshots didn't have problem except sometimes when i turn on black screen or load defaults (it can run 4-5 days without error then some day load defaults). 
Now i maded it like the screenshots and changed also this 2 options like i say before, i do not know what is difference between Windows 8/10 and Windows 8/10 WSQL but it was default Windows 8/10 , now i changed it to WSQL . 
Until now i made 4-6 restarts of pc no problems, but i hope if there is something additional that you could recommended me to do in bios settings i will be glad to make it stable.
Thank you so much for helping me people.


----------



## luckydead

Okay today while i was working on pc, i got blue screen pc run into error, pc restarted and show bios return to default. any ideas?


----------



## AndrejB

You didn't answer if this was an issue previously (before the bios update)?

Your issue is that xmp is currently unstable, cannot train 4000 at 1.4v (if you followed my instructions properly).

What I would do:

Revert to an older bios where everything worked.
if the above statement is false, reset cmos and test stability at stock
if the above fails, try another ram kit
if the above passes, activate xmp but change the ram voltage to 1.45v and maybe up the cpu voltage a bit or try lower ram speed


----------



## luckydead

Yes i have the same issues with all bios updates default when i purchased it was 9C, all versions has the same bios defaults return when run pc


----------



## alexrainmk

ezveedub said:


> Post code 25 IIRC is from AppCenter detecting update available. If you're running AppCenter, set it not to run on start up, save and reboot.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Thanks


----------



## Peds2023

luckydead said:


> Yes i have the same issues with all bios updates default when i purchased it was 9C, all versions has the same bios defaults return when run pc


Hey luckydead, Im a bit concerned that something might be shorting out your board. It sounds like something is shorting and then causing CMOS. I would try re-seating the CPU, and double check that none of the vrm pins are bent on the back of the board, and that the cpu backplate isnt contacting anything funky.


----------



## AndrejB

Peds2023 said:


> Hey luckydead, Im a bit concerned that something might be shorting out your board. It sounds like something is shorting and then causing CMOS. I would try re-seating the CPU, and double check that none of the vrm pins are bent on the back of the board, and that the cpu backplate isnt contacting anything funky.


After he reset his cmos and activated xmp the board failed to train properly (even with higher ram/training voltages).

I would think this behavior would be present at stock if this was the issue, I may be wrong of course.


----------



## Peds2023

AndrejB said:


> After he reset his cmos and activated xmp the board failed to train properly (even with higher ram/training voltages).
> 
> I would think this behavior would be present at stock if this was the issue, I may be wrong of course.


just going off of his post



luckydead said:


> Hello people, please help me because i'm not professional with this stuff.
> 
> I'm using z390 auros master r1.0
> Intel core i7-9700k
> Predator 2x8 GB 4000mhz ram
> Be quiet 850W power supply
> GPU: rx 57000 xt nitro+
> 
> And currectly i'm using F11n bios updated from APP Center program.
> 
> I need help, let me try to describe each problem one by one.
> After some times when i turn on computer, black screen showing but computer was running, but nothing worked, needed a few times to shut down manually and start again until start work.
> After some times when i trun on computer i have message "Please load default settings or enter bios" i need to click defaults and reboot a few times until loads correct.
> 
> I didn't do anything in bios changes, no options everything is default.
> Also if i enable X.M.P profile 1, i cannot boost my RAM to use full force because again will crash bios with reload default stuff.
> 
> I see some people writed F11m modded file works for them , but i cannot find it. I do not know how to mode my bios at all, thats why i do not touch it.
> Also i would ask how to make correct bios change, video or good tutorial what to do to make clean and correct bios update.
> 
> Thank you


So if I am reading this correctly he is stating every now and again after starting up his pc, he gets a message saying bios set to default. He also mentions that he has not changed anything in bios just stock. To me, this sounds like a short, or bent VRM pin or something along those lines. it does mention XMP being enabled also throws things into disarray as well, but bigger issue to me is the randomly reset bios settings.


----------



## Akoshnai

Hello! Im kinda new in this so im not sure which info to add to the post, so please if im missing something let me know!

Im currently using a 9900kf +z390 Aorus Ultra+16GB ddr4 3200mhz avexir blitz
I had it set to 5ghz at 1.34v in a 99.99% stable (it would BSOD sometimes but those were extremely rare) using the Beta F10B BIOS, 10 days ago i noticed there was a new F10H bios in the official site so i updated it using the AppCenter

First off i noticed that it messed up all my saved profiles, i tried to re-do the settings i had for my 5ghz and theres no way to get it even close to stable, even with 1.38v reaching 99c with a Kraken X62 with a Push-Pull 4fans....

Settings:
XMP ENABLED
CPU RATIO 50
RING RATIO/UNCORE 47
ENHANCE MULTI-CORE PERFORMANCE DISABLED
AVX 0
TURBO BOOST ENABLED (i set each core to 50, not sure if i need to when i already set CPU RATIO to 50)
SPEED SHIFT DISABLE
LLC TURBO
VCORE 1.34V
HYPER THREADING ENABLED
C STATES DISABLED

Not sure if im forgetting something, with the new bios i cant get it to finish a Cinebench R23 even at 1.38v and im pretty sure my temps are way higher than before... reaching 99c when trying to run the R23 test..

Any tips or experience with this BIOS would be appreciated, i honestly feel like the F9 BIOS was way more stable than the F10B and F10H,which both mention "VCORE AND POWER BEHAVIOR" fixes... :S


----------



## Peds2023

Akoshnai said:


> Hello! Im kinda new in this so im not sure which info to add to the post, so please if im missing something let me know!
> 
> Im currently using a 9900kf +z390 Aorus Ultra+16GB ddr4 3200mhz avexir blitz
> I had it set to 5ghz at 1.34v in a 99.99% stable (it would BSOD sometimes but those were extremely rare) using the Beta F10B BIOS, 10 days ago i noticed there was a new F10H bios in the official site so i updated it using the AppCenter
> 
> First off i noticed that it messed up all my saved profiles, i tried to re-do the settings i had for my 5ghz and theres no way to get it even close to stable, even with 1.38v reaching 99c with a Kraken X62 with a Push-Pull 4fans....
> 
> Settings:
> XMP ENABLED
> CPU RATIO 50
> RING RATIO/UNCORE 47
> ENHANCE MULTI-CORE PERFORMANCE DISABLED
> AVX 0
> TURBO BOOST ENABLED (i set each core to 50, not sure if i need to when i already set CPU RATIO to 50)
> SPEED SHIFT DISABLE
> LLC TURBO
> VCORE 1.34V
> HYPER THREADING ENABLED
> C STATES DISABLED
> 
> Not sure if im forgetting something, with the new bios i cant get it to finish a Cinebench R23 even at 1.38v and im pretty sure my temps are way higher than before... reaching 99c when trying to run the R23 test..
> 
> Any tips or experience with this BIOS would be appreciated, i honestly feel like the F9 BIOS was way more stable than the F10B and F10H,which both mention "VCORE AND POWER BEHAVIOR" fixes... :S


Any BSODS you were having is a general indication that you actually weren't that stable. 1.38 for 5.0 is sky high. I would first start out getting your core stable, then do the cache. Make sure also that this isnt a memory issue. Break stability down to one item at a time because otherwise there is no way of knowing really.
edit: forgot to mention that flashing bios will delete saved profiles so make sure to screen shot or write it down.


----------



## EarlZ

5Ghz wont just do for some chips, my first 9700K randomly died and would do 5.0Ghz at 1.23-ish volts and the replacement (retail unit) I got didnt go well with the silicon lottery. I need to have 1.340v for 5Ghz and it would even BSOD on idle or low loads.


----------



## jiffysound

Hey guys need some help in a few things. First of I am using a Aorus z390 pro wifi with a i9 9900k OCed to 5.0ghz. I have a few questions in regards to bios settings. Under Advanced CPU settings there are 2 items, one is called Turbo Power Limits and the other is called Turbo Per Core Limit Control. They both have options to pick either Auto, Disabled, Enabled. I have both on Auto but I was wondering what these 2 items are / do. I couldn't find anything on google / youtube / duckduckgo so I thought id come here. Also this is great treasure of information  Bios version F12K


----------



## Akoshnai

Peds2023 said:


> Any BSODS you were having is a general indication that you actually weren't that stable. 1.38 for 5.0 is sky high. I would first start out getting your core stable, then do the cache. Make sure also that this isnt a memory issue. Break stability down to one item at a time because otherwise there is no way of knowing really.
> edit: forgot to mention that flashing bios will delete saved profiles so make sure to screen shot or write it down.


Should i try a different LLC or Turbo is the best option for this mobo?


----------



## Peds2023

Akoshnai said:


> Should i try a different LLC or Turbo is the best option for this mobo?


I would first put your cache at stock and ram at stock. I usually use an adaptive voltage in which case normal or low seems to work best for my chip. I more or less followed this guide from over at bit-tech Overclocking - 9900K @ 5GHz 1.2V guide Gigabyte Z390 Master + 5.2GHz 1.28v guide pg2).


----------



## Peds2023

jiffysound said:


> Hey guys need some help in a few things. First of I am using a Aorus z390 pro wifi with a i9 9900k OCed to 5.0ghz. I have a few questions in regards to bios settings. Under Advanced CPU settings there are 2 items, one is called Turbo Power Limits and the other is called Turbo Per Core Limit Control. They both have options to pick either Auto, Disabled, Enabled. I have both on Auto but I was wondering what these 2 items are / do. I couldn't find anything on google / youtube / duckduckgo so I thought id come here. Also this is great treasure of information  Bios version F12K


per core limit control is a weird gigabyte thing that im pretty sure only gigabyte does and i would assume that gigabyte dont know what it does either (just kidding). But i am pretty sure it is specific to gigabyte boards for limiting the turbo ratio of a specific core. I just disable the turbo power limits or leave them on auto, basically they make it so you can limit the amount of juice that the cpu will get etc but i have never been able to get it to work well. Also im sure there are MANY people who know more than i do.


----------



## Skunk0001

Skunk0001 said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> HCI Memtest? Can I get a copy of the script please The scripts are for HCI MemTest 7.0, the latest version. It only costs $5 USD to buy it. You put the HCI MTPclassic.exe file in the same folder as the scripts, install AutoHotKey, right-click on the script, then Run Script...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure you don't have Windows 10 update KB4589212 installed though, otherwise Windows will force you to use the slow DE microcode, not the faster BE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KB4589212: Intel microcode updates for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2 - Microsoft Support
> 
> 
> Describes the latest microcode updates from Intel for Windows 10, version 2004 and 20H2, and Windows Server, version 2004 and 20H2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.microsoft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skunk0001 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But in future versions of windows it might get more tricky, in the latest Windows Insider Dev build I have on dual boot, there is no update to deinstall and it shows me on the DE microcode.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious, what voltages (VRVOUT/VCCSA/VCCIO) are you running for those clocks?
Click to expand...




Kaibosh said:


> I don't need the hassle of fighting Microsoft on yet _another_ front


Just an FYI for anyone who either is on the insider (or future) builds where there is no update to deinstall...

To avoid the Windows/Microsoft microcodes from loading all you need to do is *delete/rename C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll*
(or if you are on AMD; mcupdate_authenticamd.dll)


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

I also have been having a RAM OC issue. I have a 9900KS that was running 5.1 core, 4.6 cache at 1.3V with no AVX offset and Turbo LLC. I tuned my 3200 CL14 bdie kit to 3600 15-16-16-35 and other tuned subtimings. 3600 was max I could get it before. I thought I could get at least 3866 with better primary timings

I delidded and mounted CPU direct die in my custom loop over the weekend. Now I can’t even boot on 3400. Cleared CMOS and still won’t work. I’m able to tune it at 3200 MHz, but seems dumb since I had a humble RAM OC before.

Any suggestions? I don’t think anything is shorting out. Pins were fine during install unless my mount is putting too much pressure.


----------



## Akoshnai

Peds2023 said:


> I would first put your cache at stock and ram at stock. I usually use an adaptive voltage in which case normal or low seems to work best for my chip. I more or less followed this guide from over at bit-tech Overclocking - 9900K @ 5GHz 1.2V guide Gigabyte Z390 Master + 5.2GHz 1.28v guide pg2).


Would that guide work for a z390 Aorus ULTRA? I know theres a few settings missingin my board vs the MASTER


----------



## AndrejB

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> I also have been having a RAM OC issue. I have a 9900KS that was running 5.1 core, 4.6 cache at 1.3V with no AVX offset and Turbo LLC. I tuned my 3200 CL14 bdie kit to 3600 15-16-16-35 and other tuned subtimings. 3600 was max I could get it before. I thought I could get at least 3866 with better primary timings
> 
> I delidded and mounted CPU direct die in my custom loop over the weekend. Now I can’t even boot on 3400. Cleared CMOS and still won’t work. I’m able to tune it at 3200 MHz, but seems dumb since I had a humble RAM OC before.
> 
> Any suggestions? I don’t think anything is shorting out. Pins were fine during install unless my mount is putting too much pressure.


I recently had something similar happen. My cpu was unstable at stock, so I loosened the mount then tightened it back a bit and that resolved it. (Loosened around 180° then tightened 90°)


----------



## Peds2023

Akoshnai said:


> Would that guide work for a z390 Aorus ULTRA? I know theres a few settings missingin my board vs the MASTER


I would think that it would but im not familiar with that board to be honest. Def worth a shot.


----------



## darkage

hi @KedarWolf 





Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o







drive.google.com




when i try to flash this bios version it gives error loading bios file with efiflash
do you know what i am doing wrong?
thnaks for any help


----------



## KedarWolf

Change the file name to 1.f11 and try this.



Code:


efiflash 1.f11 /c /x


----------



## darkage

KedarWolf said:


> Change the file name to 1.f11 and try this.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f11 /c /x


allready done and gives same error
can it be from the efiflash version ?
thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

darkage said:


> allready done and gives same error
> can it be from the efiflash version ?
> thanks


Yes, download the efiflash from the Z390 Master support page included with the latest BIOS from there. If that doesn't work, there is one more option we can try.


----------



## Podeki71

Hi Guys, 

I've been lurking for a while, and hoping to get some feedback on my memory issue.

My board is an Aorus Pro WiFi, i9-9900K running stock bios F12k.

I just picked up some new RAM, Kingston HyperX 2x8 16GB sticks (HX436C17FB3AK2/16), which with XMP profile 1 should be good for 3600MHZ at 17,21,21,39 and voltage 1.35.

I boot fine, no issues, and yet Task Manager indicates 3600mhz but HWmonitor, CPU-Z and HWinfo64 all indicate 3200mhz. I've tried setting the timings and speed manually, changing the VCCIO / V SA to 1.2v, Dram Voltage to 1.37. Nothing seems to work, I'm stuck at 3200mhz even though task manager indicates 3600. 

I tried changing the timings to 16,16,16,38 and had a boot failure. Not sure what else to do to get these sticks to run properly.

Anyone else have this mem kit / mobo combo and can provide some advice? Thanks!


----------



## Akoshnai

KedarWolf said:


> Z390UltraF10hModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


@KedarWolf Hi, im kinda new in everything related to OCing, should i try ur modded F10H for an easier OC experience?

And a question for everyone:

Im using 1.35v in bios with LLC Turbo, and i notice that VR VOUT shows 1.331v Max 1.268v Min... is there a way to avoid such a huge fluctuation Max/Min???

This is After 26 minutes of AIDA64 Extreme is it ok?


----------



## Podeki71

Part 2:

I borrowed a set of Corsair Vengeance Pro sticks 4x8gb rated at 4000Mhz, CL 19. The XMP profile picks them up no problem, boot into Windows and now CPUZ, HWinfo etc, all indicate 1800mhz (ie 3600). Weird.... Task Manager again reports them as 4000mhz but nothing else does. Restart and go back into the bios, XMP is still showing as 4000 but to the right side of the screen, where actual CPU speed and Mem speed are displayed, it's showing up as 3600 @1.36v. 

So 2 sets of sticks, all under-report their speed. Is this a bug or am I missing something stupid? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.


----------



## AndrejB

Podeki71 said:


> Part 2:
> 
> I borrowed a set of Corsair Vengeance Pro sticks 4x8gb rated at 4000Mhz, CL 19. The XMP profile picks them up no problem, boot into Windows and now CPUZ, HWinfo etc, all indicate 1800mhz (ie 3600). Weird.... Task Manager again reports them as 4000mhz but nothing else does. Restart and go back into the bios, XMP is still showing as 4000 but to the right side of the screen, where actual CPU speed and Mem speed are displayed, it's showing up as 3600 @1.36v.
> 
> So 2 sets of sticks, all under-report their speed. Is this a bug or am I missing something stupid? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks.


Did you reset the cmos (power off psu, then hold the button)? Did you try flashing the latest bios?

At 4000mhz there shouldn't be any issue, I remember this board had issues setting 3600 for me.

Finally did you try setting the speed and timings manually?

Just throwing out ideas...

My process is:
Reset cmos (with psu off)
Boot
Set cpu settings and everything else
Boot
Set xmp, up the speed, tighten the timings, set voltage, let it train (if it shows the gigabyte logo it usually trained properly in my case, otherwise I have repeat all of the above)


----------



## AleSpi72

Akoshnai said:


> @KedarWolf Hi, im kinda new in everything related to OCing, should i try ur modded F10H for an easier OC experience?


Good Morning, i also have a Z390 AorusUltra Wifi with F10. 
What vantage to flash F10 mod ? 
Should it flash like any bios? (I always use the Gigabyte utility directly in windows 10)

many thanks


----------



## Podeki71

AndrejB said:


> Did you reset the cmos (power off psu, then hold the button)? Did you try flashing the latest bios?
> 
> At 4000mhz there shouldn't be any issue, I remember this board had issues setting 3600 for me.
> 
> Finally did you try setting the speed and timings manually?
> 
> Just throwing out ideas...
> 
> My process is:
> Reset cmos (with psu off)
> Boot
> Set cpu settings and everything else
> Boot
> Set xmp, up the speed, tighten the timings, set voltage, let it train (if it shows the gigabyte logo it usually trained properly in my case, otherwise I have repeat all of the above)


Hi, thanks for the feedback.

I had already tried everything you noted, and yet did it all again just in case. Same result, Task Manager states 4000, BIOS states 3600 as does CPUz and HWinfo64, regardless as to whether I use XMP or manually set the timings. I'm running the latest stock F12k bios.

It baffles me that the bios will only run these Corsair 4000mhz sticks at 3600mhz and the same bios will only run the Kingston HyperX 3600mhz sticks at 3200mhz. It almost seems like the board is downclocking. Weird..... I've tried setting the VVCIO and V SA to 1.2 and DRAM V to 1.35 or 1.4, no change.

If you've got any other ideas, I'm all ears, thanks!


----------



## luckydead

Hello again i'm having trouble with the startup of pc.
Everything was returned to default XMP disable all default settings.
PC started and showing this again , 3 times i click load defaults and reboot.








IMG-20210505-165103-resized-20210505-045131604


Image IMG-20210505-165103-resized-20210505-045131604 hosted in ImgBB




ibb.co




Additional when i see this screen on motherboard shows Error Code : A6


----------



## Podeki71

Podeki71 said:


> Hi, thanks for the feedback.
> 
> I had already tried everything you noted, and yet did it all again just in case. Same result, Task Manager states 4000, BIOS states 3600 as does CPUz and HWinfo64, regardless as to whether I use XMP or manually set the timings. I'm running the latest stock F12k bios.
> 
> It baffles me that the bios will only run these Corsair 4000mhz sticks at 3600mhz and the same bios will only run the Kingston HyperX 3600mhz sticks at 3200mhz. It almost seems like the board is downclocking. Weird..... I've tried setting the VVCIO and V SA to 1.2 and DRAM V to 1.35 or 1.4, no change.
> 
> If you've got any other ideas, I'm all ears, thanks!


The weirdness continues... on a lark, I change the stock timings from 19,23,23,45-68 to 18,19,19,39-68 and suddenly, bam! 4000mhz RAM.

What?? I didn't change anything else, and so am at a loss as to why tightening up the timings forced the board to run at the right speed. Is there something stupid here that I am missing? ;-)

Just to ensure stability, I afterwards bumped the DRAM voltage up to 1.4, and ran MEMTEST64 for 30 minutes, then CineBench R23 for 30. Both finished fine. The RAM sticks got to 52 degrees C, but otherwise are running fine.

I'm really happy, but would love an expert to help me understand how this fixed the issue.

Thanks!


----------



## Peds2023

Podeki71 said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> I've been lurking for a while, and hoping to get some feedback on my memory issue.
> 
> My board is an Aorus Pro WiFi, i9-9900K running stock bios F12k.
> 
> I just picked up some new RAM, Kingston HyperX 2x8 16GB sticks (HX436C17FB3AK2/16), which with XMP profile 1 should be good for 3600MHZ at 17,21,21,39 and voltage 1.35.
> 
> I boot fine, no issues, and yet Task Manager indicates 3600mhz but HWmonitor, CPU-Z and HWinfo64 all indicate 3200mhz. I've tried setting the timings and speed manually, changing the VCCIO / V SA to 1.2v, Dram Voltage to 1.37. Nothing seems to work, I'm stuck at 3200mhz even though task manager indicates 3600.
> 
> I tried changing the timings to 16,16,16,38 and had a boot failure. Not sure what else to do to get these sticks to run properly.
> 
> Anyone else have this mem kit / mobo combo and can provide some advice? Thanks!


Try running the xmp profile specs without actuay running the xmp profile. In otherwords manually enter the timings etc, or if you have done that try putting ram options on auto and then enable the xmp profile. Also disable memory fast boot and enter your dram training voltage as what is listed as spec for that ram.


----------



## Peds2023

Peds2023 said:


> Try running the xmp profile specs without actuay running the xmp profile. In otherwords manually enter the timings etc, or if you have done that try putting ram options on auto and then enable the xmp profile. Also disable memory fast boot and enter your dram training voltage as what is listed as spec for that ram.


Also forgot to mention try CMOS and start over.


----------



## Peds2023

luckydead said:


> Hello again i'm having trouble with the startup of pc.
> Everything was returned to default XMP disable all default settings.
> PC started and showing this again , 3 times i click load defaults and reboot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMG-20210505-165103-resized-20210505-045131604
> 
> 
> Image IMG-20210505-165103-resized-20210505-045131604 hosted in ImgBB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ibb.co
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Additional when i see this screen on motherboard shows Error Code : A6


Hi luckyDead, I don't know if you saw my response to your other post or no, but it sounds like you are either having some kind of power related issue. Based on this and your other reported issues I think this could be something along the lines of either psu issue or a short within your MB or a bent vrm pin. The A6 code is for storage device setting. Before you do anything else I would suggest clearing CMOS and then starting from there and see how stable everything is at a solute stock settings.


----------



## Coldblackice

For any Z390 owners that see this, what drivers do you use for your...:

*NVMe *controller?
*SATA* controller?
*USB 3.1 *controller?
Microsoft's default drivers are really old, and I've heard Intel's drivers are hit and miss, that you have to cherry-pick the right version or else. 

As for USB, I found a Win-Raid thread for USB3.1 drivers but the Windows 10 drivers for Intel 3.1 eXtensible host controller have disappeared, leaving only W7's behind. Currently using MS default driver.

I have a WD NVMe (SN750), along with WD Red drives for storage. I found a WD NVMe controller driver and tried that, but for whatever reason, though the driver worked fine and I could boot up normally, WD SSD Dashboard couldn't see the NVMe drive anymore, despite still seeing the non-NVMe's. Reinstalling WD Dashboard didn't change anything. As soon as I went back to the MS driver, my NVMe appeared in WD Dashboard again. Also strange was WD Dashboard's GUI colors changing completely between these two drivers.


----------



## darkage

@KedarWolf
just not possible to flash the Z390MASTER.F11o bios file giving allways error loading file with several efiflash versions, no problem flashing other bios files
your F11o Gop Fixed is the same as this ?
thanks for all the help


----------



## scr1mka

Hallo ,can someone upload latest bios with fastest microcodes and hard hpet off for z390 aorus elite ? i would be very grateful , thanks and regards .


----------



## Wardog19

scr1mka said:


> Hallo ,can someone upload latest bios with fastest microcodes and hard hpet off for z390 aorus elite ? i would be very grateful , thanks and regards .


I also need it, would be very nice!


----------



## QTQ

Wardog19 said:


> I also need it, would be very nice!


+++


----------



## mrgnex

I have an Aorus Master board (r1.0) with a 8086K and 16 GB of some Kingston Micron rev B kit and a 1080Ti.
When I press delete to get into the bios my screen turns on but stays black. Doesn't matter if it's from a cold boot or a reboot.
I have found two workarounds:
1. Reset CMOS and get into BIOS on the first boot.
2. Use the EasyTune app. Applying any change crashes the system (SYSTEM_SERVICE_EXCEPTION (gdrv3.sys)) and I can get into BIOS fine on the next boot.

Maybe it is related to the fact I am using HDMI? I had this issue one time before with another PC which didn't work using HDMI but DP worked great.

What is going on here? Windows works fine and it works fine when I apply either workaround..

EDIT: Other HDMI cable didn't work either. Bought a Displayport cable and now it works fine. Weird.


----------



## darkage

mrgnex said:


> I have an Aorus Master board (r1.0) with a 8086K and 16 GB of some Kingston Micron rev B kit and a 1080Ti.
> When I press delete to get into the bios my screen turns on but stays black. Doesn't matter if it's from a cold boot or a reboot.
> I have found two workarounds:
> 1. Reset CMOS and get into BIOS on the first boot.
> 2. Use the EasyTune app. Applying any change crashes the system (Forgot the code) and I can get into BIOS fine on the next boot.
> 
> Maybe it is related to the fact I am using HDMI? I had this issue one time before with another PC which didn't work using HDMI but DP worked great.
> 
> What is going on here? Windows works fine and it works fine when I apply either workaround..


which monitor ?
next time try to turn on the display on the power button, i had a samsung and sometimes it did just that


----------



## mrgnex

darkage said:


> which monitor ?
> next time try to turn on the display on the power button, i had a samsung and sometimes it did just that


It is a Crossover 34U100. Same panel as the Microboard M340CLZ. Don't think it matters much. Didn't have any issues with previous motherboards, only change is that my DP cable broke and I am now using HDMI for the time being. The workarounds work fine too.


----------



## Kaibosh

mrgnex said:


> It is a Crossover 34U100. Same panel as the Microboard M340CLZ. Don't think it matters much. Didn't have any issues with previous motherboards, only change is that my DP cable broke and I am now using HDMI for the time being. The workarounds work fine too.


Try all your output ports, including the onboard ones, and in your monitor (or even more importantly if it is a tv) try switching inputs as far as auto/hdmi goes. If you still can't get a signal to trigger onto a display, do whatever it takes to try different cables.


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

So I've upgraded from an Aorus Pro to an Aorus Master. Using same OC settings: 5.2GHz core, 4.8 ring, 1.35V. Stable in my OCCT testing.
However during RAM stress tests, it drops from 5.2 GHz to 5 despite no AVX offset and disabling power limits. I'm on a 720mm custom loop and testing that thermals are not an issue.

I'm using the stock F11n bios and see @KedarWolf modded a bios for F11o. However, I'm not fully understanding how to download and flash it. He said something about FreeDOS but I don't know what it is or how to use it. Any help will be great. TIA!


----------



## mrgnex

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> So I've upgraded from an Aorus Pro to an Aorus Master. Using same OC settings: 5.2GHz core, 4.8 ring, 1.35V. Stable in my OCCT testing.
> However during RAM stress tests, it drops from 5.2 GHz to 5 despite no AVX offset and disabling power limits. I'm on a 720mm custom loop and testing that thermals are not an issue.
> 
> I'm using the stock F11n bios and see @KedarWolf modded a bios for F11o. However, I'm not fully understanding how to download and flash it. He said something about FreeDOS but I don't know what it is or how to use it. Any help will be great. TIA!



It is not clear to me what the modded BIOS does other than remove the Spectre and Meltdown slowdowns. (Edit: Not true check post 10983)
Here is explained how.


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

mrgnex said:


> It is not clear to me what the modded BIOS does other than remove the Spectre and Meltdown slowdowns.
> Here is explained how.


I don’t know what the FreeDOS is or how to use it. I have the BIOS saved to a flash drive already but skimming through it I can’t just flash it like normal.

I also can't find efiflash.exe anywhere either


----------



## KedarWolf

mrgnex said:


> It is not clear to me what the modded BIOS does other than remove the Spectre and Meltdown slowdowns.
> Here is explained how.


The modded BIOS does NOT remove the Spectre fixes etc. That was implemented long before microcodes were released for Z390. It just adds the best performing microcodes and updates ethernet, GOP and RAID firmwares in the BIOS.


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> I don’t know what the FreeDOS is or how to use it. I have the BIOS saved to a flash drive already but skimming through it I can’t just flash it like normal.
> 
> I also can't find efiflash.exe anywhere either


Alright I figured it out and have the F11o flashed. But now it’s dropping frequency despite no thermal throttling or AVX offset. Set 5.2 GHz, reports 5.0 GHz or even 0 GHz sometimes.


----------



## KedarWolf

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> Alright I figured it out and have the F11o flashed. But now it’s dropping frequency despite no thermal throttling or AVX offset. Set 5.2 GHz, reports 5.0 GHz or even 0 GHz sometimes.


If you have C-States and/or Speedstep enabled, it'll drop frequency on idle. You need to run a load like Cinebench R20 and see if the cores stabilize at the max when you're actually doing something, or run a game like Cyberpunk, Battlefield 5 or Shadow of The Tomb Raider, check in HWInfo your sustained core speeds.


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

KedarWolf said:


> If you have C-States and/or Speedstep enabled, it'll drop frequency on idle. You need to run a load like Cinebench R20 and see if the cores stabilize at the max when you're actually doing something, or run a game like Cyberpunk, Battlefield 5 or Shadow of The Tomb Raider, check in HWInfo your sustained core speeds.


Sorry I should have specified. This was during an OCCT stress test that it dropped to 0 MHz while the test was running not idle. I will try to get a screenshot if it happens again.


----------



## KedarWolf

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> Sorry I should have specified. This was during an OCCT stress test that it dropped to 0 MHz while the test was running not idle. I will try to get a screenshot if it happens again.


If you were monitoring it in OCCT might have been an issue, try having HWInfo open while OCCT is running, see the sustained and effective core speeds there.


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

KedarWolf said:


> If you were monitoring it in OCCT might have been an issue, try having HWInfo open while OCCT is running, see the sustained and effective core speeds there.












Stress test is running. 100% CPU usage. 0 MHz on effective clock. If you can look at maximum and average, it was showing properly. Dropped to 5000 MHz at 10 minutes then 0 MHz at 11. I have power limit control disabled in the bios


----------



## KedarWolf

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> View attachment 2490036
> 
> 
> Stress test is running. 100% CPU usage. 0 MHz on effective clock. If you can look at maximum and average, it was showing properly. Dropped to 5000 MHz at 10 minutes then 0 MHz at 11. I have power limit control disabled in the bios


Try downloading the non-beta OCCT, beta can have issues. And try something like running 3DMark Time Spy test 2 in a loop, see if it's OCCT that is the issue.

Edit: Or maybe Time Spy CPU test.


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

KedarWolf said:


> Try downloading the non-beta OCCT, beta can have issues. And try something like running 3DMark Time Spy test 2 in a loop, see if it's OCCT that is the issue.
> 
> Edit: Or maybe Time Spy CPU test.


So it doesn't show 0 MHz anymore, but still downclocks from 5.2 GHz set in BIOS to 5.0-5.1 GHz at 10 minute mark. I have no AVX offset, power limits are disabled, no thermal throttling with my custom loop, and no performance limits in HWInfo.
I set this Z390 Aorus Master up exactly how I had it previously with the Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi.


----------



## KedarWolf

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> So it doesn't show 0 MHz anymore, but still downclocks from 5.2 GHz set in BIOS to 5.0-5.1 GHz at 10 minute mark. I have no AVX offset, power limits are disabled, no thermal throttling with my custom loop, and no performance limits in HWInfo.
> I set this Z390 Aorus Master up exactly how I had it previously with the Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi.


Yeah, something is causing you to throttle. 

If it's not CPU temperature and it has to be something to do with the power limits. I always manually set my CPU temp limit from Auto to 90C.

I no longer have my Master though, I have a 5950x now.

Can someone else suggest anything?


----------



## Akoshnai

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, something is causing you to throttle.
> 
> If it's not CPU temperature and it has to be something to do with the power limits. I always manually set my CPU temp limit from Auto to 90C.
> 
> I no longer have my Master though, I have a 5950x now.
> 
> Can someone else suggest anything?


Kedar, quick question im trying to use ur F10H modded bios for z390 aorus ultra, made the booteable, went into efiflash, efiflash 1.F10 and it says its an invalid bios image, am i doing anything wrong?


----------



## KedarWolf

Akoshnai said:


> Kedar, quick question im trying to use ur F10H modded bios for z390 aorus ultra, made the booteable, went into efiflash, efiflash 1.F10 and it says its an invalid bios image, am i doing anything wrong?


Do a custom search with my username KedarWolf and sort by date or scroll back some for the correct command, I'm on my phone going home from work right now and hard to get it for you.


----------



## ChrisAyyy3

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, something is causing you to throttle.
> 
> If it's not CPU temperature and it has to be something to do with the power limits. I always manually set my CPU temp limit from Auto to 90C.
> 
> I no longer have my Master though, I have a 5950x now.
> 
> Can someone else suggest anything?


So it’s dropping back to 0 MHz on stable OCCT version. But my LLC VR VOUT is holding steady. I’m guessing there’s a bug in the effective clock reporting.


----------



## KedarWolf

ChrisAyyy3 said:


> So it’s dropping back to 0 MHz on stable OCCT version. But my LLC VR VOUT is holding steady. I’m guessing there’s a bug in the effective clock reporting.


Might be a buggy sensor, yeah.


----------



## Akoshnai

KedarWolf said:


> Do a custom search with my username KedarWolf and sort by date or scroll back some for the correct command, I'm on my phone going home from work right now and hard to get it for you.


I tried but theres too many posts hahaha, if u can get it i would really appreciate it, in the meanwhile i reverted to F9 and it seems to be way more stable than F10H at least for me :S 

I also had "ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE" power plan active, and currently using High Performance, does the power plan affect the OC stability by any chance?


----------



## KedarWolf

Akoshnai said:


> I tried but theres too many posts hahaha, if u can get it i would really appreciate it, in the meanwhile i reverted to F9 and it seems to be way more stable than F10H at least for me :S
> 
> I also had "ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE" power plan active, and currently using High Performance, does the power plan affect the OC stability by any chance?


It's literally on this page a few posts back. 









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


So I've upgraded from an Aorus Pro to an Aorus Master. Using same OC settings: 5.2GHz core, 4.8 ring, 1.35V. Stable in my OCCT testing. However during RAM stress tests, it drops from 5.2 GHz to 5 despite no AVX offset and disabling power limits. I'm on a 720mm custom loop and testing that...




www.overclock.net


----------



## [email protected]

Акошнай said:


> 2490135[/ATTACH]3) открываете rufus , FreeDOS , нажимаете start . 4) вы открываете флешку и передаете два файла . 5) Вы закрываете все программы, перезагружаете компьютер, нажав Delete вы входите в bios . 6) Сделайте BIOS по умолчанию. F10 для сохранения и перезагрузки. Когда он перезагрузится, нажмите F12 и загрузитесь с USB , когда он загрузится в DOS, введите Efiflash 1.F10 /c /x


----------



## mrgnex

I can't seem to clock higher than 5.1 GHz? I disabled all power saving features and set the core clock to 52 but I'm still stuck at 5.1.. I am using offset voltage but even that shouldn't be a problem. What am I doing wrong?
Edit: Static voltage doesn't do the trick either.
Edit 2: Using individual core boost and setting them all to 52 worked.


----------



## Ajdaho pl

Colleagues, I know that this is a topic about z390 and I have a z490 master, but maybe it is similar on a newer chip, I have corsair venegance lpx kit (4000cl16), they work on such clocks



, but previously on the msi mobo (z390 gaming edge ac ) it set rtl to 67 and here it collapses 83 and I can not change it , any attempt to change it results in a bios reset, in addition, on this mobo I have a worse latency result - on z390 I had 34.9 now 40.4 any advice?


----------



## The Pook

anyone try to RMA a board with a modded BIOS on it? 

board won't POST if there is anything in the first two DIMM slots and I already tore down the system before I remembered the BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

The Pook said:


> anyone try to RMA a board with a modded BIOS on it?
> 
> board won't POST if there is anything in the first two DIMM slots and I already tore down the system before I remembered the BIOS.


You should be able to flash the stock BIOS with the BIOS Flashback option. You rename the BIOS, I don't remember to what, put in the BIOS Flashback USB port, press button, flashes for five minutes or so, done!

The USB needs to be MBR FAT32, you can make that with the free RUFUS app.

Google is your friend.

Edit: Just attach a power supply 24 pin and 4 pin to motherboard, it'll flash, no CPU, nada.


----------



## The Pook

sure, if the board _had_ BIOS Flashback.


----------



## KedarWolf

The Pook said:


> sure, if the board _had_ BIOS Flashback.


Should be fine RMAing it with a modded BIOS. Doubt they would check things like the microcode revisions etc. I really doubt it would be a problem.


----------



## Giaanc

@KedarWolf Is there a way to deactivate HPET in the bios? I can't find that option, I'm on the last modded version of z390 aorus elite F10h


----------



## valkyrie743

have 2 SK hynix Gold P31 1TB drives in Raid 0 and getting slows sleeps 



http://imgur.com/fxPjoPX


im getting the same speeds as one of these drive alone. is this a limitation with the z390 master that i have or the z390 chipset? figured i would be hitting 5gb read and writes


----------



## jiffysound

Hey guys what is this _modded bios_ i keep hearing about, where would I get it, I have the Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI 1.0 M/B, would that be a candidate for this modded bios?


----------



## Legetzu

Does this board have an issue with CPU EIST setting in BIOS not working correctly?

I've got Z490 Vision D board by Gigabyte and if I disable CPU EIST in bios, it's still on if I look it in HWINFO. And the issues with that is that it starts to throttle the efficient clocks down after running ~10 minutes full load and they don't go back up. And that affected benchmarks a lot.

After I installed ThrottleStop and disabled SpeedStep from there, the efficient clocks in HWINFO don't drop at all in full load.

Here's photo when I've got CPU EIST disabled in BIOS but it still shows in HWINFO that it's on.









Here's photo when I've disabled EIST in bios and disabled SpeedStep in ThrottleStop










I was talking with guy who had Z390 master board and he had this same issue that I have. So I'd like to know if this is an universal issue with Gigabyte Z390 and Z490 boards/BIOS.


----------



## jiffysound

Legetzu said:


> Does this board have an issue with CPU EIST setting in BIOS not working correctly?
> 
> I've got Z490 Vision D board by Gigabyte and if I disable CPU EIST in bios, it's still on if I look it in HWINFO. And the issues with that is that it starts to throttle the efficient clocks down after running ~10 minutes full load and they don't go back up. And that affected benchmarks a lot.
> 
> After I installed ThrottleStop and disabled SpeedStep from there, the efficient clocks in HWINFO don't drop at all in full load.
> 
> Here's photo when I've got CPU EIST disabled in BIOS but it still shows in HWINFO that it's on.
> View attachment 2512891
> 
> 
> Here's photo when I've disabled EIST in bios and disabled SpeedStep in ThrottleStop
> View attachment 2512892
> 
> 
> 
> I was talking with guy who had Z390 master board and he had this same issue that I have. So I'd like to know if this is an universal issue with Gigabyte Z390 and Z490 boards/BIOS.


I too suffer from EIST being on even though I turned it off in bios, I too had to use throttlestop to turn it off.


----------



## Legetzu

jiffysound said:


> I too suffer from EIST being on even though I turned it off in bios, I too had to use throttlestop to turn it off.


Seems like this is universal problem then with z390 and z490 boards made by gigabyte. I'd think it would not be that hard for gigabyte to fix this issue.


----------



## jiffysound

Legetzu said:


> Seems like this is universal problem then with z390 and z490 boards made by gigabyte. I'd think it would not be that hard for gigabyte to fix this issue.


Hey Legetzu I noticed in HWInfo under memory it says you have 1200 Mhz but your XMP states 1600, is there a reason why you're running your ram lower frequency than possible ? And your timing is 17-17-17-39-56 but your XMP is 16-18-18-36-74.


----------



## Legetzu

jiffysound said:


> Hey Legetzu I noticed in HWInfo under memory it says you have 1200 Mhz but your XMP states 1600, is there a reason why you're running your ram lower frequency than possible ? And your timing is 17-17-17-39-56 but your XMP is 16-18-18-36-74.


When I took that screenshot I had just reset my BIOS settings. I'm running the ram 3733mhz CL18 at the moment.


----------



## jiffysound

Podeki71 said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> I've been lurking for a while, and hoping to get some feedback on my memory issue.
> 
> My board is an Aorus Pro WiFi, i9-9900K running stock bios F12k.
> 
> I just picked up some new RAM, Kingston HyperX 2x8 16GB sticks (HX436C17FB3AK2/16), which with XMP profile 1 should be good for 3600MHZ at 17,21,21,39 and voltage 1.35.
> 
> I boot fine, no issues, and yet Task Manager indicates 3600mhz but HWmonitor, CPU-Z and HWinfo64 all indicate 3200mhz. I've tried setting the timings and speed manually, changing the VCCIO / V SA to 1.2v, Dram Voltage to 1.37. Nothing seems to work, I'm stuck at 3200mhz even though task manager indicates 3600.
> 
> I tried changing the timings to 16,16,16,38 and had a boot failure. Not sure what else to do to get these sticks to run properly.
> 
> Anyone else have this mem kit / mobo combo and can provide some advice? Thanks!


I have the same exact system Aorus pro wifi F12k, i9 9900k running @ 5ghz and I bought 4 F4-3600C17Q-64GTZRG DIMMs and I can't get them to run @ 3600mhz, I can get them to run @ 3333mhz, something is fishy with the mobo. We should tell Gigabyte Aorus about this issue as it really messes with the frequency of ram.


----------



## Smokediggity

Legetzu said:


> Does this board have an issue with CPU EIST setting in BIOS not working correctly?
> 
> I've got Z490 Vision D board by Gigabyte and if I disable CPU EIST in bios, it's still on if I look it in HWINFO. And the issues with that is that it starts to throttle the efficient clocks down after running ~10 minutes full load and they don't go back up. And that affected benchmarks a lot.
> 
> After I installed ThrottleStop and disabled SpeedStep from there, the efficient clocks in HWINFO don't drop at all in full load.
> 
> Here's photo when I've got CPU EIST disabled in BIOS but it still shows in HWINFO that it's on.
> View attachment 2512891
> 
> 
> Here's photo when I've disabled EIST in bios and disabled SpeedStep in ThrottleStop
> View attachment 2512892
> 
> 
> 
> I was talking with guy who had Z390 master board and he had this same issue that I have. So I'd like to know if this is an universal issue with Gigabyte Z390 and Z490 boards/BIOS.


Same problem here. Clocks drop permanently after roughly 10 minutes and have to use throttle stop to get them unstuck.


----------



## Legetzu

Smokediggity said:


> Same problem here. Clocks drop permanently after roughly 10 minutes and have to use throttle stop to get them unstuck.


Yeah. Everyone should inform Gigabyte as much you can about this issue so they would fix this. I was thinking to informing about this to Gamers Nexus, but I don't know if he cares about this. If he cared about this issue, he could make an video about this and then gigabyte would have to make an update to fix this issue because it would get so much negative attention.


----------



## zayd

Are you guys running overclocked CPU's or just default settings in bios. Stock settings will cause your CPU to speedstep up and down as your load fluctuates. I have the Z390 Aorus Ultra and run a 5ghz overclock, with all power and energy saving features switched off. My chip stays at a rock solid 5ghz. Even if you don't run any overclock, I would lock your speed at the default 4.7 ghz and do various other tweaks in the bios, as the stock default settings can be improved upon. One such example is the default VCCIO and VCCSA stock voltages are way too high than your system needs.


----------



## Legetzu

zayd said:


> Are you guys running overclocked CPU's or just default settings in bios. Stock settings will cause your CPU to speedstep up and down as your load fluctuates. I have the Z390 Aorus Ultra and run a 5ghz overclock, with all power and energy saving features switched off. My chip stays at a rock solid 5ghz. Even if you don't run any overclock, I would lock your speed at the default 4.7 ghz and do various other tweaks in the bios, as the stock default settings can be improved upon. One such example is the default VCCIO and VCCSA stock voltages are way too high than your system needs.


Are you sure that you've looked the "Effective Clocks" in HWINFO?


----------



## AndrejB

With all "power saving" options disabled, including CPU EIST Function, EIST is still active and effective clocks are all over...

Fun...


----------



## unclewebb

Legetzu said:


> Does this board have an issue with CPU EIST setting in BIOS not working correctly?


Some Asus boards do the same thing. The SpeedStep option in the BIOS is what I call a dummy option on some motherboards because it does not actually do anything. Whether SpeedStep is set to enabled or disabled in the BIOS, if you check the CPU SpeedStep register after booting up, you will see that SpeedStep is always enabled. This has been an issue for years. Most users do not check the EIST flag in HWiNFO. Everyone just assumes that if you disable something in the BIOS that it actually works. 

Your screenshot shows SST in green in both HWiNFO and in ThrottleStop which means Speed Shift Technology is enabled, likely by the BIOS. This is the way to control the CPU speed of 6th Gen and newer Intel CPUs. When Speed Shift is enabled, I do not think having SpeedStep enabled or disabled makes any difference. The register that used to control the CPU speed is no longer used when Speed Shift Technology is enabled. In this situation, the Speed Shift EPP variable is what controls the CPU speed when lightly loaded. 

If Speed Shift is enabled, ThrottleStop will report the EPP value the CPU is using in the FIVR monitoring table. An EPP setting of 0 is for maximum CPU speed regardless of load. If you are using the Windows High Performance power plan, Windows should be setting EPP to 0 automatically. When using the Balanced power plan, Windows will usually set EPP to 84. This is what allows the CPU speed to wander and decrease when the CPU is idle or lightly loaded.


----------



## EarlZ

valkyrie743 said:


> have 2 SK hynix Gold P31 1TB drives in Raid 0 and getting slows sleeps
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/fxPjoPX
> 
> 
> im getting the same speeds as one of these drive alone. is this a limitation with the z390 master that i have or the z390 chipset? figured i would be hitting 5gb read and writes


Not sure about the RAID0 speeds but your 4k random read write for Q1T1 is quite low or is that normal for those drives? As I have that issue with mine, reviews and booting in safemode runs it 63-66mb/s but normal boot or even a fresh OS install only allows me to get 40mb/s


----------



## Dibbler

never mind


----------



## SineMatiks1

@KedarWolf 

Hey man, idk why but I just can't flash your newest F.11o mod. I tried using different efiflash versions but in the end, there's always an error "Bios Loading Failed".


----------



## raad11

I've got the Z390 Aorus Master with BIOS F10b. Should I update to the newer F11n?

I've got a 9900K at 5.1GHz all-core, with 4.7GHz uncore. LLC High, 1.365v Vcore. Barely stable (for desktop use and gaming, it mostly runs fine). Memory is at 4000 16-17-17-36-2T (can do 4100 16-18-18-36-2T, but I didn't think that was faster). 

Will F11n improve stability? Will it allow me to increase my CPU/RAM overclocks?

I'm in no rush for Resizable BAR because the games I play do not support it yet. I'm worried the microcode update will slow it down (I have Spectre/Meltdown stuff turned off in Windows registry as well).

Another thing I just found out online, to set switching frequency to 300KHz. Both CPU Vcore and VAXG PWM are on 'Auto' right now, and default (right column) says 400. Will this improve stability?

I also don't want to repeat the many days, even weeks, of RAM timing tuning if the BIOS completely upends everything. Unless it's a sure bet that it will wind up in a better spot.


----------



## raad11

unclewebb said:


> Some Asus boards do the same thing. The SpeedStep option in the BIOS is what I call a dummy option on some motherboards because it does not actually do anything. Whether SpeedStep is set to enabled or disabled in the BIOS, if you check the CPU SpeedStep register after booting up, you will see that SpeedStep is always enabled. This has been an issue for years. Most users do not check the EIST flag in HWiNFO. Everyone just assumes that if you disable something in the BIOS that it actually works.
> 
> Your screenshot shows SST in green in both HWiNFO and in ThrottleStop which means Speed Shift Technology is enabled, likely by the BIOS. This is the way to control the CPU speed of 6th Gen and newer Intel CPUs. When Speed Shift is enabled, I do not think having SpeedStep enabled or disabled makes any difference. The register that used to control the CPU speed is no longer used when Speed Shift Technology is enabled. In this situation, the Speed Shift EPP variable is what controls the CPU speed when lightly loaded.
> 
> If Speed Shift is enabled, ThrottleStop will report the EPP value the CPU is using in the FIVR monitoring table. An EPP setting of 0 is for maximum CPU speed regardless of load. If you are using the Windows High Performance power plan, Windows should be setting EPP to 0 automatically. When using the Balanced power plan, Windows will usually set EPP to 84. This is what allows the CPU speed to wander and decrease when the CPU is idle or lightly loaded.


That's what I thought should happen. Setting Windows power plan to High Performance should allow the CPU to stay at its maximum power as per BIOS settings. EIST does nothing because "Speed Shift" overrides it? Am I understanding it correctly?


----------



## eliau81

my MB Z390 master F11n BIOs with 9700K refuse to OC even to 4.9hz no matter whaiti do
spent lot ot time trying adjust voltage, tweaking, youtube guides and stiil refuse.
it was stable for a while but recently got immediately crash.
also with easy tune gigabyte app the standard 4.9hz oc immediately crash
any thoughts?


----------



## Coldblackice

eliau81 said:


> my MB Z390 master F11n BIOs with 9700K refuse to OC even to 4.9hz no matter whaiti do
> spent lot ot time trying adjust voltage, tweaking, youtube guides and stiil refuse.
> it was stable for a while but recently got immediately crash.
> also with easy tune gigabyte app the standard 4.9hz oc immediately crash
> any thoughts?


@eliau81 What are all your BIOS settings/voltages? What LLC? Hard to say without knowing those.

I have a 9900K on F11o (@KedarWolf mod) and have also suddenly started getting crashes/freezes, no longer stable. I've had Windows 10 Update blocked from running (using Sledgehammer) for a while, so this isn't a recent Windows update that's causing it. I've been running 1.375v / Medium LLC @ 5Ghz ...could that have caused degradation? I have a Noctua cooler and temps rarely go above 60/70's.

Also @KedarWolf, you posted a followup F11o mod where you mention you tweaked/changed something in order to fix the integrated GPU or something. Somebody asked what was changed but I couldn't find any followup. Can I ask what was changed in that version? Would it be best to use that one over the original F11o, or does it sacrifice something for the fix?


----------



## KedarWolf

Coldblackice said:


> @eliau81 What are all your BIOS settings/voltages? What LLC? Hard to say without knowing those.
> 
> I have a 9900K on F11o (@KedarWolf mod) and have also suddenly started getting crashes/freezes, no long stable. I've blocked Windows 10 Update from running, so it's not a recent Windows update that's causing this. I have been running on 1.375v / Medium LLC @ 5Ghz ...could that have caused degradation? I'm on a Noctua cooler and temps rarely go above 60/70's.
> 
> Also @KedarWolf, you posted a followup F11o mod where you mention tweaking something to fix the integrated GPU or something. Somebody asked what was changed but I couldn't find any followup. Can I ask what was changed in this second F11o mod? Would it be best to use that one over the original F11o, or does it sacrifice something for the fix?


Second mod is better but just integrated GPU fixed is all.


----------



## Coldblackice

KedarWolf said:


> Second mod is better but just integrated GPU fixed is all.


Awesome, thanks, I'll re-flash that one. What in particular was fixed? My understanding was that the iGPU was able to work already with the original F11o?

Not disputing, I'm just merely curious, that's all.


----------



## KedarWolf

Coldblackice said:


> Awesome, thanks, I'll re-flash that one. What in particular was fixed? My understanding was that the iGPU was able to work already with the original F11o?
> 
> Not disputing, I'm just merely curious, that's all.


No, integrated GPU was messed up on the original. Do a custom search with my Username and get the very newest one I posted. It has the newest integrated GPU firmware and a fixed working version.


----------



## paxton676

KedarWolf

I have Z390 Aorus Master with 9900KS. I flashed the F10b Modded back on Nov 2019.
Microcode is listed as BE in hwinfo.

The main thing I noticed was that very fast memory timings are stable.
I got 3200 OC memory with 13 13 13 28 1T timings with 1.404V
Default timings for this memory are 14 14 14 48 2T with 1.35V

The latest prime95 with smallfft test, AVX enabled etc.. stable for days with my faster timings. 

I read that the latest modded F11o is faster than latest modded F11 that you have posted.
I am wondering if the F11o modded is faster than the F10b modded?

Any reason for me to upgrade for speed or OC purposes?
Any other reason?

Sorry if these questions are noob.


----------



## KedarWolf

paxton676 said:


> KedarWolf
> 
> I have Z390 Aorus Master with 9900KS. I flashed the F10b Modded back on Nov 2019.
> Microcode is listed as BE in hwinfo.
> 
> The main thing I noticed was that very fast memory timings are stable.
> I got 3200 OC memory with 13 13 13 28 1T timings with 1.404V
> Default timings for this memory are 14 14 14 48 2T with 1.35V
> 
> The latest prime95 with smallfft test, AVX enabled etc.. stable for days with my faster timings.
> 
> I read that the latest modded F11o is faster than latest modded F11 that you have posted.
> I am wondering if the F11o modded is faster than the F10b modded?
> 
> Any reason for me to upgrade for speed or OC purposes?
> Any other reason?
> 
> Sorry if these questions are noob.


They have the same microcodes, but that being said, the newest BIOS MIGHT enhance performance as it likely has some tweaks and fixes the old BIOS doesn't.

But that would need to be tested o be sure.


----------



## KedarWolf

SineMatiks1 said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Hey man, idk why but I just can't flash your newest F.11o mod. I tried using different efiflash versions but in the end, there's always an error "Bios Loading Failed".


Custom search my Username and find the proper flashing instructions from later posts. the one's that include the /C switch in the flashing command.

If that doesn't work, find an older post with the all checks bypassed modded efiflash.

But warning, that'll even flash a wrong board's BIOS to your board and thus could brick it.

Make SURE you are flashing the right board's BIOS. :/


----------



## ataribravo

Something's not right but I can't figure out what...

I have an Aorus Ultra with a 1TB Samsung 970 EVO+ in M2A (boot drive), and a 2TB Samsung 860 QVO in M2M. I'm only using the Intel CPU graphics (no cards installed) and a USB 3.1 data drive. And I just flashed to F10h

Easy Mode shows SATA = P0: Samsung SSD 86 (2000.3TB), PCIE = none and M.2 = none. Then under NVME Config it says No Device Found

Advanced Mode->System Info-> Plugin Devices shows all PCIE and M.2 as N/A

Device Manager shows all drives but they are all using the MS default 2/21/06 drivers. Tried installing Samsung driver but say not compatible device found.

However, they are working as I can boot Windows up and AS SSD Benchmark shows the EVO+ with a score of 5659. What gives? I need an education  Thanks!!


----------



## Smokediggity

ataribravo said:


> Something's not right but I can't figure out what...
> 
> I have an Aorus Ultra with a 1TB Samsung 970 EVO+ in M2A (boot drive), and a 2TB Samsung 860 QVO in M2M. I'm only using the Intel CPU graphics (no cards installed) and a USB 3.1 data drive. And I just flashed to F10h
> 
> Easy Mode shows SATA = P0: Samsung SSD 86 (2000.3TB), PCIE = none and M.2 = none. Then under NVME Config it says No Device Found
> 
> Advanced Mode->System Info-> Plugin Devices shows all PCIE and M.2 as N/A
> 
> Device Manager shows all drives but they are all using the MS default 2/21/06 drivers. Tried installing Samsung driver but say not compatible device found.
> 
> However, they are working as I can boot Windows up and AS SSD Benchmark shows the EVO+ with a score of 5659. What gives? I need an education  Thanks!!


The Intel SATA controller has hijacked your NVME SSD. You will need to tell it to not take control of your NVME drive in the BIOS by setting "RST Control PCIe Storage Devices" to "Manual" and setting "PCIe Storage Dev On Port xx" to "Not RST Controlled".


----------



## paxton676

KedarWolf

Thank you so much for your reply to my question of F11o vs F10b modded bios.
I was hesitant to pull the trigger and upgrade to latest without your input.

I took picture of all my F10b settings and copied them to the F11o.
Verified in hwinfo microcode is still BE.

I ran 3DMark timespy and numbers for GPU and CPU score are same , maybe a bit better 
So no reduction in performance updating to latest modded 

Still need to stress test but if that holds up this was a good upgrade. thanks 
So far about 1hr of prime95 smalfft and still stable.

FYI, running the F11n official latest bios my numbers in 3DMARK were much lower, especially the CPU score. That's an old test I did some time ago and went back to the F10b modded.
***The point being that the modded bios with faster microcode is verified better performance.
Thanks again KedarWolf, you rock!

*If you missing the hand icon to select this HWINFO image than reload webpage works for me in Google Chrome. This lets you zoom in on image.









You can see BE, F11o, 9900KS, RTX 3070 TI, better memory timings, and my name is Brian.

Lastly, I got the 3070 TI on newegg shuffle at retail price $599. Only had it about 4 days now.
A 3080 for retail $699 is the better deal but I took what I could get.
3080 is 20% FPS increase to 3070 TI. In my opinion, totally worth $100 for 20%.


----------



## ataribravo

Smokediggity said:


> The Intel SATA controller has hijacked your NVME SSD. You will need to tell it to not take control of your NVME drive in the BIOS by setting "RST Control PCIe Storage Devices" to "Manual" and setting "PCIe Storage Dev On Port xx" to "Not RST Controlled".


Thank you for your time! Is there someplace to get detail info on all of the BIOS settings?

I did try your suggestion, but the PC would not boot after "Not RST Controlled" stating inaccessible boot drive.

I did also find that the 970 EVO+ is connected to M2M, not M2A as I previously thought. Can this make a difference?


----------



## Smokediggity

ataribravo said:


> Thank you for your time! Is there someplace to get detail info on all of the BIOS settings?
> 
> I did try your suggestion, but the PC would not boot after "Not RST Controlled" stating inaccessible boot drive.
> 
> I did also find that the 970 EVO+ is connected to M2M, not M2A as I previously thought. Can this make a difference?
> 
> View attachment 2515710


After changing the BIOS settings, you will need to boot into Windows safemode so that windows can detect the change.

1. Boot into Windows normally
2. Do a Windows search for "Change advanced startup options"
3. Click Restart Now
4. Then on the following screen go to Troubleshoot > Advanced Options > Startup Settings
5. Click Restart
6. Change the settings in BIOS
7. Upon booting Select option 4, Enable Safe Mode.
8. Once you are at your desktop, wait a minute for Windows to recognize the change, then you can reboot normally and it should work.


----------



## ataribravo

Smokediggity said:


> After changing the BIOS settings, you will need to boot into Windows safemode so that windows can detect the change.
> 
> 1. Boot into Windows normally
> 2. Do a Windows search for "Change advanced startup options"
> 3. Click Restart Now
> 4. Then on the following screen go to Troubleshoot > Advanced Options > Startup Settings
> 5. Click Restart
> 6. Change the settings in BIOS
> 7. Upon booting Select option 4, Enable Safe Mode.
> 8. Once you are at your desktop, wait a minute for Windows to recognize the change, then you can reboot normally and it should work.


YES, that worked! I attached an image showing before and after AS SSD benchmark results. An improvement, yes, but not much. Should I have expected more going from SATA to PCIe? Do you have any other bits of wisdom to look for? I'm just underwhelmed at the performance since I researched and put so hefty coin into this build (2 years ago). I am only using the Intel CPU graphics. Do you think a dedicated graphics card would help? I don't game but do dabble in Photoshop. Thanks so much!!


----------



## ataribravo

ataribravo said:


> YES, that worked! I attached an image showing before and after AS SSD benchmark results. An improvement, yes, but not much. Should I have expected more going from SATA to PCIe? Do you have any other bits of wisdom to look for? I'm just underwhelmed at the performance since I researched and put so hefty coin into this build (2 years ago). I am only using the Intel CPU graphics. Do you think a dedicated graphics card would help? I don't game but do dabble in Photoshop. Thanks so much!!


Here's a screenshot of the system info provided by CPUID. Decent 2 year old system?


----------



## Smokediggity

ataribravo said:


> YES, that worked! I attached an image showing before and after AS SSD benchmark results. An improvement, yes, but not much. Should I have expected more going from SATA to PCIe? Do you have any other bits of wisdom to look for? I'm just underwhelmed at the performance since I researched and put so hefty coin into this build (2 years ago). I am only using the Intel CPU graphics. Do you think a dedicated graphics card would help? I don't game but do dabble in Photoshop. Thanks so much!!


Glad that worked out for you. I'm getting roughly the same numbers as you in AS SSD for a 1 TB 870 EVO, so I would have to guess that those numbers are about what you should expect. 

If you are looking for more performance you could try overclocking or using one of the modded BIOS from @KedarWolf, which contain a faster, but older/less secure CPU microcode. I don't use the integrated GPU or photoshop, so I couldn't really say what kind of performance gain you might see from changing to a dedicated GPU, though I would guess that it would be faster.

For future reference installing/updating the Intel RST drivers will re-hijack your nvme ssd, so you will have to undo it again if you update the drivers.


----------



## h107474

Hi guys. I have a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro (latest official Bios F12L set to defaults except for XMP memory) also and a Gigabyte RTX 3080 Eagle OC with Intel i7 9700K (not overclocked). I have been posting in a thread (below) where a number of Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro owners noted poor TimeSpy scores and tracked it down to the Balanced power plan causing the issue.

[SOLVED] MSI RTX 3080 low-ish Time Spy score in comparison to others?

I found the above thread after pulling my hair out over some serious frame rate dips in World War Z. I discovered changing to High Performance Power Plan fixed it. None of my friends could replicate it either and they all leave their PC in the Balanced plan. Then I found the Overclockers thread above and saw others with the same issue. The original poster (see his edits on Page 1) found that either using the High Perf power plan or disabling Speed Shift in the bios fixed it too and I noted some of you saying disabling this in the Bios makes no difference. Clearly it did for him. I just moved to the High Perf plan to fix this issue but I would really like to find a proper fix.

I noticed the issue first when I was running World War Z in 1440p Ultra with average FPS around 130 FPS but the 99% values were sub 50 FPS at times creating real jerky stuttering (FYI you have to use the Nvidia performance overlay as the in game benchmark just doesn’t report these low FPS numbers for some reason). See the image linked below with the comparison of Balanced vs High Performance in the World War Z benchmark. The green numbers are the Nvidia performance overlay which picks up the drops and the white ones are the in-game benchmark which doesn’t. The final figures from the benchmark in the balanced run are all lower but it never shows those low <60 FPS numbers. The GPU usage is lower too in the Balanced run suggesting the CPU is dragging the numbers down by starving the GPU.











I have run Time Spy and got some interesting results. See the screen grabs of the results screen below but as expected the score in balanced power plan is down on the score with the high-performance power plan, same as most of the people in the OC thread. What is more interesting is the graph below the scores showing CPU clock. The balanced power plan is constantly trying to down-clock the CPU while High Perf keeps it at max clock, which is what we have suspected all along relating to disabling Intel Speed Shift to fix the balanced plan. Its blatant proof that the balanced power plan and likely our Gigabyte Auros Z390 Pro has a major bug we absolutely need Gigabyte or Microsoft to acknowledge.


















So here is another image of two screen grabs showing the Nvidia performance monitor overlay. I would highly recommend everyone use this monitor in your games to see if this issue exists in them. The big red flag is the 99% FPS number utterly tanks in balanced mode. So, the ~12% drop in reported Time Spy scores does not paint the full picture. This 70% drop in minimum frame rate is the culprit for the lowered scores, not just a general reduction in performance. It’s a fundamental killing of the 99% FPS due to the CPU being throttled like crazy leading to stutter which is much worse in games than just a lowering of average FPS.











Can any of you Z390 Aorus experts help?


----------



## bass junkie xl

pro wi fi here ya lower cpu usage when using auto vcore or adpative vcore along side balanced power profile the cpu drops clocks when not being used much its done this for me even on other mobos. 

i use a vast anti virus , i use a static vcore with speed shift , avast sets games .exes to auto high power plan when in game then back to balanced down clocking whennot gaming i aadd all the games or apps .exes its callled do not disturb mode if u dont use avast u would manualy have to use hgih perf while gaming . 

fall out 3 ,4 ,5 on balanced use no cpu had this issue to years ago on balanced profile with ( adpative vcore not static )


----------



## R1-fast

Hey @KedarWolf / all

IIRC from earlier in the thread, these 2 KBs interfere with the modded F11o microcode (KB4589292, KB4589198).  

I'm on Win10 20H2 and uninstalled both KBs. I was prompted yesterday to update to Windows 21H1. I would assume this update has both of these KBs bundled... and if installed neither could be removed as they would be integrated e.g. no longer standalone.

Does anyone know either way?


----------



## Coldblackice

R1-fast said:


> Hey @KedarWolf / all
> 
> IIRC from earlier in the thread, these 2 KBs interfere with the modded F11o microcode (KB4589292, KB4589198).
> 
> I'm on Win10 20H2 and uninstalled both KBs. I was prompted yesterday to update to Windows 21H1. I would assume this update has both of these KBs bundled... and if installed neither could be removed as they would be integrated e.g. no longer standalone.
> 
> Does anyone know either way?


Ahhhh I wonder if that's what causing all the issues I'm suddenly having. I've been having odd behavior such as sporadic sluggishness, system hanging when iGPU is processed on (though not every time, and it un-hangs after 5-7 seconds), possibly sluggishness with USB devices, and most peculiar of all -- @KedarWolf F11o 2nd mod BIOS ...suddenly the RGB settings are gone from the BIOS. I've done a reset CMOS and reflash (clearing DMI: "Efiflash F11o.1 /C /X" to no avail). 

I had inadvertently installed one of those KB's, not realizing that it was yet another sneaky Windows Update bypass workaround (so tired of Microsoft's garbage).

Any ideas what's going on here?


----------



## KedarWolf

Coldblackice said:


> Ahhhh I wonder if that's what causing all the issues I'm suddenly having. I've been having odd behavior such as sporadic sluggishness, system hanging when iGPU is processed on (though not every time, and it un-hangs after 5-7 seconds), possibly sluggishness with USB devices, and most peculiar of all -- @KedarWolf F11o 2nd mod BIOS ...suddenly the RGB settings are gone from the BIOS. I've done a reset CMOS and reflash (clearing DMI: "Efiflash F11o.1 /C /X" to no avail).
> 
> I had inadvertently installed one of those KB's, not realizing that it was yet another sneaky Windows Update bypass workaround (so tired of Microsoft's garbage).
> 
> Any ideas what's going on here?


The latest F11o BIOS is NOT the RGB one.

If someone links me the F11o RBG version, I can mod that one.


----------



## KedarWolf

(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread) RBG Modded, integrated video working I think.


----------



## Coldblackice

KedarWolf said:


> The latest F11o BIOS is NOT the RGB one.
> 
> If someone links me the F11o RBG version, I can mod that one.


Ahh gotcha, okay thanks for the info.



KedarWolf said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread) RBG Modded, integrated video working I think.


Thank you. So is this the same as the other mod? What was the difference, adding an updated iGPU OROM or something?


----------



## Lurifaks

solved


----------



## eliau81

Coldblackice said:


> @eliau81 What are all your BIOS settings/voltages? What LLC? Hard to say without knowing those.
> 
> I have a 9900K on F11o (@KedarWolf mod) and have also suddenly started getting crashes/freezes, no longer stable. I've had Windows 10 Update blocked from running (using Sledgehammer) for a while, so this isn't a recent Windows update that's causing it. I've been running 1.375v / Medium LLC @ 5Ghz ...could that have caused degradation? I have a Noctua cooler and temps rarely go above 60/70's.
> 
> Also @KedarWolf, you posted a followup F11o mod where you mention you tweaked/changed something in order to fix the integrated GPU or something. Somebody asked what was changed but I couldn't find any followup. Can I ask what was changed in that version? Would it be best to use that one over the original F11o, or does it sacrifice something for the fix?


solved that with simple CMOS
probably some old setting was the problem


----------



## jiffysound

I have a problem with my ram going to their rated 3600MHz. The model of the ram is G Skill F4-3600C17Q-64GTZRG, it's a kit of 4 DIMMs. My motherboard is Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI. I can get them to their highest which is 3466MHz. When I try to set them to 3600 in bios, the bios resets itself and I have to customize it again, The bios is F12K. I've been told that 4 sticks together can have issues running their rated frequency but never thought it would happen to me. Any ideas guys ?


----------



## Skunk0001

R1-fast said:


> Hey @KedarWolf / all
> 
> IIRC from earlier in the thread, these 2 KBs interfere with the modded F11o microcode (KB4589292, KB4589198).
> 
> I'm on Win10 20H2 and uninstalled both KBs. I was prompted yesterday to update to Windows 21H1. I would assume this update has both of these KBs bundled... and if installed neither could be removed as they would be integrated e.g. no longer standalone.
> 
> Does anyone know either way?


You can check which microcode you are running using hwinfo summary (I believe all the modded BIOS use BE for the 9900k). If you want to stop windows from messing with your microcode, regardless of which version of windows you have, or which updates you have installed, just delete/rename this file and reboot:
C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll


----------



## Gkear

Hi, just found this thread as I was looking for info on th aorus pro z390 f12l bios update. I'm currently running the f11 version on my 9700k at 5.1. For those who have updated does it run better than the f11 bios? Also read in this thread about a modded version would I be better with that instead? 
Thanks


----------



## lpittman

Hey guys. Been awhile since I've been around. I have been browsing back a few pages trying to get caught up, but mainly wondering if this board still has issues with memory clocks over 4000mhz still? I've recently starting having some issues with Photoshop crashing and suspect it's memory related and possibly a bad stick or bad clock. As it's work related I don't really have time to spend re-clocking and trying to diagnose the issue, so was going to order more memory... but want to make sure I order the optimal stuff for this board.

The XMP profile of this memory has never worked for me - always causes BSODS.

Aorus Master.
F11n
i9-9900K
4x Team Group 4133 (XTREEM DDR4 desktop overclocking memory module)

If you were ordering new memory for this board today and money wasn't an issue, what would you order?

Cheers!


----------



## bass junkie xl

lpittman said:


> Hey guys. Been awhile since I've been around. I have been browsing back a few pages trying to get caught up, but mainly wondering if this board still has issues with memory clocks over 4000mhz still? I've recently starting having some issues with Photoshop crashing and suspect it's memory related and possibly a bad stick or bad clock. As it's work related I don't really have time to spend re-clocking and trying to diagnose the issue, so was going to order more memory... but want to make sure I order the optimal stuff for this board.
> 
> The XMP profile of this memory has never worked for me - always causes BSODS.
> 
> Aorus Master.
> F11n
> i9-9900K
> 4x Team Group 4133 (XTREEM DDR4 desktop overclocking memory module)
> 
> If you were ordering new memory for this board today and money wasn't an issue, what would you order?
> 
> Cheers!


i have that ram 8 gb x 4 stick in my gigabyte z390 pro wifi and a 5.2 ghz 9900 ks @ 4133 16-16-16-36 1.50v tuned lots of timings no issues cpu imc quality plays a roll to . im on moded 
bios F 12k with fastest micro code with re bar support


----------



## Gkear

KedarWolf said:


> Z390ProWiFi_F12kModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f12 /c /x


Hi would this modded bios work with the non WiFi z390 pro? I'm currently on stock f11 bios would I first need to update to stock f12 then flash the modded bios?


----------



## KedarWolf

Gkear said:


> Hi would this modded bios work with the non WiFi z390 pro? I'm currently on stock f11 bios would I first need to update to stock f12 then flash the modded bios?


You need the non-WiFi version. It's here somewhere in the thread. Search a custom search my username, KedarWolf.

not sure if the integrated GPU working though, if you need that, I'll make an updated one for you.

let me know.


----------



## Gkear

KedarWolf said:


> You need the non-WiFi version. It's here somewhere in the thread. Search a custom search my username, KedarWolf.
> 
> not sure if the integrated GPU working though, if you need that, I'll make an updated one for you.
> 
> let me know.


Thanks that would be great if you could update it for me would really appreciate it mines is the pro rgb if that makes a difference? and its okay for me to flash th modded f12 without first flashing the stock f12? Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Z390ProNOTWiFiFixed.zip







drive.google.com





Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.f12 /c /x

.


----------



## KedarWolf

Gkear said:


> Thanks that would be great if you could update it for me would really appreciate it mines is the pro rgb if that makes a difference? and its okay for me to flash th modded f12 without first flashing the stock f12? Thanks


Yeah, it'll flash okay, see the above post on how to flash.


----------



## Gkear

Thanks mate you're a legend will give it a go at the weekend when I have more time hopfully itl go smoothly lol.


----------



## bass junkie xl

such a great thread here ppl help others all the time 😁🤘


----------



## KedarWolf

bass junkie xl said:


> such a great thread here ppl help others all the time 😁🤘


I don't even own a Gigabyte board any more. Went to MSI B550 and a 5950x, but still support you guys from the days long ago when I ran a Z390 Master.


----------



## Gkear

Hi again, so i managed to flash the bios without any problems thanks again for that. I have now checked the codes in hwinfo summary and it says im running DE? I have searched for the windows updates thats been mentioned in the thread and I cant find them anywhere. Is DE the slower codes I take it?


----------



## KedarWolf

Gkear said:


> Hi again, so i managed to flash the bios without any problems thanks again for that. I have now checked the codes in hwinfo summary and it says im running DE? I have searched for the windows updates thats been mentioned in the thread and I cant find them anywhere. Is DE the slower codes I take it?
> View attachment 2518467


My bad, I used the original in the zip, not the modded. They were in the same folder. 

Here, fixed for sure. 






Z390ProNOTWiFiFixed.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Gkear

Brilliant mate jus refreshed and now showing BE microcodes


----------



## Baam

Yo guys what is the best Z390 Master bios for OC just went from F11L to O and i had to increase the voltage from 1.305 to 1.315 as i was experiencing some freeze when playing WoW


----------



## vimar

*@KedarWolf : 1. Any Chance to get Z390 Aorus Master F11n with HPET off ? Thanks very much. 
2. Why is my RTX 2080 Ti only connected via PCIe 3.0 4x? Has it something to do with the M2 SSDs stealing PCIe lanes?

Thanks for information.*


----------



## bass junkie xl

cant you disable hpet in device manager ? same thing


----------



## Lurifaks

vimar said:


> * 2. Why is my RTX 2080 Ti only connected via PCIe 3.0 4x? Has it something to do with the M2 SSDs stealing PCIe lanes?*


This is because your gpu is idle , powersaving.


----------



## zaniop

Hi guys, I just tested Kedar's modified bios (file : Z390MasterRGBModded, F11o GK) and it's crazy! (Thank you Kedar btw)

With stock beta bios F11n or F11o, I have small regular lags and my cursor drop when I open the notification area (when I go to the iCue icon for example)... But nothing, everything works perfecly with Kedar's modified bios!

In Call of Duty MW/Warzone , it is much smoother! No big difference in fps, it looks like less input lag

I know the microcode is not the same with both bios (BE vs DE). I found the fluidity of the F9 bios (or older)

But has anyone encountered similar issues?

PC specs : Z390 Aorus Master (actual bios F11o GK), 9900K (stock, P0 stepping), 4x8Gb G.Skill Trident Z 3200 c14, msi RTX 3070 suprim

Sorry for my broken english, tried to do my best, I'm french..


----------



## KedarWolf

zaniop said:


> Hi guys, I just tested Kedar's modified bios (file : Z390MasterRGBModded, F11o GK) and it's crazy! (Thank you Kedar btw)
> 
> With stock beta bios F11n or F11o, I have small regular lags and my cursor drop when I open the notification area (when I go to the iCue icon for example)... But nothing, everything works perfecly with Kedar's modified bios!
> 
> In Call of Duty MW/Warzone , it is much smoother! No big difference in fps, it looks like less input lag
> 
> I know the microcode is not the same with both bios (BE vs DE). I found the fluidity of the F9 bios (or older)
> 
> But has anyone encountered similar issues?
> 
> PC specs : Z390 Aorus Master (actual bios F11o GK), 9900K (stock, P0 stepping), 4x8Gb G.Skill Trident Z 3200 c14, msi RTX 3070 suprim
> 
> Sorry for my broken english, tried to do my best, I'm french..


Glad it helps!! There are other mods in it too, like the newest Ethernet firmware, RAID firmware and GOP too.


----------



## AndrejB

KedarWolf said:


> Glad it helps!! There are other mods in it too, like the newest Ethernet firmware, RAID firmware and GOP too.


Could we get a newer master 11o bios with the fast microcodes?
If you have the time and if any of the firmwares updated, of course.


----------



## KedarWolf

Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o







drive.google.com


----------



## vimar

KedarWolf said:


> Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Many thanks, what was modded? HPET off?


----------



## vimar

Lurifaks said:


> This is because your gpu is idle , powersaving.


 haha no, even with stress testing 100% workload, cpu socket 1151 seems to be damaged, gets repaired right now ( new socket for 40 euros )


----------



## vimar

bass junkie xl said:


> cant you disable hpet in device manager ? same thing


no bro, its not the same. you got HPET on hardware side and OS. atm using ISLC timer res 0,5ms stable with bcdedit -> useplatformtick yes, disabledynamictick yes.


----------



## vimar

zaniop said:


> Hi guys, I just tested Kedar's modified bios (file : Z390MasterRGBModded, F11o GK) and it's crazy! (Thank you Kedar btw)
> 
> With stock beta bios F11n or F11o, I have small regular lags and my cursor drop when I open the notification area (when I go to the iCue icon for example)... But nothing, everything works perfecly with Kedar's modified bios!
> 
> In Call of Duty MW/Warzone , it is much smoother! No big difference in fps, it looks like less input lag
> 
> I know the microcode is not the same with both bios (BE vs DE). I found the fluidity of the F9 bios (or older)
> 
> But has anyone encountered similar issues?
> 
> PC specs : Z390 Aorus Master (actual bios F11o GK), 9900K (stock, P0 stepping), 4x8Gb G.Skill Trident Z 3200 c14, msi RTX 3070 suprim
> 
> Sorry for my broken english, tried to do my best, I'm french..



I will test Kedars Bios soon. For maximal smoothness from what i know:

1. vsync off w. 240 hz monitor.
2. msi mode gpu
3. hyperthreading off , Turbo EIST ect off, AVX 0 ( Source Games use AVX ( Apex Legends, CS Go ). Check with Coretemp Logfiles. And really, from what i noticed, vcore set to bottom edge of stability causes microstutters sometimes.
4. MSI afterburner force stable clock ( open msi afterburner, CTRL+F , click on a point ( more right = more clockspeed, press L , close popup, press apply ).
5. ISLC 0,5ms + bcdedit useplatformtick yes + disabledynamictick yes
6. intel interrupt-affinity policy tool: usb hostcontroller switch from core 0 to core 2, gpu switch core 0 to 4. Doublecheck with Latencymon. And playing Games with deactivating these cores ( 2, 4 ) in taskmanager for this games.
7. Ram Disk, Dir Linker for NVCache ( Nvidia Cache linked to Ram Disk ).


so with this setup i get 300 - 250 fps in Apex Legends, 1200 - 400 fps in CS Go MM @ 9900k 5,0 ghz, MSI Z390 Tomahawk / Z390 Aorus Master, rtx 2080 ti watercooled.


----------



## timmey1890

vimar said:


> I will test Kedars Bios soon. For maximal smoothness from what i know:
> 
> 1. vsync off w. 240 hz monitor.
> 2. msi mode gpu
> 3. hyperthreading off
> 4. ISLC 0,5ms + bcdedit useplatformtick yes + disabledynamictick yes
> 5. intel interrupt-affinity policy tool: usb hostcontroller switch from core 0 to core 2, gpu switch core 0 to 4. Doublecheck with Latencymon. And playing Games with deactivating these cores ( 2, 4 ) in taskmanager for this games.
> 6. Ram Disk, Dir Linker for NVCache ( Nvidia Cache linked to Ram Disk ).
> 
> so with this setup i get 300 - 250 fps in Apex Legends, 1200 - 400 fps in CS Go MM @ 9900k 5,0 ghz, MSI Z390 Tomahawk / Z390 Aorus Master, rtx 2080 ti watercooled.


Is it this one? Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB 
Thanks!


----------



## vimar

timmey1890 said:


> Is it this one? Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> Thanks!


updated my post


----------



## zaniop

KedarWolf said:


> Glad it helps!! There are other mods in it too, like the newest Ethernet firmware, RAID firmware and GOP too.


Oh ok, very nice! 



vimar said:


> I will test Kedars Bios soon. For maximal smoothness from what i know:
> 
> 1. vsync off w. 240 hz monitor.
> 2. msi mode gpu
> 3. hyperthreading off , Turbo EIST ect off, AVX 0 ( Source Games use AVX ( Apex Legends, CS Go ). Check with Coretemp Logfiles. And really, from what i noticed, vcore set to bottom edge of stability causes microstutters sometimes.
> 4. MSI afterburner force stable clock ( open msi afterburner, CTRL+F , click on a point ( more right = more clockspeed, press L , close popup, press apply ).
> 5. ISLC 0,5ms + bcdedit useplatformtick yes + disabledynamictick yes
> 6. intel interrupt-affinity policy tool: usb hostcontroller switch from core 0 to core 2, gpu switch core 0 to 4. Doublecheck with Latencymon. And playing Games with deactivating these cores ( 2, 4 ) in taskmanager for this games.
> 7. Ram Disk, Dir Linker for NVCache ( Nvidia Cache linked to Ram Disk ).
> 
> 
> so with this setup i get 300 - 250 fps in Apex Legends, 1200 - 400 fps in CS Go MM @ 9900k 5,0 ghz, MSI Z390 Tomahawk / Z390 Aorus Master, rtx 2080 ti watercooled.


Thank you for tips! I'll try soon


----------



## TrebleTA

@KedarWolf not sure if the above is what am after, but was that master rev 1.o f11o Gk updated with all the lastest Kedarwolf magic?

Else a copy of the orginal GK bios in on my guide

Thanks again


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> @KedarWolf not sure if the above is what am after, but was that master rev 1.o f11o Gk updated with all the lastest Kedarwolf magic?
> 
> Else a copy of the orginal GK bios in on my guide
> 
> Thanks again


Yes, search my Username amd make sure you have the latest post of it, it has the GOP fix.


----------



## TrebleTA

KedarWolf said:


> Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


This one I am guessing, yet its in a unzipped format so I am missing the Efiflash tool, Also could you link what you updated please, so I can make recorded or could you show me how to read the bios or have you made a guide. did see you say something on here before but have real life problems the last 4 months so bit out of the loop.


----------



## Skunk0001

@TrebleTA you can get a copy of EfiFlash.exe from the zip file KedarWolf posted here, and he gave some instructions:








(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Hi guys. I have a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro (latest official Bios F12L set to defaults except for XMP memory) also and a Gigabyte RTX 3080 Eagle OC with Intel i7 9700K (not overclocked). I have been posting in a thread (below) where a number of Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro owners noted poor TimeSpy...




www.overclock.net


----------



## boydfields

KedarWolf said:


> Z390ProWiFi_F12kModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.f12 /c /x


*@KedarWolf

Hello,*

May I ask if the modded BIOS referenced above, for the Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi, includes the RGB Fusion option and most optimal microcodes?

Appreciate your time.

Many thanks
Boyd


----------



## mednag

@KedarWolf 
Would it be possible to get the Master stock F11m bios with the latest microcode updates?
Many thanks!


----------



## R1-fast

AndrejB said:


> Could we get a newer master 11o bios with the fast microcodes?
> If you have the time and if any of the firmwares updated, of course.





KedarWolf said:


> Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hi @KedarWolf - above is the non-RGB version correct? if so, did you ever get a chance to update the RGB version of F11o w/the fasted mcs etc? Maybe I'm just blind but below looks like the last activity (from a month ago)



KedarWolf said:


> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread) RBG Modded, integrated video working I think.


Thanks and sorry for the hassle!




Skunk0001 said:


> You can check which microcode you are running using hwinfo summary (I believe all the modded BIOS use BE for the 9900k). If you want to stop windows from messing with your microcode, regardless of which version of windows you have, or which updates you have installed, just delete/rename this file and reboot:
> C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll


@Skunk0001 thanks for the tip on the mcupdate file! Confirming I was able to remove the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll via _takeown > icalcs > del _commands using Admin cmd prompt.


----------



## siegfried9999

Hi guys, I have a silly question, and Im asking here because I can´t think of a better place to do it...

I am the owner of an Aorus Master, with all the NVME ports already occupied (3 of them), can I expand my storage with a 4x PCIe card? like this gigabyte AORUS RGB AIC NVMe SSD 512GB Galería de Imágenes | Solid State Drive (SSD) - GIGABYTE Mexico Or Im screwed and Ive already reached my limit?  Thanks in advance...


----------



## teskone

lpittman said:


> Hey guys. Been awhile since I've been around.  I have been browsing back a few pages trying to get caught up, but mainly wondering if this board still has issues with memory clocks over 4000mhz still? I've recently starting having some issues with Photoshop crashing and suspect it's memory related and possibly a bad stick or bad clock. As it's work related I don't really have time to spend re-clocking and trying to diagnose the issue, so was going to order more memory... but want to make sure I order the optimal stuff for this board.
> 
> The XMP profile of this memory has never worked for me - always causes BSODS.
> 
> Aorus Master.
> F11n
> i9-9900K
> 4x Team Group 4133 (XTREEM DDR4 desktop overclocking memory module)
> 
> If you were ordering new memory for this board today and money wasn't an issue, what would you order?
> 
> Cheers!


I have the same kit on a Z390 Master and the XMP setting is working but is not stable for 4133Mhz 18-18-18-38. I spent a little time with it but I'm more concerned about the timing when related to high clock speeds rather that the clock itself.


----------



## TG_bigboss

Hello Guys, 

Finally, figure I would actually overclock my Silicon lottery 9900K. According to their page, they ship with the CPU I should be able to do 5ghz at 1.3v 

Currently, with 5ghz AVX 3 Vcore 1.345 LLC high and Speedshift disable C States disable I can at least run AXV2 stress tests for 30mins without crashing.

I feel like I missing something. It seems high for a Scilion lottery chip or it could be that I haven't overclocked a CPU since owning a 4770K 

Underload I'm averaging about 1.3V on the Vcore and 1.284V on the VR Out temps don't go higher than 78 at its max 

I tried following this guide as well but using the updated version at the end of the page got me to where I am now. 

Using Modded Bois F11o RGB I believe


----------



## teskone

TG_bigboss said:


> Hello Guys,
> 
> Finally, figure I would actually overclock my Silicon lottery 9900K. According to their page, they ship with the CPU I should be able to do 5ghz at 1.3v
> 
> Currently, with 5ghz AVX 3 Vcore 1.345 LLC high and Speedshift disable C States disable I can at least run AXV2 stress tests for 30mins without crashing.
> 
> I feel like I missing something. It seems high for a Scilion lottery chip or it could be that I haven't overclocked a CPU since owning a 4770K
> 
> Underload I'm averaging about 1.3V on the Vcore and 1.284V on the VR Out temps don't go higher than 78 at its max
> 
> I tried following this guide as well but using the updated version at the end of the page got me to where I am now.
> 
> Using Modded Bois F11o RGB I believe


are you running it in a case? what's the ambient temp? what cpu cooler are you using?
more information are required


----------



## The Pook

siegfried9999 said:


> Hi guys, I have a silly question, and Im asking here because I can´t think of a better place to do it...
> 
> I am the owner of an Aorus Master, with all the NVME ports already occupied (3 of them), can I expand my storage with a 4x PCIe card? like this gigabyte AORUS RGB AIC NVMe SSD 512GB Galería de Imágenes | Solid State Drive (SSD) - GIGABYTE Mexico Or Im screwed and Ive already reached my limit?  Thanks in advance...


You can, but it's going to steal lanes from something. 

2nd PCIe x16 steals from the 1st PCIe slot (so you'll run your GPU at x8) and the bottom PCIe slot steals from the 3rd (IIRC) M.2 slot. The bottom slot will make your PCIe card and the 3rd (again, IIRC) run at 2x.


----------



## Skunk0001

TG_bigboss said:


> Hello Guys,
> 
> Finally, figure I would actually overclock my Silicon lottery 9900K. According to their page, they ship with the CPU I should be able to do 5ghz at 1.3v
> 
> Currently, with 5ghz AVX 3 Vcore 1.345 LLC high and Speedshift disable C States disable I can at least run AXV2 stress tests for 30mins without crashing.
> 
> I feel like I missing something. It seems high for a Scilion lottery chip or it could be that I haven't overclocked a CPU since owning a 4770K
> 
> Underload I'm averaging about 1.3V on the Vcore and 1.284V on the VR Out temps don't go higher than 78 at its max
> 
> I tried following this guide as well but using the updated version at the end of the page got me to where I am now.
> 
> Using Modded Bois F11o RGB I believe


I'd ignore whatever you see for Vcore, there are too many different things that make it irrelevant, or inaccurate. VR VOUT (under load) is all that really matters. 1.284V isn't bad. Not great, but not terrible.


----------



## Arcinde

I've disabled C-States in BIOS but I still see it active in hwinfo64 (C3, C7 residency). I've tried both the official F11n bios and also KedarWolf's modded F11o bios, the issue occurs in both, and I don't remember having the issue in older BIOS versions (could be wrong though). Has anyone else seen this?

The best I can do is to enable C-State Control and disable C3 and C7, in this case it seems to still have C1 enabled.

z390 aorus master / i9 9900kf


----------



## TrebleTA

Change windows power mode to high performance, also c1 is recommended by intel to have enable from what I read.


----------



## Arcinde

Already set to high performance. Thanks for the advice, I'll just leave it at C0/C1 and not worry about it then.


----------



## 648824

Ok so today I went back to tuning. Turns out trtp/twr 6/12 couldn't pass occt avx memory test for 4266/4300 but could do over 400% hcimetest/6400% karhu. Had to adjust trtp/twr to 8/10 as per ddr4 github guide. This is what I ended up with for 4266/4300 without using xmp. Will try max trefi later on. Temps on the sticks topped out just over 42c, regular ambient conditions. Not sure where to go from here for 4333-4400, Could I have some suggestions from the gigabyte/ram gods please? These were both done at 1.5v vdimm and 1.3v sa/io in bios.


----------



## [email protected]

4333-4400 . Для начала узнать пройдёт ли тест память на 4400 без X.M.P . Для этого процессор должен быть в стоке , первичные тайминги 16-17-17-36 , tRRD_S-4 , tRRD_L-6 , tFAW-16 , выбранное вами напряжение на памяти , sa/io - авто . Пройти тест без ошибок TM5 Universal-2 лучше anta777 . Если всё нормально то приступить к настройке таймингов и подбором напряжения на память и sa/io . Если ещё останется желание то разогнать процессор . IO-L не должен превышать 13-13-13-13 , 14-14-14-14 , 15-15-15-15 на Z390 . В итоге должно получиться


----------



## 648824

[email protected] said:


> 4333-4400 . Для начала узнать пройдёт ли тест память на 4400 без X.M.P . Для этого процессор должен быть в стоке , первичные тайминги 16-17-17-36 , tRRD_S-4 , tRRD_L-6 , tFAW-16 , выбранное вами напряжение на памяти , sa/io - авто . Пройти тест без ошибок TM5 Universal-2 лучше anta777 . Если всё нормально то приступить к настройке таймингов и подбором напряжения на память и sa/io . Если ещё останется желание то разогнать процессор . IO-L не должен превышать 13-13-13-13 , 14-14-14-14 , 15-15-15-15 на Z390 . В итоге должно получиться
> View attachment 2519722
> View attachment 2519723


Thank you for the reply. So cpu at stock all core multiplier with 44 ring and unlimited power limits. Whenever I try to use tm5 it tries to use too much ram per thread and when I try to edit the cfg file to use less ram per thread it doesn't listen. will occt memory test avx2 suffice? in regards to rtl/iol, it gives me 68/68/70/70 14/14/14/13 at 4400, is that ok?


----------



## [email protected]

68/68/70/70 14/14/14/13 нормально для gigabyte z390 . Настраивайте правильно для тестов в биосе . 94Я на повседневное не использую память выше 4000 MHz с напряжением 1.38 v. ,sa/io 1.19\1.14 v. , процессор в стоке . TM5 запускать после перезагрузки пк. с выбором конфига с проверкой в диспетчере задач с закрытыми приложениями иначе не вся память будет тестироваться .


----------



## 648824

no luck, tried 16-17-17-36, tcwl 14 and 16, trfc 320, trtp8/twr16, tfaw 16, rrd s/l 4/6 vdimm 1.5-1.55, 1.3-1.34 sa/io.


----------



## 648824

Just woke up and tried again, blue screen "attempted to write to read only memory". Does this mean bits of my ram are locked off or something?


----------



## TG_bigboss

Took a new approach on overclocking using offset voltage.So far 1.2 vcore normal with +0.050 offset, Meduim LLC, 5.2ghz 3AXV, with 47 uncore. It passed one hour both AVX2 and normal Stress test. Temps never went above 75-80 as you can see the average was 72
VR Out shows 1.32. 1.35 max

The main issue was not keeping the VCCIO and VCCSA on auto as well as using 300mhz CPU Vcore PWM as recommended

I'm pretty happy and with the voltages dropping at idle down to 0.95-1.2v. Just need to stress it more to make sure it's now stable with SpeedStep enabled and HT


----------



## TG_bigboss

teskone said:


> are you running it in a case? what's the ambient temp? what cpu cooler are you using?
> more information are required


Sorry, Custom water loop with 2 slim 360 rads. Using EK full monoblock cooler for VRM and CPU cooling. 
I guess my link to the page I used for overclocking disappeared. 








z390 Overclocking 5.2 low vcore


9900K 5.2GHz 1.28v with HT and AVX Offset - Prime95 Small FTT's stable.* *Overclocking is at your own risk, and I accept no liabillity. Although these settings shown work for my CPU, yours may vary. As with any overclocking, we will not overclock anything else but the CPU ...




docs.google.com





Used those instructions as a baseline but with some tweaks to make it work for me.


----------



## D-EJ915

GottaHaveMyClocks said:


> Just woke up and tried again, blue screen "attempted to write to read only memory". Does this mean bits of my ram are locked off or something?


No it means it is unstable.


----------



## KedarWolf

What are the microcode updates to uninstall again if we're using older microcodes in the BIOS?


----------



## KedarWolf

Can someone with the RGB Fusion BIOS post a screenshot where the RGB menu is in the BIOS?


----------



## 648824

KedarWolf said:


> What are the microcode updates to uninstall again if we're using older microcodes in the BIOS?


Have to rename or delete C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll


----------



## 648824

Made a little more progress today thanks to some suggestions from users on these forums, getting closer to 4400mhz. 50x all core, 45x ring, 100.5 bclk, 8C/8T, 1.37v vcore turbo llc, 1.5v vdimm, 1.3v sa/io. ram sticks topped out at just over 43c in regular ambient conditions in a 12x12 room with the door closed and the air vent closed.











Should I keep busclocking towards 4400 with these timings or do i change to 16-17-17-36 with tcwl 16? Have been unable to get 4400 stable with the 4400 memory strap. I've tried 133 divider and 100 divider. 133 divider trains 4400 when i select 4400, 100 divider trains 4500 when i select 4400, very odd.


----------



## 648824

whelp, blck overclock isn't stable between restarts/shutdowns. Should i have just gotten a set of actual 4400mhz dimms? I thought i'd be able to clock up my 4266 dimms to 4400mhz but that doesn't seem to be the case. Do i need to buy actual 4400mhz dimms to get 4400mhz stable? Like am i doing something wrong? I also can't seem to get any ram oc past 1.5v stable, are these dimms locked down or something? These are higher binned than my last set of dimms, they should definitely tolerate more voltage as my other set could do 1.56v rock stable.


----------



## TrebleTA

@KedarWolf

Settings-->IO Ports


----------



## Sheyster

GottaHaveMyClocks said:


> Have to rename or delete C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll


With this file renamed it will just use whatever microcode is in the current installed BIOS, correct?


----------



## AndrejB

Sheyster said:


> With this file renamed it will just use whatever microcode is in the current installed BIOS, correct?


Until you do a sfc /scannow or windows decides to recover it, yes.

I didn't search through this thread but it was mentioned which update needs to be uninstalled.

More info here: GRC | InSpectre


----------



## somisomi

Hey guys, Is there a way for me to check if my bios is modded? I don't remember if I successfully used KedarWolf's modded F9 bios or if it's stock. It just says "F9" for the bios version. 

Is there a way for me to revert back to the stock bios?

Using a Z390 Master.


----------



## ezveedub

somisomi said:


> Hey guys, Is there a way for me to check if my bios is modded? I don't remember if I successfully used KedarWolf's modded F9 bios or if it's stock. It just says "F9" for the bios version.
> 
> Is there a way for me to revert back to the stock bios?
> 
> Using a Z390 Master.


You should be able to flash normal stock bios fine IIRC. It's modded ones that need to be flashed with Efiflash.


----------



## somisomi

ezveedub said:


> You should be able to flash normal stock bios fine IIRC. It's modded ones that need to be flashed with Efiflash.


Sweet. Will give it a shot!


----------



## Lehner82

How easy is it to get 4000+ RAM working on the ultra ? I know the pro ones have issues getting past 3600. I guess 4400 only works on the master ?


----------



## bass junkie xl

Lehner82 said:


> How easy is it to get 4000+ RAM working on the ultra ? I know the pro ones have issues getting past 3600. I guess 4400 only works on the master ?


i have a pro wifi 180 $ moded f12 k bios with a 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz and 32 gb 8 gb x 4 sticks of 4133 mhz cl 16 16 16 36 stable for a year no issues . its down to imc on the cpu


----------



## teachmeluv

Hello Guys!

I was lucky affording a Z390 Aorus Pro (non WiFi) for a good price below 100 € as I don't want to spend that much money into an old platform. Anyway I would like to get as much out of it as possible. I have a 8700k and will try to push it up to 5 GHz. I just read through the thread and I saw that there are modded BIOS files existing from the member "KedarWolf". Is there one for the Aorus Pro and what benefits will I have in comparison to the last official one?


----------



## Lurifaks

bass junkie xl said:


> i have a pro wifi 180 $ moded f12 k bios with a 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz and 32 gb 8 gb x 4 sticks of 4133 mhz cl 16 16 16 36 stable for a year no issues . its down to imc on the cpu


Nice! , what vccsa and vccio dou you run ?


----------



## teachmeluv

KedarWolf said:


> My bad, I used the original in the zip, not the modded. They were in the same folder.
> 
> Here, fixed for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProNOTWiFiFixed.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hi KedarWolf,

is this file attached here for any Aorus Z390 Pro (non Wifi?) suitable? What are the benefits in comparison to the last original one F12l ? Will it provide some better Vcore results (like less Vcore needs for OC) or something else? I run the board with a 8700k (delid).

Thanks in advance!


----------



## bass junkie xl

Lurifaks said:


> Nice! , what vccsa and vccio dou you run ?


1.5v dram 1.23 vccio 1.24 vcssa


----------



## teachmeluv

Falkentyne said:


> Now run stress tests to test stable.
> AIDA 64 Stress FPU only, Prime95 29.8 build 6, small FFT or 12k-12k in-place, AVX disabled, Cinebench R20 looping. Hwinfo64 to check for CPU Cache L0 errors in sensors.
> 
> If stable, reduce bios voltage by 10mv and test again.
> Once unstable, raise bios voltage 10mv test, verify and save the profile.


Hey there,

do you recommend this test-set for testing a 8700k on a Z390 Aorus Pro which is only used for gaming? I want to overclock the CPU and my only test is Prime95 30.3 build 6 with 1344k + Cinebench R23.

Thanks in advance


----------



## steffmeisteren

Z390 Aorus Pro. Every time my PC has been off for a few hours and I turn it on, it turns off after about 15 seconds, then reboots and boots up. Is this due to RAM testing? I have enabled fast boot, but can't find any other valid options. Please help!


----------



## AndrejB

@bass junkie xl 
Could we get your timings? I tried replicating from your older post but wanted to see if I missed anything.
The below is pretty stable but still testing.


----------



## bass junkie xl

AndrejB said:


> @bass junkie xl
> Could we get your timings? I tried replicating from your older post but wanted to see if I missed anything.
> The below is pretty stable but still testing.


you bet I can share them . that's my old 4133 MHz @ 17-17-17-37 profile .

I have now a 16-16-16-36 way more tuned profile now.


----------



## bass junkie xl

@AndrejB

here is my gigabyte Z-390 Pro Wifi with 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz with 32 gb 8gb x 4 sticks of 4133 @ 16-16-16-36 tuned as tight as i can
rtl/iol refuse to do any tighter then what they are unless i drop back down to 3200 mhz here is the adia scores and bios settings used .

9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz adaptive @auto load line @ auto volts ( 1.25v - 1.33 v )
dram @ 1.5 v / vccio @ 1.27 v / vcssa @ 1.27 v
passes tm5 anta extreme for 13 hrs

easy copy paste settings for you guys


----------



## AndrejB

@bass junkie xl 
Very nice, can't wait to try these out tonight.
Wish I had that ks, I barely get to 5ghz @ 1.325v llc turbo with mine...


----------



## bass junkie xl

AndrejB said:


> @bass junkie xl
> Very nice, can't wait to try these out tonight.
> Wish I had that ks, I barely get to 5ghz @ 1.325v llc turbo with mine...


how did u make out ?


----------



## AndrejB

bass junkie xl said:


> how did u make out ?


Been trying to get my CPU at least a bit OCd but failed miserably 
Your timings are rock solid, thank you for getting me down to 38ns from 40. Now just need to fully test with tm5


----------



## bass junkie xl

AndrejB said:


> Been trying to get my CPU at least a bit OCd but failed miserably
> Your timings are rock solid, thank you for getting me down to 38ns from 40. Now just need to fully test with tm5


looking good , your welcome . can u get your cache up maybe try 5.0 GHz with 47 ring ? 

I had these same timings on a Asus z390 xi code before it died and I had 36 ish NS since that board trained RTL iol a bit better .


----------



## AndrejB

bass junkie xl said:


> looking good , your welcome . can u get your cache up maybe try 5.0 GHz with 47 ring ?
> 
> I had these same timings on a Asus z390 xi code before it died and I had 36 ish NS since that board trained RTL iol a bit better .


My cpu is dud especially the imc and especially with these timings. Would need 1.4v+ llc turbo for 50/47.
This is the only speed I can run safe voltages (want this to last at least another 2y)

1520 - (1.6 * amps) = safe voltage

I did try trfc @ 280 but it couldn't pass linx


----------



## Baam

What's the latest bios from Kedarwolf? Can someone link it pls


----------



## DoctorHyde

Hi everyone,

I have a big issue.

yesterday while playing (and enjoying my new 3080ti), my computer suddenly crashed.

it was in Valhalla so I did not worry as this game is a mess regarding random crash.

but this time it was kinda different, the screen froze and I had to manually reboot the PC.

I checked the bios immediately and suprisingly the latest bios that I recently upgraded for Resizable Bar was gone and I found the previous version of the bios instead with my old saved settings.

A bit weird for a simple crash on a Game. So I decided to flash it again with the latest bios F12l to reactivate ReBar.

it booted normally after the flash, then I went to the bios to re apply my OC settings.

it rebooted and then: the beggining of the end. My screen turned black and never came back. Moreover the PC remain ON 5 to 10 second then automatically reboot, again and again.

I did many test by removing component and peripherals one by one in case some faulty part were involved, i tried to plug the display directly on igpu. Nothing worked and the Mobo keeps doing exactly the same pattern.Switch On > rads blow, screen remain black, automatic reboot.

i cleared cmos, removed the flat battery, etc etc. Nothing solved the issue.

Is the mobo dead ? What’s strange is that it was running perfectly fine and delivered real good performance past few days.

Edit: my config 

Mb: Aorus z390 Pro
Cpu: 9900Ks
Ram: Corsair vengence 3200
PSU: corsaire ax1200i
Gpu: 3080ti eagle

Thanks for your help


----------



## TrebleTA

Could be PSU, you tried that, or a corrupt bios, loop is it trying to load the backup maybe.

P.s you did load cmos defaults before you flashed?


----------



## DoctorHyde

TrebleTA said:


> Could be PSU, you tried that, or a corrupt bios, loop is it trying to load the backup maybe.
> 
> P.s you did load cmos defaults before you flashed?


No i didnt, i flashed directly. 

I just bought an MSI MPG Z390 Gaming Plus to test, and it works fine, so it was indeed a motherboard failure.

I'm really surprised by the performance of the MSI. I did the same overclock and now i have no single CTD issue in Valhalla, I thought it was game related, and no instability at all in fact.

Moreover i gained 2,5% fps in 3Dmark Timespy (its a bit but its always welcome).

I start to believe that my Aorus z390 pro isnt that good finally, lot of instability, pain when you flash, etc etc. happy with the msi. I'm going to RMA the aorus and sell it when its done.


----------



## Kekkai896

KedarWolf said:


> What are the microcode updates to uninstall again if we're using older microcodes in the BIOS?


Hello, sorry for the inconvenience
Do you know how to add the RGB control and the disabled HPET in the bios of the Aorus Z390 pro (no wifi) (i'm on your F12d modded version you doint for other user in this post)
I found people who knew how to do it on a forum but the links were all dead, and as I see you doing it, I was wondering if you knew how to do one also like this

Thanks in advance, your work looks huge


----------



## siegfried9999

The Pook said:


> You can, but it's going to steal lanes from something.
> 
> 2nd PCIe x16 steals from the 1st PCIe slot (so you'll run your GPU at x8) and the bottom PCIe slot steals from the 3rd (IIRC) M.2 slot. The bottom slot will make your PCIe card and the 3rd (again, IIRC) run at 2x.


A little late, but thanks for your answer...


----------



## Be4stElectrjc

Hi, is there a way to use dynamic CPU ratio?


----------



## MyKnock

@KedarWolf Whats the HPET status of latest modified bios for z390 auros pro non wifi ? Enable or disable ?


----------



## KedarWolf

MyKnock said:


> @KedarWolf Whats the HPET status of latest modified bios for z390 auros pro non wifi ? Enable or disable ?


"BTW, here's an easier way to check if HPET is enabled in the BIOS without having to reboot.

Go to device manager, and then system devices. If you see High Precision Event Timer, then it's turned on in the BIOS."


----------



## MyKnock

KedarWolf said:


> "BTW, here's an easier way to check if HPET is enabled in the BIOS without having to reboot.
> 
> Go to device manager, and then system devices. If you see High Precision Event Timer, then it's turned on in the BIOS."


@KedarWolf Its there . How can i disabled it because there is no option in the bios ?


----------



## KedarWolf

MyKnock said:


> @KedarWolf Its there . How can i disabled it because there is no option in the bios ?











How To Improve Gaming Performance By Disabling HPET Settings?


Do You Know How To Improve Gaming Performance By Disabling HPET Settings? We have mentioned here several methods to do the same. Have a look.




silicophilic.com


----------



## MyKnock

KedarWolf said:


> How To Improve Gaming Performance By Disabling HPET Settings?
> 
> 
> Do You Know How To Improve Gaming Performance By Disabling HPET Settings? We have mentioned here several methods to do the same. Have a look.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> silicophilic.com


I know about those methods but i asked about bios level
Btw thanks for all you have done for this community !


----------



## OC-24/7

@KedarWolf Good day Sir !
Can you help me to install the latest BIOS mod from you for the z390 Aorus master !
I see many versions for this bios lake 11o GK-RGB ver. no GK 11o
Please let me know which one is the latest one with RGB and with all the goods made by you !
If you can provide me a link to download the the best one for my motherboard created by you, i will say thank you sir for the rest of my life !
Thank you in advance for all your help !!!


----------



## cwills75

bass junkie xl said:


> @AndrejB
> 
> here is my gigabyte Z-390 Pro Wifi with 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz with 32 gb 8gb x 4 sticks of 4133 @ 16-16-16-36 tuned as tight as i can
> rtl/iol refuse to do any tighter then what they are unless i drop back down to 3200 mhz here is the adia scores and bios settings used .
> 
> 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz adaptive @auto load line @ auto volts ( 1.25v - 1.33 v )
> dram @ 1.5 v / vccio @ 1.27 v / vcssa @ 1.27 v
> passes tm5 anta extreme for 13 hrs
> 
> easy copy paste settings for you guys
> 
> View attachment 2523101


Thanks for these, what sort of AVX offset do you normally get since it is set on Auto? Do you run heavy AVX loads like Handbrake?


----------



## cwills75

I saw this on Reddit posted by @Falkentyne

"(Intel's V/A curve specifies that VR VOUT should not exceed 1.280v at 150 amps of current, and 1.320v at 125 amps, and 1.360v at 100 amps for long term reliability)"

I'm trying to get my overclock on Z390 Aorus Pro w/9900K running at 5GHz with as little voltage as possible. I've tried a few different methods with fixed vcore, dvid offset and LLC levels, but I'm not sure what current I should be looking at in HWInfo for amps. I think I'm supposed to be looking at VR VOUT for voltage, but have multiple watt/amp readouts such as:

*Motherboard sensors:*
Current (IOUT)
Current (IIN)
Power (POUT)
Power (Inputs)

*CPU Sensors:*
CPU Package Power
IA Cores Power
Rest-of-Chip Power

Any advice?


----------



## OC-24/7

cwills75 said:


> I saw this on Reddit posted by @Falkentyne
> 
> "(Intel's V/A curve specifies that VR VOUT should not exceed 1.280v at 150 amps of current, and 1.320v at 125 amps, and 1.360v at 100 amps for long term reliability)"
> 
> I'm trying to get my overclock on Z390 Aorus Pro w/9900K running at 5GHz with as little voltage as possible. I've tried a few different methods with fixed vcore, dvid offset and LLC levels, but I'm not sure what current I should be looking at in HWInfo for amps. I think I'm supposed to be looking at VR VOUT for voltage, but have multiple watt/amp readouts such as:
> 
> *Motherboard sensors:*
> Current (IOUT)
> Current (IIN)
> Power (POUT)
> Power (Inputs)
> 
> *CPU Sensors:*
> CPU Package Power
> IA Cores Power
> Rest-of-Chip Power
> 
> Any advice?


You should be looking at in HWInfo for amps 
Current (IOUT)


----------



## OC-24/7

OC-24/7 said:


> You should be looking at in HWInfo for amps
> Current (IOUT)


At the full load 5G with VCore 1.300v in Current (IIN) you will not have more than 20A
You should be looking at HWInfo for amps 
Current (IOUT)


----------



## bass junkie xl

cwills75 said:


> Thanks for these, what sort of AVX offset do you normally get since it is set on Auto? Do you run heavy AVX loads like Handbrake?


no avx offset 0

my 5.2 ghz ht on and 5.3 ghz ht off profiles with 4133 cl 16 pass evrything i have thrown at it .

occt larage data avx 2 - 12 hrs 
asus rela bench 2.56 - 8 hrs 
cine bench 15/21 - 50 passes 
tm5 anta extreme - 12 hrs
prime 95 29.8 version 6 ( blend avx off ) - 8 hrs 
prime 95 29.8 version 6 ( small ffts avx off ) - 8 hrs 
blender benchmarks ( 2 hrs )
all avx games ( bf 1 , bf5 , wz , eft , gta 5 )

no whea errors in event viewer since tunning to those apps and games or failed workers


----------



## Endless14

Hi all,

I can't seem to install latest KedarWolf's BIOS, because there is no adequate EfiFlash tool, for that specific version. I must be doing something wrong.
I do the freeBoot modification with Rufus, put file on there and Efiflash from one other KedarWolf's zipped bios, but when I try to start it from USB, nothing happens, just goes back to boot menu.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Forgot to say thanks for all your efforts, this thread is really great.


----------



## AndrejB

Endless14 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I can't seem to install latest KedarWolf's BIOS, because there is no adequate EfiFlash tool, for that specific version. I must be doing something wrong.
> I do the freeBoot modification with Rufus, put file on there and Efiflash from one other KedarWolf's zipped bios, but when I try to start it from USB, nothing happens, just goes back to boot menu.
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Forgot to say thanks for all your efforts, this thread is really great.


As soon as you format a usb for freedos you should be able to boot into the usb (if csm is enabled in your bios).

I used efiflash from an older zip and it worked.

Be sure to load optimized before flashing and I like to clear cmos after loading up the new bios.


----------



## Endless14

AndrejB said:


> As soon as you format a usb for freedos you should be able to boot into the usb (if csm is enabled in your bios).
> 
> I used efiflash from an older zip and it worked.
> 
> Be sure to load optimized before flashing and I like to clear cmos after loading up the new bios.


Thanks a lot, will try these steps.


----------



## Endless14

Okay, I did the flash but I have another issue: it says "Failed to load BIOS file". What did I do wrong?
CSM is on, I have used exact command:
------------------------------------------------------------
*efiflash Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o /c /x*
------------------------------------------------------------
It reads the file but always comes back with "Failed to load BIOS file".

Any help is much appreciated.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> "BTW, here's an easier way to check if HPET is enabled in the BIOS without having to reboot.
> 
> Go to device manager, and then system devices. If you see High Precision Event Timer, then it's turned on in the BIOS."





KedarWolf said:


> How To Improve Gaming Performance By Disabling HPET Settings?
> 
> 
> Do You Know How To Improve Gaming Performance By Disabling HPET Settings? We have mentioned here several methods to do the same. Have a look.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> silicophilic.com


I followed the CMD steps on that guide, rebooted my machine and I still see the HPET on device manager as an enabled device which tells me that it is not the best indicator for knowing if HPET is enabled. I also cant find or do not know the exact label of HPET on the Z390 Aorus Master bios. If anyone could point us to the right direction ?


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

I had to do some work on my Z390 Master rig. Had to replumb the cooling loop to install my new 3080Ti. Had a little coolant leak on that got on the mainboard while leak testing with the mobo unpowered. Only the pump had power. Fixed that and cleaned off the board as best as possible with alcohol. PSU still works with a test plug on the ATX connector, so no issues there. The rear Bios/Power LEDs are lit, and the RGB's flicker when the PSU master switch is turned on, but I get no response now. I went the whole hog and removed every drive, reinserted the ram and checked the CPU. I even removed all the heatsinks and backplate to clean the board. It's acting 100% bricked.

Halp!


----------



## AndrejB

Endless14 said:


> Okay, I did the flash but I have another issue: it says "Failed to load BIOS file". What did I do wrong?
> CSM is on, I have used exact command:
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> *efiflash Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o /c /x*
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> It reads the file but always comes back with "Failed to load BIOS file".
> 
> Any help is much appreciated.


Try renaming the file to 1.f11


----------



## Endless14

Hmm, I have renamed it to 1.F11o and tried it before - same issue. If I change extension .F11o to F11, won't that corrupt file?


----------



## OC-24/7

Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB


MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.



www.mediafire.com




You can flash this one with q flash, it is the best so far


----------



## AndrejB

KedarWolf said:


> Z390AORUSMASTER.F11o
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


I used this one


----------



## OC-24/7

AndrejB said:


> I used this one











Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB


MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.



www.mediafire.com




same on is this one with RGB this is the last one, you can try. it is a perfect one
Flash it on the main Bios


----------



## Endless14

OC-24/7 said:


> Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can flash this one with q flash, it is the best so far


Thanks, will try it!


----------



## Endless14

AndrejB said:


> I used this one


Do you remember how did you do it? Because if I change extension, i think it will corrupt the BIOS file.


----------



## OC-24/7

Endless14 said:


> Do you remember how did you do it? Because if I change extension, i think it will corrupt the BIOS file.


You can flash it try the bios Q Flash utility with no restriction


----------



## AndrejB

Endless14 said:


> Do you remember how did you do it? Because if I change extension, i think it will corrupt the BIOS file.


No, renaming a file doesn't corrupt it. I just changed the name put it on the freedos formatted usb and ran the command like you.

I think there was something with long file names and efiflash in the past, so that's why I'm suggesting this


----------



## Endless14

Thanks guys for your help, I have done it.
Do you use Resizable BAR ON or OFF for this motherboard?


----------



## AndrejB

Endless14 said:


> Thanks guys for your help, I have done it.
> Do you use Resizable BAR ON or OFF for this motherboard?


Which one worked?

Re-bar can be activated when you activate Above 4g encoding, but it's only useful if you have a nv 3xxx gpu (can't comment have a 2xxx gpu)


----------



## Endless14

I have used the method from *OC-24/7. *Other method still was not working, even when I have renamed the file name. 
I am using 3090 and I have activated ReBAR. So far, only Horizon Zero Dawn was having stuttering issue and frame drops, all other games (The Witcher 3, Doom Eternal, AC Valhalla etc.) were working fine.


----------



## KedarWolf

Bunch of new microcodes available for 8000 and 9000 series Intel CPUs. I can make an updated BIOS if anyone wants to test them, but it'll likely not be as good as the fast microcodes in my earlier modded BIOSs.


----------



## Endless14

KedarWolf said:


> Bunch of new microcodes available for 8000 and 9000 series Intel CPUs. I can make an updated BIOS if anyone wants to test them, but it'll likely not be as good as the fast microcodes in my earlier modded BIOSs.


Hey KedarWolf, thanks for your contribution. Not sure if there is a point exploring new microcodes since you already informed us that they will not be as good as previous ones. Maybe someone else can share their opinion on this topic?

One question, if you don't mind me asking: Does Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB contains the best microcodes from your modifications?

Thanks again!


----------



## cwills75

EarlZ said:


> I followed the CMD steps on that guide, rebooted my machine and I still see the HPET on device manager as an enabled device which tells me that it is not the best indicator for knowing if HPET is enabled. I also cant find or do not know the exact label of HPET on the Z390 Aorus Master bios. If anyone could point us to the right direction ?


These Aorus Z390 boards don't use HPET, they use Invariant TSC so there won't be a BIOS setting for it. If you use TimerBench and run it, then enable HPET in Windows/reboot, and run TimberBench again, your scores will tank. Changing the Device Manager HPET status from enabled to disabled probably won't do anything. On my system it's there, but when checking properties, it says "No drivers are installed for this device.". You can check if HPET is enabled or not in Windows with the command of:

bcdedit /enum

Then look for useplatformclock. If it says no, then HPET is not enabled. If you use the command to enable it, you will introduce lag, I'd recommend just leaving it alone.


----------



## EarlZ

cwills75 said:


> These Aorus Z390 boards don't use HPET, they use Invariant TSC so there won't be a BIOS setting for it. If you use TimerBench and run it, then enable HPET in Windows/reboot, and run TimberBench again, your scores will tank. Changing the Device Manager HPET status from enabled to disabled probably won't do anything. On my system it's there, but when checking properties, it says "No drivers are installed for this device.". You can check if HPET is enabled or not in Windows with the command of:
> 
> bcdedit /enum
> 
> Then look for useplatformclock. If it says no, then HPET is not enabled. If you use the command to enable it, you will introduce lag, I'd recommend just leaving it alone.


Thanks for this information, as previous post may have caused confusion to others.


----------



## cisco150

KedarWolf said:


> Bunch of new microcodes available for 8000 and 9000 series Intel CPUs. I can make an updated BIOS if anyone wants to test them, but it'll likely not be as good as the fast microcodes in my earlier modded BIOSs.


If you don't mind I have a z390 master with i9-9900k. can you upload both the fastest and the newest if can? Thanks, ill test it out


----------



## KedarWolf

OC-24/7 said:


> Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can flash this one with q flash, it is the best so far





OC-24/7 said:


> Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can flash this one with q flash, it is the best so far


That file is not updated with the latest LAN and RST firmware and the fastest microcodes. 

Which is why you use the file I provide with efiflash.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.

Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F11 /c /x

.

or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes

Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.


----------



## Slayer23

Error


----------



## Mafalin

Hi everyone, I'm looking for some advice on my settings. I'm running a [email protected] 50 multiplier/43 Uncore on the latest official BIOS and I'm worrying a bit about my voltages. I'm using Vcore normal, Dynamic +0.005, LLC Medium and AC/DC LLC Auto to get it stable. In regular use (not just when stress testing) my VR VOut often goes over 1.4V in HWinfo, highest I've seen is over 1.450. This feels pretty high to me, and when using manual VCore I was unable to get it stable even with 1.4V Vcore and Turbo LLC (gave up at that point). Am I missing a crucial setting somewhere? Did I just lose the silicon lottery? Are my expectations too high?


----------



## KedarWolf

Mafalin said:


> Hi everyone, I'm looking for some advice on my settings. I'm running a [email protected] 50 multiplier/43 Uncore on the latest official BIOS and I'm worrying a bit about my voltages. I'm using Vcore normal, Dynamic +0.005, LLC Medium and AC/DC LLC Auto to get it stable. In regular use (not just when stress testing) my VR VOut often goes over 1.4V in HWinfo, highest I've seen is over 1.450. This feels pretty high to me, and when using manual VCore I was unable to get it stable even with 1.4V Vcore and Turbo LLC (gave up at that point). Am I missing a crucial setting somewhere? Did I just lose the silicon lottery? Are my expectations too high?


This is an old post but most of the BIOS settings should hold true.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Despite the bios update indicating 32GB UDIMM modules are supported on the Aorus Xtreme, for a maximum 128GB memory, the QVL was never updated. I reached out to Gigabyte support a few days ago, but haven’t heard back yet. The closest I could find that may work is Samsung M378A4G43MB1-CTD 2666...




www.overclock.net





Edit: The IA AC and DC Loadline at 1 important or your Vcore will be way too high.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## Mafalin

Thanks, both for the link and the IA AC/DC guess, they were indeed the culprits for the high VCore. Now to test if it's stable...  Half of the GT Loadline settings are missing from your link, but I assume they are all optimized defaults?


----------



## KedarWolf

Mafalin said:


> Thanks, both for the link and the IA AC/DC guess, they were indeed the culprits for the high VCore. Now to test if it's stable...  Half of the GT Loadline settings are missing from your link, but I assume they are all optimized defaults?


It's from an old BIOS but yes, anything you can't see is at optimized defaults.


----------



## Mafalin

KedarWolf said:


> It's from an old BIOS but yes, anything you can't see is at optimized defaults.


I figured. Still fighting to get it stable, but now I've got some control at least. Is there anything else besides VR VOut I should keep an eye on when raising the two LLC settings? I have both on Turbo right now, with idle voltages hovering at about 1.39 and spiking above 1.4 now and then. Just raised VRM LLC, so I might be able to lower my offset now though. P95 Small FFT + AVX is a ***** to get stable for me. 

Thanks again for your help!


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Here are the Z390 Master RGB modded, *1.F11 *has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* has the newest microcodes.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2526463
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes
> 
> Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.



Is the F11 a new version compared to the F11o ?


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Is the F11 a new version compared to the F11o ?


It's F11o but you need to use a three-digit extension for efiflash to work. So it has to be 2.F11 not 2.F11o


----------



## OC-24/7

KedarWolf said:


> Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2526463
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes
> 
> Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.


Error


----------



## KedarWolf

Mafalin said:


> I figured. Still fighting to get it stable, but now I've got some control at least. Is there anything else besides VR VOut I should keep an eye on when raising the two LLC settings? I have both on Turbo right now, with idle voltages hovering at about 1.39 and spiking above 1.4 now and then. Just raised VRM LLC, so I might be able to lower my offset now though. P95 Small FFT + AVX is a *** to get stable for me.
> 
> Thanks again for your help!


OCCT AVX2 might be a better stability test. Or Prime95 AVX 1344 FFTs In Place. Small FFTs puts a really unrealistic load on your CPU and temps will skyrocket, not the best option to test stability. Maybe RealBench too is good.


----------



## Mafalin

KedarWolf said:


> OCCT AVX2 might be a better stability test. Or Prime95 AVX 1344 FFTs In Place. Small FFTs puts a really unrealistic load on your CPU and temps will skyrocket, not the best option to test stability. Maybe RealBench too is good.


Yeah, I'm hitting throttling temps with P95, and am beginning to think that the sudden jumps in power draw when cores are throttling are what's causing the instability. I've always been in the camp that a stable OC should handle whatever's thrown at it, but I know I'm never gonna throttle outside of stress tests like that, so I'm thinking of relaxing my standards a little.


----------



## OC-24/7

KedarWolf said:


> Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2526463
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes
> 
> Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.


Good day KedarWolf !
Can you make better download link for the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded


----------



## KedarWolf

OC-24/7 said:


> Good day KedarWolf !
> Can you make better download link for the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded


Just download the file from the attachment in my previous post, right-click on theZ390MasterModded.zip.txt file , Rename it removing the .txt from it, unzip it.

It's not rocket surgery.


----------



## Assbutt9000

Can somebody please post a link to the Latest Modded BIOS for Z390 Ultra MB please.


----------



## KedarWolf

Assbutt9000 said:


> Can somebody please post a link to the Latest Modded BIOS for Z390 Ultra MB please.


I can do the Ultra for you with the fastest microcodes, but only have the regular BIOS, not the RBG one.

Does anyone have links to the RGB BIOS's? I only have the Master.


----------



## kati

Quick question, i am still on F9 at z390 Master, i tried but it seems there are bios options missing to enable tpm 2.0 for the win11 install...
Am i missing something or do i need to flash F11?


----------



## KedarWolf

This is a bit off-topic but helps PC performance, so may be interesting to some.

I use a stripped-down bloatware removed Windows 10 with a ton of services not needed disabled.

See here how I do it.

*Optimize-Offline Guide - Windows Debloating Tool, Windows 1803, 1903, 19H2, 1909, 20H1 and LTSC 2019*
All credit goes to GodHand and who wrote and maintains this script. And to @gdeliana who created the fork of Godhand' s Script we are using for...
forums.mydigitallife.net

This is my O/S after running four hours with MSI Afterburner running and VMWare installed. Some extra services with VMWare, it would be leaner if I uninstalled it.

*Edit: The second pic is with VMWare uninstalled.*


----------



## Phle

KedarWolf said:


> I can do the Ultra for you with the fastest microcodes, but only have the regular BIOS, not the RBG one.
> 
> Does anyone have links to the RGB BIOS's? I only have the Master.


I would also love to have the latest Gigabyte Z390 Ultra modded bios. Long time ago i gave up to overclock my 9700k, but with a modded bios i would give it a new try.


----------



## Rocket0990

KedarWolf said:


> Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2526463
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes
> 
> Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.


Hello KedarWolf.

Thanks a lot for your work i have flashed the 1.f11 under windows11 and everything seems good.

The last bios released by gigabyte is beta,so there is not a "final" bios since 2019... youre work is very important,i appreciate a lot what you have done here,no idea how i didnt found this before.

One think i notice is less imput lag,that can be possible?,can be a placebo effect but when i entered to windows i noticed instantly the mouse more smooth and after some hours i still feeling the same, is very smooth.

I didnt try a lot of things but another one which impressed me was switching off gsync and vsync(normally i use gsync that introduce some imput lag,can be related to what im talking) using a gamepad connected via bluetooth i notice 0 imput lag ingame,It was the same feeling as before, I pressed a button and I noticed instantly

Can be a placebo effect or that f11n provided by gigabyte have imput lag.

I have 2 questions,i dont have any knowledge about modded bios and i joned late to the party.

I've read last pages and I've seen people comment on the different versions,this version is GK from 18/03/2021,no idea what GK means,You also commented that the previous version did not have the latest LAN and RST version,is this one updated?.

And the last one,i had some problems about stuttering long time,i have a 9900kf,is not constantly,not every game,for example metro exodus first version in a zone,i notice a "jump" (every 10 seconds or similar),another game was doing the same thing after some minutes,maybe in a loading point but i think that should not happen,gears 5 same thing (watched videos without this problem),doom eternal the same occasionally,not constantly,in general sometimes i had this kind of stutter,i tried many many things.

Now i have a 3080TI with undervolt,before i had a 2080TI,probably this was happening more with the 2080TI.

I read about HPET in your comment,I have already checked it,my processor is working with TSC,interval of 0.022 us (no idea if this is extremely low to cause problems) and 24 max ms.

is there any other recommendation you can give me?,another bios without intel secure implementations?

Thanks for read me and I'm sorry for giving you more work.


----------



## cisco150

KedarWolf said:


> Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2526463
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes
> 
> Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.


Thanks for this


----------



## Assbutt9000

If you manage to find the Modded BIOS file can you please DM me or reply to me in this thread plzzz. Cheers mateyy


----------



## Assbutt9000

KedarWolf said:


> This is a bit off-topic but helps PC performance, so may be interesting to some.
> 
> I use a stripped-down bloatware removed Windows 10 with a ton of services not needed disabled.
> 
> See here how I do it.
> 
> *Optimize-Offline Guide - Windows Debloating Tool, Windows 1803, 1903, 19H2, 1909, 20H1 and LTSC 2019*
> All credit goes to GodHand and who wrote and maintains this script. And to @gdeliana who created the fork of Godhand' s Script we are using for...
> forums.mydigitallife.net
> 
> This is my O/S after running four hours with MSI Afterburner running and VMWare installed. Some extra services with VMWare, it would be leaner if I uninstalled it.
> 
> *Edit: The second pic is with VMWare uninstalled.*
> 
> 
> View attachment 2527774
> 
> 
> View attachment 2527775


Good Post , Cheers!


----------



## Phle

Hi @KedarWolf , can you do bios 10h for Z390 Ultra with the fastest microcodes for us? Thank you very much


----------



## KedarWolf

Phle said:


> Hi @KedarWolf , can you do bios 10h for Z390 Ultra with the fastest microcodes for us? Thank you very much


*Download the attachment, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*

Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F10 /c /x

.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Haven't done much with my Z390 Master lately. Looks like I'm on F11m BIOS. Should I upgrade it to F11n or a custom one? I'm not overclocking right now because I'm still bottlenecked by my GTX970. So day I'll find a 3080


----------



## SoaringStar

I went to F11o RGB fastest microcodes and are getting instant PC shutdowns. Before i had F11m RGB without any single issue. I always do the same bios settings overall. The instant shutdowns (like instant power loss) are always when system is in idle mode. One of my standard bios setting is the dummy load when system is in idle state, because back to 2018 I had a issue with my Bequiet Dark Power Pro 650W - so this is not the reason.


----------



## SoaringStar

Last night I made a cmos clear with 11o RGB (GK) and it seems to work now. I´ve never made a cmos clear after flashing a bios. Is this always recommended to do so?


----------



## TrebleTA

Before you update a bios you should always load bios defaults. Failing to do so can cause bios hanging or very long bios upload flashing.

After installing a bios you should again load defaults before you put your settings in.

Overclocking a CPU I had a GTX760 I still overclocked for general stuff loading of app memory loading etc.

F11o GK is the lastest beta bios from Gigabyte linked below. On my bios OC Guide. GK is the name they give me after asking for onboard RGB setting in the bios plus the fixs to non GK version I asked to be added.

Since windows 11 my fast boot now fails on audio. Nvidia audio device not found, When I tested, restarting pc or having fast boot off fixed. Ive tried dduninstaller etc. Get the same problem.
Have ask gigabyte to update the bios for windows 11 not that I think it related but gigabyte playing dum and lazy.


----------



## EarlZ

What I normally do is to hit clear CMOS, load default then flash the new bios, clear cmos , load default and start applying my OC. This has never failed me.


----------



## SoaringStar

Thanks alot. I put the older bios back to defaults before flashing the 11o. I will keep in mind to save defaults after a cmos clear the next time.


----------



## KedarWolf

SoaringStar said:


> Thanks alot. I put the older bios back to defaults before flashing the 11o. I will keep in mind to save defaults after a cmos clear the next time.


I'm glad you got it sorted out. As the one doing the BIOS mods, it troubles me when someone has issues and we're not sure why.


----------



## SoaringStar

Hello Kedar,

no need to worry about my case. The system is running rock solid since I cleared the cmos via button on the backside without any power applied. Why need peps to load defaults after a cmos clear? This is something I don´t know why.

I flashed several of your custom mods and I had never trouble by just flashing the bios and leave everything else undone. Now I just realize how lucky I was that I never ran into problems. Just a last question Kedar: is your 11o rom for the Master the latest bios release from Gigabyte? I saw that TrebleTA made an 11O release too and he was talking about 2 fixes and it got handed out by official Gigabyte support.


----------



## TrebleTA

Reason after a cmos reset you load defaults as cmos defaults are like a fail safe so lots of setting will be less than normal, why you load defaults after I believe.

I think @KedarWolf used my version in his mod, I haven't had anything from gigabyte since march. yet have asked but not getting far.


----------



## EarlZ

Do we need to go through all of the hoops and enable TMP 2.0 on this mobo to be able to boot into Win11 after doing a bios reset/update or is that only during the installation phase of Win11?


----------



## KedarWolf

I read only during installation stage. But on MyDigitalLife Win 11 forum is a free script you run on your ISO that removes the TPM and secure boot requirements. I'm on the bus coming home from work or I'd link it. Easy to find though.


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> I read only during installation stage. But on MyDigitalLife Win 11 forum is a free script you run on your ISO that removes the TPM and secure boot requirements. I'm on the bus coming home from work or I'd link it. Easy to find though.


Too late for me though as I've been using Win11 for about 1 week.


----------



## jasonkelly214

I've been having some instability issues for a while now with my PC causing various freezes or BSOD and it didn't cross my mind it could be OC related until this weekend. I previously had a z390 aorus Pro, and a few months back replaced it with an ultra, a new hd, and a full watercooling setup, and PSU. But running the same CPU and RAM. I updated the bios I believe to F10, and more or less set everything to run at the recommended settings; didn't really stress test it, it ran my games ok and I haven't been gaming much recently anyways.

Anyways, I finally believe it's overclock related so I've been trying to start from scratch on the overclock but just about all of the suggested starting settings result in an immediate prime95 crash. 

I loaded up @KedarWolf's 10h bios for the ultra and started tweaking.

I haven't done anything crazy in the bios, that isn't included in all the starter Z390 OC guides. I can list my settings if you want but I've been changing them trying to get something stable at 5 Ghz. I'm up to 1.380V right now and still not passing. I don't want to push it further without getting some knowledge from someone that knows more than me. But basically running xmp (3600), 5ghz, power states off, stuff in the gigabyte guide.

Note that I am using the newest version of prie95 because I couldn't find a download link that would work for an older avx version. 

I'm predominantly getting WHEA, or wdt blue screens on these tests.

Could anyone help?


----------



## Kivito

jasonkelly214 said:


> I've been having some instability issues for a while now with my PC causing various freezes or BSOD and it didn't cross my mind it could be OC related until this weekend. I previously had a z390 aorus Pro, and a few months back replaced it with an ultra, a new hd, and a full watercooling setup, and PSU. But running the same CPU and RAM. I updated the bios I believe to F10, and more or less set everything to run at the recommended settings; didn't really stress test it, it ran my games ok and I haven't been gaming much recently anyways.
> 
> Anyways, I finally believe it's overclock related so I've been trying to start from scratch on the overclock but just about all of the suggested starting settings result in an immediate prime95 crash.
> 
> I loaded up @KedarWolf's 10h bios for the ultra and started tweaking.
> 
> I haven't done anything crazy in the bios, that isn't included in all the starter Z390 OC guides. I can list my settings if you want but I've been changing them trying to get something stable at 5 Ghz. I'm up to 1.380V right now and still not passing. I don't want to push it further without getting some knowledge from someone that knows more than me. But basically running xmp (3600), 5ghz, power states off, stuff in the gigabyte guide.
> 
> Note that I am using the newest version of prie95 because I couldn't find a download link that would work for an older avx version.
> 
> I'm predominantly getting WHEA, or wdt blue screens on these tests.
> 
> Could anyone help?


Look this:


----------



## TrebleTA

@jasonkelly214 Use my guide below and you should be fine yet it is for the master not ultra, yet what cpu do you have as 1.38v is high.
I would reset cmos, load defaults set all options not cpu or ram leave them, then boot do tests too see if ok then start to overclock the cpu. Once cpu done then work on ram.
Could even be a bad connection from pump heatsink to cpu, it may need reseating as see you say just had that done. Can happen.

@EarlZ try it see what happens. As its something I should of and will tried myself. As it be interesting to know, Prob get a warning or something in windows, also can we enter safe mode in windows with them off etc


----------



## KedarWolf

jasonkelly214 said:


> I've been having some instability issues for a while now with my PC causing various freezes or BSOD and it didn't cross my mind it could be OC related until this weekend. I previously had a z390 aorus Pro, and a few months back replaced it with an ultra, a new hd, and a full watercooling setup, and PSU. But running the same CPU and RAM. I updated the bios I believe to F10, and more or less set everything to run at the recommended settings; didn't really stress test it, it ran my games ok and I haven't been gaming much recently anyways.
> 
> Anyways, I finally believe it's overclock related so I've been trying to start from scratch on the overclock but just about all of the suggested starting settings result in an immediate prime95 crash.
> 
> I loaded up @KedarWolf's 10h bios for the ultra and started tweaking.
> 
> I haven't done anything crazy in the bios, that isn't included in all the starter Z390 OC guides. I can list my settings if you want but I've been changing them trying to get something stable at 5 Ghz. I'm up to 1.380V right now and still not passing. I don't want to push it further without getting some knowledge from someone that knows more than me. But basically running xmp (3600), 5ghz, power states off, stuff in the gigabyte guide.
> 
> Note that I am using the newest version of prie95 because I couldn't find a download link that would work for an older avx version.
> 
> I'm predominantly getting WHEA, or wdt blue screens on these tests.
> 
> Could anyone help?


The newest Prime95 is bugged, causing BSODs for lots of peeps. Go here, use Show Older Versions and get 30.6 Build 4.









Prime95 (30.9 Build 3) Download


Popular system stability test program.




www.techpowerup.com





Plus you need to know what you're doing with Prime95, Small FFTs gonna produce way too much heat and BSODs.

A good test is 1344 FFTs In Place for Z390. Heat will be low, cores WILL stop if you're unstable.


----------



## jasonkelly214

TrebleTA said:


> Use my guide below and you should be fine yet it is for the master not ultra, yet what cpu do you have as 1.38v is high.
> I would reset cmos, load defaults set all options not cpu or ram leave them, then boot do tests too see if ok then start to overclock the cpu. Once cpu done then work on ram.
> Could even be a bad connection from pump heatsink to cpu, it may need reseating as see you say just had that done. Can happen.


I did look at this actually but I didn't set VCore to normal because I couldn't find a good explanation of setting it to normal vs a fixed voltage. What is the difference in that setting?

I reset the settings by using the reset command in the bios, but not by clearing CMOS. And with default settings, I'm able to run prime95 small FFT no issue. I even ran it with ram set to XMP but no cpu overclock.

I'll turn XMP off and go through the CPU overclock as you suggest.

If it comes to it then I can reseat the CPU but I of course don't want to drain my cooling loop if I don't need to. This water block had the pre-applied thermal paste so I think coverage is good and even.



KedarWolf said:


> The newest Prime95 is bugged, causing BSODs for lots of peeps. Go here, use Show Older Versions and get 30.6 Build 4.


Ok thanks for the tip I'll try that.


Other question is about the settings in ultra vs master. Notable settings I don't have include current limit and I believe some power settings. I assume that is a difference between ultra and master, and not that they're just hidden somewhere in the newer menu?


----------



## TrebleTA

If you run tests with xmp and it passed you can leave that on.
Reason for dyamanic voltage is to save power when not running full load after you got your overclock set. So only once your stable can set it up.
If you run a test with defaults and it worked, it will be down to settings in bios. If it got very hot then it could be the seating of the heatsink.

For the ultra I can not say what settings are there but if you post a pic of anything your not sure on, sure were try to help


----------



## SoaringStar

Wow, all this sounds that you need to start to sort things out and read some guides first. If you choose normal, you need to operate an + - offset and dont forget to set IA AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline to the value "1" to avoid abnormal high voltages. The third part in this chain is CPU Loadline Calibration. All these 3 options are going hand in hand and should never be observed alone.

I give you an example in the attachment how I realized my mild dynamic overclocking with 8700K on Aorus Master. Please keep in mind that every CPU is unique and you can´t add settings blind without stress testing your system and adjust voltages!!!!!! I´m a big fan of dynamic OC, because power invoices ($$$) are insane high in Germany and I don´t need full power during home office sessions. With Windows 10 you can install Powerplan Switcher for the taskbar from Microsoft store to start the beast within one click if you want to. Sadly, it got incompatible with Windows 11. Try to go with a bios update first to see if your current limit options are back.

Pre applied thermal paste is the worst thing on this planet - its close to be illegal. There is a huge impact compared to high quality pastes!


----------



## Assbutt9000

KedarWolf said:


> *Download the attachment, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2529035
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F10 /c /x
> 
> .



YOUR AMAZING - THANKS THANKS THANKS


----------



## TrebleTA

@SoaringStar I think IA AC to 1 was if you used turbo loadline?
Also for power plan you can make a desktop shortcut to chance power plans.


----------



## [email protected]

Сколько не разгонял процессор с оперативной памятью заканчивается одним и тем же - через несколько дней при пуске на холодную бесконечный старт и система не стартует , только сброс биоса и помогает . После разгона оперативной памяти всё нормально , I9-9900K не дружит с разгоном на постоянку только спортивный интерес . На windows11 всё ещё хуже - латентность разогнанной оперативной памяти хуже по сравнению с windows10 .


----------



## SoaringStar

TrebleTA said:


> @SoaringStar I think IA AC to 1 was if you used turbo loadline?
> Also for power plan you can make a desktop shortcut to chance power plans.


Guess not, if you set voltage control to normal these settings should be set to 1. My first attempt without ended with almost 1.5V (CPU Loadline High) and I was really scared.

I would never use a higher setting than "High". There is a theory that voltage spikes above "High" will end up in a less lasting CPU.


----------



## TrebleTA

Cpu vcore load line I have on normal. Other auto I've not hit over 1.28v in bios, if I change it to turbo it now 1.38v in bios, so i see what you mean yet I always used normal. I did go to put the IA AC to 1's but my system would not start, so think it must be for higher states.


----------



## Sheyster

SoaringStar said:


> I would never use a higher setting than "High". There is a theory that voltage spikes above "High" will end up in a less lasting CPU.


I've never seen evidence of this presented. I've used both High and Turbo settings. This said, Turbo is more stable for me in games. I get more kernel (WHEA) errors with High. Also, Turbo is recommended by GB officially, for 5+ GHz all-core OC's.


----------



## jiffysound

When clearing the CMOS by shorting the 2 pins labeled CLR_CMOS does the PC have to be turned on or off ? This is for a Aorus z390 Pro wifi.


----------



## KedarWolf

jiffysound said:


> When clearing the CMOS by shorting the 2 pins labeled CLR_CMOS does the PC have to be turned on or off ? This is for a Aorus z390 Pro wifi.


Turned off and power supply unplugged at least 30 seconds. Removing the CMOS battery doing this will do the same thing.


----------



## TrebleTA

As @KedarWolf said but I normally unplug then press the power button to then make sure no power left.

But back to the IA Ac I'm sure there was a big post about it some time ago but think it was fixed in the newer bios.


----------



## SoaringStar

TrebleTA said:


> Cpu vcore load line I have on normal. Other auto I've not hit over 1.28v in bios, if I change it to turbo it now 1.38v in bios, so i see what you mean yet I always used normal. I did go to put the IA AC to 1's but my system would not start, so think it must be for higher states.


It brings your voltage down, so if you set to 1 (it raises resistance) you need to add a voltage offset. As I said, all 3 settings stick together, only doing one setting alone makes no sense. Just try to get a start with the settings shown in my attachments of the related post.


----------



## RynoW

What's the best option for BIOS right now? The f11o beta? f11n modded with fastest microcode?


----------



## KedarWolf

RynoW said:


> What's the best option for BIOS right now? The f11o beta? f11n modded with fastest microcode?


F11o RGB modded in link.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


I used this one https://www.mediafire.com/file/30xj0diwselpeku/Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB.zip/file same on is this one with RGB this is the last one, you can try. it is a perfect one Flash it on the main Bios




www.overclock.net


----------



## KedarWolf

I massively cleaned up my Google Drive and no longer have any modded BIOS's in it.

If you need a modded one, let me know here, I'll make it, add it as an attachment.


----------



## Doolie

KedarWolf said:


> I massively cleaned up my Google Drive and no longer have any modded BIOS's in it.
> 
> If you need a modded one, let me know here, I'll make it, add it as an attachment.


Do you have an modded RGB bios for the Pro Wifi or is that not a thing? I'm currently running your f12k modded bios from early 2021 and been rock solid


----------



## TrebleTA

@Doolie your have to contact gigabyte e-support and request a RGB bios then I'm sure @KedarWolf can work some magic on it, that's if there is not a RGB version.

So for the IA AC if I set to 1 I need set other 2 to turbo, or increase voltage?

Sorry I'm trying fully understand before I try.


----------



## SoaringStar

_So for the IA AC if I set to 1 I need set other 2 to turbo, or increase voltage? _

*All 3 *- you need to set a defined CPU Loadline however which exactly (need to be figured out) and a voltage offset. I think you see this in the wrong order. You need to set 1 to get advantage of using voltage offset values for a defined voltage without having spikes up to 1,5 Volts, which has the ability to kill your CPU.

If you set only to 1, your CPU gets in default voltage configuration too less power to start your pc (because this value raises resistance = higher electrical resistance with default voltage = too low voltage).

There are 2 CPU Loadline attempts:* Lower voltage offset + higher loadline; Higher voltage offset + lower loadline.* The goal is to achive a stable voltage under load and you can try both strategies. I follow the last strategy.


----------



## Rocket0990

i delete.


----------



## EarlZ

SoaringStar said:


> _So for the IA AC if I set to 1 I need set other 2 to turbo, or increase voltage? _
> 
> *All 3 *- you need to set a defined CPU Loadline however which exactly (need to be figured out) and a voltage offset. I think you see this in the wrong order. You need to set 1 to get advantage of using voltage offset values for a defined voltage without having spikes up to 1,5 Volts, which has the ability to kill your CPU.
> 
> If you set only to 1, your CPU gets in default voltage configuration too less power to start your pc (because this value raises resistance = higher electrical resistance with default voltage = too low voltage).
> 
> There are 2 CPU Loadline attempts:* Lower voltage offset + higher loadline; Higher voltage offset + lower loadline.* The goal is to achive a stable voltage under load and you can try both strategies. I follow the last strategy.


It's been so long that I haven't touched my settings and totally forgot why these values were chosen but I have the AC to 50 and DC to 160 or 180 (i cant recall the exact amount) can you walk me through what these values do like Im a 5 year old.


----------



## Rocket0990

Falkentyne said:


> You would have to set Vcore to 'Auto' and Vcore loadline calibration to "Standard" and change the IA AC and IA DC loadlines to 160/160 and go from there and test if that is stable first.
> From there, lower the AC loadline value by 10 (keep DCLL at 160), re-test, and keep testing until you wind up being unstable. Then raise it up by 10 again and write down the idle and load VR VOUT and Current IOUT values as the load values will be what you're trying to maintain. (don't worry about the idle high VR VOUT's as you are still within Intel's specs AS LONG AS LOADLINE CALIBRATION IS LEFT ON STANDARD OR NORMAL. NEVER EVER raise Vcore loadline calibration to higher than Standard when using Auto Voltage and AC Loadline is at 1.6 mOhms. Ever).


EDIT: i've been all day doing this,what i asked not apply now,i delete this info and do another one.


----------



## TrebleTA

Well if you see my guide, I use normal and use off set etc most I've peeked is 1.33v via vrout.


----------



## Anulu

Why isnt it possible with the MasterF11o-modded to choose GPU Temp for Fan Control in Bios but with the Gigabyte SIV Software i can select it if i Set the Fans for the PCIex16 Sensor in Bios?
Problem is sometimes it doesnt work with the Software because the VGA Sensor disappears.
I have replaced the Fans of a EVGA FTW3 1080ti with two 120mm Noctua Fans and i want to control the Fancurve with the GPU Temp.

External Sensor attached to the GPU Heatsink works for now but it needs more Time for the Fans to react


----------



## Żelek

@KedarWolf can you send me bios (last modified bios by you) for Z390 Aorus Master?


----------



## EarlZ

Żelek said:


> @KedarWolf can you send me bios (last modified bios by you) for Z390 Aorus Master?


It's a few posts above..


----------



## Żelek

Unfortunately not. He wrote clearly in one post that he deleted all files from the google drive and in order to receive a designated or specific file you have to write to him. Due to his message, please send modified bios to the Z390 Aorus Master


----------



## Rocket0990

Żelek said:


> Unfortunately not. He wrote clearly in one post that he deleted all files from the google drive and in order to receive a designated or specific file you have to write to him. Due to his message, please send modified bios to the Z390 Aorus Master





KedarWolf said:


> Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2526463
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes
> 
> Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.


That one is the last one,click on "KedarWolf said" in the quote and you'll be redirected to that message and download it.


----------



## KedarWolf

Żelek said:


> Unfortunately not. He wrote clearly in one post that he deleted all files from the google drive and in order to receive a designated or specific file you have to write to him. Due to his message, please send modified bios to the Z390 Aorus Master


It's added as an attachment to the post, not in my One Drive. Download the attachment, rename it, remove the .txt and unzip it.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


I used this one https://www.mediafire.com/file/30xj0diwselpeku/Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB.zip/file same on is this one with RGB this is the last one, you can try. it is a perfect one Flash it on the main Bios




www.overclock.net


----------



## Rocket0990

@KedarWolf

Can i ask you something?,is it possible without problems to enable options in bios for spread spectrum and disable intel ME in bios?,kill intel ME will provide any advantage in performance/stability?,there is a tool called "coffe time" to remove intel ME but in readme txt said is updated to the last microcodes,im using your f11o with fastest microcodes,so i dont want to change it.


----------



## KedarWolf

Rocket0990 said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Can i ask you something?,is it possible without problems to enable options in bios for spread spectrum and disable intel ME in bios?,kill intel ME will provide any advantage in performance/stability?,there is a tool called "coffe time" to remove intel ME but in readme txt said is updated to the last microcodes,im using your f11o with fastest microcodes,so i dont want to change it.


I can only update the microcode and ethernet firmware etc. I can't do custom BIOS mods to enable/disable BIOS options.

You can ask on the WinRaid forums though, in the BIOS modding thread. Someone may help you out.


----------



## Rocket0990

KedarWolf said:


> I can only update the microcode and ethernet firmware etc. I can't do custom BIOS mods to enable/disable BIOS options.
> 
> You can ask on the WinRaid forums though, in the BIOS modding thread. Someone may help you out.


Okey,dont worry ill ask there ,to be honest a lot of people ask you about bios,I don't feel very comfortable asking you for more work.

Do you give me permission to give your bios to make those changes in it?(ill mention you ofcourse),if you dont want is fine,in that case instead of that can you give me the reference for those microcodes to apply the same ones to the modded bios?

I will post the link here to the forum in case they do it.

Thank you again.


----------



## TrebleTA

@Anulu be one for e support, yet prob not get far, I have complained about the fans, also that some fans spin on startup yet not all do.


----------



## Rocket0990

TrebleTA said:


> @Anulu be one for e support, yet prob not get far, I have complained about the fans, also that some fans spin on startup yet not all do.


So i understand that your fans dont spin when you power on your pc?,i have attached to motherboard only the AIO pump,my fans are plugged into a corsair commander pro but i was thinking to switch them to the mobo.

In my oppinion maybe they release another bios but i dont expect more than that,drivers the same,to be honest this is the bad point from gigabyte,i dont need a lot of bios & drivers,one thing is that,another is going to the direction of lack of support.

For example about drivers for windows10,i can understand microsoft have released a lot of updates for windows10 so i cant expect every update get a new driver,but the last ones are quite old so that makes me wonder if they work properly today,that made me the feeling of i don't have a correct support,that's why if i can download drivers from intel i do it instead of gigabyte site.

And this is another one,the chipset drivers provided by intel in the compatibility products list the z390 chipset is not on the list,so when I install it I am not sure if what I do is correct or not.

I dont want to criticize a lot but this is my honest opinion,i'm coming from a gigabyte z77 ud5h, i have this board,another gigabyte z370 gaming 7 wich i gift to my father and the next board will not be gigabyte,im going to explore other options like asrock.


----------



## KedarWolf

Rocket0990 said:


> Okey,dont worry ill ask there ,to be honest a lot of people ask you about bios,I don't feel very comfortable asking you for more work.
> 
> Do you give me permission to give your bios to make those changes in it?(ill mention you ofcourse),if you dont want is fine,in that case instead of that can you give me the reference for those microcodes to apply the same ones to the modded bios?
> 
> I will post the link here to the forum in case they do it.
> 
> Thank you again.


Sure, you can use the modded BIOS.


----------



## Rocket0990

KedarWolf said:


> Sure, you can use the modded BIOS.


Thank you a lot!.

The request is done here:

https://www.win-raid.com/t9737f54-z-aorus-master-hpet-intel-ME-spread-spectrum.html#msg153218

If someone is interested in these options:

-Spread spectrum enabled.
-Hpet disabled.
-intel ME disabled.

It would be good to go through the forum to show your interest.

Than you!


----------



## EarlZ

Rocket0990 said:


> Thank you a lot!.
> 
> The request is done here:
> 
> https://www.win-raid.com/t9737f54-z-aorus-master-hpet-intel-ME-spread-spectrum.html#msg153218
> 
> If someone is interested in these options:
> 
> -Spread spectrum enabled.
> -Hpet disabled.
> -intel ME disabled.
> 
> It would be good to go through the forum to show your interest.
> 
> Than you!



What does the spread spectrum do and disabled ME?


----------



## Rocket0990

EarlZ said:


> What does the spread spectrum do and disabled ME?


-Disable ME is for intel vulnerabilities,if you kill de management engine vulnerabilities are gone (if i am correct),this have a bad thing if you disable it you cant use windows 11 without a fisical tpm module.(but you still have an option)
I want to kill it because of the updates,maybe that will lose some performance (little) and in the future if someone dicover more vulnerabilities and gigabyte dont do nothing (like now) we have a pc vulnerable,i dont care about that but i kill it and the problem is gone and maybe i win some performance or stability.
-spread sprectrum,to give a bad answer,the frequency of the pc is changing constantly,it does not hold for more than microseconds?,this is to avoid the pc in a electromagnetic way to affect some signals like wifi,or your phone,this is the reason why your BCLK (if you look at cpu-z you'll see it) is changing constantly 100.2-100.5-99.8 etc,you can set 100 in bios,but it will have the same behaviour.
This handle the Bus of your pc,where is connected the pcie,cpu and ram,BCLK multiplied by 50 for cpu(100x50) and you get 5000MHZ for your cpu,same for ram etc,so when BCLK is chaning,your cpu franquency or ram is changing too,no idea if exactly is the voltage but if you see a graph in this matter,this cut the peaks of the signal to avoid interferences.
Due to a law that prevents electronic devices from interfering, manufacturers do that to the computer,it's supposed to work fine, but it still makes your pc constantly change frequency.
Someone said me that disable it maybe dont give any improvement,but i want to try if this ressult in more stability,he said me too the pc case is a "faraday box" (minus the part of the cristal panel) that can prevent interferes with the signals,i have asked too for human health (newbie question probably) and he told me that there is no problem without having done an exhaustive search,if anyone is interested in knowing this,look for information

Anyway,here are people who have a lot more knowledge than me,if something i said is not correct let them talk.

In other words,all 3 options i want to get disables is to obtain more stability or better performance.


----------



## Liquid4rt

What 32gb ram is compatible with the Aorus ITX Pro WIFI Z390 board?

I've just bought the Patriot Viper Steel 32gb 3200mhz kit (2x16gb) and it won't boot into bios but will boot into windows!

If i try to boot into bios it just hangs on the splash screen forever. Tried cmos reset and no go, i'm on the F7 bios as well so its pretty up to date.


----------



## AndrejB

Liquid4rt said:


> What 32gb ram is compatible with the Aorus ITX Pro WIFI Z390 board?
> 
> I've just bought the Patriot Viper Steel 32gb 3200mhz kit (2x16gb) and it won't boot into bios but will boot into windows!
> 
> If i try to boot into bios it just hangs on the splash screen forever. Tried cmos reset and no go, i'm on the F7 bios as well so its pretty up to date.


Reset cmos (take the battery out for 5,10min while the pc is unplugged), if you are getting into windows your bios is working, it just has a bad setting or something.


----------



## Deadroger

h107474 said:


> Hi guys. I have a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro (latest official Bios F12L set to defaults except for XMP memory) also and a Gigabyte RTX 3080 Eagle OC with Intel i7 9700K (not overclocked). I have been posting in a thread (below) where a number of Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro owners noted poor TimeSpy scores and tracked it down to the Balanced power plan causing the issue.
> 
> [SOLVED] MSI RTX 3080 low-ish Time Spy score in comparison to others?
> 
> I found the above thread after pulling my hair out over some serious frame rate dips in World War Z. I discovered changing to High Performance Power Plan fixed it. None of my friends could replicate it either and they all leave their PC in the Balanced plan. Then I found the Overclockers thread above and saw others with the same issue. The original poster (see his edits on Page 1) found that either using the High Perf power plan or disabling Speed Shift in the bios fixed it too and I noted some of you saying disabling this in the Bios makes no difference. Clearly it did for him. I just moved to the High Perf plan to fix this issue but I would really like to find a proper fix.
> 
> I noticed the issue first when I was running World War Z in 1440p Ultra with average FPS around 130 FPS but the 99% values were sub 50 FPS at times creating real jerky stuttering (FYI you have to use the Nvidia performance overlay as the in game benchmark just doesn’t report these low FPS numbers for some reason). See the image linked below with the comparison of Balanced vs High Performance in the World War Z benchmark. The green numbers are the Nvidia performance overlay which picks up the drops and the white ones are the in-game benchmark which doesn’t. The final figures from the benchmark in the balanced run are all lower but it never shows those low <60 FPS numbers. The GPU usage is lower too in the Balanced run suggesting the CPU is dragging the numbers down by starving the GPU.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have run Time Spy and got some interesting results. See the screen grabs of the results screen below but as expected the score in balanced power plan is down on the score with the high-performance power plan, same as most of the people in the OC thread. What is more interesting is the graph below the scores showing CPU clock. The balanced power plan is constantly trying to down-clock the CPU while High Perf keeps it at max clock, which is what we have suspected all along relating to disabling Intel Speed Shift to fix the balanced plan. Its blatant proof that the balanced power plan and likely our Gigabyte Auros Z390 Pro has a major bug we absolutely need Gigabyte or Microsoft to acknowledge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So here is another image of two screen grabs showing the Nvidia performance monitor overlay. I would highly recommend everyone use this monitor in your games to see if this issue exists in them. The big red flag is the 99% FPS number utterly tanks in balanced mode. So, the ~12% drop in reported Time Spy scores does not paint the full picture. This 70% drop in minimum frame rate is the culprit for the lowered scores, not just a general reduction in performance. It’s a fundamental killing of the 99% FPS due to the CPU being throttled like crazy leading to stutter which is much worse in games than just a lowering of average FPS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can any of you Z390 Aorus experts help?


Hi, sorry for the big quote but I'm suffering the exact same thing here. My i9 9900K is constantly dropping clocks during games and causing huge stuttering UNLESS i run the windows high performance mode, which I of course don't want to do. BIOS F9, 10 and 11 are the same as the F12L reported here so is there anything I can do or shall I just get rid of this board and cpu? Cheers

Oh and I disabled speed shift in bios, it had zero effect.


----------



## Liquid4rt

AndrejB said:


> Reset cmos (take the battery out for 5,10min while the pc is unplugged), if you are getting into windows your bios is working, it just has a bad setting or something.


I tried this, though there is no visible battery on the aorus itx pro wifi board so i just unplugged it and shorted the reset cmos pins. It did reset the bios to default and asked me to go into bios to configure the bios but as soon as i click okay it just hangs with a black screen.

I noticed once i got into windows that the ram was running at 2400mhz by default.

EDIT: Can enabling TPM cause some hardware changes to not be recognised? I noticed after i reset my bios that it was disabled but i had it enabled before when i wanted to try W11 but never did.


----------



## xtcvampire

Hello all,

I own a Z390 Aorus Master mainboard paired with a 9900K cpu and running the official F11n bios.
I cannot get this mainboard to run stable using xmp profile. The CPU is not overclocked and the cooling is not an issue (H115i pro, H500M).
The fird odd thing is that after setting up the xmp profile in bios, sometime it boots to windows just fine, other times it cannot boot to windows and invites me to use the default settings or enter the bios. And other times it boots with xmp enabled to windows, but I'm having crashes in some games. When not enabling the xmp, the system is perfectly stable. I've tried some manual settings to the memory timings and voltage, but without success apparently.

I wasn't able to find any 3600MHz (and above) kit from the QVL list available at resellers, so I tried the following kits:

2 x HyperX Predator RGB 16GB DDR4 4266MHz CL19 Dual Channel Kit (HX442C19PB3AK2/16) - has 2 xmp profiles, but with neither was I able to boot everytime I turned on the pc
2 x Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 16GB DDR4 3600MHz CL16 Dual Channel Kit (CMW16GX4M2D3600C16) - boots with xmp to os 90% of the time, but I get crashes in games

What can I try in order to run the memory at rated speeds?
I've read many pages on this thread and saw a modded bios in some postings. Would it solve my problem? Is there a real problem with this board?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Rocket0990

xtcvampire said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I own a Z390 Aorus Master mainboard paired with a 9900K cpu and running the official F11n bios.
> I cannot get this mainboard to run stable using xmp profile. The CPU is not overclocked and the cooling is not an issue (H115i pro, H500M).
> The fird odd thing is that after setting up the xmp profile in bios, sometime it boots to windows just fine, other times it cannot boot to windows and invites me to use the default settings or enter the bios. And other times it boots with xmp enabled to windows, but I'm having crashes in some games. When not enabling the xmp, the system is perfectly stable. I've tried some manual settings to the memory timings and voltage, but without success apparently.
> 
> I wasn't able to find any 3600MHz (and above) kit from the QVL list available at resellers, so I tried the following kits:
> 
> 2 x HyperX Predator RGB 16GB DDR4 4266MHz CL19 Dual Channel Kit (HX442C19PB3AK2/16) - has 2 xmp profiles, but with neither was I able to boot everytime I turned on the pc
> 2 x Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 16GB DDR4 3600MHz CL16 Dual Channel Kit (CMW16GX4M2D3600C16) - boots with xmp to os 90% of the time, but I get crashes in games
> 
> What can I try in order to run the memory at rated speeds?
> I've read many pages on this thread and saw a modded bios in some postings. Would it solve my problem? Is there a real problem with this board?
> 
> Thanks in advance.



Hello man!.

Let's go to fix your problem,sorry if my english is not really good but you'll understand me perfectly.

I have the same motherboard and processor but in my case is a 9900kf.

You have 2 switches in your board,disconnect the power cable,wait a little bit until your pc don't keep current and choose in one switch "single bios mode" and the other one "main bios mode" (look at the manual),then start your pc and turn it off.

Do a clear cmos,(read the manual first to know how to do it,dont go to press the button without read the manual,very important and follow the steps in the manual to do it.)
After done that go to bios,load factory defaults,save and exit the bios and go again to the bios.

In my case i have a 3600 kit too from hyperX,a basic one CL17,with xmp i dont have problems but when i try a manual configuration with the same values as xmp it did not work beyond 3400mhz aproximate.

I fixed it with "Dram Training Voltaje (CHA/B) at least with 1.25V in my case,what this do:
When you turn on your pc something called "memory trainer" works to test the ram values,so if that fail you dont get your ram correctly configurated (probably this can be related to your problem)
In my case the trainer i vet was using less voltaje to do the train (in my case a pair of memory ram sticks 1.35V) and the result I was not getting the correct mhz from the ram,in my case i dont need to configure the trainer to 1.35V.
Probably you dont have the trainer disabled at the start,but to have it working you have to change the value "Memory Boot Mode" to disable fast boot,you'll se when you turn on your pc the black screen is longer before the aorus logo appear cause the trainer is working,once youre pretty sure your ram is working good you can enable fast boot mode and your pc will get to windows faster when you turn it on.

If this dont work,next step.

I read in an article, manufacturer values for ram are inside the ram,when you choose XMP it reads those values and apply it,so if you get the program "asrock timing configurator",you'll see those values from xmp,as i said,in theory the manufacturer values,you can get this program from asrock's official site in the support section of one of their motherboards,from what i saw,new ones dont include this program,look at one motherboard more old (just google a little bit)

What you can do with this,take a photo with your phone to the program asrock timing configurator,you'll work only with the values in the first two rectangles on the left side, the first rectangle start with "cas latency" and the second one with write recovery time,only those 2 rectangles.

Then you go to the bios;
-set the voltaje to your modules 1,20V/1.35V (i suppose they are 1.35V)
-Set your ram frequency manually,not enable XMP.
-"VCCIO" 1.15V and "VCCSA/System Voltage Agent"(is the same thing, i have a modded bios this value can have one of this names) to 1.20V.Both are for the memory controller inside the CPU,as more high is the memory ram frequency MHZ probably more voltage needs the memory controller inside the cpu to handle the memory you plugged in,this values are safe dont worry.(this cpu by stock acordintg to intel handle 2666MHZ,this is where i take the reference when i said more high ram=more voltage,depends just testing and look what voltage need the ram,thats all)
-go to the dram trainer voltage set it to 1.25V if it is a 1.20V ram kit,dont do that obviously,set it to max 1.20V,you can try lower value too.
-Then go to advanced configuration for memory ram and set all the values i said in the program asrock timing configurator (only the 2 rectangles i mentioned before,the rest of the values dont touch nothing,left them as Auto)

Now restart your PC and watch if the trainer handle it to work or if the bios gives you an error

If everything is good,go to windows and test the memory,there are some programs to test it,for example OCCT have a section to test memory,look if you dont get your windows freezed and probably it is fixed,you can do more test like memtest86 or other to be sure.

If you dont get it to work i tell you,the memory controller inside the cpu as i said it can be more or less good varying between cpu,so to run that memory maybe in your case need more voltage for VCCIO or VCCSA/system agent,before do that,change the trainer voltage to 1.30V/1.35V(no more than 1.35) and look if it work,if not increase VCCIO and VCCSA just a little bit and try again,again until it works,but dont give it too much voltage,go around 1.25V for VCCSA not for VCCIO (if you look at defaults VCCIO have 0.950V and VCCSA 1.050V),you can raise those values but before do it come here and ask again,

If 1.15V and 1.20V works,you can try to go lower with those values until you have problems,in that point increase them a little bit for example 0.05 or 0.010 and you'll be good,you'll now by that how many voltage you need to work,do the same with the dram memory trainer voltage,lower it until the trainer not handle the memory.

Maybe,after all this test you'll touch sometimes the bios,you get some crashes without your pc recognizing the ram,so when you know the values you need,consider do another clear cmos and set up everything again.

Let me know if this solved your problem.


----------



## bigbrother

Hello everyone,

I have the Aorus z390 Master with the latest F11n BIOS update. My 9900k is unfortunately not stable at 5Ghz under Prime 95 v26.6-27.9 or OCCT with highest preset (no avx though). It crashes 15 minutes into the test.

My settings are as follows; *1.33 to 1.34 vcore* to get it to run in games, *MCE *off, *AVX *offset auto (prime 95 AVX is not used), *C states* off, *Turbo *setting are on auto and to counter vdroop *LLC *is set to Turbo. Btw, i dont know why, but the cpu always turbos to 5ghs all core even though MCE is turned off...? Shouldn't it turbo 5Ghz on just 1 core only?

My temps reach 100 degrees under stress testing with Prime 95 or OCCT and system crashes. I am using NH-D15 cooler with a custom fan curve (100 percent fans when temps are above 60) but to no avail I get a system crash.

Where am I going wrong here or should I just stick to 4.9 Ghz???

Any help would be greatly appreciated...

Thanks in advance...


----------



## Rocket0990

bigbrother said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> I have the Aorus z390 Master with the latest F11n BIOS update. My 9900k is unfortunately not stable at 5Ghz under Prime 95 v26.6-27.9 or OCCT with highest preset (no avx though). It crashes 15 minutes into the test.
> 
> My settings are as follows; *1.33 to 1.34 vcore* to get it to run in games, *MCE *off, *AVX *offset auto (prime 95 AVX is not used), *C states* off, *Turbo *setting are on auto and to counter vdroop *LLC *is set to Turbo. Btw, i dont know why, but the cpu always turbos to 5ghs all core even though MCE is turned off...? Shouldn't it turbo 5Ghz on just 1 core only?
> 
> My temps reach 100 degrees under stress testing with Prime 95 or OCCT and system crashes. I am using NH-D15 cooler with a custom fan curve (100 percent fans when temps are above 60) but to no avail I get a system crash.
> 
> Where am I going wrong here or should I just stick to 4.9 Ghz???
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated...
> 
> Thanks in advance...


The first thing i recommend to you is avoid basic tutorials for overclock where dont explain you nothing about what are you doing,probably some of them like youtube videos they dont know what are they doing and teaching to others,not all,but some of them for sure.

MCE is not related to have all cores at 5GHZ is related to the voltage,no idea exactly what that do,but it does something extrange to the voltage affecting to temperature.

your processor is all the time at 5ghz cause youre using fixed voltage and energy saving options disabled,i dint try to use fixed + states enables so i dont know if that will change your voltage/mhz in windows idle + you have to disable in windows the maximun performance in energy options,if not the processor is going to the max MHZ all the time.

Dont use prime95,it push too much your processor,just use occt.

in my case im using IA AC/DC load line seting up to 1 both of them look at energy options and LLC to high.

if im not wrong this cpu max voltage is 1.52V but dont go for that in any case,less voltage is better,try what i mentioned and dont go above 1.35V,if youre going to use this config for 24/7.
Try to get something like 1.30V.

Try doing first a clear cmos (dont push the button,look at the manual first to know how to do it),after load defaults in bios,save and exit and then apply whatever you weant to change in bios,sisable all you dont need,sata ports,igpu etc

Another thing is,this motherboard have 2 switches,you have to switch them to "single bios" and "main bios",that is to avoid problem if you get problems with that bios while overclocking,the other one will be fine + you'll have more stability for overclock in single bios,that is what buildzoid said in a video.


----------



## TrebleTA

I would update the bios that version was unstable. Can head to tweaktown for f11o or my link for f11o GK with some more fixs qnd RGB in bios or use the moddied one by @KedarWolf
Also to use turbo cpu you need to set them as they will default off if I remember right yet may of been that bios version, also If using turbo llc have you set la dc to one as said 2-3 pages back?


----------



## bigbrother

Rocket0990 said:


> The first thing i recommend to you is avoid basic tutorials for overclock where dont explain you nothing about what are you doing,probably some of them like youtube videos they dont know what are they doing and teaching to others,not all,but some of them for sure.
> 
> MCE is not related to have all cores at 5GHZ is related to the voltage,no idea exactly what that do,but it does something extrange to the voltage affecting to temperature.
> 
> your processor is all the time at 5ghz cause youre using fixed voltage and energy saving options disabled,i dint try to use fixed + states enables so i dont know if that will change your voltage/mhz in windows idle + you have to disable in windows the maximun performance in energy options,if not the processor is going to the max MHZ all the time.
> 
> Dont use prime95,it push too much your processor,just use occt.
> 
> in my case im using IA AC/DC load line seting up to 1 both of them look at energy options and LLC to high.
> 
> if im not wrong this cpu max voltage is 1.52V but dont go for that in any case,less voltage is better,try what i mentioned and dont go above 1.35V,if youre going to use this config for 24/7.
> Try to get something like 1.30V.
> 
> Try doing first a clear cmos (dont push the button,look at the manual first to know how to do it),after load defaults in bios,save and exit and then apply whatever you weant to change in bios,sisable all you dont need,sata ports,igpu etc
> 
> Another thing is,this motherboard have 2 switches,you have to switch them to "single bios" and "main bios",that is to avoid problem if you get problems with that bios while overclocking,the other one will be fine + you'll have more stability for overclock in single bios,that is what buildzoid said in a video.


Hello, thanks for your reply.

I have Intel EIST enabled. So it does turbo when there is high processor usage and reduced CPU speed when there is low usage. However my issue here is that that mobo turbo's the 9900k 5Ghz on ALL cores even though MCE is turned off (MCE enables FULL turbo speed on ALL cores) where as Intel turbo specs are much more conservative. Since my 9900k turbos to 5Ghz on all cores, the Noctua NHD15 has trouble cooling the damn thing and when under full stress testing temperatures go to 100c which is way too much. Also my 9900k never throttles down and keeps its speed at 5Ghz even though temps reach 100c, hence it crashes soon afterwards... There has to be a way to stop ALL core 5Ghz...

So is there a way to use Intel turbo speeds rather than 5Ghz on ALL cores???

Regards,

Bb


----------



## Rocket0990

bigbrother said:


> Hello, thanks for your reply.
> 
> I have Intel EIST enabled. So it does turbo when there is high processor usage and reduced CPU speed when there is low usage. However my issue here is that that mobo turbo's the 9900k 5Ghz on ALL cores even though MCE is turned off (MCE enables FULL turbo speed on ALL cores) where as Intel turbo specs are much more conservative. Since my 9900k turbos to 5Ghz on all cores, the Noctua NHD15 has trouble cooling the damn thing and when under full stress testing temperatures go to 100c which is way too much. Also my 9900k never throttles down and keeps its speed at 5Ghz even though temps reach 100c, hence it crashes soon afterwards... There has to be a way to stop ALL core 5Ghz...
> 
> So is there a way to use Intel turbo speeds rather than 5Ghz on ALL cores???
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bb


i didnt know that about MCE,as i said dont use prime95,you think that is an abnormal temps while doing a stress test but no,they can be lower but everyone will have a lot of temperature with prime95,it push the cpu really really heavy,is totally unreal those temps in a real scenario.
In my oppinion what you have to do is a better overclock,lower the voltage and try more settings, i told you to use IA AC/DC loadline 1-1 and LLC high (to be honest there is a lot of more to explain about AC/DC,you can found more info in this forum using the search) and look to VR VOUT not to vcore,that is the best accuracy measurement you can do about your voltage,use hwinfo64.

I need to look for more info,but i saw one person who have a lot of knowledge here and he said dont go over 1.3 VR VOUT,in OCCT probably no more than 1.6V cause if you use heavy loads after maybe that increase,you have to test and look for info about this,this is what im doing.

My recommendation is,if you are not able to handle your temps or a stable overclock,this mean looking for info,try more settings about overclock etc and as a last resource i'll do a overclock using power saving mode way,trying to be more efficient decreasing voltage,but i vet you can do another better overclock without use that.


----------



## TrebleTA

As I say that bios is unstable, so get a stable bios first.


----------



## bigbrother

TrebleTA said:


> As I say that bios is unstable, so get a stable bios first.


I checked the Gigabyte website, F11n is the latest BIOS... Where can I find the other BIOS's you are talking about? Also are the newer BIOS's compatible with windows 11?


----------



## TrebleTA

TrebleTA said:


> I would update the bios that version was unstable. Can head to tweaktown for f11o or my link for f11o GK with some more fixs qnd RGB in bios or use the moddied one by @KedarWolf
> Also to use turbo cpu you need to set them as they will default off if I remember right yet may of been that bios version, also If using turbo llc have you set la dc to one as said 2-3 pages back?


Hi I did link before but heres my comment from before. 
Remember to reset cmos before flashing.
And then load bios defaults before you get to do your settings.


----------



## martinmausd

Hey there... i flashed the f11o and followed your guide @TrebleTA ... o man... hours for hours i changed settings with f11n... it was never stable
could you tell me your settings to test stability with occt? until now i tested stability only with prime95 with avx (not avx2) and a non avx version too
my frist occt test runs with
avx, small dataset, extreme, variable... one issues so far 
it were interesting how do you all test your stability for me...
Vcore spikes sometimes to 1,[email protected] 9900k ... hmm...


----------



## TrebleTA

At the bottom click my bios, CPU overclock guide. That will take you to tweaktown and my settings. I've been using since start of the year


----------



## martinmausd

sry.. i meant occt settings for testing

how much Voltage is ok for the 9900k?


----------



## TrebleTA

max I would take it to is 1.40v. But would start at 1.35 then lower, there is a thread topic on another about testing also 1-2 pages back someone posted


----------



## Rocket0990

martinmausd said:


> Hey there... i flashed the f11o and followed your guide @TrebleTA ... o man... hours for hours i changed settings with f11n... it was never stable
> could you tell me your settings to test stability with occt? until now i tested stability only with prime95 with avx (not avx2) and a non avx version too
> my frist occt test runs with
> avx, small dataset, extreme, variable... one issues so far
> it were interesting how do you all test your stability for me...
> Vcore spikes sometimes to 1,[email protected] 9900k ... hmm...


you can avoid spikes (i mean big spikes for example 1.45V not 1.38)configuring IA AC/DC load line,search for info in this forum.
When you power on your pc look at the vcore in bios,if that is too high you can avoid that with IA AC


----------



## bigbrother

Rocket0990 said:


> you can avoid spikes (i mean big spikes for example 1.45V not 1.38)configuring IA AC/DC load line,search for info in this forum.
> When you power on your pc look at the vcore in bios,if that is too high you can avoid that with IA AC


My Vcore is rock solid and does not move an inch even under load... My issue is that I cannot set Turbo for each CPU core, the mobo automatically sets all-core 5Ghz turbo... I want 5 Ghz on 2 cores and rest on 4.9 Ghz for example... How can I set this in the BIOS? I have tried it but it has not worked....??? Please help...


----------



## Rocket0990

bigbrother said:


> My Vcore is rock solid and does not move an inch even under load... My issue is that I cannot set Turbo for each CPU core, the mobo automatically sets all-core 5Ghz turbo... I want 5 Ghz on 2 cores and rest on 4.9 Ghz for example... How can I set this in the BIOS? I have tried it but it has not worked....??? Please help...


configure turbo in bios in manual mode setting 2 cores @ 5ghz and the other ones as you want,i never do that but there is the place to tell each core what MHZ to use or you can set 4.7 or whatever you want for core frequency.


----------



## martinmausd

Rocket0990 said:


> you can avoid spikes (i mean big spikes for example 1.45V not 1.38)configuring IA AC/DC load line,search for info in this forum.


Ok, i will search for infos about that. But how far can I rise the voltage? How much does the 9900k endure? Should I test it with avx or without? With trebleta‘s guide, the CPU under load in OCCT with avx has 1.29V and in games up to 1.38V (changing load). About half an hour with no failures in occt. Then 1 Whea …


----------



## Rocket0990

Rocket0990 said:


> configure turbo in bios in manual mode setting 2 cores @ 5ghz and the other ones as you want,i never do that but there is the place to tell each core what MHZ to use or you can set 4.7 or whatever you want for core frequency.


Aparently im going to a good direction to get a flat voltage.

I have configured LLC high, IA AC to 10, DC to 80 (cause it have to be equal to mohm loadline calibration HIGH=0.8 mohm),dynamic vcore -10



VR VOUT almost dosnt move after some time test,vcore is almost completely flat,it's curious when i started it moves more, only inside the range 1.40-1.50 normally,i get some spikes but usually was doing the same,after 20 min when i come back i saw it almost flat and I was surprised,and current IOUT was just a very little bit bellow than before, have stopped occt and start it again and getting similar result,maybe after sometime the system get more stable?.

This is how it looks on idle(the voltage changes):



Im moving in the lowest voltage for my cpu @ 5ghz,so maybe increasing a bit ill get best ressults,what i dont have idea is where is the correct band for amps,now they are not really high i think.

ill try with a lower LLC and see what happens,probably i'll had to do the opposite increase dynamic vcore instead of decrease -10, maybe in the middle of high/mid is the sweet spot.

In this scenario what happens to voltage is less on idle and when it goes to push heavy load the voltage increase,probably with medium LLC will happen the opposite,more voltage on idle and drops down needing balance to that drop with + dynamic vcore,maybe in some point the value will be equal.

No idea if get more voltage and get a drop is better cause "maybe" this hadle better the voltage or the opposite,if it get boosted keeps better the voltage.


----------



## EarlZ

Rocket0990 said:


> Aparently im going to a good direction to get a flat voltage.
> 
> I have configured LLC high, IA AC to 10, DC to 80 (cause it have to be equal to mohm loadline calibration HIGH=0.8 mohm),dynamic vcore -10


Can you tell me how the AC/DC settings works and why you've selected this number.


----------



## Rocket0990

EarlZ said:


> Can you tell me how the AC/DC settings works and why you've selected this number.


AC change voltage, DC is related to the measurement,so from what i read DC has be equal to load line calibration's mohm to measure correctly package power,aparently if is it correct vid and vcore is aproximately the same,but this cannot be like this always from what i've seen,maybe im doing something wrong,no idea.

I need to read a lot more information cause i saw more info on the internet and probably i was doing a bad test,i'll use cinebench to look at result not only hwinfo64,my recomendation is do the same,read and read until you understand,If you do not understand things look for what each thing means to understand it.

Aparently this thread is almost dead so that doesn't help,and I don't know how to use the forum search to exclusively search this thread,obviously I'm not going to read almost 600 pages


----------



## BurritoJustice

Have gigabyte ever commented on the 4000MHz+ RTL/IOL issue? I just started tuning my ram with my Z390 Xtreme Waterforce and I'm super disappointed to find that my RAM has been running suboptimally for ages due to this bug, I turned down to 3900 with the exact same timings as at 4000 and got a boost in bandwidth and latency. I also can't even change the rtls/iols by a single clock while at 4000.

I also noticed that there is a newer beta bios for the xtreme, but none listed for the waterforce. Can I find that anywhere?


----------



## EarlZ

Rocket0990 said:


> AC change voltage, DC is related to the measurement,so from what i read DC has be equal to load line calibration's mohm to measure correctly package power,aparently if is it correct vid and vcore is aproximately the same,but this cannot be like this always from what i've seen,maybe im doing something wrong,no idea.
> 
> I need to read a lot more information cause i saw more info on the internet and probably i was doing a bad test,i'll use cinebench to look at result not only hwinfo64,my recomendation is do the same,read and read until you understand,If you do not understand things look for what each thing means to understand it.
> 
> Aparently this thread is almost dead so that doesn't help,and I don't know how to use the forum search to exclusively search this thread,obviously I'm not going to read almost 600 pages


I dont even know why I have my DC at 160 I think it was a "suggested" value on this thread if you are using low LLC and I have my AC at 50 which gives me a read out of 1.344v from hwinfo64's VRR out. So DC does not change the actual voltage going into the CPU its only used to accurately display the VRR out value?


----------



## Rocket0990

EarlZ said:


> I dont even know why I have my DC at 160 I think it was a "suggested" value on this thread if you are using low LLC and I have my AC at 50 which gives me a read out of 1.344v from hwinfo64's VRR out. So DC does not change the actual voltage going into the CPU its only used to accurately display the VRR out value?


Wich level of LLC are you using?,i read one message from falkentyne in a post about 9900k,no idea if this is for everyone or not but he said dont go above 1.3V i dont have any other info about this,from what i have seen is too much,to give you an example,im testing right now @5GHZ and i have in LLC medium around 1.2-4 ,only few times i went above 1.3 and one time was on LLC standar 160/160 with autovcore.

what is your vcore?,fixed/dynamic?


----------



## bigbrother

Rocket0990 said:


> configure turbo in bios in manual mode setting 2 cores @ 5ghz and the other ones as you want,i never do that but there is the place to tell each core what MHZ to use or you can set 4.7 or whatever you want for core frequency.


Its not working... or I do not know how to get it to work... I set the active turbo setting to enabled and configure each core to the speed I want however when PC goers into load, the CPU turbos to whatever the multiplier is set at which is at 49x at the moment. I cannot get the individual core turbo setting to work... Why isnt it working? Do I have to set the multiplier to Auto rather than a fixed setting???

Please help....


----------



## Rocket0990

bigbrother said:


> Its not working... or I do not know how to get it to work... I set the active turbo setting to enabled and configure each core to the speed I want however when PC goers into load, the CPU turbos to whatever the multiplier is set at which is at 49x at the moment. I cannot get the individual core turbo setting to work... Why isnt it working? Do I have to set the multiplier to Auto rather than a fixed setting???
> 
> Please help....


I'll be honest,im thinking if youre just trolling or you have just a lack of knowledge (that can be resolved if you invest yourself to search info and learn)

also do you think that the temperature comes from having the cpu at 5ghz or does it come from the voltage?,cause i have my cpu @ 5ghz in idle at 30 degrees,i know that youre speaking about full load,but I say it so that you understand where the real problem comes from.So you are asking about MHZ to handle your temperature,that dosnt work like that. more voltage=more temperature.

Anyway,your MHZ that is probably cause youre using a fixed voltage,apart from frequency core 50 + enabled turbo with different turbos.

I gave you a tip,avoid basic tutorials where nothing is being explained to you.if you have problems load system defaults and carry on.


----------



## EarlZ

Rocket0990 said:


> Wich level of LLC are you using?,i read one message from falkentyne in a post about 9900k,no idea if this is for everyone or not but he said dont go above 1.3V i dont have any other info about this,from what i have seen is too much,to give you an example,im testing right now @5GHZ and i have in LLC medium around 1.2-4 ,only few times i went above 1.3 and one time was on LLC standar 160/160 with autovcore.
> 
> what is your vcore?,fixed/dynamic?


Low LLC and dynamic vcore


----------



## Rocket0990

EarlZ said:


> Low LLC and dynamic vcore



Change that man,if you want to continue with this i advice you,you'll have to read and do a lot of test,i saw here people using just AC/DC 1:1

Falkentyne said,avoid in anyway 1.6-2.1 mohm and high LLC,that means 160/160 with LLC more than standard.

Look at this picture,this is a 9900kf LLC standar 160/160 @ 5ghz



VR VROUT 1.3V+ and current IOUT 139 amps.

now 50-160



as you can see this decrease under 1.3V,so i vet in 160/160 you where getting a lot more,i dont know what are the voltages for your cpu,look here from someone else overclock screeshots with your cpu and look at the VROUT and IOUT

From my test up to LLC high,decreasing AC as neccesary,and playing with +- dynamic you can reach different results less than you have,for example in my case LLC high give me VROUT around 1.252 with less amps around 110-115,LLC medium give me 120 amps but less VR VROUT,package power It also changes depending on how you do it.

This is not easy as i go for turbo on bios or high and thats all,there are more things,im a noob to all of this so my head is going around,i read now about "transient response" (how fast the voltage change by demand or something like that) and can be possible that is better in one LLC but i dont know wich one jhajajajaja.


----------



## bigbrother

Rocket0990 said:


> I'll be honest,im thinking if youre just trolling or you have just a lack of knowledge (that can be resolved if you invest yourself to search info and learn)
> 
> also do you think that the temperature comes from having the cpu at 5ghz or does it come from the voltage?,cause i have my cpu @ 5ghz in idle at 30 degrees,i know that youre speaking about full load,but I say it so that you understand where the real problem comes from.So you are asking about MHZ to handle your temperature,that dosnt work like that. more voltage=more temperature.
> 
> Anyway,your MHZ that is probably cause youre using a fixed voltage,apart from frequency core 50 + enabled turbo with different turbos.
> 
> I gave you a tip,avoid basic tutorials where nothing is being explained to you.if you have problems load system defaults and carry on.


Well to be honest, Gigabyte's BIOS is basically trash. I have been using MSI and ASUS motherboards and they give you the option to set ADAPTIVE voltage whereas Gigabyte does not. Hence I have to set a fixed voltage to be able to achieve 5Ghz. And dont tell me about DVID because you have to set the voltage to normal which then gives ridiculous voltages to the CPU which you then have to literally guess to REDUCE the voltage. 

This is a stupid system. Why not have adaptive voltage that works as it should... When the CPU turbos, then the BIOS should apply the turbo voltage set in the adaptive voltage setting... Do you see where I am getting at... Why doeesnt this allow me to set a fixed voltage and have individual turbo clocks for each core like other mobo manufacturers???

If this mobo didnt have the best VRMs I would not have bought it just because of the fiddly BIOS settings..

Also your attitude to patronise people here is not very smart. I do appreciate in you replying but telling me to invest and learn is non of your business... That is why I am here arent I, to learn from people that know this motherboard...

So anyway, when I set voltage to auto the mobo BIOS will give ridiculous voltages... How can I solve this problem then?? once it gave 1.7v to the CPU to achieve 5 ghz... So I cannot risk that again.... DVID setting is very problematic... Any ideas????


----------



## Rocket0990

bigbrother said:


> Well to be honest, Gigabyte's BIOS is basically trash. I have been using MSI and ASUS motherboards and they give you the option to set ADAPTIVE voltage whereas Gigabyte does not. Hence I have to set a fixed voltage to be able to achieve 5Ghz. And dont tell me about DVID because you have to set the voltage to normal which then gives ridiculous voltages to the CPU which you then have to literally guess to REDUCE the voltage.
> 
> This is a stupid system. Why not have adaptive voltage that works as it should... When the CPU turbos, then the BIOS should apply the turbo voltage set in the adaptive voltage setting... Do you see where I am getting at... Why doeesnt this allow me to set a fixed voltage and have individual turbo clocks for each core like other mobo manufacturers???
> 
> If this mobo didnt have the best VRMs I would not have bought it just because of the fiddly BIOS settings..
> 
> Also your attitude to patronise people here is not very smart. I do appreciate in you replying but telling me to invest and learn is non of your business... That is why I am here arent I, to learn from people that know this motherboard...
> 
> So anyway, when I set voltage to auto the mobo BIOS will give ridiculous voltages... How can I solve this problem then?? once it gave 1.7v to the CPU to achieve 5 ghz... So I cannot risk that again.... DVID setting is very problematic... Any ideas????


From what i read cause i didnt overclock with another brands,in gigabyte's motherboards overclock is different cause you can "disable" turbo and go for your MHZ desired and another brands if you want to go over the MHZ from stock you have to use turbo.

This is not real cause if you set each core turbo MHZ,for example 5GHZ,then disable turbo ratio (with that preset enabled there but turbo disabled) and then you want to rise that with the setting "core frequency" to 5.2GHZ you'll see not working,will not go up above 5ghz,cause although turbo @ 5GHZ is disabled it keep staying,you have to go to each core and set "auto".

Now,in my oppinion probably you are setting "core frequency" to 5GHZ,i vet you have to set that as "auto" and then work with turbo setting.

You said that is wrong my attitude,if you have knowledge and my assumption was bad okey I apologize,but i though if you dont know what youre doing and comming here with this problem no idea what are you doing,youre asking about mhz to handle temperature,you have to do a better overclock,loweing LLC or whatever,so no idea what kind of overclock are you using,maybe you have something like Load Line Calibration as extreme (can give spikes to kill your cpu) or something bad configured,so my advice about dont use bad guides and reset defaults is okey,cause i was telling you that to avoid you problems.Actually speaking of this, gigabyte has a guide to overclocking to 5ghz,where dont explain nothing,one friend mine has a board with extreme LLC some months thanks to that guide.

EDIT: "core frequency" mean "cpu clock ratio"


----------



## AndrejB

I like to keep it dumb:

1st way:
Manual voltage 
Ia ac/dc 1/1
Llc high - turbo

2nd way:
Auto voltage
Ia ac/dc 130/130 (for 4.9ghz)
Llc standard


----------



## bigbrother

Rocket0990 said:


> From what i read cause i didnt overclock with another brands,in gigabyte's motherboards overclock is different cause you can "disable" turbo and go for your MHZ desired and another brands if you want to go over the MHZ from stock you have to use turbo.
> 
> This is not real cause if you set each core turbo MHZ,for example 5GHZ,then disable turbo ratio (with that preset enabled there but turbo disabled) and then you want to rise that with the setting "core frequency" to 5.2GHZ you'll see not working,will not go up above 5ghz,cause although turbo @ 5GHZ is disabled it keep staying,you have to go to each core and set "auto".
> 
> Now,in my oppinion probably you are setting "core frequency" to 5GHZ,i vet you have to set that as "auto" and then work with turbo setting.
> 
> You said that is wrong my attitude,if you have knowledge and my assumption was bad okey I apologize,but i though if you dont know what youre doing and comming here with this problem no idea what are you doing,youre asking about mhz to handle temperature,you have to do a better overclock,loweing LLC or whatever,so no idea what kind of overclock are you using,maybe you have something like Load Line Calibration as extreme (can give spikes to kill your cpu) or something bad configured,so my advice about dont use bad guides and reset defaults is okey,cause i was telling you that to avoid you problems.Actually speaking of this, gigabyte has a guide to overclocking to 5ghz,where dont explain nothing,one friend mine has a board with extreme LLC some months thanks to that guide.
> 
> EDIT: "core frequency" mean "cpu clock ratio"


Ok so basically, I want to use 5Ghz on 2 cores and the rest 4.9 with adaptive voltage... How can I set this in the BIOS to work???


----------



## Rocket0990

bigbrother said:


> Ok so basically, I want to use 5Ghz on 2 cores and the rest 4.9 with adaptive voltage... How can I set this in the BIOS to work???


"cpu clock ratio" auto + turbo 2 cores @ 5ghz and the other ones at 4.9 ghz,adaptive voltage: you have to set vcore normal and use dynamic vcore + -,but here you have to test.


----------



## TrebleTA

@Rocket0990 looks like you have worked it out, can I pick your mind so I can get to work it out, so i can do a step by step guide for them intrested?

@bigbrother start at -10 then boot to windows if it boots take 10 more so be - 20 advitave boot to windows if it crashes then increase by 10, else take 10 more off untill it crashes, once found, then run some tests if crashes increase a bit more.
If you used my guide set all how I have will be a flat 4.9 turbo 5.1. Can you post a picture of how you set your cpu turbos?


----------



## EarlZ

Rocket0990 said:


> Change that man,if you want to continue with this i advice you,you'll have to read and do a lot of test,i saw here people using just AC/DC 1:1
> 
> Falkentyne said,avoid in anyway 1.6-2.1 mohm and high LLC,that means 160/160 with LLC more than standard.
> 
> Look at this picture,this is a 9900kf LLC standar 160/160 @ 5ghz
> 
> 
> 
> VR VROUT 1.3V+ and current IOUT 139 amps.
> 
> now 50-160
> 
> 
> 
> as you can see this decrease under 1.3V,so i vet in 160/160 you where getting a lot more,i dont know what are the voltages for your cpu,look here from someone else overclock screeshots with your cpu and look at the VROUT and IOUT
> 
> From my test up to LLC high,decreasing AC as neccesary,and playing with +- dynamic you can reach different results less than you have,for example in my case LLC high give me VROUT around 1.252 with less amps around 110-115,LLC medium give me 120 amps but less VR VROUT,package power It also changes depending on how you do it.
> 
> This is not easy as i go for turbo on bios or high and thats all,there are more things,im a noob to all of this so my head is going around,i read now about "transient response" (how fast the voltage change by demand or something like that) and can be possible that is better in one LLC but i dont know wich one jhajajajaja.


I am getting 1.304 (AC 50/DC160) at 4.8Ghz and 1.354 (AC 60/DC160) at 4.9Ghz. Change it to what? Where can I read more about this because I can never find the search function that limits it to this thread. I am not using high LLC. its literally the option that says "low" the more I increase AC the higher the voltage goes so I dont know what will happen if I do 160/160


----------



## EarlZ

AndrejB said:


> I like to keep it dumb:
> 2nd way:
> Auto voltage
> Ia ac/dc 130/130 (for 4.9ghz)
> Llc standard


This gives me 1.408v on bios reading with just 4.8Ghz, scary!


----------



## Rocket0990

TrebleTA said:


> @Rocket0990 looks like you have worked it out, can I pick your mind so I can get to work it out, so i can do a step by step guide for them intrested?
> 
> @bigbrother start at -10 then boot to windows if it boots take 10 more so be - 20 advitave boot to windows if it crashes then increase by 10, else take 10 more off untill it crashes, once found, then run some tests if crashes increase a bit more.
> If you used my guide set all how I have will be a flat 4.9 turbo 5.1. Can you post a picture of how you set your cpu turbos?



im doing a lot of test,im going to switch to the official f11o bios to see what happen with different microcodes.

In general words what i saw is,if you set ac/dc 1:1 you have lower vr vout,so you have to give dynamic v core + voltage
in the other hand if you use manual AC 10 or whatever (this give more voltage,not to handle vdroop from what i read) and DC is for meassure,so if you do for example 10/100 for LLC medium or 10/80 for LLC high youll see when you increase AC more voltage you get in real life,for example if in idle you have 1.212 and you increase +10 youll get after 1.222 in idle,i dont remember if AC boost full load too.

from what i read,DC mohms have to be set the same as mohms LLC.

LLC chart (no idea if this is precise)

Standard/Auto/Normal: 1.6 mOhms - Here is important if you use 160/160 in LLC standard,never go above for LLC,from what i read (i didnt try) youll get a lot of voltage.
Low: 1.3 mOhms ---> DC 130
Medium: 1.0 mOHms--->DC 100
High: 0.8 mOhms---> DC 80
Turbo: 0.4 mOhms---->DC 40
Extreme: 0.2 mOhms (estimated) ---->DC20
Ultra Extreme: 0 mOhms ---->DC 0?

From what i read,VR VOUT and VID can be matched,i have matchet it only in full load,I had the power saving modes disabled no idea if that can be related to dont get a match in idle,in my test i didnt get perfect match,close but not perfect.

In other way,what i have seen is if you set 1:1 aparently vr vout is more stable,imagine you get on full load 130 amp and 1.252 vr vout,youll notice less change in for voltage(maybe not in all cases) but this increase more wats and amps,if you instead of that for the same LLC,example 10-80,youll see that at the start you get less amps 120 and some watts less but when the test is going fordward (you dont need much time to see it),youll see the watts and amps will go increasing a bit and,amps moving around the same as 1:1 and watts just a little bit less,5 less,not a major change

No idea why in manual AC,after some time of test aparently this go more stable(maybe this not going to happen in all LLC,i didnt try everything),there is a point where amps decrease and vr vout is more stable,but this is on test,when i run a game i dont see voltage stable or amps,they are going up and down, is this normal?,for example amps 40-80-50 and stuff like that,i have a second monitor to look so i can see this in real time.

I didnt have many bluscreens of death,but yesterday i had 2 and almost broken windows,no idea if that was because a peak of low voltage was too low and windows crashed,from what i saw my cpu can crash around 0.617V,for stock voltage the lowest value i saw is 0.660 (I didn't look at it almost, it was only a quicly look),i heard that windows can be broken while overcloking,anyway windows is not dead,ill do a clean instalation after.


@EarlZ

i answer you in another moment.


----------



## KedarWolf

Rocket0990 said:


> im doing a lot of test,im going to switch to the official f11o bios to see what happen with different microcodes.
> 
> In general words what i saw is,if you set ac/dc 1:1 you have lower vr vout,so you have to give dynamic v core + voltage
> in the other hand if you use manual AC 10 or whatever (this give more voltage,not to handle vdroop from what i read) and DC is for meassure,so if you do for example 10/100 for LLC medium or 10/80 for LLC high youll see when you increase AC more voltage you get in real life,for example if in idle you have 1.212 and you increase +10 youll get after 1.222 in idle,i dont remember if AC boost full load too.
> 
> from what i read,DC mohms have to be set the same as mohms LLC.
> 
> LLC chart (no idea if this is precise)
> 
> Standard/Auto/Normal: 1.6 mOhms - Here is important if you use 160/160 in LLC standard,never go above for LLC,from what i read (i didnt try) youll get a lot of voltage.
> Low: 1.3 mOhms ---> DC 130
> Medium: 1.0 mOHms--->DC 100
> High: 0.8 mOhms---> DC 80
> Turbo: 0.4 mOhms---->DC 40
> Extreme: 0.2 mOhms (estimated) ---->DC20
> Ultra Extreme: 0 mOhms ---->DC 0?
> 
> From what i read,VR VOUT and VID can be matched,i have matchet it only in full load,I had the power saving modes disabled no idea if that can be related to dont get a match in idle,in my test i didnt get perfect match,close but not perfect.
> 
> In other way,what i have seen is if you set 1:1 aparently vr vout is more stable,imagine you get on full load 130 amp and 1.252 vr vout,youll notice less change in for voltage(maybe not in all cases) but this increase more wats and amps,if you instead of that for the same LLC,example 10-80,youll see that at the start you get less amps 120 and some watts less but when the test is going fordward (you dont need much time to see it),youll see the watts and amps will go increasing a bit and,amps moving around the same as 1:1 and watts just a little bit less,5 less,not a major change
> 
> No idea why in manual AC,after some time of test aparently this go more stable(maybe this not going to happen in all LLC,i didnt try everything),there is a point where amps decrease and vr vout is more stable,but this is on test,when i run a game i dont see voltage stable or amps,they are going up and down, is this normal?,for example amps 40-80-50 and stuff like that,i have a second monitor to look so i can see this in real time.
> 
> I didnt have many bluscreens of death,but yesterday i had 2 and almost broken windows,no idea if that was because a peak of low voltage was too low and windows crashed,from what i saw my cpu can crash around 0.617V,for stock voltage the lowest value i saw is 0.660 (I didn't look at it almost, it was only a quicly look),i heard that windows can be broken while overcloking,anyway windows is not dead,ill do a clean instalation after.
> 
> 
> @EarlZ
> 
> i answer you in another moment.


Check out the Macrium Reflect Free, you make a boot USB with Other Tasks in the program, boot from USB, backup your entire Windows drive. Takes me two minutes to do a full restore from a secondary M.2 to windows drive M.2 with all my apps, settings the same as when I backed it up.


----------



## Rocket0990

KedarWolf said:


> Check out the Macrium Reflect Free, you make a boot USB with Other Tasks in the program, boot from USB, backup your entire Windows drive. Takes me two minutes to do a full restore from a secondary M.2 to windows drive M.2 with all my apps, settings the same as when I backed it up.


Thank you a lot,i didnt know about that program,I'll do it after finish this overclock with a clean install cause this one is probably broken jajaja.

Can i ask you something?,using dynamic dvid,is normal in games having curren IOUT amps and voltage going up and down?,while testing with occt amps they are "almost" flat for example 120-121,but in games they are something like 40-65-80-50,voltage fluctuates too,i think is just the load,in games cores are not at 100% like in OCCT but i want to ask to be sure my motherboard is okey.Thank you.


----------



## AndrejB

EarlZ said:


> This gives me 1.408v on bios reading with just 4.8Ghz, scary!


Yeah sorry this was for 9900k, I think they've different VIDs.

Ia ac/dc 130/130 is intel standard for 9900ks
Ia ac/dc 100/130 is intel standard for 9900k

I would try in your case:
100/130 or even 70/130


----------



## TheSteez

bigbrother said:


> Ok so basically, I want to use 5Ghz on 2 cores and the rest 4.9 with adaptive voltage... How can I set this in the BIOS to work???


I spent 2 years on this board and I think I can help. 

Do you know your vmin under load for 4.9ghz? What level of stability are you aiming for?


----------



## Rocket0990

AndrejB said:


> Yeah sorry this was for 9900k, I think they've different VIDs.
> 
> Ia ac/dc 130/130 is intel standard for 9900ks
> Ia ac/dc 100/130 is intel standard for 9900k
> 
> I would try in your case:
> 100/130 or even 70/130


are you sure is 130?,i have a 9900kf and i read different info where 8 cores is 160 for standard.


----------



## EarlZ

AndrejB said:


> Yeah sorry this was for 9900k, I think they've different VIDs.
> 
> Ia ac/dc 130/130 is intel standard for 9900ks
> Ia ac/dc 100/130 is intel standard for 9900k
> 
> I would try in your case:
> 100/130 or even 70/130


I just want to make sure that the DC value does not affect actual voltage being given to the CPU but it only calibrates the reading to be accurate?


----------



## TrebleTA

I'm still trying to work this out at moment i have this 









and









If i set say CPU Internal AC / DC and CPU Vcore loadline Calibration to turbo my cpu will now have to much voltage 
so i would then go to IA AC and IA DC and is were i get lost.... so what would i put to start IA AC loadline 1 and IA DC loadline 1 and see what i get?


----------



## Rocket0990

i delete this.


----------



## bigbrother

Rocket0990 said:


> From what i read cause i didnt overclock with another brands,in gigabyte's motherboards overclock is different cause you can "disable" turbo and go for your MHZ desired and another brands if you want to go over the MHZ from stock you have to use turbo.
> 
> This is not real cause if you set each core turbo MHZ,for example 5GHZ,then disable turbo ratio (with that preset enabled there but turbo disabled) and then you want to rise that with the setting "core frequency" to 5.2GHZ you'll see not working,will not go up above 5ghz,cause although turbo @ 5GHZ is disabled it keep staying,you have to go to each core and set "auto".
> 
> Now,in my oppinion probably you are setting "core frequency" to 5GHZ,i vet you have to set that as "auto" and then work with turbo setting.
> 
> You said that is wrong my attitude,if you have knowledge and my assumption was bad okey I apologize,but i though if you dont know what youre doing and comming here with this problem no idea what are you doing,youre asking about mhz to handle temperature,you have to do a better overclock,loweing LLC or whatever,so no idea what kind of overclock are you using,maybe you have something like Load Line Calibration as extreme (can give spikes to kill your cpu) or something bad configured,so my advice about dont use bad guides and reset defaults is okey,cause i was telling you that to avoid you problems.Actually speaking of this, gigabyte has a guide to overclocking to 5ghz,where dont explain nothing,one friend mine has a board with extreme LLC some months thanks to that guide.
> 
> EDIT: "core frequency" mean "cpu clock ratio"


I set the multiplier to AUTO, I set the turbo to AUTO, I also left the Vcore at AUTO aaaand MCE is disabled... Yet I still get turbo 5 ghz on ALL cores which is overheating the CPU... I cannot get 5 Ghz on 2-3 cores but get them on ALL cores... This motherboard is not doing what it should...???????? What is going on here? Why isnt it working???


----------



## AndrejB

bigbrother said:


> I set the multiplier to AUTO, I set the turbo to AUTO, I also left the Vcore at AUTO aaaand MCE is disabled... Yet I still get turbo 5 ghz on ALL cores which is overheating the CPU... I cannot get 5 Ghz on 2-3 cores but get them on ALL cores... This motherboard is not doing what it should...???????? What is going on here? Why isnt it working???


So everything default and you are getting 5ghz in a stress test? Seems unlikely but maybe a cmos rest would help.

Or do you mean you are seeing all on 5ghz while idling?

Simple solution, set the multipler to whatever you want.


----------



## TrebleTA

@bigbrother Can you post pictures of your setting I have asked this already.


----------



## bigbrother

AndrejB said:


> So everything default and you are getting 5ghz in a stress test? Seems unlikely but maybe a cmos rest would help.
> 
> Or do you mean you are seeing all on 5ghz while idling?
> 
> Simple solution, set the multipler to whatever you want.


When stress testing full speed on all cores... when idling EIST lowers CPU speed accordingly... I cannot stop the motherboard to give full speed even though I set everything on auto...???


----------



## bigbrother

TrebleTA said:


> @bigbrother Can you post pictures of your setting I have asked this already.


Is there a way to capture images of the bios or should I just use the trusty mobile phone to do that


----------



## TrebleTA

Put a usb stick in then in the bios press f12 for screen shots.

P.s what bios version you using now?
Pictures of the cpu turbo setting page and main cpu page


----------



## TrebleTA

Also under turbo core ratio even it top says also put manual and make sure all cores are on auto, then put the top one back to auto.


----------



## bigbrother

TrebleTA said:


> Put a usb stick in then in the bios press f12 for screen shots.
> 
> P.s what bios version you using now?
> Pictures of the cpu turbo setting page and main cpu page


I am on the latest official bios which f11n. Will take pics when i get home... Cheers mate...


----------



## TrebleTA

was looking throu my e support history. Sure I had something like you before. 

That bios is the problem. Update to f11o, from here F11o look on the list. or mine with added RGB here F11o with rgb or contact gigabyte e-Support and request it or there is also f11o gk moddied by @KedarWolf 1-2 pages back. But I would stick with a unmoddified untill your happy

Remember before flashing bios load bios defaults before flashing to stop any problems.


----------



## Rocket0990

@AndrejB

Can you share your mohm table for LLC 8 cores?,i have this one:

CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration (8 cores)--also known as VRM Loadline

Standard/Auto/Normal: 1.6 mOhms
Low: 1.3 mOhms
Medium: 1.0 mOHms
High: 0.8 mOhms
Turbo: 0.4 mOhms
Extreme: 0.2 mOhms (estimated)
Ultra Extreme: 0 mOhms

Your VID and VOUT match in dynamic?,under full load i have similar numbers but not exact.

thanks.


----------



## AndrejB

@Rocket0990 Don't have a table unfortunately, only know what I said:

Aorus master (Auto - after cmos reset)
9900k - 100/130 ia ac/dc
9900ks - 130/130 ia ac/dc

Attached are my settings if it'll help. Also VID and VOUT not completely equal under full load.


----------



## Rocket0990

AndrejB said:


> @Rocket0990 Don't have a table unfortunately, only know what I said:
> 
> Aorus master (Auto - after cmos reset)
> 9900k - 100/130 ia ac/dc
> 9900ks - 130/130 ia ac/dc
> 
> Attached are my settings if it'll help. Also VID and VOUT not completely equal under full load.


Okey thanks for that info,do you have a 9900ks right?


----------



## AndrejB

Rocket0990 said:


> Okey thanks for that info,do you have a 9900ks right?


9900k @ 49.

Couldn't get 50 at these timings, my imc is bit weak.


----------



## Rocket0990

AndrejB said:


> 9900k @ 49.
> 
> Couldn't get 50 at these timings, my imc is bit weak.


ah okey i understand,at the end i dont know what i'll do,maybe i try auto,what i dont like from dynamic is i get random voltage spikes,they are not pretty big like 1.5V,but... i dont like that and fixed voltage force to go for LLC turbo and i want to use less LLC,this board is not bad, but this way to overclock i dont like it.

By the way,did you had liquid coming from VRM thermalpads?,i cleaned it months ago and probably i need to do it again,had a mark across the motherboard by the liquid.

I think is not conductive so I don't think there is a problem in that sense but having to clean it is a pain in the ass


----------



## TrebleTA

Anyone know 9700k figures my vcore never passed 1.33v yet at 190amps have seen?


----------



## BoldStep

Why is it that Z390 Aorus Master doesn't support per-channel timings? I can't tune RTLs or IOLs


----------



## Wam7

BoldStep said:


> Why is it that Z390 Aorus Master doesn't support per-channel timings? I can't tune RTLs or IOLs


Because the Gigabyte motherboard engineers are not Asus motherboard engineers unfortunately. 

All you can do is by trial and error wait until you get lower RTL's/IOL's and then set it to Fast Boot, that way it won't try to re-tune the memory and lock in your better timings. If we want better memory optimisation controls then we have to look to other vendours.


----------



## JirenXs

@KedarWolf . Hey, sorry to bother you but can I have the lastes f12k bios with the fastes microcode? The board is Z390 PRO WIFI. Also, can I do windows 11 on it or do I need to go back on 10?


----------



## ElGreco

Hi there!

@stasio and @KedarWolf thank you very much for keeping us updated! Since 2009 I use gigabyte motherboards (not very happy with GB but ok) and your contribution with the bioses has been extremely helpful!

So, I was wondering if you know, IF I could use F11n-RGB (moded with latest microcodes) and F11o-RGB (moded with latest microcodes) in my G2 edition Z390 Aorus Master. 
I am afraid that if nobody has the answer on this I will just have to use the F11n bios found in GB site for this mobo (G2 edition)

Thanks a lot for your time!


----------



## TrebleTA

Not sure if supported, (the same) but you can hassle e-Support at gigabyte, maybe they have f11o RGB. For that board. Then that could be modified


----------



## Doolie

JirenXs said:


> @KedarWolf . Hey, sorry to bother you but can I have the lastes f12k bios with the fastes microcode? The board is Z390 PRO WIFI. Also, can I do windows 11 on it or do I need to go back on 10?


Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great.

Z390ProWiFiModded


----------



## ElGreco

TrebleTA said:


> Not sure if supported, (the same) but you can hassle e-Support at gigabyte, maybe they have f11o RGB. For that board. Then that could be modified


Thanks, I just opened a ticket hoping to get an answer/new bios. Will let you know guys!

Edit: Will wait for e-support answer unless @KedarWolf or @stasio reply to this, but from a hash file check i did, i realised that the F11n bios found in GB site for G2 edition compared to the "simple" Z390 AORUS Master, are identical. So probably no difference at all other than the aesthetics.


----------



## JirenXs

Doolie said:


> Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great.
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded


Thank you so much! I was looking for that bios but never found it. Thanks again!


----------



## bass junkie xl

JirenXs said:


> Thank you so much! I was looking for that bios but never found it. Thanks again!


fastest microcode , rgb working ?


----------



## KedarWolf

bass junkie xl said:


> fastest microcode , rgb working ?


I've only ever had the RGB BIOS's for the Master, so have never made any for any other boards.

But like peeps said, try contacting Gigabyte customer support, see if you can get them, I'll mod them.


----------



## ElGreco

KedarWolf said:


> I've only ever had the RGB BIOS's for the Master, so have never made any for any other boards.
> 
> But like peeps said, try contacting Gigabyte customer support, see if you can get them, I'll mod them.


I just got reply from GB esupport which was very fast BUT by no means answered what I asked...

If G2 EDITION OF AORUS MASTER uses the same bios as the non G2
Instead Of sending me the F11o with RGB bios they sent me a link with what is published F11n
Later on I will try in my G2 (unless you advise me otherwise) your F11o with RGB and latest micro codes (not fastest) bios.


----------



## TrebleTA

yes I get that off some of them like a auto reply, then I submit a bad response on feedback and ask them again


----------



## TrebleTA

2 weeks ago I just asked them for a final bios for the master as after all these Bios's are all beta. awaiting 2nd response.


----------



## ElGreco

TrebleTA said:


> 2 weeks ago I just asked them for a final bios for the master as after all these Bios's are all beta. awaiting 2nd response.


Well more or less I did the same and got the following reply:

“_Dear customer,

Thank you for emailing GIGABYTE.
We would like to help you on this issue.
We are looking into the issue and will come back to you ASAP after figuring it out clearly. 
Thanks for your patience.”_


----------



## JirenXs

bass junkie xl said:


> fastest microcode , rgb working ?


The RGB is still working but I haven't tried to change it.


----------



## ElGreco

Feedback about Z390 AORUS MASTER F11o RGB moded by @KedarWolf

I decided not to wait for Gigabyte e-support to answer me and continued with the BIOS update from F9 to F11o RGB moded by @KedarWolf with the latest (not fastest) microcodes.

Perhaps some of the readers of this discussion would be interested to know some items i came across during the whole process which made me search even deeper and be very cautious (perhaps overcautious) in every step i followed...

Probably my actions even though seem to be effective/safe, are not very efficient and an experienced user could do this bios transition a lot faster!

*1. Performance: F9 vs F11o RGB moded with latest microcodes by @KedarWolf *
I ran 3DMark and despite the fact that in F11o I had the chance to enable my ASUS ROG STIX OC 3080TI Resizable Bar, F9 had better scores.

More specific:
F9 GPU Score: 19484
F11o GPU Score: 19388
F9 CPU Score: 11558
F11o GPU Score: 11451

Notes:
a. I had no time to compare F11o with latest microcodes vs fastest microcodes.
b. I just hope that the slower results are due to the safer latest/slower microcodes if thats true (just a guess)

If any of you have comparison benchmarks between F11o moded with newest vs fastest microcodes I would be really interested!

*2. Installation process*
Having read this forum multiple times I followed the road shown below:
a. disabled XMP profile
b. Loaded optimised defaults
c. Cleared CMOS
d. loaded optimised defaults
e. Installed new bios
f. loaded optimised defaults
g. cleared CMOS
h. Loaded optimised defaults
i. Enabled XMP profile

Note:
Probably only steps *a, b, e, f and i* are the only ones required and proposed in this forum, but I just wanted to make sure everything would be ok!

*3. Installation Areas of Special Emphasis*
a. I used the latest tool by Rufus to create the bootable USB stick (v3.17p) found here: Rufus - Create bootable USB drives the easy way The version found in @KedarWolf zip file (v3.15) will probably be also fine.
b. Efiflash.exe Having seen that there are also moded versions of this file, I preferred to use the efiflash.exe file found in the Official Bios zip file F11n found in Gigabyte site.
c. Before the new bios installation I first used the /s function to save the Original Bios image before installing the new one.
d. For the new bios F11o bios installation first I used ONLY the /c function of efiflash but got the following message: "*Invalid Bios Image*". I had to use the /c and /x command of efiflash as per the instructions of @KedarWolf .
e. During the F11o bios installation using both /c /x efiflash commands the bios was installed succesfully after the message: "*!!! OEMID MIsmatch !!! *". The process continued flawlessly without requiring any actions by me.

*4. F9 vs F11o RGB moded LAYOUT differences* (maaaaaaaaany!)
a. Loading screen of F11o moded bios is missing the "F9 SYSTEM INFORMATION" option during boot up, while even if you press F9 key nothing happens in F11o bios boot-up logo screen. In F9 version you got a pop-up menu showing all the system info.
b. Menu Tabs of F11o moded are completely different form the ones found in F9.
F11o RGB Moded menu tabs include: Favorites | Tweaker | Settings | System Info | Boot | Save & Exit​F9 menu tabs include: M.I.T. | System | Bios | Peripherals | Chipset | Power | Save & Exit​c. In F11o RGB moded "System Info Tab" there is an additional entry "*Customer Code: GK* " which I thought was the bios sent to @TrebleTA as I had understood from this post (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread) and NOT the one moded by @KedarWolf , but probably thats not the case (perhaps same bios).

Enjoy!


----------



## TrebleTA

No the RGB = gk version and is what he used in that lastest version but different microscodes


KedarWolf said:


> Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2526463
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x
> 
> .
> 
> or 2.F11 for the newest microcodes
> 
> Remove the .txt from the attached file and unzip it.


----------



## bigbrother

TrebleTA said:


> Put a usb stick in then in the bios press f12 for screen shots.
> 
> P.s what bios version you using now?
> Pictures of the cpu turbo setting page and main cpu page


Gday TrebleTA,

I have tried taking the screenshot however I get an error saying it cannot create file. Anyhow I have updated the BIOS to F11o and even at default settings when stress tesing I get the same CPU speed (ie. 4700mhz) on all cores rather than the Intel default of 5000mhz on 1 core etc... dunno what the issue is here so I went back to 4.9Ghz on all cores with 1.28v constant vcore...


----------



## AndrejB

@bigbrother usb needs to be formatted to fat32

Expected stock behavior:
all cores active = 47
1 core active = 50
etc...

You can adjust this under:
Advanced CPU settings > Active turbo ratios


----------



## bigbrother

AndrejB said:


> @bigbrother usb needs to be formatted to fat32
> 
> Expected stock behavior:
> all cores active = 47
> 1 core active = 50
> etc...
> 
> You can adjust this under:
> Advanced CPU settings > Active turbo ratios


Well the cpu uses all cores all the time... Thats automatic you cannot really touch how the cpu diverts power between cores... I do have active turbo ratios enabled or also tried auto it just makes no difference...? I have 4 of them set on 50, whereas the rest on 49 for example, it just turbos all of them 4.9ghz whereas the others should be 5ghz...


----------



## bigbrother

AndrejB said:


> @bigbrother usb needs to be formatted to fat32
> 
> Expected stock behavior:
> all cores active = 47
> 1 core active = 50
> etc...
> 
> You can adjust this under:
> Advanced CPU settings > Active turbo ratios


Btw the USB stick is formatted to FAT32....??? I also tried FAT but it still gives me the same error...


----------



## EarlZ

ElGreco said:


> Feedback about Z390 AORUS MASTER F11o RGB moded by @KedarWolf
> 
> I decided not to wait for Gigabyte e-support to answer me and continued with the BIOS update from F9 to F11o RGB moded by @KedarWolf with the latest (not fastest) microcodes.
> 
> Perhaps some of the readers of this discussion would be interested to know some items i came across during the whole process which made me search even deeper and be very cautious (perhaps overcautious) in every step i followed...
> 
> Probably my actions even though seem to be effective/safe, are not very efficient and an experienced user could do this bios transition a lot faster!
> 
> *1. Performance: F9 vs F11o RGB moded with latest microcodes by @KedarWolf *
> I ran 3DMark and despite the fact that in F11o I had the chance to enable my ASUS ROG STIX OC 3080TI Resizable Bar, F9 had better scores.
> 
> More specific:
> F9 GPU Score: 19484
> F11o GPU Score: 19388
> F9 CPU Score: 11558
> F11o GPU Score: 11451
> 
> Notes:
> a. I had no time to compare F11o with latest microcodes vs fastest microcodes.
> b. I just hope that the slower results are due to the safer latest/slower microcodes if thats true (just a guess)
> 
> If any of you have comparison benchmarks between F11o moded with newest vs fastest microcodes I would be really interested!
> 
> *2. Installation process*
> Having read this forum multiple times I followed the road shown below:
> a. disabled XMP profile
> b. Loaded optimised defaults
> c. Cleared CMOS
> d. loaded optimised defaults
> e. Installed new bios
> f. loaded optimised defaults
> g. cleared CMOS
> h. Loaded optimised defaults
> i. Enabled XMP profile
> 
> Note:
> Probably only steps *a, b, e, f and i* are the only ones required and proposed in this forum, but I just wanted to make sure everything would be ok!
> 
> *3. Installation Areas of Special Emphasis*
> a. I used the latest tool by Rufus to create the bootable USB stick (v3.17p) found here: Rufus - Create bootable USB drives the easy way The version found in @KedarWolf zip file (v3.15) will probably be also fine.
> b. Efiflash.exe Having seen that there are also moded versions of this file, I preferred to use the efiflash.exe file found in the Official Bios zip file F11n found in Gigabyte site.
> c. Before the new bios installation I first used the /s function to save the Original Bios image before installing the new one.
> d. For the new bios F11o bios installation first I used ONLY the /c function of efiflash but got the following message: "*Invalid Bios Image*". I had to use the /c and /x command of efiflash as per the instructions of @KedarWolf .
> e. During the F11o bios installation using both /c /x efiflash commands the bios was installed succesfully after the message: "*!!! OEMID MIsmatch !!! *". The process continued flawlessly without requiring any actions by me.
> 
> *4. F9 vs F11o RGB moded LAYOUT differences* (maaaaaaaaany!)
> a. Loading screen of F11o moded bios is missing the "F9 SYSTEM INFORMATION" option during boot up, while even if you press F9 key nothing happens in F11o bios boot-up logo screen. In F9 version you got a pop-up menu showing all the system info.
> b. Menu Tabs of F11o moded are completely different form the ones found in F9.
> F11o RGB Moded menu tabs include: Favorites | Tweaker | Settings | System Info | Boot | Save & Exit​F9 menu tabs include: M.I.T. | System | Bios | Peripherals | Chipset | Power | Save & Exit​c. In F11o RGB moded "System Info Tab" there is an additional entry "*Customer Code: GK* " which I thought was the bios sent to @TrebleTA as I had understood from this post (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread) and NOT the one moded by @KedarWolf , but probably thats not the case (perhaps same bios).
> 
> Enjoy!


Thank you for all of your hard work that is a massive difference in 3DMark! I wonder how it goes with actual gaming?


----------



## TrebleTA

Use rufus to format the usb, make sure you can see the usb stick in bios, Else check usb bios settings.
If you load bios defaults. Then enter to windows what do you get then?
But really we do need screen shots to make it easyer.
And last off go in windows then edit power profile, put on high performance.
Now it will turbo, if power plan is on balance cores will not boost


----------



## ElGreco

EarlZ said:


> Thank you for all of your hard work that is a massive difference in 3DMark! I wonder how it goes with actual gaming?


I ran 3DMark again and results are almost the same. 

F11o with latest microcodes and 3080Ti Resizable Bar enabled is slower than F9 with no Resizable Bar function!

I am strongly thinking to abandon the F11o bios and go to official F11n since I have absolutely no idea which microcodes are utilised by
1. @KedarWolf in the F11o RGB newest
2. @KedarWolf in the F11o RGB fastest
3. @stasio F11o microcodes
4. Gigabyte F11n microcodes.

I hope @KedarWolf could help us on this with a comparison table.


----------



## ElGreco

I just spent quite a few hours to run 2 rounds of 3DMark to benchmark each of the latest bioses for Z390 Aorus Master. 

*Fastest bios* seems to be the one moded by @KedarWolf with the fastest microcodes!
Also, the comparison between F11n official with Resizable Bar *Enabled versus Disabled* provided some "strange" results which may show that 3DMark does not exactly take advantage of this function (just an assumption). 

@KedarWolf 
As per the results of my benchmarks, it seems that the F11o RGB moded bios with fastest microcodes moded by you is the fastest bios for this motherboard. 
Still, for many of us, the security provided by the microcodes used is also important, therefore could you please let us know which microcodes exactly you use for both the *fast* and *latest *microcodes versions of your moded bioses?
Are these microcodes newer than the ones used by Gigabyte in F11n (INTEL-SA-00295)?
*
3DMark benchmark Results* for:

Bios F9 Official (no Resizable Bar)
Bios F11n Official Resizable Bar Disabled
Bios F11n Official Resizable Bar Enabled
Bios F11o unmoded with Resizable Bar Enabled, as posted in TT forum and presented by @stasio 
Bios F11o RGB with latest microcodes moded by @KedarWolf 
Bios F11o RGB with fastest microcodes moded by @KedarWolf 
Enjoy... 
*
Overview Sorted by mean value (of the 2 rounds per bios) of Total Score*










*
Results Analysis








*


----------



## TrebleTA

If you go to win-raid they have tools to read the bios and rebuild one


----------



## ElGreco

TrebleTA said:


> If you go to win-raid they have tools to read the bios and rebuild one


This is an area of expertise I am not even close to and I have already spent 2 days for something you could probably do in a couple of hours if not less. The only thing I would appreciate to be informed about by @KedarWolf would be the version of the microcodes used in his moded bioses (fast and newest).

I am really looking forward to his reply


----------



## KedarWolf

EarlZ said:


> Thank you for all of your hard work that is a massive difference in 3DMark! I wonder how it goes with actual gaming?


Try the fastest microcodes BIOS. It should improve 3DMark over the F9. I think in those tests that were done he said I wasn't the fast microcodes BIOS. :/


----------



## ElGreco

KedarWolf said:


> Try the fastest microcodes BIOS. It should improve 3DMark over the F9. I think in those tests that were done he said I wasn't the fast microcodes BIOS. :/


No and yes 
In a second round of 3D Mark benchmarks, I included the moded by you bios with the fastest microcodes and it became first in performance close to F9 but A LOT better than any other new bios! (see results in the picture below)

My only question to you would be if you could tell us which exactly microcodes you use in your fast bios and which ones in the newest microcodes version bios.


----------



## ElGreco

Deleted


----------



## TrebleTA

F11o gk was the last offical from gigabyte, did you test that as there are 1-2 changes to the beta on the tweaktown main thread. Just below that is my thread?
If not no matter was just wondering 
I will give you the microcodes used a bit later when I get 30min


----------



## TrebleTA

1.f11 bios
Device Controllers








Microcode









2.f11 bios
Device controllers same as above Microcode









f11.o GK
Device Controllers








Microcode









CPUID 906EC is for i7 9900k, 9900KF 9700K, 9700KF, 9600K,9600KF, 9400 and 9400F.

Have noticed that the microcode order is from the oem reverse order


----------



## EarlZ

KedarWolf said:


> Try the fastest microcodes BIOS. It should improve 3DMark over the F9. I think in those tests that were done he said I wasn't the fast microcodes BIOS. :/


I'm using your F11o with fastest microcodes


----------



## ElGreco

TrebleTA said:


> F11o gk was the last offical from gigabyte, did you test that as there are 1-2 changes to the beta on the tweaktown main thread. Just below that is my thread?
> If not no matter was just wondering
> I will give you the microcodes used a bit later when I get 30min


Thanks for the update and the time spent to give me the microcodes version. Though your snapshots a new "world" opened to my eyes and managed to download the correct tools to identiify also myself the contents/microcodes of each bios.

Unfortunately I have NOT benchmarked yout F11o GK version of the bios, but it seems that it has the same CPU microcodes as per the official site's F11n (so perhaps its not that fast).

Now, I checked Kedar's fastest microcodes bios and it seems that these are equally fast to the old F9 only because these are really old. The only concern I have with this is that the valnurebilkities (security-wise) corrected by F11n are not covered by the fastest microcodes bios of Kedar  (if I understand correct the logic).

Again, thank you for assisting me on this!!!


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes that's right the security updates slow down the cpu, so i would guess the first release of microcode would be fastest but will have holes. I still have F4 bios will see what's on that.
But that would make 2.f11 as newest microcode slowest and 1.f11 fastest we see.


----------



## [email protected]

В биосе нет настройки IOL-offset , без этой настройки на частотах 4000 и выше самый лучший IO-L -13 . Неужели для gigabyte Z390 предельная частота с правильными IO-L не более 3900 МГц ? :не уверен:


----------



## Crooksy

Been a while since I've posted here - Hi OCN 

Experienced some weird behaviour over the past few days and thought I'd pick some brains on this thread to see if anyone has had anything similar.

I've recently upgraded to Windows 11, been on it for about a month with no issues until I suddenly get a BSOD during some gameplay on Forza Horizon 5. Thought it was weird but didn't put too much thought into it. Continued using the PC and the next day I would get a crash to desktop in AOE4 as soon as I try load into a game (tried multiple times), again - that's weird. The following day, I couldn't even load into Windows, I was getting an error during post that suggested my current settings wouldn't allow me to load Windows (I can't remember the exact error, never seen it before).

I have been running the same 5Ghz OC for the past 2 years without issue so I was surprised that when I increased the vcore, the above issues appeared to disappear. Since then I've had one further BSOD during light use and I cannot get a stress test to run for more than 5 secs without hard freezing the whole computer - have to hard reset.

Reverting back to stock settings seems stable, I haven't had any issues since and no further BSODs since. However, I can't seem to get any overclock stable at all. I was previously running 5Ghz at 1.31v but I can't even get 4.7Ghz at 1.35v to run properly, something definitely wrong there.

I've made no hardware changes in over a year, only the recent upgrade to Win11. I've ran a memtest with 100% pass. I've stress tested my PSU (OCCT) and no issues there either. Everything is pointing to to CPU, mobo or OS causing the issues here. I was going to upgrade to the latest F11l BIOS to see if that improved anything but wanted to gather some of your thoughts on what could be going on here. 

Apologies for the lengthy post. Appreciate any help!


----------



## Korlikos

@KedarWolf Sir, ty for ur hard work! I did follow news about custom bios, long time ago, before i even bay my mobo. Mobo is Aorus z390 Elite and bios moddification, with fastest microcode, was done on ver f10h, latest bios. Now i'm in trouble cuz link on google drive is dead, link with file "Z390EliteModded.zip". :-O Any help is most welcome, if such file can be linked again, by u, mister? Or other good people? Ty again.


----------



## KedarWolf

Korlikos said:


> @KedarWolf Sir, ty for ur hard work! I did follow news about custom bios, long time ago, before i even bay my mobo. Mobo is Aorus z390 Elite and bios moddification, with fastest microcode, was done on ver f10h, latest bios. Now i'm in trouble cuz link on google drive is dead, link with file "Z390EliteModded.zip". :-O Any help is most welcome, if such file can be linked again, by u, mister? Or other good people? Ty again.


Download attachment, right-click on it, rename, remove the .txt unzip it.


----------



## Korlikos

I think i did it! Command: efiflash 1.F10 /x seems did magic trick. Ty! :- ) One thing more, this sshot, is ok if it saying "..no update" if microcode is fastest/older @KedarWolf (gigabyte dual bios is very confusing thing for me) :


----------



## ElGreco

Korlikos said:


> I think i did it! Command: efiflash 1.F10 /x seems did magic trick. Ty! :- ) One thing more, this sshot, is ok if it saying "..no update" if microcode is fastest/older @KedarWolf (gigabyte dual bios is very confusing thing for me) :
> View attachment 2535134


Hi there!

I use the official F11n Bios by GB for my Z390 Aorus Master and it seems to provide "Spectre" protection as per the InSpectre application.
By the way, if I recall correctly, @KedarWolf suggest to use both /c and /x commands when flashing to the bioses moded by him.

I needed the efiflash /x command only for installing moded bioses.


----------



## KedarWolf

Korlikos said:


> I think i did it! Command: efiflash 1.F10 /x seems did magic trick. Ty! :- ) One thing more, this sshot, is ok if it saying "..no update" if microcode is fastest/older @KedarWolf (gigabyte dual bios is very confusing thing for me) :
> View attachment 2535134


*Download the attachment, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*

Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F10 /c /x

.


----------



## Korlikos

Ty. I did again, now with including /c Is there easy way for checking that new bios is in it, try software? I know only that inspectre still showing same, dunno for wiser way to check if all gone fine? Tnx for help.


----------



## Qbm87

Anybody had a issues running two nvme drives. Blue screens my computer whenever I format, install windows or copy files over on the Corsair 2tb mp600 pro xt running along side a sabrent 2tb rocket nvme 4.0 m.2 drive. The sabrent drive has been running fine for a year with no issues or crashes. Sent one pro xt back today as thought it could just be a dud but same issue. Tried in both two nvme slots no difference. I have 3 Samsung 1tb evo ssd's installed aswell. Could it be overloaded, would I just be better to run 2x 4tb Evo 2.5and the 2tb rocket.


----------



## EarlZ

Qbm87 said:


> Anybody had a issues running two nvme drives. Blue screens my computer whenever I format, install windows or copy files over on the Corsair 2tb mp600 pro xt running along side a sabrent 2tb rocket nvme 4.0 m.2 drive. The sabrent drive has been running fine for a year with no issues or crashes. Sent one pro xt back today as thought it could just be a dud but same issue. Tried in both two nvme slots no difference. I have 3 Samsung 1tb evo ssd's installed aswell. Could it be overloaded, would I just be better to run 2x 4tb Evo 2.5and the 2tb rocket.


Does the Sabrent drive not crash on any of the slots?


----------



## Qbm87

EarlZ said:


> Does the Sabrent drive not crash on any of the slots?


No never had a issue. Put the mp600 into offline mode under disk management and no issues with the sabrent in the lower slot as of yet and can't imagine any showing up now 4 hours in as that's my boot drive


----------



## bass junkie xl

running a Samsung + 500gb m.2 as main top slot and 2 1tb x2 in other slot and 1 in a pcix slot never a issue . 

on pro wifi z390


----------



## Avacado

Hey ya'll, to avoid having to dig through the thread, can anyone link a modded bios for the z390 AORUS pro? Having issues getting any RAM OC over 3800 to stick.


----------



## KedarWolf

Avacado said:


> Hey ya'll, to avoid having to dig through the thread, can anyone link a modded bios for the z390 AORUS pro? Having issues getting any RAM OC over 3800 to stick.


Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.

*Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*

Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F12 /c /x

For Pro


Code:


efiflash 2.F12 /c /x










Z390ProModded.zip.txt







drive.google.com













Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt







drive.google.com


----------



## Avacado

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Followed to the T and it worked great. Very detailed instruction set HIGHLY appreciated. Thank you again.


----------



## Qbm87

Ok so this is odd? nvme in top m.2 slot. As well as other issues with drives. like om presuming the extra random partition are taken from the 2tb drive?









Updated bottom slot seems alot better as can't get in the middle slot as gpu is blocking. maybe worth people checking their own to see if it's my board, bios that's bad or something else more wide spread.


----------



## TrebleTA

Havent noticed any m.2 problems. I use top and 1 under gpu. Maybe report it to gigabyte support. Something they can look in to more, on eariler bios my m2 would get hot hitting very high temps but runs cooler now on the new firmware. Also sorted better air flow in my case.


----------



## EarlZ

I have to top and bottom slots too populated both are ADATA XS8200 Pro 2TB (before the silent parts swap) and they are doing fine! However I did notice that the random 4k read/write can be very inconsistent especially the read portion it can range from 40-60.


----------



## EarlZ

Is VCCIO linked to some kind of voltage drop or LLC? I set mine to 1.250V in bios and HWinfo64 shows me something like 1.220, VCCSA doesnt seem to exhibit this issue though.


----------



## obz

I made the wrong choice of updating my bios on my Z390 Aorus Elite to F10(latest update) when I shouldn't of. I have been trying to downgrade and absolutely nothing works. I keep getting the "invalid bios" error when I try to do it on boot and doing it through @BIOS with the app center doesn't work either and just says "update bios failed".

I tried to even do it through rufus with a USB drive and it STILL ended up saying "invalid bios image".

Does anyone have an ideas? Hoping one of you guys can help


----------



## TrebleTA

If that was a modified bios then do the same as you did with the modified bios but by using the modified efiflash that was with the modified bios, but this time use on your official bios. (You may need to rename you official bios to the same name as the modified bios) 

If it was a official bios and your getting these problems then contact gigabyte support.


----------



## ezveedub

TrebleTA said:


> If that was a modified bios then do the same as you did with the modified bios but by using the modified efiflash that was with the modified bios, but this time use on your official bios. (You may need to rename you official bios to the same name as the modified bios)
> 
> If it was a official bios and your getting these problems then contact gigabyte support.


He used the official F10 bios from Gigabyte for z390 Elite that they released for vulnerabilities, which states you cannot reverse to previous bios version. Not sure if it's possible with EFIflash to roll back I would assume like how we do with modded bios. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## TrebleTA

Hmm I see for the master there is f11 final now too, yet saying not backwards compatible also. I emailed gigabyte asking them ***, an see what they say. But sure that was 1 of there selling features. Bios changing etc


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> Hmm I see for the master there is f11 final now too, yet saying not backwards compatible also. I emailed gigabyte asking them ***, an see what they say. But sure that was 1 of there selling features. Bios changing etc


There is a modified efiflash that should be able to revert from those BIOS's. PM me, I'll provide it. I don't provide it in the main thread as it'll even flash a wrong BIOS and brick your board. 

Or search on WinRaid forums, but you may need an older version of it.


----------



## TrebleTA

For now I'll wait for more feed back.
Thanks kedarwolf will keep it in mind yet do have a version of efi flash that was in your last moddied bios. 
On another note my backup bios is f4, so long as I only flash the main I've always so far been able to switch and go back.
When I get time will strip the bios see what's inside it controller wise and micro rev code.


----------



## ElGreco

So, I suppose nobody has tried the F11 yet, to provide some performance feedback... 
With @KedarWolf efiflash we will be able to revert from F11 to previous bios, but i am wondering what is the so important difference that does make the new f11 bios not reversible to a previous version?!

Also, for the G2 edition of the Z390 AORUS MASTER the F11 is still not availble, but i just think they forgot about it since until now these bioses were identical (G2 edition vs non-G2)


----------



## TrebleTA

Some reports are saying that efi flash is not working, if you try to roll back bios from this new capsule bios, your get a invalid image.


----------



## zayd

Kedarwolf, I've been running the modded bios you provided for my Z390 Aorus Ultra and its been working absolutely fine. I've just noticed at new BIOS released on the Gigabyte support site, which is now just labelled as F10 dated 29/11/21. It mentions serious security fixes being applied and no rolling back if you flash to this one. Do you have a modded version of this, or will it not be so necessary to upgrade to this new version? Thank you as always.


----------



## clipz_bg

How is the new f12 bios for Z390 Auros Pro? I read about it that if you update you cant go back?


----------



## zayd

clipz_bg said:


> How is the new f12 bios for Z390 Auros Pro? I read about it that if you update you cant go back?


It seems like this is the case for all Z390 Aorus boards.


----------



## ezveedub

These new bios files are for security fixes reported to Intel/Gigabyte and others, that's the reason they don't want the bios file to be rolled back. IMO its for Gigabyte to close the security concern on these older mobos and be down with it by locking off rollbacks.


----------



## Waknah

I recently learned that some of the new Intel motherboards prevent booting with engineering samples.
How does this generation behave with the latest bios?


----------



## Xalkerro

Hey guys, i am thinking on doing the Bios update to F11 official version from Aorus page.. is it fine? I am currently still on F11c version.


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes it should be fine, f11c was not the best beta version. F11 final should be better just more security patches so cpu will slow a little.
Not sure If it works but if you have switches on main bios and single and you flash the main bios and dont like it, you can then switch to backup bois then boot and in the bios can press alt f10 and it will flash backup bios to the main if your not happy with the newer bios.


----------



## Alex_

TrebleTA said:


> Yes it should be fine, f11c was not the best beta version. F11 final should be better just more security patches so cpu will slow a little.
> Not sure If it works but if you have switches on main bios and single and you flash the main bios and dont like it, you can then switch to backup bois then boot and in the bios can press alt f10 and it will flash backup bios to the main if your not happy with the newer bios.


This doesn't work for me. I updated to F11 and I want to go back to a previous BIOS, I tried freedos, qflash, @BIOS and now this and it still doesn't let me.


----------



## KedarWolf

Alex_ said:


> This doesn't work for me. I updated to F11 and I want to go back to a previous BIOS, I tried freedos, qflash, @BIOS and now this and it still doesn't let me.


I can PM you an efiflash that likely will work.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I can PM you an efiflash that likely will work. Never mind, did that already. :/


----------



## Xalkerro

TrebleTA said:


> Yes it should be fine, f11c was not the best beta version. F11 final should be better just more security patches so cpu will slow a little.
> Not sure If it works but if you have switches on main bios and single and you flash the main bios and dont like it, you can then switch to backup bois then boot and in the bios can press alt f10 and it will flash backup bios to the main if your not happy with the newer bios.


Thank you. Will try it out today.


----------



## Anzial

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.


thanks for the mod! May I ask what was modded and what official bios version it was based on? I'm guessing on 11 but not sure if it is.


----------



## KedarWolf

Anzial said:


> thanks for the mod! May I ask what was modded and what official bios version it was based on? I'm guessing on 11 but not sure if it is.


The last one before the final you can't roll back BIOS.


----------



## TrebleTA

From what other people have said the capsule bios stops all rollback's it seems.


----------



## steve_reg

Has anyone been able to run 4000Mhz 4x8gb config on the Z390 Elite? I have 4x8 micron revB 3600C16 and a 9900k. Despite messing with everything the board seems to have a wall at 3733-3800, sometimes it doesn't even boot and get stuck on vga debug led having to clear cmos, sometimes it boots at 3733 but cpuz reports running at 3400mhz.. is it due the 4layers design or some bug? I am on bios F10H.

The weird thing is that QVL shows it is "capable" of doing 4133-4000 on Samsung b-die, so I am wondering if anyone could get it stable?


----------



## Blackmess

Hey @KedarWolf, I haven't found the latest modded bios for the z390 Aorus Ultra. Is it better to stay on your modded F10H beta?

You're doing life's work, thank you for your service over the years!

Appreciate ya, 🖖


----------



## bscool

@steve_reg I had the z390 Pro which is comparible and I could get it to run 4000c17 4x8 but it wouldnt always boot/train correctly. I would say 3800 or 3866 was a more realistic limit on the MB I had Then I got an Ultra and it was better, Could run 4266c17.

Then went Asus z390 Hero and 4400c17 and z390 Apex 4533c17 1t. Now just Asus and MSI. Gigabyte if ok but for memory oc there are better choices.


----------



## Sabani

Sorry for the question but i'm new. What's the best modded bios for my z390 aorus pro and where can I find it? Had no luck with the search function.


----------



## TrebleTA

Message @KedarWolf and ask him nicely.
Or search better, 1 page back..


KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


----------



## Sabani

TrebleTA said:


> Message @KedarWolf and ask him nicely.
> Or search better, 1 page back..


Fair enough, thank you.


----------



## kikng

Sabani said:


> Sorry for the question but i'm new. What's the best modded bios for my z390 aorus pro and where can I find it? Had no luck with the search function.


There's an "advanced search" on the top right, the three dots next to your profile icon. Use that and search for "Kedarwolf" under "posted by" and your mobo as a keyword (for me, z390 aorus ultra). Sort by most recent and go from the top.



KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


----------



## Sabani

Just installed the bios, works flawlessly. Benchmarks score are slightly improved as well. Gonna post the results after further testing
Thanks for the help by the way.


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes you will have better cpu scores as it's a older microcode. Also search, guess its were you had aorus. Were here its labled z390 pro on this thread.

Has anyone been able to roll back from the new capsule bios yet.
I want to try it yet at the same time i want to beable to rollback.

I Was thinking of trying to putting capsule on the main bios and keep f11o mod on backup then use the board switch. Yet i am thinking the new bios will flash main and backup.

When f11 was released I contacted gigabyte, i've had some responce but now I'm waiting for some more feedback from gigabyte and a updated version.

Also from what I've read two people so far have had problems with the bios, 1 cant enable tpm, other had secureboot disabled with a warning. Did what warning said now main bios will not boot.
Also the gigabyte logo image cant be changed by gigabytes ui


----------



## ElGreco

TrebleTA said:


> Yes you will have better cpu scores as it's a older microcode. Also search, guess its were you had aorus. Were here its labled z390 pro on this thread.
> 
> Has anyone been able to roll back from the new capsule bios yet.
> I want to try it yet at the same time i want to beable to rollback.
> 
> I Was thinking of trying to putting capsule on the main bios and keep f11o mod on backup then use the board switch. Yet i am thinking the new bios will flash main and backup.
> 
> When f11 was released I contacted gigabyte, i've had some responce but now I'm waiting for some more feedback from gigabyte and a updated version.
> 
> Also from what I've read two people so far have had problems with the bios, 1 cant enable tpm, other had secureboot disabled with a warning. Did what warning said now main bios will not boot.
> Also the gigabyte logo image cant be changed by gigabytes ui


Please keep up posted if you have any news about the new bios. Is it faster than F11n that was previously officially released? The reason you cannot rollout is efiflash or what?

Thanks a lot!!!


----------



## TrebleTA

Last offical was f11o, was two types f11o and f11o gk, the gk was newer. The gk is for onboard RGB in bios. The fastest is that version f11o gk moddied by @KedarWolf.
Follow my link below for f11o gk. Or search z390 master and ya find the moddified


----------



## ElGreco

TrebleTA said:


> Last offical was f11o, was two types f11o and f11o gk, the gk was newer. The gk is for onboard RGB in bios. The fastest is that version f11o gk moddied by @KedarWolf.
> Follow my link below for f11o gk. Or search z390 master and ya find the moddified


You are right,...
I was just referring to the last official bios shown at Gigabyte site (F11n) which was also the official bios Gigabyte support advised me to install, when at the same time F11o by stasio and Kedar (and F11o GK) were available in this "neighborghood".


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes not sure why they never updated the web page, as f11n has problems that were fixed in f11o gk.


----------



## Kivito

TrebleTA said:


> Last offical was f11o, was two types f11o and f11o gk, the gk was newer. The gk is for onboard RGB in bios. The fastest is that version f11o gk moddied by @KedarWolf.
> Follow my link below for f11o gk. Or search z390 master and ya find the moddified


Sure? the las bios listed is f11.


----------



## bass junkie xl

hey guys I have the rig in my sig. 

I now got a 12900k and a Asus Strix z690 ddr4 d4 board and tested it vs my sig and fps went way up mostly cpu heavy games. 

metro exodus in the Volga when u arrive on the train in the snow map when u get stuck on the tracks rig in my sig gpu was 86% with 103 fps same spot I'm pushing about 135 - 142 fps gpu maxed out . 

stalker anomaly seen a massive boost 110 fps up to 155. 

I'm at 1440p 240hz . 

I kinda don't want to get rid of my 9900 ks @ 5.2 GHz she's to good to me and the Gigabyte z390 pro wifi with 32 GB 4133 cl 16 is solid . 

my 4133 cl16 is a no go on the new board. 

testing 4000 cl 17-17-17-37 same kit......


----------



## TrebleTA

Kivito said:


> Sure? the las bios listed is f11.


We was talking pree capsule bios F11.

@bass junkie xl when a new cpu are first released there normaly a lot faster, then security patches microcodes slow it down some. yet that cpu is 3 gen newer so you should expect a increase.


----------



## Xalkerro

@TrebleTA I see your OC guide for 9700K, is it applicable for 9900KF? I am using Aorus Master Z390 Mobo and updated to latest Bios from Official Aorus page.


----------



## mednag

Does anyone know if the new capsule bios for Master forces update to main and backup bios? Can we roll back via the backup bios using the switches on the mb?


----------



## TrebleTA

Xalkerro said:


> @TrebleTA I see your OC guide for 9700K, is it applicable for 9900KF? I am using Aorus Master Z390 Mobo and updated to latest Bios from Official Aorus page.


It should be fine just you voltage settings will be different for the cpu also speed of the cpu depending on what your overclocking too.



mednag said:


> Does anyone know if the new capsule bios for Master forces update to main and backup bios? Can we roll back via the backup bios using the switches on the mb?


Yea were all waiting for more feedback need someone to take the plunge, yet rolling back seems to be blocked, and not sure if its flashing both bios's.


----------



## Alex_

mednag said:


> Does anyone know if the new capsule bios for Master forces update to main and backup bios? Can we roll back via the backup bios using the switches on the mb?


I updated to F11 and I'm unable to go back to a previous version no matter what I try. I tried the following:

qflash utility
App center @BIOS utility
FreeDOS with official efiflash and modded efiflash
Updating main bios from backup bios

My backup bios is still the same and was not forced to update but I cannot change my main bios from the backup bios. So far I'm stuck with F11.


----------



## TrebleTA

Thanks for the update, quick question.

how did you try to copy the backup to main bios.
Alt f10 or f12 in bios?

If you set the motherboard switches to single and backup, you say your booting from the backup bios ok?


----------



## Alex_

TrebleTA said:


> Thanks for the update, quick question.
> 
> how did you try to copy the backup to main bios.
> Alt f10 or f12 in bios?
> 
> If you set the motherboard switches to single and backup, you say your booting from the backup bios ok?


I tried by following these steps: How to fix corrupt BIOS ROM with BIOS Switch (BIOS_SW)? | FAQ - GIGABYTE Finland

Everything goes well, it appears as if it's flashing the bios (no error message) but it does nothing, I'm still on F11 on the main bios. My backup bios is F11l which is the version I had on my main bios before updating to F11. I could boot from the backup bios without problems but I will try again when I can and let you know.


----------



## TrebleTA

Can you try this, switch off pc, set the motherboard switches to single and backup. Boot in to bios should be the backup and press alt f10 then alt f12, then enter qflash and in there press alt f10, then alt f12. Give it 2 min then save and exit and reboot back to backup bios then switch off and change one of the switches to main bios and reboot see what happens?

This is how I recovered my bios before from a invalid mismatch. This was on bios f9, my backup is sill the orginal f4.

Also I tried that guide at the time, yet it did not work. But it is not for the 300 series.


----------



## Alex_

TrebleTA said:


> Can you try this, switch off pc, set the motherboard switches to single and backup. Boot in to bios should be the backup and press alt f10 then alt f12, then enter qflash and in there press alt f10, then alt f12. Give it 2 min then save and exit and reboot back to backup bios then switch off and change one of the switches to main bios and reboot see what happens?
> 
> This is how I recovered my bios before from a invalid mismatch. This was on bios f9, my backup is sill the orginal f4.
> 
> Also I tried that guide at the time, yet it did not work. But it is not for the 300 series.


I couldn't even try because by watching the MBIOS_LED and BBIOS_LED I see that my Backup BIOS and my Main BIOS are inverted. When setting BIOS_SW to 2 (Backup BIOS) I boot in the Main BIOS and vice versa, when setting BIOS_SW to 1 (Main BIOS) I boot in the Backup BIOS.

EDIT: I don't know if I'm crazy or what but it switched back to normal... I wonder what happened

EDIT 2: 


TrebleTA said:


> press alt f10 then alt f12, then enter qflash and in there press alt f10, then alt f12.


Nothing happens when I'm pressing alt+F10 and alt+F12, is there supposed to be a message or something?


----------



## TrebleTA

Nope there is no message, and strange with the switch's yet how they work is a bit strange.


----------



## politbureau

I updated to OEM F12 before reading up... Oooops! I see Kedarwolfs F12 is based on F12k, which I can't revert to now with the full fat F12.

Any word on a full F12 version from KW?
Thanks!


----------



## ezveedub

bass junkie xl said:


> hey guys I have the rig in my sig.
> 
> I now got a 12900k and a Asus Strix z690 ddr4 d4 board and tested it vs my sig and fps went way up mostly cpu heavy games.
> 
> metro exodus in the Volga when u arrive on the train in the snow map when u get stuck on the tracks rig in my sig gpu was 86% with 103 fps same spot I'm pushing about 135 - 142 fps gpu maxed out .
> 
> stalker anomaly seen a massive boost 110 fps up to 155.
> 
> I'm at 1440p 240hz .
> 
> I kinda don't want to get rid of my 9900 ks @ 5.2 GHz she's to good to me and the Gigabyte z390 pro wifi with 32 GB 4133 cl 16 is solid .
> 
> my 4133 cl16 is a no go on the new board.
> 
> testing 4000 cl 17-17-17-37 same kit......


Which exact memory kit are you using? Its 4x8 I assume. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Baldingbaldguy

Hello everyone. I'm looking for the modded f9j bios provided by KendarWolf in an earlier post but unfortunately, the link is no longer valid. I would appreciate it if anyone could help me out, thanks.


----------



## KedarWolf

Baldingbaldguy said:


> Hello everyone. I'm looking for the modded f9j bios provided by KendarWolf in an earlier post but unfortunately, the link is no longer valid. I would appreciate it if anyone could help me out, thanks.


What motherboard model?


----------



## Baldingbaldguy

KedarWolf said:


> What motherboard model?


I'm using the z390 xtreme rev 1.0


----------



## TrebleTA

Ok I've been chating to gigabyte like normal getting my gk version. This is the reply.

Question:No problem, let me know when the RGB version is ready.Untill then I'm using bios f11o RGB, modified with bios f5 microcode.12/14/2021 10:27 AMAnswer:You can try this special BIOS GK.F11.
Please note that with this special BIOS, we will not be responsible for any bug that may arise.12/22/2021 10:20 AMGIGABYTE - eSupport
What's got me is what they mean by bugs that arise. From what I've asked it's just f11 with RGB no other changes requested?
I would think if any arise there be in f11 also?
Not sure what to make of it....


----------



## KedarWolf

Baldingbaldguy said:


> I'm using the z390 xtreme rev 1.0


I'll mod a BIOS and link it as an attachment in about 8 hours when I get home from work.


----------



## sayoXD

Hello Sir @KedarWolf would you mind modding f11o (non gk) and if possible F11 final only with fast microcodes for z390 master? (no firmware upgrades) 
Much appreciated!


----------



## KedarWolf

sayoXD said:


> Hello Sir @KedarWolf would you mind modding f11o (non gk) and if possible F11 final only with fast microcodes for z390 master? (no firmware upgrades)
> Much appreciated!


Will do later.


----------



## Blackmess

Blackmess said:


> Hey @KedarWolf, I haven't found the latest modded bios for the z390 Aorus Ultra. Is it better to stay on your modded F10H beta?
> 
> You're doing life's work, thank you for your service over the years!
> 
> Appreciate ya, 🖖


Hey @KedarWolf, could you also mod the latest z390 Aorus Ultra F10 Bios?

Much appreciated!


----------



## KedarWolf

Baldingbaldguy said:


> Hello everyone. I'm looking for the modded f9j bios provided by KendarWolf in an earlier post but unfortunately, the link is no longer valid. I would appreciate it if anyone could help me out, thanks.


----------



## KedarWolf

Blackmess said:


> Hey @KedarWolf, could you also mod the latest z390 Aorus Ultra F10 Bios?
> 
> Much appreciated!


----------



## KedarWolf

sayoXD said:


> Hello Sir @KedarWolf would you mind modding f11o (non gk) and if possible F11 final only with fast microcodes for z390 master? (no firmware upgrades)
> Much appreciated!


----------



## KedarWolf

sayoXD said:


> Hello Sir @KedarWolf would you mind modding f11o (non gk) and if possible F11 final only with fast microcodes for z390 master? (no firmware upgrades)
> Much appreciated!


Here is a guaranteed working Master BIOS's with all the firmwares updated. Highly recommend you use this version, not the one with only the microcodes updated. A lot of fixes and bugs worked out, better for overall stability.


----------



## Baldingbaldguy

thank you so much


----------



## TrebleTA

@KedarWolf what bug and fixs? As will report to gigabyte if problems. Also have a f11 gk of them just well not sure what there up to so waiting to have a peek before I link. Then if you could do your magic


----------



## sayoXD

Thank you @KedarWolf. What bug fixes if you don't mind me asking? And are there any significant differences between this latest f11o and the f11ogk u modded before?


----------



## zayd

Thank you very much for providing this. This is a text file and different to the previous bios file you provided. Sorry for my lack of knowledge in this regard, but how do I flash using the Rufus method with this file type. Thank you.


----------



## sayoXD

zayd said:


> Thank you very much for providing this. This is a text file and different to the previous bios file you provided. Sorry for my lack of knowledge in this regard, but how do I flash using the Rufus method with this file type. Thank you.


Go to file explorer -> view -> check file name extensions and delete .txt


----------



## zayd

Thank you so much. The damn file downloaded as a pure text file for some reason and I couldn't unzip it.


----------



## zayd

Mr Wolf, if you would be so kind to look at this bios file, in which the requester was asking for a Z390 Aorus Ultra. The one you supplied is for Z390 Aorus Elite, as indicated when trying using efiflash on boot up and it gives an error, not being able to proceed. Thank you kindly.


----------



## ElGreco

Hi all!

After a month of waiting, Gigabyte e-support sent me on 22 DEC 2021 the bios I kindly requested by them that would include RGB support. It is named GK.F11 and was sent to me as GK.F11.zip which I share with you in this message with .txt extension (that has to be removed.

@KedarWolf I have absolutely no idea if this is newer or better than the one you moded neither have I installed it! It would be nice if you could have a look!

Anyway, I just thought to share this with you guys.

BTW, below are the messages we exchanged with e-support just if you want to get the idea why they sent me this file...

*My reply to their first response follows:*
_"Could you please clarify if the G2 edition I have of the Z390 Aorus master uses the exact same bios as the non G2 edition?
Also, could you please send me for the G2 edition the F11o WITH RGB Support bios?
Thank you!"_

and below is *their last reply sent together with the NEW BIOS* (I suppose with RGB support):

_"Dear customer,

Thank you for emailing GIGABYTE.
We would like to help you on this issue.
Please try the attached BIOS GK.F11
GK.F11.zip

We are looking into the issue and will come back to you ASAP after figuring it out clearly.

Thanks for your patience._"


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

clipz_bg said:


> How is the new f12 bios for Z390 Auros Pro? I read about it that if you update you cant go back?


I have the new F12 and it is pretty decent in my opinion. Before that I was using F12k. Doesn't seem to be much of a difference at least performance wise, if anything probably a little better. Although every time I exit the BIOS whether I save or just exit without saving it shuts down then turns back on. It also appears it trains memory differently I'm assuming that's the reason for the different power cycling behavior.


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

steve_reg said:


> Has anyone been able to run 4000Mhz 4x8gb config on the Z390 Elite? I have 4x8 micron revB 3600C16 and a 9900k. Despite messing with everything the board seems to have a wall at 3733-3800, sometimes it doesn't even boot and get stuck on vga debug led having to clear cmos, sometimes it boots at 3733 but cpuz reports running at 3400mhz.. is it due the 4layers design or some bug? I am on bios F10H.
> 
> The weird thing is that QVL shows it is "capable" of doing 4133-4000 on Samsung b-die, so I am wondering if anyone could get it stable?
> View attachment 2537852


I experienced the same with my Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi with 9900k. Couldn't get above 3866 with 16gb of micron-E. I had trouble getting one error using Micron E-die. It turned out to be tFAW, basically I had to leave it on auto as any adjustment would result in error. I bought a kit of 4x8 of 3200cl14 B-die that was on an A0 PCB. I could not get that over 3900 stable. I was able to boot at higher frequencies but was not stable at all. Then my friend wanted his memory back lol. So I bought this kit F4-4000C18Q-32GTZKW 18-19-19-39 B-die as it was on the QVL and happened to be cheaper than 3200cl14 and 3600cl16 kits. This kit performs superbly. I believe the difference was the PCB. This board favors A2 PCBs for sure.

So I have been meaning to make a post about my memory overclocking on Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi. I am able to boot in at 4400mhz and run a stress test but not stable. 4400 and 4200 are easier to post than 4000 or 4133. I even posted at 4533 easier. I have screenshots if anyone is interested. I have 4000 16-15-15-28 1.45v 1.16vSA&IO with super tight secondaries and tertiaries stable through many hours of TM5, OCCT and HCImemtest. As well as 3900 15-15-15-28 with tight sub-timings. 4200 was stable at 16-18-18-36. I haven't messed around a whole lot above 4000 as my board doesn't even like 4000 and I doubt it would do those frequencies with tight timings. I need to set VCCIO to 1.35v to POST at 4000, but then I can lower down to 1.16v and I'm stable. Not sure why but I hope someone has some clarification. What's weird is both 4400 and 4200 POST with 1.25v VCCIO. I know four sticks are harder to overclock than two and my board is T-topology same as all the other Aorus Z390 boards. I can't seem to get 15-15-15-30 to post at 4000. I know the sticks can do that as I stuck them into my buddies Z390 Asus ITX board obviously two at a time, but I'm guessing it's my motherboard since it's not great at memory overclocking. Not 100% but I think what I have stable is really good even if it was a better mobo. Approximate latency using Aida64 with the 3900cl15 profile is 38ns. At 4000 16-15-15-28 it's only a touch higher around 38.3. That's really good I think(right?) in general let alone on an Aorus Pro. Is trying to go for [email protected] unrealistic with four sticks? It's either because there are 4 sticks or my motherboard trains weird when I try for that and it definitely trains weirdly at times. I post/train faster as speeds not supported than I do at some supported speeds. If I can post at 4400 and run a stress test on a frequency I consider way out of reach for a mobo like this then I'd like to think I would be able to hit 4000cl15.

Also memory multiplier tweaker can change the RTLs and possibly IOLs. I have seen RTLs change but I cant remember if IOL changed as well. I am stating this because I could not find any info on it. I even emailed gigabyte and there response was what I thought it would be. "Memory multiplier tweaker allow customer manually over clock memory."

I would like to thank everyone on this sites forums for all the absolutely superb information. It's the only place I have been able to find in-depth answers to my increasingly complicated questions. I haven't asked one question directly as the information is almost always out there and more often than not it's here.


----------



## cisco150

ElGreco said:


> Hi all!
> 
> After a month of waiting, Gigabyte e-support sent me on 22 DEC 2021 the bios I kindly requested by them that would include RGB support. It is named GK.F11 and was sent to me as GK.F11.zip which I share with you in this message with .txt extension (that has to be removed.
> 
> @KedarWolf I have absolutely no idea if this is newer or better than the one you moded neither have I installed it! It would be nice if you could have a look!
> 
> Anyway, I just thought to share this with you guys.
> 
> BTW, below are the messages we exchanged with e-support just if you want to get the idea why they sent me this file...
> 
> *My reply to their first response follows:*
> _"Could you please clarify if the G2 edition I have of the Z390 Aorus master uses the exact same bios as the non G2 edition?
> Also, could you please send me for the G2 edition the F11o WITH RGB Support bios?
> Thank you!"_
> 
> and below is *their last reply sent together with the NEW BIOS* (I suppose with RGB support):
> 
> _"Dear customer,
> 
> Thank you for emailing GIGABYTE.
> We would like to help you on this issue.
> Please try the attached BIOS GK.F11
> GK.F11.zip
> 
> We are looking into the issue and will come back to you ASAP after figuring it out clearly.
> 
> Thanks for your patience._"


I tried this bios but does not have the rebar for the 3000 series cards in bios. thanks for sharing


----------



## [email protected]

ARTimusMAXimus said:


> I experienced the same with my Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi with 9900k. Couldn't get above 3866 with 16gb of micron-E. I had trouble getting one error using Micron E-die. It turned out to be tFAW, basically I had to leave it on auto as any adjustment would result in error. I bought a kit of 4x8 of 3200cl14 B-die that was on an A0 PCB. I could not get that over 3900 stable. I was able to boot at higher frequencies but was not stable at all. Then my friend wanted his memory back lol. So I bought this kit F4-4000C18Q-32GTZKW 18-19-19-39 B-die as it was on the QVL and happened to be cheaper than 3200cl14 and 3600cl16 kits. This kit performs superbly. I believe the difference was the PCB. This board favors A2 PCBs for sure.
> 
> Поэтому я хотел написать пост о разгоне моей памяти на Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi. Я могу загрузиться на частоте 4400 МГц и выполнить стресс-тест, но не стабильно. 4400 и 4200 разместить проще, чем 4000 или 4133. Я даже написал на 4533 проще. У меня есть скриншоты, если кому-то интересно. У меня 4000 16-15-15-28 1,45 В 1,16 vSA и ввода-вывода с супер плотными вторичными и третьими, стабильными в течение многих часов TM5, OCCT и HCImemtest. А также 3900 15-15-15-28 с жесткими подменами. 4200 были стабильными в 16-18-18-36. Я не возился намного выше 4000, так как моей плате даже не нравится 4000, и я сомневаюсь, что она будет работать на этих частотах с жестким временем. Мне нужно установить VCCIO на 1,35 В, чтобы разместить на 4000, но затем я могу снизить напряжение до 1,16 В, и я стабилен. Не знаю почему, но я надеюсь, что у кого-то есть какие-то разъяснения. Что странно, так это сообщение 4400 и 4200 с VCCIO 1,25 В. Я знаю, что четыре палочки труднее разогнать, чем две, и моя плата имеет T-топологию, такую же, как и все остальные платы Aorus Z390. Кажется, я не могу заставить 15-15-15-30 опубликовать сообщение на 4000. Я знаю, что палочки могут это сделать, так как я вставил их в плату Asus ITX моих приятелей Z390, очевидно, по две за раз, но я предполагаю, что это моя материнская плата, так как она не очень хорошо разгоняет память. Не на 100%, но я думаю, что то, что у меня стабильно, действительно хорошо, даже если бы это был лучший мобо. Приблизительная задержка при использовании Aida64 с профилем 3900cl15 составляет 38 мс. При 4000 16-15-15-28 это всего лишь немного выше, около 38,3. Это действительно хорошо, я думаю(верно?) В целом, не говоря уже о Aorus Pro. Является ли попытка перейти на [email protected] МГц нереалистичной с четырьмя стиками? Это либо потому, что есть 4 палочки, либо моя материнская плата странно тренируется, когда я пытаюсь это сделать, и время от времени она определенно странно тренируется. Я отправляю/тренируюсь быстрее, так как скорости не поддерживаются, чем на некоторых поддерживаемых скоростях. Если я смогу опубликовать сообщение на 4400 и провести стресс-тест на частоте, которую я считаю недоступной для такого моба, то мне хотелось бы думать, что я смогу набрать 4000cl15.
> 
> Также настройщик множителя памяти может изменять RTLS и, возможно, IOL. Я видел, как меняются RTLS, но я не могу вспомнить, изменился ли также IOL. Я заявляю об этом, потому что не смог найти никакой информации об этом. Я даже отправил по электронной почте gigabyte, и там ответ был таким, каким я и думал. "Настройка множителя памяти позволяет клиенту вручную управлять тактовой памятью".
> 
> Я хотел бы поблагодарить всех на форумах этого сайта за всю абсолютно превосходную информацию. Это единственное место, где я смог найти подробные ответы на мои все более сложные вопросы. Я не задал ни одного вопроса напрямую, так как информация почти всегда есть, и чаще всего она здесь.
> [/ЦИТАТА]
> Я перед покупкой решил что не буду использовать оперативную память на частоте отличной от 4000 MHz поэтому выбрал память Patriot 4000 cl19 из коробки . На своей z390 Ultra использую 4000 4x8 cl17 dram1.38v. , VCCIO сразу 1.14 v , IO-L-13 мат.плата выставляет сразу , блок RTL на любой частоте изменения в меньшую сторону не применяет что очень плохо . IO-L -6-7 мат.плата выставляет после перезагрузки на частотах 3900 MHz и ниже но проблема сохранить IO-L -6-7 после перезагрузки мат. плата делает очень неохотно . Пытался изменить сам биос т.к многое недоступно но что управляет тем что на частотах 3900 MHz и ниже IO-L -6-7 а на частотах 4000 MHz IO-L-13-15 не понятно
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Память нормально разгоняется на частотах выше 4000 MHz , для 4000 cl 16 dram 1.43v. . Для частот меньше 4000 четырёх планок важно для правильной тренировки выставлять в биосе Rank Interleaving - Enabled , Realtime Memory Timing-Enabled после тренировки в avto , Memory Enhancement Settings -Normal.


----------



## zayd

zayd said:


> Mr Wolf, if you would be so kind to look at this bios file. Its for the Z390 Aorus Elite, as indicated when trying using efiflash on boot up and it gives an error, not being able to proceed. Thank you kindly.


Bump please.


----------



## TrebleTA

cisco150 said:


> I tried this bios but does not have the rebar for the 3000 series cards in bios. thanks for sharing





ElGreco said:


> Hi all!
> 
> After a month of waiting, Gigabyte e-support sent me on 22 DEC 2021 the bios I kindly requested by them that would include RGB support. It is named GK.F11 and was sent to me as GK.F11.zip which I share with you in this message with .txt extension (that has to be removed.
> 
> @KedarWolf I have absolutely no idea if this is newer or better than the one you moded neither have I installed it! It would be nice if you could have a look!
> 
> Anyway, I just thought to share this with you guys.
> 
> BTW, below are the messages we exchanged with e-support just if you want to get the idea why they sent me this file...
> 
> *My reply to their first response follows:*
> _"Could you please clarify if the G2 edition I have of the Z390 Aorus master uses the exact same bios as the non G2 edition?
> Also, could you please send me for the G2 edition the F11o WITH RGB Support bios?
> Thank you!"_
> 
> and below is *their last reply sent together with the NEW BIOS* (I suppose with RGB support):
> 
> _"Dear customer,
> 
> Thank you for emailing GIGABYTE.
> We would like to help you on this issue.
> Please try the attached BIOS GK.F11
> GK.F11.zip
> 
> We are looking into the issue and will come back to you ASAP after figuring it out clearly.
> 
> Thanks for your patience._"


Yes I got it gk.f11 of them yet did not share as they said there not responsible for any bugs that arise. As I stated 1-2 pages back.

So resize bar is the first bug.

To me it looks like it's the same bios to the master rev 1.0 and the g.2 but gigabyte seem busy. Yet I would of expected they new if g2 was the same as the rev 1.0. So a bad responce by them.

@KedarWolf I know your a busy man and have been a great help to us all so thank you.

What I was going to do was see what the difference was between f11 and f11gk if possable and devices etc. But since the responce I got from gigabyte at the moment I'll keep on f11o gk mod or use the new moddied by @KedarWolf 

@KedarWolf is your new f11 moddied still a capsule?


----------



## ElGreco

cisco150 said:


> I tried this bios but does not have the rebar for the 3000 series cards in bios. thanks for sharing


Sorry to ask this, but are you sure you selected the correct settings to make the rebar visible and selectable?

STEP 1 : BIOS → Advanced Mode → Settings → Above 4G Decoding, choose “Enabled”
STEP 2 : BIOS → Advanced Mode → Settings → Re-Size BAR Support, choose “Auto”
STEP 3 : BIOS → Advanced Mode → Boot → CSM Support, choose “Disabled”



https://www.gigabyte.com/WebPage/785/NVIDIA_resizable_bar.html


----------



## Blackmess

Hey @KedarWolf , sorry for the late reply, I understand we've all been busy during the holiday season.

As mentioned by @zayd, the Aorus Ultra bios you provided is actually for the Elite so we're unable to flash our motherboards.

Could you take a look? The Aorus Ultra Bios ID is 8A1FAG0N and the one provided in your post is 8A1FAG0I.

Let me know if ya need anything on my end,

Thanks again!


----------



## cisco150

ElGreco said:


> Sorry to ask this, but are you sure you selected the correct settings to make the rebar visible and selectable?
> 
> STEP 1 : BIOS → Advanced Mode → Settings → Above 4G Decoding, choose “Enabled”
> STEP 2 : BIOS → Advanced Mode → Settings → Re-Size BAR Support, choose “Auto”
> STEP 3 : BIOS → Advanced Mode → Boot → CSM Support, choose “Disabled”
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/WebPage/785/NVIDIA_resizable_bar.html


Yea after the 4g decoding its working.
but after flashing to this i can not flash to the final f11 from @KedarWolf


----------



## ElGreco

cisco150 said:


> Yea after the 4g decoding its working.
> but after flashing to this i can not flash to the final f11 from @KedarWolf


Merry Christmas everybody 

So the F11.GK has no REBAR bug as you say. @TrebleTA , this is good news  

@TrebleTA , I would do a hasch check to compare the F11.GK version I was sent by Gigabyte with yours. In the email they sent me, they did not sayanything about bugs!

@cisco150 and all...
Regarding "flasshing to F11 by @KedarWolf" ,... which one?
I thought that any version of F11 as long as it is F11.GK or F11 or F11 moded would be reflashable to another F11 version if using efiflash /x /c 
I thought that the only limitation of this (F11 versions bioses) is that you cannot roll-back to F11o F11n etc...
Is this true? Anybody?


----------



## cisco150

[QUOTE = "ElGreco, post: 28917314, member: 121908"]
Merry Christmas everybody 

So the F11.GK has no REBAR bug as you say. [USER = 641894] @TrebleTA [/ USER], this is good news 

[USER = 641894] @TrebleTA [/ USER], I would do a hasch check to compare the F11.GK version I was sent by Gigabyte with yours. In the email they sent me, they did not sayanything about bugs!

[USER = 497491] @ cisco150 [/ USER] and all ...
Regarding "flasshing to F11 by [USER = 350041] @KedarWolf [/ USER]", ... which one?
I thought that any version of F11 as long as it is F11.GK or F11 or F11 moded would be reflashable to another F11 version if using efiflash / x / c
I thought that the only limitation of this (F11 versions bioses) is that you cannot roll-back to F11o F11n etc ...
Is this true? Anybody?
[/ QUOTE]
I was trying to flash from @KedarWolf zip ( Z390MasterMicrocodesAndFirmware ) bios F11Final.F11 from F11.GK you uploaded


----------



## KedarWolf

Blackmess said:


> Hey @KedarWolf , sorry for the late reply, I understand we've all been busy during the holiday season.
> 
> As mentioned by @zayd, the Aorus Ultra bios you provided is actually for the Elite so we're unable to flash our motherboards.
> 
> Could you take a look? The Aorus Ultra Bios ID is 8A1FAG0N and the one provided in your post is 8A1FAG0I.
> 
> Let me know if ya need anything on my end,
> 
> Thanks again!


I need the full name of the BIOS. Searching just 8A1FAG0N finds absolutely nothing.


----------



## KedarWolf

Ultra F10 Final, NO FLASHING BACK TO OLDER VERSIONS FROM THIS BIOS.


Blackmess said:


> Hey @KedarWolf , sorry for the late reply, I understand we've all been busy during the holiday season.
> 
> As mentioned by @zayd, the Aorus Ultra bios you provided is actually for the Elite so we're unable to flash our motherboards.
> 
> Could you take a look? The Aorus Ultra Bios ID is 8A1FAG0N and the one provided in your post is 8A1FAG0I.
> 
> Let me know if ya need anything on my end,
> 
> Thanks again!


Ultra F10 final fixed.

NO FLASHING BACK TO OLD BIOS AFTER THIS BIOS.


----------



## cisco150

I was trying to flash from @KedarWolf zip ( Z390MasterMicrocodesAndFirmware ) bios F11Final.F11 from @ElGreco F11.GK that he uploaded. is there a way to flash your over his @KedarWolf


----------



## TrebleTA

The f11.gk that is on here is for the master g.2.
I have the master rev1.0.
Linked here
At moment I will not have time to compare the g.2 version with my rev1 version as busy with my kids.
Reply from gigabyte is that it is f11 with just RGB added so replyed would the bugs not be in f11, still waiting for more information on what they mean by bugs that arise.


----------



## ASCP

@KedarWolf
Hello KedarWolf.
Excuse me but can you provide the fastest-modded bios for f12 (29 Nov 2021) for z390 aorus pro rev1.0?
Sorry if my English is weird I'm using a translator.


----------



## Oasis

ARTimusMAXimus said:


> I have the new F12 and it is pretty decent in my opinion. Before that I was using F12k. Doesn't seem to be much of a difference at least performance wise, if anything probably a little better. Although every time I exit the BIOS whether I save or just exit without saving it shuts down then turns back on. It also appears it trains memory differently I'm assuming that's the reason for the different power cycling behavior.


can you say if F12 (final 11/29) includes Resizable-BAR support?


----------



## TrebleTA

Another reply from gigabyte saying they will not support me using the f11.gk bios!! 
Think that adding RGB is breaking the bios and they dont want to admit it.


----------



## cisco150

TrebleTA said:


> Another reply from gigabyte saying they will not support me using the f11.gk bios!!
> Think that adding RGB is breaking the bios and they dont want to admit it.





TrebleTA said:


> Another reply from gigabyte saying they will not support me using the f11.gk bios!!
> Think that adding RGB is breaking the bios and they dont want to admit it.


Could be. but i also think the app is more easer or you can use this program for rgb works great no need for fusion Thanks for downloading SignalRGB! its called Signal Rgb


----------



## zayd

KedarWolf said:


> Ultra F10 Final, NO FLASHING BACK TO OLDER VERSIONS FROM THIS BIOS.
> 
> 
> Ultra F10 final fixed.
> 
> NO FLASHING BACK TO OLD BIOS AFTER THIS BIOS.


Thank you very much for doing this for us, especially during the holiday season. Would you be kind enough to say, if there are any performance improvements with this final bios update compared to the last one, or is it purely the security fixes that have been made.


----------



## TrebleTA

cisco150 said:


> Could be. but i also think the app is more easer or you can use this program for rgb works great no need for fusion Thanks for downloading SignalRGB! its called Signal Rgb


Hoping to get some my time tomorrow so will check that out, was using openrgb but has problems with the RGB on the master


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

Oasis said:


> can you say if F12 (final 11/29) includes Resizable-BAR support?


Yes resizable bar is supported


----------



## AP514

Hey guys been awhile but I just updated my Z390 Pro - BIOS to the F12 (for security ??)...
Now I get Asetek USB installed on my Removable Devices. 
My EVGA Flow control for my CLC does not show Pump Speed or Fan Speed (just Blank) - I have done a reinstall on Software..
Set Smart Fan5 in Bios to %100 CPU, Auto and PWM no help. Still blank. Can not control my CLC.
It says I can not go back to F11 on website but really thinking about try'n. Or maybe reflashing the F12 again ??

Some Help fixing this stuff...The OCD in me is driving me Crazy.


----------



## KedarWolf

AP514 said:


> Hey guys been awhile but I just updated my Z390 Pro - BIOS to the F12 (for security ??)...
> Now I get Asetek USB installed on my Removable Devices.
> My EVGA Flow control for my CLC does not show Pump Speed or Fan Speed (just Blank) - I have done a reinstall on Software..
> Set Smart Fan5 in Bios to %100 CPU, Auto and PWM no help. Still blank. Can not control my CLC.
> It says I can not go back to F11 on website but really thinking about try'n. Or maybe reflashing the F12 again ??
> 
> Some Help fixing this stuff...The OCD in me is driving me Crazy.


I can PM you a modded efiflash that worked for someone else to flash back.


----------



## ASCP

KedarWolf said:


> I can PM you a modded efiflash that worked for someone else to flash back.


Can you give me the modded efiflash too? I also flashed the f12 and I'm having a minor performance hit but I'm stuck and can't go back..


----------



## KedarWolf

Check your PMs. Command is:

Replace with the name of your bios, like 1.F12



Code:


efiflash /c biosname.f**


----------



## FriKKels

Hi All

I recently flashed my Gigabyte Z390 Pro Wifi to the new F12 Capsule Bios, worst idea I've ever had 

My 9900k is now unstable on default bios settings(freezes,BSOD and WHEA errors in event log). I never OC the chip before (i know, why buy it then) so never changed any settings in the bios.

First I suspected hardware and tested everything all ok. I noticed that my symptoms mimics OC issues when the settings are wrong aswell as some noticeable coil whine after the bios update. This lead me to suspect that my 9900k is not running the right settings.

Ive changed the following in the Bios and since last night its has run stable without any freezes, BSOD or WHEA errors in event log:

changed all CPU voltage settings from auto --> Normal
Turned off Cstate
Intel turbo boost technology from Enabled --> disabled (think this made the most difference)
CPU vcore loadline calibration from auto --> Turbo
XMP is currently off

My CPU under performs now, but at least so far stable and able to plane some games (Vanguard, Warzone and BF2042). Im still testing the stability but so far so good.

Since i cant go back to the previous bios can anyone recommended some Bios settings for me to try with my i9900k, Corsair 2x16GB 3200mhz and Gigabyte Aorus 2080 super?

Also please be specific with the settings as I mentioned before im not up to date with the latest OC settings.
Ive turned off the RGB for the mobo and Cstate but still coil whine, any ideas here as well?

Thx
FriKKels


----------



## Qbm87

FriKKels said:


> Hi All
> 
> I recently flashed my Gigabyte Z390 Pro Wifi to the new F12 Capsule Bios, worst idea I've ever had
> 
> My 9900k is now unstable on default bios settings(freezes,BSOD and WHEA errors in event log). I never OC the chip before (i know, why buy it then) so never changed any settings in the bios.
> 
> First I suspected hardware and tested everything all ok. I noticed that my symptoms mimics OC issues when the settings are wrong aswell as some noticeable coil whine after the bios update. This lead me to suspect that my 9900k is not running the right settings.
> 
> Ive changed the following in the Bios and since last night its has run stable without any freezes, BSOD or WHEA errors in event log:
> 
> changed all CPU voltage settings from auto --> Normal
> Turned off Cstate
> Intel turbo boost technology from Enabled --> disabled (think this made the most difference)
> CPU vcore loadline calibration from auto --> Turbo
> XMP is currently off
> 
> My CPU under performs now, but at least so far stable and able to plane some games (Vanguard, Warzone and BF2042). Im still testing the stability but so far so good.
> 
> Since i cant go back to the previous bios can anyone recommended some Bios settings for me to try with my i9900k, Corsair 2x16GB 3200mhz and Gigabyte Aorus 2080 super?
> 
> Also please be specific with the settings as I mentioned before im not up to date with the latest OC settings.
> Ive turned off the RGB for the mobo and Cstate but still coil whine, any ideas here as well?
> 
> Thx
> FriKKels


Setup up xmp but everything else to default then CPU voltage set to offset mode and set to -0.010. Obviously disable c states when needed. I found that to on some of the latest bios on the master.


----------



## FriKKels

Qbm87 said:


> Setup up xmp but everything else to default then CPU voltage set to offset mode and set to -0.010. Obviously disable c states when needed. I found that to on some of the latest bios on the master.


Hi

The only setting that allows me -0.010 is the Dynamic Vcore(DVID) which is currently set to normal (+0.000V) , is this what i need to change to -0.010V


----------



## AndrejB

FriKKels said:


> Hi
> 
> The only setting that allows me -0.010 is the Dynamic Vcore(DVID) which is currently set to normal (+0.000V) , is this what i need to change to -0.010V


Did you try resetting the cmos?
(Turn off psu, hold reset cmos button for 5s, turn on psu, turn on pc. It should "restart" 3 times)

It would be pretty bad if the official bios couldn't run stock.


----------



## FriKKels

AndrejB said:


> Did you try resetting the cmos?
> (Turn off psu, hold reset cmos button for 5s, turn on psu, turn on pc. It should "restart" 3 times)
> 
> It would be pretty bad if the official bios couldn't run stock.


I have pulled the battery and when i loaded back into the bios i got the message that the CMOS has been cleared.


----------



## TrebleTA

After flashing the bios you did load defaults?

2nd changing CPU load line to turbo your cpu be running high voltages!

Z390 Master Rev1.0. GK.F11 Bios(RGB)
Linked here
@KedarWolf hope your having a good Christmas. When free could you mod this bios with all your magic please.


----------



## FriKKels

TrebleTA said:


> After flashing the bios you did load defaults?
> 
> 2nd changing CPU load line to turbo your cpu be running high voltages!
> 
> Z390 Master Rev1.0. GK.F11 Bios(RGB)
> Linked here
> @KedarWolf hope your having a good Christmas. When free could you mod this bios with all your magic please.


Yeah, i did load optimal defaults, didnt work. i will switch the cpu load line back to auto and see if it brings back the errors


----------



## TrebleTA

Right so for now load defaults dont change anything else and test.
What you using to test?

If under defaults your getting errors etc then maybe the ram or your gpu is not happy, If your sure it's not that then I would hassle gigabyte


----------



## OC-24/7

KedarWolf said:


> That file is not updated with the latest LAN and RST firmware and the fastest microcodes.
> 
> Which is why you use the file I provide with efiflash.


Thank you for everything


----------



## FriKKels

TrebleTA said:


> Right so for now load defaults dont change anything else and test.
> What you using to test?
> 
> If under defaults your getting errors etc then maybe the ram or your gpu is not happy, If your sure it's not that then I would hassle gigabyte


Ok, Loaded optimal defaults in bios. Booted to windows, checked event viewer, First WHEA error since last night, opened steam, opened 3d mark, Blue screen critical processed died.

Back in Bios loaded my "stable" settings (I saved what i mentioned in my first post as a profile before i loaded optimal defaults)

Back in windows, no WHEA error so far, opened steam, running 3d mark, so far no issues.


----------



## zayd

I think, I will persevere with the last bios update from Gigabyte before this capsule crap. I don't relish the fact of being stuck with a broken system due to the latest bios being locked from flashing!


----------



## TrebleTA

FriKKels said:


> Ok, Loaded optimal defaults in bios. Booted to windows, checked event viewer, First WHEA error since last night, opened steam, opened 3d mark, Blue screen critical processed died.
> 
> Back in Bios loaded my "stable" settings (I saved what i mentioned in my first post as a profile before i loaded optimal defaults)
> 
> Back in windows, no WHEA error so far, opened steam, running 3d mark, so far no issues.


If that is the case contact gigabyte e-Support. Default setting should be a fail safe. So if that is failing it's not good. 
Can always try going back to a older bios?


----------



## Qbm87

FriKKels said:


> Dynamic


Yeah that's the one sorry was at work so couldn't recall off the top of my head what it was called. Tried flashing to gigabyte official latest bios master rev 1 from modded bios through qflash but get a mismatch and fail. Any ideas been out of the loop for a little while sorry.


----------



## FriKKels

TrebleTA said:


> If that is the case contact gigabyte e-Support. Default setting should be a fail safe. So if that is failing it's not good.
> Can always try going back to a older bios?


Cant go back from the capsule bios. its stated so on the bios page. I tried but it doesnt allow you to flash back.


----------



## FriKKels

FriKKels said:


> Hi All
> 
> I recently flashed my Gigabyte Z390 Pro Wifi to the new F12 Capsule Bios, worst idea I've ever had
> 
> My 9900k is now unstable on default bios settings(freezes,BSOD and WHEA errors in event log). I never OC the chip before (i know, why buy it then) so never changed any settings in the bios.
> 
> First I suspected hardware and tested everything all ok. I noticed that my symptoms mimics OC issues when the settings are wrong aswell as some noticeable coil whine after the bios update. This lead me to suspect that my 9900k is not running the right settings.
> 
> Ive changed the following in the Bios and since last night its has run stable without any freezes, BSOD or WHEA errors in event log:
> 
> changed all CPU voltage settings from auto --> Normal
> Turned off Cstate
> Intel turbo boost technology from Enabled --> disabled (think this made the most difference)
> CPU vcore loadline calibration from auto --> Turbo
> XMP is currently off
> 
> My CPU under performs now, but at least so far stable and able to plane some games (Vanguard, Warzone and BF2042). Im still testing the stability but so far so good.
> 
> Since i cant go back to the previous bios can anyone recommended some Bios settings for me to try with my i9900k, Corsair 2x16GB 3200mhz and Gigabyte Aorus 2080 super?
> 
> Also please be specific with the settings as I mentioned before im not up to date with the latest OC settings.
> Ive turned off the RGB for the mobo and Cstate but still coil whine, any ideas here as well?
> 
> Thx
> FriKKels


@KedarWolf , Can you maybe suggest some magical manual settings i can try for stock stability or any OC settings that is known to work for most people. At this point the above settings is the only settings i have gotten to be stable. all other suggestions has not helped. I have opened a ticket with Gigabyte and they are looking into it but this could take weeks


----------



## FriKKels

Qbm87 said:


> Yeah that's the one sorry was at work so couldn't recall off the top of my head what it was called. Tried flashing to gigabyte official latest bios master rev 1 from modded bios through qflash but get a mismatch and fail. Any ideas been out of the loop for a little while sorry.


Nope, did not work 
I have tried just switching off intel turbo boost on optimal defaults but that also seems unstable, my bios settings in my first post is the only ones so far that is holding stable.


----------



## TrebleTA

@FriKKels if you pm @KedarWolf he can share a patched efiflash that can help roll back the bios


----------



## chrispaida

@KedarWolf hi! i need the patched efiflash to roll back on a previous BIOS ver. as well, but can't send a PM here


----------



## TrebleTA

Happy New Year all, Hope you all have a blast


----------



## Qbm87

FriKKels said:


> Nope, did not work
> I have tried just switching off intel turbo boost on optimal defaults but that also seems unstable, my bios settings in my first post is the only ones so far that is holding stable.


Maybe try occt mem stability see if mem is the issue or CPU do you have hwinfo64 screen with voltage settings so we can try and help more. Seems either a mem issue of it being unstable maybe at xmp but if you're leaving it at stock 2133 to do the tests then most probably a power draw or voltage issue with the latest bios seems odd. Presuming it was a clean flash of bios done through qflash. Maybe worth trying to reflash see if that helps any. I'm not to impressed with gigabyte as can't leave on c states otherwise the vrms scream at me and putting anymore than 1 nvme gives me constant crashes which isn't great consider they put 3 slots on the master board and it wasn't cheap and getting a new board cost at least £200-300 for a 9900ks that might be dead in the water next gen.


----------



## Dannyele

ARTimusMAXimus said:


> I experienced the same with my Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi with 9900k. Couldn't get above 3866 with 16gb of micron-E. I had trouble getting one error using Micron E-die. It turned out to be tFAW, basically I had to leave it on auto as any adjustment would result in error. I bought a kit of 4x8 of 3200cl14 B-die that was on an A0 PCB. I could not get that over 3900 stable. I was able to boot at higher frequencies but was not stable at all. Then my friend wanted his memory back lol. So I bought this kit F4-4000C18Q-32GTZKW 18-19-19-39 B-die as it was on the QVL and happened to be cheaper than 3200cl14 and 3600cl16 kits. This kit performs superbly. I believe the difference was the PCB. This board favors A2 PCBs for sure.
> 
> So I have been meaning to make a post about my memory overclocking on Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi. I am able to boot in at 4400mhz and run a stress test but not stable. 4400 and 4200 are easier to post than 4000 or 4133. I even posted at 4533 easier. I have screenshots if anyone is interested. I have 4000 16-15-15-28 1.45v 1.16vSA&IO with super tight secondaries and tertiaries stable through many hours of TM5, OCCT and HCImemtest. As well as 3900 15-15-15-28 with tight sub-timings. 4200 was stable at 16-18-18-36. I haven't messed around a whole lot above 4000 as my board doesn't even like 4000 and I doubt it would do those frequencies with tight timings. I need to set VCCIO to 1.35v to POST at 4000, but then I can lower down to 1.16v and I'm stable. Not sure why but I hope someone has some clarification. What's weird is both 4400 and 4200 POST with 1.25v VCCIO. I know four sticks are harder to overclock than two and my board is T-topology same as all the other Aorus Z390 boards. I can't seem to get 15-15-15-30 to post at 4000. I know the sticks can do that as I stuck them into my buddies Z390 Asus ITX board obviously two at a time, but I'm guessing it's my motherboard since it's not great at memory overclocking. Not 100% but I think what I have stable is really good even if it was a better mobo. Approximate latency using Aida64 with the 3900cl15 profile is 38ns. At 4000 16-15-15-28 it's only a touch higher around 38.3. That's really good I think(right?) in general let alone on an Aorus Pro. Is trying to go for [email protected] unrealistic with four sticks? It's either because there are 4 sticks or my motherboard trains weird when I try for that and it definitely trains weirdly at times. I post/train faster as speeds not supported than I do at some supported speeds. If I can post at 4400 and run a stress test on a frequency I consider way out of reach for a mobo like this then I'd like to think I would be able to hit 4000cl15.
> 
> Also memory multiplier tweaker can change the RTLs and possibly IOLs. I have seen RTLs change but I cant remember if IOL changed as well. I am stating this because I could not find any info on it. I even emailed gigabyte and there response was what I thought it would be. "Memory multiplier tweaker allow customer manually over clock memory."
> 
> I would like to thank everyone on this sites forums for all the absolutely superb information. It's the only place I have been able to find in-depth answers to my increasingly complicated questions. I haven't asked one question directly as the information is almost always out there and more often than not it's here.


Hello buddy,

Do you mind to share that profiles please? This are my current settings with the Z390 Aorus Master and x4 of F4-4266C19D-16GTZR, but not stable at 100%, so I would like to try the 3900MHz profile as is faster than my 4133 MHz...



http://imgur.com/UEvAPiU


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

Dannyele said:


> Hello buddy,
> 
> Do you mind to share that profiles please? This are my current settings with the Z390 Aorus Master and x4 of F4-4266C19D-16GTZR, but not stable at 100%, so I would like to try the 3900MHz profile as is faster than my 4133 MHz...
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/UEvAPiU


Absolutely, it would be my pleasure. Happy New Year! This is what I am currently stable at. I thought it seemed like a better profile as I didn't lose latency. I run 3900 with the same settings pretty much except tCWL and tCL are set to 15. I also turn tRFC down a touch. Ram voltage is 1.44v with these settings VCCIO&SA are both 1.16v. At 3900 15-15-15-28 I needed 1.45v. Almost forgot I used my auto values for RttNom, RttPark, RttWr. Problem is sometimes it can show and set more than one auto value for same timings/frequency settings depending on how it trains. As an example you will see set in BIOS RttNom 60 Rttpark 20 RttWr 40. While the auto values that should have been set show RttNom 60 Rttpark 120 RttWr 40. Sometimes Rttpark would be 60 as well but never actually set as that while on auto. I set 60,120,40 manually as that worked best for me. It might be different values for you but they can greatly affect overclocking. I hope this helps and that I explained everything ok. If you have any questions don't be afraid to ask.


----------



## [email protected]

ARTimusMAXimus said:


> Absolutely, it would be my pleasure. Happy New Year! This is what I am currently stable at. I thought it seemed like a better profile as I didn't lose latency. I run 3900 with the same settings pretty much except tCWL and tCL are set to 15. I also turn tRFC down a touch. Ram voltage is 1.44v with these settings VCCIO&SA are both 1.16v. At 3900 15-15-15-28 I needed 1.45v. Almost forgot I used my auto values for RttNom, RttPark, RttWr. Problem is sometimes it can show and set more than one auto value for same timings/frequency settings depending on how it trains. As an example you will see set in BIOS RttNom 60 Rttpark 20 RttWr 40. While the auto values that should have been set show RttNom 60 Rttpark 120 RttWr 40. Sometimes Rttpark would be 60 as well but never actually set as that while on auto. I set 60,120,40 manually as that worked best for me. It might be different values for you but they can greatly affect overclocking. I hope this helps and that I explained everything ok. If you have any questions don't be afraid to ask.
> View attachment 2540426


IO-L-13-14 это плохо .


----------



## kiczkabog

Hi. Can anyone send me a modded bios for Z390 Aorus PRO (no wifi) F12 with possibility of return from official?


----------



## AP514

Well, my OP System locked up on me ...Tried several ways to recover the ops system but no Joy..So, I had to reinstall..whata Pain in the Dick....
All Startd w/ the F12 bios UPDATE...

Note to SELF.."IF it Ant Broke then Let it alone. Damit"


----------



## TrebleTA

The main change to the bios is the tpm, also herd it maybe setting to software and not hardware enabled. To do with the windows 11 changed by default it was disabled. Anyone with more info?


----------



## FriKKels

FriKKels said:


> Hi All
> 
> I recently flashed my Gigabyte Z390 Pro Wifi to the new F12 Capsule Bios, worst idea I've ever had
> 
> My 9900k is now unstable on default bios settings(freezes,BSOD and WHEA errors in event log). I never OC the chip before (i know, why buy it then) so never changed any settings in the bios.
> 
> First I suspected hardware and tested everything all ok. I noticed that my symptoms mimics OC issues when the settings are wrong aswell as some noticeable coil whine after the bios update. This lead me to suspect that my 9900k is not running the right settings.
> 
> Ive changed the following in the Bios and since last night its has run stable without any freezes, BSOD or WHEA errors in event log:
> 
> changed all CPU voltage settings from auto --> Normal
> Turned off Cstate
> Intel turbo boost technology from Enabled --> disabled (think this made the most difference)
> CPU vcore loadline calibration from auto --> Turbo
> XMP is currently off
> 
> My CPU under performs now, but at least so far stable and able to plane some games (Vanguard, Warzone and BF2042). Im still testing the stability but so far so good.
> 
> Since i cant go back to the previous bios can anyone recommended some Bios settings for me to try with my i9900k, Corsair 2x16GB 3200mhz and Gigabyte Aorus 2080 super?
> 
> Also please be specific with the settings as I mentioned before im not up to date with the latest OC settings.
> Ive turned off the RGB for the mobo and Cstate but still coil whine, any ideas here as well?
> 
> Thx
> FriKKels


Ok, Some more testing has revealed that Intel turbo boost is causing the instability.
Load optimized defaults and just disable intel turbo boost --> Stable
disable turbo boost + XMP profile --> Stable
Next going to try overclock to 5ghz with turbo boost disabled and see if it is stable.
Was turbo boost disabled on the previous bios versions by default? As I was always running stock bios settings except for XMP profile1. 

Event viewer shows the WHEA logger error if i turn on turbo boost.


----------



## coder30

Hello, I uploaded the F11 bios to the z390 AORUS MASTER is unstable and my i9 9900k has much higher temperatures. Maybe someone explain to me step by step how to change this bios, I'm a layman. Some tutorial instruction Please help

Which bios will be the best to replace it ?


----------



## cisco150

coder30 said:


> Hello, I uploaded the F11 bios to the z390 AORUS MASTER is unstable and my i9 9900k has much higher temperatures. Maybe someone explain to me step by step how to change this bios, I'm a layman. Some tutorial instruction Please help
> 
> Which bios will be the best to replace it ?


As of now we are stuck with this f11 bios


----------



## TrebleTA

FriKKels said:


> Ok, Some more testing has revealed that Intel turbo boost is causing the instability.
> Load optimized defaults and just disable intel turbo boost --> Stable
> disable turbo boost + XMP profile --> Stable
> Next going to try overclock to 5ghz with turbo boost disabled and see if it is stable.
> Was turbo boost disabled on the previous bios versions by default? As I was always running stock bios settings except for XMP profile1.
> 
> Event viewer shows the WHEA logger error if i turn on turbo boost.


By default turbo was on default, if turbo is failing it soulds like voltage. Same for XMP
What's your default dram voltage for xmp, set manual and increase a small amount. Like mine is 1.35v yet I set at 1.36v For the cpu set at 1.35v most 1.4v, see if turbo fails still. Try to keep eye in hwinfo at the voltages and temps

Also change the windows power profile to balance will stop turbo usage. Dont disable c states untill your more stable


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

I just installed the new F11 Bios from Gigabyte, didnt run stable, just CMOS reset 3 times... now it runs even better than F11o from this site. Watch my Temps ( attachment ), cpu, vrm... nice nice nice 

turbo boost, eist.. c states off. 
forced vcore 1.27 llc turbo. 
forced 47 ratio. 
AVX 0. 

IMHO 47 ratio avx 0 is the best setting for 9900k. i focus on regarding frametimes ( -> rivatuner ) and i get the best results ( zero microstutters ... ) with ratio 47, avx 0.


----------



## FriKKels

MasterOfCelsius said:


> I just installed the new F11 Bios from Gigabyte, didnt run stable, just CMOS reset 3 times... now it runs even better than F11o from this site. Watch my Temps ( attachment ), cpu, vrm... nice nice nice
> 
> turbo boost, eist.. c states off.
> forced vcore 1.27 llc turbo.
> forced 47 ratio.
> AVX 0.
> 
> IMHO 47 ratio avx 0 is the best setting for 9900k. i focus on regarding frametimes ( -> rivatuner ) and i get the best results ( zero microstutters ... ) with ratio 47, avx 0.


How did you do the cms reset 3 times? Battery pull, insert, battery pull, insert, battery pull, insert? Mine is not running stable with stock settings and at this point I am thinking hardware issue (although everything started when i updated the bios, so either its a weird co-incidence with the hardware issue)


----------



## OC-24/7

MasterOfCelsius said:


> I just installed the new F11 Bios from Gigabyte, didnt run stable, just CMOS reset 3 times... now it runs even better than F11o from this site. Watch my Temps ( attachment ), cpu, vrm... nice nice nice
> 
> turbo boost, eist.. c states off.
> forced vcore 1.27 llc turbo.
> forced 47 ratio.
> AVX 0.
> 
> IMHO 47 ratio avx 0 is the best setting for 9900k. i focus on regarding frametimes ( -> rivatuner ) and i get the best results ( zero microstutters ... ) with ratio 47, avx 0.


vcore 1.27 is to much for 4.7Ghz, i run my 9900k at 1.115 vcore on 4.7Ghz and 1.225 for 5Ghz


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

sure, avx offset -10?


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

OC-24/7 said:


> vcore 1.27 is to much for 4.7Ghz, i run my 9900k at 1.115 vcore on 4.7Ghz and 1.225 for 5Ghz


well idk how you do it, perhaps you can explain? 

i believe in MSI Overclock 9th Gen and this:


----------



## OC-24/7

MasterOfCelsius said:


> well idk how you do it, perhaps you can explain?
> 
> i believe in MSI Overclock 9th Gen and this:


----------



## OC-24/7

This is for 4.7Ghz at 1.115v Vcore
1. Load optimal default 
2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Auto
4. CPU Vcore - Auto
5. CPU Clock Ratio - 47
6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable 
7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v

This is for 5Ghz at 1.225 Vcore
1. Load optimal default 
2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Low
4. CPU Vcore - Auto
5. CPU Clock Ratio - 50
6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable 
7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v

I feel when it comes to overclocking, people thing they should increase as many settings as possible, winch produce more heat from the motherboard and CPU, which is not great, especially for a 24/7 OC


----------



## OC-24/7

MasterOfCelsius said:


> well idk how you do it, perhaps you can explain?
> 
> i believe in MSI Overclock 9th Gen and this:

















All Gigabyte Z390 boards Intel Turbo Boost - Disabled for this OC settings

This is for 4.7Ghz at 1.115v Vcore
1. Load optimal default
2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Auto
4. CPU Vcore - Auto
5. CPU Clock Ratio - 47
6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable 
7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v

This is for 5Ghz at 1.225 Vcore
1. Load optimal default 
2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Low
4. CPU Vcore - Auto
5. CPU Clock Ratio - 50
6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable 
7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v

I feel when it comes to overclocking, people thing they should increase as many settings as possible, winch produce more heat from the motherboard and CPU, which is not great, especially for a 24/7 OC


----------



## gebyz

For the Z390 Xtreme, what is the difference from the F9J vs newer F9?


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

OC-24/7 said:


> View attachment 2541101
> View attachment 2541100
> 
> 
> All Gigabyte Z390 boards Intel Turbo Boost - Disabled for this OC settings
> 
> This is for 4.7Ghz at 1.115v Vcore
> 1. Load optimal default
> 2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
> 3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Auto
> 4. CPU Vcore - Auto
> 5. CPU Clock Ratio - 47
> 6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable
> 7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
> 8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v
> 
> This is for 5Ghz at 1.225 Vcore
> 1. Load optimal default
> 2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
> 3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Low
> 4. CPU Vcore - Auto
> 5. CPU Clock Ratio - 50
> 6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable
> 7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
> 8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v
> 
> I feel when it comes to overclocking, people thing they should increase as many settings as possible, winch produce more heat from the motherboard and CPU, which is not great, especially for a 24/7 OC


thanks i will try out your settings


----------



## coder30

cisco150 said:


> As of now we are stuck with this f11 bios


Well, you can come back (Q flash)only needs a good and proven bios


----------



## TrebleTA

FriKKels said:


> How did you do the cms reset 3 times? Battery pull, insert, battery pull, insert, battery pull, insert? Mine is not running stable with stock settings and at this point I am thinking hardware issue (although everything started when i updated the bios, so either its a weird co-incidence with the hardware issue)


You have forwarded your problem to gigabyte?


----------



## FriKKels

TrebleTA said:


> You have forwarded your problem to gigabyte?


Yes, They are looking into it. Waiting to hear


----------



## cisco150

FriKKels said:


> Yes, They are looking into it. Waiting to hear


Hope they can release working bios and hope we can revers it


----------



## FregApple

KedarWolf said:


> Here is a guaranteed working Master BIOS's with all the firmwares updated. Highly recommend you use this version, not the one with only the microcodes updated. A lot of fixes and bugs worked out, better for overall stability.


Hey Kedar,

Does this mod stop any functions on the mobo. EG the RGB.
I am currently on f11n. Will this be better for OCing and performance / stability?

thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

FregApple said:


> Hey Kedar,
> 
> Does this mod stop any functions on the mobo. EG the RGB.
> I am currently on f11n. Will this be better for OCing and performance / stability?
> 
> thanks!


Lots of peeps having trouble with the F12 Final. But the F11o RGK is fine. Should be a few pages back.

The mods don't affect any BIOS functionality like RGB etc.


----------



## TrebleTA

F12 final, that a typo Kedar?


----------



## Dannyele

ARTimusMAXimus said:


> Absolutely, it would be my pleasure. Happy New Year! This is what I am currently stable at. I thought it seemed like a better profile as I didn't lose latency. I run 3900 with the same settings pretty much except tCWL and tCL are set to 15. I also turn tRFC down a touch. Ram voltage is 1.44v with these settings VCCIO&SA are both 1.16v. At 3900 15-15-15-28 I needed 1.45v. Almost forgot I used my auto values for RttNom, RttPark, RttWr. Problem is sometimes it can show and set more than one auto value for same timings/frequency settings depending on how it trains. As an example you will see set in BIOS RttNom 60 Rttpark 20 RttWr 40. While the auto values that should have been set show RttNom 60 Rttpark 120 RttWr 40. Sometimes Rttpark would be 60 as well but never actually set as that while on auto. I set 60,120,40 manually as that worked best for me. It might be different values for you but they can greatly affect overclocking. I hope this helps and that I explained everything ok. If you have any questions don't be afraid to ask.


Hello again buddy!

I've been playing a lot with the OC on the RAM, and unfortunatelly I cannot get better timmings at 3900 than this:

(1.25v SA/IO and 1.45v DDR in BIOS):


----------



## TrebleTA

Dannyele said:


> Hello again buddy!
> 
> I've been playing a lot with the OC on the RAM, and unfortunatelly I cannot get better timmings at 3900 than this:
> 
> (1.25v SA/IO and 1.45v DDR in BIOS):


Increase your dram voltage, In hwinfo its reporting 1.44, not 1.45. Also your cpu core voltage is high.


----------



## Dannyele

TrebleTA said:


> Increase your dram voltage, In hwinfo its reporting 1.44, not 1.45. Also your cpu core voltage is high.


Regarding the vcore, it's just at IDLE, doing Cinebench drops to 1.29 aprox. (Im at 5ghz 4.7ghz ring)


----------



## saydji

Hello everyone! i'm new here  here's my problem.

I have a z390 aorus Elite and i asked gigabyte to send me a bios version with rgb integrated into the bios.
The problem is since i flashed my bios to the latest version (f10 for security vulnerabilitie) once i wanna flash again it says "invalid bios image" as an error. 

Can anyone help me on it please? thanks in advance and have a good day


----------



## TrebleTA

saydji said:


> Hello everyone! i'm new here  here's my problem.
> 
> I have a z390 aorus Elite and i asked gigabyte to send me a bios version with rgb integrated into the bios.
> The problem is since i flashed my bios to the latest version (f10 for security vulnerabilitie) once i wanna flash again it says "invalid bios image" as an error.
> 
> Can anyone help me on it please? thanks in advance and have a good day


it also says 

Introduce capsule BIOS support starting this version.
Customers will NOT be able to reverse to previous BIOS version due to major vulnerabilities concerns.
so far its unwise to try to revert if you have flashed to the newer capsule bios


----------



## saydji

Even if it's not a downgrade? It's basically the same bios just with a plus option


----------



## TrebleTA

But sure if you has asked Gigabyte for a RGB version of the f10 final, it may take a week or two but they should provide.


----------



## saydji

TrebleTA said:


> But sure if you has asked Gigabyte for a RGB version of the f10 final, it may take a week or two but they should provide.


Well that's what i got i gave every detail about my system. The files name is "Z390AORUSELITEGF.F10". I dont know whats wrong with the final F10 bios... I can't even reflash it with the same version so i assume it's kinda 'locked'? using @BIOS it's restarts to the bios and when i use Q Flash i get "invalid bios image"


----------



## TrebleTA

hmm that is strange, it should be flashable. i would suggest contacting them telling them they have messed up, as it should be classed as a update to the f10 final.

Question, in the zip file from gigabyte was there any other files?


----------



## saydji

TrebleTA said:


> hmm that is strange, it should be flashable. i would suggest contacting them telling them they have messed up, as it should be classed as a update to the f10 final.
> 
> Question, in the zip file from gigabyte was there any other files?


Yes I left a message and i'm waiting for a reply. I went even further to compare the errors through @BIOS? If you wanna downgrade you have a different message telling you that the motherboard is protected from this bios etc ... so it's another issue. I Think since F10 you're only allowed to "upgrade" not even reflash to the same bios version which is in my case F10


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes could be. Keep us updated


----------



## saydji

TrebleTA said:


> Yes could be. Keep us updated


Yes! if i get an answer or a proper fix i could even upload the bios that they sent for z390 elite users here


----------



## cisco150

Any update on the Z390 master im on f11 capsule bios i thought i have downgraded but after a factory reset its back to f11 and my backup bios is the same don't know how that happen. Cant use SignalRGB because of this new bios


----------



## TrebleTA

cisco150 said:


> Any update on the Z390 master im on f11 capsule bios i thought i have downgraded but after a factory reset its back to f11 and my backup bios is the same don't know how that happen. Cant use SignalRGB because of this new bios


I have a copy of gk.f11 it's the f11 with RGB use my link below in my OC guide, and let me know how you get on


----------



## R1-fast

R1-fast said:


> Hey @KedarWolf / all
> 
> IIRC from earlier in the thread, these 2 KBs interfere with the modded F11o microcode (KB4589292, KB4589198).
> 
> I'm on Win10 20H2 and uninstalled both KBs. I was prompted yesterday to update to Windows 21H1. I would assume this update has both of these KBs bundled... and if installed neither could be removed as they would be integrated e.g. no longer standalone.
> 
> Does anyone know either way?


Hey @KedarWolf and gang, long time no see

Thinking of dual booting Win11 (still same rig e.g. Z390 master, 9900k). I remember way back, these 2 KB articles messed with the modded mc. I uninstalled those 2 KBs back then, and AFAIK none of the H1/H2 Win10 updates have reverted either KB. 

But wondering if anyone knows - does Win11 upgrade reinject either of these KBs or others that mess with the modded BIOS / microcodes?


----------



## EarlZ

Could anyone check for me if they are facing the same voltage read out with HWinfo64 on a Z390 Aorus Master. I am getting a huge difference on the VCCIO reading if I set it at 1.200V at bios I get around 1.180V on HWinfo. VCCSA seems fine its only VCCIO that has this issue or is this normal?

EDIT:

1.210V at bios = 1.199v in HWinfo64 and PC health (bios voltage list)
1.220v at bios = 1.200v " "
1.230v at bios = 1.210v " "
1.240v at bios = 1.220v " "
1.250v at bios = 1.220v no increase
1.260v at bios = 1.232v " "


----------



## saydji

saydji said:


> Yes! if i get an answer or a proper fix i could even upload the bios that they sent for z390 elite users here












Just got this and they want me to RMA which is completely stupid and i won't do... The board is working great and always has been it's just their latest bios that enables some sort of block i guess when you wanna flash ... still trying to figure things out


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes I get voltage like you will link more tomorrow but is like you also I set ddr ram at 1.36 yet hwinfo sees 1.38.

If they want to RMA the board maybe they expect something has failed. But thanks for letting us know, but sometimes you just need try explane to them a bit more so they can copy what you did


----------



## saydji

TrebleTA said:


> Yes I get voltage like you will link more tomorrow but is like you also I set ddr ram at 1.36 yet hwinfo sees 1.38.
> 
> If they want to RMA the board maybe they expect something has failed. But thanks for letting us know, but sometimes you just need try explane to them a bit more so they can copy what you did


****ty experience with gigabyte software i hate it ...! 
I guess but i can't just rip off my pc since i use it for work and they won't send me a new one before receiving this one ...


----------



## TrebleTA

saydji said:


> ****ty experience with gigabyte software i hate it ...!
> I guess but i can't just rip off my pc since i use it for work and they won't send me a new one before receiving this one ...


Hmm did you offer to pay for another one and then refund when they received your old one?.


----------



## saydji

TrebleTA said:


> Hmm did you offer to pay for another one and then refund when they received your old one?.


Nope, now they are trying to solve the problem differently without returning the mobo


----------



## coder30

I have a question, does any of you have a GP-AORUS WATERFORCE X 360 cooling system?
I want to use a Micro SD card but I can't see my 32 GB sandisc, can anyone tell me what card they have?


ok solution found 16 GB Kingston Works


----------



## bass junkie xl

ezveedub said:


> Which exact memory kit are you using? Its 4x8 I assume.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


late reply , it's 8gb x 4 of team group extreme ddr4 4133 MHz, cl 18, 1.40v xmp @ 4133 MHz 16-16-16-36 1.50v @ 37.2 NS on my Gigabyte z390 pro wifi and 9900 ks with good imc. 

there in my Asus Strix d4 z690 board and 12900k there doing 4000 cl 15-15-15-35 1.55v gear 1. it shouldn't be stable with 8gb x 4 at those speeds but I guess my imc is decent on the 12900k as well it's doing 44ns on z690 but z690 has higher latency then z390 by quit a bit.  where your say 45 NS on z390 you would be 55 NS on z690
( roughly ) Gota tune tight.


----------



## 1daG

Hello guys, first of all im newbie on oc, I had F11 BIOS version and after Q-flash to F12 my oc settings isn't working at all.. Before with F11 I had 5Ghz.

*My oc settings: (AORUS Z390 PRO WIFI / i7-9700k*
TWEAKER:

CPU upgrade: DEFAULT
CPU base clock: AUTO/100 Mhz
Enchanced multi-core: Disabled
CPU clock ratio: 50/36
Ring ratio: 47/43
IGP ratio: Auto/30
AVX Offset: Auto

Advanced CPU settings:
CPU Vcore: 1,35V/1,20V
Dynamic Vcore: Auto/+0
SVID offset: Disabled
BCLK Adaptive voltage: Auto
CPU Graphics voltage: Auto/1,2
CPU VCCIO: 1,160V/0,95V
CPU System agent voltage: 1,190V/1,050V

Any ideas how to fix it? As u know i cant qflash back to f11...

*Thank you in advance!*


----------



## 1daG

I tried to efiflash latest @KedarWolf modded F12 for PRO WIFI, but got Invalid BIOS Image. What to do?


----------



## s3r1u5

Hi guys, i have a z390 aorus master with f11c, what firmware do you recommend? the last fw on gigabyte support site is F11 without any letter


----------



## Coldblackice

1daG said:


> I tried to efiflash latest @KedarWolf modded F12 for PRO WIFI, but got Invalid BIOS Image. What to do?


What version of Efiflash are you using? What parameters/switches did you use when flashing? Don't quote me on this, but I believe there's an older version of Efiflash you need to use, which has been posted a number of times in this thread. I'd search for it and try that.



s3r1u5 said:


> Hi guys, i have a z390 aorus master with f11c, what firmware do you recommend? the last fw on gigabyte support site is F11 without any letter


I would use one of the more recent modded BIOSes generously created by @KedarWolf


----------



## TrebleTA

I would go with f11o gk was the last before the new capsule bios, @KedarWolf released a modified f11o gk version. The F11 final from gigabyte once you flash that your locked to that untill gigabyte release something newer or there is my f11 final Gk, Added RGB in bios. Yet your be locked to that as this new bios lock, capsule lock.


If you flashed a gigabyte capsule bios it is not recomend to try to flash to a older bios as can cause problems. There was a thread on overclock by someone about it.

I do have a copy of a efiflash(off @KedarWolf ) that will bypass the invalid image but it is risky as it will flash any bios image. Plus there could be other problems from the caps bios. Unless you have a bios CH341A-based programmer to flash SPI EEPROM. As a back up.


----------



## bass junkie xl

hey guys I got my 2nd system up I have a 12900k , Asus Strix d4 , 32 GB 8gb x 4 @ 4000 MHz cl 15 does 44ns , Samsung m.2 980 pro , rtx 3080 EVGA xc3 . 

my Gigabyt3 system is back up and running and it is 

gigabyte z390 pro wifi - bios f12k modes fastest micro code 

9900 ks @ 5.2 GHz / 4.9 ring @ auto evrything ( 1.25v rout )

32 GB 8gb x4 @ 4133 cl-16-16-16-36 tuned tight @ 1.5v dram 1.27v vccio / 1.27 v vcssa 

360mm RGB captian deep cool AIO just 3 fans. 

GTX 1080 ti founders with kraken g12 mount and a 360mm AIO celsoous s36 aio on it 3 fans. 

here is my Adia scores for my Gigabyt3 z390 prof wifi updated passes prime 95 and tm5 pretty happy the only reason I'm stable is the imc on this cpu lets me do up to 4400. 

35 NS latency with ppd = 0 and txp = 6 
with working Asus memo tweak it 

I'm having so much fun on this rig that my 12900k and rtx 3080 build is been off for 2 days lol


----------



## Coldblackice

TrebleTA said:


> I would go with f11o gk was the last before the new capsule bios, @KedarWolf released a modified f11o gk version. The F11 final from gigabyte once you flash that your locked to that untill gigabyte release something newer or there is my f11 final Gk, Added RGB in bios. Yet your be locked to that as this new bios lock, capsule lock.
> 
> 
> If you flashed a gigabyte capsule bios it is not recomend to try to flash to a older bios as can cause problems. There was a thread on overclock by someone about it.
> 
> I do have a copy of a efiflash(off @KedarWolf ) that will bypass the invalid image but it is risky as it will flash any bios image. Plus there could be other problems from the caps bios. Unless you have a bios CH341A-based programmer to flash SPI EEPROM. As a back up.


Wait, seriously? Do you have a link to that thread? Not doubting, just curious.

I don't get how a BIOS could suddenly become a one-way no-going-back, as it's not like there's any downstream hardware being changed/updated. But I'm not an expert, of course.


----------



## TrebleTA

Coldblackice said:


> Wait, seriously? Do you have a link to that thread? Not doubting, just curious.
> 
> I don't get how a BIOS could suddenly become a one-way no-going-back, as it's not like there's any downstream hardware being changed/updated. But I'm not an expert, of course.


Link to the overclock thread, no I can not find it now!!! I have searched and sure I see it on a thread on here. But unless someone else has tried and won i'm no expert why I havent tried and am still on f11o gk moddied yet will be biting the bullet and going to the final soon, as these new viruses hacking the efi and the spi of the bios so guess it's down to that were getting this capsule bios, But I think asus have been using capsule bios for a bit and people still mod theres so hoping it will just take time.


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

hey overclockers.
Someone can help a newbie ?
Why my memory performance is much better when I reduce processor + ring frequencies ?
I wish I had [email protected],8ghz and the [email protected] MB/s performing in the same config.
What's the cause of this behavior ?
Thanks !


----------



## TrebleTA

Did you try multipl tests, as all timings are slower like another task was running, was windows in high performance, try increasing voltage a bit see if any changes, cpu first if not put back and then dram then vccio vcssa.


----------



## Meridian_UK

Hi,

Has anyone got a working link to the latest Z390 Ultra modded BIOS. Thanks

EDIT: nvm, found one.....eventually....damn, this is a long thread 😃


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

TrebleTA said:


> Did you try multipl tests, as all timings are slower like another task was running, was windows in high performance, try increasing voltage a bit see if any changes, cpu first if not put back and then dram then vccio vcssa.


Thanks for response.
I'm using the same exact settings for all options in bios, except processor + ring. And all the times I imediatly run the test when Windows Starts, in the same conditions.
(I set the memory voltage in 1.35v (like described on XMP) / all timings lowest as possible / VCCIO 1.30 / VCSSA I think It's set to auto - I didn't find)
The fact is : 

When processor is set to 4,3ghz (ring 4,0ghz) : memory reaches almost 50000 MB/s
When processor is set to 4,8ghz (ring 4,5ghz) : memory performs like 35000~38000MB/s
As far I know, with the lastest bios (F12) instaled (capsule bios), I cannot downgrade anymore. So I'm stuck in F12 terrible bios.


----------



## TrebleTA

Have you tried just changing ring to auto and then set cpu to 4.8ghz, I had read increasing ring has no real affect.


----------



## steffmeisteren

Can someone please help me with getting the latest custom BIOS for Gigabyte Z390 Pro?

EDIT: Found it!


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

TrebleTA said:


> Have you tried just changing ring to auto and then set cpu to 4.8ghz, I had read increasing ring has no real affect.


Yes. I don't know what's happening, but I give up. Now it's 4,8ghz with 39000mb/s


----------



## TrebleTA

Shadowzero_BR said:


> Yes. I don't know what's happening, but I give up. Now it's 4,8ghz with 39000mb/s


In the bios under memory setting disable fast boot, it could be the memory training


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

TrebleTA said:


> In the bios under memory setting disable fast boot, it could be the memory training


humm doesn't solved the mistery 😢... but thanks for the help.


----------



## TrebleTA

Hmm problem is I'm not sure what bios settings you have, I have the master so sure I'll have more settings. But under memory can you post a screen shot were disable memory fast boot is, so I can see what you have.

Also on a different note vccio and vcssa, set voltages lower, default by gigabyte is way to hi for now set as below yet you prob can go lower. Max was 1.25v.
Vccio set 1.10v
Vcssa set 1.20v


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

TrebleTA said:


> Hmm problem is I'm not sure what bios settings you have, I have the master so sure I'll have more settings. But under memory can you post a screen shot were disable memory fast boot is, so I can see what you have.
> 
> Also on a different note vccio and vcssa, set voltages lower, default by gigabyte is way to hi for now set as below yet you prob can go lower. Max was 1.25v.
> Vccio set 1.10v
> Vcssa set 1.20v


Sorry for late response. It's been a long week here.
Tried Memory Boot Mode -> Disable fast memory as you asked and nothing changed. So I returned this option to Auto.
With all these settings, if I change - ONLY - CPU CLOCK RATIO to 42 or 43 , I can get +10000 score on AIDA64... If I set to auto or 48 like the photo, memory performance down on AIDA64.


----------



## TrebleTA

Try setting all your memory timings to auto, could be your tweak settings and remember to disable fast memory boot after changing memory settings for 3 boots then enable memory fast boot.(leaving memory fastboot on auto and editing memory timings has caused me problems.)

Also set vccio and cpu system agent voltage to 1.10v and 1.2v it's more than enough 1.3 is too much
I use vccio 1.08v cpu sys agent (vccsa) 1.18v
P.s see my bios oc guide below. See what I use.


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

TrebleTA said:


> Try setting all your memory timings to auto, could be your tweak settings and remember to disable fast memory boot after changing memory settings for 3 boots then enable memory fast boot.(leaving memory fastboot on auto and editing memory timings has caused me problems.)
> 
> Also set vccio and cpu system agent voltage to 1.10v and 1.2v it's more than enough 1.3 is too much
> I use vccio 1.08v cpu sys agent (vccsa) 1.18v
> P.s see my bios oc guide below. See what I use.


I will try your advices and your guide. I will be right back to give the feedback.
Thanks for help


----------



## TrebleTA

Shadowzero_BR said:


> I will try your advices and your guide. I will be right back to give the feedback.
> Thanks for help


Guess all is working now?


----------



## gamererz

Hi everyone. I have a Z390 Aorus Ultra with a 9900k currently on the F8 BIOS as I haven't bothered updating since I got it. Is there a known issue with this board and CPU boosting behaviour in balanced power plan? I'm noticing than in balanced, my 1% lows are reported as in the 50 fps mark, but when on high performance, my 1% lows jump up to over 110 fps. This is repeatable in different games and prevents stuttering. I'm wondering if this is a BIOS issue on F8 which is just solved by turning off CPU downclock. I don't want to overclock my CPU, but what is the best BIOS version for this board? F10 (latest) can't be downgraded, but there's also F10H and F9. Would appreciate any help to try and solve this problem. Should I just stay on F8 and stick with high performance plan if that's easier?


----------



## TrebleTA

Apon starting a game it should be running at high performance. 

Right click on desktop, then right click display settings, the look for graphics. Game should be there make sure it's high performance


----------



## gamererz

Do I really need to do that for every game I play? Here is an example of a Forza Horizon 5 benchmark with high performance plan vs balanced plan. I am just wondering whether I should update my BIOS to see if it solves anything. Currently on F8. I know there is a modded one on this forum but not really sure what it does or whether to trust it. I know staying on high performance is technically safe, but not as efficient as balanced. Just a weird issue and was wondering if anyone else was facing it. My BIOS settings are basically all stock, so unsure why it's not seemingly boosting properly and causing stutters.


----------



## TrebleTA

Well it's how windows works can just leave system in high performance, or make desktop shortcuts to change power profile

Bios wise, do a search on here maybe a moddied version from @KedarWolf else I would use one before this capsule bios, you say f10h

The modified bios will have faster microcodes so before security patches to cpu also updated device controllers.


----------



## Coldblackice

Shadowzero_BR said:


> hey overclockers.
> Someone can help a newbie ?
> Why my memory performance is much better when I reduce processor + ring frequencies ?
> I wish I had [email protected],8ghz and the [email protected] MB/s performing in the same config.
> What's the cause of this behavior ?
> Thanks !
> 
> View attachment 2545640


This is super strange. Can you post a screenshot of your RAM timings for each of these configurations? I'm curious what timings your RAM is being trained to. Perhaps it's trying to "run faster" in one aspect, but thus falls behind in other aspects.

Your CPU L1/L3 cache speeds are somewhat different, as well. I would run these benchmarks 5 minutes or so after Windows has started, and closing all running software beforehand, including the task tray. Perhaps there's some background software or antivirus that sucked up resources for a moment during this benchmark.


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

TrebleTA said:


> Guess all is working now?


No, all the same here.
I´m working a lot, even weekends.
But I tried lower Vccio and Vccsa 1 to 1.2 (various atempts)
I don´t tried your overclock guide yet because I need at least one entire day to test everything. Each boot costs some time and there is a lot of settings that could bsod or freeze my system.
So I decided to load bios defaults and change only 2 options : turn on XMP profile (3000mhz) and processor multiplier on 42 and 48. The behavior persists. As you can see, only changing processor to 42, there is a lot of memory bandwidth gains. And I don´t know why. I don´t made any test with processor multiplier on auto because of automatic changes on speed. Almost all times keeps on turbo mode, 4,8ghz.. and the result was the same with 4,8ghz fixed.


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

Coldblackice said:


> This is super strange. Can you post a screenshot of your RAM timings for each of these configurations? I'm curious what timings your RAM is being trained to. Perhaps it's trying to "run faster" in one aspect, but thus falls behind in other aspects.
> 
> Your CPU L1/L3 cache speeds are somewhat different, as well. I would run these benchmarks 5 minutes or so after Windows has started, and closing all running software beforehand, including the task tray. Perhaps there's some background software or antivirus that sucked up resources for a moment during this benchmark.


Hi, thanks for response.

Yes, super strange.

All my ram timings can be found a few posts before yours. There is a big photo with all my bios config.

Yes, all the benchmark results are different - L1/L3 and others.
I don't have any item on my windows startup, except for firestorm (my zotac overclock tool) and realtek audio assistant driver. I don't have any AV, except for windows embedded solution.

I made the tests so many times (50 or more) on various situations. And I have the habbit to wait 30 seconds for windows initialization (nvme 2500mb/s here) and always do the tests with the same enviroment.

As You can see on my recent post above, there is a screenshot with results with the bios on default. 

I'm intrigated with this new F12 capsule bios. I cannot downgrade bios anymore. This time Gigabyte has done well on locking bios.


----------



## TrebleTA

@Shadowzero_BR thats cool it can take time.
1. Have you tried from a Cmos reset and then just load system defaults and test.
2. Are running windows in high performance power profile if not please test in this power profile.
3. if your get problem from just loading system defaults in bios no other changed then its something more internal related and would talk to gigabyte e-support too yet will takes ages..
4. firestorm (my zotac overclock tool), use MSI afterburner or I can tell you other ways to not have these programs running taking system usage.
5. what version of windows are you using windows 10-windows 11- windows 11 beta etc?

Let us know 
P.s I did not see the post before. but latency is over the roof something is not right.... memory should be around 55 ish









This is of mine is power saving mode


----------



## AndrejB

Shadowzero_BR said:


> No, all the same here.
> I´m working a lot, even weekends.
> But I tried lower Vccio and Vccsa 1 to 1.2 (various atempts)
> I don´t tried your overclock guide yet because I need at least one entire day to test everything. Each boot costs some time and there is a lot of settings that could bsod or freeze my system.
> So I decided to load bios defaults and change only 2 options : turn on XMP profile (3000mhz) and processor multiplier on 42 and 48. The behavior persists. As you can see, only changing processor to 42, there is a lot of memory bandwidth gains. And I don´t know why. I don´t made any test with processor multiplier on auto because of automatic changes on speed. Almost all times keeps on turbo mode, 4,8ghz.. and the result was the same with 4,8ghz fixed.
> 
> View attachment 2547635


That looks like improper training of the xmp profile.
I would try 1.4v 3000mhz 15-17-17-35 and let the board train everything else.


----------



## Yara_XD

gamererz said:


> Do I really need to do that for every game I play? Here is an example of a Forza Horizon 5 benchmark with high performance plan vs balanced plan. I am just wondering whether I should update my BIOS to see if it solves anything. Currently on F8. I know there is a modded one on this forum but not really sure what it does or whether to trust it. I know staying on high performance is technically safe, but not as efficient as balanced. Just a weird issue and was wondering if anyone else was facing it. My BIOS settings are basically all stock, so unsure why it's not seemingly boosting properly and causing stutters.
> 
> View attachment 2547139
> View attachment 2547140


I have the same board, screen resolution, 32GB memory, and the CPU (@4.8 GHz all cores) and RTX 3080. And in Forza Horizon 5 I have the same min FPS on any power plan in Windows. I have 266.5 min FPS on CPU Simulation and 91.1 on CPU Render on the same graphic settings. Tested it yesterday after your post. My BIOS is F10h Modded by KedarWolf and this BIOS Is good. I don't recommend flashing on New F10 Capsule at the moment IMO according to reviews here.


----------



## steffmeisteren

Almost every time, whenever my PC has been off for a while and I turn it on, my monitor is black and all my fans go brrrr without anything happening for about 20-30 sec. Then my PC restarts by itself, and then it boots up normally. It's even worse if I disconnect the PSU over a longer period of time. Then I really struggle to get it to boot normally at all. MY CPU has a stable overclock - but idk what does this. I have a 1000W PSU as well, so I'm thinking maybe there is something I can try in the BIOS. Any advice?


----------



## TrebleTA

steffmeisteren said:


> Almost every time, whenever my PC has been off for a while and I turn it on, my monitor is black and all my fans go brrrr without anything happening for about 20-30 sec. Then my PC restarts by itself, and then it boots up normally. It's even worse if I disconnect the PSU over a longer period of time. Then I really struggle to get it to boot normally at all. MY CPU has a stable overclock - but idk what does this. I have a 1000W PSU as well, so I'm thinking maybe there is something I can try in the BIOS. Any advice?


Do you have a pc speaker connected to the motherboard, if so is it before the post beep.
What motherboard do you have?
Could be memory training, or do you have the sensor on the wrong header- cmos reset on the motherboard, silly question but have to check?
Do you have the digital display is ot getting to 40 then repeating?


----------



## steffmeisteren

I have the Gigabyte Aorus Pro Z390 motherboard. I have no motherboard speaker and have not touched the sensor HEADER. How can I turn off memory training on this motherboard?


----------



## TrebleTA

steffmeisteren said:


> I have the Gigabyte Aorus Pro Z390 motherboard. I have no motherboard speaker and have not touched the sensor HEADER. How can I turn off memory training on this motherboard?


Not sure on that board but on the master the temp sensor header is next to cmos reset header. I have know some have connected the temp sensor to the cmos reset not sensor header bymistake.
To disable memory training, in bios look for advance memory setting, then memory boot mode select enable fast boot.
But if its looping it sound like a problem with a bios setting, ram-cpu settings or voltage.


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

steffmeisteren said:


> Almost every time, whenever my PC has been off for a while and I turn it on, my monitor is black and all my fans go brrrr without anything happening for about 20-30 sec. Then my PC restarts by itself, and then it boots up normally. It's even worse if I disconnect the PSU over a longer period of time. Then I really struggle to get it to boot normally at all. MY CPU has a stable overclock - but idk what does this. I have a 1000W PSU as well, so I'm thinking maybe there is something I can try in the BIOS. Any advice?


It's possible the battery for the CMOS is depleted. Also not sure if you're running F12 BIOS but this acted different when changing BIOS settings compared to F12K and F11. By that I mean when you change a setting in the BIOS (or not) save and exit or just simply exit the BIOS the computer always shuts down and restarts itself to whereas on F12K and F11 that did not happen.


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

I just picked up a Z390 Ultra from Amazon warehouse. Showed up with no CPU cover on socket or even in the box and bent pins. I straightened the pins out. They didn't have another board to replace that one with so I was left with little options. I'm hoping they will at least give me a partial refund. Unfortunately when I installed the CPU and then took it back out to make sure one didn't break off and be loose shorting something out, one broke. The pin in question is for VCC GT. I am pretty confident that since I'm not using the iGPU it should not matter. Does anyone know for sure if it will work just fine or not before I power up?


----------



## steffmeisteren

TrebleTA said:


> Not sure on that board but on the master the temp sensor header is next to cmos reset header. I have know some have connected the temp sensor to the cmos reset not sensor header bymistake.
> To disable memory training, in bios look for advance memory setting, then memory boot mode select enable fast boot.
> But if its looping it sound like a problem with a bios setting, ram-cpu settings or voltage.


The headers are correct, and memory training are already disabled/set to fast boot.



ARTimusMAXimus said:


> It's possible the battery for the CMOS is depleted. Also not sure if you're running F12 BIOS but this acted different when changing BIOS settings compared to F12K and F11. By that I mean when you change a setting in the BIOS (or not) save and exit or just simply exit the BIOS the computer always shuts down and restarts itself to whereas on F12K and F11 that did not happen.


I left my PC without power to PSU for christmas holidays, and that's when I struggled to get it to boot, like 15 times - so that was probably a CMOS problem on top of whatever my PC is struggling with now. It's kinda obvious that some parts of the PC does not get enough power when I boot - I just don't know which one(s). I'll try upping the voltage some.


----------



## TrebleTA

maybe its the power supply as its seems strange, is there any way you can connect a mini speaker to the motherboard to see what beeps you get. some other questions if ok.
What usb devices do you have connected any storage devices?
What bios version you on?
what nvme device do you have?


----------



## brazvan93

Can someone help me with the modded efiflash from KedarWolf? I have a Z390 Aorus Elite. Was dumb and upgraded to the latest BIOS and now I have BSODs and random reboots on stock settings.

Tried some older efiflash versions with F9 BIOS, no luck - invalid BIOS image. I can't send PMs unfortunately.


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

TrebleTA said:


> @Shadowzero_BR thats cool it can take time.
> 1. Have you tried from a Cmos reset and then just load system defaults and test.
> 2. Are running windows in high performance power profile if not please test in this power profile.
> 3. if your get problem from just loading system defaults in bios no other changed then its something more internal related and would talk to gigabyte e-support too yet will takes ages..
> 4. firestorm (my zotac overclock tool), use MSI afterburner or I can tell you other ways to not have these programs running taking system usage.
> 5. what version of windows are you using windows 10-windows 11- windows 11 beta etc?
> 
> Let us know
> P.s I did not see the post before. but latency is over the roof something is not right.... memory should be around 55 ish
> View attachment 2547712
> 
> 
> This is of mine is power saving mode


1. Yes. My normal memory overclock was 3400Mhz. I reseted everything, even tried to short pins from cmos to cause a collapse on bios and back my backup bios LOL - This is why I'm on 3000mhz now. As I said to you, I reseted everythning to create a clean scenario, where I only changes CPU to 42x and 48x and memory to XMP (3000mhz). And the behavior persists. When was on 3400mhz, It's not XMP, it's manual adjustment. 

2. It's on high performance power profile. Default, I never touched the advanced settings.

3. The bios seems to be ok. F12 is the worst update ever and I can´t downgrade because of capsule bios protection

4. Firestorm exists in both scenarios. And I tried the same test 4200mhz x 4800mhz like 50 times and 100% of the tests, the difference of 10000mb/s of bandwidth persists. I have the combo MSI x Riva too, for monitoring purposes. But I run MSI on demand. MSI is anoying with constant updates, Firestorm never disappoint me, only do his job.

5. Windows 10 Pro (I have original key) - 21H2 - 24/10/2020 - 19044.1526

Yes, the latency as others indicators are all bad when cpu @ 4800Mhz - Happens even when cpu is set to auto, because on tests will be pushed to 4800mhz by turbo intel feature.

Thanks for the tips and sorry for bad english.


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

AndrejB said:


> That looks like improper training of the xmp profile.
> I would try 1.4v 3000mhz 15-17-17-35 and let the board train everything else.


I never choose XMP because there is only one profile with 3000Mhz. I always stick with 3400Mhz manual setting.

The XMP is present here on my tests because the necessity to create a clean scenary with no wrong options. - I have reseted the bios, removed the battery, power off, cut energy, hold power button, the normal procedure. And with the bios default, only have set the XMP1 (3000Mhz) and processor @4200mhz and @4800mhz to get the data to make easier to ask help

I will research more about memory training. Seems to be more deeper than I thought.

Thanks for your interest on my case


----------



## TrebleTA

Shadowzero_BR said:


> I never choose XMP because there is only one profile with 3000Mhz. I always stick with 3400Mhz manual setting.
> 
> The XMP is present here on my tests because the necessity to create a clean scenary with no wrong options. - I have reseted the bios, removed the battery, power off, cut energy, hold power button, the normal procedure. And with the bios default, only have set the XMP1 (3000Mhz) and processor @4200mhz and @4800mhz to get the data to make easier to ask help
> 
> I will research more about memory training. Seems to be more deeper than I thought.
> 
> Thanks for your interest on my case


Take it to gigabyte e support, see what they say about it.


brazvan93 said:


> Can someone help me with the modded efiflash from KedarWolf? I have a Z390 Aorus Elite. Was dumb and upgraded to the latest BIOS and now I have BSODs and random reboots on stock settings.
> 
> Tried some older efiflash versions with F9 BIOS, no luck - invalid BIOS image. I can't send PMs unfortunately.


Sorry but for now there is no way to roll back a bios from the new capsule bios


----------



## brazvan93

I believe that KedarWolf said a few pages back that he has a modded efiflash that allowed rollback for some people.


----------



## TrebleTA

But as was posted else were that reverting is unsafe unless you use a bios programmer, no one has reported that the efiflash has worked. Plus the efiflash can flash anything even if its incorrect, thats why there is no direct link.

Sure in time there be something but at moment there is not.


----------



## brazvan93

well, since my motherboard in unusable in it's current state I'm willing to try it. Worst case I'll have a bricked board which I need to change anyway if the issues aren't fixed.


----------



## TrebleTA

Ok you can pm @KedarWolf or I can pm you the version I got from him later when I'm at my PC?

But also please report your problems to gigabyte so there aware of the hassle they have given us with this crap.

I was so close to updating to gk.f11 for my master, yet they gave me a bios I could not use as oem mismatch lol from f11o.gk.
Fixed now I think yet not used as seen so many with problems.

Also you can try this if efiflash fails.








[GUIDE] The Beginners Guide to Using a CH341A SPI Programmer/Flasher (With Pictures!)


If you’re worried about flashing your motherboard with an SPI Programmer, then this is the guide for you. Each step is explained in detail, with pictures. We’ll go over everything, from buying your Programmer to flashing your chip with Flashrom. As per usual, this is a tutorial on the internet...




www.win-raid.com


----------



## brazvan93

Yes, if you have it please send it. I already PMed KedarWolf but I'm not sure he'll reply to me since I'm a new member. If it fails I'll order a SPI programmer.

Already sent a ticket to Gigabyte but I haven't received a response. Thing is I have a friend with a Z390 Pro and after the last BIOS update he also encounters instability at stock. It can work perfectly for days, but sometimes it fails to POST or freezes randomly during idle or gaming. Something is definitely wrong with these damn capsule BIOSes.


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

I'm not sure why everybody seems to have problems with the new BIOS. I have a Z390 Pro WiFi and Ultra. Both F12(Pro) and F10(Ultra) work without any issues whatsoever. Both are completely stable with overclocked RAM and CPU. In fact I swear RAM compatibility was improved as well. Best BIOS they have released in my opinion. As long as your settings are proper and you have compatible components there really shouldn't be any issues especially at stock default BIOS settings. Maybe try checking other potential sources of instability.


----------



## Shadowzero_BR

ARTimusMAXimus said:


> I'm not sure why everybody seems to have problems with the new BIOS. I have a Z390 Pro WiFi and Ultra. Both F12(Pro) and F10(Ultra) work without any issues whatsoever. Both are completely stable with overclocked RAM and CPU. In fact I swear RAM compatibility was improved as well. Best BIOS they have released in my opinion. As long as your settings are proper and you have compatible components there really shouldn't be any issues especially at stock default BIOS settings. Maybe try checking other potential sources of instability.


Hello friend

I'm a Z390 Pro WiFi Owner - My Bios settings are the same from F8 to latest capsule bios F12. I have another pair of ram modules 4000Mhz and I cannot run 4000mhz again (stuck black screen), only 3866mhz. I have searched some posts and there's a lot of similar situations. I know memory QVL works, but this mobo only have 1 or 2 QVL for 4000mhz. And I bought my modules because I had the chance to test before. Now with F12 and all secuties breaches solved (whatever), the performance seems affected. But this is only my opinion. Each computer is a unique enviroment.


----------



## RockThePylon

Apparently bricked my Z390 Aorus Elite with Thaiphoon Burner. Turns out clicking on stuff out of curiousity is bad. Google "Z390 Gigabyte SMbus 0x68", that's my best guess on what happened. Litterally one click on the mouse, system instantly shutdown, and has been silent since.

Any ideas on how I might recover?


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> Ok you can pm @KedarWolf or I can pm you the version I got from him later when I'm at my PC?
> 
> But also please report your problems to gigabyte so there aware of the hassle they have given us with this crap.
> 
> I was so close to updating to gk.f11 for my master, yet they gave me a bios I could not use as oem mismatch lol from f11o.gk.
> Fixed now I think yet not used as seen so many with problems.
> 
> Also you can try this if efiflash fails.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [GUIDE] The Beginners Guide to Using a CH341A SPI Programmer/Flasher (With Pictures!)
> 
> 
> If you’re worried about flashing your motherboard with an SPI Programmer, then this is the guide for you. Each step is explained in detail, with pictures. We’ll go over everything, from buying your Programmer to flashing your chip with Flashrom. As per usual, this is a tutorial on the internet...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.win-raid.com


Modded efiflash NOT allowing rollback.


----------



## ARTimusMAXimus

Shadowzero_BR said:


> Hello friend
> 
> I'm a Z390 Pro WiFi Owner - My Bios settings are the same from F8 to latest capsule bios F12. I have another pair of ram modules 4000Mhz and I cannot run 4000mhz again (stuck black screen), only 3866mhz. I have searched some posts and there's a lot of similar situations. I know memory QVL works, but this mobo only have 1 or 2 QVL for 4000mhz. And I bought my modules because I had the chance to test before. Now with F12 and all secuties breaches solved (whatever), the performance seems affected. But this is only my opinion. Each computer is a unique enviroment.


Hello 

What ram kit do you have that runs at 4,000 and what's the one that doesn't? I also own the Pro and with micron-e(2 sticks of 8gb) would reach 3866. However, with 4 sticks of this kit F4-4000C18Q-32GTZKW which is on the QVL, I able to get 4133 stable at 16-16-16-36. I was even able to post at 4533. I could boot into Windows at 4400 and I had run a stress test but ultimately didn't feel like trying to get it stable because of inconsistent training. Keep in mind the Z390 Aorus boards all use T-topology I believe so they play nicer with 4 sticks over having 2. If you set RTTnom, RTTpark, RTTwr to correct values that can eliminate some inconsistencies while training at high frequencies. Also allows you to run the same settings you would be previously with less voltage. For my Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi 60,20,40 seemed to work best with the 4000mhz G.skill kit.


----------



## FriKKels

brazvan93 said:


> Can someone help me with the modded efiflash from KedarWolf? I have a Z390 Aorus Elite. Was dumb and upgraded to the latest BIOS and now I have BSODs and random reboots on stock settings.
> 
> Tried some older efiflash versions with F9 BIOS, no luck - invalid BIOS image. I can't send PMs unfortunately.


I have the same issue with Z390 Aorus Pro wifi after Bios Update to Capsule F12. Check my comments a few pages back, had some bios settings that kept the BSOD away for a few days, but eventually i couldnt even load win10 anymore without crashes. so I gave up and bought a new CPU and Mobo. If you do ever find another bios to flash too drop me a msg. I would like to test too.


----------



## TrebleTA

KedarWolf said:


> Modded efiflash NOT allowing rollback.


Thanks for the update


----------



## brazvan93

Can I rollback the BIOS with a SPI programmer? I can get one really cheap.


----------



## TrebleTA

brazvan93 said:


> Can I rollback the BIOS with a SPI programmer? I can get one really cheap.


It should yes, but I have not used a spi programmer myself so can not comment more on the process.


----------



## justinkb

KedarWolf said:


> Here is a guaranteed working Master BIOS's with all the firmwares updated. Highly recommend you use this version, not the one with only the microcodes updated. A lot of fixes and bugs worked out, better for overall stability.


this doesn't seem to have updated microcodes? also it shows bios date february 2021, whereas a previous version of yours I had flashed was march 2021? are you sure you uploaded the right file?


----------



## KedarWolf

justinkb said:


> this doesn't seem to have updated microcodes? also it shows bios date february 2021, whereas a previous version of yours I had flashed was march 2021? are you sure you uploaded the right file?


You need to do something in Windows for the microcode to work, rename a file or uninstall updates or something. Search the thread, I don't recall exactly what it was.

Edit: And I checked, they are F11o and F11 Final, just the non-RGB versions.

Second Edit: They have the fastest microcodes, not the newest ones. That's what I mean by microcodes updated. Peeps prefer the fastest best-performing microcodes.


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes f11o RGB is dated march, also i think you did two updated version with newest microcode too if I remember right 1 was faster mc 2 was lastest.


----------



## ziwoowp

chrispaida said:


> @KedarWolf hi! i need the patched efiflash to roll back on a previous BIOS ver. as well, but can't send a PM here


Hello, I am z490 aorus elite. I use the F22 version bios and there are many problems. I cannot go back to a different version of the bios.
can you help me My email is [email protected]
If you can provide the patched file, write the article with a translator


----------



## ziwoowp

chrispaya said:


> @KedarWolf 안녕하세요! 이전 BIOS 버전에서 롤백하려면 패치된 eflash가 필요합니다. 하지만 여기에 PM을 보낼 수 없습니다.
> [/인용문]
> 안녕하세요 z490 오러스엘리트입니다. F22버전 바이오스를 사용하는데 문제가 많습니다. 다른 버전의 바이오스로 돌아갈 수 없습니다.
> can you help me 내 이메일은 [email protected]입니다
> . 패치된 파일을 제공할 수 있다면 번역기와 함께 기사를 작성하십시오


----------



## ziwoowp

TrebleTA said:


> @FriKKels if you pm @KedarWolf he can share a patched efiflash that can help roll back the bios


Hello, I am z490 aorus elite. I use the F22 version bios and there are many problems. I cannot go back to a different version of the bios.
can you help me My email is [email protected]


----------



## TrebleTA

There is no patched efi flash. It did not work


----------



## osergios

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hello 

I have followed the guide and flashed my Z390 Aorus pro with the appropriate file but in the bios show the same version and date as before (F12l) .


----------



## alv-OC

Hi guys!

Between the F11o and the F11 Final, wich one is the best for stability under overclocking for the Aorus Z390 Master? and was the bug on the VRM finally addressed by Gigabyte?

Kind regards.


----------



## TrebleTA

osergios said:


> Hello
> 
> I have followed the guide and flashed my Z390 Aorus pro with the appropriate file but in the bios show the same version and date as before (F12l) .


Think that is the bios version of that modified bios, your just have a different microcode and update device controllers.



alv-OC said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> Between the F11o and the F11 Final, wich one is the best for stability under overclocking for the Aorus Z390 Master? and was the bug on the VRM finally addressed by Gigabyte?
> 
> Kind regards.


F11o Gk is prob the last solid bios. Its f11o but 1-2 fixs plus RGB added. And last bios before this capsule bios. There is a modified version on here by @KedarWolf some pages back.

Also VRM bug not sure I still have mine set on 300.


----------



## alv-OC

Hi TrebleTA



TrebleTA said:


> F11o Gk is prob the last solid bios. Its f11o but 1-2 fixs plus RGB added. And last bios before this capsule bios. There is a modified version on here by @KedarWolf some pages back.
> 
> Also VRM bug not sure I still have mine set on 300.


Ok thhnks, I will give the F11o a try, currently I'm on F11n with the fast microcodes, and I will keep the 300kh switch speed.


----------



## Padinn

Is there a model bios i can install that supports windows 11?


----------



## osergios

hello everyone
I'm facing a very strange issue with my z390 aorus pro and my overclocked 9700k
I have a dynamic overclock at 5.0ghz which satisfies me with dynamic down clock and dynamic voltage with nice temps and stability.

The issue im facing is that the system after sleep or after fast start has noticeable lower performance but after restart the system goes back to normal.

This is before sleep








This is after sleep


----------



## TrebleTA

osergios said:


> hello everyone
> I'm facing a very strange issue with my z390 aorus pro and my overclocked 9700k
> I have a dynamic overclock at 5.0ghz which satisfies me with dynamic down clock and dynamic voltage with nice temps and stability.
> 
> The issue im facing is that the system after sleep or after fast start has noticeable lower performance but after restart the system goes back to normal.
> 
> This is before sleep
> View attachment 2549885
> 
> This is after sleep
> View attachment 2549884


What version of windows?
I have noticed myself some strange stuff happening with fast boot enabled with windows 11 beta. Realtek Audio problems, Print problems, windows search freazing, some of my lastest problems I have reported.
Also make sure you have c1 and c3 enabled in bios not on auto. Same for other boost settings for cpu in bios if using boost make sure enabled.
After sleep I was losing LAN, but fixed now in a driver update
P.s if I get time will check mine and let you know


----------



## osergios

@TrebleTA 
Thank you for taking time to respond to me, I,m using windows 10 and after reading your comment i have enabled c1e and c3 in bios instead of Auto but nothing changed.
i also have noticed in HWInfo that after sleep my core effective clock go up to 4800 instead of up to 5000 when benchmarking.


----------



## TrebleTA

Did you check other bios setting to do with the turbo ratios. See my guide below make sure there on enabled not auto. I've not had time to do a sleep test yet.
Check windows power profile and make sure high performance is on, when im on power saving my cpu stops at 4.8ghz balance I get 5.1 could be related to that. Worth a look.


----------



## osergios

TrebleTA said:


> Did you check other bios setting to do with the turbo ratios. See my guide below make sure there on enabled not auto. I've not had time to do a sleep test yet.
> Check windows power profile and make sure high performance is on, when im on power saving my cpu stops at 4.8ghz balance I get 5.1 could be related to that. Worth a look.


i have just tried removing limits form bios by setting 4096w instead of auto also my power setting is high performance but still the same behavior 
i have some logs with simple benchmark from cpuid
to share with you 
*before sleep*





before sleep.CSV







drive.google.com





*after sleep*





after sleep.CSV







drive.google.com





your can check them and compare with generic log viewer from hwinnfo


----------



## TrebleTA

Check this
"CPU O/C Resets to Stock Ghz | Overclock.net" CPU O/C Resets to Stock Ghz


----------



## osergios

Hello again i have tried throttlestop but my problem you see is not that my processor downclocks if you see the logs my multiplier is x50 even after sleep but the effective clock as measured by hwinfo is x48.
It is so annoying but may i will live with it because otherwise it works fine


----------



## TrebleTA

What bios version are you on?
Also do you have any software that could affect the settings, msi afterburner has done this before. 
If you are on the new capsule bios then report it to gigabyte.
There also was a old windows patch that was controlling cpu overclock too.


----------



## osergios

i have installed latest bios mod from @KedarWolf but my bios info shows as the previous (f12j) i don't if its right i haven't received an answer yet about that.
msi afterburner disabled but still the same behavior.


----------



## TrebleTA

Yes all that bios will have is fastest microcodes, what make cpu faster has with newer microcodes have security fixs that slow it down, bios version wise would be the same. Plus some updated device controllers.
Can try using msconfig and disable all system services not windows. Plus disable all startup app expect realtek if used and any ms ones like windows security if used. And see if the same.


----------



## ShawnTRD

Finally getting a RTX GPU. So now there will be a reason up OC my 9600K. Is there a best guide for latest BIOS? Everything I've seen in the past was different then my BIOS and with a 970 it hasn't been worth looking into more till now.


----------



## chinobino

I have written a guide on how to downgrade the BIOS for Gigabyte Z370/Z390 motherboards if you have flashed the latest capsule BIOS --> guide here!

Make sure to read it carefully as you can brick your board or overwrite (erase) any Intel Gigabit MAC addresses using Intel FPT.


----------



## TrebleTA

chinobino said:


> I have written a guide on how to downgrade the BIOS for Gigabyte Z370/Z390 motherboards if you have flashed the latest capsule BIOS --> guide here!
> 
> Make sure to read it carefully as you can brick your board or overwrite (erase) any Intel Gigabit MAC addresses using Intel FPT.


Nice one 
At last we have a work around.

I may get brave and try the capsule bios...


----------



## SgtRotty

Doolie said:


> Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great.
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded


so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing.
take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive and run rufus 3.13.
close it and go flash in bios with command :
efiflash 1.12k /c /x
????????

if thats correct, it sounds easy.

The only other question i have is will all the lan, chipset etc drivers be all installed already or will i have to install all drivers but the Micro code?


----------



## KedarWolf

Make a FreeDOS USB like below the the included RUFUS, then put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.










Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, hit F12 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.

When it boots into DOS, type


Code:


efiflash 1.F12k /c /x

.

Edit: If you have your chipset and LAN drivers installed, they'll stay installed. You only need to update them if you want the newest versions from Station Drivers.

Find the driver on Station Drivers, sort by date, download the newest one. If it doesn't download, right-click on the link, Save As and ignore the unsecure warning.


----------



## SgtRotty

KedarWolf said:


> Make a FreeDOS USB like below the the included RUFUS, then put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2552156
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, hit F12 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> When it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12k /c /x
> 
> .


Thank you for your time and hard work!!


----------



## ShawnTRD

So what is the favorite BIOS for the Z390 Master? I installed F11m a while ago. I this it was a custom BIOS. I was playing with overclocking my 9600K today and didn't have much luck.


----------



## ShawnTRD

OK so I download Z390MasterMicrocodesAndFirmware.zip
I made a USB with rufus and tried dos command 
efiflash 1.F11o /c /x
It said something like invalid bios. Am I doing something wrong?


----------



## politbureau

Hey all, I made the mistake of updating my Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi to the latest GB capsule bios (wonh wonhhh) and am getting a lot of performance issues, and would like to flash back to the latest Kedarwolf BIOS.

I have downloaded the correct version of FPT, backed up my BIOS, noted my MAC address and am ready to flash the latest Kedarwolf bios (1.F12 from the link provided). However I decided to try a quick validation by loading the file in the BIOS flash utility, which returns an "Invalid File!" message.

Is this something to be concerned about? Is there any way to validate the file before I go deep and use FPT?

Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

politbureau said:


> Hey all, I made the mistake of updating my Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi to the latest GB capsule bios (wonh wonhhh) and am getting a lot of performance issues, and would like to flash back to the latest Kedarwolf BIOS.
> 
> I have downloaded the correct version of FPT, backed up my BIOS, noted my MAC address and am ready to flash the latest Kedarwolf bios (1.F12 from the link provided). However I decided to try a quick validation by loading the file in the BIOS flash utility, which returns an "Invalid File!" message.
> 
> Is this something to be concerned about? Is there any way to validate the file before I go deep and use FPT?
> 
> Thanks!


You may have to download an earlier version of a non modded BIOS to get it to work. Then flash a modded BIOS after.


----------



## politbureau

KedarWolf said:


> You may have to download an earlier version of a non modded BIOS to get it to work. Then flash a modded BIOS after.


Decided toplay it safe - used FPT to reflash to F12k official, then followed your instructions and now running on your F12K modded as provided by a user previous! Thanks and +rep! Already much smoother in W11!

Is F12kmodded (as linked by SGTRotty, first post on this page) currently the latest and greatest?


----------



## SgtRotty

politbureau said:


> Decided toplay it safe - used FPT to reflash to F12k official, then followed your instructions and now running on your F12K modded as provided by a user previous! Thanks and +rep! Already much smoother in W11!
> 
> Is F12kmodded (as linked by SGTRotty, first post on this page) currently the latest and greatest?


I believe this is the last one before the capsule bios. I was researching all thru this thread and it seems to be the latest. Unless im corrected


----------



## politbureau

SgtRotty said:


> I believe this is the last one before the capsule bios. I was researching all thru this thread and it seems to be the latest. Unless im corrected


Thank you sir! Very happy with the performance so far - Win11 felt .. laggy. Much better now and a nice 150 point bump in Cinebench r20 over the F12 official. Cheers!


----------



## SgtRotty

politbureau said:


> Thank you sir! Very happy with the performance so far - Win11 felt .. laggy. Much better now and a nice 150 point bump in Cinebench r20 over the F12 official. Cheers!


Sounds good! I havnt even tried this board yet, bought it cheap new 179.00. Got everything ready to go. Been using asus z390 hero. I Just wanted to see if the better power delivery made a difference! I'm hoping I can run my 4x8gb royals 3600c14 @ 4000c15


----------



## politbureau

SgtRotty said:


> Sounds good! I havnt even tried this board yet, bought it cheap new 179.00. Got everything ready to go. Been using asus z390 hero. I Just wanted to see if the better power delivery made a difference! I'm hoping I can run my 4x8gb royals 3600c14 @ 4000c15


Let us know if you have any luck - I have a 4200mhz 4x8 kit of B-die, and it won't go an inch past 3733C15. This board is not great for memory OC, especially if you are pushing your CPU hard.

Also note there is almost no clock cycle difference at 4000C15, especially since you'd more likely hit 4000C16+.

3600C14 >> 1 / ( 3600 / 2 ) * C14 = 0.00777
4000C15 >> 1 / ( 4000 / 2 ) * C15 = 0.00750
4000C16 >> 1 / ( 4000 / 2 ) * C16 = 0.00800


----------



## JronMasteR

Hi all, I have been following this thread for quite some time. I have a Z390 xtreme and 9900ks. System workes well since over 3 years and all. I have the modded F9j BIOS on it.
However, whenever I switch off my PSU the cmos gets cleared. This has been since the beginning from time to time. Sometimes cmos was cleared, sometimes it wasn't.
It didn't bother me much since I rarely switched it off. But these days I did some stuff with the system and GPU and it started to get really annoying. Now it gets cleared every time I switch the PSU off.

I replaced the cmos battery etc. but that didn't help. Anyone experienced the same issue?

Thanks a lot in advance


----------



## ShawnTRD

Updating BIOS and praying the power doesn't go out. It didn't.


----------



## ShawnTRD

So is F11o going to be the last update for the Z390 Master?


----------



## Coldblackice

JronMasteR said:


> Hi all, I have been following this thread for quite some time. I have a Z390 xtreme and 9900ks. System workes well since over 3 years and all. I have the modded F9j BIOS on it.
> However, whenever I switch off my PSU the cmos gets cleared. This has been since the beginning from time to time. Sometimes cmos was cleared, sometimes it wasn't.
> It didn't bother me much since I rarely switched it off. But these days I did some stuff with the system and GPU and it started to get really annoying. Now it gets cleared every time I switch the PSU off.
> 
> I replaced the cmos battery etc. but that didn't help. Anyone experienced the same issue?
> 
> Thanks a lot in advance


Check the voltage of the replacement battery, it might be old or bad. Otherwise, try cleaning the contacts of the battery holder.


----------



## Janosi

Hello, what the last z390 Aorus Master modded bios? thanks the answer!


----------



## JronMasteR

Coldblackice said:


> Check the voltage of the replacement battery, it might be old or bad. Otherwise, try cleaning the contacts of the battery holder.


Thanks for you suggestions. I changed the battery and the voltage is 3.344V. Guess that is OK?


----------



## sayoXD

chinobino said:


> I have written a guide on how to downgrade the BIOS for Gigabyte Z370/Z390 motherboards if you have flashed the latest capsule BIOS --> guide here!
> 
> Make sure to read it carefully as you can brick your board or overwrite (erase) any Intel Gigabit MAC addresses using Intel FPT.


Can confirm it works, flashed without any errors from F11 capsule back to official F11n for z390 Master. Much appreciated for the detailed guide.


----------



## bae

Janosi said:


> Hello, what the last z390 Aorus Master modded bios? thanks the answer!



Also looking for this answer! I have an old modded F11m BIOS and am looking for the latest bios with the fastest micro codes.


Thank you all for your answers and info.


----------



## ShawnTRD

bae said:


> Also looking for this answer! I have an old modded F11m BIOS and am looking for the latest bios with the fastest micro codes.
> 
> 
> Thank you all for your answers and info.


Best I could tell was F11o. Search back a few pages here.


----------



## TrebleTA

The last modified bios for the master was f11o GK by @KedarWolf. He did 2 versions, 1 with fastest microcode, 2nd with lastest microcodes both with updated device controllers firmware. The microcode is for the security of the cpu, fastest means before any cpu security patches.

If you have updated to the new f11 final you can now roll back. But if doing so, roll back to a offical version before then using a modified bios.

On another note is Anyone here using windows 11 and using the realtek audio. I have noticed some problems. Anyone else???

Another problem I have noticed were I have a pc post speaker. If I shutdown the pc leave it power on but shutdown for x time apon restart before the post beep I see usb power is not correctly applied and the fan headers will report a problem and buzz if fan stop warning enabled. Anyone else able to test this? Maybe someone can use a multi meter am unsure myself?.


----------



## bae

Thank you for all the information everyone. It definitely wasn't just a few pages back and I had to search KedarWolf's post history to find the downloads. 

Just to make sure, this attachment here is what I want to use for the latest bios with fastest microcodes for my Z390 Master, correct?


----------



## KedarWolf

bae said:


> Thank you for all the information everyone. It definitely wasn't just a few pages back and I had to search KedarWolf's post history to find the downloads.
> 
> Just to make sure, this attachment here is what I want to use for the latest bios with fastest microcodes for my Z390 Master, correct?


Yes, that's the one. 

Edit: You want to flash F11o in that zip, not F11Final though.

Second Edit: There is also an F11o GK version with RGB options in the BIOS settings if you search.


----------



## bae

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, that's the one.
> 
> Edit: You want to flash F11o in that zip, not F11Final though.


Thank you for confirming, it means a lot for us casuals that just want the latest and fastest!
To flash, I'll want to use:


Code:


efiflash F11o.F11 /c /x

Correct?



KedarWolf said:


> Second Edit: There is also an F11o GK version with RGB options in the BIOS settings if you search.


I think I'll stick to this one, since my search is leading me to various posts from July of last year, and you highly recommended using the one I linked. Save me a headache for another day. 
Thanks again!


----------



## KedarWolf

bae said:


> Thank you for confirming, it means a lot for us casuals that just want the latest and fastest!
> To flash, I'll want to use:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash F11o.F11 /c /x
> 
> Correct?


Yes, see my edits above though, you might want to find the GK version with RGB options in the BIOS settings.


----------



## bae

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, see my edits above though, you might want to find the GK version with RGB options in the BIOS settings.


Is this the version you recommend? I don't mind doing the searches if you don't mind me bothering you with confirmations!

Sorry I'm taking your time on this subject that probably gives you no benefit as I'm sure you don't use this mobo anymore!


----------



## KedarWolf

bae said:


> Is this the version you recommend? I don't mind doing the searches if you don't mind me bothering you with confirmations!
> 
> Sorry I'm taking your time on this subject that probably gives you no benefit as I'm sure you don't use this mobo anymore!


Yes, that's the one.

Yeah, I haven't used Z390 for a long time, but help you peeps when I have the time with modded BIOS's etc.


----------



## KedarWolf

I might check, there may be newer microcodes since then. Almost everyone wants the fastest which hasn't changed, but if security is the priority for you, over speed, you'll want the newest.

I'll check when I get home from work in 8 hours or so.


----------



## bae

Perfect, thank you for confirming which version is the RGB one! I'll be updating shortly. 
I'm sure that others like me are very thankful for your replies and help. And this discussion should help find the links to the latest version.



KedarWolf said:


> I might check, there may be newer microcodes since then. Almost everyone wants the fastest which hasn't changed, but if security is the priority for you, over speed, you'll want the newest.
> 
> I'll check when I get home from work in 8 hours or so.


Personally, I prefer the fastest microcodes.
But I appreciate you still looking into this for all of us aorus owners, as I'm sure there might be some that prefer the newest/most secure.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I might check, there may be newer microcodes since then. Almost everyone wants the fastest which hasn't changed, but if security is the priority for you, over speed, you'll want the newest.
> 
> I'll check when I get home from work in 8 hours or so.


The microcodes are already the newest in the second file.


----------



## KedarWolf

Newer microcodes just came out. Very little chance they'll be faster than the fastest microcodes BIOS I made, but if security over speed is your priority, flash this one.

You'll need to update your ME firmware as well. See this guide.

Be sure to run the ME Firmware check tool to see which firmware you need and flash the right one.









Intel (Converged Security) Management Engine: Drivers, Firmware and Tools (2-15)


Intel (Converged Security) Management Engine: Drivers, Firmware and Tools for (CS)ME 2-15 Last Updated: 2022-09-08 Intel Management Engine Introduction: Built into many Intel-based platforms is a small, low power computer subsystem called the Intel Management Engine (Intel ME). This can...




www.win-raid.com


----------



## ShawnTRD

F11o is faster but less secure then this one? 



KedarWolf said:


> Newer microcodes just came out. Very little chance they'll be faster than the fastest microcodes BIOS I made, but if security over speed is your priority, flash this one.


----------



## KedarWolf

ShawnTRD said:


> F11o is faster but less secure then this one?


They are both F11o, just one has the faster microcodes modded into it, and this newest one has the latest, more secure, slower microcodes modded into it.


----------



## Lehner82

Is it normal I get BSod above 4.6 Cache, everything auto except Vcore voltage wise ? Core wise my 9900k can do 51x. Cache should be within three of Core right ?


----------



## cisco150

Anyone updated to the capsule bios on Z390 etc and want to downgrade bios there is a way, use at your own risk and read thruout. RE: Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image" - 21


----------



## TrebleTA

cisco150 said:


> Anyone updated to the capsule bios on Z390 etc and want to downgrade bios there is a way, use at your own risk and read thruout. RE: Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image" - 21


So have you used the above, if so did it all go smoothly?


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> So have you used the above, if so did it all go smoothly?


Someone did, and just as long as you don't skip the network part, it went well for them.


----------



## cisco150

TrebleTA said:


> So have you used the above, if so did it all go smoothly?


Yes, it did work great I was able to update both bios. if you need help let me know. you do have to add the .bin to your bios file but don't need to rename it just read the directions


----------



## cisco150

KedarWolf said:


> Someone did, and just as long as you don't skip the network part, it went well for them.


Yup, you have to save a file ( gbe.bin ) that haves your network mac address and enter( *fpt -SAVEMAC -f <DowngradeBIOSName>.bin* ) with your bios name in there. And @KedarWolf really appreciate your help in the community even tho you left the z390 a while ago without your help our boards would be toasted and a Special shootout to @*chinobino* for finding a way to revert from that locked bios Capsule bios.


----------



## politbureau

cisco150 said:


> Anyone updated to the capsule bios on Z390 etc and want to downgrade bios there is a way, use at your own risk and read thruout. RE: Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image" - 21


I followed the guide and it worked flawlessly for me! No issues at all.


----------



## gabeomatic

Hi everyone, looking to do a bit of fine tuning on my guest PC to up the warzone frames and make it a bit more snappy and responsive and wanted some tips and suggestions

MB: *Gigabyte Z390M Gaming* - Current Bios F6 (This is before several revisions, I am using a 8700k chip not 9th gen on this board as it was gifted to me, and noticed worse cinebench scores and a higher vcore needed when I fiddled with it in the past)

Currently at 5ghz 47 uncore 0avx HT on, LLC Turbo (aiming for 5.1now at around 1.37v or so when I delid this chip as its getting warm out)
H80i v2 push pull
Corsair 2x16gb C16 Hynix CJR kit that I hope to push to 3800+ with similar timings
VCCIO/ VCCSA - I just lowered to 1.2/1.2 each to play around with - is that okay for this mem speed or should I aim for lower?
I can't find the PWM/VAXG Switching rate in this bios for some reason, is that because its not fully updated or because this board doesn't support it? ( I heard 300hz is a good setting to use)

Should I try one of these custom modified bios's or update to the new format and try again with these new micro codes etc? Will I see any benefits even though I'm using an 8th gen cpu? I see that if you apply the latest bios you may not be able to revert is this true? Any other settings I should check, when attempting 5.1-5.2? I don't have any other settings modified or C states disabled etc

If anyone has some suggestions to tweak memory there is more info in this post

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/kzlu87

ALSO: I only have kryonaut, should I order conductonaut for the delid specifically? Thanks all!


----------



## TrebleTA

Something I have noticed on my z390 master if I do a clean install of windows 11 via a restart, windows will have no sound on installing or after installing untill installing the realtek drivers. Yet if I start the install from a cold boot I get sound on windows install.
Anyone else able to test this?


----------



## tigerwolf

Hello all im new here i wanted to know what ppl think is the best Bios version for i7 9700k for oc i was on f12 not good for me moved to f10 lot better i am told that myabe f9 is the best version and there might be some modded bios versions ?


----------



## TrebleTA

tigerwolf said:


> Hello all im new here i wanted to know what ppl think is the best Bios version for i7 9700k for oc i was on f12 not good for me moved to f10 lot better i am told that myabe f9 is the best version and there might be some modded bios versions ?


For what motherboard?


----------



## tigerwolf

Aorus pro z390 rev 1


----------



## TrebleTA

Sure if you search you will find else drop @KedarWolf a message.
No one able to test the above windows install from a system restart not setting up sound, you dont even have to complete the set up?


----------



## tigerwolf

TrebleTA said:


> Something I have noticed on my z390 master if I do a clean install of windows 11 via a restart, windows will have no sound on installing or after installing untill installing the realtek drivers. Yet if I start the install from a cold boot I get sound on windows install.
> Anyone else able to test this?


Hi I have done the same as you and have had no problems no need to install the drivers you mentioned


----------



## TrebleTA

So you was in windows, then restarted the pc with a windows 11 install usb and then installed windows and you had sound during installing?

Maybe it's just the Z390 master.
Thank you for trying.


----------



## tigerwolf

TrebleTA said:


> So you was in windows, then restarted the pc with a windows 11 install usb and then installed windows and you had sound during installing?
> 
> Maybe it's just the Z390 master.


Correct


----------



## soulofuniverse

KedarWolf said:


> Newer microcodes just came out. Very little chance they'll be faster than the fastest microcodes BIOS I made, but if security over speed is your priority, flash this one.


Hi Buddy, will this suite Z390 Master G2? I have only the latest official and it has issues with memory clocking the Vegnance Pro 3600 MHZ.


----------



## cisco150

soulofuniverse said:


> Hi Buddy, will this suite Z390 Master G2? I have only the latest official and it has issues with memory clocking the Vegnance Pro 3600 MHZ.


If you need to revert back to an older bios check this out (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


----------



## soulofuniverse

cisco150 said:


> If you need to revert back to an older bios check this out (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Hi, no I need to update to a custom bios best bios, I always been flashing using official bios.


----------



## chinobino

Microcode F0 is showing as "EC" on Windows 11 on two Z390 boards but displays correctly on my Z370.


----------



## KedarWolf

chinobino said:


> Microcode F0 is showing as "EC" on Windows 11 on two Z390 boards but displays correctly on my Z370.


Search this thread. There is a Windows tweak, rename a .dll or uninstall some updates or something to disable the updated microcode in Windows to have the one in the modded BIOS to show.


----------



## chinobino

KedarWolf said:


> Search this thread. There is a Windows tweak, rename a .dll or uninstall some updates or something to disable the updated microcode in Windows to have the one in the modded BIOS to show.


Yes, I forgot to mention that mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll has been renamed on all 3 PC's so it is not being loaded.


----------



## KedarWolf

chinobino said:


> Yes, I forgot to mention that mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll has been renamed on all 3 PC's so it is not being loaded.


I'll check the BIOS's I made but it's been confirmed the microcodes on the fastest microcodes GK BIOS is correct. I'll check on the one with the newer microcodes when I get home from work.


----------



## soulofuniverse

KedarWolf said:


> I'll check the BIOS's I made but it's been confirmed the microcodes on the fastest microcodes GK BIOS is correct. I'll check on the one with the newer microcodes when I get home from work.


Hi, could you please reply on my question? Thank you.


----------



## KedarWolf

soulofuniverse said:


> Hi, could you please reply on my question? Thank you.


If I recall correctly I did a hash check of the regular Master BIOS and the G2 and they were identical.

So should be able to flash the modded one.

But if you want to be 100% sure, download the 64-bit HashMyFiles and open both the Master and G2 from Gigabyte's website. If they are identical SHA-32, then I'm right.


----------



## tigerwolf

KedarWolf are you able to reply to my message please ?


----------



## KedarWolf

tigerwolf said:


> KedarWolf are you able to reply to my message please ?


Did you PM me or was it here?

Latest modded BIOS posted earlier in the thread the best.


----------



## tigerwolf

Hello I sent you 2 pm messages


----------



## KedarWolf

tigerwolf said:


> Hello I sent you 2 pm messages


Okay, will check when I get home from work


----------



## KedarWolf

(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread) Bios screenshots old post though.

Z390 Pro modded bios attached.


----------



## tigerwolf

Thankyou KedarWolf


----------



## Saber84

I got a *Z390 AORUS ELITE (rev. 1.0)*

Has anyone got a modded version latest bios that's compatible with my motherboard.

Preferred if HPET was forced off and lean towards having very low DPC latency but also have the option to turn resizable bar on/off.

ATM I have disabled my onboard LAN (using pci-e lancard) and onboard AUDIO to drop DPC latency alot but my mouse still feels floaty in games and I hate it.

No doubt some z390 people know what I'm talking about.

[email protected]/RTX3080/Z390 AORUS ELITE/3000mhz 16GB DDR4/WIN10 latest build


----------



## TrebleTA

Do a search for it, im it sure there is a bios version on here would. Ht disabled that would be a custom bios. Dont think there will be one on here, else can ask on win-raid.


----------



## eliu9395

For Z390 Aorus pro wifi, which version has the best performance and boot times? I'm currently using the modded f12k from January 2021, but I found another modded f12k from December, and I also see a lot of people using modded f11. Confused as to which has the best performance and latency.

Edit: which microcode should I be on? It currently says "BE" in hwinfo. Also, how do I verify I'm on a modded bios?

Specs:
9700k, 1060 3gb, 2x8GB 3000Mhz ram, windows 11.


----------



## kikng

Saber84 said:


> I got a *Z390 AORUS ELITE (rev. 1.0)*
> 
> Has anyone got a modded version latest bios that's compatible with my motherboard.
> 
> Preferred if HPET was forced off and lean towards having very low DPC latency but also have the option to turn resizable bar on/off.
> 
> ATM I have disabled my onboard LAN (using pci-e lancard) and onboard AUDIO to drop DPC latency alot but my mouse still feels floaty in games and I hate it.
> 
> No doubt some z390 people know what I'm talking about.
> 
> [email protected]/RTX3080/Z390 AORUS ELITE/3000mhz 16GB DDR4/WIN10 latest build


I use this: Intelligent standby list cleaner (ISLC) v1.0.2.5 Released - Wagnardsoft Forum

Combined with the cmd prompts FR33THY talks about: 



(he also talks about HPET around the 12:20 mark and a takeaway was you want to disable HPET in Windows via device manager but enable it in the BIOS, if you have the option. I found his whole video to be interesting, if you have 20 min)

My system has never felt so buttery smooth and responsive. Micro stutters are gone and input lag-wise, it feels like I "advanced the timing". I've gamed on this system with a 3440x1440 144hz monitor for a little over a year, and it's a totally new machine.

My brother just bought an Elite board for his build so I'll be looking for a modded BIOS too. You can do an advanced search for "Kedarwolf" and the keyword "Elite" or something.


----------



## Minarthitep

Hi,
Is there a Z390 Aorus Ultra RGB Bios ? Or does F10/F10h version includes that (I am still on F9 version) ?
Thank you

EDIT : I have read a bunch of pages back... not sure F10/F10h is worth the troubble vs staying on old good F9. And no RGB version... so I think I am done.


----------



## alboz

Hi, i have Aorus z390 Pro Wifi, i7-9700k and Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 2x8 3200 cl16, Hynix. I have overclocked cpu to 5ghz but I can't get the ram up to frequency (only 3200 to 3600). I tried up to 4266mhz with voltage max 1.60v and cas 20 max but i have errors, reboot and reset the bios. Someone can help me? it seems impossible to get to 4000mhz at least


----------



## alboz

Avacado said:


> Hey ya'll, to avoid having to dig through the thread, can anyone link a modded bios for the z390 AORUS pro? Having issues getting any RAM OC over 3800 to stick.


Hi i have the same problem, from 3800mhz i can't boot (i have corsair dominator platinum 3200mhz). I see that exist a modded bios, but this resolve this issue? It is a limitation of the motherboard?
Or what more do you get with modded bios? Thanks


----------



## TrebleTA

alboz said:


> Hi i have the same problem, from 3800mhz i can't boot (i have corsair dominator platinum 3200mhz). I see that exist a modded bios, but this resolve this issue? It is a limitation of the motherboard?
> Or what more do you get with modded bios? Thanks


Scroll up, it on this page, please look before requesting. Also over clicking 3200 to 3800 can that memory even go that high


----------



## alboz

TrebleTA said:


> Scroll up, it on this page, please look before requesting. Also over clicking 3200 to 3800 can that memory even go that high


I have read and tried everything but over 3800 I always have problems. I have the latest official BIOS, but I would like to know if it is better to flash modded BIOS and what benefits it brings


----------



## TrebleTA

alboz said:


> I have read and tried everything but over 3800 I always have problems. I have the latest official BIOS, but I would like to know if it is better to flash modded BIOS and what benefits it brings


As I say if the default of the stick is 3200mhz there is no guarantee it will oc that high. Yet run my 3200 at 3600mhz.

High per event timing should be left to the system to control. Looked at the video and he even says let windows control by deleting the bcdedit vaule.


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

alboz said:


> I have read and tried everything but over 3800 I always have problems. I have the latest official BIOS, but I would like to know if it is better to flash modded BIOS and what benefits it brings


From what i know, you have to boost up VCCIO and System Agent ( -> i tested even 1,34 V ) to make your RAM stable. The higher you OC your ram and uncore / ring ratio, the more its all unstable i recognize. sometimes its the ram that gets unstable because of too high ring ratio. you need a lot vcore to stabilize the ring with heavy ram oc. i would try ring 40, ram oc like u want, and vccio + sa -> 1,34 v


----------



## alboz

MasterOfCelsius said:


> From what i know, you have to boost up VCCIO and System Agent ( -> i tested even 1,34 V ) to make your RAM stable. The higher you OC your ram and uncore / ring ratio, the more its all unstable i recognize. sometimes its the ram that gets unstable because of too high ring ratio. you need a lot vcore to stabilize the ring with heavy ram oc. i would try ring 40, ram oc like u want, and vccio + sa -> 1,34 v


Thanks i have uncore at 47, i'll try to decrease and increase VCCIO and system agent


----------



## kikng

TrebleTA said:


> High per event timing should be left to the system to control. Looked at the video and he even says let windows control by deleting the bcdedit vaule.


That's not what he says at all. Through the video he's demonstrating what the values actually do, and you may have caught a snippet of that thinking that's what he was recommending, but go to around the 19:45 mark, he wraps up and summarizes. He says "useplatformclock No", "useplatformtick Yes" and "disabledynamictick Yes".


----------



## kikng

MasterOfCelsius said:


> From what i know, you have to boost up VCCIO and System Agent ( -> i tested even 1,34 V ) to make your RAM stable. The higher you OC your ram and uncore / ring ratio, the more its all unstable i recognize. sometimes its the ram that gets unstable because of too high ring ratio. you need a lot vcore to stabilize the ring with heavy ram oc. i would try ring 40, ram oc like u want, and vccio + sa -> 1,34 v


From my experience, running B-Die, from 3200Mhz to 4133Mhz @ 1.5v from 1.35v. Cl 18, from 14. My VCCIO and SA are showing 1.243v and 1.248v. Been running rock-solid stable for months, passed the tests running for hours, yadda yadda... Spent weeks working on it though; I'd call it a well-informed elementary attempt at a memory OC.

I didn't spend time on Tertiaries, but I sacrificed a little bit of latency for a big bump in bandwidth, like 2ns for 13000MB/s. I would show a before and after, but I don't want to mess with the training on this board so this is only the current:


----------



## TrebleTA

kikng said:


> That's not what he says at all. Through the video he's demonstrating what the values actually do, and you may have caught a snippet of that thinking that's what he was recommending, but go to around the 19:45 mark, he wraps up and summarizes. He says "useplatformclock No", "useplatformtick Yes" and "disabledynamictick Yes".


By default the 2 delete values are not there and if you read the ms doc sheet on bcdedit your see them settings are for debug only.








BCDEdit /set - Windows drivers


The BCDEdit /set command sets a boot entry option value in the Windows boot configuration data store (BCD) for Windows.



docs.microsoft.com




And they was saying about hpet disabled in device manager! And in video he leaves it alone. If you want to play with setting do more research I link what I use below, I use Islc too and get what he wants in video by default. 0.5ms








Melody's Ultra Tweaks Pack - Basic Tweaks


Basic Tweaks that are good to know and don't interfere with power saving features and other stuff. For people who don't want to perform deep tweaking. Updated Jul 15 2020. Windows Firewall Warning. Updated Aug 1 2022. DalDramClockChangeLatencyNs seems to cause massive flickers on some AMD GPUs,




sites.google.com




Yet most of the tweaks are not needed in later versions. Most was for windows 7-8 Yet work on lastest versions like 10 and 11. I use 3-4 of these settings. Like the first 2 he comments on then the msi, and use the msi utility v3, then the drivers to memory and 1-2 others


----------



## TrebleTA

Not sure why the 2nd link is not working. Your have to search for his site manually.


----------



## kikng

TrebleTA said:


> By default the 2 delete values are not there and if you read the ms doc sheet on bcdedit your see them settings are for debug only.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BCDEdit /set - Windows drivers
> 
> 
> The BCDEdit /set command sets a boot entry option value in the Windows boot configuration data store (BCD) for Windows.
> 
> 
> 
> docs.microsoft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they was saying about hpet disabled in device manager! And in video he leaves it alone. If you want to play with setting do more research, I use Islc too and get what he wants in video by default. 0.5ms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melody's Ultra Tweaks Pack - Basic Tweaks
> 
> 
> Basic Tweaks that are good to know and don't interfere with power saving features and other stuff. For people who don't want to perform deep tweaking. Updated Jul 15 2020. Windows Firewall Warning. Updated Aug 1 2022. DalDramClockChangeLatencyNs seems to cause massive flickers on some AMD GPUs,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sites.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet most of the tweaks are not needed in later versions. Most was for windows 7-8 Yet work on lastest versions like 10 and 11. I use 3-4 of these settings. Like the first 2 he comments on then the msi, and use the msi utility v3, then the drivers to memory and 1-2 others


I think we'll just agree to disagree then, cause it seems like we agree that we want a .5ms timer, it's just we have different methods of getting there. Melody's notes for the Low Latency Software:

It is not advised to run this program in stripped/modified systems. Do it at your own risk.
When using my program, it is advised to* use platform tick *because of the way it works.
The dude in the video tells you to leave the device manager setting alone because disabling platform tick through Bcdedit does the same thing and it's redundant at that point. The only HPET setting that remains enabled is through the bios, if you even have the option, otherwise it's likely already on.

I can only testify to what I've experienced on my system which is running Windows 10 19043. I do appreciate the back and forth though, always looking to learn something new!


----------



## TrebleTA

But as I said by default them values are not there, so by default windows has hpet off. In later versions of windows, the tick is not needed any more as the off set from windows as shown in his video is not there.
P.s look at the comments from his video ya see. Yet by default that vaule is no longer in the bcdedit file. So nothing to delete


----------



## kikng

TrebleTA said:


> But as I said by default them values are not there, so by default windows has hpet off. In later versions of windows, the tick is not needed any more as the off set from windows as shown in his video is not there.
> P.s look at the comments from his video ya see. Yet by default that vaule is no longer in the bcdedit file. So nothing to delete


Ahh I see what you're saying, I was operating on old information and didn't look at the comments. Fair point!


----------



## TrebleTA

But if you could help me with some advice oc my memory, I have g.skill 3200, 4 stick, 2 different dies I belive, 16cl. I have kind of oc them but sure I have not done it correct.
Were would you start, increase dram voltage to say 1.4v and vccio vcssa to 1.25v. Set ram to 3600, and disable memory fastboot?
See what timings I get?


----------



## kikng

TrebleTA said:


> But if you could help me with some advice oc my memory, I have g.skill 3200, 4 stick, 2 different dies I belive, 16cl. I have kind of oc them but sure I have not done it correct.
> Were would you start, increase dram voltage to say 1.4v and vccio vcssa to 1.25v. Set ram to 3600, and disable memory fastboot?
> See what timings I get?


As long as it's safe for your die, I would go to whatever voltage you can thermally handle. When I did 1.5v with no active cooling, the chips would get to 50c plus and would fail stress. Once I cooled it and kept them below 45c, I was able to go further. And then yeah, more than 3600Mhz I would go 1.25v VCCSA/IO, but you might find you can lower them. I was able to drop the VCCIO voltage once I had found stability.

While doing any memory tweaks, disable fast boot to allow the training to happen. After you've rebooted a few times and the timings remain, you can re-enable fast boot and that should lock them in. These boards are finicky though, keep an eye on the timings, mainly the RTL and IO-L, you want to make sure they have a maximum difference of only 4 and 2, respectively.

I learned a lot of what I know through this guide: MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper
And forums and google searches and all that fun stuff, but mostly through that guide.


----------



## TrebleTA

@kikng Hi sorry for the slow reply had a long bank holiday weekend in the UK.
I Was going to link my timings from the Asrock UI but it gives me a error now about driver can not be loaded, prob this windows 11 build and its very old now.
But I had voltage of dram at 1.4v set boot ram voltage to 1.4v set vccio etc to 1.25v then went form there best I can get is 18-20-20 % 3600. 16-18-18 being the default at 3200. So if your willing to help I can take screen shots of the bios.


----------



## gabeomatic

Hey guys, I am running a gigabyte z390m gaming with an 8700k @ 5.1 on my guest build and am trying to tweak it a bit for warzone. Its a t-topology board with only 2 dual rank 8-bit sticks 2 x 16gb hynix CJR C16 memory which I wanted to push it to 3800+ if possible, or even attempt 4000 at looser timings if that benefits me in games. Currently have vccio/vccsa only at 1.15/1.20v but assume I'll have to raise that a bit for stability, just not sure the best approach for a t-topology board even though it has decent VRMs as i cant find much info for intel setups like this, and obviously what this "old trusty" 8700k's IMC is capable of. It's a decent clocker though! 5.1ghz @ 1.35v load, 49 uncore, HT on 0avx

my ram info here

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/kzlu87

Set the timings loose like from stock 3600 xmp @ 16-19-19-39 to 16-20-20 /17-21-21 for 3800 or 18-22-22 (4000?) etc and try to slowly up the speed @ 1.4-1.43v for CJR?

Will pushing uncore/ring too much affect my ram OC (currently 49 on an 8700k which I assume is pushing it a bit)? Also IO/SA Voltages to start with for 3800+? 1.2/1.25, 1.25/1.3?

Thank you all so much!


----------



## kikng

TrebleTA said:


> @kikng Hi sorry for the slow reply had a long bank holiday weekend in the UK.
> I Was going to link my timings from the Asrock UI but it gives me a error now about driver can not be loaded, prob this windows 11 build and its very old now.
> But I had voltage of dram at 1.4v set boot ram voltage to 1.4v set vccio etc to 1.25v then went form there best I can get is 18-20-20 % 3600. 16-18-18 being the default at 3200. So if your willing to help I can take screen shots of the bios.
> View attachment 2559380


I was barely willing to go through the weeks of work for my memory. Sorry man I'm just not totally comfortable doing that, if you have specific questions I can try to help, but if I was you I'd go through that MemOC guide I linked on my previous post and work off of that. The mismatched DIMMS will, I believe, hold you back so maybe pick the better of the two pairs and work on them only.



gabeomatic said:


> Hey guys, I am running a gigabyte z390m gaming with an 8700k @ 5.1 on my guest build and am trying to tweak it a bit for warzone. Its a t-topology board with only 2 dual rank 8-bit sticks 2 x 16gb hynix CJR C16 memory which I wanted to push it to 3800+ if possible, or even attempt 4000 at looser timings if that benefits me in games. Currently have vccio/vccsa only at 1.15/1.20v but assume I'll have to raise that a bit for stability, just not sure the best approach for a t-topology board even though it has decent VRMs as i cant find much info for intel setups like this, and obviously what this "old trusty" 8700k's IMC is capable of. It's a decent clocker though! 5.1ghz @ 1.35v load, 49 uncore, HT on 0avx
> 
> my ram info here
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/kzlu87
> 
> Set the timings loose like from stock 3600 xmp @ 16-19-19-39 to 16-20-20 /17-21-21 for 3800 or 18-22-22 (4000?) etc and try to slowly up the speed @ 1.4-1.43v for CJR?
> 
> Will pushing uncore/ring too much affect my ram OC (currently 49 on an 8700k which I assume is pushing it a bit)? Also IO/SA Voltages to start with for 3800+? 1.2/1.25, 1.25/1.3?
> 
> Thank you all so much!


If you own Aida64 Extreme and can run the memory bench, you can track the performance differences through all your changes. Since the stock timings are already pretty loose, I don't know how much more you'll want to open them up, sacrificing memory latency. If you haven't already, work off of that guide I linked in my previous post.


----------



## h107474

gamererz said:


> Do I really need to do that for every game I play? Here is an example of a Forza Horizon 5 benchmark with high performance plan vs balanced plan. I am just wondering whether I should update my BIOS to see if it solves anything. Currently on F8. I know there is a modded one on this forum but not really sure what it does or whether to trust it. I know staying on high performance is technically safe, but not as efficient as balanced. Just a weird issue and was wondering if anyone else was facing it. My BIOS settings are basically all stock, so unsure why it's not seemingly boosting properly and causing stutters.
> 
> View attachment 2547139
> View attachment 2547140


I know your post is pretty old but I had the same issue and thought it was my RTX 3080 card. Here is a long forum post where a chap investigated it and worked out it was an issue with the Gigabyte Z390 board playing poorly with CPU stepping in Windows Balanced plan. I just keep mine in High Performance now. No other option it seems.

[SOLVED] MSI RTX 3080 low-ish Time Spy score in comparison to others?


----------



## DrKZ

Hello guys,
My mb is Aorus Master, I've updated the BIOS from F11n to F11.
Everything was fine until I see my scores on Cinebench r20 in F11 at 5Ghz.
Before in F11n I was at 5100 and now with the last F11 I am only at 4800. I understood that they had updated the microcodes for more security that is why I want to install a modded version with faster microcodes.
I followed several tutorials found in the inside pages of this thread, I did everything with rufus, I put the last modded F11 bios on the key, but when I do (efiflash F11Final.F11 /c /x) an error message appears: Invalid boot image
I tried with several modded Bios, but always the same error message.

Who knows why and has a solution?
Do I have to go back to an older version of the official bios before installing the modded, example the F11n ?

Thank you all


----------



## chinobino

@DrKZ You can use Intel's Flash Programming Tool (FPT) to flash a modified capsule BIOS. I have written a guide here on how to use FPT to downgrade to an earlier Gigabyte non-capsule BIOS but it can also be used to flash a modified capsule BIOS (to bypass the 'Invalid boot image' message).

Please read the entire guide as there is some risk involved, such as overwriting/deleting your Intel Ethernet Adapter's MAC address.


----------



## DrKZ

@chinobino First of all thank you for your answer, I tried a lot of times to follow your tutorial but when I write (fpt -SAVEMAC -f <F10.F10>.bin) an error message appear: Can not redirect output to file ' .bin'.
If I remove the <> another error message: Error 189: File does not exist.

What am i supposed to do? I tried to change several times the name of the Bios file, always the same message...


----------



## chinobino

@DrKZ What is the name of the BIOS file you are trying to flash?

You must give the correct file name e.g. Z390AOMA.F10 is the name given by Gigabyte for the official F10 BIOS, did you change the file extension from .F10 to .bin?

If not then don't add the .bin extension e.g.

fpt -SAVEMAC -f Z390AOMA.F10

Hope this helps.


----------



## Kaltenbrunner

I've been watching some Buildzoid videos on z690 mobo's, and he always says the Gigabyte z690, DDR4 boards anyways, are sub-par, and hard to use in terms of RAM.

I'm looking at the z690 Aorus Elite AX DDR4 ATX, that and similar class is my upper price. I'd be getting another 2x8 3000, for 32GB total, or 2x16 3600

I'm no ram oc'er anyways, so I probably shouldn't worry should I ? The elite AX is about the cheapest for me here. Then maybe the msi Tomahawk


----------



## RockThePylon

This thread is for older gen Z390, i.e. 8xxx/9xxx processors, not Z690, which is 12xxx.

That said, my Gigabyte Z390 board turned me off Gigabyte for life, I would do everything possible to find an alternative.


----------



## zayd

RockThePylon said:


> This thread is for older gen Z390, i.e. 8xxx/9xxx processors, not Z690, which is 12xxx.
> 
> That said, my Gigabyte Z390 board turned me off Gigabyte for life, I would do everything possible to find an alternative.


Which Z390 Gigabyte motherboard do you have? My Z390 Aorus Ultra has been absolutely fantastic and I've been overclocking it for three years without any issues. The board temparatures, especially VRM's are always very low, even when under intense loadings.


----------



## DrKZ

@chinobino Thank you very much, you’re a legend
I removed the . bin at the end and it worked. So I was able to install the F10 and after that, the F11o modded without any problems. I’m happy now, at 5Ghz I reach 5240 Points on Cinebench r20 with my 9900K.
Thanks again and all good for you


----------



## chinobino

@DrKZ Good stuff! Looks like you've got it all sorted out


----------



## RockThePylon

zayd said:


> Which Z390 Gigabyte motherboard do you have?


Z390 Aorus Elite.

The board itself was fine. Memory overclocking was garbo, but that's not a huge issue to me. 

It's the company behind it. Gigabyte only offered "Is it plugged in?" canned responses in multiple support messages, and denied a warranty claim. So, ya know, not gonna fool me twice.


----------



## zayd

RockThePylon said:


> Z390 Aorus Elite.
> 
> The board itself was fine. Memory overclocking was garbo, but that's not a huge issue to me.
> 
> It's the company behind it. Gigabyte only offered "Is it plugged in?" canned responses in multiple support messages, and denied a warranty claim. So, ya know, not gonna fool me twice.


I think overall, even with some ups and downs over the years, Asus boards are consistently good, but only if you buy the higher tier models, as in the ROG line up. I will most likely get a ROG board for my next build.


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

Guys one question: is this relevant for us? Recommended AHCI/RAID and NVMe Drivers ?


----------



## zayd

MasterOfCelsius said:


> Guys one question: is this relevant for us? Recommended AHCI/RAID and NVMe Drivers ?


I wish I never clicked that link. Its a bloody minefield!


----------



## madaisandor95

Hey @KedarWolf can you make a bios for z390 pro based on f9 but the fastest? I have no luck achieve gaming performance and ram clocks as high as on f9 on everey bios that above f9.
A lot of thanks for your work and if you have patreon or anything i make you a six pack, a six pack of beers, not abs


----------



## KedarWolf

madaisandor95 said:


> Hey @KedarWolf can you make a bios for z390 pro based on f9 but the fastest? I have no luck achieve gaming performance and ram clocks as high as on f9 on everey bios that above f9.
> A lot of thanks for your work and if you have patreon or anything i make you a six pack, a six pack of beers, not abs


I can when I get home from work in six hours or so.

No need to give me a dono or anything, though a six-pack of root beer would be nice (I gave up drinking in 1999), peeps on this forum have helped me far more than I've helped anyone else, and my contributions are always for free.


----------



## ASCP

KedarWolf said:


> I can when I get home from work in six hours or so.
> 
> No need to give me a dono or anything, though a six-pack of root beer would be nice (I gave up drinking in 1999), peeps on this forum have helped me far more than I've helped anyone else, and my contributions are always for free.


@madaisandor95 @KedarWolf
Excuse me, but can you give me the modded f9 bios of z390 aorus pro(non-wifi) you guys mentioned too?
I've done a few tests since f12l, which added the rebar function, but the advantage is not noticeable and there are problems such as stutter (at least in the 9th generation?), so I've been using it off recently. I remember that the stability and performance of the f9 bios were quite satisfactory. I am also interested in a modified version of kedarwolf.


----------



## madaisandor95

ASCP said:


> @madaisandor95 @KedarWolf
> Excuse me, but can you give me the modded f9 bios of z390 aorus pro(non-wifi) you guys mentioned too?
> I've done a few tests since f12l, which added the rebar function, but the advantage is not noticeable and there are problems such as stutter (at least in the 9th generation?), so I've been using it off recently. I remember that the stability and performance of the f9 bios were quite satisfactory. I am also interested in a modified version of kedarwolf.


I'm waiting for it too


----------



## KedarWolf

madaisandor95 said:


> I'm waiting for it too


Thanks for reminding me, I forgot. Then they moved the WinRaid forums, and I had to find all the files I needed on the new one. My M.2 died a week ago and I lost everything. 

Usual efiflash method. Go back a few posts, you see the correct command, or just search this thread, username search, KedarWolf.


----------



## madaisandor95

KedarWolf said:


> Thanks for reminding me, I forgot. Then they moved the WinRaid forums, and I had to find all the files I needed on the new one. My M.2 died a week ago and I lost everything.
> 
> Usual efiflash method. Go back a few posts, you see the correct command, or just search this thread, username search, KedarWolf.


Thank you for your time and work. Finally i can boot up my 4400 c19 on 3866 with reasonable cpu performance


----------



## TexSC

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> ...
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hello KedarWolf! I've been following your posts for a few months now. I have a new system with a 9900K paired with a Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi. I have been able to achieve a 51 core multiplier on all 8 cores, 47 uncore, with 1.325V (in the BIOS, CPU-Z reports 1.308) stable. This is on the stock F10 bios. I previously thought it was stable with only 1.290V, but that was with 1440p gaming as the main use case, and it turns out 1080p gaming made it crash as it stresses the CPU more. On Cinebench R23, it scores 13055-13082, which seems a bit low. It maintains the 5.1ghz clocks through the runs, so perhaps the microcode is to blame.

Is the modded BIOS in your post that I quoted still the preferred BIOS for this setup? Do you think it would significantly help my overclocking results? Is there a newer one that would be better for gaming? My current F10 doesn't support Resizable-BAR, but that is less of a concern since the improvement in 9th-gen is mixed. Also ,is your modded bios reversible? I noticed the official F12 says " Customers will NOT be able to reverse to previous BIOS version" Thank you!


----------



## KedarWolf

TexSC said:


> Hello KedarWolf! I've been following your posts for a few months now. I have a new system with a 9900K paired with a Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi. I have been able to achieve a 51 core multiplier on all 8 cores, 47 uncore, with 1.325V (in the BIOS, CPU-Z reports 1.308) stable. This is on the stock F10 bios. I previously thought it was stable with only 1.290V, but that was with 1440p gaming as the main use case, and it turns out 1080p gaming made it crash as it stresses the CPU more. On Cinebench R23, it scores 13055-13082, which seems a bit low. It maintains the 5.1ghz clocks through the runs, so perhaps the microcode is to blame.
> 
> Is the modded BIOS in your post that I quoted still the preferred BIOS for this setup? Do you think it would significantly help my overclocking results? Is there a newer one that would be better for gaming? My current F10 doesn't support Resizable-BAR, but that is less of a concern since the improvement in 9th-gen is mixed. Also ,is your modded bios reversible? I noticed the official F12 says " Customers will NOT be able to reverse to previous BIOS version" Thank you!


You DON'T want to use the latest BIOS. Lots of people having issues with it. You want to use the release before it. That one works fine.


----------



## TexSC

KedarWolf said:


> You DON'T want to use the latest BIOS. Lots of people having issues with it. You want to use the release before it. That one works fine.


Thank you! So in the post I quoted, I think that is your modded BIOS based on the latest which is F12, and those should be avoided. Should I be using these instead, which is based on the one before it, F12k? (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


----------



## KedarWolf

TexSC said:


> Thank you! So in the post I quoted, I think that is your modded BIOS based on the latest which is F12, and those should be avoided. Should I be using these instead, which is based on the one before it, F12k? (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Yes, that's the one.

Edit: Unistall these two Windows updates or Google how to block Microsoft microcodes in Windows. It involves renaming a .dll I think.

*KB4589212 
KB4589198 *


----------



## TexSC

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, that's the one.
> 
> Edit: Unistall these two Windows updates or Google how to block Microsoft microcodes in Windows. It involves renaming a .dll I think.
> 
> *KB4589212
> KB4589198 *


Thanks for all of the help! Can you reupload "Z390ProWiFi_F12kModded.zip"? The google drive link says that it doesn't exist.

I have a recent install of Windows 10 21H2, so it did not have either of those windows updates. I did google around and found which .dll to rename, and renamed all instances of it. Before and after I did this, my MCU in HWiNFO was B8. It didn't change from B8 and my cinebench scores didn't change either. 

Can't wait to try out the modded BIOS, and I'll verify that it changes the MCU as well.


----------



## KedarWolf

Z390ProWiFiModded. Read recent instructions how to flash it with efiflash.


----------



## madaisandor95

I have a z390 pro ,with watercooled vrm-s and cpu. my problem is , i had a pair of corsair 3200 c16-18-18-36 ram what boot up and stable at 3866mhz 18-20-20 . i bought a viper steel 4400 c19 flat , with 4400 xmp wont boot , with 4266 xmp wont boot , with f9 some time boots at 4133 and 3866 but if i restart or shutdown the pc next time it wont post ,my cpu is a 9600k anyone have a trick or tip how can i boot on 3866 with the viper steel or above? (the corsair stable at 3866 even with xmp turned off , but the viper steel doesnt even post above 3200 with xmp off)and sometimes when i set 3600 the asrock timing software shows 3700mhz so if you have 9600k and aorus pro and you can use your rams at 3866 or above please help


----------



## TexSC

KedarWolf said:


> Z390ProWiFiModded. Read recent instructions how to flash it with efiflash.


Thanks! So, I did it using your instructions and replaced the bios filename in the freeDOS with "1.12k" and it worked and booted immediately! HWiNFO now shows the microcode MCU as *"BE"*, is this correct? I think it worked! Quick benches to test stock CPU with no XMP. 11892-11952 Cinebench R23 at 72C. Cool and quiet, but we can do better! 

Into the BIOS, it looks different. Enabled Advanced Mode, confirmed BIOS Version F12k. Enabled XMP and left everything else for now. 12029-12040 at 72c. Still cool and quiet. CB really doesn't care about RAM that much, huh? OK, time for the good stuff. 

Core 51x, uncore 47x, avx offset 0, vcore 1.325, turbo ratios all 51, loadline calibration Turbo. CB: 13871-13875 at 88C. The highest score I've ever seen on this system, and it's a 6% improvement at the same overclock settings. Amazing, thank you!


----------



## msromike

I have a Z-390 Aorus Pro WiFi. According to @BIOS I am on BIOS version "Z390 AORUS MASTER F11n."

Anyway, I tried to update to the latest version F12 from the Gigabyte support forum with @BIOS and also from inside the bios and got a "BIOS ID Mismatch" error.

So I came here and downloaded the F12K from a couple of posts above, made a freedos boot stick, reset BIOS settings with F7, booted to dos and tried efiflash with /c and /x command line options. I am still getting the "BIOS ID mismatch" error.

Do I need to revert to an older BIOS version before going to this one? Any ideas?


----------



## TrebleTA

msromike said:


> I have a Z-390 Aorus Pro WiFi. According to @BIOS I am on BIOS version "Z390 AORUS MASTER F11n."
> 
> Do I need to revert to an older BIOS version before going to this one? Any ideas?


I would, what you say above is its reporting a different motherboards bios. Sounds like you have flashed a incorrect bios...


----------



## TrebleTA

Sorry its been awhile been alittle unwell.
So tweaking my memory so far this is my setting. 
Am trying to get better timings.


----------



## msromike

TrebleTA said:


> I would, what you say above is its reporting a different motherboards bios. Sounds like you have flashed a incorrect bios...


UPDATE: flashed to F11n sucessfully.

OK, thanks! Good to know that I actually have a Master and not a Pro Wifi. First rule of overclocking is to know what motherboard you have?

Can you recommended a stable modded BIOS? or should I just load up the capsule BIOS and be done with it? I get the feeling that there won't be any further releases from Gigabyte for this board.


----------



## msromike

I downloaded KedarWolf's modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Master. Inside the zip archive there is a F11Final.F11 and a F11o.F11. What is the difference between the two, and which do you recommend?


----------



## KedarWolf

msromike said:


> I downloaded KedarWolf's modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Master. Inside the zip archive there is a F11Final.F11 and a F11o.F11. What is the difference between the two, and which do you recommend?


Definitely F11o, not F11 Final. Lots of people having trouble with F11 Final and complicated to go back to F11o.


----------



## msromike

KedarWolf said:


> Definitely F11o, not F11 Final. Lots of people having trouble with F11 Final and complicated to go back to F11o.


Weird, but I'm getting an invalid image error on F11o.F11. I am definitely running a Z390 Master, and the zip file I downloaded off the forum is Z390MasterMicrocodesAndFirmware. I was able to flash F11n off the Gigabyte download page. Any ideas?


----------



## KedarWolf

msromike said:


> Weird, but I'm getting an invalid image error on F11o.F11. I am definitely running a Z390 Master, and the zip file I downloaded off the forum is Z390MasterMicrocodesAndFirmware. I was able to flash F11n off the Gigabyte download page. Any ideas?


If you flashed F11 Final you need to go back some posts and find the guide for going back to F11o. DON'T skip the Ethernet part when you use the guide or very likely your ethernet controller will never work again.


----------



## KedarWolf

msromike said:


> Weird, but I'm getting an invalid image error on F11o.F11. I am definitely running a Z390 Master, and the zip file I downloaded off the forum is Z390MasterMicrocodesAndFirmware. I was able to flash F11n off the Gigabyte download page. Any ideas?


Oh, you need to use efiflash to flash them with the right switches. Go back some posts where you see the command for efiflash and how to make the boot USB.

If you flashed F11n you can flash F11o with efiflash. No need to use the guide with the ethernet stuff.

Here. Use the BIOS name of the BIOS you are flashing though.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great. Z390ProWiFiModded so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing. take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive...




www.overclock.net


----------



## msromike

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, you need to use efiflash to flash them with the right switches. Go back some posts where you see the command for efiflash and how to make the boot USB.
> 
> If you flashed F11n you can flash F11o with efiflash. No need to use the guide with the ethernet stuff.
> 
> Here. Use the BIOS name of the BIOS you are flashing though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great. Z390ProWiFiModded so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing. take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


All good now. Thanks for the link, I was putting the switches (from memory) before the filename instead of after.


----------



## KedarWolf

msromike said:


> All good now. Thanks for the link, I was putting the switches (from memory) before the filename instead of after.


----------



## msromike

So now that my Aorus Master is flashed to the latest stable BIOS, what is a good place to start for overclocking? I tried it with the Gigabyte guide a couple years ago, but couldn't get any improvement over the motherboard auto configuration. 

Just got computer out oif storage for a year and feel like playing with it again. I am running an I7-9700K. So far all I have done is turn on XMP.


----------



## KedarWolf

msromike said:


> So now that my Aorus Master is flashed to the latest stable BIOS, what is a good place to start for overclocking? I tried it with the Gigabyte guide a couple years ago, but couldn't get any improvement over the motherboard auto configuration.
> 
> Just got computer out oif storage for a year and feel like playing with it again. I am running an I7-9700K. So far all I have done is turn on XMP.


Old post but most of the settings should be the same. DON'T neglect the Loadline settings if I changed them, or your CPU voltages will be too high.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


I wonder if easy tune is setting it to 5.2ghz. It has a setting for that. It does it to 5.2 but with too high voltage and unstable under stress....




www.overclock.net


----------



## KedarWolf

(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Despite the bios update indicating 32GB UDIMM modules are supported on the Aorus Xtreme, for a maximum 128GB memory, the QVL was never updated. I reached out to Gigabyte support a few days ago, but haven’t heard back yet. The closest I could find that may work is Samsung M378A4G43MB1-CTD 2666...




www.overclock.net





Here's another one. DON'T neglect the 'IA AC Loadline' and 'IA DC Loadline' settings.


----------



## 212

Figured it out, thanks!


----------



## empyr

Hi. I guess this is aimed at @KedarWolf - But overall the best BIOS for the Z390 Aorus Pro, is that the one you posted a few pages back? the F9 one?


----------



## KedarWolf

empyr said:


> Hi. I guess this is aimed at @KedarWolf - But overall the best BIOS for the Z390 Aorus Pro, is that the one you posted a few pages back? the F9 one?


This one F12L.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


KedarWolf are you able to reply to my message please ? Did you PM me or was it here? Latest modded BIOS posted earlier in the thread the best.




www.overclock.net


----------



## empyr

KedarWolf said:


> This one F12L.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> KedarWolf are you able to reply to my message please ? Did you PM me or was it here? Latest modded BIOS posted earlier in the thread the best.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


This is the best interms of both CPU / Memory performance and overall stability? I've tried your F9 and it seemed quite decent. 

Either way, I assume it's the exact same way of flashing?


----------



## StefanAm

KedarWolf said:


> BIOS settings for 5.1GHz CPU, 4.7GHz cache, 4200MHz memory. You can probably go lower on the Dynamic VCore .175 Offset, but with my second Master board, I get 1.333v VRVout while running 1344FFTs in Prime95 which I need for no errors. My first board, I'd get that at .155 Offset.
> 
> This is Prime95 and GSAT for memory stable, plus countless hours of gaming with zero game crashes or blue screens.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Hi man! What memory do you use in this overclock?


----------



## KedarWolf

StefanAm said:


> Hi man! What memory do you use in this overclock?


I had 4x8GB G.Skill CL14 3200 b-die. You want 4x8GB this board, it's t-topology.


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

Guys if you have Aorus Master, u got Dual Bios. I got F11o and F11 ( the newest from Gigabyte ) and i am just using F11 and deleted mcupdate_GenuineIntel . Dont get me wrong, KedarWolf is doing a great job for us all, but you all think, u get like 10%+ performance out of this all. i just got a 9900KS @ 2nd hand market and i run this @ 5.1 ghz 1,41 V ( and NO its not too much and YES, my CPU will not survive 10 years, only 9 but in 9 years 9900KS is garbage anyway ). Listen guys, i am playing around with this 9th gen cpus like for 2 years, i had 9600k, 9700k, 9900k and 9900ks. And if you really want the maximum out of this cpus, imho AVX 0, LLC turbo, VCCIO and SYS agent 1,25v, ring voltage default and give this f cpu enough voltage. i noticed these cpu run well with 1,28v and 1,32v an so on, BUT in very high cpu and gpu demanding situations it just runs much better if you just give enough voltage to your system. it just stops having this weird fps drops sometimes like in apex legends or cs go. 1,41 V is f no problem with an good AIO and liquid metal @ HS.


----------



## 1daG

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


@KedarWolf when i tried efiflash i got this. Could you help me?


----------



## KedarWolf

1daG said:


> @KedarWolf when i tried efiflash i got this. Could you help me?


If you flashed F12 you need to go back in this thread for the guide how to go back. DON'T neglect the ethernet part of the guide, or your ethernet port will never work again. Also, flash an older BIOS with the guide from Gigabyte support first, then flash this modded one with efiflash.


----------



## neobr

Hi guys

I've been following this thread for a long time and really like the content, today I'm the one who needs help.

After years using the machine without any problems on Windows 10 today I had the "great idea" to make it compatible with Windows 11 and the last missing requirement was to enable some Secure Boot options on BIOS, I saved the configuration and the board never booted again 

The LED status keep showing "VGA", I've already tried 3 different graphics cards on both slots and nothing changes, I also tried to remove the battery, Clear CMOS, leave the PSU it unplugged for a while... no success.... 

The board manual says it has DualBIOS but I'm not sure how to load the backup one, I saw some links that indicate a physical switch for the change but from what I understand it only exists on Aorus Master, not in Aorus Pro.

Below my configuration:

i9-9900KF (stock)
Noctua NH-D15
Z390 Aorus Pro (BIOS F12l)
MSI Ventus RTX 2080 Ti

Any idea what could have happened and how to fix it?


----------



## KedarWolf

neobr said:


> Hi guys
> 
> I've been following this thread for a long time and really like the content, today I'm the one who needs help.
> 
> After years using the machine without any problems on Windows 10 today I had the "great idea" to make it compatible with Windows 11 and the last missing requirement was to enable some Secure Boot options on BIOS, I saved the configuration and the board never booted again
> 
> The LED status keep showing "VGA", I've already tried 3 different graphics cards on both slots and nothing changes, I also tried to remove the battery, Clear CMOS, leave the PSU it unplugged for a while... no success....
> 
> The board manual says it has DualBIOS but I'm not sure how to load the backup one, I saw some links that indicate a physical switch for the change but from what I understand it only exists on Aorus Master, not in Aorus Pro.
> 
> Below my configuration:
> 
> i9-9900KF (stock)
> Noctua NH-D15
> Z390 Aorus Pro (BIOS F12l)
> MSI Ventus RTX 2080 Ti
> 
> Any idea what could have happened and how to fix it?


Unplug the power cord from the power supply. Remove the CMOS battery for a minute or so. Put the battery back in, problem solved!!


----------



## neobr

KedarWolf said:


> Unplug the power cord from the power supply. Remove the CMOS battery for a minute or so. Put the battery back in, problem solved!!


I've tried this several times so far, didn't work  

How do I load Bios backup in Aorus Pro board? I didn't find anything in the manual.


----------



## neobr

Well, searching online I saw similar situations and I think I found a cause (or at least a possible solution).

It was certainly caused by activating some Secure Boot options and for some reason the fact that the processor is a"F" (no iGPU) caused this (maybe a bug?). Many who had a similar problem managed to solve it by booting the system through the onboard video and reverting the configuration, but my processor doesn't have that so it stopped at boot with the VGA led on.

The weirdest thing was that the Clear CMOS/battery removal didn't have any effect on this, but everything was working perfectly so far, nothing else has been disassembled, cleaned, replaced or anything like that.

Unfortunately I don't know people nearby with compatible hardware and repair shops aren't very reliable around here, but I found old Celerons G49xx pretty cheap in China and I'm going to order one and see what happens.

Soon I get back with good news I hope.


----------



## horochii

KedarWolf said:


> Unplug the power cord from the power supply. Remove the CMOS battery for a minute or so. Put the battery back in, problem solved!!



Been taking a look at your work for Z390 Gigabyte boards and am really thankful how responsive and helpful you are. Just a few questions, I am very new to flashing modded bios and have currently flashed the latest official GB f12 bios for the z390 Aorus Pro Wifi. I looked through the thread and could not find a detailed guide on how to go back to f12k to be able to use your modded bios. Could you help me with this? I was also looking for a link to the f12k modded bios zip but I believe the link has expired. Thank you for your time.


----------



## KedarWolf

horochii said:


> Been taking a look at your work for Z390 Gigabyte boards and am really thankful how responsive and helpful you are. Just a few questions, I am very new to flashing modded bios and have currently flashed the latest official GB f12 bios for the z390 Aorus Pro Wifi. I looked through the thread and could not find a detailed guide on how to go back to f12k to be able to use your modded bios. Could you help me with this? I was also looking for a link to the f12k modded bios zip but I believe the link has expired. Thank you for your time.


DON'T skip the ethernet part of the guide.









Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"


I decided to investigate the error “Invalid BIOS image” that plagued some Gigabyte users. It turns out Gigabyte is using a structure called BiosDataRecord to perform an integrity check. It seems Gigabyte specific and it was present in older platforms as well (checked and found at Z87 and X79)...




winraid.level1techs.com













(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Z390 Aorus Elite. The board itself was fine. Memory overclocking was garbo, but that's not a huge issue to me. It's the company behind it. Gigabyte only offered "Is it plugged in?" canned responses in multiple support messages, and denied a warranty claim. So, ya know, not gonna fool me twice...




www.overclock.net


----------



## horochii

KedarWolf said:


> DON'T skip the ethernet part of the guide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"
> 
> 
> I decided to investigate the error “Invalid BIOS image” that plagued some Gigabyte users. It turns out Gigabyte is using a structure called BiosDataRecord to perform an integrity check. It seems Gigabyte specific and it was present in older platforms as well (checked and found at Z87 and X79)...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> winraid.level1techs.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> Z390 Aorus Elite. The board itself was fine. Memory overclocking was garbo, but that's not a huge issue to me. It's the company behind it. Gigabyte only offered "Is it plugged in?" canned responses in multiple support messages, and denied a warranty claim. So, ya know, not gonna fool me twice...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Thanks a lot for this!


----------



## KedarWolf

horochii said:


> Thanks a lot for this!


Just use the modded efiflash, no need to do anything else I believe. I read the thread.


----------



## horochii

KedarWolf said:


> Just use the modded efiflash, no need to do anything else I believe. I read the thread.


Sorry to ask again, do you happen to have the modded efiflash to go back to f12k? Then run the command efiflash xx.bios ver? Edit: Got everything to work fine, thank you a lot!


----------



## Coldblackice

Does anyone have a more _recent_ BIOS config/settings for 5.0GHz, namely F11o?

I've followed older ones in the past, but I haven't found any for more recent BIOSes, namely F11o. Curious if anyone has a more recent recommended template that I could start with and tweak from there. I'd appreciate any if so!


----------



## KedarWolf

Coldblackice said:


> Does anyone have a more _recent_ BIOS config/settings for 5.0GHz, namely F11o?
> 
> I've followed older ones in the past, but I haven't found any for more recent BIOSes, namely F11o. Curious if anyone has a more recent recommended template that I could start with and tweak from there. I'd appreciate any if so!


I only have the settings from a really old BIOS that I've already shared. I haven't owned my Z390 for several years now.


----------



## OC-24/7

Coldblackice said:


> Does anyone have a more _recent_ BIOS config/settings for 5.0GHz, namely F11o?
> 
> I've followed older ones in the past, but I haven't found any for more recent BIOSes, namely F11o. Curious if anyone has a more recent recommended template that I could start with and tweak from there. I'd appreciate any if so!


All Gigabyte Z390 boards Intel Turbo Boost - Disabled for this OC settings
This is for 5Ghz at 1.225 Vcore
1. Load optimal default 
2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Low
4. CPU Vcore - Auto
5. CPU Clock Ratio - 50
6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable 
7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

OC-24/7 said:


> All Gigabyte Z390 boards Intel Turbo Boost - Disabled for this OC settings
> This is for 5Ghz at 1.225 Vcore
> 1. Load optimal default
> 2. CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Power Saving
> 3. CPU Vcote Loadline Calibration - Low
> 4. CPU Vcore - Auto
> 5. CPU Clock Ratio - 50
> 6. X.M.P Profile1 DDR4-3200 - Enable
> 7. CPU VCCIO - 1.150v
> 8. CPU System Agent Voltage 1.150v



Its not all about low vcore guys, i checked via protocols from core temp and OSC Rivatuner, source games like cs go , apex legends .. all use AVX, so with default AVX -3 u get 4700 Mhz. So whats the point, chilling in windows watching youtube with 5 ghz? I want 5 Ghz all the time, and this settings imho will not work for scenarios this whole CPUs and Mainboards are made for: gaming.


----------



## zayd

MasterOfCelsius said:


> Its not all about low vcore guys, i checked via protocols from core temp and OSC Rivatuner, source games like cs go , apex legends .. all use AVX, so with default AVX -3 u get 4700 Mhz. So whats the point, chilling in windows watching youtube with 5 ghz? I want 5 Ghz all the time, and this settings imho will not work for scenarios this whole CPUs and Mainboards are made for: gaming.


I totally agree with you. I've been running 5ghz all cores for the past year now, but as soon as you put a heavy load on to the CPU, like playing Call of Duty Warzone for example, there has to be sufficient voltage being fed to the chip. I'm managing 5ghz core, 4.7ghz ring, 1.325 Vcore, VCCIO and VCCSA 1.2V, LLC at turbo and all energy saving options off. The system runs fantastic during heavy gaming sessions and CPU utilisation remains well under 50%, leaving the GPU with the greatest loads.


----------



## OC-24/7

MasterOfCelsius said:


> Its not all about low vcore guys, i checked via protocols from core temp and OSC Rivatuner, source games like cs go , apex legends .. all use AVX, so with default AVX -3 u get 4700 Mhz. So whats the point, chilling in windows watching youtube with 5 ghz? I want 5 Ghz all the time, and this settings imho will not work for scenarios this whole CPUs and Mainboards are made for: gaming.


With this OC settings i run my system for a years and no errors
Prime95 with AVX small FFT 24 hours no errors all the games no shut downs the CPU is cool and safe on the standard 360 rad


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

OC-24/7 said:


> With this OC settings i run my system for a years and no errors
> Prime95 with AVX small FFT 24 hours no errors all the games no shut downs the CPU is cool and safe on the standard 360 rad


well if it fits for you, then why not. what i mean is: i play apex legends @ 241 fps ( RTSS ) @ 9900KS 5.1 Ghz HT off, and CS Go fps_max 999 / 0 ( the same ) so round about 400-900 fps @ BenQ xl2546k Dyac+ premium. 9900ks also runs with 1,28v etc... but imho there is less lag / stutter if you just give this CPU just much juice.


----------



## OC-24/7

I was testing the system wi


MasterOfCelsius said:


> well if it fits for you, then why not. what i mean is: i play apex legends @ 241 fps ( RTSS ) @ 9900KS 5.1 Ghz HT off, and CS Go fps_max 999 / 0 ( the same ) so round about 400-900 fps @ BenQ xl2546k Dyac+ premium. 9900ks also runs with 1,28v etc... but imho there is less lag / stutter if you just give this CPU just much juice.


I want to point out that Vdrop it's better and healthy for the system, to keep the Vcore on auto and that the processor will take as much voltage as it needs
On heavy load the system is more stable on auto Vcore with low LLC instead of fix voltage with turbo LLC


----------



## FallenUpwards

Hello overclock-community!

I've been having a look into this thread a while ago already but to be honest, most parts of BIOS configuration are still a bit too much for me.
Since it's however getting quite hot over the summer months now and i have a particular game that likes to spike my CPU into temperature territories that i'm not too comfortable running for longer periods of time, i'm hereby looking for assistance or at least something to start on in regards to *undervolting *said CPU.

*CPU: i9-9900KF* (currently on stock/optimised default settings, except for fan curves)
*Cooler: be-quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4* (yes, i'm on air cooling, which is one reason why i'm not looking to push it higher)
*Mainboard: Z390 Aorus Master* (with a modded F11e that i picked from here some time ago i think...)

Firstly, should i upgrade to a newer BIOS - i mean, the answer is probably 'yes' either way but you know - i think F11o by KedarWolf it would be? If so, i know where to find it. ^^

Secondly, where would i start? What settings are integral for me to change and using what values as a starting point? And what can i perhaps leave alone when not pushing clocks?

Would really appreciate some pointers since there's so much information out there, lots of which is more confusing than anything else. I dabbled in OC a bit in the past but have yet forgotten a lot of it i'm afraid. In the end i'm just looking to achieve stable stock performance at lower temperatures than what Intel's automatic mess tends to create.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts!


----------



## Kivito

FallenUpwards said:


> Hello overclock-community!
> 
> I've been having a look into this thread a while ago already but to be honest, most parts of BIOS configuration are still a bit too much for me.
> Since it's however getting quite hot over the summer months now and i have a particular game that likes to spike my CPU into temperature territories that i'm not too comfortable running for longer periods of time, i'm hereby looking for assistance or at least something to start on in regards to *undervolting *said CPU.
> 
> *CPU: i9-9900KF* (currently on stock/optimised default settings, except for fan curves)
> *Cooler: be-quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4* (yes, i'm on air cooling, which is one reason why i'm not looking to push it higher)
> *Mainboard: Z390 Aorus Master* (with a modded F11e that i picked from here some time ago i think...)
> 
> Firstly, should i upgrade to a newer BIOS - i mean, the answer is probably 'yes' either way but you know - i think F11o by KedarWolf it would be? If so, i know where to find it. ^^
> 
> Secondly, where would i start? What settings are integral for me to change and using what values as a starting point? And what can i perhaps leave alone when not pushing clocks?
> 
> Would really appreciate some pointers since there's so much information out there, lots of which is more confusing than anything else. I dabbled in OC a bit in the past but have yet forgotten a lot of it i'm afraid. In the end i'm just looking to achieve stable stock performance at lower temperatures than what Intel's automatic mess tends to create.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any thoughts!


Greetings from Mallorca. 

After reading this thread a lot and with the great help of the people on the forum, in particular, the best solution for my system (I also have a 9900kf with the same model of motherboard as you) has been to lower the voltages as much as possible and leave the speed fixed, in my case 4.9.

If you want, I can send you some screenshots in case they can help you.

Sorry, my english is bad.


----------



## MasterOfCelsius

FallenUpwards said:


> Hello overclock-community!
> 
> I've been having a look into this thread a while ago already but to be honest, most parts of BIOS configuration are still a bit too much for me.
> Since it's however getting quite hot over the summer months now and i have a particular game that likes to spike my CPU into temperature territories that i'm not too comfortable running for longer periods of time, i'm hereby looking for assistance or at least something to start on in regards to *undervolting *said CPU.
> 
> *CPU: i9-9900KF* (currently on stock/optimised default settings, except for fan curves)
> *Cooler: be-quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4* (yes, i'm on air cooling, which is one reason why i'm not looking to push it higher)
> *Mainboard: Z390 Aorus Master* (with a modded F11e that i picked from here some time ago i think...)
> 
> Firstly, should i upgrade to a newer BIOS - i mean, the answer is probably 'yes' either way but you know - i think F11o by KedarWolf it would be? If so, i know where to find it. ^^
> 
> Secondly, where would i start? What settings are integral for me to change and using what values as a starting point? And what can i perhaps leave alone when not pushing clocks?
> 
> Would really appreciate some pointers since there's so much information out there, lots of which is more confusing than anything else. I dabbled in OC a bit in the past but have yet forgotten a lot of it i'm afraid. In the end i'm just looking to achieve stable stock performance at lower temperatures than what Intel's automatic mess tends to create.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any thoughts!


Noone here can tell you what u should do here. We have the fraction of "KedarWolf modded Bios" and "Guys who want 500 Horsepower but give the CPU only 1 Liter Diesel" aka low Voltage.

If you cannot cool down your system properly, you should first think about that. Many Thanks to KedarWolf, great guy, but i really believe that the final F11 Bios from Gigabyte for Aorus Master is great too. Use proper CPU and GPU cooling, good Airflow, Liquid Metal, turn off C-States in Bios, turn off Turboboost, turn off HT imho ( gaming ), fixed core ratio, fixed high vcore, fixed VCCIO and Sys Agent, use good RAM with XMP, optimize your windows OS with things like "useplatformtick" and so on. Youtube der8auer and so on for z390 aorus master...

i was on your trip too, undervolting like hell, and the only thing that i got from this, was brain hurting much for nothing. start reading whole google, too low vcore can cause even ram instability....


----------



## danandrei96

@KedarWolf @blueline64 sorry to bring this up after so long but any chance either one of you could reupload the modded z390i bios from post #10,413 ? The link is dead. Really appreciate your help


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted.


----------



## KedarWolf

danandrei96 said:


> @KedarWolf @blueline64 sorry to bring this up after so long but any chance either one of you could reupload the modded z390i bios from post #10,413 ? The link is dead. Really appreciate your help


----------



## zilog

Hi there.

I have a Z390 Aorus Pro Rev1 and a 9900K.

I wanted to do some DDR4 tweaking and felt that the F12 BIOS would be more stable than my old F9/F10 one (It was and enabled me to OC my DDR4 3000 to 3400 which was impossible previously but that's not the point)

=> I saw the "no turning back" message on the F12 spec page but stupidly thought "hey, what could be wrong?" (silly me)

=> my CPU'OC is now much more difficult to achieve and I had to go back to 4.5 Ghz instead of 4.9 Ghz previously (with same temps), else it's impossible, no matter what I tweak on vcore, LLC, etc, it's a completely different "feeling"

=> more annoyingly I have random cold boot issues (bootloop, only way to boot is to switch the PSU off and on again, which is a pain)

So I tried like many of you to revert back to a "pre Capsule" BIOS.

I've tried all the solutions detailed in this in thread for a whole afternoon, to no avail:

- Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image" is supposed to work for a lot of people but I must be missing something ; the 0.65 efiflash is not OK with the Z390 ; I tried the 0.85 modded one, doesn't work either (invalid etc) ; the /X option doesn't help.

- I tried the "old" Gigabyte solution to copy the backup bios to the main one (PSU switch OFF, case button ON, PSU switch ON, etc) : doesn't work (the days of x58 Gigabyte are over I guess, worked like a charm on those)

- I have no BIOS M/B switches on the Aorus Pro else I'd have tried something.

For now, the only solution I see I getting to trash my BIOS (which happened a lot while finetuning my OC) to revert back to the backup BIOS, but this is ridiculous.

What am I missing?

The Intel FPT solution is often referred to, but I haven't found any specific link to the tool or -more important- a tutorial.

I don't usually need help with computers, been tweaking stuff for more than 20 years, but this is putting me almost in a state of rage, any help appreciated and sorry for the long babble


----------



## KedarWolf

zilog said:


> Hi there.
> 
> I have a Z390 Aorus Pro Rev1 and a 9900K.
> 
> I wanted to do some DDR4 tweaking and felt that the F12 BIOS would be more stable than my old F9/F10 one (It was and enabled me to OC my DDR4 3000 to 3400 which was impossible previously but that's not the point)
> 
> => I saw the "no turning back" message on the F12 spec page but stupidly thought "hey, what could be wrong?" (silly me)
> 
> => my CPU'OC is now much more difficult to achieve and I had to go back to 4.5 Ghz instead of 4.9 Ghz previously (with same temps), else it's impossible, no matter what I tweak on vcore, LLC, etc, it's a completely different "feeling"
> 
> => more annoyingly I have random cold boot issues (bootloop, only way to boot is to switch the PSU off and on again, which is a pain)
> 
> So I tried like many of you to revert back to a "pre Capsule" BIOS.
> 
> I've tried all the solutions detailed in this in thread for a whole afternoon, to no avail:
> 
> - Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image" is supposed to work for a lot of people but I must be missing something ; the 0.65 efiflash is not OK with the Z390 ; I tried the 0.85 modded one, doesn't work either (invalid etc) ; the /X option doesn't help.
> 
> - I tried the "old" Gigabyte solution to copy the backup bios to the main one (PSU switch OFF, case button ON, PSU switch ON, etc) : doesn't work (the days of x58 Gigabyte are over I guess, worked like a charm on those)
> 
> - I have no BIOS M/B switches on the Aorus Pro else I'd have tried something.
> 
> For now, the only solution I see I getting to trash my BIOS (which happened a lot while finetuning my OC) to revert back to the backup BIOS, but this is ridiculous.
> 
> What am I missing?
> 
> The Intel FPT solution is often referred to, but I haven't found any specific link to the tool or -more important- a tutorial.
> 
> I don't usually need help with computers, been tweaking stuff for more than 20 years, but this is putting me almost in a state of rage, any help appreciated and sorry for the long babble


Ask @horochii they got it to work from that link.

But I think they just used the modded efiflash provided in that link.

Use the link below, DON'T neglect to do the ethernet portion of it.









Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"


This guide is for those who have updated their Gigabyte Z370, Z390 to the latest BIOS with a capsule and want to go back to an earlier BIOS but can’t such as @obz @XQJ-37 @saydji @monta990 @hukis @GHOST.CHIP It’s possible to downgrade using Intel’s Flash Programming Tool (FPT). For Z370 (and...




winraid.level1techs.com


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## zilog

THANK YOU SIR.

Took 5 minutes with "method 1"

My most sincere thanks, this was driving me NUTS.

BIOS F10 is back, I can get back some control and stability on this board again !!

Note: the link was OK but the "/305" page did the trick to have the actual FPT tutorial instead of the frontpage efiflash/0.65 which is not a valid solution.

👍👍👍


----------



## KedarWolf

zilog said:


> THANK YOU SIR.
> 
> Took 5 minutes with "method 1"
> 
> My most sincere thanks, this was driving me NUTS.
> 
> BIOS F10 is back, I can get back some control and stability on this board again !!
> 
> Note: the link was OK but the "/305" page did the trick to have the actual FPT tutorial instead of the frontpage efiflash/0.65 which is not a valid solution.
> 
> 👍👍👍


----------



## Marius93

Hello everyone!
I didn't have time and money, to be honest, to upgrade to a newer platform lately, i'm stuck with my old Gigabyte z390 Aorus Master paired with i9 9900k. Yesterday i saw a good price for a M2 SSD gen 4 2tb ( SSD ADATA S70 2TB PCI Express 4.0 x4 M.2 2280 ) and since i needed space i bought it without consulting my motherboards compatibility sheet. It's not up to date, since it's from 2021 december i think ( the sheet ) but still, my ssd is not there ( looked for the code AGAMMIXS70-2T-C ), alltough the same model of ssd, but the 1 tb variant is there. So, to cut to the chase, my pc won't boot ( it just powers on but nothing happens when i have the new ssd installed ) is there a way to make it work so i don't have to return it? Oh my bios version is F11, the one from their site, oh and i have 1 more ssd, which was my main one - Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB PCI Express 3.0 x4 ( but i installed with just the new ssd and still won't boot ) .


----------



## AdrianWatcher

Can anyone show me where i can download KedarWolf's latest stable modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Master. I cant find it...


----------



## zilog

Hi back.

so....reverted from F12 "Capsule" to F10 because of unstable behavior, higher temps, lower overclock but also a random bootloop at cold start => that bug is still here with F10 unfortunately. (Z390 Aorus Pro + 9900K)

Symptoms : pressing start button on the case / cold boot : once in a while, PC stays in an endless bootloop ; only solution is switch the PSU OFF then ON, then the PC starts like a charm.

Pc is rock stable in idle state, CPU benches (OCCT Linpack & Small FFT OK / 10 hours 80°C max with a Dark Rock Pro 4), heavy CPU+GPU gaming etc ; 2 x 8Gb sticks of Corsair Vengeance 3000, no fuss, non OC'd ; CPU undervolted @1.25v with mild LLC settings, MCE off, all "manual" UV/OC.

Constant bootloop is a classic, it's usually a RAM issue ; the randomness and "solution" of that bootloop feels unusual.

Seems other people have this kind of issue on other Gigabyte mobos, but no clear solution came from Googling : any ideas are welcome


----------



## andrejbekcic91

zilog said:


> Hi back.
> 
> so....reverted from F12 "Capsule" to F10 because of unstable behavior, higher temps, lower overclock but also a random bootloop at cold start => that bug is still here with F10 unfortunately. (Z390 Aorus Pro + 9900K)
> 
> Symptoms : pressing start button on the case / cold boot : once in a while, PC stays in an endless bootloop ; only solution is switch the PSU OFF then ON, then the PC starts like a charm.
> 
> Pc is rock stable in idle state, CPU benches (OCCT Linpack & Small FFT OK / 10 hours 80°C max with a Dark Rock Pro 4), heavy CPU+GPU gaming etc ; 2 x 8Gb sticks of Corsair Vengeance 3000, no fuss, non OC'd ; CPU undervolted @1.25v with mild LLC settings, MCE off, all "manual" UV/OC.
> 
> Constant bootloop is a classic, it's usually a RAM issue ; the randomness and "solution" of that bootloop feels unusual.
> 
> Seems other people have this kind of issue on other Gigabyte mobos, but no clear solution came from Googling : any ideas are welcome


Test first at bone stock (reset cmos). Then you can deduce if its the board or the undervolt/xmp.


----------



## zilog

andrejbekcic91 said:


> Test first at bone stock (reset cmos). Then you can deduce if its the board or the undervolt/xmp.


Hi there.

Was afraid of that answer. "Bone stock" is with MCE activated, massive LLC, a final vcore >1.5v, and >100°C after 5 seconds of any CPU-burn test.

Can't function with the computer with those settings.

Will give it a thought as it's the logical solution, even if not ideal


----------



## andrejbekcic91

zilog said:


> Hi there.
> 
> Was afraid of that answer. "Bone stock" is with MCE activated, massive LLC, a final vcore >1.5v, and >100°C after 5 seconds of any CPU-burn test.
> 
> Can't function with the computer with those settings.
> 
> Will give it a thought as it's the logical solution, even if not ideal


Ahh, that doesn't sound right. My master and 9900k on stock are between 1.1-1.3v

Maybe someone with a Pro will chime in.
The only thing I can suggest is to set:
Ia Ac - 100
Ia Dc - 130


----------



## zilog

andrejbekcic91 said:


> Ahh, that doesn't sound right. My master and 9900k on stock are between 1.1-1.3v
> 
> Maybe someone with a Pro will chime in.
> The only thing I can suggest is to set:
> Ia Ac - 100
> Ia Dc - 130


Well, I'm trying the stock ("optimized settings") settings : MCE is ON, XMP if OFF, vcore & LLC are on auto, real vcore under heavy Linpack load is around 1.4v...

Under normal "real life" load, including HEVC compression, I'm around 85-90°C instead of the 70-75°C with my stable/tested manuel undervolt. Acceptable for testing a few days and see if the cold boot bug still is here. If it's OK, I'll reactivate XMP (2133 RAM setting is great...but not), and see if that's the culprit (had already tried raising VccSA/system agent to no avail)

Thanks for the support, anyway, folx


----------



## AdrianWatcher

Can anyone show me where i can download KedarWolf's latest stable modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Master. I cant find it... ?


----------



## KedarWolf

AdrianWatcher said:


> Can anyone show me where i can download KedarWolf's latest stable modded bios for the Z390 Aorus Master. I cant find it... ?


You want to use the fastest microcodes one.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


I used this one https://www.mediafire.com/file/30xj0diwselpeku/Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB.zip/file same on is this one with RGB this is the last one, you can try. it is a perfect one Flash it on the main Bios




www.overclock.net


----------



## horochii

Back in this thread again because I just wanted to confirm, I can tell if I'm on the modified f12k bios by looking at the MCU? It's currently showing as BE on HWInfo. Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

horochii said:


> Back in this thread again because I just wanted to confirm, I can tell if I'm on the modified f12k bios by looking at the MCU? It's currently showing as BE on HWInfo. Thanks!


Yes, the microcode on the modded BIOS is BE.


----------



## MickeyPadge

KedarWolf said:


>


@KedarWolf

Great thread, most helpful info, thanks very much! 

Did we ever get an RGB BIOS for the Z390 Ultra? Shame the board is limited in such a way...


----------



## msromike

Running Bios 11u on Aorus master with an EVGA 3070Ti. I just tried to enable 4G decoding and resizable bar in the bios. On power up I get 5 short beeps, computer boots to Windows, but no display.

EDIT:

OK, just disabled CSM in boot menu, and it works fine now.


----------



## akaNatrix

Deleted, figured it out. Thanks!


----------



## andrejbekcic91

msromike said:


> Running Bios 11u on Aorus master with an EVGA 3070Ti. I just tried to enable 4G decoding and resizable bar in the bios. On power up I get 5 short beeps, computer boots to Windows, but no display.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> OK, just disabled CSM in boot menu, and it works fine now.


Where'd you find 11u, I thought the latest was 11o before the capsule?


----------



## akaNatrix

Something I noticed while working on updating my BIOS recently and restarting my computer afterwards. I have loaded optimized defaults and used the clear CMOS button several times before updating my BIOS and it installed just fine once I followed the instructions I found here. Every time I follow the procedure for clearing CMOS it seems like my computer has a hard time starting back up afterwards. It clicks on and off a handful of times before it finally gets back to Windows. Is this standard behavior after doing this or do I have an issue that I need to resolve? My BIOS tends to be very laggy and my computer randomly reboots while in BIOS occasionally, I never have a problem once I am in Windows. I linked a short video I made so you can see and hear it in action. Also, bonus points to anyone who can tell me how to get my video card to be anything but green, I've tried everything. I'm on an Aorus z390 Master with F11o BIOS.

Hard Start


----------



## KedarWolf

akaNatrix said:


> Something I noticed while working on updating my BIOS recently and restarting my computer afterwards. I have loaded optimized defaults and used the clear CMOS button several times before updating my BIOS and it installed just fine once I followed the instructions I found here. Every time I follow the procedure for clearing CMOS it seems like my computer has a hard time starting back up afterwards. It clicks on and off a handful of times before it finally gets back to Windows. Is this standard behavior after doing this or do I have an issue that I need to resolve? My BIOS tends to be very laggy and my computer randomly reboots while in BIOS occasionally, I never have a problem once I am in Windows. I linked a short video I made so you can see and hear it in action. Also, bonus points to anyone who can tell me how to get my video card to be anything but green, I've tried everything. I'm on an Aorus z390 Master with F11o BIOS.
> 
> Hard Start


Maybe CMOS battery needs to be replaced?

And I think someone else had to disable CSM for the video card issue.

And check here how to properly flash the BIOS. Just use the BIOS name of the BIOS you are flashing.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great. Z390ProWiFiModded so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing. take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive...




www.overclock.net


----------



## akaNatrix

KedarWolf said:


> Maybe CMOS battery needs to be replaced?
> 
> And I think someone else had to disable CSM for the video card issue.
> 
> And check here how to properly flash the BIOS. Just use the BIOS name of the BIOS you are flashing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great. Z390ProWiFiModded so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing. take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


I'll try replacing the CMOS battery tonight. The battery is buried behind the video card which is part of the water loop so I will have to drain it. I'll give the CSM setting a shot to see if that works. I flashed your F11o bios from F11 using the IFP Tool and that went smoothly, only way I could do it because my old BIOS was encapsulated.


----------



## KedarWolf

akaNatrix said:


> I'll try replacing the CMOS battery tonight. The battery is buried behind the video card which is part of the water loop so I will have to drain it. I'll give the CSM setting a shot to see if that works. I flashed your F11o bios from F11 using the IFP Tool and that went smoothly, only way I could do it because my old BIOS was encapsulated.


Try reflashing the BIOS using this before you drain your loop.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great. Z390ProWiFiModded so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing. take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive...




www.overclock.net


----------



## akaNatrix

KedarWolf said:


> Try reflashing the BIOS using this before you drain your loop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great. Z390ProWiFiModded so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing. take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Reflash your F11o over my existing F11o to make sure there were no issues? Or were you thinking a different version?


----------



## KedarWolf

akaNatrix said:


> Reflash your F11o over my existing F11o to make sure there were no issues? Or were you thinking a different version?


Yes, reflash F11o using this command with efiflash using the name of your F11o BIOS you are flashing.

Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.

*UPDATED NEWER MICROCODES VERSION. USE 2.F11 IF SECURITY IS A PRIORITY ON YOUR PC.*



Code:


efiflash 1.F11 /c /x


----------



## ShawnTRD

How would I know if I did the 1.F11 or the 2.F11?


----------



## KedarWolf

ShawnTRD said:


> How would I know if I did the 1.F11 or the 2.F11?


Check the microcode version in HWInfo.


----------



## ShawnTRD

KedarWolf said:


> Check the microcode version in HWInfo.


Having trouble finding microcode. I am aslo seeing that HWINFO shows F11J for BIOS where my BIOS shows F11o.Is that just a glitch?


----------



## ShawnTRD

Reflashing


----------



## ShawnTRD

Better


----------



## kiczkabog

What would be the best modded bios for Z390 Aorus Pro non-wifi for OC? Thanks


----------



## ShawnTRD

KedarWolf said:


> microcode


Hi KedarWolf, 
So if I had updated to Gigabytes F11 from 2021/11/29 does that keep me stuck with the slower microcode? Or doesn't flashing with the "F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11*" switch it back. I see GB says "Customers will NOT be able to reverse to previous BIOS version due to major vulnerabilities concerns."


----------



## KedarWolf

ShawnTRD said:


> Hi KedarWolf,
> So if I had updated to Gigabytes F11 from 2021/11/29 does that keep me stuck with the slower microcode? Or doesn't flashing with the "F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11*" switch it back. I see GB says "Customers will NOT be able to reverse to previous BIOS version due to major vulnerabilities concerns."


1.F11 is F11o with the fastest microcode, not F11 Final that you can't flashback. It's named 1.F11 only because efiflash needs a 3-digit extension as it's DOS based and if it was named 1.F11o it wouldn't flash properly as that has a four-digit extension.

If you flashed the F11 Final BIOS from another source, you need to use the instructions found earlier in the thread to go back to F11o.


----------



## akaNatrix

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, reflash F11o using this command with efiflash using the name of your F11o BIOS you are flashing.
> 
> Here are the Z390 Master RGB F11o BIOS modded, the *1.F11* file has the fastest microcodes, *2.F11* file has the newest microcodes.
> 
> *UPDATED NEWER MICROCODES VERSION. USE 2.F11 IF SECURITY IS A PRIORITY ON YOUR PC.*
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F11 /c /x


I loaded optimized defaults, cleared the bios, installed your microcodes with efiflash and everything went smoothly. Cleared bios again and loaded optimized defaults. Computer still behaves the same way, multiple resets before it finally boots to windows. This only happens when bios is cleared so it's not really a big deal. Video card is still locked to green and the RGB on the RAM isn't controllable, does what it wants. Next time I drain the loop for maintenance I will try replacing the CMOS battery. Thanks for the suggestions though.


----------



## KedarWolf

akaNatrix said:


> I loaded optimized defaults, cleared the bios, installed your microcodes with efiflash and everything went smoothly. Cleared bios again and loaded optimized defaults. Computer still behaves the same way, multiple resets before it finally boots to windows. This only happens when bios is cleared so it's not really a big deal. Video card is still locked to green and the RGB on the RAM isn't controllable, does what it wants. Next time I drain the loop for maintenance I will try replacing the CMOS battery. Thanks for the suggestions though.


You can test if your CMOS battery needs replacing. Shutdown down your PC. Unplug your cable to your power supply for at least 60 seconds, 2 minutes maybe. Restart your PC, if BIOS settings are reset and the date in your BIOS is 2019 or something like that, the CMOS battery needs to be replaced. If the date is correct and all your BIOS settings are intact, the BIOS battery is fine.

If the BIOS battery is fine, it likely is some settings at default settings are causing the boot issues.


----------



## andrejbekcic91

akaNatrix said:


> I loaded optimized defaults, cleared the bios, installed your microcodes with efiflash and everything went smoothly. Cleared bios again and loaded optimized defaults. Computer still behaves the same way, multiple resets before it finally boots to windows. This only happens when bios is cleared so it's not really a big deal. Video card is still locked to green and the RGB on the RAM isn't controllable, does what it wants. Next time I drain the loop for maintenance I will try replacing the CMOS battery. Thanks for the suggestions though.


Clearing the cmos initiates memory training. It's normal for this board to turn off and on 3 times after cmos reset. (Proper cmos reset, per manual, is done by turning off the the psu and holding the cmos reset button for 5s then turning on the psu and clicking the power button). When setting xmp or custom timings it restarts stays black while cycling through the code (training again) and then should restart a second time and boot normally (if it trained properly).

Gpu and memory rgb cannot be controlled through the bios and depending on the manufacturer the gpu retains It's last color. In my case ram is always rainbow until windows. 

Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not seeing an issue.


----------



## akaNatrix

andrejbekcic91 said:


> Clearing the cmos initiates memory training. It's normal for this board to turn off and on 3 times after cmos reset. (Proper cmos reset, per manual, is done by turning off the the psu and holding the cmos reset button for 5s then turning on the psu and clicking the power button). When setting xmp or custom timings it restarts stays black while cycling through the code (training again) and then should restart a second time and boot normally (if it trained properly).
> 
> Gpu and memory rgb cannot be controlled through the bios and depending on the manufacturer the gpu retains It's last color. In my case ram is always rainbow until windows.
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not seeing an issue.


Thank you, that makes a lot of sense. The memory and RAM are a whole different onion to peel. I've changed the BIOS, reinstalled Windows, used a variety of RGB programs, reinstalled windows again, cleared drivers, etc. Nothing seems to be able to affect the color of those components even though they did work properly when I first got the computer. My wife has a computer specced exactly the same and hers works fine, strange issue I have not been able to get to the root cause of.


----------



## gabeomatic

If anyone has tips on my CJR OC with my z390m gaming and its t topology limitations I would really appreciate it! Full description and settings are posted in a comment towards the bottom. Thank you so much!

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/wn25kt



http://imgur.com/a/Zg5dkYB




http://imgur.com/a/IIrchRf

Using this for my guest warzone build
*8700k 51/49 HT on 0avx 1.38 bios 1.36v load (llc turbo)*
H80i gt v2 push pull (Chip not delidded yet)
Gigabyte Z390m Gaming T-topology board (using bios 6 as I noticed the newer ones required more voltage from the cpu, and its an 8th gen chip with a 9th gen board which was a gift from the cousin)
970 evo plus m2
*IO/SA 1.2/1.22* (should I aim for 1.25v at 4000+ for stability? Doing what I can to reduce heat)
*2x16gb Hynix Dual Rank CJRs 3600 16-19-19-39 (Ripjaws V) @ 3800 16-20-20-38 @ 1.4v*
No fans on them yet as I know they get dicey over 1.425v
Trfc tested to high 400s, and trefi to 50k or so
EDIT: Currently 520 trfc and working down, trefi 40k and working up, (haven't passed 1.41v yet for lengthy testing)
TRDDS 4, TRDDL 6, Tfaw 16, TWR 12
This gives me like *44.5ns* latency with aida64 benchmark (although I can't find that version everyone else uses, assuming I have to pay but I think that one may net 2ns+ lower without anything running as I see a discrepancy between the two.
Feel free to help me push this thing further! Should I am for 4000 @ c18s etc? CPU has been tested up to 52/50 at like 1.43v in bios which is on the higher end for this gen, maybe when I Delid I can try 5.3 @ 1.46-47+ if I can stay under 90c and I will be pairing this with an *EVGA FTW3 Ultra 3070* which I will put an UV curve on later. Any tips to push this sucker appreciated! Tested with testmem5 extreme/ absolut, forza 5 , warzone which can be OC killers, Geekbench, Cinebench, cpu z can post scores for reference. (I honestly don't plan on using prime as if it works for my use cases ill be happy) When continuing to test, how do I isolate if things come down to a board issue, ram issue, IMC issue etc? Any settings to mess with from first glance?


I even tested timings like this but haven't went over 1.41v as I don't have my fan yet and know these dual rank chips can get really dicey with temps over 45C or so?


----------



## Zoli_G

Hi, I have a question about the PCI lanes on the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master. I really like the motherboard, but few days ago I got the RTX 3070 (3 slots thick GPU), so I had to move my Avermedia 4K capture card from the the second PCI Express x16 to the third/bottom one. Sadly I noticed the bottom PCI Express x16 runs only at 2x speed instead of 4x, I know it shares bandwidth with the M2P m.2 slot, but I have no drive in that slot, I have only 1 NVMe drive in the M2A m.2 slot. The Avermedia 4K capture card needs to run at 4x speed to operate at 4K. So I am not sure what else is eating up the bandwidth of the bottom PCI Express x16 slot.


----------



## OryxGod

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


When I put the code 
"efiflash 1.F12 /c /x" into dos it gives me Bad command or file name "efiflash. Can you tell me what im doing wrong?


----------



## Shepy

gabeomatic said:


> If anyone has tips on my CJR OC with my z390m gaming and its t topology limitations I would really appreciate it! Full description and settings are posted in a comment towards the bottom. Thank you so much!
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/wn25kt
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/Zg5dkYB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/IIrchRf
> 
> Using this for my guest warzone build
> *8700k 51/49 HT on 0avx 1.38 bios 1.36v load (llc turbo)*
> H80i gt v2 push pull (Chip not delidded yet)
> Gigabyte Z390m Gaming T-topology board (using bios 6 as I noticed the newer ones required more voltage from the cpu, and its an 8th gen chip with a 9th gen board which was a gift from the cousin)
> 970 evo plus m2
> *IO/SA 1.2/1.22* (should I aim for 1.25v at 4000+ for stability? Doing what I can to reduce heat)
> *2x16gb Hynix Dual Rank CJRs 3600 16-19-19-39 (Ripjaws V) @ 3800 16-20-20-38 @ 1.4v*
> No fans on them yet as I know they get dicey over 1.425v
> Trfc tested to high 400s, and trefi to 50k or so
> EDIT: Currently 520 trfc and working down, trefi 40k and working up, (haven't passed 1.41v yet for lengthy testing)
> TRDDS 4, TRDDL 6, Tfaw 16, TWR 12
> This gives me like *44.5ns* latency with aida64 benchmark (although I can't find that version everyone else uses, assuming I have to pay but I think that one may net 2ns+ lower without anything running as I see a discrepancy between the two.
> Feel free to help me push this thing further! Should I am for 4000 @ c18s etc? CPU has been tested up to 52/50 at like 1.43v in bios which is on the higher end for this gen, maybe when I Delid I can try 5.3 @ 1.46-47+ if I can stay under 90c and I will be pairing this with an *EVGA FTW3 Ultra 3070* which I will put an UV curve on later. Any tips to push this sucker appreciated! Tested with testmem5 extreme/ absolut, forza 5 , warzone which can be OC killers, Geekbench, Cinebench, cpu z can post scores for reference. (I honestly don't plan on using prime as if it works for my use cases ill be happy) When continuing to test, how do I isolate if things come down to a board issue, ram issue, IMC issue etc? Any settings to mess with from first glance?
> 
> 
> I even tested timings like this but haven't went over 1.41v as I don't have my fan yet and know these dual rank chips can get really dicey with temps over 45C or so?
> View attachment 2570230
> View attachment 2570231


RTL(68/68) and IOL(13/14) trained a bit high IMO.
This also append to me sometimes while re-training.

I noticed that putting Memory Enhancement: Enhanced performance (if you have the option) tends to train the RTL/IOL better.

Usually I manage to reach RTL(57/59) and IOL(6/6) sometimes less.


----------



## TescoBag

Hi guys,

I have an Aorus Z390 Elite and have just tried to update to F10 (as per the website latest bios). Everything seemed to flash fine via Q-flash in the bios, I didn't update the backup bios (for safety) but when it completed and rebooted my PC is dead. Lights are all on but not getting any post.

I've tried clearing the CMOS, it seems to do this successfully as when I turn the machine on next it does 3 short reboots then stays on.

I've tried holding the power on (and it reboots multiple times) in order to go to the backup bios but this also doesn't seem to do anything.

Any ideas here?


----------



## andrejbekcic91

Here's an interesting one I just noticed today. Thinking it might be Windows 11 but want to get your thoughts.
How the heck are my clocks not static (pics attached)?

Edut: rosolved - reinstalled windows (possible culprit- messing with secure boot)


----------



## Lorenzone

Normal


----------



## selfcontained555

Best modded bios for aorus pro? Also when i enable XMP (3600mhz CL14) a relatively expensive kit, pc wont boot and i have to reset bios. Do i need to manually tweak the timings and voltage for it to work?


----------



## selfcontained555

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


hello sir, i followed every step exactly but the process suddently stops due to "invalid bios image" is this because i'm already on the latest official F12 bios? any bypass for this? dont wanna risk doing anything on my own, i dont want to brick my mobo


----------



## OC-24/7

selfcontained555 said:


> hello sir, i followed every step exactly but the process suddently stops due to "invalid bios image" is this because i'm already on the latest official F12 bios? any bypass for this? dont wanna risk doing anything on my own, i dont want to brick my mobo


Open folder option go on view and uncheck Hide extension for known file types and apply, try again by removing the txt in the file name, extract from the zip file should work


----------



## selfcontained555

OC-24/7 said:


> Open folder option go on view and uncheck Hide extension for known file types and apply, try again by removing the txt in the file name, extract from the zip file should work
> View attachment 2572364


Already did that, i have the zip archieve on my desktop already and used the modded bios and efiflash from @KedarWolf , but it seems that you cannot rollback bios once its updated to F12 from what ive read on previous pages from 1 year ago or so. I was just hoping there is a bypass for this and if it is maybe i havent found it yet. Its not even a rollback since im already on F12 and trying to go on a modded F12 but it still won't let me


----------



## OC-24/7

selfcontained555 said:


> Already did that, i have the zip archieve on my desktop already and used the modded bios and efiflash from @KedarWolf , but it seems that you cannot rollback bios once its updated to F12 from what ive read on previous pages from 1 year ago or so. I was just hoping there is a bypass for this and if it is maybe i havent found it yet. Its not even a rollback since im already on F12 and trying to go on a modded F12 but it still won't let me


i check this guide and works 








Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"


Just wanted to say thank you so much I needed this could not have my PC running Blocked your a lifesaver. Do you have a donation link for yourself.




winraid.level1techs.com


----------



## selfcontained555

OC-24/7 said:


> i check this guide and works
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"
> 
> 
> Just wanted to say thank you so much I needed this could not have my PC running Blocked your a lifesaver. Do you have a donation link for yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> winraid.level1techs.com


unfortunately the download link does not work, a blank page opens for a split sec when clicking on FPT file but nothing downloads. i tried other modded efiflashes from that site (0.80 and 0.85) but still no luck. which is weird, because another z390 aorus pro user supposedly could rollback bios using this method, so i'm wondering if its because i'm trying to flash a modded bios and not a official older one from gigabyte



__
https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabytegaming/comments/fuex04


----------



## OC-24/7

selfcontained555 said:


> unfortunately the download link does not work, a blank page opens for a split sec when clicking on FPT file but nothing downloads. i tried other modded efiflashes from that site (0.80 and 0.85) but still no luck. which is weird, because another z390 aorus pro user supposedly could rollback bios using this method, so i'm wondering if its because i'm trying to flash a modded bios and not a official older one from gigabyte
> 
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/gigabytegaming/comments/fuex04


I try to download and it is OK 
You can download from here


----------



## selfcontained555

OC-24/7 said:


> I try to download and it is OK
> You can download from here


thanks a lot, downloaded and ready to use as a last resort, but hopefully @KedarWolf has an modded efiflash that he can PM me as i see he did for other members in the past, FPT looks kind of risky


----------



## OC-24/7

selfcontained555 said:


> thanks a lot, downloaded and ready to use as a last resort, but hopefully @KedarWolf has an modded efiflash that he can PM me as i see he did for other members in the past, FPT looks kind of risky


Cool
If you have latest BIOS with a capsule on you motherboard im a fraid your only option is FPT !


----------



## selfcontained555

OC-24/7 said:


> Cool
> If you have latest BIOS with a capsule on you motherboard im a fraid your only option is FPT !


@OC-24/7 ended up using FPT and worked flawlessly, just had to install some intel ME drivers for it to work cause i was getting some errors at first. thank you for your help, csgo finally running as smooth as it should on my specs


----------



## OC-24/7

selfcontained555 said:


> @OC-24/7 ended up using FPT and worked flawlessly, just had to install some intel ME drivers for it to work cause i was getting some errors at first. thank you for your help, csgo finally running as smooth as it should on my specs


I'm glad that the problem was solved, and I'm even more glad that I could help you !


----------



## Lancer645

Good morning,

Been pulling my hair out, wanted to see if anyone had any ideas.

Trying to get Apex Legends to play without crashing, I read about it's SSE2 coding and it causing faults in overclocks. I was crashing to desktop multiple times per session and HWINFO64 showing a WHEA error. I've been upping the VCOR voltage and it's been better but I will still get a crash about once a session.

I'm currently at 1.35v, temps are fine but I'm not sure I want to go any further. I'm on a corsair 240mil AIO, so I probably can in necessary, gaming temps are mid-50's.

Can't post bios right now, but here's the basic settings.
i9900k on Aorus Master BIOS: F11N
CPU Clock: 50
Ring: 47
EMP: Disabled
XMP: Stock (2x8 3600 G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series)
C States: Auto
CPU Vcore: 1.35v
VCCIO: 1.15v
VCCSA: 1.2v
LLC: Turbo
IA/AC/DC Loadline: 1

Looking for any advice/settings that may help without an AVX offset.

@OC-24/7 I tried your power saving settings a few pages back and my machine wouldn't boot into windows.

Thanks!


----------



## OC-24/7

Lancer645 said:


> Good morning,
> 
> Been pulling my hair out, wanted to see if anyone had any ideas.
> 
> Trying to get Apex Legends to play without crashing, I read about it's SSE2 coding and it causing faults in overclocks. I was crashing to desktop multiple times per session and HWINFO64 showing a WHEA error. I've been upping the VCOR voltage and it's been better but I will still get a crash about once a session.
> 
> I'm currently at 1.35v, temps are fine but I'm not sure I want to go any further. I'm on a corsair 240mil AIO, so I probably can in necessary, gaming temps are mid-50's.
> 
> Can't post bios right now, but here's the basic settings.
> i9900k on Aorus Master BIOS: F11N
> CPU Clock: 50
> Ring: 47
> EMP: Disabled
> XMP: Stock (2x8 3600 G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series)
> C States: Auto
> CPU Vcore: 1.35v
> VCCIO: 1.15v
> VCCSA: 1.2v
> LLC: Turbo
> IA/AC/DC Loadline: 1
> 
> Looking for any advice/settings that may help without an AVX offset.
> 
> @OC-24/7 I tried your power saving settings a few pages back and my machine wouldn't boot into windows.
> 
> Thanks!


Try this settings !

Flash the modded bios from @KedarWolf F11o.F11 i attach the file and you can download
Intel Turbo Boost Technology - Disabled
VT-d - Disabled
X.M.P Enable
VCCIO - 1.15v i have 1.1
VCCSA - 1.2v i have 1.1
CPU Clock Ratio 50
AVX offset - 0
Ring ratio - Auto
CPU Vcore - Auto
SVID offset - Disabled
CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Auto
CPU Vcore Load line Calibration - Medium "you can also try Low" with IA AC Load Line 60 and IA DC Load Line 120
IA VR Config - Enabled
IA AC Load Line 35 "you can go up to 50 if needed"
IA DC Load Line 95
And keep rest of the settings related to the CPU and Voltage on Auto
Let me know what are the results you have in HWInfo64 look VR VOUT


----------



## Lancer645

OC-24/7 said:


> Try this settings !
> 
> Flash the modded bios from @KedarWolf F11o.F11 i attach the file and you can download
> Intel Turbo Boost Technology - Disabled
> VT-d - Disabled
> X.M.P Enable
> VCCIO - 1.15v i have 1.1
> VCCSA - 1.2v i have 1.1
> CPU Clock Ratio 50
> AVX offset - 0
> Ring ratio - Auto
> CPU Vcore - Auto
> SVID offset - Disabled
> CPU Internal AC/DC Load Line - Auto
> CPU Vcore Load line Calibration - Medium "you can also try Low" with IA AC Load Line 60 and IA DC Load Line 120
> IA VR Config - Enabled
> IA AC Load Line 35 "you can go up to 50 if needed"
> IA DC Load Line 95
> And keep rest of the settings related to the CPU and Voltage on Auto
> Let me know what are the results you have in HWInfo64 look VR VOUT


I lowered my vCORE to 1.325 and re-ran all of my stability tests: passes realbench, OCCT medium in AVX2, and p95 1344 custom.

VR VOUT under load drops to 1.28/1.29. Wondering if I can run it at an DVID offset with NORMAL Vcore +.5ish

Will run Apex when I have a chance and see if it's still freezing, based on all the other issues with the game going on, I'd be surprised if I was able to fix it.

This weekend I will try to get the modded bios uploaded and give your settings a go.

I appreciate your response!


----------



## adrian.m.miller

@KedarWolf

I notice a lot of references to your BIOS mods for the Z390 boards, is there an easy to find list of them, or even a pointer to a reference of what you alter, so i dont have to read through 500+ pages of the thread  I looked for a Search Thread option once in the thread but couldnt find one...im so used to XDA and the Thread Search option...and still peeved when every newb ignores just the main Search option itself 

Im not a stranger to modding BIOS's (i do remember from a previous Z390 board things like Microcode update 7 killed off all core max clocks) but just looking for what you remove or mod if an already modded BIOS for the Z390 Pro (non-Wifi) doesnt already exist...

Thanks in advance

update:

i found an earlier post with a linked "AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip" but its dead.....






AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## selfcontained555

adrian.m.miller said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> I notice a lot of references to your BIOS mods for the Z390 boards, is there an easy to find list of them, or even a pointer to a reference of what you alter, so i dont have to read through 500+ pages of the thread  I looked for a Search Thread option once in the thread but couldnt find one...im so used to XDA and the Thread Search option...and still peeved when every newb ignores just the main Search option itself
> 
> Im not a stranger to modding BIOS's (i do remember from a previous Z390 board things like Microcode update 7 killed off all core max clocks) but just looking for what you remove or mod if an already modded BIOS for the Z390 Pro (non-Wifi) doesnt already exist...
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> update:
> 
> i found an earlier post with a linked "AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip" but its dead.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AorusProF12lNonWiFiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Go back to the previous page, i quoted a reply from KedarWolf which includes the modded bios for z390 aorus pro and pro wifi. Im using it on my own pro (non-wifi) board right now and it works really well, can def feel a difference in smoothness and fps in cpu bound games


----------



## adrian.m.miller

selfcontained555 said:


> Go back to the previous page, i quoted a reply from KedarWolf which includes the modded bios for z390 aorus pro and pro wifi. Im using it on my own pro (non-wifi) board right now and it works really well, can def feel a difference in smoothness and fps in fps bound games


haha, i looked through so many pages of search results, and it was on the next to last page?

*I was really looking for the 12l (L) version as it looks less funky to mod*

Thanks mate


----------



## OC-24/7

Lancer645 said:


> I lowered my vCORE to 1.325 and re-ran all of my stability tests: passes realbench, OCCT medium in AVX2, and p95 1344 custom.
> 
> VR VOUT under load drops to 1.28/1.29. Wondering if I can run it at an DVID offset with NORMAL Vcore +.5ish
> 
> Will run Apex when I have a chance and see if it's still freezing, based on all the other issues with the game going on, I'd be surprised if I was able to fix it.
> 
> This weekend I will try to get the modded bios uploaded and give your settings a go.
> 
> I appreciate your response!


Yes you can do DVID offset with NORMAL Vcore +
- I will do this instead -
If you need more Voltage rise up IA AC Load Line to 40 or 45 on Medium LLC, I'm sure you will not needed !


----------



## Spinal2k

Hi,

Question for @KedarWolf

I have a Z390 Aorus Master and I've installed the file "Z390MasterModded.zip" that was provided here in this topic.

I was able to install via the rufus/efi install following your instructions (i used file 1.F11 which contains the "fastest" microcodes).

I can see in both BIOS and WINDOWS (HWINFO) that version "F11o" is the one installed (some users reported seeing different versions).

However, in stock settings, my windows is "unusable". Too slow loading everything, games run very choppy, webpages open extremely slow (like a slow connection loading images).

Do you have any hints what this might be? Do I need to uninstall any sort of specific windows update (microcodes related)?

Windows 11
i9-9900KF

Cheers


----------



## KedarWolf

Spinal2k said:


> Hi,
> 
> Question for @KedarWolf
> 
> I have a Z390 Aorus Master and I've installed the file "Z390MasterModded.zip" that was provided here in this topic.
> 
> I was able to install via the rufus/efi install following your instructions (i used file 1.F11 which contains the "fastest" microcodes).
> 
> I can see in both BIOS and WINDOWS (HWINFO) that version "F11o" is the one installed (some users reported seeing different versions).
> 
> However, in stock settings, my windows is "unusable". Too slow loading everything, games run very choppy, webpages open extremely slow (like a slow connection loading images).
> 
> Do you have any hints what this might be? Do I need to uninstall any sort of specific windows update (microcodes related)?
> 
> Windows 11
> i9-9900KF
> 
> Cheers


Does your motherboard have a Slow Mode switch? If it does, Slow Mode might be on. Check the motherboard manual. Please you might have to do the microcode tweak. Searching this thread is your friend.


----------



## Spinal2k

KedarWolf said:


> Does your motherboard have a Slow Mode switch? If it does, Slow Mode might be on. Check the motherboard manual. Please you might have to do the microcode tweak. Searching this thread is your friend.


I have no idea what a slow mode switch is (never heard of that and why would such option exist?). Is it possible that on Gigabyte motherboards has another name?

I did the microcode tweak suggested in this thread:



> IIRC from earlier in the thread, these 2 KBs interfere with the modded F11o microcode (KB4589292, KB4589198).


Can't find these updates on windows 11.



> If you want to stop windows from messing with your microcode, regardless of which version of windows you have, or which updates you have installed, just delete/rename this file and reboot:
> C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll


I did rename this file (turned pc completely off, rebooted).

However, I had no success with these solutions.

Unless there's any additional suggestions, I will eventually format the PC (it's a gaming pc, I was just trying as much as possible to prevent it).


----------



## andrejbekcic91

@Spinal2k it's possible that windows 11 doesn't like the old microcodes, if this started with the bios, I would go to a older official version then see if it works. Then maybe something happened during the bios flash.


----------



## Spinal2k

andrejbekcic91 said:


> @Spinal2k it's possible that windows 11 doesn't like the old microcodes, if this started with the bios, I would go to a older official version then see if it works. Then maybe something happened during the bios flash.


Unfortunately, I did try that. I tried my previous bios (also a modded bios based on F11e), I tried an official bios, cleared cmos (button and battery), no go... always same symptoms.

I ended up formatting the PC, fully update my windows 11 (no more updates available), and the problems are all gone throwing down the pipes your theory. I guess some software related to "microcodes fixing" must have been there hanging.

The situation has been resolved, the worst way possible. I really wanted to know the reason, but I don't want to go into next week with the problem to be resolved (next two weeks I won't be able to fix it).

Thank you for your suggestion.


----------



## Lancer645

OC-24/7 said:


> Yes you can do DVID offset with NORMAL Vcore + - I will do this instead - If you need more Voltage rise up IA AC Load Line to 40 or 45 on Medium LLC, I'm sure you will not needed !


 After a ton of stability testing on realbench, I was able to get stability at 1.355v and not throw any WHEA errors on Apex. Hopefully this holds, otherwise I'll try the modded bios. Thanks for the suggestions.


----------



## Lancer645

Ok, weird one for you guys. While I was stress testing I upped the TJMAX to 110 just to keep throttling down. I forgot about it but when I went to change it back to auto today, the computer will BSOD and will not post to windows. It doesn't matter what other temperature I set it on, Auto, 100, etc, if it's not at 110, it won't post. Any ideas?

Edit: I was able to fix it by applying defaults and then re-loading my OC profile. It's back on AUTO and posts now, still a weird bug though.


----------



## andrejbekcic91

Hi @Falkentyne sorry for bothering, just wanted to ask if I should apply a medium llc to the below setup or if you have any other recommendations?

9900k, auros master, 4133 c16 1.5v

4cores: 50
8cores: 49
IA ac/dc: 150/160
llc: standard 

Currently stats:

Apex 70c min1.2v, max1.4v, avg1.3v
Ychruncher 95c min1.23v, max1.4v, avg1.28v
Linpack windows freeze

No whea errors observed in 2 days of testing.


----------



## mrgnex

Just to check. What do the modded BIOS' as shared in post this post do?
The 1.F11 has faster (older) microcodes but what about 2.F11?


----------



## KedarWolf

mrgnex said:


> Just to check. What do the modded BIOS' as shared in post this post do?
> The 1.F11 has faster (older) microcodes but what about 2.F11?


2.F11 has the newest, slower, more secure microcodes.


----------



## mrgnex

KedarWolf said:


> 2.F11 has the newest, slower, more secure microcodes.


Just to be sure. What is the difference between that and the official F11?


----------



## KedarWolf

mrgnex said:


> Just to be sure. What is the difference between that and the official F11?


Official F11 really unstable for people, F11o much better.


----------



## Chunky1311

Has @KedarWolf made a modded BIOS of the latest iteration for the Z390 Pro WiFi? BIOS version F12 (not F12k). I don't know if it's possible to roll back, if not, since the website states: "Introduce capsule BIOS support starting this version. Customers will NOT be able to reverse to previous BIOS version due to major vulnerabilities concerns." Also, what sort of improvements do the modded BIOS's come with? I'm new to this and have never used a modified BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

Chunky1311 said:


> Has @KedarWolf made a modded BIOS of the latest iteration for the Z390 Pro WiFi? BIOS version F12 (not F12k). I don't know if it's possible to roll back, if not, since the website states: "Introduce capsule BIOS support starting this version. Customers will NOT be able to reverse to previous BIOS version due to major vulnerabilities concerns." Also, what sort of improvements do the modded BIOS's come with? I'm new to this and have never used a modified BIOS.


Everyone has a lot of instability with the Final BIOS. Best to use the last modded beta. Forum search is your friend.


----------



## fusionmaker

Hey, can't find the f9 modded with a good working link anywhere. would you be so kind as to re-link a copy? Thanks


----------



## fusionmaker

im sorry for the pro wifi


----------



## KedarWolf

fusionmaker said:


> im sorry for the pro wifi











Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt







drive.google.com


----------



## fusionmaker

i can't get the damn thing to download off google. it shows the code but wont download


----------



## KedarWolf

fusionmaker said:


> i can't get the damn thing to download off google. it shows the code but wont download


Try a different browser. It's shared and open to all and downloaded for me.

Edit: You need to hit the download button top right.


----------



## fusionmaker

your right, thanks


----------



## Chunky1311

KedarWolf said:


> Everyone has a lot of instability with the Final BIOS. Best to use the last modded beta. Forum search is your friend.


Hey sorry to bother you again.

By 'modded beta', are you referring to your modified F12 BIOS for the Z390 Pro WiFi?
F12 is still listed as the latest beta BIOS here, even though F12k is out, so I'm somewhat confused.

I did search the forums but couldn't find information on a way to rollback from the F12k capsule BIOS, I've already flashed that one mistakenly thinking newest is best.
The only issue I've noticed is *massive *DPC latency from acpi.sys that causes brief system lockups.
Having not been able to find information on how to roll back, I posted to ask if you'd done a modified version of F12k.

I did find this:


KedarWolf said:


> Latest Pro WiFi is F12k.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS - TweakTown Forums
> 
> 
> Warning Some of beta BIOSes are still undergoing compatibility testing. GIGABYTE is sharing these BIOSes for testing purposes only and are not meant for general release. If you are not familiar with beta BIOS testing, then please only flash the recommended release BIOSes that are posted on the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tweaktownforum.com


but the file is no longer available, plus I'd rather rollback if the modded non-capsule F12 is a better option. 
_Is _it possible to roll back and use your modified F12 BIOS? Or am I just royally screwed?  

Assistance or links or walkthroughs from anyone will be greatly appreciated.
I'm not new to PC's or BIOS settings or flashing, etc.
I'm new to using any modified BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

Chunky1311 said:


> Hey sorry to bother you again.
> 
> By 'modded beta', are you referring to your modified F12 BIOS for the Z390 Pro WiFi?
> F12 is still listed as the latest beta BIOS here, even though F12k is out, so I'm somewhat confused.
> 
> I did search the forums but couldn't find information on a way to rollback from the F12k capsule BIOS, I've already flashed that one mistakenly thinking newest is best.
> The only issue I've noticed is *massive *DPC latency from acpi.sys that causes brief system lockups.
> Having not been able to find information on how to roll back, I posted to ask if you'd done a modified version of F12k.
> 
> I did find this:
> 
> but the file is no longer available, plus I'd rather rollback if the modded non-capsule F12 is a better option.
> _Is _it possible to roll back and use your modified F12 BIOS? Or am I just royally screwed?
> 
> Assistance or links or walkthroughs from anyone will be greatly appreciated.
> I'm not new to PC's or BIOS settings or flashing, etc.
> I'm new to using any modified BIOS.











Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"


This guide is for those who have updated their Gigabyte Z370, Z390 to the latest BIOS with a capsule and want to go back to an earlier BIOS but can’t such as @obz @XQJ-37 @saydji @monta990 @hukis @GHOST.CHIP It’s possible to downgrade using Intel’s Flash Programming Tool (FPT). For Z370 (and...




winraid.level1techs.com





DON'T skip the LAN part or your onboard ethernet will never work again.

And the BIOS I linked is NOT F12 Final, but F12k, it's just named 1.F12 because to flash it you need a three-digit extension and it won't flash if it is named 1.F12k.









Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt







drive.google.com


----------



## Chunky1311

KedarWolf said:


> Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"
> 
> 
> This guide is for those who have updated their Gigabyte Z370, Z390 to the latest BIOS with a capsule and want to go back to an earlier BIOS but can’t such as @obz @XQJ-37 @saydji @monta990 @hukis @GHOST.CHIP It’s possible to downgrade using Intel’s Flash Programming Tool (FPT). For Z370 (and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> winraid.level1techs.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DON'T skip the LAN part or your onboard ethernet will never work again.
> 
> And the BIOS I linked is NOT F12 Final, but F12k, it's just named 1.F12 because to flash it you need a three-digit extension and it won't flash if it is named 1.F12k.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Just to be clear before I go ahead with this, I should follow the steps on the website you linked and flash the BIOS you attached? 
Or is that just if I wish to downgrade, and the BIOS you attached will flash naturally even though I'm on the F12k capsule BIOS? 
In your opinion, what modded BIOS edition of your would I be best off using? 
The PC is purely for gaming, secure microcode or whatever isn't very important to me, just speed and stability. 

Thank you for your time and hard work!


----------



## KedarWolf

Chunky1311 said:


> Just to be clear before I go ahead with this, I should follow the steps on the website you linked and flash the BIOS you attached?
> Or is that just if I wish to downgrade, and the BIOS you attached will flash naturally even though I'm on the F12k capsule BIOS?
> In your opinion, what modded BIOS edition of your would I be best off using?
> The PC is purely for gaming, secure microcode or whatever isn't very important to me, just speed and stability.
> 
> Thank you for your time and hard work!


If your PC has F12k BIOS on it, efiflash will flash the BIOS I linked.

If it has F12 Final, you need to follow those instructions first, then flash mine.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


I used this one https://www.mediafire.com/file/30xj0diwselpeku/Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB.zip/file same on is this one with RGB this is the last one, you can try. it is a perfect one Flash it on the main Bios




www.overclock.net





See there how to flash, put your WiFi Pro BIOS name in.


----------



## Chunky1311

KedarWolf said:


> If your PC has F12k BIOS on it, efiflash will flash the BIOS I linked.
> 
> If it has F12 Final, you need to follow those instructions first, then flash mine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)
> 
> 
> I used this one https://www.mediafire.com/file/30xj0diwselpeku/Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB.zip/file same on is this one with RGB this is the last one, you can try. it is a perfect one Flash it on the main Bios
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See there how to flash, put your WiFi Pro BIOS name in.


My apologies, I had in my head that F12k was the latest (capsule) BIOS.
Checking now, I see I was wrong and F12 is the latest and final (capsule) BIOS. 
I understand now, downgrade from F12 final and flash your F12k =) 
Thank you!


----------



## Chunky1311

KedarWolf said:


> Flashing Gigabyte while avoiding "Invalid BIOS image"
> 
> 
> This guide is for those who have updated their Gigabyte Z370, Z390 to the latest BIOS with a capsule and want to go back to an earlier BIOS but can’t such as @obz @XQJ-37 @saydji @monta990 @hukis @GHOST.CHIP It’s possible to downgrade using Intel’s Flash Programming Tool (FPT). For Z370 (and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> winraid.level1techs.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DON'T skip the LAN part or your onboard ethernet will never work again.
> 
> And the BIOS I linked is NOT F12 Final, but F12k, it's just named 1.F12 because to flash it you need a three-digit extension and it won't flash if it is named 1.F12k.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Alrighty, so, I followed the link you provided and downgraded from F12 Final to the official F12k, I wasn't sure if I should flash straight to your modded one or not so I did the official one first just to be safe.
Then used the same process to flash your modified F12k that you linked.
It seems to have worked, though it went a lot faster than flashing the official one did 🤔 
Is there a way to check that your modified F12k is now the bios flashed and running? 
All seems well, LAN works fine. 

A final thank you for your help, you've been awesome. 
I'd never have been able to do it without your help to baby me along =) 
Hopefully others find this useful too!


----------



## KedarWolf

Chunky1311 said:


> Alrighty, so, I followed the link you provided and downgraded from F12 Final to the official F12k, I wasn't sure if I should flash straight to your modded one or not so I did the official one first just to be safe.
> Then used the same process to flash your modified F12k that you linked.
> It seems to have worked, though it went a lot faster than flashing the official one did 🤔
> Is there a way to check that your modified F12k is now the bios flashed and running?
> All seems well, LAN works fine.
> 
> A final thank you for your help, you've been awesome.
> I'd never have been able to do it without your help to baby me along =)
> Hopefully others find this useful too!


You might need to rename a microcode DLL, then check the microcode version in HWInfo. Google the dll to rename. Tell me the microcode version here, I'll tell you if it's correct.

Hey peeps, I now own a 7950x CPU, but it'll be a couple of months before I have the motherboard and DDR5, the motherboard I need is only $792 CAD with tax. :/


----------



## Chunky1311

KedarWolf said:


> You might need to rename a microcode DLL, then check the microcode version in HWInfo. Google the dll to rename. Tell me the microcode version here, I'll tell you if it's correct.
> 
> Hey peeps, I now own a 7950x CPU, but it'll be a couple of months before I have the motherboard and DDR5, the motherboard I need is only $792 CAD with tax. :/


I'm sorry, I have nooo idea what you mean by that, or what I should be Googling >.<
I definitely flashed your modified BIOS, so I assume it's the one I'm running and all is well, I just figured it can't hurt to check. 
It's no biggie if it's a hassle though, I'm not too worried, I'm pretty confident it's your BIOS I'm running now. 

&& that's one beefy CPU you got yourself 👀


----------



## KedarWolf

Chunky1311 said:


> I'm sorry, I have nooo idea what you mean by that, or what I should be Googling >.<
> I definitely flashed your modified BIOS, so I assume it's the one I'm running and all is well, I just figured it can't hurt to check.
> It's no biggie if it's a hassle though, I'm not too worried, I'm pretty confident it's your BIOS I'm running now.
> 
> && that's one beefy CPU you got yourself 👀


Literally Google 'Rename Intel microcode .DLL" and use HWInfo to check the microcode after. You can Google how to do that too.


----------



## Chunky1311

KedarWolf said:


> Literally Google 'Rename Intel microcode .DLL" and use HWInfo to check the microcode after. You can Google how to do that too.


Alright cool, file renamed. PC power cycled. 
HWINFO says microcode update revision BE ? 
CPUZ says 0xBE


----------



## KedarWolf

Chunky1311 said:


> Alright cool, file renamed. PC power cycled.
> HWINFO says microcode update revision BE ?
> CPUZ says 0xBE


BE is correct.


----------



## Chunky1311

Awesome, I actually did it all right XD


----------



## di4b0liko2

difference between f5 and f11 official?
z390 pro wi fi aorus.

i'm not sure to update...


----------



## BigMack70

Anyone have any data if PCI-e 3.0 limits the performance of the 4090? 

Not sure if it's time to upgrade from z390 or not. I feel like my 9900ks is still going strong...


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

I'm sure someone will do PCIE scaling with it eventually. I too don't feel in a rush to upgrade from my 9900KS. It's a beast.


----------



## GrampaBob

Hi is there a link for overclocking the i9-9900k air cooled for a z390 aorus PRO board?


----------



## Chunky1311

BigMack70 said:


> Anyone have any data if PCI-e 3.0 limits the performance of the 4090?
> 
> Not sure if it's time to upgrade from z390 or not. I feel like my 9900ks is still going strong...


I'm rocking a 9900ks too, so this is something I wouldn't mind an answer to, as well.
I feel like it would, but I guess we can't really know unless someone does a performance comparison between the two.


----------



## BigMack70

Chunky1311 said:


> I'm rocking a 9900ks too, so this is something I wouldn't mind an answer to, as well.
> I feel like it would, but I guess we can't really know unless someone does a performance comparison between the two.


Looks like it got answered. Happy I get to keep my 9900ks a few more years. Games just don't seem to need CPU upgrades more than once every 5-6 years when playing at high resolutions like 4k. 2-3% performance loss vs PCI-e 4.0 x16, which won't ever be noticeable outside of synthetic benchmarks.









NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 PCI-Express Scaling


The new NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is a graphics card powerhouse, but what happens when you run it on a PCI-Express 4.0 x8 bus? In our mini-review we've also tested various PCI-Express 3.0, 2.0 and 1.1 configs to get a feel for how FPS scales with bandwidth.




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## BigMack70

Got my 4090 and did some testing. Definitely CPU limited in some games even at 4k. Good news is that it's not a problem unless you have a screen that can do 4k at above 120 HZ, because the 9900K can still drive 120+fps in basically everything. 

Bad news for me is that I have my rig hooked up to both a 4k 120Hz screen and a 5120x1440 240Hz screen and now I have to decide how much I care about some games getting closer to that 240fps mark when I play on the ultrawide...


----------



## FuriouStyles

BigMack70 said:


> Got my 4090 and did some testing. Definitely CPU limited in some games even at 4k. Good news is that it's not a problem unless you have a screen that can do 4k at above 120 HZ, because the 9900K can still drive 120+fps in basically everything.
> 
> Bad news for me is that I have my rig hooked up to both a 4k 120Hz screen and a 5120x1440 240Hz screen and now I have to decide how much I care about some games getting closer to that 240fps mark when I play on the ultrawide...


If it's a gsync/freesync screen I wouldn't really care much. But since you already spent $1600+ on the 4090, why not spend another 2 grand?


----------



## Chunky1311

BigMack70 said:


> Got my 4090 and did some testing. Definitely CPU limited in some games even at 4k. Good news is that it's not a problem unless you have a screen that can do 4k at above 120 HZ, because the 9900K can still drive 120+fps in basically everything.
> 
> Bad news for me is that I have my rig hooked up to both a 4k 120Hz screen and a 5120x1440 240Hz screen and now I have to decide how much I care about some games getting closer to that 240fps mark when I play on the ultrawide...


Proper first world problems right there hahaha 
Does the card live up to the hype? 
I'm not jealous, you're jealous XD 
_laughs in poor _


----------



## BigMack70

Chunky1311 said:


> Proper first world problems right there hahaha
> Does the card live up to the hype?
> I'm not jealous, you're jealous XD
> _laughs in poor _


Yeah, card lives up to the hype. It's insane... I never thought I'd need to upgrade my CPU for 4k gaming, but my CPU can't lock 120fps at 4k in Elden Ring, Plague Tale: Requiem, or Halo Infinite (campaign), and this GPU can do that and more.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus

Yeah, I think we're safe with our 9900KS's (or anything in that realm of performance) for a few years as far as high resolution/frame rate gaming is concerned.


----------



## OzborN.

Hi everybody i have z390 xtreme edition and i broke some micro parts on the bord and idk with part number they have is there any way i can see all of the component on the motherboard ? With part numbers


----------



## Driller au

Hi guys, scored myself a 4090 and was wondering if you have seen any improvement with re-bar enabled ?. Been running the modded F10b bios with my 2080Ti so no need to update.
I have the modded Z390MasterRGBModded file (F11o) bios from @KedarWolf would it be worth updating for re-bar or not worth the hassle from what i have read it does not seem worth it


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Hi guys, scored myself a 4090 and was wondering if you have seen any improvement with re-bar enabled ?. Been running the modded F10b bios with my 2080Ti so no need to update.
> I have the modded Z390MasterRGBModded file (F11o) bios from @KedarWolf would it be worth updating for re-bar or not worth the hassle from what i have read it does not seem worth it


It only helps really in benchmarks and only by maybe 5% tops.


----------



## Driller au

KedarWolf said:


> It only helps really in benchmarks and only by maybe 5% tops.


Thanks, hope everything is going good for you still appreciate your work everyday


----------



## Riva 128 Fan

Apologies for such a basic question. I’m fairly new to overclocking. Recently installed a Z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi motherboard. I flashed the @KedarWolf modded F12k BIOS after mistakenly upgrading to the capsule F12 BIOS. All the step by step overclocking guides I can find use F11 or older BIOS versions that have the M.I.T. tab. I’d love to get a stable 5 or 5.1 gHz clock speed. I’ve tried my best to figure this out on my own but only achieved instability or higher temps with the same performance on multiple CPU benchmarks. Any F12k overclocking for dummies tips that could be shared would be very much appreciated. Thanks for all the amazing info here!


----------



## Coldblackice

BigMack70 said:


> Got my 4090 and did some testing. Definitely CPU limited in some games even at 4k. Good news is that it's not a problem unless you have a screen that can do 4k at above 120 HZ, because the 9900K can still drive 120+fps in basically everything.
> 
> Bad news for me is that I have my rig hooked up to both a 4k 120Hz screen and a 5120x1440 240Hz screen and now I have to decide how much I care about some games getting closer to that 240fps mark when I play on the ultrawide...


Mind sharing how you're reaching that conclusion of it being CPU limited? Do you have identical machines + OS installs differing by CPU only?

Not disputing it or anything, just curious.


----------



## Sheyster

Coldblackice said:


> Mind sharing how you're reaching that conclusion of it being CPU limited? Do you have identical machines + OS installs differing by CPU only?
> 
> Not disputing it or anything, just curious.


Low GPU usage in relation to the CPU usage... It's not hard to identify the bottleneck.

I believe he already upgraded to a 13700K. Good move, it's a beast of a processor.


----------



## BigMack70

Coldblackice said:


> Mind sharing how you're reaching that conclusion of it being CPU limited? Do you have identical machines + OS installs differing by CPU only?
> 
> Not disputing it or anything, just curious.


I looked up 4k benchmarks of the 4090 running 12th/13th gen CPUs on youtube, matched their in-game settings, ran the benches myself, and noticed lower performance numbers. Also noticed some really horrible GPU usage in A Plague Tale: Requiem on the 9900k where sometimes it would tank down to 60-70fps when lots of rats/characters were on screen.

After upgrading to a 13700k, I can confirm that there were numerous titles where the 9900k was holding back performance at 4k. It's very dependent on what games you play, though. Plenty of games either GPU bound or can reach higher than 4k120 fps anyway. The 9900k was very playable, but it frustrated me that I couldn't lock to 120fps in some titles and was leaving GPU performance on the table.


----------



## KedarWolf

Driller au said:


> Thanks, hope everything is going good for you still appreciate your work everyday


I recently built a beast of a PC.

7950x CPU, ASROCK X670E Taichi motherboard, A-Die DDR5 at 6400MHz with great timings, ASUS Strix OC RTX 4090, Gen 4 2TB M.2, WD Black 8TB platter drive.

And my CPU is absolutely golden, Core Cycler and y-cruncher stable with a CO Curve of all -30s except 3 and 11 at -29, which is unheard of.

I know someone that bought and binned three 7950x's and they don't even come close to what mine can do.


----------



## msromike

Is there a Wake on Lan setting in the BIOS? I can't seem to find it.


----------



## jiffysound

KedarWolf said:


> I recently built a beast of a PC.
> 
> 7950x CPU, ASROCK X670E Taichi motherboard, A-Die DDR5 at 6400MHz with great timings, ASUS Strix OC RTX 4090, Gen 4 2TB M.2, WD Black 8TB platter drive.
> 
> And my CPU is absolutely golden, Core Cycler and y-cruncher stable with a CO Curve of all -30s except 3 and 11 at -29, which is unheard of.
> 
> I know someone that bought and binned three 7950x's and they don't even come close to what mine can do.
> 
> View attachment 2582146
> 
> View attachment 2582144
> 
> View attachment 2582145


Yeah that's great and all but what does this have to do with the thread topic _Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread_


----------



## KedarWolf

jiffysound said:


> Yeah that's great and all but what does this have to do with the thread topic _Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread_


Well, I help lots of peeps in this thread still with modded BIOS's and stuff, and I was replying to someone thanking me for doing so, so sharing the good news.

Why you be a troll?


----------



## jiffysound

KedarWolf said:


> Well, I help lots of peeps in this thread still with modded BIOS's and stuff, and I was replying to someone thanking me for doing so, so sharing the good news.
> 
> Why you be a troll?


Didn't mean to sound like a troll, rather I was focusing on the fact that this is a z390 thread with 8th and 9th gen procs and some of those folks might not be able to pay the big bucks that the new gen stuff costs and it seemed like you were showing off is all.


----------



## KedarWolf

I can enable an HPET option in one of the modded BIOS's for peeps now I think. And I can either have it enabled or disabled by default.

I know some asked for this.


----------



## KedarWolf

Here's Master BIOS with HPET option available and disabled by default.

Edit: It's in Setup\PCH-IO Configuration


----------



## TrebleTA

Hi ya @KedarWolf
Was wondering if you could find out more about the RGB added to the bios, f11o I've noticed gigabyte did not do it correctly for me compared to other bios the RGB they added. I would hassle gigabyte but last I asked them I got f11 final with RGB and havent used, and not sure there do anything for me now due to age of the board, plus non cap bios.

Also your above bios for master, is that my f11o that you have used or basic f11o + did you update the controllers as well as hpet since your last release?


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> Hi ya @KedarWolf
> Was wondering if you could find out more about the RGB added to the bios, f11o I've noticed gigabyte did not do it correctly for me compared to other bios the RGB they added. I would hassle gigabyte but last I asked them I got f11 final with RGB and havent used, and not sure there do anything for me now due to age of the board, plus non cap bios.
> 
> Also your above bios for master, is that my f11o that you have used or basic f11o + did you update the controllers as well as hpet since your last release?


That BIOS is with the fastest microcodes and all the firmware updated like Ethernet and RST etc. It's the RGB one too I think.

Strongly recommend you DON'T update to Final, lots of peeps have found it is very unstable and difficult to roll back.

Not sure what you can do about the RGB though in it.


----------



## wilsonb

Hey guys..
I personally haven't touched my Bios since Gigabyte dropped support and last update F12, took a **** on everyone.. (They disabled stuff)
I used to be able to overclock to 5 Ghz, back in version F10.
Thought I would check today and came across this post / topic thread..
My Spec: Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI (rev. 1.0) + i7-9700K, 32GB Patriot 3200mhz (Windows says it's running 3.60Ghz)
Force Flashing unofficial Bios is a little scary, but if for exact model will try. I thought 1.3V on CPU was enough, but maybe not. Please see bios setting for ANY RECOMMENDATIONs. Really appreciate it.
Here are my current settings;


----------



## wilsonb

BigMack70 said:


> Anyone have any data if PCI-e 3.0 limits the performance of the 4090?
> 
> Not sure if it's time to upgrade from z390 or not. I feel like my 9900ks is still going strong...


Our board does not support Raz Buss to GPU, I plan on upgrading my RTX 2080 to 4090 in Jan. (Hope prices will come down) , will after start looking to upgrade MB & intel CPU . Dont think I will ever buy a Gigabyte again...:-(


----------



## TrebleTA

Thanks for the update, aye not too sure about what to do with the RGB, but if I select purple- pink only the RGB headers change, yet the onboard RGB is a different colour, yet if I select blue it's all blue, also I use to be able to edit the colour via hex, or even the RGB numbers. Guess i have to live with it, yet was different.


----------



## TrebleTA

wilsonb said:


> Hey guys..
> I personally haven't touched my Bios since Gigabyte dropped support and last update F12, took a **** on everyone.. (They disabled stuff)
> I used to be able to overclock to 5 Ghz, back in version F10.
> Thought I would check today and came across this post / topic thread..
> My Spec: Z390 AORUS PRO WIFI (rev. 1.0) + i7-9700K, 32GB Patriot 3200mhz (Windows says it's running 3.60Ghz)
> Force Flashing unofficial Bios is a little scary, but if for exact model will try. I thought 1.3V on CPU was enough, but maybe not. Please see bios setting for ANY RECOMMENDATIONs. Really appreciate it.
> Here are my current settings;


Check my setting for my bios setting below your find your board has most, compare with what you have, anything else just ask.


----------



## CBreezy

Hey there everyone, sorry I am very, very late to the party and kind of barging in here but I had a few questions about which BIOS version would be best for my setup. I am also trying to fix some temperature sensor issues on my build and I was wondering if an update to the BIOS might help with that.

The basic gist of the temp sensor issue is that the CPU fan in SIV/Smart Fan 5 seems to be being driven by the wrong sensor, see below, it's using System 1 as a temp input instead of the CPU. Since I'm running a very outdated BIOS I was wondering if updating the BIOS might fix that. Even if it doesn't I was still thinking about updating the BIOS anyway as I was curious about whether it might help unlock some of my machine's potential or is it basically just going to be the same or worse actually cause more problems?

*1. The Temperature Sensor* Basically I am running the Z390 AORUS Master with the original F4 BIOS right now, I never updated or overclocked this PC from when I originally built it as an AIO cooled machine. Long story short I recently changed to an air cooler but at the same time I noticed that for some reason the CPU fan is not being driven by the CPU temperature. I have tried resetting the BIOS to optimized defaults and it does seem to have fixed the temperature readout in the BIOS and that now works fine but Smart Fan 5 in the windows environment still seems to be broken and it only reads the System 1 temperature on the CPU fan. I still have no idea why this is and there doesn't seem to be any way to change this in SF5/SIV in Windows. As you can see in this image I'm hitting mid 80's and yet SF5 still thinks the CPU is at 26°C.










I was wondering if this might be either a software bug in SIV/SF5 (I'm running the latest version from Gigabyte's APP Center) or if updating the BIOS might fix the sensor reporting?

*2. Updating the BIOS: *I've never flashed a BIOS before now, mainly because I've never had any issues with the standard one up to this point. Are there any things to be aware of before I do? I know a lot of people have been talking about the very latest version (V11 or 12?) being pretty bad and locking you from rolling back which sounds a bit scary. Is there a sweet spot for the best version which is a good balance of performance, security fixes and most importantly to me stability! I really don't want to have to deal with BSODs if I can avoid it as this PC is going to be used mostly for 3D rendering for my work and so it's very important that the computer be as stable as possible while under load. I'm not too concerned about absolute performance but I do want a smooth experience.

Thanks so much if you can help with any of this, I know it's a bit slapdash but I'm struggling to find good solid answers.


----------



## TrebleTA

Hi and welcome, the best bios is @KedarWolf moddied f11o for the z390 master.
Or if you follow my oc guide ya find f11o offical from gigabyte.
Temp sensor wise I've not noticed a problem yet could not say for bios F4, as not used for years now.
Also there was a Header update along time ago just after the boards release that's not part of the bios. Can not remember more now as was years ago but was for the usb controller.

A common error for the temp sensor was people connecting to the wrong header on the motherboard. Connecting to the bios cmos reset header by mistake and not the temp sensor header as there are very close to each other, this would cause a bios reset after every power cycle, and funky temp sensor readings.

I would update the bios to f11o. just the main bios so motherboard switches have to be on main and single. Then flashing the bios from the bios UI. This way you can change the switch to backup and it will still be on F4. And main will be f11o.
And can put other switch on duel once done. Also make sure to start from a cold boot and load bios defaults, before flashing.

Also fan control wise, I set all via bios smart fan, then monitor that via hwinfo. Gigabyte software is a pain.


----------



## CBreezy

TrebleTA said:


> Hi and welcome, the best bios is @KedarWolf moddied f11o for the z390 master.
> Or if you follow my oc guide ya find f11o offical from gigabyte.
> Temp sensor wise I've not noticed a problem yet could not say for bios F4, as not used for years now.
> Also there was a Header update along time ago just after the boards release that's not part of the bios. Can not remember more now as was years ago but was for the usb controller.
> 
> A common error for the temp sensor was people connecting to the wrong header on the motherboard. Connecting to the bios cmos reset header by mistake and not the temp sensor header as there are very close to each other, this would cause a bios reset after every power cycle, and funky temp sensor readings.
> 
> I would update the bios to f11o. just the main bios so motherboard switches have to be on main and single. Then flashing the bios from the bios UI. This way you can change the switch to backup and it will still be on F4. And main will be f11o.
> And can put other switch on duel once done. Also make sure to start from a cold boot and load bios defaults, before flashing.
> 
> Also fan control wise, I set all via bios smart fan, then monitor that via hwinfo. Gigabyte software is a pain.


Ok, I followed the link in your signature, is this the place to download the official F11o BIOS? Z390AORUSMASTERGK-F11o-RGB

It just seems really strange that Gigabyte don't list this version on their official support download page, there's F11n and F11 which is pretty confusing but no F11o.


----------



## TrebleTA

This was a personal request bios with added RGB control in bios, none on there site have this control, so it will not be on there site, f11o was replaced with f11 final yet my f11o gk had RGB added also 1 or 2 bios fixs. The letters after the bios is for beta, eg the n and o, why the final f11 has no letter as its the last supported by gigabyte. And is a capsule bios so can not be roll back to any older bios, but f11o is before they made it capsule.
Yes that is the correct place.


----------



## Riva 128 Fan

Successfully installed KedarWolf's 1.F12 BIOS on my AORUS Z390 Pro Wifi using efiflash with the /c and /x parameters and my microcode is showing as DE in HWINFO and CPUID not BE as I read previously in this forum. My CPU is a 9900KF. Would appreciate any thoughts on why I'm not seeing a BE microcode designation after flashing this modded BIOS.


----------



## KedarWolf

Riva 128 Fan said:


> Successfully installed KedarWolf's 1.F12 BIOS on my AORUS Z390 Pro Wifi using efiflash with the /c and /x parameters and my microcode is showing as DE in HWINFO and CPUID not BE as I read previously in this forum. My CPU is a 9900KF. Would appreciate any thoughts on why I'm not seeing a BE microcode designation after flashing this modded BIOS.


You may need to rename an Intel microcode .DLL, Google it.

And link the post with the BIOS you used, I'll check it.


----------



## KedarWolf

(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Ty. I did again, now with including /c Is there easy way for checking that new bios is in it, try software? I know only that inspectre still showing same, dunno for wiser way to check if all gone fine? Tnx for help.




www.overclock.net





Those are the correct ones.


----------



## Riva 128 Fan

KedarWolf said:


> You may need to rename an Intel microcode .DLL, Google it.
> 
> And link the post with the BIOS you used, I'll check it.


This is the BIOS I'm using.
Also successfully renamed the DLL file and voila, BE microcode now. Thank you so much!


----------



## Riva 128 Fan

KedarWolf said:


> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Sorry, meant to quote this.


----------



## TrebleTA

@KedarWolf, see the above bios can I install via q flash in bios or I need to do via efiflash. See you never said for the z390 master bios.

Has anyone tried his newer bios yet, also is High Precision Event Timer, best disabled,.
Some say yes some say no as some older games require, so it not better to disable via windows?


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> @KedarWolf, see the above bios can I install via q flash in bios or I need to do via efiflash. See you never said for the z390 master bios.
> 
> Has anyone tried his newer bios yet, also is High Precision Event Timer, best disabled,.
> Some say yes some say no as some older games require, so it not better to disable via windows?


Efiflash needed.


----------



## 8ender

I'm running into an issue on my Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi that is driving me nuts. I have a Radeon 5700xt in the top PCI-E slot, and that works just fine. I'd like to add a Radeon Pro W5500 to the very bottom PCIEx16 slot but it the system won't post when I do.

The W5500 works fine in the second from top PCIE slot but then it's blocking air to my 5700xt, and both run at PCIEx8.

I'm on Bios F12j, but I don't want to get trapped by the capsule bios F12 final. I've tried messing with things like CSM, etc with no luck. It will boot with the card in the bottom slot if I remove my NVMe drive from the second drive slot. Manual says I should still be able to run something in that bottom slot with a second NVMe installed, but it'll run PCIEx2 which I'm fine with.

Any ideas?


----------



## TrebleTA

@KedarWolf if I need to use efi flash, will any version do and what was the command when useing again please.


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> @KedarWolf if I need to use efi flash, will any version do and what was the command when useing again please.


Efiflash that comes with the BIOS.









(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Hi there - this is the modded f12k bios that @KedarWolf made for my Pro Wifi - works great. Z390ProWiFiModded so i just got this z390 prowifi board,i wanna make sure i understand this correctly before flashing. take a clean formatted flash drive, put this bios and the Efiflash into the drive...




www.overclock.net





If you flashed the Final BIOS you need to use the guide to go back to an earlier one.

Overclock.net search is your friend.


----------



## TrebleTA

I was meaning the z390 master bios with hpet above. It was not include in the zip.
So do I need normal efi flash or modified and what version.








[Tool] EFIFLASH v0.80/v0.85/v0.87 FOR GIGABYTE MOTHERBOARDS


Gigabyte recently released EFIFlash v0.80 of the DOS based BIOS flashing tool for Gigabyte’s Z390 platform, although it is also compatible with 100/200/300 series Intel chipsets [Edit: and 400 series using v0.87], as well as AMD X570, X470, X370, B450, B350, A320, X300, A300, and PRO 500...




winraid.level1techs.com


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> I was meaning the z390 master bios with hpet above. It was not include in the zip.
> So do I need normal efi flash or modified and what version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Tool] EFIFLASH v0.80/v0.85/v0.87 FOR GIGABYTE MOTHERBOARDS
> 
> 
> Gigabyte recently released EFIFlash v0.80 of the DOS based BIOS flashing tool for Gigabyte’s Z390 platform, although it is also compatible with 100/200/300 series Intel chipsets [Edit: and 400 series using v0.87], as well as AMD X570, X470, X370, B450, B350, A320, X300, A300, and PRO 500...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> winraid.level1techs.com


Normal efiflash should be fine. If it doesn't work, let me know. 

I only PM the modified efiflash as it'll even flash a wrong BIOS and brick the board.


----------



## TrebleTA

@KedarWolf thanks, so i used efi flash version 0.98 all seemed to flash ok, check and running MC BE but can not see the HPET in bios?



KedarWolf said:


> Here's Master BIOS with HPET option available and disabled by default.
> 
> Edit: It's in Setup\PCH-IO Configuration


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> @KedarWolf thanks, so i used efi flash version 0.98 all seemed to flash ok, check and running MC BE but can not see the HPET in bios?


It's called High Precision Timer in Setup\PCH-IO Configuration


----------



## TrebleTA

It's not there.
I dont even see pch-io config. Check everywhere.


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> It's not there.
> I dont even see pch-io config. Check everywhere.


It might be under Setup/MIT


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> It's not there.
> I dont even see pch-io config. Check everywhere.


Try this one if you don't see it.

And check Setup/MIT


----------



## TrebleTA

I have looked at every setting. I will try the above in the day tomorrow. Thanks will let you know


----------



## storm-chaser

Just got this board up and running. Had to repair the board to fix some wonky wifi issues, but it seems to be running just fine now, as you can see below.








Problem is, I'd like to use easytune to overclock from within windows. I installed the giga app first and then easy tune per the support page, however, it is not opening, even if I try to access from within the giga app:
Both programs are up to date. I just click on it and nothing happens. Any advice is appreciated.
Also, how do I tune memory timings from windows? Is there an alternative to easytune?









EDIT:
Also not sure what the deal is with the Bios version? Take a look... there is no F10g listed on the website and the date is all wrong...









EDIT:
BIOS is updated to F10g now (latest, but cant roll back  )
Still has not fixed my easytune issues.


----------



## TrebleTA

@KedarWolf, I just tried the other file you linked, it's not in that bios too the hpet. So now am feeling unsafe with this bios. Reverted back to one you released in nov. 

I have screen shots of the bios too, showing it's not there.


----------



## KedarWolf

TrebleTA said:


> @KedarWolf, I just tried the other file you linked, it's not in that bios too the hpet. So now am feeling unsafe with this bios. Reverted back to one you released in nov.
> 
> I have screen shots of the bios too, showing it's not there.


Did you check under setup/mit/PCH configuration?


----------



## TrebleTA

I dont have that sub menu, but I checked every menu/sub menu.


----------



## TrebleTA

storm-chaser said:


> Just got this board up and running. Had to repair the board to fix some wonky wifi issues, but it seems to be running just fine now, as you can see below.
> View attachment 2584266
> 
> Problem is, I'd like to use easytune to overclock from within windows. I installed the giga app first and then easy tune per the support page, however, it is not opening, even if I try to access from within the giga app:
> Both programs are up to date. I just click on it and nothing happens. Any advice is appreciated.
> Also, how do I tune memory timings from windows? Is there an alternative to easytune?
> View attachment 2584267
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> Also not sure what the deal is with the Bios version? Take a look... there is no F10g listed on the website and the date is all wrong...
> View attachment 2584269
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> BIOS is updated to F10g now (latest, but cant roll back  )
> Still has not fixed my easytune issues.
> 
> View attachment 2584271


Gigabyte stuff is always buggy. Your best to ask them. Only advice I can say is try to install the version on the CD.


----------



## storm-chaser

TrebleTA said:


> Gigabyte stuff is always buggy. Your best to ask them. Only advice I can say is try to install the version on the CD.


TY 

I will give this a shot! Might just work.


----------



## Wam7

@KedarWolf 
I've been using your modded F11m for ages. (a thousand thanks for that). I've just got an Arctic Freezer II 360 A-RGB and can't get the A-RGB to work when the fans are plugged into the motherboard even though it's plugged into the A-RGB header (and voltage is at default 5v).

I've searched through the thread and found what I believe is your latest modded RGB bios for the Master, which is F11o RGB from 27th Sep 21, is that last one you've done for the Master? Hopefully it will get my A-RGB working.


----------



## TrebleTA

Have you checked that the 2nd pin is correct, like for my fans I had to redo the RGB cable so it was correct?
F11o is that last he did back in november I belive.


----------



## mrgnex

msromike said:


> Is there a Wake on Lan setting in the BIOS? I can't seem to find it.


If you are still looking: IO Ports -> Network stack -> PXE boot (if I am correct)


----------



## Wam7

TrebleTA said:


> Have you checked that the 2nd pin is correct, like for my fans I had to redo the RGB cable so it was correct?
> F11o is that last he did back in november I belive.


Yes, it's definitely the Z390 Master motherboard as I tried the Freezer II on another board with A-RGB headers and that worked fine. I'll flash the F11o and see if that fixes things.


----------



## TrebleTA

Only other thing it could be is another software interfering, yet it should have a default colour before your system loads.
Other wise could be a blown RGB header, can try a meter see if you get a reading or trying another A RGB device, on that header. Remember there is a header pin to select 5v or 12v. Default was 5v


----------



## xen64

Hello everyone. I am just wondering if it's possible for someone to help me flash to a modded BIOS. Never done it before, and I own the z390 Aorus Master and would like to experiment with HPET off. I can give my Discord id if needed. Thanks


----------



## TrebleTA

2-3 page back, has the bios, also a link to the efi flash and how to do it. But when I tried the hpet was not there.


----------



## xen64

TrebleTA said:


> 2-3 page back, has the bios, also a link to the efi flash and how to do it. But when I tried the hpet was not there.


Thanks for the info TrebleTA. Does that BIOS version have Spread Spectrum settings?


----------



## 8ender

8ender said:


> I'm running into an issue on my Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi that is driving me nuts. I have a Radeon 5700xt in the top PCI-E slot, and that works just fine. I'd like to add a Radeon Pro W5500 to the very bottom PCIEx16 slot but it the system won't post when I do.
> 
> The W5500 works fine in the second from top PCIE slot but then it's blocking air to my 5700xt, and both run at PCIEx8.
> 
> I'm on Bios F12j, but I don't want to get trapped by the capsule bios F12 final. I've tried messing with things like CSM, etc with no luck. It will boot with the card in the bottom slot if I remove my NVMe drive from the second drive slot. Manual says I should still be able to run something in that bottom slot with a second NVMe installed, but it'll run PCIEx2 which I'm fine with.
> 
> Any ideas?


Quoting my own post in the hopes that this helps someone. I was able to get the W5500 working in the PCEIx4 slot, using KedarWolf's modded F12j, but only with a very specific order of operations.


Remove all hardware except the SSD in the top slot
Let it boot
Add the SSD to the bottom slot
Let it boot
Add the GPU to the bottom slot
Let it boot
Add the GPU to the PCIEx16 slot
Let it boot
Slowly change the settings you want in the BIOS one by one, saving profiles along the way. Reboot after each one and be sure it boots.
Some settings are going to boot you out into a text mode only boot up (turning on resizable BAR and turning off CSM did this), where you can't access the BIOS setup anymore. You can counteract this by removing all the GPUs and booting from the HDMI output on the iGPU. I don't know why this helps, but it does.
You can overclock now, but voltage adjustments are now off limits. I have no idea why. These will now cause the BIOS to boot with a failure notice, and reset to defaults every time. You can adjust literally every other option. My fav setting DVID is also off the table, so you have one hand tied behind your back when overclocking. I was able to get a stable 5ghz overclock by setting Loadline to High and AC/DC to Power Saving, but I have an excellent 9900k that only needs about 1.2-1.25 to be stable at 5ghz.
All in all I'm happy I've got this working, but I'm also a little terrified at these strange new rules that came with it. I suspect I've run into a bug in the BIOS. Getting the W5500 working as a secondary GPU has been a success, 5ghz is a nice bonus, and I'm not going to touch anything ever again if it continues to be stable. Gigabyte BIOSes are a trip.


----------



## storm-chaser

jiffysound said:


> Didn't mean to sound like a troll, rather I was focusing on the fact that this is a z390 thread with 8th and 9th gen procs and some of those folks might not be able to pay the big bucks that the new gen stuff costs and it seemed like you were showing off is all.


LMAO


----------



## zayd

Good folks, I don't often ask for help, but usually trawl throught the internet to research my problem and look for fixes. However, I'm quite stumped at the moment. Ok, I've been running my system, as detailed in my signature, quite stable for over a year with the following bios summary settings:

CPU Core - 5Ghz all cores
Ring Ratio - 4.7 Ghz
Vcore - 1.325V
VCCSA - 1.15V
VCCIO - 1.15V
LLC - Turbo
All energy efficiency settings are off inclucing C-states and P-states and voltage limits are at max.
I was able to play my game of choice, Warzone without any shutdowns or issues for two years, but now with the new Warzone 2.0, I'm getting system crashes where the whole system restarts almost every couple of games. This game is definitely more demanding as I've seen frames drop by around 20 FPS. I've tried upping my Vcore right up to 1.35V but still get the instability and crashes. Its definitely to do with my overclock, as when I run at default bios settings, I get no instabilty or crashes.

Do you think if I up my VCCSA and VCCIO voltages this could help?

I am running the recommended modded bios as provided by our wizard Kedarwolf and it has microcode DE. 
Can you advise if this is the fastest and overall best microcode to use? Is it true that running sfc /scannow cmd prompt will change your microcode to the latest version? Much obliged for your help and time.


----------



## storm-chaser

zayd said:


> Good folks, I don't often ask for help, but usually trawl throught the internet to research my problem and look for fixes. However, I'm quite stumped at the moment. Ok, I've been running my system, as detailed in my signature, quite stable for over a year with the following bios summary settings:
> 
> CPU Core - 5Ghz all cores
> Ring Ratio - 4.7 Ghz
> Vcore - 1.325V
> VCCSA - 1.15V
> VCCIO - 1.15V
> LLC - Turbo
> All energy efficiency settings are off inclucing C-states and P-states and voltage limits are at max.
> I was able to play my game of choice, Warzone without any shutdowns or issues for two years, but now with the new Warzone 2.0, I'm getting system crashes where the whole system restarts almost every couple of games. This game is definitely more demanding as I've seen frames drop by around 20 FPS. I've tried upping my Vcore right up to 1.35V but still get the instability and crashes. Its definitely to do with my overclock, as when I run at default bios settings, I get no instabilty or crashes.
> 
> Do you think if I up my VCCSA and VCCIO voltages this could help?
> 
> I am running the recommended modded bios as provided by our wizard Kedarwolf and it has microcode DE.
> Can you advise if this is the fastest and overall best microcode to use? Is it true that running sfc /scannow cmd prompt will change your microcode to the latest version? Much obliged for your help and time.


Have you tried an aida64 or cpuz torture test for stability?


----------



## zayd

storm-chaser said:


> Have you tried an aida64 or cpuz torture test for stability?


I've done such stability tests and it's fine.


----------



## Wam7

zayd said:


> I've done such stability tests and it's fine.


Have you checked your memory? What is it and what timings do you have it at etc?


----------



## storm-chaser

zayd said:


> I've done such stability tests and it's fine.


I remember reading that it's a difficult task to get a 9900K stable across all threads at 5.0GHz, which is weird because that is their turbo speed.

Anyway, I've never had one (just a 9600KF which has slightly different performance characteristics) so you might try backing down to like 4.8GHz with same settings to see if that makes a difference.


----------



## zayd

Thanks for your continued support guys. My ram is all at stock timings, using XMP profile and default voltage auto setting. I think the much higher system demands of this new game are pushing any small instability of my system to the forefront.


----------



## Hawkjoss

zayd said:


> Good folks, I don't often ask for help, but usually trawl throught the internet to research my problem and look for fixes. However, I'm quite stumped at the moment. Ok, I've been running my system, as detailed in my signature, quite stable for over a year with the following bios summary settings:
> 
> CPU Core - 5Ghz all cores
> Ring Ratio - 4.7 Ghz
> Vcore - 1.325V
> VCCSA - 1.15V
> VCCIO - 1.15V
> LLC - Turbo
> All energy efficiency settings are off inclucing C-states and P-states and voltage limits are at max.
> I was able to play my game of choice, Warzone without any shutdowns or issues for two years, but now with the new Warzone 2.0, I'm getting system crashes where the whole system restarts almost every couple of games. This game is definitely more demanding as I've seen frames drop by around 20 FPS. I've tried upping my Vcore right up to 1.35V but still get the instability and crashes. Its definitely to do with my overclock, as when I run at default bios settings, I get no instabilty or crashes.
> 
> Do you think if I up my VCCSA and VCCIO voltages this could help?
> 
> I am running the recommended modded bios as provided by our wizard Kedarwolf and it has microcode DE.
> Can you advise if this is the fastest and overall best microcode to use? Is it true that running sfc /scannow cmd prompt will change your microcode to the latest version? Much obliged for your help and time.


I had similar issues with MW2 (I also have 9900K 5.0Gz)
My issue was the game froze each 5-10 maps, and then crashed. Windows log showed issues with the Nvidia driver - I defaulted all settings in Afterburned but it didn't help.
After browsing a few threads about the given error, I figured that it can be RAM overclock (manual). I defaulted to XMP and so far no crashes.

Also, at the loading of some scenes, I noticed significant CPU utilization/load spikes - which can (potentially) translate to increased transient, and on LLC Turbo it can (potentially) cause crashes


----------



## Wam7

TrebleTA said:


> Only other thing it could be is another software interfering, yet it should have a default colour before your system loads.
> Other wise could be a blown RGB header, can try a meter see if you get a reading or trying another A RGB device, on that header. Remember there is a header pin to select 5v or 12v. Default was 5v


Can you check on your Master if this is the default jumper position for 5v on the D_LED V_SW2?


----------



## greasemonky89

Anyone with aorus pro non wifi manage getting over 3900mhz on memory with 4 dimms?. I tried everything 1.55vdimm 1.25vccio/1.310 sa etc ... Im using b-die single rank on all 4 sticks team groups . No dice decided to just work on the rest of my timings to push bandwidth and latency instead. Bums me out though.


----------



## chinobino

@greasemonky89 I have the Z390 Pro WIFI and Z390UD and both boards are not stable above 3900 MHz with 4 x Samsung B-Die single rank DIMMs that use the *A0* PCB.

Using 4 DIMMs that have the *A2* PCB I can hit 4266 MHz stable on both boards with 4 x Samsung B-Die single rank DIMMs.

A0 PCBs look like this.

A1 PCBs look like this.

A2 PCBs look like this.


----------



## greasemonky89

[/QUOTE]


chinobino said:


> @greasemonky89 I have the Z390 Pro WIFI and Z390UD and both boards are not stable above 3900 MHz with 4 x Samsung B-Die single rank DIMMs that use the *A0* PCB.
> 
> Using 4 DIMMs that have the *A2* PCB I can hit 4266 MHz stable on both boards with 4 x Samsung B-Die single rank DIMMs.
> 
> A0 PCBs look like this.
> 
> A1 PCBs look like this.
> 
> A2 PCBs loo/QUOTE]


Interesting cause mine are a2 as well from team group t-force dark pros

*TDPGD416G3200HC14ADC01 atleast thats what thiaphoon burner says. *


----------



## Driller au

zayd said:


> Good folks, I don't often ask for help, but usually trawl throught the internet to research my problem and look for fixes. However, I'm quite stumped at the moment. Ok, I've been running my system, as detailed in my signature, quite stable for over a year with the following bios summary settings:
> 
> CPU Core - 5Ghz all cores
> Ring Ratio - 4.7 Ghz
> Vcore - 1.325V
> VCCSA - 1.15V
> VCCIO - 1.15V
> LLC - Turbo
> All energy efficiency settings are off inclucing C-states and P-states and voltage limits are at max.
> I was able to play my game of choice, Warzone without any shutdowns or issues for two years, but now with the new Warzone 2.0, I'm getting system crashes where the whole system restarts almost every couple of games. This game is definitely more demanding as I've seen frames drop by around 20 FPS. I've tried upping my Vcore right up to 1.35V but still get the instability and crashes. Its definitely to do with my overclock, as when I run at default bios settings, I get no instabilty or crashes.
> 
> Do you think if I up my VCCSA and VCCIO voltages this could help?
> 
> I am running the recommended modded bios as provided by our wizard Kedarwolf and it has microcode DE.
> Can you advise if this is the fastest and overall best microcode to use? Is it true that running sfc /scannow cmd prompt will change your microcode to the latest version? Much obliged for your help and time.


Don't know if you got this sorted but on my setup when i changed from F10b bios to F11o for re-bar support i had to up my VCCIO to 1.2 and SA to 1.210 but i do run OC memory at 400mhz another thing to try is drop the ring ratio to 46, When i first came here we used to start at 1.2 for both and work back, I had similar numbers to you but cannot do them now and be stable


----------



## Qiko

KedarWolf said:


> Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded.
> 
> *Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it.*
> 
> Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it.
> 
> View attachment 2535681
> 
> 
> Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load BIOS defaults, F10 to save and reboot. As it reboots, hit F12 and boot from the USB *NOT UEFI*.
> 
> For Pro Wifi when it boots into DOS, type
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 1.F12 /c /x
> 
> For Pro
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> efiflash 2.F12 /c /x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z390ProWiFiModded.zip.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Hi folks! I decided to Overclock my Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi! Was having trouble overclocking on F12K bios that was already preinstalled from Gigabyte.
I tried the steps above and it appears I was able to flash the motherboard with modded bios. Is it normal to still see under system info Bios Version "F12k" or should it be "1.F12"

Sry, I'm new to all this bios mods for z390. Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

Qiko said:


> Hi folks! I decided to Overclock my Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi! Was having trouble overclocking on F12K bios that was already preinstalled from Gigabyte.
> I tried the steps above and it appears I was able to flash the motherboard with modded bios. Is it normal to still see under system info Bios Version "F12k" or should it be "1.F12"
> 
> Sry, I'm new to all this bios mods for z390. Thanks!


1.F12 is how the BIOS you flash needs to be named. It has to have a three digit extension. Named 1.F12k will not flash. But it's the F12k BIOS, that's the correct one it shows within the BIOS.


----------



## Qiko

KedarWolf said:


> 1.F12 is how the BIOS you flash needs to be named. It has to have a three digit extension. Named 1.F12k will not flash. But it's the F12k BIOS, that's the correct one it shows within the BIOS.


Thanks so much! You da best! I went ahead and renamed C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll
I followed this guide
--https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/9g8lqi/windows_10_interfering_with_overclock/
Finally disable mitigations for Spectre & Meltdown with InSpectre.

Now time for overclocking 😁


----------



## Qiko

Anyone knows what "IA VR Voltage Limit" means for gigabyte? I was wondering if that sets a cap on the "CPU Vcore"

Thanks!


----------



## rwijnhov

Anyone know how to get microcode be in windows 11? mcupdate_genuineintel.dll isn't there.


----------



## KedarWolf

rwijnhov said:


> Anyone know how to get microcode be in windows 11? mcupdate_genuineintel.dll isn't there.


Did you flash the latest modded BIOS?


----------



## rwijnhov

Hi, yes I flashed 1.F12 now i have microcode DE. I have a z390 aorus pro wifi.


----------



## KedarWolf

rwijnhov said:


> Hi, yes I flashed 1.F12 now i have microcode DE. I have a z390 aorus pro wifi.








[Feature Request] Removal of Intel microcodes that was on the images


I completely understand the implication of this feature request. The reason why I want this feature is because I want to use the intel microcode that was on the installed on the bios not the updated one when you freshly installed Windows.. I've tested that every Windows (8.1 / 10 2015 LTSB and...




www.ntlite.com


----------



## KedarWolf

rwijnhov said:


> Hi, yes I flashed 1.F12 now i have microcode DE. I have a z390 aorus pro wifi.


Do a search on your C: drive for *mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll* and delete all the files it's finds, then reboot.

Edit: And from which post and file did you flash?

There is a version with the newest microcodes and one with the fastest BE microcodes.


----------



## rwijnhov

Qiko said:


> Hi folks! I decided to Overclock my Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi! Was having trouble overclocking on F12K bios that was already preinstalled from Gigabyte.
> I tried the steps above and it appears I was able to flash the motherboard with modded bios. Is it normal to still see under system info Bios Version "F12k" or should it be "1.F12"
> 
> Sry, I'm new to all this bios mods for z390. Thanks!


I used the file from this post 8 topics up. 11961


----------



## KedarWolf

rwijnhov said:


> I used the file from this post 8 topics up. 11961


I checked, and that BIOS has the BE microcodes.

Do a search on your C: drive for *mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll* and delete all the files it finds, then reboot.


----------



## rwijnhov

That did the trick on the BE now. Awesome. What else is modded in this bios?


----------



## KedarWolf

rwijnhov said:


> That did the trick on the BE now. Awesome. What else is modded in this bios?


Ethernet firmware updated, RST firmware updated, integrated graphics firmware updated, that's it.


----------



## rwijnhov

What would be the most advisable bios for a 9900k and a 3090? your modded 11 or this latest modded 12?


----------



## KedarWolf

rwijnhov said:


> What would be the most advisable bios for a 9900k and a 3090? your modded 11 or this latest modded 12?


What motherboard do you have?


----------



## rwijnhov

z390 pro wifi


----------



## KedarWolf

rwijnhov said:


> z390 pro wifi











(Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Owners Thread)


Z390 Pro and Z390 Pro WiFi modded. Download the attachment from my Google Drive, overclock.net won't let me attach it, rename it and remove the .txt, then unzip it. Make a FreeDOS USB like below with the included RUFUS, put the BIOS and efiflash.exe on it. Boot into BIOS. Hit F7 to load...




www.overclock.net


----------



## zayd

Mr Wolf, I have been running your modded F10H bios for my Z390 Aorus Ultra for over a year now, but since reading recent posts in this thread, I've discovered that my microcode version is also DE. Is this correct for the modded bios you provided, or should I also delete the file as you indicated above in post #11,971? Thank you as always.


----------



## KedarWolf

zayd said:


> Mr Wolf, I have been running your modded F10H bios for my Z390 Aorus Ultra for over a year now, but since reading recent posts in this thread, I've discovered that my microcode version is also DE. Is this correct for the modded bios you provided, or should I also delete the file as you indicated above in post #11,971? Thank you as always.


Yes, delete he files.


----------



## zayd

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, delete he files.


Thank you kind sir. My tinkering with this system will soon come to an end, when I hand it down to my son and I will build a new platform similar to yours.


----------



## Janosi

Hello, which is the latest z390 Aorus Master modded bios? can someone send it? thank you!  I'm use F12b


----------



## soymgomez

Hello,

some time ago I installed a BIOS from this thread that disabled Intel mitigations. I wonder if there is an updated version for an Aorus Master that does not have the mitigations but enables Resizable Bar.


----------



## mrgnex

soymgomez said:


> Hello,
> 
> some time ago I installed a BIOS from this thread that disabled Intel mitigations. I wonder if there is an updated version for an Aorus Master that does not have the mitigations but enables Resizable Bar.


As in it does have the latest microcodes? Why not use Gigabyte's official latest one?


----------

